Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 01-23-23 roF c`�e T,NER y�, Cityof C /NDIANp. Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes Monday,January 23,2023 Location: Cannel City Hall Council Chambers,2nd Flr., 1 Civic Sq.,Cannel,IN 46032 Members Present: Leo Dierckman(President),Brad Grabow,Jim Hawkins(Vice),Alan Potasnik,Leah York DOCS Staff Present: Mike Hollibaugh(Director);Angie Conn(Planning Administrator)Joe Shestak(Recording Secretary) Legal Counsel: Sergey Grechukhin,Allison Lynch-Mcgrath Time of Meeting: 6:00 PM Declaration of Quorum,Swearing-in of Members,and Officer Elections 1. Election of President:A Motion made by Hawkins and seconded by Potasnik to elect Dierckman as President. Approved 5-0. 3. Election of Vice President:A Motion made by Grabow and seconded by Dierckman to elect as Hawkins as Vice President.Approved 5-0. Approval of Minutes and Findings of Facts of Previous Meetings A Motion made by Grabow and seconded by Hawkins to approve the Nov.28,2022,meeting minutes. Approved 5-0. Communications,Bills,and Expenditures:Angie Conn: • PZ-2022-00192 UV;00193 V;00201 V;00203 V: Insurance Office Variances has been tabled to Feb.27 IPublic Hearings Leo: Explained the Rules of Procedure for a BZA public hearing (SE)44 Horseshoe Ln.Group Home. The applicant seeks the following special exception approval for an 8-person group home for the elderly: 1. Docket No.PZ-2022-00208 SE UDO Section 2.07 Residential Special Exception. The site is located at 44 Horseshoe Ln.(Woodland Springs Subdivision, Lot 360). It is zoned RI/Residence.Filed by Jennifer Piccione of J&B RAL 1 Indiana,LLC. Petitioner: Jennifer Piccione: • Requesting to operate as housing with services established as defined under Indiana Law,and not a medical facility or skilled nursing home requiring licensing • Residents will have more one or more physical or mental disabilities which will require support of services • These residents are protected by housing discrimination by the State and Federal Fair Housing Law • We are requesting Reasonable Accommodation under Section 5.72 E.of the UDO. We will meet the 7 criteria listed: There are no other Group Homes within a block of this site.There will be up to 8 residents that will function as one single housing unit.Daily staff will consist of 2 caregivers during the day,and 1 at night.None of the caregivers will reside at this home. The residents will not have their own vehicles,and the caregivers will park their vehicles in the driveway or garage,and their personal cars will not be marked.The exterior of the home will remain to look as it does now and will not have any indication that the home will be inhabited by Group Home residents. There will be no undue financial or administrative burdens that would be imposed on the City,and our proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Our proposal will give Cannel residents an option to live within a neighborhood setting • Our home will continue to blend into this neighborhood remaining as the same size and scale.No additional lighting is being requested.No loud parties or barking dogs will not be done at this site. • By 2029, it is estimated that there will be a shortage of nearly 3 million assisted-living beds • This housing type will give Carmel residents an option to age and reside in a residential home 1 BZA Meeting Minutes 1-23-23 • Studies show that outcomes for residents improved in a housing setting like ours • A CDC study showed that residents in larger caregiver facilities are 2x more likely to fall then in homes like ours • There's no indication that having a Group Home in a neighborhood reducing surrounding property values • I personally researched all the surrounding homes by the Story Cottage Group Home in Cannel,and all have increased in value • Group Homes are treated as residential under Federal and State laws • Laundry is done in-house,groceries are purchased by caregivers,not delivered by commercial trucks • There's no required extensive driving through the neighborhood, since this home is located just three houses from the neighborhood entrance • This home,prior to us purchasing it,was occupied by 8 residents,some related,and some not related. Either adult or school-aged children who left the house daily for work, school, social engagements,errands,etc. The previous 8 residents lived at this home without incident or complaint. • This use does not violate any of the CRCs of the Woodland Springs subdivision • We have received requests from future residents who are waiting for this home to open • We received approximately 46 opposition letters that make inaccurate and false claims how this home will operate and the type of residents who will live here • There are over 400 homes in Woodland Springs,which means approximately 350 households did not object • We are providing a much needed and desired housing option,and we are truly invested in this community Public Comments in Support: Jenna Centofante,Beech Drive: I live next door to the Story Cottage Group Home. I love living next to this property. My property increased just from residing next door. Landscaping is consistently taken care of.The arrival of emergency vehicles is not an issue. Visitors visiting the residents respect the neighborhood. Mindy Garcia, Westfield: I'm trying to find a place for my sister to live. Loneliness is an issue. My sister fell while living