HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 01-24-12Present: James Hawkins, President
Kent Broach
Earlene Plavchak
Alan Potasnik
Ephraim Wilfong
Connie Tingley, Recording Secretary
Staff members in attendance:
Legal Counsel: John Molitor
Citv of Carmel
MINUTES
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting
January 24, 2012
6:00 PM
Council Chambers, Carmel City Hall
Alexia Donahue Wold, Planning Administrator
Angie Conn, Planning Administrator
Mike Hollibaugh, Director, Department of Community Services
Swearing -in of Members:
John Molitor led swearing -in of James Hawkins, Earlene Plavchak and Ephraim Wilfong
Election of Officers:
On a motion made by Kent Broach and seconded by Earlene Plavchak:
James Hawkins be elected President of the Board of Zoning Appeals.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
On a motion made by Earlene Plavchak and seconded by James Hawkins:
Ephraim Wilfong be elected Vice President of the Board of Zoning Appeals.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Previous Minutes:
On a motion made by Earlene Plavchak and seconded by Kent Broach:
The Minutes for the meeting dated November 28, 2011 were approved as circulated.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Department Report: Alexia Donahue Wold
Item #1, Docket No. 11100016 V, Meridian Main II was withdrawn
Items #14 -15, Docket Nos. 11120010 UV and 11120011 V, North Augusta, Lot 4, were tabled
WWW.CARMEL.IN.GOV (317) 571 -2417
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
Briefing of the Traditions on the Monon PUD issues and Planning Director's determination
would be discussed at end of meeting
Legal Report: John Molitor
Will be given at end of meeting; relating to Traditions on the Monon PUD
Public Hearing:
1 (V) Meridian Main II (former North Meridian Heights neighborhood).
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
WITHDRAWN:
Docket No. 11100017 V ZO Ch. 20G.05.04.b.2 Maximum 20 -ft front building setback
Docket No. 11100018 V ZO Ch. 2.09 Required Compliance with Thoroughfare Plan
The site is located at 1304 W. Main St., and is zoned a mix of OM/MU —Old Meridian Mixed
Use on the southern portion and B -6 /Business and US 31 Overlay on the northern portion.
Filed by Mr. Jamie Browning for Meridian Heights Associates, LLC.
Present for the Petitioner:
Jamie Browning, Meridian Height Associates, LLC
Site rendering shown
First Variance Building 9A:
o Want relief from required 20 -foot setback line to allow for greater visibility
o Requesting 53 -foot setback
Second Variance Thoroughfare Plan:
o Thoroughfare Plan requires 65 -foot right -of -way
o Seeking 55 -foot right -of -way
o Meridian Main I is 43 feet
o St. Vincent parcel is 43 feet
o Roads will never align
o Variance will allow for more density, greater building area and more parking
o Road is 22 feet with 7 -foot parking, 2 -foot curb /gutter area and 4 -foot planting strip with
8 -foot walkway on one side and 5 -foot planting strip and 5 -foot walkway on other side
These were areas of concern in Development Plan
Added parking, 5 -foot walkway and 8 -foot bike path
Have come to reasonable resolution with Staff regarding pavement section and current plan
Public Hearing Closed
Department Report:
Alexia Donahue Wold:
Petitioner worked with Department regarding requested variances; reached compromise
No long need Docket No. 11100016 V for required on- street parking; it has been provided
Request Commitment for variance for Building 9A
o Setback requirement only for north/south street; not Pennsylvania
Comfortable with decreased road right -of -ways which will accommodate on- street parking and
8 -foot path requested by Plan Commission
Page 2 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
Department recommended positive consideration of both variances
Discussion:
Petitioner agreed to Commitment of setback variance apply to only north/south street and new
buildings on Pennsylvania will be sited to comply with 20 -foot setback
Motion: On a motion made by Earlene Plavchak and seconded by Kent Broach:
Docket Nos. 11100017 V and 11100018 V, Meridian Main II, be approved, for maximum 20-
foot front building setback from north -south street only (New buildings on Pennsylvania will be sited to
comply with the 20 -foot maximum setback.) and required compliance with Thoroughfare Plan.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
4. (V) Meridian Main, Parcel 1. TABLED
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
Docket No. 11120012 V ZO Chptr. 23B.08.03.A building must have 2 occupiable floors
Docket No. 11120013 V ZO Chptrs. 27.08 23B.12.A.1 required parking spaces
The site is located at 1440 W. Main St. It is zoned B- 6/Business and lies in the US 31/Meridian
St. Overlay Zone. Filed by Joseph Scimia of Baker Daniels LLP, for Meridian 131, LLC.
