HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 09-24-12 - ' G`,z,,tir.\IR,y�Fe -
\\ - -
. r
f::?7-1— i ® a e
I \ r ONW 1`- NDIANP,
MINUTES
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting '
Monday, September 24, 2012
6:00 PM
Council Chambers, Carmel City Hall
Present: James Hawkins, President
Earlene Plavchak
Alan Potasnik
Ephraim Wilfong
Kent Broach (absent)
Connie Tingley, Recording Secretary
Staff members in attendance: Angie Conn, Planning Administrator
Rachel Boone,Planning Administrator
Mike Hollibaugh, Director, Department of Community Services
'Legal Counsel: John Molitor
Previous Minutes:
On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Ephraim Wilfong:
The Minutes for the meeting dated August 27,2012 were approved as circulated.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Department Report: Angie Conn
o Items 10 and 11, Tom Wood Parking Lot and Day Drive Access have been tabled
• Items 3-9, McDonald's — Signage will need Suspension of Rules for public notice in newspaper being
one day late
Action:
On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Earlene Plavchak:
To suspend the rules for the McDonald's signage petitions.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Legal Report: John Molitor
• Hearing for Bowen/Barnett matter still pending in Court
o Continued to November 20th at 1:30 p.m.
o Board members are welcome to attend and observe the oral argument between two sides
® One supporting BZA Board's decision to deny variance to Bowens
WWW.CARMEL.IN GOV Page 1 of 9 (317)571-2417
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
September 24,2012
• Other side arguing Board overstepped its bounds by not agreeing to the variance
Public Hearing:
1-2. (V) Greyhound Commons—Signage.TABLED:
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
Docket No. 12070014 V PUD Z-344, Section 11.3(C) (1): Number of signs(2 additional proposed, 1
existing allowed)
Docket No. 12070015 V PUD Z-344,Section 11.3(C) (3): Ground sign height(20 +1-proposed, 10'
allowed). The site is located at 14480 Lowes Way. It is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development. Filed by Joy
Skidmore of Kite Realty Group.
3-9. (V)McDonald's—Signage.
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
Docket No. 12080008 V Ch. 25.07.02-08 b) Number of signs (20 proposed,6 allowed)
Docket No. 12080009 V Ch. 25.07.05 Menu Board size (38.8 sq. ft. proposed, 16 sq.ft. allowed)
Docket No. 12080010 V Ch.25.07.05 Menu Board height(6'9"proposed,6' allowed)
Docket No. 12080011 V Ch.25.07.02-08 c) Total square footage (250.33 s.f. proposed,227 s.f. allowed)
Docket No. 12080012 V Ch. 25.07.02-08 b) Number of signs facing east ROW(10 proposed,2 allowed)
Docket No. 12080013 V Ch. 25.07.02-08 b) Number of signs facing south ROW (4 proposed, 1 allowed)
Docket No. 12080014 V Ch.25.07.02-08 b) Number of signs facing west ROW(6 proposed,3 allowed)
The site is located at 750 E. Carmel Drive. It is zoned B-8/Business within the Keystone Parkway Overlay Zone.
Filed by Timothy E. Ochs of Ice Miller on behalf of McDonald's Corporation.
Action:
• Mr. Hawkins recused himself. Vice President, Ephraim Wilfong, led the meeting.
