Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 09-26-22 , ... .„... City of C \\ a, !NDIAti/ Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes Monday, September 26, 2022 Location: Carmel City Hall Council Chambers,2'Flr., 1 Civic Sq.,Carmel,IN 46032 Members Present: Alan Potasnik(President),James Hawkins(Vice President),Brad Grabow,Leo Dierckman, Kent Broach DOCS Staff Present: Angie Conn—Planning Administrator;Joe Shestak-BZA Secretary;Mike Hollibaugh—Director of DOCS Legal Counsel: Sergey Grechukhin,Allison Lynch-Mcgrath Time of Meeting: 6:00 PM Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting: A Motion made by Grabow and seconded by Dierckman to approve the meeting minutes from the August 22,2022,BZA meeting.Approved 5-0. Public Hearings: (V)Napleton Genesis of Carmel Sign Variances. The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval: 1. Docket No. PZ-2022-00123 V UDO Section 5.39.H.2- 1 sign allowed,4 signs requested. 2. Docket No. PZ-2022-00138 V UDO Section 5.39.H- Signs must face a street frontage(east); Signs facing south requested. The site is located at 4240 E. 96th Street. It is zoned B3/Business and is partially in the SFHA/Special Flood Hazard Area. Filed by Rick Lawrence of Nelson& Frankenberger LLP on behalf of EFN Crossroads Property, LLC. Petitioner: Rick Lawrence: • We are seeking variance approvals for additional signage • Presented Site Location and Site Plan, the dealership will be constructed on the SW corner of the site • Presented Elevations that show the locations of the three wall signs • Presented Rendering of the ground sign that will be located off of the roundabout • Presented Landscape Plan at the base of the ground sign • We ask for approval to allow the installation of the ground and wall signs presented at tonight's meeting Public Comments: None Rebuttal to Public Comments: Department Report: Angie Conn • The Petitioner has requested two variances related to signage. They have worked with Staff to address all of our concerns and comments. • Staff recommends positive consideration of the variances and the adoption of the Petitioner's findings of fact Board Comments: Brad: What is the level of compliance in this area with the car dealership test drives going through the Williamson Run subdivision and with inventory cars from the dealership parked along Randall Drive?Angie Conn: We did receive written correspondences from a neighbor of Williamson Run of these issues. I will defer to the Petitioner to address these. Rick Lawrence: We did receive copies of the neighbor's comments of the cars parked on the street. Those parked cars Iare from construction workers and not dealership cars. There has been a delay in the construction of the service center, but once completion of the parking lot is done,those workers can park in the lot. Code Enforcement has been to this site, and since it's a public street and cars are allowed to park on a public street, no violations have occurred. There's currently a "No Test Drive"sign on Randall Drive but we are willing to add a second sign if needed. The dealership management has been telling the sales team not to do test drives through the subdivision. 1 BZA Regular Meeting Minutes 9-26-22 A Motion made by Grabow and seconded by Dierckman to approve PZ-2022-00123 V&PZ-2022-00138 V with the Condition the Dealership to relocate or add a"No Test-Driving"sign and the adoption of the Petitioner's Findings of Fact submitted. Approved 5-0. (V)King Residence Variances. The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals: 3. Docket No. PZ-2022-00159 V UDO Section 3.64.C.1 — Maximum 55' house width allowed,80' requested. 4. Docket No. PZ-2022-00161 V UDO Section 3.64.C.11 — Buildings shall not exceed the height of the tallest dimension of the nearest 2 Character Buildings by more than 7', 12' requested. 5. Docket No. PZ-2022-00162 V UDO Section 5.79.J — Maximum 24"window well encroachments into yard allowed; 42"encroachment requested. The site is located at 401 1st Ave NE(CW Weidler's Addition Lot 1 and part Lot 2). It is zoned R3/Residence and Old Town Overlay Character Subarea. Filed by John Hefton of Old Town Design Group on behalf of Thomas& Yvonne King, owners. Petitioner: Justin Moffett,Old Town Design Group: • We represent the homeowners who want to build a new home in Old Town • We know there's a difference of opinion and sensitivity in content to the adjacent homes • After I spoke with the homeowners and got a better idea of what they wanted • Presented an aerial view of the previous existing home,the home has been recently demoed • Our clients wanted a wider home to match the width of the actual lot space • Across the street are two duplex units of with an average of 74-ft wide structure widths • We have unique situation at each block in Old Town,and some lots are wider than what is a typical lot in downtown Carmel. The subject lot is 90-ft wide. • Presented photo of a wide home on a corner lot that was supportive of Planning Staff for a lot width variance • The existing lot is a wide lot, and the owner wants to have a wider home to preserve the rear yard space • Presented floor plan, they will stair stepping back the home, so the width isn't felt at the street front per the full degree of the variance request for house width • Presented elevations, after hearing Staff's feedback,we removed 2-ft off the height • Presented floor plan, there's a contradiction between building code and window well building standards. We would like more natural light, so we needed larger window wells. • We are not asking for lot coverage variance request, which is the number request for this area Public Comments: None Department Report: Angie Conn • Staff thinks the site could be designed to comply with the Ordinance, so Staff is considering negative recommendation of the 3 variance requests • Per building code, only one window well is required if there's a bedroom in the basement. The Client wants more window wells to allow for natural light in the proposed fitness room and sitting room • If approved, we ask for a condition of approval that the Petitioner addresses the concerns from the neighbor to the north that the construction traffic doesn't block their driveway Board Comments: Jim: With 4,000 sq. ft. for the main floor, about 2,600 sq. ft for the basement, and a 3-car garage. Is this normal for this area,or is this unique?Angie Conn: It is a trend we are seeing for this area. People are building homes to age-in-place. This lot is so large, and we think they can comply with the district standards in the Ordinance. Leo: How many feet is it to the side yard property line from the window well?Justin Moffett: 1 'h ft. Leo: How wide is a lawn mower? Justin Moffett: About 22 inches. Leo: Will a lawn mower be encroaching into the neighbor's yard. How do you get around this?Justin Moffett: This does present a challenge. Modest adjustments to the plan so a lawn mower can pass is a reasonable request. Brad: How are the two nearest character buildings identified?Angie Conn: The UDO has a marking(map)of all the 2 BZA Regular Meeting Minutes 9-26-22