HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 08-22-11 C ity
of Carms
p1Aro
MINUTES
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting
August 22, 2011
6:00 PM
Council Chambers, Carmel City Hall
Present: James Hawkins, President
Kent Broach
Alan Potasnik
Earlene Plavchak
Ephraim Wilfong
Connie Tingley, Recording Secretary
Staff members in attendance: Rachel Boone, Planning Administrator
Mike Hollibaugh, Director, Department of Community Services
Brent Liggett, Code Enforcement
Legal Counsel: John Molitor
Previous Minutes:
On a motion made by Ephraim Wilfong and seconded by James Hawkins:
The Minutes for the meeting dated July 25, 2011 were approved as circulated.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Department Report: Rachel Boone
Item #1 Docket No. 11050006 UV, 3610 W. 96 St Office, has been tabled indefinitely
Items #2 -4 Docket Nos. 11050019 SU Amend, 11060016 V and 11060017 V, Lubavitch Worship
Center, have been tabled to September 26, 2011 meeting
Legal Report: John Molitor
Announced Alan Potasnik had accepted appointment as new Board of Zoning Appeals member
o Sworn in before the meeting
Executive Session immediately following this meeting for discussion of strategy with respect to
pending litigation
I Mr. Hawkins welcomed Mr. Potasnik to the Board and thanked Leo Dierckman for his years of service and
dedication to the community.
Public Hearing:
Page 1 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
1. TABLED INDEFINITELY: (UV) 3610 W 96 St. Office
pfePeFtYi
1. 1 1 1
:th Strcct. It is zoncd S 1/Residence and lies within the US 421
e A .a.
2 -4. TABLED TO SEPT. 26: (SU, V) Lubavitch of Indiana Worship Center
appfevalsi
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 11 .1 1'
The site is located at 2640 W. 96 Street and is zoncd S1 /Residence. Filed by E. Davis Coots of Coots
Henke Wheeler, PC for Lubavitch of Indiana.
I. Old Business
1 -6. (V) Circle K/Shell (Range Line Rd.) Signage
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
Docket No. 11040014 V Ch. 25.07.02 -09 d): Ground sign height (9' proposed, 6' allowed)
Docket No. 11040015 V Ch. 25.07.02 -09 b): Number of signs (4 proposed, 1 allowed)
Docket No. 11040016 V Ch. 25.07.02 -09 b) Number of signs facing west ROW (4 proposed, 1
allowed)
Docket No. 11040017 V Ch. 25.07.02 -08 c) Total square footage (78.99 sq. ft. proposed, 30
sq. ft. allowed)
Docket No. 11040018 V Ch. 3 Definitions; Changeable Copy: Digital pricing sign prohibited;
must be changed non electronically.
Docket No. 11040019 V Ch. 3 Definition of Identification Sign 100% logo wall sign proposed;
25% logo allowed.
The site is located at 545 S. Range Line Rd. It is zoned B -1 /Business within the Carmel Drive Range
Line Road Overlay Zone. Filed by Auna Foote of Corporate ID Solutions on behalf of Circle K/Shell.
7 -13. (V) Circle IC/Shell (College Ave.) Signage
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
Docket No. 11040020 V Ch. 25.07.02 -09 d): Ground sign height (8' proposed, 6' allowed)
Docket No. 11040021 V Ch. 25.07.02 -09 b): Number of signs (5 proposed, 2 allowed)
Docket No. 11040022 V Ch. 25.07.02 -09 b): Number of signs facing north ROW (2
proposed, 1 allowed)
Docket No. 11040023 V Ch. 25.07.02 -09 b): Number of signs facing east ROW (3 proposed,
1 allowed)
Docket No. 11040024 V Ch. 25.07.02 -08 c): Total square footage (113.62 sq. ft. proposed, 65
sq. ft. allowed)
Docket No. 11040025 V Ch. 3 Definitions; Changeable Copy: Digital pricing sign prohibited,
must be changed non electronically.