Present for Petitioner:
Tim Ochs, Ice Miller, Indianapolis, Blair Carmosino,The Carmosino Group, Inc., Noblesville, and Robert
Guyton,McDonald's Regional Head of Construction
• Existing McDonald's at Keystone Parkway and Carmel Drive for over 20 years
o Overhead shown with current configuration just west of roundabout over Keystone Parkway
o Signage variances are necessary for new store to be constructed
o Existing store well-maintained but starting to look tired
o Redevelopment will allow McDonald's to update store with current prototype
• Modern, inviting, current store
• Larger double drive-thru needed; over 60 % of sales
• Efficiency getting patrons on and off the site
• Long drive-thru queue at current building
• Not safe for customers
• Need to alleviate
o Site plan for new store shown
• Similar in location and general traffic circulation
• Trash dumpster area rebuilt and enclosed (ADLS approval)
o Shield drive-thru from northeast Keystone traffic, with majority of signage
o New landscaping brought up to current standards along eastern and
southern boundaries; more aesthetically pleasing
o Twenty signs seems to be huge sign package; worked hard with Staff
Page 2 of 9
,Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Sepcember•24, 2012 y
• Only five or six signs are directed to potential customers and people not on the
McDonald's site
• South elevation facing Carmel Drive will have McDonald's sign (just under 33
square feet) and small golden arches of 14 square feet
o Only two signs large enough to be seen by people not on the site
• East elevation will have same McDonald's and golden arches signs
• No signage on north elevation
• West elevation will have only golden arches of 14 square feet
• Existing ground sign at southeast corner of property with golden arches and
Wilson Office Park
o Ground sign will not change, understanding with office park
• Remaining signs intended to deal with customers on site i
• Modern McDonald's very busy
1
• Signs make sure customers know where to go and what to do, especially with dual
drive-thru lanes
• Beneficial to McDonald's and customers to reduce stacking queue
• All signage details pointed out in information packet/overhead projector
o All smaller than 10 square feet, except for menu boards
o Directional signs at entrance will be 3.0 square feet; corrected from 3.71
square feet in packet
• Carmel Zoning Ordinance exempts signs 3 square feet or smaller
• Agreed with Staff to reduce those to 3 square feet
o Drive-thru canopy with Order Here sign to direct patrons (2 signs)
o Double welcome point gateway
• Delineates two drive-thru lanes
• Small overhang with height limit
o McDonald's sign with individual lettering, LED internally illuminated
• Two almost 33 square feet signs; south and east elevations
• Most traditional of signage
o Three golden arches, four feet wide by a little less than 4 feet tall; west,
south and east elevations
• Third sign for south and west elevations located above primary
entrance into building
• Indicating entrances for patrons parking and eating on-site
• Increases safety in parking lot
o One outdoor menu board permitted at site; requesting two
• Height is limited to six feet
• Requesting 6 feet 9 inches
• Originally requested six feet tall that complied with Ordinance
• Did not look good
• Staff suggested mounting menu boards on pedestals with
stone base to match building
• Consistent with other restaurants in Carmel
• Wide variety of menu items for board
Page 3 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
September 24, 2012
• Both menu boards located at northeast corner of site; away
• ,
from surrounding business
• Blocked by landscaping to the west or by wall for trash
dumpster that matches building materials
o Pre-sale board comes before lane splits for two drive-thru lanes
a Helps people make up their minds before they get to main menu
board to place order
■ Helps keep queue shorter
a Also on stone base
o Bollards adjacent to store for protection purposes as cars turn corner to
head south along west side of store to drive-thru windows
■ Small signs (17 inches wide by 18 inches tall); "Please Have Your
Money Ready"
o "Pay Here" and "Pick-Up" signs to direct patrons to correct windows
a Hang off overhang; above drive-thru
a Difficult to see from anywhere other than drive-thru area
a Directional signage for people on the site
o Photo of existing ground sign
a No plans for any changes
■ Wilson Office Park directly north of McDonald's building
o Directional signs at.entrances
■ Three•square feet for"In" and "Out" traffic
• Total number of signage looks large
o Permitted 205 square feet for six signs
o Requesting 253.84 square feet for twenty signs
o Most signs are small directional signs for people on the site
o Necessary for traffic at McDonald's
Public Hearing closed.
Department Report:
Rachel Boone:
• Well presented; Department in favor
o Primarily directional signs; not excessive with identification signs to public on Keystone and
Carmel Drive
o Fairly modest with signs used for recognition
o A lot of directional signs, but each has own purpose
o Worked well with Department in compromising on menu board signs
■ Department preferred stone base and height variance versus sign all the way to the
ground on mounting pole with components
• Nine-inch stone base hides sign components
• Many components for turning/changing menus
o Commendable only exceeding permitted square footage by 23 square feet
Department supported all Variances.