Present for the Petitioner:
Jamie Browning, Meridian Height Associates, LLC
At the Department's request, Dockets tabled to the February 27, 2012 meeting.
5 (V) 12085 River Rd Pole Barn.
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals for:
Docket No. 11100008 V ZO Ch. 25.01.01.A: accessory building with no principal
building
Docket No. 11100009 V ZO Ch. 25.01.01.B.5: maximum ground floor area
The site is located at 12085 River Rd. It is zoned S -1 /Residence, within the Flood Hazard
District. Filed by Kimberly Wise, owner.
Present for the Petitioner:
Kimberly Wise, owner
Property located just north of Citizens Water Treatment facility
One acre purchased in 2006 to build home
o Given letter of build ability from the City of Carmel
o Parcel located in flood plain
o Spoke with FEMA about removing parcel from floodplain
o When she tried to get building permits, told Carmel had just passed an Ordinance no
longer allowing filling in a floodplain
o Worked with City's Engineering Department
Was finally granted a variance to build a home without a basement
It would never be removed from the floodplain
o In the meantime she had bought another home
She sells commercial real estate and put the property on the market
o Current interested party wants to build a pole barn for storage
Page 3of16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
o First person interested enough to put in an offer, since property went on market in 2007
Parcel was shown
o North is 6 acres of vacant land
o South is 80 acres of water treatment facility
o Horse stable south of water treatment facility
o Residential across the street
Proposed pole barn would be 45 feet by 65 feet
o Utilized for storage of lawn equipment for landscape business
o Mr. Claypool does a lot of business in Carmel and Fishers
o Would like to store trucks, bobcats and mowers
o Landscape /buffer shown with existing trees and additional 9 -foot Norway spruce to
screen view from River Road
o Worked with Engineering Department to line up driveway and existing street into
Northwood Hills
o Strictly storage; no business run at location
o No more than 2 cars at any given time
Early in the morning to pick up landscape trucks
Bring equipment back at end of day
o Area behind barn will be used to clean trucks; no visible trucks on blocks
o Property is lined in back with spruce trees as well
Water treatment is building near property line
View from Northwood Hills shown bare land
Pole barn structure with tree cover will not detract
o Rendering shown of tan barn with green roof and wainscoting
Custom barn would have three overhead doors across front
Passenger door in side
Two more overhead doors in rear; not visible from street
Remonstrance:
Robert Penzes, 11964 River Road, across from water plant
This would be a commercial business in a neighborhood
He had tried to buy a lot in that neighborhood and knew about the floodplain
She is making it commercial property
Eventually there will be tractors and trucks setting outside as the company gets bigger
Sam Ansell, 6330 Northwood Drive
Beautiful neighborhood
Charming horse facility fits into area
Park south of water treatment plant
Park to the north
Beautiful neighborhood along a golf course
Northwood Hills also beautiful neighborhood
This would be a commercial area
Barn/business first thing he will see out his front door
Trucks and equipment will be going in and out every day; early and late
o Noise and dust
Page 4 of 16
1
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
o Detract from neighborhood
Already having difficulties with Shook Construction which wedged their way in next to the
water treatment plant
o He was not notified of any meeting about it
Allowing commercial to creep into a residential area is disservice to everyone
There are more appropriate places for this business
Sorry she cannot build the house she wants or sell the property
David Bickel, 12311 Medalist Parkway, commercial /industrial realtor
Deals with pole barn construction and businesses like this one
Does this variance include storage tanks for gasoline to service the equipment?
Intentions of this owner are good, but life of the building is long, what happens when business
turns over?
Will zoning for an industrial use require more parking then two cars?
Will we be looking at other vacant parcels for commercial use in the future?
