HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplications - Dunkin 110212CITY OF CARMEL — BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE
FEE: Single Family (Primary Residence) $297 for the first variance, plus $91.50 for each additional section of the
ordinance being varied. All Other $1,177 for the first variance, plus $556 for each additional section of the
ordinance being varied. OR, see Hearing Officer Fees.
DOCKET NO. DATE RECEIVED:
1) Applicant: H & H Restaurant Management
Address: See Exhibit "B" Phone: See Exhibit "B"
2) Project Name: 9800 N. Michigan Road— Dunkin Donuts, C -Store and Commercial Building
Engineer /Architect: See Exhibit `B"
Attorney: Charles D. Frankenberger Phone: (317) 844 -0106
Email: jim@nf- law.com
Contact Person: Jon C. Dobosiewicz Phone: (317) 844 -0106
Email: jon@nf- law.com
3) Applicant's Status: (Check the appropriate response)
(a) The applicant's name is on the deed to the property
(b) The applicant is the contract purchaser of the property
X (c) Other The applicant represents the owner of the property
4) If Item 3) (c) is checked, please complete the following:
Owner of the property involved: Heartland Oil LLC
Phone: (317) 867 -0033
Landowner address: 5201 86th St. W, Indianapolis, IN 46268
5) Record of Ownership:
Deed Book No. /Instrument No.:
6) Common address of the property involved: 9800 & 9802 Michigan Road, Carmel, Indiana 46032
Legal description: See "Exhibit A"
Tax Map Parcel No.: 17- 13- 07- 00 -00- 043.000 & 17- 13- 07- 00 -00- 044.000
7) State explanation of requested Development Standards Variance: (State what you want to do and cite the
section number(s) of the Carmel /Clay Zoning Ordinance that applies and/or creates the need for this request).
See Exhibit "C ".
8) State reasons supporting the Development Standards Variance: (Additionally, complete the attached question
sheet entitled "Findings of Fact- Development Standards Variance ").
See Exhibit "C ".
9) Present zoning of the property (give exact classification): I -1 (Industrial) within the Michigan Road Overlay
10) Size of lot/parcel in question: 3.98 +/- acres
11) Present use of the property: Vacant
12) Describe the proposed use of the property: Dunkin Donuts / C -Store and Commercial Building
13) Is the property: Owner occupied
Renter occupied
Other: The applicant represents the owner of the property
14) Are there any restrictions, laws, covenants, variances, special uses, or appeals filed in connection with this
property that would relate or affect its use for the specific purpose of this application? If yes, give date and
docket number, decision rendered and pertinent explanation.
The applicant will also be seeking DP and ADLS approval from the Carmel Plan Commission.
15) Has work for which this application is being filed already started? If answer is yes, give details: No
Building Permit Number: N/A
Builder: N/A
16) If proposed appeal is granted, when will the work commence?
Immediately upon obtaining all required. approvals.
17) If the proposed variance is granted, who will operate and/or use the proposed improvement for which this
application has been filed?
The Applicant, its successors and assigns.
NOTE: LEGAL NOTICE shall be published in the Indianapolis Star a MANDATORY twenty-five (25) days prior to the public hearing date. The
certified 'Proof of Publication" affidavit for the newspaper must be available for inspection the night of the hearing.
LEGAL NOTICE to all adjoining and abutting property owners is also MANDATORY, two methods of notice are recommended:
1.) CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED sent to adjoining property owners. (The white receipt should be stamped by
the Post Office at least twenty-five (25) days prior to the public hearing date.)
2) HAND DELIVERED to adjoining and abutting property owners (A receipt signed by the adjoining and abutting property owner
acknowledging the twenty-five (25) day notice should be kept for verification that the notice was completed)
REALIZE THE BURDEN OF PROOF FOR ALL NOTICES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT. AGAIN, THIS TASK MUST BE
COMPLETED AT LEAST TWENTY -FIVE (25) DAYS PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARING DATE
The applicant understands that docket numbers will not be assigned until all supporting information has been submitted to the Department of
Community Services.
The applicant understands that docket numbers will not be assigned until all supporting information has been
submitted to the Department of Community Services.
