Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 03-31-05 . . . City of Carme Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals SPECIAL MEETING Thursday, March 31, 2005 I The Special Meeting ofthe Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals met at 6:00 PM on ThJsd ry, Match 31, 2005, in the Council Chambers of City Rall, Carmel, fudiana. The meeting opened w~lli I 'e Pledge of I Allegiance. i I i I Members in attendance were Kent Broach, Leo Dierckman and Jqmes Hawkins, th~re yestaJblishing a "quorum.' Jon Dobosiewicz, Angie Conn and Mike Hollibaugh represented the'Depart ent of Community Services. John Molitor, Legal Counsel, was also present. Mr. Dierckman nioveci to approve the minutes of the February 28, 2005 meeting as su II mitted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Broach and APPROVED 3-0. Mrs. Conn ga~e the Department Report. She reported that i~ a memo to the Board i;t "'1r~.bropght to the Board's attentIon that they would need to suspend the rules In ord:er to hear Items 1 p amd 2h. i Also, , , .. I I Items 8-10h had been tabled due to the fact that there would not bea quorum for that I'em'. The Department requested that the Board reorder the agenda so that Items 2-3i could behe11rd fir$t, second would be Items 3-7h due to the fact that there is a meeting immediately after this BZAmeetihg. Mr. Dierckman moved to suspend the rules. The motion was seconded by Mr. Broach: rid APPROVED 3-0. Mr. Dierckman moved to reorder the agenda. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brdac I! and APPROVED 3-0. I I Mr. Molitor gave the Legal Report. He stated there was litigation still pending betwlee., the Board and Martin Marietta. Restated thatMr. Weiss was here and wanted to speak to the tabling pftheir petition. The Board's attorneys are in contact with Mr. Weiss and other representatives of Martln Marietta with respect to the issue of relocation of the processing plant, which is one of the items Qf tie pending . litigation. The parties may be able to come to some agreement. There is a probability tiat the Board's attorneys and Martin Marietta's ,attorneys can agree to have that item remanded to the I!oard for further consideration. Zeff Weiss, attorney with Ice Miller, 3400 One American Square, Indianapolis, spoike , : S the :attorney representing Martin Marietta. They asked to table their item to the May 23, 2005 m~edhg in brder to co~t~nye their fruitful discussions. with the. Kings~??d Romeown~rs A.ssocia~io.n. a~d ol~rtain lot~er adJo,In, mg property owners regardmg blastmg actIvItIes, proposed blastmg actIvItIes! ~lrelocatlOn of the existing sand and gravel plant. It is their understanding that the Board has autho'riz~d, under certain circumstances, for that matter which is in litigation to be remanded back to the Board Iksumihg they have an agreement with Kingswood to allow that plant to be relocated. Page 1 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31,2005 Mr. Molitor stated that Staff can schedule the petition for the May 23, 2005 meeting i no objections. Mr. Dierckman noted that Kingswood Homeowners Association was not in attendance:, but he wanted them to be aware that the item could notbe tabled indefinitely. There needed to be gold progress by the May meeting because another tabling of the item would be difficult. Mr. Molitor stated that he would give an interim report next month as to how things wire go~ng with the litigation and discussion related to the scheduling. Mr. Hawkins reminded everyone of the format for the Pubic Hearing items. The Petitil' ner' s pr~sentation ca~ last up to 15 minutes. .General public. comments that .are favorablear911lal10Wi~d 5 mInutes. OrganIzed remonstrance that IS unfavorable IS allowed 15 mInutes and genera!lpubl~c comments that are unfavorable are allowed 5 minutes. The Petitioner will then have 5 !' inutes for rebuttal. Then the Board will hear Staff comments. Mr. Molitor stated that since the first item is Old Business, the Board has the authority to request that any additional comments be limited to new information that was raised at this meeting and any remonstrance be directed toward the new issues. The Chair can exclude redundant and repetitive remarks from the public, but he felt it was important to allow the public to weigh in 0] addit]onal material submitted tonight. Mr. Hawkins encouraged people to come to the podium one at a time, stating their nale and I address, but to address any questions to the Board, not to the Petitioner. He asked that items 'no be repeated since this petition had already been heard. H. Public Hearin2. 