by herself. She is not ready for the traditional nursing home and wants to be part of a family in the setting of a home Marcy Brittingham,Fishers: I am my mother's primary caregiver. It was very difficult. She then moved to a 55 and older community. I had to take away her car. I toured every facility within my budget. My mother needs to live with a small group. She is not ready for assisted living in a large institution facility. Public Comments in Opposition: Vern Roach,Eden Estates Drive: Keystone Pkwy was designated as a boundary between single-family housing and business in the late 70's. This is a residential business.There's no positive impact for this Group Home. I don't care where the house is located.This request is a slippery slope,and it should be denied. David Conley, Horseshoe Lane: I live next door. We have had family members that need care,but that's hardly the issue. There were not 8 people living in that house. There were 2 divorced males living here,who had 3 children between them. Occasionally the children would be there for the weekend, but they didn't live there. Only 1 adult male lived here full time. Why would we have a commercial enterprise that makes money in the middle of the residential neighborhood? Jack Rogers,Horseshoe Lane: UDO Section 5.72 E states reasonable accommodation.#7 states if a fundamental alteration in the Comp Plan would be required. Of course, it is.Anything east of Keystone is a single-family dwelling. This is not a single-family dwelling. This would request would destroy the Comp Plan. In the 70's they established the Keystone Pkwy as a boundary between commercial and residential. This is a business.The issue is not old people,but the location. Where should this be placed?There's a lot of places that the zoning allows it. Why should this go in the middle of a residential area?I would hate to have only 2 bathrooms for 8 people. Put this in an allowable zoning district. Our neighborhood covenants state only residential is allowed. When people bought homes in our neighborhood,we knew this was for single-family housing.This will change the surrounding property values.Nobody is opposed to the need of this type of housing. It just shouldn't be placed here and destroy our entire area for no reason. The issue isn't against lonely old people,the issue is where are you going to place this. There's very little house and land for this type of housing. There's no park within 2 miles and you don't want these residents walking around our neighborhood. Rebuttal to Public Comments: Sarah Jane Hunt,Attorney for Jennifer Piccione(Petitioner): 2 BZA Meeting Minutes 1-23-23 • I want to draw your attention to the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act.The Board is to treat the UDO's Reasonable Accommodation request separately from the Special Exception request. • This residence request should pass the Special Exception since the Petitioner has indicated all the factors as to why that is the case. • A request for a reasonable accommodation, is requesting this Board accommodate these residents. If it isn't granted and because of their disabilities,they can't live in the community of their choice. • Our laws say that just because you have a disability doesn't mean you have to live in an institution or live in a certain part of town • The Fair Housing Act protects individuals with disabilities. People living here will have physical and cognitive disabilities and will need help caring for themselves. • Cannel Code doesn't limit the amount of people who could live together by blood or marriage. We are asking for an accommodation from this rule to allow people with a disability to live in a neighborhood with a family-like environment.Just because you age doesn't mean you should live in a traditional nursing home. • This accommodation should be analysis by a case-by-case basis,and doesn't present a"slippery slope" • There's no evidence of parking problems, lighting problems,traffic congestion,or property values decreasing. The only thing we heard is"we don't want them in our neighborhood"and that is not a valid defense. • We respectfully request the City to treat this home as functionally equivalent to a family Department Report: Angie Conn: • The Petitioner is seeking Special Exception approval from the BZA • Per the UDO,a Group Home of not more than 8 unrelated persons should be considered favorably • Per the UDO,and under State and Federal laws,a Group Home is considered as a residential use • The UDO does allow the BZA to approve the Special Exception with a condition or commitment • The HOA did change their stance,and they are now not supportive of this Special Exception request • TAC did review this proposal,and a few remaining comments relate to how the State will classify this structure as it relates to the remodel building permit being reviewed • The Planning Dept.recommends favorable consideration of this request with the following conditions:the Petitioner addresses remaining TAC review comments before the issuance of the remodel permit,and that the Petitioner complies with all applicable laws,regulations,and restrictive covenants and limitations as it relates to UDO Section 9.08(EX3),also with the adoption of the findings of fact submitted by the Petitioner. Board Comments: Alan: Do you know who the 8 residents will be living in this home?Do they need to be considered disabled to live