Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 4-28-08 CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DEPARTMENT REPORT April 28, 2008 6-8h. Shideler Dermatology - Signage The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval: Docket No. 08020029 V Section 25.07.02-10 (b) Number of signs per tenant Docket No. 08020035 V Section 25.07.02-10 (b) Sign not facing right-of-way Docket No. 08020036 V Section 25.07.02-10 (b) N umber of signs facing right-of-way The site is located at 755 W. Carmel Dr. and is zoned M-3. Filed by Amy Rottman ofSign-A-Rama. General Info: The subject site is within an established office park, located within the Carmel Drive Executive Park. Multiple signs are requested to indicate multiple services provided by the petitioner, each with its own access point. The building has two frontages, on City Center Dr. and West Carmel Drive, and has access on both frontages. Analysis: Because of the building's orientation on the site, one entrance faces West Carmel Drive, and the other entrance faces the retention pond. The City Center Dr. fa<;ade is a short fa<;:adc with no public entrances. Therefore, signs facing west, towards the pond, would require the grant of a variance, even though the site has two street frontages. The tenant occupies the majority of the building, and offers several related specialties, each with their own entrance. A sign is requested for each specialty/entrance, to clarify which entrance visitors need to use. If there were individual, different tenants in each space, they would each be permitted to have their own signs, and multiple signs per fac;ade are not unusual in this development. The Department's main concern is with the size of the primary sign, reading "Shidclcr". While the size does not require a variance, it is larger than many other signs located in the same office park. The Department would prefer to see a reduction in size. Additionally, the tenant space signs do not all match in font; all italicized or all regular font types should be used. Findings of Fact: Number of signs facing the right-of-way 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: The additional requested signs will increase tenant visibility and building visibility without being visually obtrusive. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will be not affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The additional requested signs will increase tenant visibility and building visibility without being visually obtrusive. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in a hardship in the use of the property because: If this variance is denied, then little signage will be on the rear/west side of the building, making it harder for patrons to identify a business' location. Findings of Fact: Sign not facing the right-of-way 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare ofthe community because: The signs will be visible from the right-of-way. 2. The use and value ofthe area adjacent to the property included in the variance will be not affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The signs will be visible from the right-of-way. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in a hardship in the use of the property because: Building tenants would lose visibility on West Carmel Drive and 122nd Street. Findings of Fact: Number oftenant signs 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: the signs would be pcnnittcd if they were for different tenants, and are within the allowable size. 2. The use and value ofthe area adjacent to the property included in the variance will be not affected in a substantially adverse manner because: the signs would be permitted if they were for different tenants, and are within the allowable size. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in a hardship in the use of the property because: individual specialties will not have signage directing clients to the correct tenant space. Recommendation: The Dept. of Community Services recommends positive consideration of Docket Nos. 08020029 V, 08020035 V and 08020036 V after all concerns have been addressed.