Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 02-24-03gIVIV�'�' of CAq`� C i ty of arme Carmel /Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Monday, February 24, 2003 The regularly scheduled meeting was held at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of Carmel City Hall on February 24, 2003. Those members in attendance: Leo Dierckman, Michael Mohr, Pat Rice, and Charles Weinkauf, thereby establishing a quorum. Earlene Plavchak was absent. Department of Community Services Staff in attendance: Department Director Mike Hollibaugh, Planning Administrators Laurence Lillig and Jon Dobosiewicz. John Molitor, Legal Counsel, was also present. Mrs. Rice moved to approve the minutes from the January 27, 2003, February 10, 2003, and February 18, 2003 meetings. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weinkauf and APPROVED 4 -0. Mr. Molitor reported that Item 1 i. WTF Sprint Spectrum (A- 111 -01) on the agenda would not be discussed tonight. The Board did not approve the proposed settlement agreement at the February 18, 2003 Special Meeting. Therefore, responsive pleadings were filed today and the matter will be litigated. The Board did not conduct an Executive Session preceding this meeting due to a lack of a quorum; therefore, the Martin Marietta litigation was not discussed. He would like the Board to discuss a time for another Executive Session. The Martin Marietta attorneys have requested to meet with him and consultant Gene Lausch Tuesday, February 25, to discuss the pending litigation. Discussion followed regarding the February 25 meeting. Regarding the Robinson pending litigation, Mr. Molitor reported that Mr. Robinson's attorneys have suggested that they are willing to file with DOCS and with the Board a request for a Development Standards Variance which if approved would result in the authorization for them to get a variance from the 800 foot minimum for the apartments in the Range Line area. This will be discussed at the Executive Session. This could lead a dismissal of the pending lawsuit. Mr. Molitor clarified the status of the Sprint item. Sprint has filed an action in Federal Court against the Board and against the City arising out of the City's revocation of the permit for the location of their cellular equipment on a ham radio structure on the west side. The Board later decided to uphold the revocation of that permit and to determine that a Special Use approval was required before Sprint could be allowed to utilize that structure. The status now is that the Board and the City have moved to dismiss the Sprint petition on the grounds primarily that Sprint has not exhausted its administrative remedies before the Board. Sprint has filed in response a motion for summary judgment stating that they in fact have made all the elements of proof to demonstrate that under the Federal Telecommunications Act they are entitled to get their permit. Today's filing was our response to their motion for summary judgment. It was a 25 -page motion Page 1 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 2 of 11 with supporting argument. The final opportunity for negotiations was last week. The Court has ordered us to proceed with all due responses and is no longer entertaining settlement discussions. Mr. Lillig gave the Department Report. He pointed out that Item 19j. should have a correct zoning classification of M3 /Manufacturing. li. WTF Sprint Spectrum (A- 111 -01) Board to consider proposed Consent Decree to resolve Case No. IP 02 -1133 C T/K before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, contesting the Director's August 23, 2002, decision to revoke Improvement Location Permit No. 627.01b to install a wireless telecommunications antenna on an existing HAM radio tower; the Board's June 24, 2002, decision to grant an appeal (Docket No. A- 97 -01) of the issuance of the Improvement Location Permit; and the Board's July 22, 2002, decision to deny Sprint's appeal of the revocation of the Permit. The site is located at 1388 Queen's Way. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence Very Low Density. This item was not heard at this meeting. J. Public Hearing 1 -13j. Carmel/Clay Schools Carmel High School (SUA- 194 -02; V- 195 -02 through V -206- 02) Petitioner seeks Special Use approval to construct a 173,000- square -foot Freshman Center addition to the existing high school. Petitioner also seeks the following Development Standards Variances: V- 195 -02 §25.07.01 -2 12- square -foot traffic directional sign A V- 196 -02 §25.07.01 -2 5- square -foot traffic directional sign B V- 197 -02 §25.07.01 -2 6- square -foot traffic directional sign C V- 198 -02 §25.07.01 -2 19.5- square -foot traffic directional sign D V- 199 -02 §25.07.01 -2 four -foot (4) traffic directional sign D V- 200 -02 §25.07.02- 5(b)(i) eight (8) institutional signs V- 201 -02 §25.07.02- 5(b)(ii) two (2) changeable copy signs V- 202 -02 §25.07.02- 5(c)(i) 29.25- square -foot institutional wall sign V- 203 -02 §25.07.02- 