Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication DSV for signsRatio Architects 317-633-4040 Doug Staley, Jr. 317-637-4567 ZP Investments LLC 11460 N. Meridian Street, Carmel, IN 46032 317-379-6838 Instrument No. 2017046544 9/15/2017 (deed recorded 9/19/2017) One Zotec Way Section 2, Township 17, Range 3 17-13-02-00-00-001.102 See attached explanation: Addendum #1 See attached supporting reasons: Addendum #2 PUD Z-550-11 7.51 acres professional office building signs for professional office building NO May 2020 Zotec Partners Doug Staley, Jr.Digitally signed by Doug Staley, Jr. Date: 2020.03.12 17:04:01 -04'00'3/12/20 AFFIDAVIT hereby swear that I am the owner/contract purchaser of property involved in this application and that the foregoing signatures, statements, and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I, the undersigned, authorize the applicant to act on my behalf with regard to this application and subsequent hearings and testimony. STATE OF INDIANA SS: Signed Name: a"I'l., (Prbwry6r, Aftorney, or Power of Attorney) Printed Name: _ -) ��,�y -r. La. w County of M c),r % O n Before me the undersigned, a Notary Public (County in which notarization takes place) for. M0+ro G-n County, State of Indiana, personally appeared (Notary Public's county of residence) 3 e � - e r� T. L--o-1.0 and acknowledge the execution of the foregoing instrument (Property Owner, Attorney, or Power of Attorney) this I rL_' "" day of M co-cyl (SEAL) ' `�}irsnirr, SHIRLEY C. LATTA �'�QY•p��� Notary Public, State of Indiana rEAL;"= 1,S Morgan County . * Commission # 71361G. ✓,HoiA�y�`; My Commission Expires nrE a May 20, 2026 20 Q-0 lhw C , c tCc., Notary blic--Signature S�n�rieU C. La+ -+-a. Notary Public —Printed Name My commission expires: _ NAM ?,C) t Q C)QjD _ Page 3 of 12 Filename: development standards variance application & instructions 2020 Revised 1/2/2020 Addendum #1 Development Standards Variance Application One Zotec Way Petitioner: Doug Staley, Jr on Behalf of ZP Investments LLC #7) Explanation of Development Standards Variance: We are seeking a variance for (2) development standards. First, the Bridges PUD Z-550-11, Section 9.4(B) does not allow for ground or roof signs. We are seeking approval to install (1) ground. Second, UDO 5.39 (C)(7) does not allow for signs larger than 3 square feet on accessory structures. We are seeking approval to install (1) wall sign on the East elevation of parking garage structure. Addendum #2 Development Standards Variance Application One Zotec Way Petitioner: Doug Staley, Jr on Behalf of ZP Investments LLC #8) Reasons supporting why the BZA should grand the Development Standards Variance: We believe that the BZA should grant the variance to allow for a ground sign for the following reasons. Most likely, the original PUD limited the use of ground signs to prevent proliferation of multi-tenant ground signs for the retail area. A professional office building is being constructed on this 7.5 acre property. It is very traditional and common in Carmel for a ground sign to be allowed for a professional office building. The proposed ground sign complies with all the guidelines for ground signs in the UDO. The proposed ground sign is extremely high quality and intentionally designed to compliment and even replicate the architecture of the building. We believe that the BZA should grant the variance to allow for a wall sign on the East elevation of the parking garage for the following reasons. The parking garage is connected to the building. The parking garage has been designed to share architectural features with the building. Although under strict definition, the garage might be an accessory structure, based on the design and connectivity of the garage, it is an integral part of the building. The proposed sign is to be located on a section of the garage that looks like the building. Locating the sign on the East elevation of the office building is not an acceptable option. There is a 4 th floor, outdoor balcony level on the East elevation. Zotec employees and guests on the balcony level would be looking eight feet up, directly at the sign. This is not appropriate to the design of the building or the purpose of the balcony. Per the ordinance, Zotec would be allowed two signs on the office building. Zotec would like to trade the second sign location for the East elevation of the parking garage. Finally, we feel that the sign will be more visible to US 31 traffic at the proposed location on the garage.