Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 01-28-08 u u u /- f City of Carmel , - If ; r '\ -;' '''J.!tI?IA~;/ Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Monday, January 28, 2008 The regularly scheduled meeting ofthe Cannel Board of Zoning Appeals met at 6:00 PM on Monday, January 28,2008, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Members in attendance were Kent Broach, Leo Dierckman, James Hawkins, and Madeleine Torres, thereby establishing a quorum. Christine Barton-Holmes, Rachel Boone and Mike Hollibaugh represented the Department of Community Services. John Molitor, Legal Counsel, was also present. Swearing-in of Members and Election of Officers: No Oaths of Office were given. Mr. Hawkins, Mrs. Plavchak and Mrs. Torres had each been reappointed and had previously taken the Oath of Office. Mr. Broach nominated James Hawkins for President, seconded by Mrs. Torres. James Hawkins was elected President by unanimous consent. Mr. Dierckrnan moved to elect Mr. Broach for Vice President, seconded by Mrs. Torres. Mr. Broach was elected Vice President by unanimous consent. Mr. Dierckman moved to approve the minutes of the December 17, 2007 meeting as submitted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hawkins and APPROVED 4-0. Mrs. Barton-Holmes gave the Department Report. There was only one live item on the agenda. Item 8h, Deca Environmental had requested to be tabled to February 25, 2008. Under Old Business, Items 2-31 North Meridian Medical had requested to be tabled to February 25,2008. Item 11, Westwood Estates Buffer Yard had submitted a request in writing to be withdrawn. Mr. Molitor gave the Legal Report. As discussed in the past, there is a settlement conference facilitated by the Magistrate Judge of Federal Court in Indianapolis on February 6,2008. Mr. Hawkins had volunteered to participate on behalf of the Board along with the Mayor, Attorneys and other Staff from the City. He hoped that would bear some fruit and they could have an Executive Session next month to discuss the results of the hearing. H. Public Hearing: 1-711. Mike's Express Carwash Michigan Road The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals: Docket No. 07110006 V Section 23C.08.02.A Reduction of required front yard greenbelt Docket No. 07110007 V Section 23C.11.A Reduction of required number of parking spaces Docket No. 07110008 V Section 23C.10.02.2 Reduction in perimeter landscaping Page 1 of6 Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes January 28, 2008 Docket No. 07110009 V Section 23C.11.G Car stacking visible from Michigan Road U Docket No. 07110010 V Section 25.07.02-09 Increase in permitted wan sign size Docket No. 07110011 V Section 25.07.05 Two drive-through menu boards requested Docket No. 07110012 V Section 23C.09.D Partial relieffrom building fa~ade break requirements The site is located at 10580 North Michigan Road arid is zoned IllIndustria1 within the US 421 Overlay. Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson & Frankenberger for Mike's Express Car Wash Present for the Petitioner: Jim Shinaver. Also present were Bill Dahrn and Jerry Dahm, owners of Mike's Carwash; Frank Hindes, architect with Cripe Engineers & Architects; and Miles Floetker, Lawn Pride. Mike's Carwash is a leader in its industry. There is also a Mike's Carwash on Range Line Road in Cannel. They have purchased the lot in the Weston Park Commerc.ial Complex. An aerial of the site was shown. They had superimposed the site plan for the project onto the aerial. The site is zoned 1-1 Industrial and a carwash is a permitted use in that classification. Surrounding the site are bank buildings, the new LA Fitness Center and many other commercial and retail businesses. This outlot is along a very busy section of the Michigan Road Corridor. This plan received unanimous approval for the ADLS/DP applications at the January 24,2008 Plan Commission meeting. The final approvals for this project relate to these variances, because of the size of the site and the unique nature of the carwash use. A site plan was shown. The carwash facility is centered in the middle of the property. The traffic flow was indicated on the site plan. Traffic would enter at one of the entrances, move toward the main entrance of the facility on the east side of the building and exit to the west. The site will be very heavily and extensively landscaped. The landscape architect had reviewed the landscape plan with Scott Brewer. It was their understanding Mr. Brewer supports the plan and has no 0 remaining issues. The reduction of required front yard greenbelt would be along Michigan Road. The Overlay requires a 30-foot greenbelt buffer area. They are seeking to reduce that to approximately 10 feet. To mitigate this request, Mike's Carwash has obtained approval from the Indiana Department of Transportation for permission to encroach approximately 17 feet into the right-of-way area. The 17 feet will be used to install