Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report BZA HO 12-19-241 of 3 CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING OFFICER DEPARTMENT REPORT THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2024 (V) Ardalan Plaza. The applicant seeks approval for the following development standards variances for a mixed-use development: 1. Docket No. PZ-2024-00192 V UDO Section 2.36 Maximum 80% lot cover allowed; 90% requested. 2. Docket No. PZ-2024-00193 V UDO Section 2.36 Maximum 35-ft building height allowed when adjacent to single family residences; 65-ft requested. 3. Docket No. PZ-2024-00194V UDO Section 1.07 Transportation Plan compliance is required; Requesting Thoroughfare Plan Map, Mobility & Pedestrian Plan Map, Street Topographies, and Streetscape Facilities modifications. 4. Docket No. PZ-2024-00195 V UDO Section 5.21 (C) Minimum bufferyard width shall be equal to the building height of the nearest building to each side or rear lot line, not to exceed 35’; 5’ width requested. Also, minimum planting standard shall be Bufferyard C; Requesting the planting standard be per the submitted landscape plans. The 1-acre site is located at 311 W. Main St. (not in any subdivision) and is zoned C2/Mixed Use. Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson & Frankenberger, LLC. General Info: • The Petitioner seeks approval to tear down the existing structures and redevelop the site for a mixed-use building that will consist of: (i) retail uses (a restaurant space, retail tenant space, and an art gallery) and five (5) enclosed private residential garages on the first floor; (ii) four (4) luxury condominium residences on the second floor; (iii) the Ardalans’ personal residence on the third floor; and (iv) the Ardalans’ private roof-top terrace including a greenhouse. • Related petition is Plan Commission Hearing Officer Docket No. PZ-2024-00191 DP/ADLS. • Variances are requested for lot cover, building height, transportation plan compliance, and bufferyard. • The site is located in the Arts and Design District, fronting on Main Street, adjacent to the roundabout at 4th Ave and Main. • Surrounding this site are residential uses, office/commercial/restaurant uses, and a parking garage. o One and two-story tall single family detached homes are located south and west of the subject site. Three-story tall townhomes with live-work units are located north of the subject site. A mixed-use building with integrated parking garage is located east of the subject site. • Commitments were adopted as part of the original C2 Rezone application. The related rezone and commitment amendment applications can be viewed under Docket Nos. 15030009 Z: West Main Street C-2 Rezone and PZ-2024-00205 CA: Ardalan Plaza Commitment Amendment. The Commitment Amendment application will be heard at the Tuesday, December 17, 2024 regular Plan Commission meeting. • Please see the Petitioner’s info packet for more details on the variance requests. Variances Requested: 1. Lot Coverage - • The UDO allows a maximum 80% lot coverage, and 90% is requested. This is an 10% increase. An updated site plan will be presented at the hearing with a specific lot coverage calculation based on plan amendments. • Things that count towards lot coverage are building footprints, parking areas, on-site sidewalks, patios, etc. • The project will provide some green space with landscaped, planted areas and several street trees. • The Petitioner is working with the Carmel Engineering Dept. to provide stormwater quality and detention. 2 of 3 2. Building Height - • The UDO’s definition of Building Height is: The vertical distance from the lot ground level to the highest point of the roof for a flat roof, to the deck line of a mansard roof and to the mean height between eaves and ridges for gable, hip and gambrel roofs. • Per the C2 zoning standards, the UDO requires a maximum 35’ tall building height when adjacent to single family residences, and 65’ is requested (up to the top of the roof stairwell access). However, the proposed official Building Height is calculated be 50’8”. This is an increase of 15.7 feet or a 44.8% change. • For comparison, the Anthony’s Chophouse / Monon and Main building to the east of this site is around 60’8” tall (or 4 stories tall). And, the Sophia Square building is around 60’ tall (or 4/5 stories tall). The Midtown West - Railyard building is around 65’4” feet tall (or 5-stories tall). • The building is designed with the third-floor stepped back, to minimize the visual impact of the third floor residence. • The third-floor residence is designed with a pitch roof to help minimize the visual impact of the overall building. • When looking at the Roof Terrace Plan (sheet A104), one can see that little of the roof area will have structures projecting up from it, and they are centered in the floor plan with a building step-back design. 