Docket No. 11040026 V Ch. 3 Definition of Identification Sign: 2 -100% logo wall signs
proposed, 25% logo allowed. The site is located at 10598 College Ave. It is zoned B-1/Business
Page 2 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
within the Home Place Business District. Filed by Auna Foote of Corporate ID Solutions on behalf of
Circle K/Shell.
Action: Items 1 -13 were heard together
Present for the Petitioner:
Ben DeHays, Corporate ID Solutions
Scrubbed everything down to level accepted by the Department
Circle K specializes in convenience stores; they partner with a fuel company
Signage for two brands sharing one property
o Circle K convenience store and Shell fuel
Range Line Road
Circle K logo above the station door; 4 feet by 4 feet
Completely re- designed, free standing ground sign
o Two logos at top; each 30 inches by 30 inches
o Diesel sold at this location
o Two price panels: one regular and one diesel
Asking for 7 feet to accommodate 18 inches for base
o Landscaping will not block prices
o Winter snow will not block prices
o Meets allowable square footage
College Avenue
Store oddly positioned at corner
Free standing ground sign
o Challenge for visibility
o Asking for 32 square feet; under 35 square feet permitted
o Need additional 12 inches in height for visibility above cars in parking lot
o Photos of area showing line -of -sight
o Northbound on College, need time to make left turn
o Southbound on College or westbound on 106 does not have much visibility
o Eastbound on 106 has best visibility
Building has two elevations for building signs
o Divided allowable 30 square feet into two signs (two 14.7 square feet signs)
o Elevations shown with signs strategically placed on building
Worked with Rachel Boone to develop these new signs for both locations
Department Report:
Rachel Boone
Worked with Petitioner to reduce number of variances
Pleased with progress
Canopy signs were removed
LED pricing signs eliminated; manual price signs
Range Line Road
Ground sign correct square footage
Page 3 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
o Just one foot taller than permitted
o No landscaping for current ground sign
o Any landscaping would currently cover gas prices
o Additional 12 inches will accommodate landscaping and gas prices
Circle K wall sign is 15 square feet
Docket 11040018 V withdrawn for digital pricing sign
Reduced previous variances
o 9 feet to 7 feet for ground sign 11040014 V
o Number of signs reduced from 4 to 2 11040015 V
o Number of signs facing west from 4 to 2 11040016 V
o Total square footage reduced from 78.99 to 43.5 square feet 11040017 V
100% logo sign remains 11040019 V
College Avenue location
Split square footage for wall signs; good compromise
o Requiring variance for one extra sign, instead of three over permitted number
o Removed canopy signs
o Better scaled on building
o Square footage in compliance
Three dockets withdrawn
o Number of signs facing north 11040022 V
o Square footage 11040024 V
o Digital pricing sign 11040025 V
Supported remaining variances:
o Seven -foot ground sign needed for visibility 11040020 V
o Number of signs; 3 proposed, 2 allowed 11040021 V
o Number of signs facing east; 2 proposed 1 wall and 1 ground 11040023 V
o 100% logo 11040026 V
Discussion:
Variance updates were not on the agenda
Red and white stripes on building are not considered signage
o Colors on canopy and building are part of branding; discussed with ADLS Amend
Nothing will be printed on additional 12 -inch plate at bottom of Range Line Road ground sign
College Park will be printed on bottom of College Avenue ground sign
o Required to list Center's name
o Will not have any advertising
Range Line Road ground sign will have low landscaping
College Avenue current height is 5.5 feet for ground sign
o Proposed ground sign would be 7 feet
No signage on the canopies
College Avenue will not have second panel for diesel pricing
Circle K will be illuminated at both stores
Circle K 48 inches at Range Line Road; 46 inches at College Avenue
Former Crystal Flash did not have same branding standards as Circle K
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Kent Broach:
Page 4 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
Docket Nos. 11040014 V through 11040019 V and 11040020 V through 11040026 V with the exclusion
of those dockets withdrawn (11040018 V, 11040022 V, 11040024 V, 11040025 V), Circle K/Shell at Range
Line Road for ground sign height (7' proposed, 6' allowed); number of signs (2 proposed, 1 allowed);
number of signs facing west right -of -way (2 proposed, 1 allowed); total square footage (43.5 square feet
proposed, 30 square feet allowed) and Definition of Identification Sign (100% logo wall sign proposed,
25% logo allowed) and Circle K/Shell at College Avenue for ground sign height (7' proposed, 6' allowed);
number of signs (3 proposed, 2 allowed); number of signs facing east right -of -way (2 proposed, 1 allowed)
and Definition of Identification Sign (2 100% logo wall signs proposed, 25% logo allowed) be approved.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
14. (A) Appeal to building permit #11010015, Carport for Thornhurst, Lot 4.
