Also present in-person: Adam Decker, Board Attorney; Bryan Blazak, Town Council Liaison; Joseph Wiszowaty, Town Manager; and Sergio Mendoza, St. John Building and Planning Director.
Absent: Yolanda Cardona
A quorum was attained.
Mr. Birlson made a motion to nominate Mark Lareau as Chairman, seconded by Mr. Sheeran and carried by voice vote with four ayes.
Aye – Bob Birlson, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, Mark Lareau
Nay – None
Mr. Sheeran made a motion to nominate Yolanda Cardona as Vice-Chairman, seconded by Mr. Birlson and carried by voice vote with four ayes.
Aye – Bob Birlson, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, Mark Lareau
Nay – None
Mr. Lareau made a motion to nominate Brendan Sheeran as Secretary, seconded by Mr. Popovic and carried by voice vote with three ayes and one nay.
Aye – Bob Birlson, Drago Popovic, Mark Lareau
Nay – Brendan Sheeran
December 19, 2022 Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting
Mr. Birlson made a motion to approve the December 19, 2022 Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting, seconded by Mr. Sheeran and carried by voice vote with four ayes.
Aye – Bob Birlson, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, Mark Lareau
Nay - None
Mr. Lareau stated he believed this item should be delayed until the next meeting since we did not receive all of the documents in a timely manner. Ms. Todosijevic stated she had communicated via email that she would be out of town. The receipts from the certified mail were sent and the green and white receipts were given, but prior to the green and white receipts being given, the receipt was sent to show the letters sent. Both notices that were in the newspaper were also given. Mr. Lareau stated he has been told by staff that those were not received five days prior to this meeting. Ms. Todosijevic stated they received both of those prior to five days. Building and Planning Director, Sergio Mendoza, stated we received the green and white receipts not even an hour ago. Ms. Todosijevic stated that was correct. Mr. Mendoza stated as part of us confirming the notices, we need the list of property owners to compare these green and white receipts to that were just handed in, which has not been provided either. Mr. Lareau stated we have to have this entire package five days prior to the meeting in order to ensure that notices were sent out properly. Right now, you do not qualify to be heard at this meeting. Ms. Todosijevic asked for a deferral. Mr. Lareau directed Ms. Todosijevic to confer with staff on what exactly is needed before the next meeting. Attorney Decker stated if the applicant submits satisfactory evidence of the proof of publication in the newspapers as well as the list identifying property owners that needed to receive notices, the recommendation would be to continue the hearing and allow it to be heard next month as well as make a public statement if the Board elects to defer to the next month. If satisfactory evidence is submitted, you do not need to require the applicant to resubmit or readvertise for the new meeting. Ms. Todosijevic stated she has the papers that were sent via email to the department from the newspapers as well as the receipts from the post office showing the mailings paid for. She stated she understood that staff needed the list of property owners, but you should have access to that list since it came from you. Mr. Mendoza stated you were given an affidavit signed by the Assessor’s office that gives you a list of adjacent property owners within three hundred feet, we do not have that list. There was a form that you should have sent to the Assessor’s office to get that list. Ms. Todosijevic agreed and was not aware that staff did not have access to that same list that she received from them.
Board Action
Mr. Popovic made a motion to defer BZA 2023-01, the developmental variance from StJMC 24-520 and StJMC 24-516 (e)(1), until next month seconded by Mr. Sheeran and carried by voice vote with four ayes.
Aye – Bob Birlson, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, Mark Lareau
Nay – None
Mr. Lareau stated please be in touch with staff to confirm what is still needed. Mr. Mendoza stated before you reach out to me, please review the emails you were sent in the last few weeks. If anything else is needed, contact us. Attorney Decker stated the proof of publication is a separate document from the receipt that the newspapers will send you.
Mr. Lareau asked what the square footage was. Mr. Whitener stated the main level and bedroom level are 1,282 square feet, but that does not include the family room and spare room on the lower level. Mr. Sheeran asked if the foundation was being pulled out. Mr. Whitener stated it would be. The fire got up to two thousand degrees in the garage, which just melted the concrete, plus with all of the contaminants that seeped in to the concrete, we have to remove everything. Mr. Lareau asked what the minimum square footage was for a story and a half home. Mr. Mendoza stated it is currently 2,100 square feet. Mr. Whitener stated the total square footage with the finished lower level is 1,821 square feet.