5(c)(i) 24.5- square -foot institutional wall sign V- 204 -02 §25.07.02- 5(c)(ii) 24- square -foot changeable copy sign V- 205 -02 §25.07.02 -5(d) 62" institutional ground sign V- 206 -02 §8.04.01 57 -foot building height The site is located at 520 East Main Street. The site is zoned R -2 /Residence. Filed by William E. Payne of Fanning /Howey Associates for the Carmel/Clay School Corporation. Present for the Petitioner: Chuck Tyler, Fanning /Howey Associates, 9025 N. River Road, Indianapolis, IN. Also present were Ron Farrand, Director of Facilities and Transportation with Carmel Clay Schools, and Allen Cradler and Jeff Bolinger with Fanning /Howey Associates. Page 2 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 3 of 11 Mr. Tyler recounted how this project had come to this BZA meeting. It has been comprehensive in scope and a very open community engaged process throughout. It began with designation of five facility plans as a part of the School Board work sessions in December 2000. That proceeded with the identification of a facilities planning committee of 64 members of the community, staff, and students. That committee met over the summer of 2001 wrestling with the challenges of the growing school district and pressures that were developing at multiple grade levels. In July 2001 recommendations were made to the School Board, which began the facility improvement process. Programming and conceptual design for the Freshman Center began in August 2001. A project website for all of the projects for all of the schools was developed to communicate with the Carmel citizenry in December of that year. Ultimately four conceptual plans were developed and presented for community review and input in March 2002. The Board approved an initial conceptual plan in April 2002. Schematic design approval was obtained in June 2002, design development approval in November 2002 and the construction document phase is almost completed. Community meetings were held throughout this design process to gain broader public input, as well as specifically targeted meetings to meet with adjacent property owners and address items of mutual concern. The task group ultimately generated a recommendation for a separate, but attached, Freshman Center. The desire being to create a separate identity for the Freshman Center with separate entrance, cafeteria, administration and guidance, but to take advantage of the resources of the high school itself, the library, advanced curriculum available to all students, performing arts and the physical education and athletic facilities. Freshman would generally remain within the Freshman Center for approximately eighty percent of their day and venture into the high school for specific resource areas. The desire has been to create the best of both worlds, to create identity for the freshmen in smaller learning communities, as well as not to duplicate resources between the Freshman Center and Carmel High School. The project has taken the shape of two additions, one on the east side and one on the west side of the building. The east side is a performing arts addition of approximately 14,000 to 15,000 square feet. The primary academic addition on the northwest side of the building is approximately 159,000 square feet. Initially there was no intent to purchase additional property to support this plan. As the design was shared with the public, a number of homeowners identified themselves as being agreeable to the sale of their property, specifically in the area northwest of the existing building. Six properties were purchased and have become a part of the site development. As of the Plan Commission's hearings, a seventh property has been added to that list. The intent has been upon improving the relationship between the school corporation, the high school, and residential property to the northwest, to improve upon existing conditions and to buffer and separate the residential property from the school property. That has been accomplished through existing tree retention, the development of extended landscape areas, and berming and fencing. A great deal of discussion has occurred with regard to traffic flow. The approach of separating the school driveway from the adjacent residential drive was determined to be the best approach. As part of this project there is a redirection and reconnection of Audubon Drive and Sylvan Lane. The separation of the school property and residential area was a high priority. An emergency only egress has been incorporated at the desire of both Police and Fire Departments. Bus loading is a concern and an issue. The existing bus loading area on the west end of the building will be retained. The north drive from Smokey Row Road and the turn around are being reconfigured to allow bus queuing and loading on the north to address concerns with the current number of buses and the number needed to serve the expanded facility in the future. A part of this development on the north, is the creation of a fifteen to eighteen foot