Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 02-28-00CITY OF CARMEL AND CLAY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FEBRUARY 28, 2000 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals met at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana, on February 28, 2000. Members present were: Leo Dierckman; Michael Mohr; Pat Rice; and Charles W. Weinkauf. Director Steve Engelking; Terry Jones; and Laurence Lillig were present representing the Department of Community Services. The minutes of the January 24, 2000 meeting were approved as submitted. F. John Molitor noted that at this time, there is very little pending in State Legislature regarding Planning and Zoning. G. Laurence Lillig reported that Public Hearing items lh., Wingate Inn V- 93 -99; and 3h., Rod Busters, Inc. UV -2 -00 have been TABLED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MARCH MEETING. Old Business item li., Robinson Barber Shop UV -61 -99 has been TABLED BY THE PETITIONER TO AN INDEFINITE TIME. H. Public Hearing: 2h. Marriott Suites Hotel (UV -1 -00) Petitioner seeks approval of a Use Variance of Sections 17.1: Permitted Uses (B6 /Business District) 23B.3: Permitted Uses (US Highway 31 Overlay Zone) in order to establish a suite hotel with cooking facilities on 8.07 acres. The site is located in the 11800 block of North Meridian Street. The site is zoned B- 6 /Business within the US 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by Elizabeth Hobbs for Meridian Mile Associates. Joseph Scimia, attorney with Baker Daniels, 300 North Meridian Street, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant, Meridian Mile Associates. Elizabeth Hobbs of REI Real Estate Services was also in attendance. The petitioner is requesting a Use Variance to develop two, suite hotels on approximately 8 acres of real estate located north of 116 Street on Pennsylvania Avenue. The real estate is currently unimproved. One of the suite hotels would be a Residence Inn; the second facility would be a Springhill Suites, a lesser known facility in the midwest, but is basically for stays of between 1 to 5 days. s ABZA\Minutes \feb2000 Under the Zoning Ordinance, the definition of a hotel or motel does provide that no individual cooking facilities may be provided, and it is this provision from which the applicant is seeking a variance from. The property is currently zoned B -6, business district, and located within the US 31 Overlay Zone. The B -6 District and the Overlay permit a hotel or motel, but individual cooking facilities are not permitted. The site plan for the 8 acre parcel contains two buildings; the southern -most facility is the Springhill Suites, the Residence Inn is across from Springhill Suites. Both facilities would be operated by Mariott and developed by REI Real Estate Services. Mr. Scimia displayed layouts of the individual units that provide cooking facilities. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the petition; no one appeared. Laurence Lillig reported that the Department is recommending favorable considerable of the petition. Elizabeth Hobbs of REI Investments stated that the property is properly zoned and the petitioner meets all of the requirements and will go before the Plan Commission on March 21 st The public hearing was then closed. Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of Docket No. UV -1 -00, Marriott Suites Hotel. APPROVED 4 -0. 3h. Rod Busters, Inc. (UV -2 -00) TABLED to March. 4h. Meadowlark Office Park (V -3 -00) Petitioner seeks approval of a Developmental Standards Variance of Section 27.5: Amount of Parking Spaces Required in order to landbank seventeen (17) parking spaces required for a three- building office project. The site is located in the 700 block of Pro -Med Lane. The site is zoned B -6 /Business District. Filed by Jennifer D'Orso of Brizzi Collignon Dietrick for Dauby O'Connor Zaleski, LLC. Jennifer D'Orso, attorney, 127 East Michigan Street, Suite 600, Indianapolis, appeared before the Board representing the petitioner. Approval is being sought for a variance of Section 27.5 of the Zoning Ordinance in order to landbank 17 parking spaces required for an office project. The petitioner has received ADLS approval from the Plan Commission contingent, among other things, upon a variance from the BZA for landbanking the parking spaces. The landbanking is desirable because of the environment at the site; to the east is Meadowlark Park and the pond; to the south is a path and residential area; to the north is s:\BZA\Minutes \feb2000 2 residential, Kensington Place and Wildwood Estates. The neighboring park use and residential use require some special consideration. Strict adherence to the Ordinance would require 227 parking spaces and the petitioner is requesting 17 fewer spaces in the form of landbanking, thereby reconfiguring the parking. The petitioner has worked with the neighbors in order to maximize landscaping and minimize the parking. The petitioner has added landscape islands, trees