Page 4 of 9
1
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
September 24,2012 '
Discussion:
Alan Potasnik:
• Norm Rothenberg first franchisee since 1970's
Blair Carmosino:
• Corporation store; not franchise
Robert Guyton:
• Company store built in 1976; Norm Rothenberg was original owner
o Company bought it from Rothenberg approximately 15 years ago
Alan Potasnik:
• Yellow signs on asphalt for pavement markings; follow directional arrows; follow sign for drive-thru;
and one that splits for new configuration
o Wonder about intelligence: how much more signage do they need to go into a drive-thru?
o Maybe just one sign between the two drive-thru lanes
Tim Ochs:
t
• Need to build stores for everybody
• McDonald's experience with thousands of stores suggests this is necessary for everybody, so everyone
knows where they are going
o Much safer store
o In busy times, even with double queue and drive-thru, it does back up and cars are over
pavement markings
® Need some signage above pavement
o If only one drive-thru with clearance sign on one side, someone with a too tall vehicle would try
iscussion:
to drive through on other side and damage overhang or menu board
Alan Potasnik and Tim Ochs:
• Outdoor drive-thru menu boards
o For circulation (indicated on plan):follow pavement signs and one of the two overhead signs to
approach pre-order menu board, then look at full menu board to place order, place order into
board with LCD confirmation order display, with menu boards located directly behind them
® Can see menu board as parked placing order
® One pre-order board prior to the split of drive-thru lanes
• Gives people information about what is available so they are ready to place order
when they pull up to order board
® Outdoor menu board on each lane
® Current site has one large outdoor, multi-panel menu board for one lane
• Also one pre-sale menu board ,
® Existing store has 19 signs with one drive-thru lane
• New store has 20 signs with two drive-thru lanes
• McDonald's has worked long and hard to make sure everyone knows it is a McDonald's store
o That's how they limit signs directed toward general off-site public
o Signs are to move people on-site in an efficient manner
o None of the signs on any of the three permitted street frontages stick up above the flat roof line
• Purpose of stone base is to hide components of sign and be more aesthetically pleasing
o Six-foot sign is functional and conforms with Ordinance
o Worked with Staff for options
Page 5 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
September 24,2012
o This was best alternative
Ephraim Wilfong and Blair Carmosino:
o McDonald's tries to stay current with menu boards
o These new menu boards will be electronically switched/rotated
o Future menu boards may be LED and integrated with computer
o Illumination is not for advertising, but to be more efficient
Rachel Boone:
o New Sign Ordinance before City Council allows LED menu boards
® New Sign Ordinance has skirting detail as a requirement for menu boards
o Size of menu board increased
o Preview board added
o Trying to be proactive for signage variance requests
Ephraim Wilfong:
o Is Wilson Office Park/McDonald's sign owned by McDonald's or placed in McDonald's easement by
another owner?
o Would sign be updated through an ADLS approval?
o Is sign indicated on footprint for building and signage?
Robert Guyton:
® Was not sure, but it has always been a shared sign
Tim Ochs:
o Sign owned by McDonald's
® Not sure about agreement with Wilson Office Park
o It is either written or an easement
o No plans to change sign
® Would consider updating ground/entrance sign
Alan Potasnik:
o Ask Rachel Boone to reiterate the effect of this total square footage
Rachel Boone:
o Allowed 227 square footage, taking into consideration their three public street frontages
o Three main identification signs
o One 16-square foot menu board
o Two small enter/exit directional signs
® By dividing it among identification signs that are significantly smaller than allowed, they utilize other
directional signs that are mostly under three square feet each
o Large number needed to help people travel through the site
o Two large menu boards take a lot of the square footage
o Reallocating allowed square footage
o Only exceed total amount of permitted square footage by 23.33 square feet
o Other business sites have gone over by 50 to 100 square feet
o The number of small directional signs makes the square footage over total permitted
® She thinks entrance to Wilson Office Park platted together with McDonald's entrance
o Have sign permit for location
Motion: On a motion made by Ephraim Wilfong and seconded by Earlene Plavchak:
Docket Nos. 12080008 V through 12080014 V,McDonald's - Signage, be approved, for number of signs (20
proposed, 6 allowed); menu board size (38.8 square feet proposed, 16 square feet allowed); menu board height
Page 6 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
September 24, 2012
(6 feet 9 inches proposed, 6 feet allowed); total square footage (250.33 square feet proposed, 227 square feet '
allowed); number of signs facing east right-of-way'(10 proposed, 2 allowed); number of signs facing south
right-of-way (4 proposed, 1 allowed); and number of signs facing west right-of-way (6 proposed, 3 allowed).
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (3-0)
10. (UV) Tom Wood Parking Lot. TABLED:
The applicant seeks the following use variance approval for a surface parking lot on a residentially zoned property:
Docket No. 12080016 UV ZO Ch.6.01.01 Permitted Uses
The site is located at 9624 Day Drive It is zoned S-2/Residence. Filed by Paul Reis of Krieg DeVault for Tom
Wood, Inc.