wide sidewalk to connect the north entrance with the parking to the north of Smokey Row Road. The Page 3 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 4 of 11 expanded pavement and guardrail system will allow this drive to be operational. The Freshman Center will have a new main entrance and that will provide a new point of student drop off. As part of this development, the new parking replaces the existing parking that is lost via this construction. One hundred fifty -two spaces are being incorporated. Zoning for this facility would require 2350 parking spaces. The proposed plan includes 2539 spaces, including the 152 additional spaces. This builds upon what was previously approved in 1996 with regard to utilizing the remote parking adjacent to the football field. Another concern has been tree preservation. The current plan calls for 159 new trees, the relocation of 67 existing trees of a size that makes them reasonable to relocate, and the loss of 51 existing trees. There are a number of trees that are smaller than six inches and it is the intent to preserve as many of those as possible. Allen Cradler, Fanning /Howey Associates, 9025 N. River Road, Indianapolis, IN. Mr. Cradler addressed the building elevations. They are consistent with, or blend in with, the existing buildings, utilizing matching brick. Some pre -cast concrete panels have been brought in. This will create an identifiable building that will tie in with existing buildings. A canopy out front will have a different design. The height of the building and windows will blend in and match the existing buildings. The height variance is for a three -story building with a 57 -foot mechanical penthouse. It is set back from the edge of the building and therefore its impact is lessened. The new site signage is consistent with existing directional and wall signage on the site. Mr. Tyler noted that they are in agreement with conditions stated by staff with regard to rights of -way, combining the property into a single tax parcel, right -of -way connection and rededication, emergency access easement, and the resolution of any outstanding TAC items. Remonstrance: Public in Support: Frank Vanovermeiren, 135 Audubon Drive, Carmel, IN. He had been very active in monitoring the proposed plans from the very beginning. He had attended numerous School Board meetings, watched dozens of meetings on TV, made presentations to those meeting, had met with school people, had telephone conversations and emails, and other community meetings. He had a couple of minor things he would like addressed at this meeting and as part of the approval. First, that the properties to the north and to the west of the existing right -of -way that is proposed as a green space buffer remain as is and that any future development of that property require BZA approval, including the development of additional parking space. Second, the school has purchased one additional property and it has not been made public on exactly what the intent is of that property. Lastly, the situation regarding the smaller trees, it hasn't been identified what will happen with them. They could potentially be relocated prior to development of the parcels. Public in Opposition: Wayne Wilson, 24 Wilson Drive, Carmel, IN. He was neither in support or opposition. He wanted to bring some attention to the BZA. Something that has come up at the City Council level is relying on the football field to create additional parking space. Bus loading zone is on Main Street, utilizing a city street to load school buses. He thought tonight's meeting would address the bus loading issue and additional parking concerns. The City Council will be addressing the bus loading zone on a city street. Page 4 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 5 of 11 Rebuttal: Ron Farrand, Director of Facilities and Transportation for the school corporation, 5304 Underwood Court Carmel, IN. He stated with regard to the bus issue, the back drives are being reconfigured to relieve the buses off the street. Their best effort has been to balance the green space with the need for parking. They are trying to leave some green areas for students around the buildings. They could all be used for parking, but they felt the green space was best for the environment. Mr. Tyler felt the school corporation would have no difficulty with the requirement that any changes to the property come back to the BZA. There is not a final resolution as to how the Andich property will be handled, other than the school's commitment to retain it as a residential property, either through sale, which would be preferable, or through rental. They have made the further commitment to the Weigel's, which is the next house to the west, that the Andich property would remain a residence. At this point he was not sure how much more detail they could get on the smaller trees. It would be the intent for areas to remain undisturbed, but they would not know until the property is staked. Mr. Lillig gave the