2-3i. Carmel/Clay Schools, Soccer Fields at River Rd The applicant seeks special use approval to construct sports fields and parkingllJ , Docket No. 05010046 SU Chapter 5.02 SpecIal Use 16 8-1 Zone Docket No. 05020006 V Chapter 27.03.0 parking lot c~rbing The site is located at the northwest comer of River Rd~nd 126th Street. The siib is zoned S- l/Residence-Low Density and is within the Special Flood Hazard Zone. Filed by George Zboyovsky of Paul I Cripe for Carmel/Clay Schools. i Pres~nt for the Petitioner: Geor~e Zbo~ovs~y, Senior Pro~ect Manager ~ith Paul I. ~rife: At the last meetmg there were questlOns raIsed pnmanly about 10catlOn and operatlOns. Repre&en1~tIvesofthe CarmeVClay School Corporation and the Carmel Dad's Club were present to answer t~bse questions. Roger McMichael, AssistantSuperintendent for Business Affairs for Carmel/Clay sChLIS. 5201 E. 131 st Street. He stated that since the last meeting, Carmel Schools and Dad's Club Heldla neighborhood meeting to fu~her ~iscuss the project an? he felt they had made significant pro~ess. T,e conbem he felt focused pnmanly on use by the Dad s Club more than the School CorporatlOn bec~use of parking and traffic to the area. Changes had been made to the parking lot on River Road. The ~kd's Glub had agreed to reduce the two parking I' ots of 92 and 10,8 spaces to just t. he 108-space lot. I., It 1111,' a S, anticipated that would be enough for the programming. The programming by the Dad's Club OI} th, River Road portion had been reduced. The School Corporation and the Dad's Club had worked wit I! the neighbors Page 2 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March .31, 2005 to cre~te a Commitment letter that outlined the intended use of the property and identiiIed th~ schedule of use of the property with regard to hours and days. Brad Little,E.xecutive ?irector of the C~el Dad's Club, 5459 E. 131 st Street, Carm,~. Last month they had receIved asenous wake-up call wIth regard to the use of the property. TheYlrve had meetings atPrairie Trace Elementary with the homeowners to work out agreements. Tlti1.e Board was given a copy of the agreement/commitments. He stated there is a need for the Dad's dub to use the Schools' facil, ities to accomm, odate the needs of.their programs. U.seof the facilities, ? 11,11 t,'. he D, ad.' s Club helps to offset expenses that the Schools would mcur. The escalating cost of ground I~ Carmel IS beyond the Dad's Club reach. Therefore, a partnership with the Schools and other org4lJllizations allows them to. meet the growth. The River Road fields are replacement fields for the fields O~J~Shelborne Road that w~re,lost with t~e co~struction.ofCreekside Middle Sch,ool a?d the ne,:" e, lei! entat,.y school. In the commItments, SectlOn 2 IS the sectIOn to the north and SectIon 1 IS the sectlO~ t : the s<Duth. The six fields WOUld, be activated on 30-,mi?ute increments.,Fi~ldS 1-3 would start on the, h~'I~" r and, fields 4- 6 would start on the half-hour. That wIll stagger the start tIme and ease the traffic flowllm and out ofthe facility. Secondly they have agreed to put traffic control officers at the entrance on 12 t Street and instruct them to, all 0, w traffic out of the facility to th, , e,west up 126t,h Street, which Wi"ll t~.ake the, traffic to the roundabout on Hazel Dell Parkway. That prevents the traffic and concerns on Med~list Parkway through Plum Creek Village. They have agreed to not use the facility on Fridays. The11will gate and lock the facility to maintain security and safety like t,heir other facilities. The Dad's, CI, b would use the facility in the spring, Section 1 and the High School program would use the facilityin ~he fall. Therefore these; commit~ents are for the spring. Th~~ would have limited use on S~~rYS, ~pmarily for tournaments or occaslOnal make-up games. A cntIcal concern has been the northedll sectIfm. They will eliminate the northern parking lot, so that Chapman's Claim will not be looking 0 II:t at a parking lot. h1 the fall season when the High School is using Section 1, they will limit Secti{m:; to practice only for younger age groups Monday through Thursday, 5:00-7:15 PM. The diagram sll ows @ne large field. They will either accommodate one large or eight small-sided fields for practi<k b the i commitments is a provision that they will meet with the representatives of the homeo ihers associations ap~roximately two weeks after the season t?s~e ho~everything went,.so'l~hey ~ould