Applicant Signature:
alker,
Authorized Representative of H & H Restaurant Management
Date: // 4 //Z---
The applicant certifies by singing this application that he /she has been advised that all representations of the Department
of Community Services are advisory only and that the applicant should rely on appropriate subdivision and zoning
ordinance and /or the legal advice of his /her attorney.
*The applicant will provide individual ballot sheets for all requested variances at the BZA meeting.
CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Carmel, Indiana
Docket No.:
Petitioner: H & H Restaurant Management
FINDINGS OF FACT - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE (Ballot Sheet)
1.
2.
3.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 2012.
Board Member
CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CARMEL, INDIANA
Docket No.:
Petitioner: H & H Restaurant Management
FINDINGS OF FACT - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE
1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the community because:
See Exhibit "C ".
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:
See Exhibit "C ".
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:
See Exhibit "C ".
DECISION
IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards
Variance Docket No. is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this
Board, which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof.
Adopted this day of , 2012.
CHAIRPERSON, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
SECRETARY, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Conditions of the Board are listed on the back. (Petitioner or his representative to sign).
EXHIBIT "A"
(LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
PART OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 17 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST IN
CLAY TOWNSHIP, HAMILTON COUNTY, INDIANA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A P. K. NAIL AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 17 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST; THENCE NORTH 88
DEGREES 57 MINUTES 24 SECONDS EAST (ASSUMED BEARING) 674.55 FEET TO THE
POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND
THE CENTERLINE OF MICHIGAN ROAD (US 421, FORMERLY STATE ROAD 29) AT A
POINT ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 69 DEGREES 34
MINUTES 05 SECONDS EAST 121,951.22 FEET FROM THE RADIUS POINT OF SAID
CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CENTERLINE AND CURVE AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 669.01 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH AMERICAN PARK
SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CENTERLINE AND CURVE AN
ARC DISTANCE OF 200.01 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF A 1.40 ACRE TRACT
OF REAL ESTATE DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT #9210565 AND THE POINT OF
BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION:
THENCE SOUTH 86 DEGREES 37 MINUTES 29 SECONDS WEST PARALLEL WITH THE
NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTH AMERICAN PARK SUBDIVISION, 609.52 FEET TO A 5/8"
IRON ROD WITH YELLOW CAP STAMPED S0083 ON THE EAST RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE
OF THE FORMER T. H. I. & E. TRACTION COMPANY; THENCE NORTH 20 DEGREES 31
MINUTES 51 SECONDS WEST ON SAID EAST RIGHT -OF -WAY 299.39 FEET TO A 5/8"
IRON ROD WITH YELLOW CAP STAMPED S0083 ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE TRACT
OF REAL ESTATE DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT No. 200000000117; THENCE ON SAID
NORTH LINE NORTH 86 DEGREES 37 MINUTES 29 SECONDS EAST 607.44 TO THE
CENTERLINE OF SAID MICHIGAN ROAD BEING A NON - TANGENT CURVE WITH A
RADIUS OF 121,951.22 FEET OF A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 27
SECONDS; THENCE ON THE ARC OF SAID CURVE 300.00 FEET WITH A CHORD
BEARING SOUTH 20 DEGREES 54 MINUTES 39 SECONDS EAST 300.00 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 4.00 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, SUBJECT TO ALL
EXISTING RIGHT -OF -WAYS.
EXHIBIT "B"
(CONTACT LIST)
1. Applicant Brad Walker
H & H Restaurant Management
5201 West 86th Street
Indianapolis, IN 46268
Phone: (317) 203 -3030
Fax: (317) 203 -3209
Email: bradames @comcast.net
2. Attorney/
Land Use Professional
James E. Shinaver
Jon C. Dobosiewicz
Nelson & Frankenberger
3105 E. 98th Street, Suite 170
Indianapolis, IN 46280
Phone: (317) 844 -0106
Fax: (317) 846 -8782
Email: JimS @nf- law.com
Email: Jon @nf- law.com
3. Engineer Civil Site Group, Inc.
Eric Gleissner, P.E., Principal
643 Massachusetts Ave. Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: (317) 423 -3305
Fax: (317) 423 -3306
E -mail: egleissner @civilsite.net
4. Architect Brad Smith
SITE ARCHITECTURE
Architecture + Landscape Architecture
P.O. Box 7054
Fishers, IN. 46038
Phone: (317) 374 -8720
E -mail: brad @site - architecture.com
EXHIBIT "C"
EXPLANATION OF REQUESTED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCES
and
FINDINGS OF FACT
Requested Variances:
A. Section 23C.11.G. — Location of stacking for drive -thru lanes
The applicant seeks approval to permit car stacking for a drive -thru lane to be to the side of
the building.