Opened to Public Hearing BZA 2023-02 Development Variance
Ed Gordon, 10667 Manor Drive, stated he approves the rebuilding of the home. He was present when the house burned and watched them lose everything they have.
Rick Thomas, 10705 Manor Drive, stated they are not changing from anything that was there already. Reducing the square footage will not be a deterrence from the neighborhood at all. He stated he would like to see the variance approved.
Closed to Public Hearing BZA 2023-02 Development Variance
Board Action
Mr. Sheeran made a motion to approve BZA 2023-02, the variance from StJMC 24-125 (b), allowing for reconstruction of the home no more than two hundred and seventy-nine square feet smaller than what the Ordinance allows, including Findings of Fact and all discussions had. The motion was seconded by Mr. Popovic and carried by voice vote with four ayes.
Aye – Bob Birlson, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, Mark Lareau
Nay – None
Jonathan Lunn, Chicago Storage 100 LLC, stated we are bringing something that is not in the area to the area. These are starting to happen around Northwest Indiana and follow a supply and demand concept. In looking for sites, we take in to consideration what is available in the area and the configuration of the lot. Mr. Lunn stated these differ from your typical self-storage units in that it is completely indoors and you do not run the risk of snow or weather blowing in to your unit as you are trying to unload your vehicle to load your unit. To get in to the lot itself, we do not look for “A+” lots. We look for lots that are just off of the beaten path with some visibility. The facility being built in Dyer is in a similar location as the lot we are looking at in St. John, if not a little more visible than the lot we are looking at. This lot has been for sale for quite a while and the two end lots have been sold off, leaving this center piece empty. Mr. Lunn stated a positive for this facility being allowed is that, compared to Goodwill who does not pay real estate taxes, we will be paying in to taxes for the area as well as in to the TIF District. He went on to review the building photos that were submitted in the business plan. See Exhibit A. Mr. Rettig asked what a typical unit size is. Mr. Lunn stated they will average around one hundred square feet. We will probably have a five by five as the smallest unit available.
Opened to Public Hearing BZA 2023-03 Use Variance
No one was present to speak for or against the petitioner.
Closed to Public Hearing BZA 2023-03 Use Variance
BOARD QUESTIONS/COMMENTS/DISCUSSION
Mr. Lareau asked what would happen if the Board made no recommendation. Attorney Decker stated it still would be presented to the Town Council for their consideration. Mr. Lareau asked if it would come back to the Board for any further consideration. Attorney Decker stated no. Mr. Lareau asked if the Council approved this with no recommendation from the Board, would they need to come back for another variance. Attorney Decker stated the variance has been applied for with the Town. This is the first step in that process, to be considered by the Board of Zoning Appeals. You conduct the hearing and receive the facts, and based on the evidence and Ordinances, will make a decision for a favorable, unfavorable, or no recommendation to the Town Council. At that point, the Town Council will take it up and review what the Board of Zoning Appeals has done and ultimately decide to approve or disapprove the use variance that has been applied for with the Town. They will have the final say on whether or not the use variance is approved. Mr. Rettig stated if approval is given for the use, the site plan would also still have to be presented to the Plan Commission, so we would not be done by any means.
Mr. Lareau asked Councilman Blazak his opinion on this use in the Overlay District and if he had an idea of the overall feeling of the Council. Councilman Blazak stated each individual Council member would have to make their own decision based on the information presented. Each person will evaluate the application of this use in the neighborhood. Attorney Decker advised the Board members to follow the requirements that are set forth in the Findings of Fact when deciding on a recommendation.
Mr. Lunn stated his use is normally not in the Zoning Ordinance, so he is normally hesitant to state that it is a self-storage facility. He stated when he first came in to the Town Hall, the question was “what is the use”, but he did not want to say self-storage because it is not simply that. It is something new and interesting. As soon as “self-storage” is said everyone assumes it is a garage, which is not true. This use does not fit in to what is presented in the Code because it is still new and the Code was written over ten years ago, so to assume it is the same thing as what is known as self-storage is not true, but it is what happens when this idea is presented. Mr. Mendoza stated, to clarify, on the staff level the reason the use is asked for is to help guide the petitioner. The staff has no opinion on the use. We give the facts and present that to the Board who makes the decision, so before accusations are made on the staff that is the process. There is a permitted use in Industrial sections by right, but once you get in to the Overlay District it falls under a Special Exception or Use Variance. Councilman Blazak asked if there were any renderings of a two-story building, like the one that is proposed. The Council will want to see some sort of picture to really get an idea of what is being proposed for the site. Mr. Lunn stated he agreed and the best he can do is to show stuff he has done in the past. The renderings that were submitted are very close to what we are proposing for this site.