and grassy areas to the main parking lot that will fit in with the park area. Due to the reconfiguration, some parking spaces will be lost. The landscaping has been designed to create a transition zone so that the office park is set apart from the surrounding land uses. The landscaping has been designed so that if future parking is required, only 4 trees would need to be removed and replaced. There is no definite date at present to start constructing the third building. The petitioner is asking that the Variance be approved to allow landbanking for 17 spaces. The the landbanking will be an enhancement to the surrounding properties as well as the trail connected with the park. A strict application of the Ordinance would result in a less attractive setting. John Molitor reported that there is a provision in the Ordinance that states the variance shall be effected or part of a project on which continuous construction has commenced within one year from the date of the granting of the variance, or shall become null and void. However, the period of time can be extended for six months upon application to the Director of the Department for a total of 18 months rather than 12 months. The Board does not really have the ability to waive this requirement. Ms. D'Orso stated that her clients are presently securing tenants and financing, and they are anxious to start construction Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to this petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Laurence Lillig clarified that this petition is made necessary by a requirement of the Plan Commission's Special Study Committee. The Department does support this petition and recommends favorable consideration. Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of V -3 -00, Meadowlark Office Park. APPROVED 4 -0. Laurence Lillig advised the petitioner that application for extension must be made prior to February 28, 2001, and if granted, the variance would expire August 28, 2001, if construction has not yet commenced. 5h. Northridge Addition, Lots 315, 316 317 (in part) (V -4 -00) Petitioner seeks approval of a Developmental Standards Variance of Section 7.4.3(B); Minimum Side Yards (R -1 /Residence District) to reduce the south side yard setback on Lot 316 from 10 feet to 9.7 feet for a 22.2'X 24.0' addition. The site is located at 407 East 102 Street. The site is zoned R -1 /Residence. s:\BZA\Minutes \feb2000 Filed by Adam DeHart of Keeler -Webb Associates for William Marilee Rice. Adam DeHart, Keeler -Webb Association, 486 Gradle Drive, Carmel, appeared before the Board representing the applicants. Mr. and Mrs. Rice were also present. Approval is being requested from Development Standards to allow the reduction of the south side yard setback on Lot 316. The lot extends and includes 315, 316, and a sliver of 317 in the Northridge Subdivision. The property is bounded on the south by Methodist Medical Plaza. Northridge was originally platted in 1949 and was built out in the 1950's and 60's. In addition, the covenants on this particular portion of the Subdivision did not define what portion of lots could be built on or over, and they were sold off in a piece -meal fashion. The petitioner is planning to construct a sun room on the south side of the house, 22 feet X 24 feet. Strict adherence to the definitions in the zoning ordinance require that setbacks be based off lot lines; therefore, there is a 10 foot side yard setback in the R -1 zoning that would require 20 feet off their southern property line. Mr. Rice has personally contacted his neighbors and has received no negative information or comments. Mr. DeHart referred to some typographical errors in the application -these have been noted by the Department. Mr. DeHart stated that a strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would impose difficulties on the construction because of the location of the lot lines as originally platted, subdivided, and sold and built -out prior to City Ordinances being enacted. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Laurence Lillig reported that there were two remedies in dealing with the problem. The preferred remedy for correction would be re- platting the lots so that the side yard setback is no longer an issue. There is already an existing, non conformity in that the house is built over a lot line. The alternative is the Variance. The Department would prefer the re- platting of the property and is therefore recommending a negative consideration for this petition. The Rice's do not own lot 317 in its entirety and the property owner of the remainder of the lot would have to sign -off on the plat amendment. The remainder of lot 317 should be vacated, since it is no longer a viable lot. The mounding is essentially a landscape buffer between the Northridge Addition and the Methodist Plaza to the south. This is more a technical issue in how setbacks are measured. Leo Dierckman moved for approval of Northridge Addition, Lots 315, 316 and 317 (in part) V -4 -00 and encouraged the petitioner to ultimately re -plat the property. APPROVED 4 -0. s:\BZA\Minutes \feb2000 4 6h. Asherwood Golf Course (SUA -5 -00) The petitioner seeks Special Use Amendment approval under Section 5.2: Permitted Special Uses in order to expand the private Sherwood Golf Course onto the 14.4 acres adjoining to the south. The site is located at 9950 Ditch Road. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence. Filed by James J. Nelson of Nelson Frankenberger for Melvin Brenda J. Simon Jim Nelson, attorney, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Board representing Melvin and Brenda Simon. Also present were Dwayne Scheer and Nola Albrecht of Schneider Engineering; and Aaron Cohen, adviser and construction manager. Mr. Nelson displayed an aerial view of the 94 -acre parcel of real estate owned by Mr. and Mrs. Simon at 10110 Ditch Road, commonly known as Asherwood. Asherwood has frontage on Ditch Road as is surrounded by the residential communities of Deerfield to the south, Windemere to the west, and Coppergate to the north. Surrounding the home site is a private golf course, previously approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals as a Special Use. South of Asherwood is the parcel of real estate that is the subject matter of the current request. The petitioner is requesting a Special Use Amendment application for approval to expand the private golf course into the 14 acre parcel. There are certain improvements on the property today and there will be some changes with respect to those improvements. The home and other structures on the real estate today will be razed and replaced by a golf course. The lake that exists near the south end of the property will be expanded northward to a size approximately 2.2 acres overall. There is a white, brick wall and wrought -iron fence that runs adjacent and parallel to Ditch Road. It is the petitioner's intention that the brick wall will remain, at least for now, as it currently exists. There are two points of ingress /egress to the site. It is the petitioner's intention to eliminate the southern-most point of ingress /egress and incorporate the two points into a single ingress /egress near the north property line. The site plan provides for a private drive extending to the golf chalet, a small clubhouse and maintenance facility, that is to be part of the project. The chalet will be located near the north property line and the lake area will be expanded. The routing plan for the short course is accommodated by 8 new greens and multiple tees that, in combination, can provide for an 18 hole, short or executive -style golf course. Irrigation for the current golf course is provided by the Indianapolis Water Co.- -wells are not utilized -it is all Indianapolis Water. During the review process, Hamilton County Highway Department made request for dedication of right -of -way and the petitioner has agreed to a 28 foot one -half right -of -way measured from the center line of Ditch Road which would take the right -of -way up to the existing fence and wall. A principal feature of the plan is the perimeter landscaping. A five foot high, wrought- s:\BZA\Minutes \feb2000 iron fence will be placed near the property's edge along the west and south property lines; within that area is a series of undulating mounds, three to five feet high, landscaped. The landscaping feature will provide the framework for the golf course as to perimeter treatment; that same treatment is extended adjacent to Ditch Road. The golf chalet is in style, design and building materials of the existing home. It is the intention that the chalet will be used as a small, golf clubhouse and maintenance facility. The petitioner has met with the neighbors on an individual and group basis. Mr. Nelson received correspondence from 5 of the 7 neighbors adjoining to the west indicating their support for the petitioner's request. The letter also identifies those commitments made by the petitioner regarding the use and development of the property. Mr. Nelson shared with the Board a letter from him to Dave Coots, attorney for Dr. and Mrs. Grossman. The letter evidences an agreement that the petitioner will install a wrought -iron fence adjacent to the west and south property lines; said fence not to exceed five feet in height. By way of letter from Mr. Nelson to Mr. and Mrs. Chris Yeager, the petitioner has agreed to extend the sewer line provided by Clay Regional Waste District to the west property line, thus providing an opportunity for sanitary sewer service to the Yeagers as a part of this request. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; the following appeared: Howard (Bob) Meeker, 9797 Ditch Road, opposite side of the street from the proposed golf course, stated concern with drainage of the golf course during heavy spring rains and additional water flow. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the petitioner; the following appeared: Charles Grossman, 9900 Ditch Road, south side of the proposed golf course extension, requested clarification for golf ball safety. Dr. Grossman was concerned about golf balls that might be driven towards his property that would pose a danger, an inconvenience, and a bother. Jim Nelson addressed Dr. Grossman's question about the routing of the course and the direction of the holes. As stated, this is to be played as a short course and as such, the opportunity for dispersion is far less than if it were on a longer, or full length golf course. With respect to the playability of the holes adjacent to Dr. Grossman's property, those holes are leading away from Dr. Grossman's property line and the opportunity for an errant shot to land on Dr. Grossman's property is very unlikely. With respect to drainage, the area drains west to east or from Deerfield to Ditch Road. A part of the proposal is the fact that plans provide for the installation of 7 catch basins s ABZA\Minutes \feb2000 along the west property line, equally distributed between the south to the north, the purpose of which is to catch the storm water drainage received from off -site, route the water into the enlarged lake area, and from there release and discharge at a controlled rate, thereby reducing the sheet drainage that occurs today. Mr. Meeker asked for further clarification on the drainage; how it would function and whether or not it would go through his property. Dwayne Scheer of the Schneider Corporation, explained the drainage. The plan is to enlarge the pond over the existing size, the impervious areas are being reduced, the drive and bathhouse, and pool deck will be eliminated. The drainage being picked up from off site is the same drainage as is today -there is no additional drainage being added to the area. The intention is to funnel everything into the pond and release it at a lesser rate than today. Mr. Scheer thought there would be no adverse effect on the drainage. Ms. Rice asked if Mr. Scheer would be willing to commit to Mr. Meeker regarding the drainage Also, where would the water go that is being released. Mr. Scheer stated that they would address all of the drainage coming onto the Simon property, especially from the west, but could not guarantee that people off -site, especially up- stream, would not be affected. Definitely, the situation would not worsen. Mr. Scheer stated that there is more water because there is more surface area, but that also provides more storage area. Less water can be released because there is more area to store it. The water is released into the legal drain that runs across the corner of Dr. Grossman's property to the southeast corner across Ditch Road. According to Mr. Scheer, there are currently problems with the legal drain because it is a 10 inch tile and a lot of the drainage doesn't get to the pond at present and there is no opportunity for detention. The goal is to bring all the water into the pond and release it at a controlled rate. Mrs. Grossman addressed the Board regarding the "unlikely" occurrence of errant golf balls onto their property as stated by Mr. Nelson. There was further discussion regarding the "unlikely" occurrence of a golf ball entering the Grossman property and the amount of use the golf course would have. Mr. Nelson stated that with the mounds and the fence, it would be impossible for a golf ball directed toward the hole to find its way onto the Grossman property. In response to questions from Michael Mohr, Aaron Cohen stated that between May first and October first, Saturday's play would be 4 or 5 foursomes; Sunday, there may be 3 or 4 foursomes. There is very little play during the week. Overall, the course does not get a lot of use. Leo Dierckman asked if the green in question could be moved another 50 feet to the s:\BZA\Minutes \feb2000 north; Mr. Cohen offered to plant a barrier of Spruce Trees to the south of the green. There was more discussion and comments regarding the layout of the course, and the direction of golf balls in relation to the Grossman property. Mr. Nelson expressed a willingness to meet with the Department to specifically address Dr. Grossman's concerns, and re- design the green by moving it farther north and away from the property line. The petitioner was willing to accept this solution as a condition of approval. Laurence Lillig reported that the Department is recommending favorable consideration of this petition. Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of Asherwood Golf Course, (SUA -5 -00, contingent upon the petitioner planting the previously mentioned pine trees on the south property line and reaching an agreement with the neighbor and the Department to re- locate the green in the southeast corner. It is understood, agreed, and further conditioned that Dr. Grossman has the right to return to the Board for a remedy if a satisfactory resolution cannot be accomplished. APPROVED 4 -0. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 PM. Charles W. Weinkauf, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary s:\BZA\Minutes \feb2000