Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings of Fact CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARMEL,INDIANA Docket No.: PZ-2023-00044V Petitioner: LOR Corporation Request: UDO Section 2.36 Maximum Lot Coverage: The UDO standard for C-2 allows a maximum parcel coverage of 80%;the variance requests a maximum parcel coverage of 92%. FINDINGS OF FACT-DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE 1. The approval of the requested variances will not be injurious to the public health, safety,morals and general welfare of the community because: The approval of the requested variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the variance only requests the relief necessary to accommodate the proposed development for the site with a"Downtown" style of development as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan and which is consistent with other redevelopment sites within close proximity of the subject property. As a result, approval of the requested variance should not result in any negative impacts to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The use and value of the area adjacent to the real estate that is the subject of the requested variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because the proposed use (mixed-use commercial along Range Line Road and townhome buildings along lst Avenue) is a permitted use in the C-2 zoning classification and the variance only request the relief necessary to accommodate the proposed site design, including parking and building footprints. As a result, the requested variance will not have a substantially adverse impact on the use and value of the area adjacent to the subject Real Estate. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because: Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance results in practical difficulties in the use of the Applicant's real estate, as the real estate is the subject of planned redevelopment effort and the proposed development was part of this vision for this site and the variance relief is necessary to accommodate the desired uses and site design expected for redevelopment of the site. Due to the foregoing, absent approval of the requested variances, the Applicant will be substantially impacted on how it is able to utilize the real estate for development of the site that has been coordinanted with the CRC. Page 1 of 2 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARMEL,INDIANA Docket No.: PZ-2023-00045 V Petitioner: LOR Corporation Request: UDO Section 2.36 Maximum Building Height: The UDO standard for C-2 allows a maximum building height of 35 feet for a principal building when adjacent to single- family residences; the variance requests 49'5". FINDINGS OF FACT -DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE 1. The approval of the requested variances will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: The approval of the requested variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the variance only requests the relief necessary to accommodate the proposed construction of eleven (11) townhomes facing 1st Avenue SE. As a result, approval of the variance should not result in any negative impacts to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The use and value of the area adjacent to the real estate that is the subject of the requested variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because (i) the proposed use (townhomes) is a permitted use in the C-2 zoning classification and (ii) as evidenced in the building cross section provided behind TAB 11,the townhome building has been designed such that the area of the building above the permitted building height is recessed behind the front building facade the distance necessary to almost completely obscure it from view from the perspective of someone standing on the east side of 1st Avenue SE. As a result, the requested variance should not have a substantially adverse impact on the use and value of the area adjacent to the subject Real Estate. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because: Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance results in practical difficulties in the use of the Applicant's real estate, as the real estate is the subject of planned redevelopment effort in the Downtown Area in coordination with the CRC including the desire to provide a residential use as a transition across from single family residential uses along 1st Avenue SE where the C-2 zoning otherwise permits commercial structures. Townhomes provide the appropriate transitional use. It is appropriate for the building to be compatible with the scale of buildings along Range Line Road while also respecting the single-family residential uses along 1st Avenue SE. To this end, the proposed building height of the townhome building, where it is closest to 1st Avenue SE, meets the ordinance maximum height of 35' as evidenced by the building cross section provided behind TAB 11. Additionally, the townhome building has been designed such that the area of the building above the permitted building height is recessed Page 1 of 2 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARMEL,INDIANA Docket No.: PZ-2023-00046 V and PZ-2023-00047 V Petitioner: LOR Corporation Request: UDO Section 1.07 Transportation Plan — Transportation Plan compliance is required; requesting Thoroughfare Plan Map, Mobility & Pedestrian Plan Map, Street Topographies and Streetscape Facilities modifications. UDO Section 5.21 Street Trees — Street trees required and required within street rights of way;requesting street trees to be located outside of rights of way. FINDINGS OF FACT-DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE 1. The approval of the requested variances will not be injurious to the public health, safety,morals and general welfare of the community because: The approval of the requested variances will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the variances only request the relief necessary to accommodate a proposed transportation and streetscape plan with a "Downtown" style of development as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. Further, direction has been provided by the City to provide improvements which compliments the existing surrounding transportation network to the benefit of the general public. As a result, approval of the variances should not result in any negative impacts to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The use and value of the area adjacent to the real estate that is the subject of the requested variances will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because the proposed uses are permitted uses in the C-2 zoning classification and the variances allow for transportation and landscape improvements which compliment and are similar to the patterns of streetscape and pedestrian facilities surrounding other similarly situated redevelopment sites throughout the Downtown area and have been designed to provide transportation enhancements to the benefit of the area adjacent to the property. As a result, the requested variances will not have a substantially adverse impact on the use and value of the area adjacent to the subject Real Estate. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because: Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would result in practical difficulties in the use of the Applicant's real estate, as the real estate is the subject of planned redevelopment effort in the Downtown area. Strictly adhering to the UDO Transportation Plan, including streetscape Page 1 of 2 DECISION IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Cannel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No. PZ-2023-00044 V is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this meeting,which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. A this cn day o ril 023. A ARING OFFI R, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals SECRETARY, Cannel Board of Zoning Appeals Conditions of the Board are listed on the back. (Petitioner or his representative to sign). Page 2 of 2 behind the front building facade the distance necessary to almost fully obscure it from view from the perspective of someone standing on the east side of 1st Avenue SE (across the street). The C2 section of the UDO does not address stair stepping of building heights as a way of managing such transitions in the way other zoning districts provide. In the event the UDO did, there may not be the need for the variance. Due to the foregoing, absent approval of the requested variances, the Applicant will be substantially impacted on how it is able to utilize the real estate and provide an appropriately designed transitional building design and residential use. DECISION IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No. PZ-2023-00045 V is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this meeting,which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. this 6th day o ri1 2023. BOARD HEA G OFFI R, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals SECRETARY, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Conditions of the Board are listed on the back. (Petitioner or his representative to sign). Page 2 of 2 standards, would prohibit the most beneficial right-of-way improvements which tie into the existing surrounding transportation network. Therefore, the Transportation Plan and street tree requirements need to be varied in order to permit a high-quality development with the best transportation network for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles as coordinated with the CRC. Due to the foregoing, absent approval of the requested variances, the Applicant will be substantially impacted on how it is able to utilize the real estate and provide an appropriately designed streetscape. DECISION IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No. PZ-2023-00046 V and PZ-2023-00047 V are granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this meeting, which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. A d this 6a` ay o pril,2023. BOARD A OFFICER, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals SECRETARY, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Conditions of the Board are listed on the back. (Petitioner or his representative to sign). Page 2 of 2