Mr. Birlson asked how many facilities Mr. Lunn has built. Mr. Lunn stated he has been doing this since 1995. Mr. Birlson stated but you did not bring pictures in of your previous facilities. Mr. Lunn stated the first picture shown is one that was done in Arlington Heights that sits right across from a Target. Discussion followed.
Mr. Popovic stated the building itself is fantastic, but the idea of maintaining the Overlay District for the intended use is where he struggles with allowing this. Mr. Lunn stated he understood, but this lot has been vacant for over ten years and has become a bit of a question mark with how the rest of the area has built up. The purpose of the Town is to protect the Overlay District, which is understandable, but this business will bring in around $140,000 per year in taxes which is beneficial to the Town. Mr. Lunn stated the reason he gets pushback is because he is not in the Code, but this use is high quality which is proven by Dyer putting one right by their Jewel. Mr. Birlson stated this is St. John, not Dyer. For development and commercial, we are still young and there is still more room for growth. This is a nice looking building, but it is important to maintain our Overlay District. There is a spot and a need for this, with the self-storage facility that is going in on Hart Street, but maybe not in this area. Mr. Lunn stated he is not in the same group as the self-storage that is being built on Hart Street.
Town Manager, Joseph Wiszowaty, asked how many units were expected to be in this building. Mr. Lunn stated about seven hundred and fifty. Mr. Wiszowaty asked Mr. Rettig how many units were going to be in the storage facility on Hart Street. Mr. Rettig loosely calculated about three hundred and fifty. Mr. Wiszowaty stated this will be about double, then. He asked the estimated assessed value on the property. Mr. Lunn stated the Cube Smart on US30 sold a few years back for $8 million, paying around $150,000 in taxes, which is comparable to what we will have here. The clientele is here for it, but the only issue is that it is not in the Code. He stated he did know that there were further hoops to jump through when designing the building due to the Overlay District, but that he was willing to do so.
Board Action
Mr. Popovic made a motion to send an unfavorable recommendation to the Town Council for BZA 2023-03, the use variance from StJMC 24-192 and StJMC 24-342 et seq. StJMC 24-45 allowing a self-storage facility in the C-2 and US 41 Overlay District, including Findings of Fact and all discussions had. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sheeran and carried by roll call vote with three ayes and one nay.
Aye – Bob Birlson, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran
Nay – Mark Lareau
| Mark Lareau | Brendan Sheeran |
| Board of Zoning Appeals, Chairman | Board of Zoning Appeals, Secretary |
Also present in-person: Adam Decker, Board Attorney; Sergio Mendoza, St. John Building and Planning Director.
Absent: Mark Lareau, Chairman; Bryan Blazak, Town Council Liaison; and Joseph Wiszowaty, Town Manager.
A quorum was attained.
Mr. Sheeran made a motion to approve the January 16, 2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting, seconded by Mr. Birlson and carried by voice vote with four ayes.
Ayes – Bob Birlson, Yolanda Cardona, Drago Popovic, and Brendan Sheeran
Nays - None
Michelle Rosen, 10704 Manor Drive, stated she had hired True Line Fence to install a fence at their home and they had thought they had gotten a permit for it, but it turned out they did not. We then found out that a variance was needed for our lot, even though no new holes were dug, the fence was just replaced exactly where it was before. Mrs. Cardona asked if the new fence had already been installed. Mrs. Rosen stated it has been.