This is a residential area
Jeff Thomas, 11848 Hoster Road, Northwood Hills HOA President
Just came to his attention today; cannot speak for the neighborhood
This is a commercial use
He is also in a floodplain and knows it is not easy to sell property
Residential area; screening will not do justice
Given time, he was confident he could get a petition signed by his neighborhood opposing this
Rebuttal:
Kimberly Wise
Mr. Claypool intends to store the equipment inside
No intent to run business, have signage or customers
It is adjacent to the water treatment facility
It will look better with the landscaping than it does now as a vacant lot
o Cleared in 2007
No one interested in parcel since water treatment facility is building next to property line
Public Hearing Closed
Department Report:
Alexia Donahue Wold:
Single family residential does surround site
Construction of pole barn would detract from the residential character; even more than the water
treatment plant being constructed nearby
Concern this site would function more as a business since it would be used for storage of
landscaping equipment
Petitioner stated there has been a variance to allow construction of a single family home
Department recommended negative consideration
Page 5 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
Discussion:
Variance is from Engineering requirements for building in a floodplain
o Cannot build a basement because of floodplain
o Has to be built up four feet from current elevation
o Carmel Ordinance does not allow filling in a floodplain
Petitioner felt it excludes this parcel from building
Site included six feet concrete block walled area on asphalt, divided to store two kinds of mulch
o Only storage for rock or mulch
o Not visible from front
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Earlene Plavchak:
Docket Nos. 11100008 V and 11100009 V, 12085 River Road Pole Barn, be approved, for
accessory building with no principal building and maximum ground floor area.
MOTION DENIED UNANIMOUSLY
7 (V) Fifth Third Bank.
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
Docket No. 11120015 V ZO Chptr. 23F.08.01 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.5
Docket No. 11120016 V ZO Chptr. 23F.06.02 Building occupying <70% frontage
Docket No. 11120017 V ZO Chptr. 23F.03.01 Prohibited sign, ground sign
The site is located at 205 E. Carmel Dr. The site is B -8 /Business and lies within the Carmel
Dr. Rangeline Rd. Overlay Zone. Filed by Kurt Prosser of GPD Group, Inc.
Present for the Petitioner:
Jeffrey Wagner, V.P. and Regional Director of Corporate Real Estate, Fifth Third Bank, and Kurt
Prosser, Project Coordinator, GPD Group
Redevelop site currently occupied by medical /professional office building
Currently occupy leased premises on East Carmel Drive
Will be free standing banking facility offering broader range of services to community
Discussing project with City since last Fall for development requirements
o Standard Fifth Third Bank building prototype not compatible with Rangeline
Road/Carmel Drive Overlay
o Site will be custom building
Site map shown
Have worked through requirements of Ordinance and Departments
Received Plan Commission approval
o Few technical items before sub committee meeting
Project narrowed down to three variance requirements
o Floor area ratio requirement
Single occupant banking facility
Required parking for employees (17 -18) and peak times
Drive -thru banking
Making it impossible to reach .5 FAR
o 70% frontage
Working with existing curb cut
Oriented building with drive -thru on back
Page 6 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
Preserved pedestrian access at the front and side for some parking
Making it impossible for building to take up 70% frontage (proposed 50 -55
o Prohibited ground sign
Working with Urban Forester, found any signage on building would not be visible
because of existing and proposed landscaping
Propose ground sign in lieu of wall sign
Project meets all remaining requirements of the Overlay District
o Two -story building
o Both floors occupied
o Placing building as close to street as Ordinance allows
Small conflict between Ordinance and Overlay requirements for width
Will require dedication of additional right -of -way; pushing building back
o Pedestrian entrance in front
o Materials aesthetically pleasing
Public Hearing Closed
Department Report:
Alexia Donahue Wold:
Petitioner worked well with Department to create a project that satisfies the intent of the Carmel
Drive/Rangeline Road Overlay
o Two -story building fronting on Carmel Drive
o Provide attractive, pedestrian- friendly streetscape
Position of building and preservation of existing trees would block the view of any proposed
wall signs
o Any ground sign would require a variance
Department not generally in support of any variances from the Overlay Zone, but believe this
project has done a good job of meeting the goals of the Carmel Drive/Rangeline Road Overlay
Department recommended positive consideration all variances
Discussion:
Cross access easement on southern portion of property
o A sidewalk connects two properties
Sidewalk connecting parcel to the Racquet Club parcel was for previous owner's
personal access to Racquet Club
o A strip labeled as proposed for future cross access
This is a requirement of the Zoning Code to have cross access between the
properties
20 feet would be dedicated for the cross access easement
Proposed 31.99 square feet ground sign is smaller than permitted 45 square feet
o Replace current ground sign
Motion: On a motion made by Kent Broach and seconded by Alan Potasnik:
Docket Nos. 11120015 V through 11120017 V, Fifth Third Bank, be approved, for floor area
ratio 0.5; building occupying <70% frontage; and prohibited ground sign.
