HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 05-22-95 CARNIFL/CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
MAY 22, 1995
CARMEUCLAY
PLAN COMMISSION/BZA
UNOF7ICIAL MINUTES
The meeting was called to order by the President in Council Chambers, One Civic Square,
Carmel, Indiana, at approximately 7.00 PM with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Members present were as follows. Diana Cordray; Bill Ensign; Dick Klar; and Alan
Klineman.
A quorum was declared.
Also present were Dave Cunningham and Terry Jones of the Department of Community
Development and City Attorney, Gordon Byers
The minutes of the previous meeting had not been distributed to all Board members,
therefore, the April minutes will not be acted upon until the June meeting.
H. PUBLIC REARING.
lh. Rothberger Pool Variances (V-18-95)
Petitioner seeks approvals for variances from the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to
construct a swimming pool within the front yard (Section 5.3.2), to construct the pool
within the 75' setback required for an accessory use (Section 5.3.1) Paragraph 6), and
to construct a fence 5 feet in height in the front yard setback (Section 25.2.1). The
site is located at 10547 Chatham Court (lot 25 in the Windemere Subdivision.)
Site is zoned S-1/Residential.
Filed by Pools of Fun on behalf of Mr. and Mrs Rothberger.
Larry R Baker, owner of Pools of Fun, Keystone Way, Cannel appeared before the Board
representing the applicant. Two of the variances are occasioned by the front yard definition;
the third variance is for the construction of the fence
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed project;
none appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Alan Klineman moved to approve Docket No. V-18-95, seconded by Bud VanDyne. The
vote was five in favor, none opposed, MOTION APPROVED.
2h. Conarro Pool Variance (V-20-95)
Petitioner seeks approval for a variance from Section 5.3 2 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning
Ordinance to construct a swimming pool within a front yard. The site is located at
10590 Ditch Road.
1
The site is zoned S-1/Residential.
Filed by Pools of Fun on behalf of Mr. and Mrs Conarro
Larry R. Baker, owner of Pools of Fun, Keystone Way, Carmel appeared before the Board
representing the applicant. The petitioner is requesting a vanance from the ordinance to allow
the construction of a pool within a front yard.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed project;
none appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Bill Ensign questioned Mr Baker about the commencement of construction without having
obtained prior approval. Mr Baker responded that in the previous year, his company was
given permission to start site work prior to inspection and approval, and thought the same
policy would hold true for this year also
Dave Cunningham stated that no permit had been issued on this particular site, and the policy
of the Department is that no construction would begin prior to the issuance of a permit, the
permit would not be issued until the variance had been granted. Dave Cunningham stated
that at this point, the petitioner was probably facing a fine for construction without a permit.
The City Attorney has been made aware of the situation, and a "Stop Work Order" had been
posted on the site
In response to questions from the Board, Terry Jones said that no permits are needed to do
grading, site work, and/or landscaping. In the current case, the construction went a little too
far in regard to site preparation, in fact, sides of the pool were actually installed.
Mr. Ensign questioned the amount of the fine involved; Terry Jones responded that the fine
was $100 00 for the commencement of construction without a permit.
Bill Ensign moved for the approval of Docket V-20-95 with the following restriction. the
continuation of construction shall not commence until June 15, 1995, seconded by Bud
VanDyne.
Alan Khneman recalled that Mr. Baker had been before the Board a number of times and had
a good record thus far. Mr. Khneman stated that he was not in favor of penalizing Mr.
Baker.
Alan Klineman moved to amend Mr. Ensign's motion to eliminate the restriction, seconded by
Diana Cordray, the vote was four in favor, Bill Ensign opposed. MOTION APPROVED.
NO"1E Items 3h. through 7h , Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc., Docket No. SU-21-95, and
Docket Nos. V-22-95 through V-25-95, were heard together but voted on separately.
2
3h. Shurgard Storage (SU-21-95)
Petitioner seeks Special Use approval to construct an enclosed storage warehouse
facility in a B-3/Business district. The site is located at the southern edge of the
intersection of US 31 and State Road 431 The petitioner has appeared before the
Carmel/Clay Plan Commission and has obtained approval for their Development Plan
and Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping, and Signage review The site is
zoned B-3/Business.
Filed by James J Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger on behalf of Shurgard Storage Centers,
Inc.