Mr. Birlson asked what type of fence it was and if there were pictures. Danielle Todosijevic, True Line Fence, stated it is a vinyl fence. She submitted pictures to the Board showing the site lines from Mrs. Rosen’s property with the new fence as well as pictures of other homes in the area with corner lot fences that go all the way to the sidewalk. Ms. Todosijevic stated this fence is at a stop sign, but the fence is well before the stop sign to where you can see all the way down the street on both sides. Mr. Popovic asked why a permit was not pulled. Ms. Todosijevic stated we did apply for a permit. She explained that they do a lot of work in St. John, and she thought it was in a stack of permits she had picked up one day. After picking up the stack she thought it was in, she went out of town, and when she came back she realized that they did not have the permit and that the Town was looking in to the potential variance needed. She stated no one had called her by November, even though they had applied for the permit at the very end of September. When she had come in to pick up other permits, she inquired about this one, and that is when she found out that a variance was needed. Ms. Todosijevic stated at that time she had told the department that the fence was already installed in error since they thought they had received the permit. Mrs. Cardona stated technically you did not have the proper permit to erect the fence. Ms. Todosijevic stated that was correct. Mrs. Cardona asked when Ms. Todosijevic found out about the variance. Ms. Todosijevic stated November 10th. Mrs. Cardona stated at that time the fence was already installed. Ms. Todosijevic stated that was correct. Since it was a replacement fence, we did not think it would be an issue, but overall it was overlooked and an error that happened.
Mr. Sheeran asked how far the fence was in to the vision triangle. Mr. Mendoza drew a line on the lot showing the area that fell in to the triangle. Mrs. Cardona asked if the municipal code was in effect when the original fence was erected. Mr. Mendoza stated the original fence permit was pulled in 2002. He stated he believed at that time the vision triangle was not in effect, but would need to confirm. Ms. Todosijevic stated there are quite a few homes within the neighborhood that have fences that come all the way to the sidewalk.
Opened to Public Hearing BZA 2023-01 Development Variance
Dean Hasselgren, 10717 Manor Drive, stated that fence has been there for twenty years and there has never been an issue with it. It would be a pain for the homeowner to have to move it for such a small area.
Pete Cappas, 10716 Manor Drive, stated there have never been issues on that corner with the fence. It is still in the same place as it was when it was originally installed, and looks even nicer and is an asset to the neighborhood. If you look going east, the entire subdivision is uniform with fences that come to the sidewalk. We would hate to see these people penalized for a simple mistake.
Denise Sebben, 10733 Manor Drive, stated she has also been in the neighborhood for twenty years and has never had an issue with a site line and that fence. She stated the fence is beautiful and it needed to be done.
Ken DeYoung, 10747 Manor Drive, stated the fence is beautiful and he would hate to see anything done to it. There has never been a site line issue at that corner with the fence the way it is, and he would like to see it stay.
Mr. Mendoza read a letter of support from Richard and Cheli Thomas, 10705 Manor Drive. See Exhibit A.
Closed to Public Hearing BZA 2023-01 Development Variance
Board Action
Mr. Birlson made a motion to approve the development variance from StJMC 24-520 and StJMC 24-516 (e)(1) to allow the replacement of a privacy fence along the property line within the vision triangle at 10704 Manor Drive, St. John, IN, including Findings of Fact and all discussions had, seconded by Mr. Sheeran and carried by voice vote with four ayes.
Ayes – Bob Birlson, Yolanda Cardona, Drago Popovic, and Brendan Sheeran
Nays - None
| Yolanda Cardona | Brendan Sheeran |
| Board of Zoning Appeals, Vice-Chairman | Board of Zoning Appeals, Secretary |
Members present in-person: Bob Birlson, Yolanda Cardona, Vice-Chairman; Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, Secretary; and Mark Lareau, Chairman.
Also present in-person: Adam Decker, Board Attorney; Bryan Blazak, Town Council Liaison; and Sergio Mendoza, St. John Building and Planning Director.
Absent: Joseph Wiszowaty, Town Manager.
A quorum was attained.
February 13, 2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting
Mr. Birlson made a motion to approve the February 13, 2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting, seconded by Mr. Sheeran and carried by roll call vote with four ayes and one abstention.
Ayes – Bob Birlson, Yolanda Cardona, Drago Popovic, and Brendan Sheeran
Nays – None
Abstain – Mark Lareau
Mr. Birlson stated he did not see the rear yard setback called out on the drawing. Building and Planning Director, Sergio Mendoza, stated it is not shown on this drawing as it is a requirement per the Zoning Ordinance. The structure encroaches twenty-two feet in to that forty foot rear yard requirement with a balance of eighteen feet from the proposed structure to the property line. Mr. Birlson asked if there were utilities in the area. Mr. Mendoza stated no. The utility and drainage easement is the western ten feet of the lot. Mr. Lareau asked how the pool was installed if the setback is at forty feet. Attorney Svetanoff stated that is a proposed pool. We will have to gain access from the other side of the yard to construct the pool.
