HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report l� h
CARMEL /CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
DEPARTMENT REPORT
June 23, 2003
6 -9h. 10850 Towne Road Towne Meadow Elementary
(V- 50 -03, V- 51 -03, V- 52 -03, V- 53 -03)
Petitioner seeks the following Development Standards Variances:
V -50 -03 03050007 §25.07.02 -05(b) two (2) insttional signs
V -51 -03 03050008 §25.07.02 -05(c) 36 -sq -ft in ign
sign
V -52 -03 03050009 §25.07.02- 05(c)(ii) 24 -sq -ft changeable copy sign
V -53 -03 03050010 §25.07.02 -05(d) 6 -ft 2in tall ground sign raegis
o The site is located at 10850 Towne Road. The site is
u zoned S- 1/Residential.
Filed by William Fanning of Fanning /Howey
Associates, Inc., on behalf of Carmel /Clay Schools.
TOPAZ LN
54 4 ,,,,,704.y.vg, G Information: The school property lies near
1, 1Fz 106"' Street and Towne Road. The property and the
o j surrounding area is zoned S -1 /Residential. The
o s v I comprehensive plan shows this area as a Residential
rr
a 1 Co Area. The two institutional signs will be 36
Ya N 'a a W AUGUSTA LN and 24 square feet, respectively. The height of the signs
J will be 6 -ft 2 -in, rather than the required 5 -ft height.
J
r ,4' A °:8 Background Information:
The school has already had variances in 2002, case V-
rn 3 0 -02 and V- 31 -02, for two directional signs.
E a t (Excerpt from BZA Minutes, June 6, 2002): `IN
o
PALAC �1 c r 106 Tx 9-10j. Carmel/Clay Schools Towne Meadow
Elementary (V- 30 -02; V- 31 -02)
Petitioner seeks approval of the following Developmental Standards Variances:
V -30 -02 §25.7.01 -2 22.22- square -foot traffic directional sign #1
V -31 -02 §25.7.01 -2 22.22- square -foot traffic directional sign #2
The site is located at 10850 Towne Road. The site is zoned S- 1/Residence Very Low Density.
Filed by Chris Hinkle of Paul I. Cripe, Inc. for the Carmel /Clay School Corporation...
...Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared.
Department Recommendation: Favorable consideration. Laurence Lillig recommended the Board suspend
the rules in order to take a single vote on each school, so that would be three votes.
The public hearing was closed.
Earlene Plavchak moved to approve V -30 -02 and V- 31 -02. The motion was seconded by Pat
Rice. V -30 -02 and V -31 -02 were APPROVED 3 -0.
June 23, 2003
Carmel /Clay Board of Zoning Appeals Department Report
6
Analysis:
The applicant would like to construct a building identification sign with changeable copy, exceeding area
size and height restrictions by the Zoning Ordinance. The need for a larger sign is so it can be legible to
drivers that pass by the site, informing them of upcoming events.
Findings of Fact:
1.) The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and
general welfare of the community because: The continued existence of two institutional signs on this
site will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community
because the signs are an existing violation that has never proven to be injurious to the public health,
safety, morals and general 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: It is the Department's opinion that the use and
value of the area adjacent to the property will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner by
allowing the second institutional sign to remain.
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: The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance
will not result in practical difficulties in the use of the property. The site is now and has been for several
years occupied by an elementary school and utilized for institutional purposes. The site would continue
to function in this manner if the second sign were removed. The Depatlntent recognizes that there is a
unique need at educational facilities to let parents and other visitors know of functions that may be held.
Recommendation:
The Department recommends favorable consideration of Docket Nos. V -50 -03 through V- 53 -03.
June 23, 2003
Carmel /Clay Board of Zoning Appeals Department Report
7