Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 06-23-08 CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DEPARTMENT REPORT June 23, 2008 I. Old Business 1-Si. Stout Shoes Buildings The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals: Docket No. 08030010 V Section 20G.OS.04(A)(3) Retail uses in excess of50% Docket No. 08030011 V Section 20G.05.04(B)(2)(a) Height under 28'/One occupiable floor Docket No. 08030012 V Section 20G.05.04(B)(2) Setback of less than 10'. Docket No. 08050001 V Section 20G.04.01(A) Site plan to match adopted plan Docket No. 08050035 V Section 20G.05.04.C (1) Frontage less than 70' along ROW The site is located at 13 100-13155 Old Meridian Street and is zoned Old Meridian/Mixed Use within the Old Meridian District. Filed by Michael C. Cook ofWoodcn & McLaughlin LLP for Old Meridian & Main Street Properties, LLC. General Info: The applicant is seeking four variances, to vary from the requirements of the Old Meridian District, to be able to build two mixed-usc buildings. Surrounding uses include commercial, special uses, and residential. Analysis: Two buildings are proposed on this 3.195- acre site. They would be set back less than the ten-foot minimum, to allow for more developable room on the site. The Old MeridianlMixed Use District requires buildings to be brought up to the tront ,?f their site, between ten and twenty feet of thc right-of-way, to help foster an urban environment. While the proposed buildings would be closer than ten feet, Old Meridian Street has recently been extensively improved, and further improvements are unlikely. The setback reduction should not impede traffic lines of sitc or public safety. The Old Meridian District also requires a mix of uses, with no more than 50% retail, and two fully occupiable floors at no less than 28 feet in height, to fostcr a sense of urban identity and provide for a vibrant corridor that is occupied 24 hours a day. The petitioner has requested retail uses that would be in excess of the pemlitted 50%, and to have one building be one story; the other building would be two full stories. The variances would apply to Building Two. The Stout Shoes building would meet the height, occupancy, and usage requirements of the District. The fourth variance is requested because the Old Meridian District has an adopted site plan which guides development within the entire com'dor, and the proposed project would deviate from that site plan. However, the original intention for this parcel was for one special use building, such as a religious use, to occupy the entire parcel and to be offset from the intersection of Old Meridian Street and Main Street. The building at the site was intended to be a landmark building. That development did not occur, the site was rezoned to Mixed Use, and the proposed project's uses are pemlitted at this site, however, the site plan has not been updated to reflect the change in intended use. The petition as originally filed indicated two, one-story buildings with 100% retail uses. The request has since been modified to show one, one-story building and one, two-story building, with a corresponding reduction in retail; the second floor would be used for offices. The Department has worked extensively with the petitioner to produce a project that more closely matches the requirements of the Old Meridian District, and can be considered a landmark within the District. The most recently-submitted elevations indicate buildings which would contribute overall to the design intent of the District. Some items for the BZA and Committee to consider as they review the project are: . The site's intention to produce a landmark building on this prominent site; · The choice of exterior building materials and architectural details on the building; ( ;~ t. l \ ~~ .- r. o The design effect of two new buildings with contrasting architecture and building finishes; e The percentage of retail relative to this site and the CotTidor as a whole; . How tbis proposal complements the redevelopment of adjacent parcels, including the existing vet clinic; o Whether the overall quality of the project reflects the scope of the variance requests. Ffudings of Fact: Setback reductions 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: the building setback would be comparable to other proposed structures in the area, and would not interfere with the implementation of the Thoroughfare Plan. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property include~ in the variance will .be not affected ill a substantially adverse manlier because: the building setback would be comparable to other proposed structures in the area, and would not interfere with the implementation of the Thoroughfare Plan. 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: the petitioner could be unable to provide adequate parking. Findings of Fact: Retail uses 1. The approval of this variance will n.ot be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfareofthe community because: while one structure would have 100% retail uses, the other structures proposed for the site would have 50% or less retail, and the overall site would contribute to the mix of uses required tor the area. . 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: while one structure would have 100% . retail uses, the other structures proposed for the site WQuld have 50% or less retail, and the overall site would contribute to the mix of uses required for the area. 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: the buildings' design and the parking ratio could be negatively affected. Findings of Fact: Height less than 28' lOne occupiable floor 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: part of one structure would not comply with the height or occupiable floor requirement, however, the overall appearance and mass of the building would meet the intent of the District's design requirements. 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: part of one structure would not comply with the height or occupiable floor requirement, however, the overall appearance and mass of the building would meet the intent of tile District's design requirements. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in a hardship in the use ofthe property because: the buildings' design and the parking ratio could be negatively affected. Findings of Fact: Site plan to match adopted plan/frontage less than 70' along ROW. 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: the overall mass, size, and site design of the site meets the intent of the Old Meridian District. 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 overall mass, size, and site design of the site meets the intent of the Old Meridian Oishi ct. 3. The strict application of the t~rms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in a hardship in the use of the property because: the buildings' design and the parking ratio could be negatively affected. Recommendation: The Dept. of Community Services recommends approval of Docket Nos. 08030010 V, 08030011 V,. 08030012 V, 08050001 V, and 08050035 V.