Mr. Birlson asked how long Mr. Longoria has resided at the property. Gary Longoria, 12945 Red Lily Way, stated six years. Attorney Svetanoff stated they made a substantial investment in the subdivision in building their home there, and they would like to increase that investment.
Opened to Public Hearing BZA 2023-04 Developmental Variance
Mr. Lareau read a remonstrance letter received by Steven and Mary Ann Mis at 9817 Tall Grass Trail. See Exhibit A.
No one was present to speak for or against the petitioner.
Closed to Public Hearing BZA 2023-04 Developmental Variance
BOARD QUESTIONS/COMMENTS/DISCUSSION
Mr. Sheeran asked if this met the amount of hard surface allowed on a residential lot. Mr. Mendoza stated we have reviewed that, and this does meet the requirements. Mr. Popovic stated there was mention of blocking the neighbor’s site as well as blocking them from noise. He asked if there was an issue going on currently. Attorney Svetanoff stated no, but we wanted to bring to light that this structure will serve in accomplishing that purpose. Mrs. Cardona asked the location of the neighbor that wrote the remonstrance letter. Mr. Lareau stated behind and across the retention pond, to the southwest. Mr. Mendoza showed the location on Near Map. Mr. Birlson asked if the neighbors to the south were in favor. Mr. Longoria stated everyone in the cul-de-sac is in favor of the project. Attorney Svetanoff stated the representative of the developer is also in favor of it and has signed off on it.
Mr. Birlson asked what was located on the northwest corner of the property. Mr. Longoria answered a playset. Mr. Birlson asked if this were approved, would the plat need to be re-recorded at the County with the vacation of easement. Mr. Mendoza stated this is not a vacation of easement. It is an encroachment in to a rear yard setback. Mr. Popovic asked if this structure is for guest purposes or if it would become a rental. Attorney Svetanoff stated it will not be rented out. It will be used for the kids and entertainment purposes. Mrs. Cardona asked specifically how requirement number three on the Findings of Fact would affect them. Attorney Svetanoff stated the strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property as without the variance, the petitioner will not be able to construct this residential addition to conform to the look and style of the existing structure and increase the assessed value of this home and the homes around it. Mr. Popovic asked if the variance was strictly for the pool house. Mr. Lareau stated it is for the pool as well. Mr. Popovic stated this is a large amount of yard to take up. He confirmed with Mr. Mendoza that this meets the requirements of lot coverage. He also asked if there was an alternative plan that is not as large. Mr. Longoria stated we have drawn about six plans and this was the best one to use.
Mr. Birlson stated it looks like there is a patio on the south that could potentially block the drainage on this lot along the property line. Mr. Longoria stated it does not need to be there if it is an issue. Mr. Lareau stated it does not look like there is much room there to allow water to flow between the proposed possible landscaping brick and property line. Mr. Sheeran stated he did not believe drainage would be an issue on the lot. Discussion followed regarding the drainage of the lot.
Mr. Popovic asked if a contractor was already lined up for the work. Mr. Longoria stated yes. Mr. Popovic asked the timeframe for the work to be done. Mr. Longoria stated about three months for the addition, not including the pool. Mr. Lareau stated so we are not approving the pool tonight. Mr. Longoria stated he already has a pool permit. Mr. Lareau asked if a variance was needed. Mr. Mendoza stated no because it is a flat surface, not a structure.
Board Action
Mr. Birlson made a motion to approve BZA 2023-04, a variance from StJMC 24-82 et seq. StJMC 24-95(d)(4) to allow an addition to the current home that will encroach into the rear yard setback by approximately twenty-two feet , including Findings of Fact and all discussions had. As a condition, Mr. Birlson added that a patio shall not be created between lots 22 and 23 in order to allow for drainage, and that there shall be no blockage of drainage along the lot line. Mrs. Cardona seconded the motion and stated that this fits the criteria necessary for approval as stated by Attorney Svetanoff, along with the fact that Mr. Mendoza has made sure that this meets the requirements for lot coverage. The motion failed three to two by roll call vote.
Ayes – Bob Birlson and Yolanda Cardona
Nays – Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, and Mark Lareau
Attorney Adam Decker stated this is not a recommendation, rather a decision that stays with the BZA. Since the motion failed, it is not approved.
Jill Van Tholen, 5512 Beacon Ridge, Lowell, IN, stated she primarily does hormone and weight loss therapy in her current office. She also stated that she will only have part-time hours and see approximately fifteen patients per week.