here? Jennifer Piccione: Two people have contacted us,but we have not selected the 8 residents.They only qualify if they have a disability to live at this home. Alan: Did you personally meet with either the HOA or surrounding homeowners to explain your petition?Jennifer Piccione: I sent personal letters to the surrounding neighbors and the HOA. I've have had continue discussions with the HOA. We offered to have a personal meeting at the home,but no one took our offer.Alan: 20-year term seems like a very long time for this petition, so I would suggest 5-years instead. I don't see the outside of this home changing,but personally I think it would effectively change the neighborhood. Jim: Do you have any previous history of running a Group Home?Why did you choose Cannel as the location of your home?Jennifer Piccione:No previous group home,but I've had experience with my mother and sister being in Group Homes for the last 45 years. Both of my business partners live in Indian and I'm from the Midwest. I have I wanted to open a home in the Midwest my mother can use. Cannel was a great choice for us. Jim: Does Staff have any concerns with items 6 and 7 of the Reasonable Accommodation in the UDO?Angie Conn: The Department has no concerns with those.Jim: I'm in real estate banking,and there are these types of homes throughout the Midwest. They blend into the community. It is a trend going forward giving seniors an alternative place to live. IBrad: Is there a condition or provision in Indiana Code that predisposes Boards like ours to approve these types of Special Exceptions that carries conditions regarding the type of operation or the composition of the residence?Sergey Grechukhin: I'm not aware of Indiana Code like that,but our own UDO does provide certain conditions you can implement,but none of them relate to the type of residence.Our UDO does not impose any limitations on elderly or disabled. 3 BZA Meeting Minutes 1-23-23 Leo: Can Jack Roger approach the stand?Do you live in this neighborhood?Jack Rogers: Yes, I live on Horseshoe Lane. Leo: What's your recollection of who previously lived at this house?Jack Rogers: Two divorced men, and their kids would stay there on the weekends,but they didn't live there all the time. Leo: I'm challenged by the Petitioner's Findings of Fact.My understanding this house was owned by one dividual with 3 children. There were never 8 individual people living here. Does the Petitioner have facts that state 8 individuals living here?Who told you this?Jennifer Piccione: During the transaction of this real estate,we spoke with the sellers daily for a month. It was 2 adult men who lived here, unrelated,who were not married,and had 3 children each. If you pull up the online posting of this home,you can see the pictures all of the different bedrooms and 8 beds. 8 people lived at this house. The children might have lived with the other parent during the week. Leo: I walked this neighborhood and spoke to some of the neighbors,asking them who lived here.They said an adult male and his 3 kids lived here. I then spoke to the person who owned this home,and it was only him and his 3 kids.Jennifer Piccione: That is not the case. There might be personal reasons why he said that, and I don't want to get into this tonight. If you pull up the posting on Zillow,there are 8 different beds shown.Leo Dierckman: After speaking with the neighbors and the owner,they are saying only one adult and his 3 kids lived here. You are using this as logic on your Findings of Fact,and you are asking us to support this?On the issue of location,you are using an example of the Group Home on 33 Beech Drive,and this location has parking for 10 spots,and is the first house as you turn onto Beech Drive. This location is totally different and is not being impacted as I feel this neighborhood would be impacted. This is not apples to apples.Your arguments and Findings of Fact don't jive on the way you want us to rule on this. I'm not challenged on the use since that is a protect use by law. I'm challenge by the set of circumstances you presented,and the validly of this location and methods you are using to validate that you will not negatively affect the neighborhood. You state 8 people have lived here independently of each other,and I don't know that is the case. I don't find the Findings of Fact factual in nature. I don't feel this is an appropriate location for this use. A Motion made by Hawkins and seconded by Grabow to approve PZ-2022-00208 SE.,conditioned upon: • The Petitioner addresses remaining TAC review comments before the issuance of the remodel permit, • The Petitioner complies with all applicable laws,regulations,and restrictive HOA covenants and limitations as it relates to UDO Section 9.08(EX3), • The special exception approval is only valid for 5-year time limit(would need to come back to the BZA after 5 years),and • The implementation of Special Exception will not otherwise result in a violation of any limitations or prohibitions imposed by any applicable HOA restrictive covenants. Approved 3-2,Dierckman,Potasnik. TABLED TO FEB.27-(UV,V)Insurance Office Variances, 2. , 3. Docket No. PZ 2022-001 ' DO-Seetion-5:-3 ,5 hhiii Ground Sign e-requested-fer-residen-tial structure erted t.office 4. , (V)Pruett Residence,Home Occupation Variance. The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval: 6. Docket No.PZ-2022-00243 V UDO Section 