11. (CA) Tom Wood Day Drive Access. TABLED:
Docket No. 12080017 CA. .
The applicant seeks approval to amend a commitment made in 1969 as a part of the Special Exception for an auto
dealership,to allow access to Day Drive.The site is located at 3130 E. 96th Street. It is zoned B-3/Business within
the Keystone Overlay Zone. Filed by Paul Reis of Krieg DeVault for Tom Wood, Inc.
Action:
® Mr. Hawkins rejoined the meeting.
o Mr. Hawkins welcomed the Boy Scouts in the audience
Old Business:
1. (V) Olive Garden.
The'applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals:
Docket No. 12070007 V Ch. 23C.09 E. Roof material (Clay tile proposed)
The site is located at 10206 N. Michigan Rd. It is zoned I-1/Industrial and lies in the Michigan Rd./US 421
Corridor Overlay Zone. Filed by Janet Reid of GHA Architecture/Development on behalf of Jack
DeGagne for GMRI, Inc.
Present for Petitioner:
Jack DeGagne, Darden Restaurants, Orlando, FL
o Received Plan Commission approval September 18, 2012
o Brought samples of building materials with EIFS, brick clinkers, stone and roof tiles
o Agreed with Department Report and Findings of Fact
® Tile roof material an integral part of design for building
Public Hearing closed.
Department Report:
Angie Conn:
o Architecture and site plan for building approved at September 18, 2012 Plan Commission meeting
® Department still feels the architecture is a blend of Tuscan farmhouse and Italianate style
6 Generally in support of project
Department recommended positive consideration of variance for clay roof tile.
Discussion regarding changes:
Page 7 of 9
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
September 24,2012
Angie Conn:
• Changes were made to the overall building design
o More detailing in façade
o Different break ups in façade element
• More pedestrian scale, not massive
o Main tower feature raised about two feet
o Changes made to back of building so it did not look as plain; more broken up
o EIFS with brick clinkers showing through looks more like an Old World style
Ephraim Wilfong:
o On Plan Commission committee that reviewed these plans
o Did not vote in favor of the architecture
• Design is more Tuscan farmhouse
• Not full Italianate
• Detracts from the community because Michigan Road Overlay calls for Italianate
• Will not be in compliance with Overlay Zone
• Committee spent a lot of time trying to get the architecture updated to look fully
Italianate
• Petitioner had images for comparison
• There are elements, but this does not compare to images shown
• Not full compliance for Italianate architecture
• EIFS style with extra brick clinkers is biggest change
o Extra elements on left side of front façade
James Hawkins:
• What are alternative roofing materials that would not require a variance?
Angie Conn:
• Residential asphalt shingles, metal, wood/cedar shake
Jack DeGagne:
• Received 8-1 approval at Plan Commission
• Extensive work with Staff
• Originally three materials: brick, little EIFS and stone
o Design too busy
o Working with Staff, minimized and simplified amount of materials
• Kept many Italianate architectural features —different opinions for Italianate
• Horizontality found in Overlay District
• EIFS or stucco
o EIFS will need variance because it is above the ten percent permitted
• Window treatments: arched and straight
• Tower feature
• Different roof lines
• Predominately bracketed cornice on tower feature
• Additional arches for accents
• Roof tile integral part of Italianate
• Roof tile more solid reddish in color than splotchy as shown in copy
o Roof tile samples shown
Page 8 of 9
•
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
September 24, 2012
o Three dimensional photo shows differences in elevation: horizontality,
various roof lines, tower feature, arches
o Two dimensional photo closer to colors being used
o Original proposed building renderings shown
® Stone, stucco and brick: too busy
• Very happy with approved plan with horizontal features, arches, multi-roof lines
• Felt this building would be complimentary to Overlay area
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Alan Potasnik:
Docket No. 12070007 V, Olive Garden, be approved, for roof material (clay tile proposed)
MOTION CARRIED 3-1 (Wilfong negative)
Adjournment
Motion: On a motion made by James Hawkins and seconded by Ephraim Wilfong:
The Meeting be adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
The meeting adjourned at 7:25 PM.
Approved this 2:2- day of Or%