Department Report. He pointed out the letter that the Board had received from Paul Spranger, President of the Plan Commission, dated February 22, 2003. Mr. Spranger's letter expressed the parking concerns the Plan Commission would like to have addressed as part of this process. The Department is recommending favorable consideration of V- 195 -02 through V- 205 -02 for signage. The signs are consistent with the signs considered previously for the high school and the other school facilities. The Department is also recommending favorable consideration for the 57 -foot height variance request. With respect to SUA- 194 -02, the Department recommends five conditions. First, the vacation of the lots and rights -of -way within the Carmelwood Subdivision plat needs to be accomplished. The Plan Commission has approved its aspect of the plat vacation. The legal document accomplishing that will need to be finalized and recorded. The rights -of -way for Audubon Drive and Sylvan Lane will also need Council approval. Second, that all the tax parcels shall be combined into one tax parcel and a single legal description is provided for the entire property. Third, the rights -of -way for Sylvan Lane and Audubon Drive connecting the remainders of those two streets will need to be taken to the Carmel Board of Public Works and Safety for dedication acceptance and a copy of that document will also need to be recorded and returned to the City. Fourth, the emergency access easement that would connect Sylvan/Audubon connection to the drive within the Carmel High School site needs to be described and also taken to the Board of Public Works for dedication and acceptance. Finally, the Department is recommending that all outstanding TAC issues be resolved. Mrs. Rice, as a member of the Plan Commission, expressed the Plan Commission's concerns over this project. There are a number of serious safety issues, which need to be addressed. Most of those concerns were expressed in the letter from the Plan Commission President, Mr. Spranger. She asked that the petitioner address each of these issues and suggestions of Mr. Spranger. Mr. Weinkauf wanted to know if every student at Carmel High School could ride the bus, if they chose. Page 5 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 6 of 11 Mr. Farrand responded there was not adequate space for each student. However, they have found that from the later part of sophomore year many choose not to ride the bus. Mr. Weinkauf found it interesting that several years ago the School Board decided to integrate freshmen into the high school. He wondered if that was for the benefit of the students or the benefit of the overcrowded middle schools at that time. Now the intent is to segregate the freshmen. Why? The high school location is already extremely crowded for facilities and parking, when there is other school land in other areas. It is hard to vote for a new Freshman Center with all the concerns that exist. Mr. Farrand stated that Carmelwood properties around the school are not easy to use for parking because of differences in grade. The 60- member committee thought the Freshman Center was a good idea for the students. If the structure was located somewhere else, the students would not have use of the resources at the high school and many resources would need to be duplicated. Areas are vastly overcrowded for parking, but other areas are not full. Many people chose to park close to the door, regardless of the other parking being available. The doors to the facility are open and a person who parks anywhere on the site can walk through the building to an activity. They have chosen to have green space and not all asphalt around the buildings. Strip parking along the access road can be eliminated. Discussion continued regarding the parking issues, the bus staging on Main Street, and traffic flow of the buses and parents' cars. Mr. Wilson commented on the amount of traffic in front of the school on Main Street in the mornings, making it impossible to get in and out of private driveways on Main Street. There are only two officers stationed in front of the school, with no effect on traffic control going away from the school. He had not heard how the bus loading along Main Street would be addressed. He noted there is a shuttle from the football field parking lot for sporting events. The City has spent an inordinate amount of money restricting parking on nearby streets by the students. Specific commitments need to be made for parking arrangements. Mr. Farrand commented that the buses would be dropping students on the backside of the school without using the streets. The only solution would be structured parking. He felt this would cause problems with the east side neighbors. That would pave over what little green space is left. Mr. Mohr stated that looking at this plan, as the school grows, sooner or later that green space is going to be paved. When do we get to the point we look at a second high school? Mr. Farrand could not answer the