Page 7 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
10. (SU) Hamilton Crossing West, Building 2 Middle Star Center.
The applicant seeks the following special use approval:
Docket No. 11120006 SU ZO Chptr. 16.02 Special Uses.
The site is located at 12650 Hamilton Crossing Blvd. It is zoned B- 5/Business and lies within
the US 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by Blaine Paul of Duke Realty.
Present for the Petitioner:
Blaine Paul, Duke Realty; from Little Star Center, Inc.: Dwayne McCoy, Center Controller, and Mary
Rosswurm, Executive Director
Little Star existing tenant in Hamilton Crossing, Building 1; Special Use 2004
o Group has been in operation for ten years
o First center in the State to serve children with autism
o Received State and City recognition
o Provides individualized, therapeutic intervention for older children, teens and young
adults affected by autism
Aerial site plan shown
Work on ADL (activities of daily living), vocational and social skills
o Maximize ability levels
Initial space will be 9,000- 10,000 square feet
o Want potential to expand
o Special Use is focused on entire property
Anticipate 14 learners and 19 teachers
Office hours of 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday
o Very fitting for office development
Little Star space only takes children up to certain age
Middle Star will allow them to grow into next phase
o Children 10 and above, including teens and young adults
o Carrying over curriculum from Little Star
Have been a great tenant with no complaints
Public Hearing Closed
Department recommended positive consideration of Special Use
Discussion:
Typical day includes outside activities
o Walking path on all four sides of Hamilton Crossing
Page 8 of 16
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Department Report:
Alexia Donahue Wold:
Use will function similar to office use with regard to number of users (employees and students),
hours of operation, and parking
Little Star north of this site is similar use for younger children
Compatible use to other existing office uses on the site
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
o Field trips
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Alan Potasnik:
Docket No. 11120006 SU, Hamilton Crossing West, Building 2 Middle Star Center, be
approved, for special uses within the B 5 /Business and US 31 Overlay Zones.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
11. (UV) 1200 W. Carmel Dr. Shepherd Insurance Building.
The applicant seeks the following use variance approval:
Docket No. 11120007 UV ZO Chptr. 20G.05.05.A Permitted Uses.
The site is located at 1200 W. Carmel Dr. It is zoned OM/O Old Meridian District, Office
Subarea. Filed by Amy Conville of 1200 West, LLC.
Present for the Petitioner:
Charlie Frankenberger and Jon Dobosiewicz, Nelson Frankenberger; Amy Conville and Dr.
Angela Corea, 1200 West, LLC
1200 West is contract purchaser of Shepherd Insurance Building
Aerial photograph of 1.9 acre site shown
o Multi family to the east and west
o Office, service and retail to the south
o Meijer Store to the north
o Multi family, retail sales and restaurants at Providence at Old Meridian to the north
OM /O (Old Meridian/Office) permitted uses include professional offices, medical spas,
commercial recreational facilities such as Yoga, Pilates and personal training, physical therapy
and similar uses
Variance is to allow general personal service uses
o Defined in the Zoning Ordinance as "an establishment or place of business primarily
engaged in the provision of frequent or recurrent needed services of a personal nature.
Typical uses include but are not limited to beauty and barber shops, shoe repair shops,
and tailor shops."
o General personal service uses are compatible with other uses permitted on the subject real
estate and are found in frequency in the vicinity of the subject real estate
o General personal service uses do not include, as primary uses, such uses as retail sales,
dry cleaning establishments, daycare or restaurants
The applicant plans to have one primary building entrance to common area to be used by all
occupants
o Three or four businesses would have separate entrances from the common area
o The largest tenant space is planned for a medical spa, which is a permitted OM/O use
This area plus common area will occupy just under one -half of occupiable space
o A hair and nail salon (general personal services use) is currently planned for another
tenant space
o Remainder of the building will be open for additional businesses that will be of the same
professional, office and service mix
o The Use Variance will allow the integration of this compatible and synergistic mix of
uses
Page 9 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
Conditions of the use of the real estate for general personal services, requested by the
Department:
o 1. Dedication of right -of -way for Carmel Drive
o 2. Installation of multi -use path along entire Carmel Drive frontage
o 3. Inclusion of bicycle rack
o These Conditions, approved by the Department, were attached to the Findings of Fact
Public Hearing Closed
Department Report:
Alexia Donahue Wold:
This Use Variance will not allow retail sales
o Compatible with surrounding uses
Existing parking lot satisfies parking needs
Increase in traffic is not anticipated
Department recommended positive consideration with the Conditions stated by the Petitioner.
