Board of Zoning Appeals approves variances to rebuild fire-damaged Frankfort home

The Frankfort Board of Zoning Appeals approved two developmental variances on June 22 to allow the reconstruction of a fire-damaged, legal nonconforming single-family dwelling and the placement of a 10-by-14-foot addition that would increase the lot's impervious surface to 51 percent in a B Residential district.

Staff member Miss Lestissel told the board the property—identified in the staff report as the east half of Lot 8, Block 3 of the Cohen and Crothers addition on West Wabash Street—contains an approximately 1,200-square-foot dwelling that is legal nonconforming for front and side setbacks. Quoting the Unified Development Ordinance provisions relevant to docket 2026-014, Lestissel said, “According to 903.02, when a structure is damaged by fire ... to more than 50% of its pre-damaged value, it may not be restored except in conformity with the regulations of the zoning district,” but noted the ordinance allows the BZA to consider reconstruction on a case-by-case basis.

Lestissel told the board the county assessed value for the property is $77,900, meaning the 50 percent threshold is $38,950, and that the petitioner's repair estimate submitted to staff is $68,500—above the 50 percent threshold. "Based upon what they need to do, we believe they will spend more," Lestissel said, summarizing staff's reason to bring the request before the board.

Rob Bogue, identified in the hearing as the building inspector administrator, answered board questions about the extent of damage and the condition of the exterior. Bogue said the damage was primarily interior and that the exterior walls and foundation appear sound, indicating the house could be restored without moving the exterior walls: "All of the damage was in the interior part of the house ... the exterior of the house is in good shape."

Staff recommended approval of both variances with two conditions: the addition and any repairs must not extend closer toward Wabash Street or the alley than the existing house footprint, and if construction reveals that exterior walls must be torn down during repairs, the applicant must return to the BZA to request any additional variances needed to relocate the structure.

A board member moved to approve both variances with the conditions recommended by staff; the motion was seconded, a roll call was taken, and the chair announced that the application passed. The board directed the petitioners to work with staff (Rob and Grace) to secure necessary permits.

The action restores the property's legal nonconforming status under UDO 903.02 and grants a variance from UDO 304 to allow the site's impervious-surface ratio to rise to 51 percent subject to the conditions described. No additional appeals, deadlines, or implementation dates were stated at the hearing.