Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket 12-17-07 u u u u o u u u [j u U U u u U G U G - i . U DECA ENVIRONMENTAL & ASSOCIATES, INC. USE VARIANCE AND DEVELOPMENTAL STANDARDS VARIANCES APPLICATION Docket Nos. 07110013 UV, 07110014 V and 07110015 V City of Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing 6:00 pm December 17,2007 Applicant: Deca Environmental & Associates, Inc. its successors and assigns c/o Jim B. Euler 575-0095 Attorney: Nelsoll & Frankenberger c/o James E. Sbinaver 844-0106 ,---~-:\....- " ,~~~) t ;:1., ~ - /.~i/">'Y. ~ ':~, /.",-'7 Ir . ~13!~.':. DECr~~I~;D ~::.. Ict. ~ DOCS / ',<~A;'I ~)/ LJ r U U T ABLE OF CONTENTS , \ ; U 1. Explanation u 2. Aerial Photograph CO U u 3. Zoning Map \ U rl 4. Photographs of Property and Building u ,I i U 5. Floor Plan of Building ( LJ u 6. Findings of Fact for Use Variance Application LJ .~ 7. Findings of Fact for Variance RegaIding Elimination of Requirement to Provide Bicycle Parking I G 8. Findings of Fact for Variance Regarding Elimination of Requirement to Construct Sidewalk Adjacent to 4th Street ~ I , I U ~ u o u [j o u o o u u u u u u [j , u EXPLANATION OF REQUEST The Applicant, Deca Environmental & Associates, Inc., ("Deca"), is the owner of a parcel of real estate that is located north of and adjacent to 4th Street NE and west of and adjacent to 1 sl Avenue NE and is commonly known as 410 1st A venue NE ("Real Estate"). The Real Estate is zoned R3- Residential. The Real Estate is depicted on the aerial photograph that is behind Tab 2. Included behind Tab 3 is the Zoning Map for the general vicinity that shows that the Real Estate is surrounded by parcels that are zoned B5 - Business to the immediate west, B 1- Business to the immediate east, and there have been other parcels in this general area that have received use variance approvals to operate as non-residential uses. The Applicant's business is a very low intense, environmental consulting business. The Applicant employs only two (2) full time employees and one (1) part time employee. The hours of operation are Monday tluough Friday from approximately 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. During the course of any particular year, the Applicant may only have a few client visits to the propeliy. There is no signage on the Real Estate and the Applicant does not have a need to provide signage on the site. The prior owner of the Real Estate owned this property for approximately 30 years and during that time the owner conducted, at various times, an ice manufacturing and sales business and an oil distribution business. The Applicant purchased the Real Estate from the prior owner in August of 2004. Based on the prior owner's use of the Real Estate, it was the Applicant's understanding that a low intense office use was a permitted use. However, upon learning that the Applicant's use was in fact not a permitted use, the Applicant filed this request for a Use Variance in order to obtain the proper permission to continue utilizing the Real Estate as a low intensity, professional office. During the Applicant's use of the Real Estate from August of2004 to the present time, they have not been cited for any zoning violations, they have not received nor are they aware of any objections to their current use of the Real Estate and they have maintained the Real Estate in a professional manner. However, in order for the Applicant to continue using the Real Estate for its low intensity professional office, they must obtain Use Variance approval. rL\ U In addition to the Use Variance request, the Applicant is also seeking two (2) Developmental Standards Variances. The first developmental standards variance seeks relief from the requirement to provide bicycle parking on the site. In this regard, the Applicant has a garage on the Real Estate that can accommodate bicycle parking. The second developmental standards variance seeks relief from the requirement to construct a sidewalk adjacent to 4th Street. In this regard, currently there is no sidewalk on the nOlih side of 4th Street from Rangeline Road to 151 Avenue NE. If the Applicant were required to construct a sidewalk along 4th Street it would literally not connect to any other sidewalk. Further, in order to construct such a sidewalk, the Applicant would be required to cut down a few mature trees that cunently exist along this portion of 4th Street. LJ u u We look forward to presenting the Use Variance and Developmental Standards Variances to the Board of Zoning Appeals at the December lib hearing. I~ U Of ~ I ul ~ U r~n9\..