Discussion:
Practice is an hybrid between a medical spa and an aesthetics practice that joins with a surgery or
dermatology group
o Medical aesthetics practice guided by physicians
Laser rejuvenation, Botox
More aggressive approach than facials
Vision for the building is to be a nice place to come for hair, nails and medical based procedures
o Maybe Yoga, something health related to have a sense of community
Practice on Pennsylvania has grown, larger facility needed
Hair salons will be allowed to sell incidental items; sales not a primary use
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Ephraim Wilfong:
Docket No. 11120007 UV, 1200 W. Carmel Drive Shepherd Insurance Building, be
approved, for permitted uses to allow general personal services with Conditions:
1. Dedication to City of additional right -of -way necessary to establish an aggregate, fifty -foot half right -of way for
Carmel Drive along the entire frontage of subject real estate, prior to issuance of first building permit.
2. Dedication to City of a corner cut of additional right -of -way of an area and configuration determined by a one
hundred twenty foot radius measured from the center point of the intersection of Carmel Drive and Old
Meridian Street, effected upon the occurrence of both the issuance of the first building permit and the receipt by
owner of a written request from the Carmel Department of Engineering.
3. Multi -use Path: At owner's option, either the construction of a multi -use path along the entire Carmel Drive
frontage of subject real estate or payment into the non reverting Thoroughfare Fund of an amount equal to the
estimated, usual and customary cost as provided by the Alternative Transportation Coordinator. This condition
shall be satisfied within twelve months after the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. The Department
of Community Services, in its discretion, shall be allowed to provide up to two six -month extensions of time by
which to satisfy this condition.
4. Bicycle Parking Rack Construction of a bicycle parking rack to accommodate four bicycles shall be satisfied
prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.
(Conditions attached to Findings of Fact sheet.)
Page 10 of 16
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
12 13.(V, SU Amend) Rinehart Stable.
The applicant seeks the following special use amendment development standards variance
approvals:
Docket No. 11120008 SU ZO Chptr. 21.05 5.02 Special Use Expansion, Riding Stable
Docket No. 11120009 V ZO Chptr. 27.03 Curbed/paved parking area
The site is located at 14350 Ditch Rd. It is zoned S- 1/Residence. Filed by Joseph Scimia of
Baker Daniels LLP, for Rinehart Farm, Inc.
Present for the Petitioner:
Roger Kilmer and Joseph Scimia, Faegre Baker Daniels, and Richard Rinehart, owner
Special Use for addition onto main barn for stalls and increased number of permitted horses on
property
Variance to permit existing parking area to remain graveled; not paved or curbed
Zoning map shown
In S -1 Residential Zoning, a riding stable requires a Special Use
o Existing operation approved as a Special Use in 1995
Included in the motion to approve the Special Use was a limitation of no more
than 20 horses to be stabled on the property
o An accompanying Variance was granted to delay for a period of two years the paving and
curbing of the parking areas
Aerial of 10 -acre parcel shown
o Surrounded by residential development
Carmel Zoning Ordinance allows up to ten percent expansion of a Special Use without Board's
approval
o This addition to the main barn is about twenty -one percent
o Addition would consolidate all the horse stalls on the property within a single building
o Currently space is utilized in some of the out buildings for horse stalls
o This would reduce the amount of horse traffic on the property
Less movement of horses from the out buildings into the main building
Vehicular traffic on the site would be reduced
Owners need to drive to out building to get to their horse
o Out buildings would be converted into storage areas
o New addition would match materials and color of existing building
Twenty -horse limitation was identified in the minutes of the meeting in 1995
o Discussed in presentation and included in part of the motion for the Special Use
o Mr. Rinehart saw opportunities to grow his business with horses in the out buildings
o He did not recall the agreement at the end of the meeting for the 20 -horse limitation
As a handshake businessman, he forgot since it was not written down except in
the minutes of the meeting
On occasion he has stalled up to 45 horses; property can handle that number
No calls have been received in remonstrance to this request