4h. Shurgard Storage (V-22-95)
Petitioner seeks a variance of Section 27 5 of the Carmel/Clay Ordinance to construct
a parking lot that contains 53 parking spaces, instead of the required 229 parking
spaces The site is located at the southern edge of the intersection of U S 31 and
State Road 431 The petitioner has appeared before the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission
and has obtained approval for their Development Plan and Architectural Design,
Lighting, Landscaping, and Signage review Site is zoned B-3/Business
Filed by James J Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger on behalf of Shurgard Storage Centers,
Inc
5h. Shurgard Storage (V-23-95)
Petitioner seeks a variance of Section 23.B.8 3 of the Carmel/Clay Ordinance to
construct an enclosed storage warehouse facility that encroaches into the required front
yard setback requirement of the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone of 90 feet by 45 feet. The site
is located at the southern edge of the intersection of U S 31 and State Road 431 The
petitioner has appeared before the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission and has obtained
approval for their Development Plan and Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping,
and Signage review Site is zoned B-3/Business
Filed by James J. Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger on behalf of Shurgard Storage Centers,
Inc.
6h. Shurgard Storage (V-24-95)
Petitioner seeks a variance of Section 23.A.2 of the Carmel/Clay Ordinance to
construct an enclosed storage warehouse facility that encroaches into the required front
yard setback requirement of the Keystone Overlay Zone of 120 feet by 60 feet. The
site is located at the southern edge of the intersection of U.S. 31 and State Road 431
The petitioner has appeared before the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission and has obtained
approval for the Development Plan and Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping,
and Signage review. Site is zoned B-3/Business.
Filed.by James J. Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger on behalf of Shurgard Storage Centers,
Inc.
3
7h. Shurgard Storage (B-25-95)
Petitioner seeks a variance of Section 23.B.10.2(2) of the Carmel/Clay Zoning
Ordinance to install landscaping on the site that does not meet the minimum
requirements of the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone. The site is located at the southern edge of
the intersection of U.S. 31 and State Road 431. The Petitioner has appeared before
the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission and has obtained approval for their Development
Plan and Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping, and Signage review Site is
zoned B-3/Business.
Filed by James J. Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger on behalf of Shurgard Storage Centers,
Inc.
Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Board representing the
applicant. Also present on behalf of the applicant were Doug McAuley, Scott Nieman, Paul
Wells, and traffic consultant Steve Fehnbach. Shurgard is requesting a special use to permit
the construction and operation of an enclosed storage warehouse in the northern part of
Cannel within the triangle formed by the merger of Keystone Avenue and U S 31
Mr. Nelson described the corporate philosophy and objectives of Shurgard, reviewed an aerial
photograph and a series of drawings depicting the development plan which was approved by
the Plan Commission on April 18, 1995, and discussed the developmental standards variances
being requested.
An informational booklet and traffic analysis which had been prepared by A & F Engmeenng
_ was submitted to each of the Board members. The real estate is accessible by a frontage road
which exists to serve the Lotus Garden Restaurant. Of particular importance is the right-of-
way of U.S. 31 in respect to the setback requirements and the curve required to provide a
merger with Keystone Avenue. The natural features include a partially wooded lot, Cool
Creek, and natural vegetation. Adjacent uses include the Cool Creek Apartments and the
Lotus Garden Restaurant. Other uses include a gas station, a small retail/service center, the
Carmel Cemetery, and a small, enclosed warehouse facility which is owned and operated by
Harry Elliott. There are other commercial and industrial business uses in the area, which
includes the Carmel Dairy Queen.
Access to the proposed site is by a frontage road, extended northward from Rangeline Road
with 30 foot back-to-back roll curb and glitter in compliance with Cannel's roadway
standards, and will also contain a four foot concrete sidewalk.
A definitive landscape plan is on file with the Department of Community Development which
P P
identifies all plant material by botanical and common name, and the quantity of plant
materials and size. The landscape plan is one of both preservation of existing plant material
as well as additional plant material. The areas to be preserved are west of the Creek and
those areas where vegetation exists today, the remainder of the site is barren and the applicant
has provided landscaping around the entire perimeter, within certain islands adjacent to the
buildings, and additional landscaping adjacent to the entry of building No One. The
4
landscape plan is substantial and has been approved by rvlike Hollibaugh of the Depai tiiient.
The building materials selected consist of dnvit as well as rough textured and smooth
textured split-faced block. The northwest and northeast elevations of building one were
shown as seen driving north and south on Keystone Avenue.
The variances are attributable to the uniqueness of the real estate, the overlay zones, the use,
and parking variance (229 spaces to 53) The traffic report indicates that this particular type
of use is very low generator of traffic. It is believes that a strict adherence to the ordinance
would create a hardship on the petitioner and a practical difficulty in that the expense of
constructing additional parking facilities when they are not needed would create a hardship; it
is also thought be a detriment in preserving a many natural features as possible.