a mound and other extensive landscaping that will be adjacent to Michigan Road to provide additional buffering and screening. Although they are seeking a 20-foot reduction in the front yard greenbelt bufferyard area adjacent to Michigan Road, they will be using 17 feet of the INDOT right-of-way. The net reduction of the buffer is approximately 3 feet. Due to the nature of a carwash use, they are seeking reduction in the number of parking spaces. The customers do not park but instead drive through the carwash. The only required parking would be for the few employees working during a particular shift. The seven parking spaces were indicated on the north side of the building. With over 50 years experience, Mike's Carwash is confident these spaces will meet the needs of the employee parking and also allow a few spaces for customer parking. For customers utilizing the vacuum island service on the north portion of tbe site, there would be indi vidual spaces to use for those services. This use has different parking needs than traditional retail and commercial use. The reduction in perimeter landscaping is requested for the entrance and exit points to the carwash building. Because a carwash is a functioning building, its design is not conducive to landscape plantings directly adj acent to certain' portions of the building. These open areas will have asphalt and will need to be open for the customers to drive through. However, it should be noted that the overall U landscaping for the entire site exceeds the required number of plantings per the Zoning Ordinance. Further, Mike's has voluntarily agreed to relocate the existing County drainage easement at a considerable expense. The County drainage easement was located on the northwestern portion of the site. The easement was indicated on the plans. The original version of the site plan for this project with the existing drainage easement did not have as many landscape plantings in that area of the property. l;-" Page 2 of6 u u u Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes January 28, 2008 However, Mike's voluntarily agreed to incur the additional expense to relocate the County drainage easement so it is entirely in the road right-of-way. As a result, they were able to plant more trees, bushes, etc. on the northwestern portion of the site. They are not seeking reduction in the overall required number ofplantings. Instead they are seeking variances as to where these plantings would be located. The fourth variance is needed for the car stacking that would be partially visible from Michigan Road. A mound and trees would provide buffering and screening along Michigan Road. A rendering of how the stacking would be shielded from Michigan Road was shown. As a result of working with Staff and the Plan Commission and relocating the drainage easement, they were able to realign the site and were able to reduce the stacking lane. He indicated the location of the two drive-through menu boards that were requested. The menu boards are very important to provide the customers with the services and prices. The signs are well constructed and encased in brick. The menu signs will be visible from the stacking lane, but should not be clearly visible from Michigan Road due to the extensive landscape planting and mounding adjacent to Michigan Road. Partial relief is needed from the required fayade breaks of 8 feet for every 60 feet of bui I ding elevation. Due to the unique shape of the drive-through carwash facility and its long narrow configuration, portions of the building do not lend themselves well to fa<;:ade breaks, such as the entrance and the exit. They do believe the building is very well designed and attractive and will be compatible to other buildings in the area. The building design was unanimously approved at the Plan Commission. As the Staff Report explains, fa<;:ade breaks on certain portions of a building with these dimensions would not necessarily achieve the aesthetic affect intended by the Overlay. It would actually have a negative impact on the building's functionality. They have gone to great extent to buffer and screen this site from Michigan Road. Mike's is seeking one 100 square foot wall sign to alert drivers to their location. The sign will be above the eastern entrance to the facility. A rendering ofthe sign was shown. Michigan Road is heavily traveled and very busy. The speed limit is 45 mph. This building is positioned perpendicular to Michigan Road. lfthe building had been slightly turned, the eastern elevation might have been more visible. The site is surrounded on all four sides by roads, but they are only seeking one wall sign to give the drivers on Michigan Road an opportunity to see the site and make the necessary turn. Other businesses and buildings along this corridor have multiple wall and/or ground signs that advertise their locations to their customers. Based on the setback from Michigan Road and the amount of building frontage adjacent