~V@ N E ~I ~. ',..' , '" , ' ,I' ~ II ~ !I ;~), l~. ~ 2~ [j~A\Y~~ ;llft:JfilW\}v/@ffi~ 001,"'"- , c. ~,'l I. ~...., , : ,~ I ;~ . ,=l I ~ ~ I ~; I co I , ~~ ~ .I!:J "i o Qj M 1]J T-A'VE"" --'-r- - - -~ @I ~ I!:!- 00 -I :I[ iFl ~I I ,I ~ I I I I COI I ! I i I ~-8~-A-VE-N.E ~Nr5I:U\ \fr.k~J? 'm , Ii' .~ ~J i 111. ~ rd fR d 01 M ~ ~!rJ'J Ii ,~; JJJ i~,~,~, ,. ~ , r'. , J1 00 I J] H ~ , Lf) I CO I td I I COI \ I Q Zl H en d ma: 1. LO-- II CO L!) ~ L!) L!) 5+ I Z! il II ~ CO ~I CO CO ~ J] I :IT Id i Id- ~'-l~ [~J[~-~ tY l_~, ~r:Y ' I I ~I I I COI I I L!) II CO 1 L!) I CO o Q Q ~ ~ u ~ ~ o u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c o u ~ f , ' "', "', ,. ;0 " i.' ~;!1.i \, , . \.:, i~ t '. ", g<; 1 f", .' ~ 'I . , ;i: . J . ~ ~ , ,( c 1\ l , '..\ 11 I \ 0 I U ~ 0 0 Q 0 0 0 Q II I. III ~ n a 0 41' e ~ ill ,I~ 0 \ ~ I , , a 0 ~ \ I.' 0 j] j] D \f. ~ lit U I I , I L ] \ I . J ~ .... l "'f ~..... ~. ~ I. _.t r .... . "t l 1- ~J\.. I ~}L-J 1 I U D U o o o u u u [j U D U o o o o u u ---. 1st Ave. NE N r Office Office ~ - File ~ - I Room i Closet I - Office I I Bathmom - J Enclosed 11 Porch - - I L-, W & Dryer Fire Place Reception --- Kitchen Bathroom , I IT r 4th St. NE l L-- U \. U U U I U U I U I U I 0 I U I U I U I U I 0 I U 1 U I r~ I U [j U CARMEUCLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARMEL, INDIANA Docket No.: Petitioner: successors and assiqns 07110013 UV - Use Variance to permit low intensity professional offices Deca HoldinQs, LLC. Deca Environmental & Associates, Inc. and Jim B. Euler, and their FINDINGS OF FACT - USE VARIANCE 1. The grant of this variance will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the existence of special conditions(s) such that enforcement of the zoning ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship because: The subiect site is currently zoned R3 and does not permit a low impact professional office type of use; however. the site is surrounded by 85 and 81 zoninq and other use variances have been qranted for other properties in the qeneral area to permit non-residential uses. Enforcement of the current zoninQ classification of R3 results in an unnecessary hardship because the Applicant would be prevented from operatinQ a low impact type of professional office use that would be appropriate for this site and the Qeneral area. As a result of the foreooino, the orant of this use variance would not be contrary to the public interest and would prevent and unnecessary hardship on the Applicant. 2. The grant of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: In addition the same rationale set forth in Response Numbered One (1) above, the QrantinQ of the requested use variance will allow for an appropriate low impact type of professional office use for this site and it would not be obiectionable to the surroundinq neiqhbors and would be consistent with the zoninq classification for the parcels that surround this site. As a result of the foreqoinq, the Qrant of the requested use variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety. morals and Qeneral welfare of the community. 3. The use or value of the area adjacent to the subject property will not be substantially affected in any adverse manner because: In addition to the same rationale set forth in Response Numbered One (1) and Two (2) above. the use and value of the area adiacent to the subiect property will not be substantially affected in any adverse manner because the site is already beinq used as a tow impact professional office use and has not resulted in anv neaative impact to the $urroundina uses or homes in the Qeneral vicinity_ 4. The need for the variance arises from a natural condition peculiar to the subject property because: In addition to the same rational set forth in Responses Numbered One (1), Two (2) and Three (3) above, the need for this use variance does arise from a natural condition peculiar to the subiect property because the current zoninq of R3 does not permit a low impact professional office type of use on this site. but the properties that are immediately adiacent to the site do have a zonina classifications that would permit a low impact professional office types of uses. 5. The granting of this variance does not substantially interfere with the Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan because: In addition to the same rationale set forth in Responses Numbered One (1). Two (2), Three (3) and Four (4) above, the proposed low impact professional office use for this site is consistent with zonina and use of many of the surroundinQ properties and it is compatible with the principles and Quidelines contained in the Comprehensive Plan applicable to this