This would legally establish the business as it is currently operating
Variance had required parking to be curbed and paved within two years after initial approval
o Paved parking areas can become slick surfaces for horses
o These areas are used for loading and unloading of horses
Rendering of addition to main barn was shown
Page 11 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
o Located on west side of property
o Existing building would buffer view of addition from the east
o Residences to the west are buffered by a pond and plantings along the property line
o Addition would match materials and color of existing barn
Public Hearing Closed
Department Report:
Alexia Donahue Wold:
Support a design expansion that matches the existing barn
Concerned with non compliance of number of horses
o It has been in existing use
o Do not believe it will adversely affect surrounding area
Support not paving and curbing the parking area
Department recommended positive consideration of both dockets
Discussion:
Neither condition of original approval were met
o Petitioner was not represented by legal counsel
o Things were agreed to that he may not have fully understood
o In unfamiliar setting, he did not know how to respond to or rebut any arguments at the
time
o Department was not aware of any complaints
Mobile home on the property shown in old photograph of the property
o It is no longer there
o Two mobile homes on property when he purchased it
One was used as a residence for a while
Both have been removed
Row of 12 -foot arborvitaes at property line will remain
o From 20 -foot building setback, which is as far as building could be built to the west, it is
345 feet to nearest home
Housed up to 45 horses on the entire property
o Waste is put into 40 yard dumpster emptied by Waste Management, every 5 to 6 days
o Area is kept clean with no additional flies, rodents or odors
For compliance:
o Time limit could be set
o With inspections, Department could keep abreast of the number of horses
o Department would be comfortable with the Petitioner not required to come back for
continued approvals
Could be better monitored by inspections by the Department
45 would be the top number; no additional stalls in other buildings
In 1995 this area was not developed
o This use has co- existed with new developments without any opposition
o Mr. Rinehart did not fully understand the 1995 conditions
He represented himself
Page 12 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
He thought he had gotten all the approvals he needed
He became aware of violations when he spoke with the Department regarding the
expansion
This is a good facility for Carmel residents to board and ride their horses
Most enforcement actions start with complaints; there have been none
He is now aware of the process and will stay in compliance
Department was not aware he was not in compliance until he came to them with
proposed addition
If he were found not in compliance, he would have 7 to 10 days to bring it
into compliance voluntarily
Could take longer based on complexity of the matter
Fine can be substantial ($100 per day); it is set by Carmel City Court on a
daily basis
Board could set a time limit for re- approval
o Additional expense for Amendment/Extension application
Buildings A, B, and C will be used for storage and supplies
Building D (main barn) has 21 stalls with 23 new stalls to be built
Mr. Rinehart would like Building A used to sequester a horse for health or
safety reasons
o Most activity in main building (Building D)
He committed to no more than 45 horses on the property in Buildings D and A;
Building A only used to sequester horses, Buildings B and C used for storage
Motion: On a motion made by Kent Broach and seconded by James Hawkins:
Docket No. 11120008 SU, Rinehart Stable, be approved, for Special Use expansion, riding stable
with Commitments that no more than 45 horses will be boarded in Buildings A and D with other
buildings being used for storage, not boarding horses.
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Ephraim Wilfong:
Docket No. 11120009 V, Rinehart Stable, be approved, for curbed/paved parking area.
BOTH MOTIONS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
14 15. TA .l3I,FD (V, UV) North Augusta, Lot 4 Retail Use.
The applicant seeks the following use variance approval development standards variance for
a small retail business:
Docket No. 11120010 UV ZO Chptr. 5.01 23C.03 Permitted Uses in S -1 district
Docket No. 11120011 V ZO Chptr. 27.03 No parking lot curbing
The site is located at 9799 N. Michigan Rd. It is zoned S- 1/Residence, located within the US
421/Michigan Rd. Overlay Zone. Filed by Christine Jones.