FINDINGS OF FACT (request A)
1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals
and general welfare of the community because:
The applicant is seeking a variance to permit car stacking along the side of the
building. To mitigate this request, the applicant will be installing additional
landscape plantings adjacent to the drive -thru stacking area to provide screening and
buffering. As a result, the approval of this variance will not be injurious to the
public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the area
will be buffered by additional landscape plantings.
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:
In addition to the rationale included in the response above, the area adjacent to the
site is zoned I -1 Industrial and consists of many types of business, manufacturing
and industrial uses. As a result, the use and value of the area adjacent to the property
included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner
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 terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in
a practical difficulty because the applicant will be unable to design an efficient and
effective site circulation plan for the proposed uses that are permitted by the
underlying zoning.
B. Section 23C.09.D. — facade offsets
The applicant seeks approval to allow two buildings with reduced facade offsets along two
sides of each building.
FINDINGS OF FACT (request B)
1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals
and general welfare of the community because:
Facade offsets and articulation of the building projections is being provided on the
front and rear of each building which is consistent with the mass and scale of the
building.
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:
Facade offsets and articulation of the building projections is being provided on the
front and rear of each building which is consistent with the mass and scale of the
building.
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:
Facade offsets and articulation of the building projections is being provided on the
front and rear of each building which is consistent with the mass and scale of the
building. The Zoning Ordinance does not provide for adjustments between large and
small buildings thereby requiring the same minimum 8' offset for buildings such as
the 100,000 square foot Super Target and the smallest permitted buildings at 2,500
square feet. The strict application of the ordinance would prevent the applicant from
providing a building design in terms of mass and scale that is consistent with the
smaller size of the proposed buildings.
C. Section 25.07.02 -9(b) — total number of signs
D. Section 25.07.02 -9(c) — total square footage
The applicant seeks approval to allow one additional sign for a tenant with entrances on the
north and east face of a proposed building, the aggregate area of which would total more
square footage than permitted by Ordinance
FINDINGS OF FACT (requests C and D)
1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals
and general welfare of the community because:
The proposed number and location of signs will effectively address the wayfinding
needs of the motoring public and pedestrians. The approval of this request will have
little, if any, discernible negative affect on public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the community In fact, the proposed signs will allow approaching
motorists and pedestrians to make informed and safe decisions prior to reaching or
passing the building.
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 number and location of signs will effectively address the wayfinding
needs of the motoring public and pedestrians.
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 ordinance will prevent the conveying of necessary and
visible information to the public (both motoring and walking/biking) when in the
vicinity of the real estate.
E. Chapter 2 — Definition of Identification Sign - permitting 25% logo area
The applicant seeks approval to allow signage with logos comprising 32% of the total sign
area.
FINDINGS OF FACT (requests E)
1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals
and general welfare of the community because:
The size and appearance of the proposed sign is consistent with development in the
vicinity and would be permitted if the proposed use was in single tenant building not
in a unified center.
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 size and appearance of the proposed sign is consistent with development in the
vicinity and would be permitted if the proposed use was in single tenant building not
in a unified center.
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 ordinance will prevent the conveying of the tenant logo
and name in a manner consistent with other businesses in the vicinity of the real
estate.
F. Section 23C.08.02.B. — 120' maximum building setback
The applicant seeks approval to allow a building with a greater setback than the 120'
maximum.
FINDINGS OF FACT (request F)
1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals
and general welfare of the community because:
The site design provides one building along the south side of the property that meets
the maximum 120' building setback which is consistent which is the use and
development of other properties subject to the same standards.
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 design provides one building along the south side of the property that meets
the maximum 120' building setback which is consistent which is the use and
development of other properties subject to the same standards.
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 ordinance will prevent the siting of buildings in a
manner consistent with other businesses in the vicinity of the real estate.