Variances two and three are requests from Developmental Standards from the 31 and 431
Overlay Zone to permit a reduction in the required front yard setbacks The application of
the overlay zones to the triangular piece of real estate has the net effect of creating two front
yards The request is to reduce the setback on US 31 from 90 feet to 45 feet and on
Keystone from 120 feet to 60 feet. The fourth vanance is for landscaping requirements of
the US 31 Overlay Zone. Mr. Nelson stated that the petitioner's plan meets all but one
landscaping provision which is that there shall be plantings immediately adjacent to the
building; said provision is workable for office buildings, but an enclosed storage warehouse
facility is not consistent with the anticipated use of the real estate The petitioner has,
however, provided for substantial 30 foot greenbelts and plantings which will provide the
reasonable and appropriate screening of the warehouse facility.
The petitioner has appeared before the Technical Advisor Committee three times and it was
concluded that there were no remaining issues to be addressed. The petitioner has also
appeared before the Plan Commission.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed project;
none appeared and the public hearing was closed.
3h. Alan Klineman moved for approval of SU-21-95, Special Use for Shurgard storage
facility, seconded by Diana Cordray The vote was 5 in favor, none opposed, MOTION
APPROVED.
4h. Bill Ensign moved for approval of V-22-95, parking lot variance for Shurgard Storage
Center, seconded by Diana Cordray. The vote was 5 in favor, none opposed, MOTION
APPROVED.
5h. Diana Cordray moved for approval of V-23-05, variance for front yard setback
requirement of US 31 Overlay Zone, seconded by Bill Ensign. The vote was five in favor,
none opposed, MOTION APPROVED.
5
6h. Bill Ensign moved for approval of V-24-95 , variance for front yard setback requirement
of Keystone Overlay Zone, seconded by Diana Cordray The vote was five in favor, none
opposed, MOTION APPROVED
7h. Diana Cordray moved for the approval of V-25-95, variance for landscaping
requirements, seconded by Bud VanDyne. The vote was five in favor, none opposed,
MOTION APPROVED.
8h. Pittman Partners (V-26-95 through V-43-95)
Petitioner seeks several developmental standards vanances of Section 8.0 of the
Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to construct 22 single family dwellings on 12 existing
lots planned as part of the Walter's Plaza Subdivision. The site is located west of
Rangeline Road, just north of the existing Carmel Motel Site is zoned R-
2/Residential.
Filed by Mr Steve Pittman of Pittman Partners.
Steve Pittman, P O. Box 554, Carmel, appeared before the Commission requesting
developmental standards variances Mr Pittman showed an aerial photograph of the site as it
currently exists Walters Plaza is located approximately one-half mile south of 146th Street,
west of Meridian and Frontage Road, east of Stonehenge Subdivision, and north of Rolling
Acres and the Carmel Motel. Walters Plaza consists of 15 acres, 5.3 of which are zoned B-3
and the remaining 9 7 acres zoned R-2.
Carmel's Comprehensive Plan has designated the subject area as regional commercial/office;
the plans for residential are much less intense. The onginal plat was approved in 1979, and
there are three different uses for the site with no separation, the front 5.3 acres are zoned B-3/
Commercial, there is a multi-family designation, and also single family designation. There
are no covenants or restrictions on this particular site.
The average lot size in Walters Plaza is 23,000 feet, more than twice the size of that required
in an R-2 District. The petitioner had agreed with the neighbors to construct single family
units on those lots that back up to Stonehenge, and limiting the structure to one story. The
petitioner also agreed to share 50/50 with the neighbors any buffering costs such as fencing
and landscaping on lots 11, 12, and 13
Mr Pittman stated that he was willing to place restrictions on every lot which would cover
home sizes, garages, what would be required in driveways, what would be allowed in terms of
swimming pools, solar heat panels, fencing, etc. The petitioner has agreed to construct a six
foot bamcade fence on the back of lot 17 as it abuts Stonehenge There will be further
restrictions in regard to trash, storage tanks, animals, additional storage, occupancy of
residential use or partially completed home prohibited.
The variances requested are in regard to minimum lot size and lot width in an R-2 District.
6
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed project. The following
persons appeared
George Meissner, 207 Rockberry Drive, resident of Stonehenge stated that he had originally
spoken against the proposed development and had presented a petition on behalf of
Stonehenge asking that the plans not be approved. However, Mr. and Mrs. Meissner and the
residents of Stonehenge approve of the proposed request to re-plat the Walter's property
Most if not all original objections had been resolved. Mr. Meissner asked that the project be
allowed to go forward once the City has completed its project to correct the drainage problem
existing in the area.
Mike Thomas, 521 Thornberry Dnve, Carmel, reiterated that the petitioner had met with the
neighbors and they are all satisfied and in support of the proposed construction.