5.18 Home Occupation Standards-Backyard area requested to be used. The site is located at 13787 Hickory Ridge Ct. (Springmill Crossing subdivision,Lot 163). It is zoned S2/Residence. Filed by Steven Lammers of MRL(Mandel Rauch&Lammers, P.C.),on behalf of Cary &Carrie Pruett, owners. Petitioner: Steven Lammers,Mandel Rauch&Lammers,P.C.: • With me tonight are the homeowners,Cary&Carrie Pruett • Coach Cary is now pursing his passion in coaching kids in agility soccer training 4 BZA Meeting Minutes 1-23-23 • Coach Cary received approval from the HOA for his backyard space that has turf he uses for training • Coach Cary did not proactively seek this as a full-time job,but he became very good at what he does and thus gained a lot of business from kids who wanted him for training • We are willing to impose conditions for our variance request to address the concerns of the neighbors • We received over 20 letters of support and most of them are here tonight • We received concerns about the noise generated in his backyard,but Coach Cary only limits 1-on-I training.The noises you hear wouldn't be any different than the noises from kids playing outside. • Coach Cary doesn't use whistles or megaphones. There's no shouting. Coach Cary is a conscientious neighbor and will limit the noises generated. • We are willing to limit lessons from loam to 7pm, 6 lessons a day,2 trainees per session • This doesn't change the nature of the neighborhood,and neighbors will still be able to enjoy their backyards • There will be no signage or advertising on site,and it is not visible from the street • Traffic generated will be no different than a kid hosting a birthday party • We will limit the parking to the driveway only,and no parking on the street • Outside training doesn't really exist during the winter months,and we are willing to cut off training in the warmer months at 7pm • Some neighbors are concerned about the soccer balls bouncing off a wall, is no different than kids bouncing and shooting basketballs • The neighbors who live directly behind fully support it. They are exposed to it immediately.They have stated the trainees are not loud and do not cause stress or distraction. • We are seeking variance approval for supervised outside play Cary Pruett,homeowner: • I have a passion teaching Spanish and soccer,and working with the youth • It started as a side business,and it got bigger than I ever expected • I believe in an active outdoor lifestyle,and all of the same sounds from kids in this neighborhood will continue regardless of if I'm approved or not • I created this multi-space in my backyard for my family,and now I want to share it with others • It feels if there were ever a purpose for a variance,this should be the one Mulley Danforth,5th grader: • I see Coach Cary every Thursday to train with him in his backyard • I can bike to his home for training,and I have gained the skills and confidence needed to play soccer Public Comments in Support: Jacob Highton,Springmill Crossing: The noise generated is normal active play.Our neighborhood has lots of kids and you can hear them play outside daily. The noise is minimal. Coach Cary has a passion,and this will continue. Brent Santiwictz,former neighbor: My son trains with Coach Cary.He comes to my son's game. Coach Cary trains several players on my son's team.He's willing to train the low-income kids on my son's team for free. Ryan Feiock, Springmill Crossing.: I live directly behind Cary. My office where I work from is 25-ft from the backyard. The noise is not a problem.The noise my kids make from playing basketball is a lot louder. I take a lot of phone calls from my home and the noise is never an issue.The property is never an eyesore. They have been great neighbors. Public Comments in Opposition: Tania Roudebush, Hickory Ridge Ct.: We are a next-door neighbor. There's no doubt he's a good coach and teacher. That's not the point or why we are here tonight.An outdoor business does not belong in the middle of subdivision and not allowed per the Cannel UDO. Home Occupation Standards state a business shall be conducting wholly within the home. Cary did not tell us he was coaching kids other than his home and running an outdoor business. It is a nuisance for us and the sounds of the ball hitting the wall is loud. I can hear him coaching up the kids. Back-to-back lessons occur.Cars idle Iwhile parents wait for pickup.His turf buildout now creates standing water next in our backyard,passes out photos. Terry Hickey,Hickory Ridge Ct.: Lives across the street. This has been very hard for me. We hired private coaching for our kids.After reading and listening to all the responses,the BZA should deny this variance.UDO 5.18 is based on more than player development through private coaching. What important for these kids is Coach Cary and not this backyard.A 5 BZA Meeting Minutes 1-23-23 neighbor asked me to do something for this soccer business because he didn't know how to stop this escalation. I contacted the HOA.I didn't receive any communication from the HOA. It's our belief the HOA did not approve this buildout per the bylaws. We were to believe that this buildout in their yard was for their kids to play in. Nancy Beckerich,Hickory Ridge Ct.: I live across the street.You read my letter, and a lot of the support are from people who are not directly affected by this. It's a nuisance, and this contradicts UDO 