to Michigan Road, they would be entitled to a 40 square foot sign. This is a very narrow building because it is a carwash. A more traditionally shaped building would be entitled to a larger sign. The narrowest portion of the bui Iding is the portion facing Michigan Road. If the longer side was adjacent to Michigan Road, it would be permitted a sign about 75 square feet in size. Site circulation issues would not permit the longer side to be adjacent to Michigan Road. This proposed 100 square foot sign would not be the largest sign along the corridor. The Pearson Ford Auto Dealership has at least 6 large wall &igns and a very large ground sign that were visible from Michigan Road. Another consideration would be the significant landscape plantings, trees and mounding that they will be putting adjacent to Michigan Road. As these plantings begin to mature, they may partially screen portions of the building and potentially obstruct some of the sign from view. This use is not immediately adjacent to any residential uses and is not close by any residential uses. They are surrounded by other retail and commercial uses and the property is zoned lndusttial. In their opinion a 100 square foot sign would not have a negative impact on surrounding uses or property values. Nor would a sign q,f this size be injurious to public health, safety, morals or general welfare of the Page 3 of6 Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes January 28, 2008 community. However, absent the variance, Mike's would suffer hardship because they would be U.." denied an opportunity to provide adequate and clear notice of their location to drivers going along Michigan Road. Those drivers will only have a brief moment to notice the sign and location of the site so they can maneuver their cars to the location. They did not feel the sign was disproportionate to the building nor out of character with the other signs in this general area. They are requesting a sign that is lOa square feet in size, but they have continued discussions with the Staff. If they were not pemlitted a 100 square foot sign, from past experience the owners could be comfortable with a sign approximately 79 square feet in size. He had copies of that rendering distributed to the Board members. They had worked hard with the Staff and Plan Commission on the refinement and design of this site. These variances are a function ofthe size ofthe property, the unique nature of the caJ"Wash use, as well as the building's design. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared. Mrs. Barton-Holmes gave the Department Report. The nature of most of these variances arises from the size of the site, the use and the configuration it requires. In the Ordinance carwashes are considered a retail use, but they do not have the same retail parking needs as most retail uses. The key for the Department, when the request was evaluated as it went through the Plan Commission and Special Studies process, was the overall amount of the landscaping is not being reduced. Actually it is being increased, even though the overall planting area has been reduced. Staff does believe that the increase in landscaping does mitigate a lot of the variances that have been requested. The only variance they continue to have some concern with is the 100 square feet for the wall sign, although concern has been U grheatl,Y decre~sedd'bBashedOon thle narrhow sectlidonb" ofltlhe budildinhg tha4tOfronts ontito MTichhiganh Roaddandd. " w at IS penmtte y t " ever ay, t " ey wou. e.a owe to ave square eet. ey ave re uce It to 79 square feet. That does increase Staff's comfort level with the size. It does mitigate the overall size. Some of the uses mentioned by the Petitioner that have large signs have requested variances in the past. It is not entirely unprecedented in the Overlay, although the majority of the signs in the Overlay are compliant or close to being compliant. However, the Staff recognizes this will be their only sign on site and it will be extensively landscaped which mitigates some of the concern with the size. The Department recommended positive consideration Docket Nos. 07110006 V through 0711009 V and 07110011 V and 07110012 V and negative consideration of 07110010 V, although it has come down 111 SIze. Mr. Dierckman asked if they would amend their request to reflect the 79.29 square feet for the sign. Mr. Shinaver confirmed they would accept the 79.29 square feet. Mr. Dierckman stated the Plan Commission had gone through this very thoroughly and was happy with the accommodations the Petitioner had made with the site throughout the process. He was in favor of all the variances with the reduction in the signage. Mrs. Torres asked if Mike's would be permitted other.signs. u Mrs. Barton-Holmes stated they would only be permitted the one sign. She believed there had been some discussion at the Special Studies Committee level about a tenant sign for the overall development that would include