HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 07-23-01
<$,'-
City of Carmel
DEPARTMENT of C01WUNTIY SERVICES
Division ofPhl11n;ng & Zoning
July 18,2001
Department Report
To: Bo~dofZorungAppews~emb~s
From: Department of Community Services
Re: Projects scheduled to be he~d July 23, 2001
H. Public Hearin!!:
lh-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 Developmentw Stand~ds Variances of the following Sections of the
Sign Ordinance:
25.7.01-2: Traffic Directional Sign 5-square-foot directional sign
25. 7.02-8(b): Number & Type 2 Identification Signs
25. 7.02-8(b): Number & Type 2 wwl signs on the east fayade
The site is located at 1422 Keystone Way East. The site is zoned B-8/Business and is
located p~wly within the SR 431/Keystone Avenue Overlay Zone.
V-66-01- Section 25.7.01-2: Traffic Directional Sign - Petition to wlow a five-square-
foot Traffic Directionw Sign.
In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the
granting of a variance of development stan~ds, the Bo~d shall determine in writing
that:
1. The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the community;
Insof~ as the generw welf~e of the community is defmed by the Sign Ordinance (ZO
Section 25.7; Z-302), the appropriate size for a traffic directionw sign is four squ~e feet.
Injury to the generw welf~e would be sustained through the granting of a l~ger sign ~ea
without practicw difficulty being demonstrated. Furthermore, injury would be done
Page 1
Department Report - Board of Zoning Appeals
July 23,2001
Page 2 of18
~'
through the granting to the property owner the ability to establish signage that is not
permitted other business owners 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 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 (ZO
Section 25.7; Z-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.
Page 2
Department Report - Board of Zoning Appeals
July 23, 2001
Page 3 of 18
::
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 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 f~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 fayade.
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 fayade.
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 f~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