The applicant seeks to appeal the issuance of an improvement location permit:
Docket No. 11060001 A Appeal to permit 11010015, Carport for Thornhurst Addition, Lot 4.
The site is located at 37 N. Guilford Rd. It is zoned R -2 /Residence. Filed by Becky Feigh, neighbor.
Present for the Petitioner:
Becky Feigh, 18 Thornhurst Drive, representing neighbors in Thornhurst
New accessory building would severely alter and change character; detrimental to neighborhood
Aerial photo of surrounding neighborhood shown
Gas station and American Legion parcels are zoned Old Meridian/Mixed Use and Old Meridian
Medical/Mixed Use
Southwest commercial property follows guidelines of Old Meridian Corridor with two -story facade
Old Meridian Corridor has very strict guidelines
Thornhurst neighborhood mostly single, one story, contemporary, post -modern style ranch homes
consisting of brick, stone, wood and few homes with vinyl siding
Property at 37 N. Guilford has brick 3 to 4 feet from ground level; tan vinyl siding with green trim;
asphalt shingle roof
Property owner was parking 2 trailers on the site (one commercial and one recreational)
o After numerous complaints, Building Code Department gave the owner two options:
Permanently remove trailers from property
Erect structure to house trailer
January, 2011 property owner filed building permit for aluminum sided, metal frame building
o Approximately 14 feet tall, 10 feet wide, and 31 feet long
o Photo shown of similar structure
Neighbors recognize property owner is allowed to erect some type of accessory structure
Photo of trailer shown
Rendering shown of proposed structure on south side of home
o 14 feet height comes to approximately top of eave of garage
It is the opinion of neighbors that this does not go with the character of existing premise or surrounding
properties
o No aluminum or metal structures in Thornhurst neighborhood
o Not aware of any such structure in R -2 zoning or any other residential area in Carmel
o From experience, knows the City has high architectural standards
o Petitioner needed variances to erect this structure
Severely alters character of building
Trailer exceeds maximum 3 /4 ton allowed weight limit
Trailer used for home business
Page 5 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
Section 25.18 states "Home occupation shall not change the character of the dwelling.
The dwelling shall not bear any indication that the exterior is being utilized for whole or
part purpose other than dwelling. An home occupation shall not be permitted outside
storage, display materials in connection with the home occupation."
The non motorized trailer used for business is being stored outside his home in a
structure that alters the character of neighborhood and surrounding properties and
exceeds allowable weight limit
Asking BZA Board to deny building permit for not following intent of the Ordinances to protect the
citizens of Carmel
Public in Favor of Appeal
Matt Mitchel, 25 N. Guilford Road (read statement)
Next to carport side of 37 N. Guilford
Lots of great buildings and statues in nearby Old Town
Very nice residential neighborhood
Want to keep area upscale and maintain house values
Worried about landscaping and retaining wall by his property
Him home will lose value because metal carport clashes with nice surrounding houses
He suggested 6 x 6 posts and trusses to make matching roof connecting to house
Matching garage will increase value of 37 N. Guilford house and keep neighborhood values up
A metal carport too industrial for area
Carmel is the prettiest town in Indiana
Remonstrance to Appeal:
Stan Hunnicutt, 37 N. Guilford owner
Felt Ordinances were not being violated; received building permit
Main issues are property values, size of trailer, structural integrity
o Structural integrity not brought up by Petitioner at this meeting
Engineering plans state it will withstand 70 -75 mph winds
o Property values are subjective; could go up or down
His will raise because of higher assessed value
Only three properties in neighborhood will be able to see his house
Back of carport will look like back of house; siding matches
Will match current siding on his house for any side views
Does not match houses in Thornhurst; but matches vinyl -sided houses along Guilford
Does not match Old Meridian or Historic Districts(his home not located in either district)
Tried to follow Ordinance, as explained to him
Changed permit to cover sides and rear of structure
Willing to add door to front of carport
o Trailer was re- designed; not capable of carrying N ton
Purchased as empty shell; capability of carrying 2 tons
Finished as RV with cabinetry
Cannot store or carry large items
Electronic equipment in cabinets
Large RV, with no weight limit, can be stored in driveway; but not his trailer which is
structured like an RV
Willing to apply for variances for project
Page 6 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
Rebuttal:
I Becky Feigh
Structural integrity not discussed tonight
o Three -sided windsock collecting wind from west
o Concerned about blowing onto adjoining properties
o 75 mph winds can damage super structures made out of aluminum or metal
Property values:
o This property would be assessed higher because of additional structure
o After speaking with numerous realtors, believe it does not conform to neighborhood and de-
values other properties
o More than three properties can view his property; everyone who drives by will see it
o Color will match vinyl siding of his house
o Carport will be aluminum siding which can dent, warp, etc.
o No like materials are anywhere in the neighborhood
Trailer size
o Taking items out of trailer, it increases maximum load capacity
o Talked to manufacturers, dual rear axles can hold 5,000 pounds each
o Trailer could be changed to haul more in future
o Photo shown of 3/4 ton trailer used by Army (much smaller than Mr. Hunnicutt's trailer)
This structure and uses will alter and change character of premise
Public Hearing closed.
Department Report:
Mike Hollibaugh
Started as issue with Enforcement Department
o Trailer on real estate did alter character of premises
o Trailer was not enclosed
Both violations of Rules of City of Cannel
Mr. Hunnicutt chose carport solution
He could store the trailer off -site permanently; ideal situation
o Issued permit after give and take with Mr. Hunnicutt
o Ordinance requires unit to be enclosed and not viewed from adjacent properties
After initial hearing, BZA Board instructed Department and neighbors to work out compromise
o One meeting held which focused on trailer weight meeting Code
o Key issue is whether or not permit should have been issued
o Mr. Hunnicutt is allowed to improve his property with a carport
o If trailer is too big, Department will make sure it is not on the real estate
Felt Zoning Ordinance did not prohibit the Department from issuing permit for proposed structure
Understand and respect neighbors' concerns
At meeting, discussed ways to build a stick -built carport with siding consistent with vinyl siding and
shingle roof
Staff Report recommended negative consideration of the Appeal
Discussion:
Department felt proposed structure met guidelines in order to issue a building permit
o Also reviewed site plan with setbacks in covenants
o Met City setbacks and neighborhood covenants
Page 7 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
o Questions to detriment of neighborhood was only concern
o City does not enforce covenants
o Mr. Potasnik felt if proposed structure met City guidelines, City did not need to be involved with
neighborhood covenants and Appeal
Section 30.01 applies for appellate time line filed with Director within 30 days)
Letter submitted by Becky Feigh started Appeal process
Neighbors are not contesting covenants, but whether structure meets City Code
Mr. Broach asked if trailer's maximum load issue would come through Code Enforcement or Police
o Mr. Hollibaugh stated Code Enforcement would enforce load limit
o Mr. Hunnicutt has outfitted the trailer for less than its capable load
Is issue how it is outfitted or what it is capable of hauling?
Mr. Hollibaugh stated Ordinance talks about maximum load capacity of 3 /4 ton or less
Trailer has larger capacity than its current finish
Distinct difference between photos of trailer sizes shown by Petitioner.
Landscaping was not proposed or discussed at neighborhood meeting
o Plantings would be needed along southern and eastern sides
Mr. Hawkins felt there might be an enforcement action against the trailer later
o The Department cannot ignore the way the Ordinance reads
o Need to look into trailer weight
o Mr. Hunnicutt is entitled to accessory structure for boat, garden tractor, etc.
o Not allowed to park trailer on parcel without structure
Becky Feigh felt if structure approved, neighbors would be returning to BZA or Code Enforcement
o Purpose of structure was to house this particular trailer
o For past six months, trailer has been stored at another location
Storage fee could be business expense
No hardship not having trailer immediately accessible
Mr. Wilfong ask if structure was approved, would Code Enforcement not allow this trailer to be parked
on the parcel
o Mr. Hollibaugh stated the rules require the trailer be stored
o They need to find out if trailer violates Ordinance
When process started, Mr. Hunnicutt was notified of all the provisions of the Ordinance,
including weight limit
Mr. Hunnicutt responded by moving forward with construction of carport; feeling weight
was not an issue
The Department does not have the details as to whether it does exceed the weight limit
o If trailer violates Ordinance, it will not be allowed to be parked on the parcel
o Mr. Wilfong was not comfortable making decision until Department came to decision regarding
trailer weight
Brent Liggett, Code Enforcement, believed BZA did not need to address trailer weight
City does not have scales to weigh trailer
Issue could go before City Court
Went on Mr. Hunnicutt's phone calls and emails regarding current weight of trailer
Next year Mr. Hunnicutt could get a different trailer (larger or smaller), go out of
business, move, etc.
The Appeal is based on the permit for the carport alone; not the trailer
Mr. Molitor read the statute regarding role of BZA Board in this matter.
Page 8 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
August 22, 2011
o "Upon Appeal the Board may reverse, affirm or modify the order requirement, decision or
determination appealed from. For this purpose the Board has all the powers of the official
officer, Board or body from which the Appeal is taken."
The statute does give the Board the right to essentially substitute your judgment for that
of the Staff in this matter
Irrespective of Staff, one of the issues in the Appeal is whether the trailer weight exceeds
the maximum load capacity of 3 /4 ton or less
As Mr. Molitor understands it, the Staff has made the determination that the maximum
load capacity is 3 /'ton or less
It is appropriate for the Board to make their own determination whether the vehicle has a
maximum load capacity of 3 /4 ton or less
Mr. Hawkins ask Mr. Hunnicutt to confirm from last meeting that the trailer did have a maximum load
capacity of greater than 3/ ton
o Mr. Hunnicutt confirmed that it did on the factory floor
Clarification: A "yes" vote upholds the Appeal Petition (reverse Staff determination); a "no" vote allows the
structure to be built. The Board also has the power to modify the determination of the Staff.
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Earlene Plavchak:
Docket No. 11060001 A Appeal to permit #11010015, Carport for Thornhurst Addition, Lot 4, be
approved.
Clarification: A "no" vote allowing the structure to be built would also be ruling on the weight issue of this
particular vehicle being 3/ ton or less. A different vehicle might be a different case in the future. The Board could
ask to continue the item for more evidence. The Petitioner (Becky Feigh of Thornhurst) does have the burden of
proof.
MOTION CARRIED 3 -2 (Potasnik Wilfong negative)
Adjournment
Motion: On a motion made by Ephraim Wilfong and seconded by Earlene Plavchak:
The Meeting be adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
The meeting adjourned at 7:32 PM.
Approved this ,,g4 day of 1; 20
6 "...),....xL j
Pr= �ident -James R. Hawkins Secretary C ni -i' ingley
Filename: 20110822 .doc
Page 9 of 9