New Business:
Briefing of the Traditions on the Monon Planned Unit Development (PUD) issues and Planning
Director's determination
John Molitor:
At November meeting, Board authorized pre hearing conference with attorneys for the
Petitioners
Page 13 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
Discussed memorandum prepared by Mr. Molitor regarding pre hearing conference
o Met three weeks ago
o Prepared list of procedures, Section 13 temporary
Suspend Article 7 Section 13 of regular Rules of Procedure which provides for
procedure for a regular hearing
Replace that entire section for the hearing of these two Docket numbers with
procedures outlined in memorandum
Distributed letter from Mike Hollibaugh to involved parties: the Pulte Group and the Traditions
on the Monon Homeowners Association
o This was Director's determination of requirements of PUD on the development for this
neighborhood
o Both the Pulte Group and the Homeowners Association appealed certain parts of the
determination
o Also distributed both Appeal applications for the February 27 BZA meeting
Both attorneys were very cooperative in discussing the need for a streamlined
procedure combining the hearings into one hearing
They were segmented into six general topics to be covered
Three are generally raised by each side
With the amount of material, the hearing make take 3 hours and 45
minutes, not to include any time absorbed by cross examination of any
expert witnesses
Department could budget for food, if meeting were split with a dinner
break
Recommended Board agree to suspend Section 13 of Article 7 of the Rules of Procedure and
replace with the temporary Section 13 for the hearing on these two Appeals
o Six topics from Appeals to Determination letter:
Banked parking
Streets and curbs
Landscaping and grounds
Landscape audit
Irrigation system
Miscellaneous
o Each side will present their three topics
Mr. Hollibaugh will get five minutes, as the third speaker, to rebut or defend at
the end of each topic
Mr. Molitor will represent the BZA Board on how to consider both Appeals
Mr. Hollibaugh could be represented by someone else
o At the conclusion of the hearing the Board may make a motion of disposition of either or
both Appeals and any Conditions must be stated in the motion
Further discussion may require amendments to pending motions
Might be very complicated motions to consider
Board may decide to take it under advisement and Table to next hearing
Petitioners could supply Findings of Fact to aid with the motions
Discussion:
Page 14 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
City of Carmel is trying to bring PUD into compliance and the two parties are trying to
determine how Pulte should repair the situation
o The Homeowners submitted a number of complaints to the Department indicating they
did not believe the builder had complied with various aspects of the PUD
o Mr. Hollibaugh took those under consideration, met with them several times and issued
the letter agreeing with certain claims made by the Homeowners and agreed with certain
explanations by Pulte, using the Ordinance as his guide
o BZA Board has jurisdiction to take action on Appeals, under the Zoning Ordinance, for
any determination made by the Director
BZA Board's determination can be appealed to the Courts
Individual members of the Board are not usually called or deposed
This Suspension of the Rules of Procedure would only be for these two Appeals
If these Appeals are continued, a special meeting could be scheduled in March or it could be
continued to the regular meeting in March
o No obligation to finish in one or two meetings
o Board could hear 3 issues in February and 3 issues in March with 2 hour limit
o Board did not want to take dinner break and continue until 10:30 or 11:00 pm
o There would be a lead attorney and lead interested party on each side, plus members of
the Homeowners Association
Meeting will be handled as typical BZA hearing with questions discussed in each of the six
sections
o Board members will be able to discuss among themselves
There will not be a Department Report since the Department is the respondent
o Mr. Molitor can respond to Board questions
Board will either uphold Mr. Hollibaugh's decision, modify it or decline it
o Upholding or denying the Appeal, or sections of the Appeal, from either or both sides
Pulte was not the original builder
o Buckingham was original owner
o Centex was builder
o Pulte bought Centex
Expert witnesses from each presentation can be cross examined by the opposing side
Both parties know they will have 15 minutes on each topic
Time limits will be enforced
Petitioners have equal standing to present their Appeal
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Ephraim Wilfong:
Suspend typical procedures and rules for Docket Nos. 11110010 A and 11110011 A with the
addition/revision that this occur in two meetings with three topics each.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Discussion continued:
Mr. Hollibaugh was a mediator between the two parties to discuss issues
o He issued the Letter of Determination to resolve the issues.
Both can appeal to the Court
o Court usually defers to BZA Board
Redline version could be helpful in making decisions
Page 15 of 16
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2012
o Show how Mr. Hollibaugh's letter could be changed in the submitted Findings of Fact
Rejection of both Appeals means agreement with Department
Pulte may claim the Department does not have jurisdiction or has exceeded authority
Board cannot have any contact with Department Staff
o All questions should be directed to Mr. Molitor
Adjournment
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Ephraim Wilfong:
The Meeting be adjourned.
The meeting adjourned at 8:40 PM.
Approved this f2 day of Gb.--vt o 20
resident James R. Hawkins
Page 16 of 16
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Filename. 20120124 doc