a panel for Mike's Carwash. If and when that would happen, it would require a variance because it would be an off-premise sign. " Page 4 of6 L u u Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes January 28, 2008 Mr. Broach asked about the color and size. Was it white and internally illuminated? The sign could be 75 square feet ifit was placed on the longer side? He was in favor of the variances but would like to see the sign a little less than 79 square feet. Did the Plan Commission have any recommendation on the size ofthe sign? Mr. Shinaver con tinned the sign colors and the size. They had no intention of putting the sign on the longer side. He was just pointing out what would be permitted on a more traditional shaped building. Mr. Dierckman did not remember a size for the sign. The Plan Commission knew it would be coming for a variance. He suspected the logic of the 75 square feet would make sense to them also. To him 79.29 square feet versus 75 square feet did not make much difference. Mrs. Torres asked about the placement of the sign. Was it on the part sticking out closest to Michigan Road or the part where the cars go? Mr. Shinaver stated it was the part closest to Michigan Road. Frank Hindes, the architect from Cripe Architects & Engineers, stated the site plan is somewhat misleading. The offset shown in the building is actually under an overhang. The front fa<;ade of the building is flush all the way across. He indicated the wall on the site plan. Bill Da1un, one ofthree owners of Mike's Carwash. They realized when they bought the site they would only have one sign. None of their other locations have just one sign. They usually have a monument and a pylon. All the surveys ever done in their industry show they are an impulse-driven business. Most people do not leave home or work and say they are going to get a carwash. So signage is paramount because it is kind of a last minute decision. This is a 20 percent compromise from what they have for all of their other building signs. Mr. Hawkins had a question about the noise. Did they have any kind of study? Mr. Shinaver stated the Noise Ordinance was discussed at the Plan Commission level. They hired a sound engineer to do an analysis and it was determined the Range Line Road site was in compliance with the Noise Ordinance. Based on some of the information obtained from the Range Line Road study, the sound engineer felt confident the property on Michigan Road would also be in compliance. Once the project is built and functioning, they can take the sound readings. They understand and intend to comply with the Noise Ordinance. Mr. Hawkins asked if they would make a commitment mandating they would comply with the Noise Ordinance. Mr. Shinaver confirmed they had to comply by law. Mr. Molitor stated a commitment would have some possible application. If the Noise Ordinance would be changed in the future, the commitment would still stand. Mr. Broach moved to approve Docket Nos. 07110006 V through 07110012 V Mike's Express Carwasb Micbigan Road with the CONDITION the sign be no larger than 79.29 square feet and the Page5of6 Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes January 28,2008 COMMITMENT to follow the Noise Ordinance; The motion was seconded by Mr. Dierckman and ALL were APPROVED 4-0 with the Condition and Commitment. 8h. Deca Environmental & Associates, Inc. TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 25 The applicant seeks the following use variance and development standards variance approvals: Docket No. 07110015 V Alternative Transportation Plan Elimination ofrequiredsidewalkslpaths The site is located at 410 First Avenue NE and is zoned R3IResidential. Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson & Frankenberger for Deca Environmental & Associates, inc. K Old Business 11. Westwood Estates Buffer Yard Withdrawn January 25, 2008 The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval: Docket No. 07080010 V Section 26.04.04 Buffer yard in regulated drain easement The sites are located at 2165 Renegade Court-2095 Renegade Court and are zoned Sl/Single-fainily residential Filed by Paul Reis of Bose McKinney & Evans, LLP for Justus Home Builders, Inc. 2 31. Nartll MelfidiaH MedicalPa.iliOH SigHage TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 25 The applieant seeks the following deyelopmont standards variance approval: Daeket No. 07080lHl V Seeti9H 25.07.02 10 Nllmber af signs faeing ROW Bldg. A. Dael,ct Na. 07080012 V Seeti9n 2S.(}7.02 10 Nllmber af signs facing ROW Bldg. B. The site is located at 12188 N. Meridian St., El-Hd is zoned B 6. Filed by Deug Staley, Jf. of Staley Signs. J. New Business There was no New Business. K. Adjoununent Mr. Dierckman moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hawkins and APPROVED 4-0. The meeting adjourned at 6:40 PM d~.~-z f/ James R. Hawkins, President S:\Board of Zoning Aj)peals\Minutes\Board of Zoning Appeals - 2008/200S012S.rtf Page 60f6 c u u