Opened to Public Hearing BZA 2023-05 Use Variance
No one was present to speak for or against the petitioner.
Closed to Public Hearing BZA 2023-05 Use Variance
Board Action
Mr. Sheeran made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for the use variance from StJMC 24-172 and StJMC 24-342 et seq. StJMC 24-45 to allow a medical office use within a C-1 and US41 Overlay District, including Findings of Fact and all discussions had. The motion was seconded by Mr. Popovic and carried by voice vote four to one.
Ayes – Yolanda Cardona, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, and Mark Lareau
Nays – Bob Birlson
| Mark Lareau | Yolanda Cardona |
| Board of Zoning Appeals, Chairman | Board of Zoning Appeals, Vice-Chairman |
Members present in-person: Bob Birlson, Yolanda Cardona, Vice-Chairman; Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, Secretary; and Mark Lareau, Chairman.
Also present in-person: Adam Decker, Board Attorney; Joseph Wiszowaty, Town Manager; and Sergio Mendoza, St. John Building and Planning Director.
Absent: Bryan Blazak, Town Council Liaison.
A quorum was attained.
March 20, 2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting
Mr. Lareau stated he did not believe the Board received the minutes in their email with the agenda and packet for this meeting and asked for a motion to defer approval of them until next month.
Mr. Birlson made a motion to defer the March 20, 2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes, seconded by Mr. Sheeran and carried by voice vote with five ayes.
Ayes: Bob Birlson, Yolanda Cardona, Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, and Mark Lareau
Nays: None
Attorney Svetanoff stated he had gone through the facts at the last meeting and asked if the Board would like for him to go through them again. Mr. Lareau asked Attorney Decker his opinion on allowing that. Board Attorney Adam Decker stated if counsel would like to review items as part of the application, it should be considered by the Board. Attorney Svetanoff gave an overview of project stating it is a 1,750 square foot addition that will connect directly to the current home and feature a living space, bathroom, and shower area. The outside of this addition will match the existing house with character and style of the neighborhood at large. We are of the opinion that the variance approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the community as this addition will conform to the look and style of the present existing structures and increase the assessed value of the houses in and around that area. Second, the use and value of the area adjacent to the residents included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner as, again, this is a simple residential addition that will conform to the look and style of the present existing structure and neighborhood and increase the assessed value of the houses in and around that area. Third, the strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property as without the variance, the petitioner will not be able to construct this residential addition that will again conform to the character and nature of the subdivision and increase the assessed value of the houses in and around that area. Furthermore, you have received approval through staff as well as Jack Slager with Schilling Development, who is the developer of this subdivision. Finally, we have tendered a petition supporting this project that has been circulated through the Preserve subdivision. We also have a Realtor with us tonight that has more than thirty years of experience selling homes in and around that subdivision who is ready to discuss the positive effects of the project on the community at large.
Mr. Lareau asked for clarification on whether the request is for a twelve foot variance or twenty-two feet. Building and Planning Director Sergio Mendoza stated it is a twelve foot variance. There is a thirty foot rear yard setback with an encroachment of twelve feet. We did check the recorded plat, which shows the thirty foot rear yard setback, not forty.
Nancy Frigo, Realtor with Coldwell Banker, gave a brief description of her experience in real estate and development as well as her professional experience in the area. She stated what Mr. Longoria is looking to do with the addition is not unusual and will not only add value to the neighborhood, but enjoyment for his family. It is not unusual to have such an addition or in-ground pool in this area. She stated as a Realtor, she is not concerned with the proposed project because it is only going to add value not only to his home, but to the surrounding neighbors, which is always a good thing. Ms. Frigo went on to give statistics of the prices of homes in the area of Mr. Longoria’s home, and ended with stating that she believed the project is ‘awesome’ and will only add value to the community.
Attorney Svetanoff stated in closing, we have provided a petition in favor of the project that has been signed by eight neighboring properties and we have had a Realtor speak who knows the area and knows the value it will add to the community. We are of the opinion that this is a great project for the Town of St. John.
Mr. Sheeran asked if the addition could go to the north and east rather than to the south and west in order to avoid the encroachment. He stated the request is not for just a foot or two, regardless of the value it may add to the property. We have rear yard setbacks in place for a reason. Attorney Svetanoff stated he believed the neighbors have encroached on their setbacks. Mr. Sheeran stated he cannot speak to that, but that he has been on the Board for several years and if that is the case, it should have come before the Board previously. Mr. Mendoza stated if the applicant is questioning neighboring properties we can go back and pull those records to make sure that the projects were done in compliance with the Town Codes or find out if they were done in violation, but we cannot do that tonight.
Gary Longoria, 12945 Red Lily Way, stated esthetically this is the best option we came up with. Once again, this was us working with Jack Slager, Mr. Mendoza, and the hired architects. Mr. Popovic stated he can appreciate what Mr. Longoria is trying to do with the addition and use, but his concern is the amount that it is encroaching and the potential drainage issues that it could cause the neighboring property. Mr. Longoria stated he believed at the last meeting that Mr. Sheeran had said he did not believe that drainage would be an issue. Mr. Popovic asked if a study has been done on that. Attorney Svetanoff stated we are just here for the variance tonight. Mr. Popovic stated he understood that, but the variance is creating a potential issue. Attorney Svetanoff stated your own staff person has gone through the project and given his endorsement, and the developer has given his endorsement. Mr. Lareau stated he did not believe that Mr. Mendoza had given an endorsement. Mr. Mendoza has done his job in getting you prepared for this, so the endorsement piece is a stretch. Mr. Mendoza stated that is correct. He stated his role is to assist in the process and we have worked to get a request in front of the Board for as few variance requests as possible. The professionalism offered should not be confused with an endorsement of the project. Mr. Lareau stated Mr. Mendoza does not work for the Board, we work in concert with him. He is not this Board’s staff, just to make that clear.
Mr. Birlson stated to go back to the drainage, at the last meeting the motion included a condition that the patio needs to be removed because it has a retaining wall which only allows one or two feet from the north property line to allow water to flow to the southwest. Mrs. Cardona asked if there could be amendments made to the addition where the encroachment would not be so large. If you want to proceed forward, perhaps there could be some compromise with what you are presenting. Mr. Longoria stated he has made revisions and that he currently has about $22,000 tied up in prints. We are approved right now for a pool to go about one foot from the fence line, which is again why the addition is proposed where it is proposed. He stated since he is allowed to put concrete almost all the way to his property line, he is wanting the addition to sit this way in order for it to look esthetically pleasing. Mr. Mendoza stated to comment, the pool permit is expired. Mr. Longoria stated it expires on May 24th. Mr. Mendoza stated we will have to double check that. Also, we want to confirm that the proposed drawing that he presented this evening is not what was submitted as a permit so there are conflicts there as well. Mr. Lareau stated it looks larger than it was before. He stated his concern, along with the drainage and setback issue, is that the addition looks like an in-law suite.
Mrs. Cardona stated the petitioner was here last month and the petition was denied. The petitioner is now here again with no changes to the plans that have been submitted for us to review. She asked how many times the petitioner gets to come back to present this item. Attorney Decker stated at the last meeting there was a motion to approve the developmental variance, but that motion failed because it did not garner three votes at the meeting. Indiana Code provides that at Board of Zoning Appeals shall approve or deny variances from the development standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board may impose reasonable conditions as part of the Board’s approval. A variance may be approved under this section only upon a determination in writing that approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the community, the use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner, and that the strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property. Those standards mirror our Zoning Ordinance, and the applicant is required to satisfy all three of those criteria in making the request for the variance. We are meeting tonight because there has been no affirmative vote to either confirm or deny the application. He stated in retrospect, perhaps that could have been considered at the last meeting if there was going to be a separate motion to deny the variance, but that motion was never made. Typically when the presentation is made to the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board will consider that and make a motion to either approve or deny the application. Mr. Lareau asked since the motion failed the last time, should a new motion have been made to deny the request. Attorney Decker stated yes because the motion must be to either approve or deny, with a passing vote.
Board Action
Mr. Sheeran made a motion to deny BZA 2023-04, a variance from StJMC 24-82 et seq. StJMC 24-95(d)(4) to allow an addition to the current home that will encroach into the rear yard setback by approximately twelve feet, including Findings of Fact and all discussions had, seconded by Mr. Popovic and carried by roll call vote three to two.
Ayes – Drago Popovic, Brendan Sheeran, and Mark Lareau
Nays – Bob Birlson and Yolanda Cardona
| Mark Lareau | Yolanda Cardona |
| Board of Zoning Appeals, Chairman | Board of Zoning Appeals, Vice-Chairman |
