HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 08-27-01
-0
~
City of Carmel
August 22, 2001
Department Report
To: Board of Zoning Appeals Members
From: Department of Community Services
Re: Projects scheduled to be heard August 27, 2001
H. Public Hearin2:
Ih-9h. These Items Currently Tabled:
Lakes at Hazel Dell, Section 1 (UV-133-00; UV-134-00; UV-135-00; UV-136-00; V-
153-00; V-154-00; V-155-00; V-156-00; V-157-00)
10-12h. Donatos Pizza (V-66-01; V-67-01; V-68-01)
Petitioner seeks Developmental Standards Variances of the following Sections of the
Sign Ordinance:
25.7.01-2: Traffic Directional Sign S-square-foot directional sign
25. 7.02-8(b): Number & Type 2 Identification Signs
25. 7.02-8(b): Number & Type 2 wall signs on the east fa9ade
The site is located at 1422 Keystone Way East. The site is zoned B-8/Business and is
located partially within the SR 431/Keystone Avenue Overlay Zone.
V-66-01 - Section 25.7.01-2: Traffic Directional Sign - Petition to allow a five-square-
foot Traffic Directional Sign.
In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the
granting of a variance of development standards, the Board shall determine in writing
that:
1. The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the community;
Insofar as the general welfare of the community is defined by the Sign Ordinance
(ZO Section 25.7; Z-302), the appropriate size for a traffic directional sign is four
square feet. Injury to the general welfare would be sustained through the granting
of a larger sign area without practical difficulty being demonstrated. Furthermore,
injury would be done through the granting to the property owner the ability to
establish signage that is not permitted other business owners in the community.
Page 1
". .
~
Department Report
Board of Zoning Appeals
August 27, 2001
Page 2 of 14
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; and
It is the Department's opinion that the use and value of the area adjacent to the
property will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner by the installation
of a five-sQuare-foot traffic directional sign.
3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in
practical difficulties in use of the property.
There is no evidence to suggest that there is practical difficulty posed by the
installation of a four-sQuare-foot traffic directional sign that meets code versus the
installation of a five-sQuare-foot sign that does not.
V -67-01 - Section 25.7. 02-8(b): Number & Type - Petition to allow two Identification
Signs.
In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the
granting of a variance of development standards, the Board shall determine in writing
that:
1. The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the community;
Insofar as the general welfare of the community is defined by the Sign Ordinance
(20 Section 25. 7~ 2-302), the appropriate number of signs for a single-tenant
building is prescribed as one identification sign per frontage on a public street.
The Donatos Pizza site only has frontage on Keystone Way East~ therefore, it is
only permitted a single identification sign. Injury to the general welfare would be
sustained through the granting of a second identification sign without practical
difficulty being demonstrated. Furthermore, injury would be done through the
granting to the property owner the ability to establish signage that is not permitted
other occupants of single-tenant buildings in 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; and
It is the Department's opinion that the use and value of the area adjacent to the
property will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner by the installation
of a second identification sign.
3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in
practical difficulties in use of the property.
There is no evidence to suggest that there is practical difficulty posed by the
installation of a single identification sign per code rather than two. Both signs
Page 2
'j
"
Department Report
BOMdofZorumgApp~s
August 27, 2001
Page 3 of 14
would be oriented to the same frontage, being essentially redundant.
V-68-01 - Section 25.7. 02-8(b): Number & Type - Petition to allow two Identification
Signs on the east fac;ade.
In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the
granting of a variance of development standards, the Board shall determine in writing
that:
1. The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the community;
Insofar as the general welfare of the community is defined by the Sign Ordinance
(ZO Section 25.7; Z-302), the appropriate location for signs for a single-tenant
building is prescribed as one ground, wall or roof identification sign per frontage
on a public street. For properties having frontage on more than one public street,
two identification signs would be permitted on the same frontage provided that
only one be a wall or roof sign and the second a ground sign. The Donatos Pizza
site only has frontage on Keystone Way East; therefore, it is only permitted a
single identification sign on the east fac;ade. Injury would be done through the
granting to the property owner the ability to establish signage that is not permitted
other occupants of single-tenant buildings in 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; and
It is the Department's opinion that the use and value of the area adjacent to the
property will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner by the installation
of a second identification sign on the east fac;ade.
3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in
practical difficulties in use of the property.
There is no evidence to suggest that there is practical difficulty posed by the
installation of a single identification sign on the east fac;ade per code rather than
two. Both signs would be oriented to the same frontage, being essentially
redundant.
The Department recommends negative consideration of Docket Nos. V-66-01. V-
67-01 and V-68-01 given the findings expressed above.
Page 3