City of Bloomington, Indiana Board of Zoning Appeals, 16 Nov 2017

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Bloomington Board of Zoning Appeals 11/16/2017

Description

Onboard Link: https://bloomington.in.gov/boards/zoning-appeals/meetings/2017

A

17 carmen rule, I'm sorry carbonated see.

A

B

Pranking carmen is here: we have no.

A

Minutes to approve any reports resolution to communications, 2018.

C

Meeting dates we're still working on our calendar and our deadlines for those meetings, but these are the dates. Dates are finalized, so we've cross-checked that against the holiday calendar and and other important events. I did just a.

C

Couple minutes ago to send that to you via email, so you can put that in your calendar, so I would be great and hopefully we'll have a very productive 2018. Also that's it. Thank you. First.

A

Petition is b 9, 17, austin goodman.

A

D

Who's here, okay, good evening, the only.

D

Petition, we have for you here tonight, vo 29:17. The property is located at 724.

D

West 3rd street, on the near west side of town, the site is 0.05 acres, zoned.

D

Residential core and the gpp designation.

D

Is core residential? The property currently contains a single family house, and all of the surrounding uses are single-family as well. So the variance.

D

Requests before you tonight are both a side and rear yard setback, variance to allow the addition of a screened-in porch on the rear or north of the property. You can see here circled in red.

D

So the petitioner submitted some images.

D

Of the existing conditions behind the house currently include multiple decks.

D

And concrete pads, as well as cellar.

D

Doors there on the bottom left and then gravel landscapes, stone areas around the.

D

Property, so here are some of the images that were also in your packet. The.

D

Petitioner is requesting to remove the existing improvements and build a 9 foot.

D

9 inch by 18 foot 2 inch porch on the.

D

Back of the house- and you can see the rough area of where that would be here and then here is an elevation of what.

D

That would look like as well so a screened-in porch, the minimum lot size.

D

In the rc zoning district is about 0.17.

D

Acres, there was some information in your packet. That said, it was half an acre. That was incorrect. Sorry about that.

D

And the petition site is 0.05 acres, so.

D

Because of its small size, the setback requirements for the rc zone, don't quite allow for reasonable development on this particular parcel. So the proposed porch.

D

Would, of course, provide usable living space but would also provide coverage for the existing cellar door. You can see here in the picture on the left and then all so in the aerial there on the right. So.

D

In order to be able to cover the cellar doors with the roof of the new addition, the porch would have to be roughly almost 2 feet from the side, property line, which would actually be slightly.

D

Inset from the existing side, wall line.

D

Of the house so again, this property is.

D

Quite undersized not only for the zoning district but for the area, so you can see it circled here in red and then related to other properties in the immediate blocks surrounding. So it's 88 feet deep.

D

Undersized for area surrounding and zoning district and so doing, the addition is going to require the.

D

Encroachment into the 25-foot setback requirement, the petitioner is asking to.

D

Build an almost 14 foot, deep porch in.

D

The on the rear of the structure, so the.

D

Department found peculiar condition related to size and dimensions of the lot and the location of the cellar door.

D

On the house, limiting where the actual.

D

Addition could go and then also peculiar condition in the relationship of the lot.

D

And the existing buildings to the surrounding lots and buildings, for example the property to the north. That.

D

Would actually be their side yard immediately adjacent to the rear of this property, so they could build as close as six feet to that property line, whereas this property has held the 25 feet and typically rear yards when the ordinance.

D

Was written, the idea would be that rear yards would have but one another and have similar regulations. And that isn't the case here. So staff finds that because the lot is undersized and uniquely situated that the variances.

D

Requested are appropriate with the it's.

D

An appropriately sized addition request.

D

First, first such as excuse me for this.

D

Area, so the department recommends that the bca adopts the proposed findings that are in the state purport with three conditions that the variance is approved for the screened porch addition, as shown in the renderings and site plans submitted, and that it is held also to the site plan, as well as the renderings, and any subsequent encroachments would require additional variance and that the petitioner has to obtain a building permit prior to construction. So I know the petitioners here. If you have any questions- and I can answer any as well thanks. Thank you. Yes, petitioner.

D

A

Please state your name: austin goodman, okay, jackie did a great.

E

Job of presenting the overall plan, what.

E

I'm trying to do is essentially just simplify the backyard, apparently there's a lot of stuff going on back there. What I'd like to do is is remove a lot of this random, a lot of the random structures and create a more functional living space. Thank you, yeah. You can see.

E

Any questions for staff and/or.

A

Petitioner by the board, anyone in the.

A

Public like to comment any final.

A

Comments from the petitioner thank you back to the board for action. 29 17.

F

Variance from side yard and rear yards setbacks based on the findings and.

F

Conclusions in the staff report and with the three conditions of approval in the staff report, any comments please. Yes, yes,.

F

Motion passes, petition granted and we.

A

B