particular area of Old Town. u u DECISION u IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals that Use Variance Docket No. 07110013 UV is granted, subject to any conditions in the minutes of this Board, which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. Adopted this 17th day of December, 2007. U I CHAIRPERSON, Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals U I SECRETARY, Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals Condition ofthe Board are listed on the back. o I o I U I U I [J I U i [J I u , [j I D I U I [j I U u o u , o I I U I U I U I o j CARMEL/CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARMEL, INDIANA Docket No.: Petitioner: 07110014V - Elimination of Bicvcle ParkiOQ Requirement Deca HoldinQs, LLC, Deca Environmental & Associates, Inc. and Jim B. Euler, and their successors and assiqns FINDINGS OFFACT-DEVELOPMIENT STANDARDS VARIANCE I. The approval ofthis variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: The Applicant operates a very low impact type of professional office. Employees and customers of the Applicant do not ride their bicycles to tbis site. If they did ride their bicycles to the site, the Applicant has a garal,';e that can accommodate bicycle parking. Thus, the granting of this variance will not be iniurious to the public health. safetv. morals and Qeneral 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: In addition to the same rationale set forth in Response Numbered One (1) above. the use and value of the area adiacent to the subiect property should not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because persons utilizinQ bicvcles could park in the Applicant's QaraQe. U I o I U I o I U I 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: In addition to the same rational set forth in Responses Numbered One (1) and Two (2) above. the strict application of the terms of the Zonin!:] Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties because the Applicant would be required to spend money to provide for bicycle parkinq when parkinq already exists for parking in the Applicant's QaraQe. DECISION U I IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals that Variance Docket No. 07110014V is granted, granted subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. Adopted this 17th day of December, 2007. [J t o I o I o I U o BZA President, CanneIlClay Board of Zoning Appeals BZA Member, (name) SECRETARY, Cannel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals o I U I U o I [J \ o I u o I o I 0' t o I U I [J I o I o I o I o I o o I CARMEL/CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARMEL, INDIANA Docket No.: Petitioner: 0711 0015V - Elimination for Sidewalk Requirement alonq 4th Street Deca HoldinQs, LLC, Daca Environmental & Associates, Inc. and Jim B. Euler, and their successors and assiqns FINDINGS OF FACT - DEVELOPMENT ST ANDARDS VARIANCE I. The approval of this variance will not blj injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare ofthe community becauslj: Currentlv no sidewalk exists on the north side of 4t~ Street. If the Applicant were not seeking a use variance for the site. the current condition would remain. Further. if the Applicant did in fact build a side walk on his Rroperty adiacent to 41~ Street it would not connect to anything. Thus. the granting of this variance will not be iniurious to the public health, safety, morals and qeneral welfare of the community. 2. The use and value of the arlja adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse maImer because: In addition to the same rationale set forth in Response Numbered One (1) above, the use and value of the area adjacent to the subiect property should not be affected in a substantiallv adverse manner because no sidewalk exists on this side of 4th Street at the current time. 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: In addition to the same rational set forth in Responses Numbered One (1) and Two (2) above. the strict application of the terms of the ZoninQ Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties because the Applicant would be required to spend money 10 construct a sidewalk that does not connect to ano1her sidewalk and would mosllikelv not be used bv pedestrians. DECISION IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals that Variance Docket No.07110015V is granted, granted subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof Adopted this 1 ih day of December, 2007. BZA President, Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals BZA Member, (name) SECRET ARY, Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals