Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept ReportCARMEL/CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DEPARTMENT REPORT ~ ~'~ May 24, 2004 1-4 h. Carmel Hope Fellowship Church - Special Use The applicant seeks special use approval for a church and seeks multiple variances: Docket No. 04030014 SU Ch.7.02.A special uses Docket No. 04040028 V Chapter 7.04.03.A front yard setback Docket No. 04040029 V Chapter 26.02.08 side yard for church Docket No. 04040030 V Chapter 7.04.03.F lot coverage The site is located at the southeast comer of 146th Street and Carey Road. The site is zoned R-l/Residence. Filed by Don Hawley of Carmel Hope Fellowship. General Information: The petitioner is seeking approval to operate a church from an existing home. Future plans are to construct a parking lot and a new worship space, incorporating the existing house into the design. Background Information: The petitioner has returned a second time to the (May 19) TAC meeting to show a new, revised, and more detailed site plan. Excerpt from March 17 TAC Minutes: This would be best described as three phases. The first phase is to remodel the existing for a temporary meeting place with temporary parking. HOYES: HAWLEY: HILL: HAWLEY: HILL: HAWLEY: HILL: BROERMANN: HILL: DOBOSIEWICZ: HILL: DOBOSIEWICZ: I E-mailed a comment letter yesterday. No objections to the Phase-one. We will need to do additional drainage talcs for future expansion. Talked with Weihe Engineers for drainage calculations on Taylor Trace. Phase-one: is this an existing residence and is it currently connected to sewer? Yes and it is hooked up to sewer but not water. And the fees were paid? Yes and paid on usage. S. Broerman is the existing driveway in your right-of-way? No. I believe you will need the Board of Works approval on the curb cut. So that you know D. Hawley, the fee you paid was for the house not for future sanctuary availability... I have that in my comment letter. There is a sizable figure attached to this. HAWLEY: HILL: HAWLEY: ...SHUPPERD: HAWLEY: SHUPPERD: HAWLEY: BREWER: BUTLER: HOYT: BROERMANN: DOBOSIEWICZ: BROERMANN: DOBOS~WICZ MAGEE: I did get some figures on that. Will you be connecting water later? Yes... This is total electric? Yes. Will it stay electric? The house will but we are not sure about the new structure. This is considered a Level D Landscape Buffer. I do not have a problem with phasing the plantings but I want you to show it now, show all the landscaping now. You were just given our letter. No additional. I believe we asked for a Knox-box for the building. I notice parking is all one-way going in and out. In the future we will need to look at the canopy height. Under the code you are not required to ann the building with alarms. I met with Jim yesterday and talked with J. Dobosiewicz about bypassing the Board of Commissioners and do it administratively. So if you could have Jim give me call we can get that taken care of. We are going to need some time to review these revised plans and get you some comments. Our preference would be to see two-direction traffic in this first parking lane. You are specifying nine by twenty (9 x 20) space when you could spec ten by eighteen (10 x 18) space and pick up some room for traffic flow. It seems if we moved the entrance over a bit and straighten the parking it will create a better flow. S. Broerman do you have any problems with them moving the entrance closer to the intersection by twenty-five feet. When we acquired fight-of-way for the 146th Street project a lot of that included a non-access easement along there. There are three driveways now with non-access easements between each drive. It will be a matter of vacating one. I am talking about getting the future drive away from the adjacent property owner by the twenty-five feet and lining it up with the drive that goes up and around the building. The other issue about the storm drainage this cannot work without storm drainage working and you are occupying quite a bit of the site with hard surface. I do not think it is appropriate to take this to the BZA without that being addressed. Along with A. Butler's letter setbacks will be needed with regard to the twenty-five feet buffer width as well as the building and parking setbacks along the roadway. We will offer our support of the reduction of the buffer along the roadways where we could eventually see this being a situation where along 146~ Street the building pulled up to the future right-of-way. The difference between the existing and future fight-of-way there is twenty feet. So we are talking more than two additional lane widths. I hesitate to offer our support to move forward to the BZA without curb and pavement of the parking area without the knowledge of Phase-two and three. Our support is contingent upon a timeframe permissible before moving to Phase-two, the rest of the parking and Phase-three the sanctuary. If you can get those answers it will make the Board comfortable in making a decision that keeps you moving forward. No conflicts. ...END OF TRANSMISSION. Analysis: The parcels arc large enough to allow a new church. The use of a church in a residential zone is more compatible, rather than a commercial use. There is concern with traffic on Carey and 146t~ Street and how this use will add to thc traffic congestion. Findings of Fact: SU 1.) The Special Use in the Flood Plain District, Ordinance Z-160, Section 21.6 as amended does not apply and all prerequisites have been met by the Petitioner as verified by: The site plan does not show the property in a flood plain. 2.) The Special Use will be consistent with the Character and the Permitted Land Use of the Zoning District and Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan because: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map shows this area s as being a Low-intensity residential community. The Comp. Plan also states that these areas should be accessible to and served by school, parks, neighborhood commercial areas, and trails (Comp Plan, pg. 5-5). A church would be a religious service to the neighborhood. 3.) The Special Use is physically suitable for the land in question because: This is one of the last parcels in the area that has not been subdivided for residential use. The location at a road intersection is also a positive aspect. 4.) The Special Use will not be injuriously or adversely affect the adjacent land or property values because: The church will increase or keep property values the same, since the proposed use is an amenity to the neighborhood. A commercial use might do the opposite to property values. 5.) The Special Use will not adversely affect vehicular or pedestrian traffic flow, nor the adequate availability of water, sewage, or storm drainage facilities or police or fire protection because: The church will not affect the availability of facilities. All utilities already exist. The church will add pedestrian paths when Carey Rd is improved. Vehicular flow can bc controlled with proper placement of driveways and closure of existing drives that are closer to the road intersection. 6.) The Board has reviewed the requirements of the Ordinance Z-160, Section 21.3 (1-25) as they relate to this Special Use, and does not find that those criteria prevent the granting of the Special Use: The site plan has been reviewed, and thc meets all requirements for a church. Findings of Fact: setbacks 1.) The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: The variance will not have a negative effect on the community. The building will be slightly closer to the street, but all of the necessary right of way will be dedicated. 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: The proposed setback will allow the building to be placed more appropriately on the site, paying attention to the road right-of-way along Carey Rd that will be converted to actual travel lanes and road shoulder. 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 may result in practical difficulties in the use of the property due to fact that that the road fights-of-way must be used by the City and County for road improvements. Findings of Fact: lot coverage l.) The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: The variance will not have a negative effect on the community. The church needs to have adequate parking for its facility, which contributes to the need for a variance from lot coverage. 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: The site is located at the intersection of two streets, where there is much traffic. This use will be suitable for the site. The intensity of its use calls for a slightly greater than allowed lot coverage, but will provide a transition and benefit the adjacent neighborhoods. 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 may result in practical difficulties in the use of the property. However, another way of looking at the situation is to conclude that the applicant is overbuilding the site. Recommendation: The department recommends positive consideration of Docket Nos. 04030014 SU and 04040028 V through 04040030 V with the following conditions: 1.) That the applicant will install sidewalks/path along Carey Rd. 2.) That the applicant dedicates right-of-way per the approval of the County Highway and City of Carmel. 3.) That the plans be amended to meet the minimum buffer yard planting requirements.