question about another school. He did not know if the School Board could answer that question. The projected growth for the community, when it is built out, will be handled by this building. Mr. Lillig pointed out that the plan shared tonight had an auxiliary parking lot in the northeast that is an increase from the original plan that was in the packets. Discussion continued regarding the bus staging and traffic flow on Main Street, a traffic study, and sacrificing green space. Page 6 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 7 of 11 Roger Conn, 736 E. Main Street, Carmel, IN. He lives there and worked the traffic in front of the high school for seventeen years as a Carmel Policeman. The heaviest flow of traffic coming in from Keystone was 7:15 -7:55 AM. He discussed traffic flow in and around the school. Public Hearing was closed. Mr. Lillig stated that a traffic study is for the impact of use on surrounding roadways. An operation analysis is for the onsite flow of traffic and how it is all functioning. The Board is looking for more of an internal or operation analysis. Mr. Farrand requested something in writing that clearly states goal for what they are being asked to study. Mr. Mohr stated the Board was trying to find a more efficient way to get traffic in and out of the school, not necessarily a traffic count, but an efficient plan. Mr. Lillig suggested the Board dispose of the variances tonight, so the Board can focus on the traffic analysis at next month's meeting. He wanted clarification of outcome with respect to all the analysis of the onsite traffic. Is it ultimately toward revisions to the site plan or refinements of the operations themselves, given this site configuration? Mr. Mohr stated that both are needed. Mr. Weinkauf stated that without the Special Use approval for the Freshman Center, there would be no need for the variances. Mr. Lillig asked if the entire use hinges on traffic issues or are they resolvable issues? Mr. Dierckman felt a very well thought out traffic plan or traffic study will be needed to get the approvals. Mr. Lillig stated that the Department would meet with the petitioner to set the parameters and specifics for the study. Mr. Dierckman moved to table SUA- 194 -02; V- 195 -02 through V- 206 -02, Carmel/Clay Schools Carmel High School. The motion to table was seconded by Mrs. Rice and APPROVED 3 -1, with Mr. Weinkauf casting the opposing vote. Page 7 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 8 of 11 14 -17j. King of Glory Lutheran Church (V- 208 -02; V- 209 -02; V- 210 -02; V- 211 -02) Petitioner seeks the following Development Standards Variances: V- 208 -02 §25.07.01 -2 3.75- square -foot traffic directional sign V- 209 -02 §25.07.02- 5(b)(i) two (2) institutional signs V- 210 -02 §25.07.02 -5(d) 6 -foot institutional ground sign (new) V- 211 -02 §25.07.02 -5(e) zero -foot ground sign setback (existing) The site is located at 2201 East 106 Street. The site is zoned S -2 /Residence within the SR 431/Keystone Avenue Overlay Zone. Filed by William E. Erickson of King of Glory Lutheran Church. Present for Petitioner: Bill Erickson, Eagle's Watch, Fishers, IN. The 3.75 square foot sign was manufactured inadvertently at that size, instead of 3.0 square feet. The new 6 -foot institutional sign will replace the old one at 106 Street and Keystone and will match the newer existing sign on 106 Street. The widening of 106 Street and the curb cut created the zero -foot setback. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the petition. No one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lillig gave the Department Report. On December 3, 2002, the Plan Commission Special Study Committee approved Docket 9128 -02 ADLS Amend for this project. The Department is recommending favorable consideration of V- 208 -02 through V- 211 -02 consistent with the Special Study Committee's approval of Docket 9128 -02 ADLS Amend. The report sites a condition of Board of Public Works and Safety approval, which has already been met. Mr. Dierckman moved to approve V- 208 -02; V- 209 -02; V- 210 -02; V- 211 -02, King of Glory Lutheran Church. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weinkauf and all variances were APPROVED 4 -0. 18j. Carmel United Methodist (UV -1 -03) The petitioner seeks Use Variance approval in order to establish a food pantry /counseling center use in an existing structure. The site is located at 621 South Range Line Road. The site is zoned B -3 /Business and R- 2 /Residence. Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker Daniels for Carmel United Methodist Church. Present for Petitioner: Roger Kilmer, Baker Daniels, 600 E. 96 Street, Carmel, IN. The building currently serves as a parsonage. The counseling services and food pantry are currently located within the main church building. The proposed uses will remain accessory uses to the main use of the property as a church. There will be no structure required and parking already exists. Existing interior drives will be utilized for access to the building and no exterior renovations or modifications are proposed at this time, other than a ramp to meet ADA requirements. The interior of the structure will be altered to provide offices for each use and an ADA compliant bathroom. Two of the TAC requests have already been met. The third request was for a key to be placed in the Knox Box of the larger church building. That request will be accommodated. Page 8 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 9 of 11 Remonstrance: Public in Support: Roger Conn, 736 E. Main Street, Carmel, IN. He is the church Business Administrator. He emphasized the work that is done by the church through the food pantry and counseling center. The Salvation Army will also locate with them in this building. He asked the Board to waive a portion or all of filing fees, so they could use the fund for other uses. Rev. Patti Payntor, Associate Pastor at Carmel United Methodist Church, as well as a Chaplain with the Carmel Police Department. She also emphasized their need to expand the food pantry and counseling center. They are also looking at a number of missions to serve the elderly and those with special needs. They have many members anxious to begin these programs. No one appeared in Opposition. Mr. Lillig gave the Department Report. The Department is recommending favorable consideration with the condition that all Technical Advisory Committee comments shall be satisfactorily addressed. The Board does not have the authority to waive the filing fee, neither does the Department. Mr. Dierckman moved to approve UV -1 -03, Carmel United Methodist. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weinkauf and APPROVED 4 -0. 19j. Carmel Science Technology Park, Block 13, Building 1 Lakeside Corporate Center Deborah Wood Associates (V -2 -03) The petitioner seeks approval of a Development Standards Variance of Section 25.07.02 10(b) in order to establish a second wall identification sign on the west facade. The site is located at 630 West Carmel Drive. The site is zoned M- 3/Manufacturing. Filed by Paul G. Reis of Drewry Simmons Pitts Vornehm for Deborah Wood Associates. Present for Petitioner: Paul Reis, 5013 Buckeye Court, Carmel, IN. The variance is to allow a second wall sign to be installed on the Guilford Avenue frontage. An aerial map was shown of the location of the building. The primary orientation of the building is toward Guilford Avenue and has the widest facade. This will best utilize the building design to promote the aesthetics of the building. A design of the sign was shown. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the petition. No one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lillig gave the Department report. He reported that on February 4, 2003, the Special Study Committee approved Docket #15 -03 ADLS Amend for this site. The Department is recommending favorable consideration of V -2 -03 consistent with the Special Study Committee's approval of Docket 915 -03 ADLS Amend. Page 9 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 10 of 11 Mr. Dierckman moved to approve V -2 -03, Carmel Science Technology Park, Block 13, Building 1 Lakeside Corporate Center, Deborah Wood Associates. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Rice and APPROVED 4 -0. K. Old Business lk. There was no Old Business on the February 24, 2003, agenda of the Board of Zoning Appeals. L. New Business. 1L. There was no New Business on the February 24, 2003, agenda of the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Hollibaugh asked for more clarification for analysis of the traffic for the School Board. There are so many variables in activities for the school days. Mr. Dierckman stated he believed the school bus issue had been figured out. He thought the only other thing to figure out was the number of cars stacked on Main Street toward Keystone and how that issue can be resolved most efficiently. Mrs. Rice stated an operation analysis on the traffic should be done. There should be a very specific plan about how all the traffic flows in and out, around and in front of the school. Mr. Weinkauf thought it should be a plan, more than an analysis. He felt the School Board should stress more kids riding the bus. A lot of the traffic seems to be parents dropping their kids off, rather than using the bus service that is provided. Mr. Mohr stated it is a real issue and he felt they were basically asking the School System how they were going to deal with the traffic. There is a plan for inside the building, but there doesn't seem to be any plan for the outside. The next Executive Session was scheduled for Thursday, March 6 at noon. M. Adiourn Mr. Weinkauf moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dierckman and APPROVED 4 -0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 PM. Page 10 Carmel/Clay Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals February 24, 2003 Page 11 of 11 Michael Mohr, President Connie Tingley, Secretary Page 11