Terry Tryon, 1809 Walnut Way, Noblesville, stated that he is building trades instructor at
Carmel High School Steve Pittman has agreed to work with the Carmel Vocational Building
Trades Board in support of their building trades program. Mr Tryon stated that lots for
constructing residences are becoming very scarce and the Trades Board is in support of the
proposed project and all variances.
Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed project; none
appeared and the public hearing was closed.
In response to questions from Alan Klineman, Steve Pittman stated that he did not own the
commercial section of Walter's Plaza, but does own lots 1 thru 5, 7 thru,9; and 11 thru 13.
Lot 15 that has been built on is owned by Jim Deering who resides primarily in Florida.
Bud VanDyne asked about the price range of the homes; Mr. Pittman responded between
$90,/95,000 to $115,000
Diana Cordray was complimentary of Mr Pittman's efforts and stated her pleasure at seeing
the coming revitalization of the area.
Mr. Pittman stated that he was asking for two variances; minimum lot size and lot width at
the building line.
Alan Klineman moved for approval of Docket Nos. V-26-95, 27-95, 28-95; 29-95; 30-95; 31-
95; 32-95, 33-95, 34-95, 35-95, 36-95; 37-95; 38-95, 39-95, 40-95; 41-95; 42-95; and 43-95;
seconded by Diana Cordray. The vote was 5 in favor, none opposed, MOTION APPROVED.
9h. Italian Cottage (SU-44-95)
TABLED
7
•
10h. Crystal Flash (V-45-95)
Petitioner seeks a variance of Section 25 7 01-4(n) of the Carmel/Clay Zoning
Ordinance to construct a sign with changeable copy. The site is located at the
southwest corner of 106th Street and College Avenue. The site is zoned B-1/Business.
Filed by Mr Greg Zubek of Kunz and Kunz on behalf of Crystal Flash.
Greg Zubek of Kunz and Kunz, 320 North Meridian Street, Indianapolis, appeared before the
Board representing Crystal Flash. Greg Cobb, vice president of operations for Crystal Flash
Corporation was also in attendance The petitioner is seeking a variance for a sign with
changeable copy which is being constructed at the southwest corner of 106th and College
Avenue. The changeable copy will allow for the changing prices of gasoline to be posted.
The neighborhood center will be called "College Crossing " Approximately 3,000 feet of the
!0,000 square foot facility will be a Crystal Flash convenience store along with a Subway
Shop Other businesses in the center will be local such as a cleaners, eateries, etc The
corner at 106th and College will be landscaped.
The petitioner presented two signs Alternative A The "College Crossing Center" sign with
one part for changeable copy for gasoline prices, constructed of metal, brick, and masonry
One number representing the price of regular unleaded gasoline would be posted on the sign,
and is viewed as a competitive marketing tool by Crystal Flash. This alternative is preferable
to Crystal Flash because of visibility The sign must serve traffic on 106th Street as well as
College Avenue. At the angle of the intersection, there will be a "blind spot" where the sign
will not be visible. The Cyrstal Flash logo is on the bottom of the sign. Alternative B does
not have the Crystal Flash logo on the bottom, has a red stripe and yellow background, and
three numbers on the sign representing the different grades of gasoline.
The petitioner is asking for approval of Alternative A as well as Alternative B and allow
Crystal Flash the flexibility to post either of the signs submitted with either one number of
three numbers.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition; none appeared and the
public hearing was closed.
Dave Cunningham of the Department stated that the Variance was for changeable copy only
and not for color or size. The reason for Alternative A, single number, is that the panels that
make up the numbers slip in and out; the reason for alternative B is one of conformance to
the area for gas signs.
Alan Klineman commented that the logic of the blind spot in relation to one number as
opposed to three numbers was not valid; the blind spot will exist either way Mr Klineman
felt the sign would be more consumer friendly if indeed the sign would conform to existing
signs in the area, and he would therefore support Alternative B
8
Diana Cordray expressed agreement with Mr. Klineman.
Diana Cordray moved for approval of Docket No. V-45-95, seconded by Bill Ensign. The
vote was 5 in favor, none opposed, MOTION APPROVED.
ITEM OF INFORMATION.
Dave Cunningham reported to the Board that in June, 1993, a Use Variance was granted at 11
South Guilford (southeast corner of Guilford and Main Street). The then owners had agreed
to install a parking area to accommodate 9 spaces, asphalt and curb. The property was
subsequently sold in late 1993 or early 1994, and the specifics of the parking were not
disclosed to the purchaser. The new owners, Mr. and Mrs. Stan Naraine, have worked with
the neighbors and agreed with the Wilson Terrace Property Owners Association that the work
will be completed no later than June 1, 1996; the Department is in support.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
•
Ramona Hancock, Secretary Richard J. Klar, President
9