5.18. We are concern if this goes forward, what's next?The sound is a constant sound of the soccer ball thudding against the wall. There was a lack of transparency between the Petitioner and the neighbors. We have been put in the middle of this. We do not want this outdoor business. Mr. Carey can take his business elsewhere at a park or an open field. There are options. Rebuttal to Public Comments: Steven Lammers: • A variance introduces some flexibility to the Ordinance • You did not hear from any disapproval from the HOA.There was no attempt from the HOA to shut down • The homeowner was forthcoming with the HOA and received approval • Once we received a violation notice from Cannel Code Enforcement,he has not done any training since • It is not in violation of the Home Occupation Standards with the variance Department Report: Angie Conn: • The Petitioner is seeking variance approval from Home Occupation Standards • We did feel the proposed intensity of this use is of concern and should be addressed • The Petitioner is willing to reduce the hours of operations,trainees on site,and number of lessons • Our goal is to mitigate or eliminate the nuisance • We want the Petitioner to work the Cannel Engineering Dept.to resolve the standing stormwater • Staff recommends positive recommendation with several conditions: parking on site,reducing number of trainees, seeking a fence permit for existing fence,reducing the days and hours,and comply with the property maintenance codes,which relates to the standing water, and to relook at the existing lot coverage. Board Comments: Leah: Have you agreed to reduce to 2 trainees at a time,and 6 lessons a day?What were the hours?Carey Pruett: Correct. Hours would be from loam to 7pm.Leah: Have you looked at commercial space?Cary Pruett: I would lose money daily if I had to rent a commercial space.Leah: I did some math on revenue with the limitations,and that is a significant income. Jim: Have you looked at utilizing parks or any other open spaces we have in Cannel to do this type of training where it wouldn't have that much of an impact on the neighborhood?Cary Pruett: I have looked into this. There's no way for me to achieve what I achieve and connect with the kids with the way I do on consistent basis. The turf that I placed in my backyard drains any rain immediately.Any open space wouldn't be useable if it rains. Brad: How much time would you spend given lessons in a given in a day?Cary Pruett: There's only 2 months of the year where I can do 6 lessons a day. I can only give 4 lessons during a school day.Cutoff would be at 7pm. During the spring and summer breaks,6 would be the max.Brad: How much time during the day the neighbors would hear the noise?Cary Pruett: During this last summer,I did 7 lessons, around 5-6 hours a day. The other months I did 3-4 hours daily. Brad: Would the normal noise ordinance of the City comply with this request?Angie Conn: The Petitioner has committed to no use of whistles,and megaphones, but we have not measured what the level would be at the property line from the other noises generated,such as the thump of the soccer ball. Brad: Can the Petitioner continue to be in compliance with the HOA and their covenants?Cary Pruett:Yes.I'm willing to do what I can to change certain noises. Using a decibel reader,the noise shouldn't be louder than a basketball bouncing. If it is louder than a bouncing basketball,I will do my best to reduce my noise levels generated on site. Brad: If this petition is denied tonight,can that effect of the denial be delayed for the Petitioner and his students to allow for a transition period?Sergey Grechukhin: That would not be an option. There was no permit obtained prior to this. 6 BZA Meeting Minutes 1-23-23 Brad: Can Code Enforcement delay this for a short period to allow the Petitioner to transition?Angie Conn: Yes, if you direct us to do that since we are in the middle of winter. ILeo: When this was first introduced to us, I was under the impression that this was built for your kids, and then you expanded it to other kids to the point where you can do it full-time. Cary Pruett: That is correct.Leo: A remonstrator brought up a Facebook page about your services for soccer agility training before the date you built your turf space.Cary Pruett: I have always done soccer lessons on the side at high school fields.I built this for my kids to use. I decided to stay and work at home when we had a baby. Leo: This is having a negative impact on your neighbors. This is a variance request with a bunch of added requirements such as reducing the hours and resolving the stormwater issue. There are facilities built in this town that you can lease space from.Alan: I agree with you.You can add the need for a fence permit for the existing fence. When did you move in?Cary Pruett: March 2022.Alan: When did the soccer turf get installed?Cary Pruett: May 2022. Alan: Why couldn't you do lessons on a football field?Cary Pruett: It would be like playing basketball on a gravel road. The turf drains the water efficiently and allows me to conduct my training agilities during any conditions. That's why I built the training space. A Motion made by Grabow and seconded by Hawkins to approve PZ-2022-00243 V. Motion Denied 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:02 p.m. '-%"--- —. Leo Dierckman—President e Shestak—Recording Secretary I BZA Meeting Minutes 1-23-23