3. Transportation Plan Compliance - • The UDO requires compliance with the Transportation Plan (which is found in the Comprehensive Plan). • The Transportation Plan contains standards for street right of way widths, as well as what should be located within that street right of way (ROW), such as street trees, planting strips, sidewalk or path, on-street parking, drive lanes, etc. (also known as Streetscape Facilities). • The approximate existing street right of way widths for the site are the following: 50-ft for 4th Ave SW, 60-ft for Main Street, and 45-ft for 3rd Ave SW. • The proposed street rights of way are 54-ft for 4th Ave SW, 70-ft for Main Street, and 50-ft for 3rd Ave SW. • Per the Comp Plan, this segment of Main Street (and 3rd Ave SW) are labeled to be Local street types. This means they can have a range of 46-78 foot wide street right of way widths. It makes sense that 3rd Ave SW will have a 50 foot wide ROW width and that this stretch of Main Street will have a 70-ft wide ROW width. • Also, per the Comp Plan, 4th Ave SW is labeled to be a Boulevard street type. This street type is required to have a ROW width range of 68-100 feet. A 54-ft wide ROW is proposed for this section of 4th Ave SW. • On-street parking will be provided along Main Street and along 3rd Ave SW. • Sidewalks are proposed along all three street frontages. • Street trees in the ROW are proposed along Main St. and along 3rd Ave SW. (Trees proposed along 4th Ave SW will be on private property, outside of the ROW.) • Tree Lawn areas (grassy areas between the streets and the sidewalks) are not provided, however. • The City Engineer requested a few design changes, such as a wider sidewalk along the roundabout area and additional street right of way. 4. Bufferyards - • Per the UDO, C2 bufferyards shall be required along any side and/or rear lot line abutting a side or rear lot line of detached single-family residences and shall extend the entire length of the lot line. • Two single family residences are located just south of the subject site, and they are both 1-story tall ranches, approximately 12-14 feet tall. • For C2 zoned sites, the UDO requires that the minimum bufferyard width shall be equal to the building height of the nearest building to each side or rear lot line, not to exceed 35’ (width), and a 5’ wide bufferyard width is requested. Also, the minimum planting standard shall be Bufferyard C (found in UDO Section 5.19 (F)(1)), and the Petitioner requests the planting standard be per the submitted landscape plans. • Bufferyard C lists the following plantings to be in a Rear bufferyard: 6 shade or evergreen trees, 1 ornamental tree, and 15 shrubs per 100 linear foot increment. • The Petitioner requests that the as-submitted Landscape Plan be what is considered and approved. 3 of 3 • A private driveway (soon to become public alley) will run east-west along the south side of the site. • This private driveway will soon become a public alley as the plans get finalized, and that alley could be accessible by the parcels of land that exist on the southern half of this block, too, for any future development. • If an alley is implemented along the south part of this project as designed, the proposed 5-ft wide buffeyard will be further reduced. The petitioner will need to work with property owner to the south on an acceptable bufferyard solution. Remaining Review Comments: • A few review comments remain in ProjectDox, the city’s online electronic plan review software, that still needs to be addressed by the Petitioner. • An additional variance might be needed for 1.) Shade trees required to be planted along all streets within the rights of ways (UDO section 5.21.B), if plans cannot be amended. • An additional variance might be needed for 2.) Roof Pitch shall be 3:12 or less and shall not be a substantially visible part of the building (UDO Section 3.63.E), if the Commitment Amendment is not approved and the Old Town Overlay District regulations kept in place. Final Comments: • The project will be a nice ‘bookend’ for the Carmel Arts & Design District. • The Petitioner is working to address all remaining City review comments, while also trying to address concerns of surrounding neighbors. The building plan was recently flipped, moving the restaurant space to the east, and gallery space to the west. The plaza area adjacent to 4th will now be a combination of greenspace and tree plantings, with minimal paving. • The Planning Dept. supports the variance requests, as long the remaining review comments are addressed. • The Carmel Redevelopment Commission is also supportive of the variances. • The Carmel Engineering Dept. has the following comment as of 12/10/2024: The Petitioner has been working with the Engineering Dept. to address our comments on the site layout. We still need to complete our detailed review and reserve the right to make additional comments regarding the following, but we are generally supportive of the most recent overall site layout uploaded to ProjectDox (Sheet C200 on 12/06/24) showing the through alley at the rear of the project, the expanded pedestrian facility on 4th, the pedestrian facility and on-street parking on 3rd, and the proposed street right of way dedications. Findings of Fact: • Please refer to the Petitioner’s Findings of Facts included in their BZA Info Packet. Recommendation: • The Dept. of Community Services (DOCS) recommends positive consideration of the variance requests with the condition of the Petitioner addressing the remaining review comments in ProjectDox, and with adoption of the Findings of Facts submitted by the Petitioner.