be able to make adjustments. The restroom and storage facIlItIes wIll be smgle-story and ~pproxImately I 1000 square feet with brick and wood exterior. The Dad's Club will be the manager oThe facility. Steve Brown, attorn~y, 5255 Longstone R~undabout, Carmel, member of the Carmel.nr~d's ~lub Board. He had expenenceas the Carmel CIty Legal Counsel. Normally the school bUlI~mg would be first and accessory to that Special Use would be these athletic fields. He showed a tl;1a~.19fth~ area. These fields would go with a school that may be built there in the future. He felt th~y Ha~d satisfied most of the neighbors' concerns. Section 21.01 in the Ordinance states that "Specia~ U~es sh<!.ll gene~ally be con.sidere~ favorabl!' by the Board except. in ca~es where .t~e Board fin~s frat prp~osed SpecIal ~se ~bvlOusly mappr?pnate as a result of SP~CIaI.unIque c,ondItIons." .~her9f01~ there IS a presumptIon In favor of SpecIal Uses. Along the WhIte RIver comdor are PraIne VleWiGOlf Course, Plum Creek Golf Course, P, arks, homes, River Glen Golf Course, so this is a consist!entuse fQr the corridor. Events at these facilities bring traffic to the area, not just the Dad's Club. The~r written commitments address many of the issues. They have worked hand~in-handwith the,Scftools for activities to benefit the children. ,j Jennifer Tenbarge, 11260 Williams Court, Carmel, President-elect of the Carmel Dad' I Club. She is a past President of Wood brook Elementary PTO and the current President of the Clay M~ddle School PTO showing that she is involved in the community and knows there have to be compr~mises along Page 3 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 the way, . The northern field is necessary even though it will only be used, for practice. I.~I r" actiC,e'fields are diminishing around town. There are expansions at Clay Middle School and Carmel Lutheran church as well as all the element~ry schools, taking a~ay .appropriate prac~ice area&. .T~i.s will provided the safe and needed space for chIldren to develop theIr skIlls through practIce and sku'hushes. Public in Favor: David Stamps; 12560 Medalist Parkway, Carmel, Plum Creek Village. Their concerns were not about the basic use, but the extent of the use of the facility,and traffic on Medalist Parkway. I hey were also concerned with congestion, safety, noise and general pollution. They met with the ]>eti~llidnerlon March I I 17 at Prairie Trace Elementary. They were given verbal commitments at that time and,lhave Sin, ce received written ones to show what was agreed upon. He thanked everyone for workink witq' them. They had posted drafts of th~ proposals on th~ Plum Cre~k Village web site and tried t~ ma~e people aware. They want the commItments recorded m NoblesvIlle. On behalf of the ad hQC crmmIttee, the Plum Creek Village Homeowners Association believes their concerns have been addr ksed and they no longer oppose the proj ect. Omer Stocker, 5942 McKinges Circle, Carmel. He has been involved on behalf of so . ,e of the neighbors in the Prairie View Homeowners Association. He had met with various peo~1e and he felt they did a good ~ob of ~swering his questions. Their maj~r concern had ?een about tbJp development along the west sIde of RlVer Road. Late today he had receIved the CommItments by thb Carmel Dad's CIU~ to reduce the number of parking spaces redU~ing the use of the ~eldS on the nort1 side. I . DavId Cutshaw, 1209 Helford Lane, Carmel, PresIdent ofCarmelUmted Soccer TI1aV~lCIUQ. (Members of the club also stood at the podium area.) Their use of the fields is coorclin~ted through Carmel Dad's Club, Many ofthe players come up through the ranks to the Carmel High School State Championship teams and on to college with scholarships. . Haley Anderson (youth) stated that theylove soccer and hoped the fields would be built so that they would have more room to practice and play. Mr. Cutshaw. asked everyone in attendance from Carmel Dad's Club and Carmel Uhit ,d Soccer who were in support of the petition to stand. David Burkert, 5777 Gyrfalcon Place",Carmel. He moved back to the Carmel area 5 y ,ars ago because ofthe schools and the opportunities his three daughters would have to participate in at~hetic opp'ortunities. This is about a few hours out of a few weeks that the fields would beusjiJd. lIe had been asked if he lived across from these fields would he be for it and his answer was unequ+ocally "Yes, he would." He lives across the street from the Badger fields. Every Saturday it is a litHe I ~ud and there is a little bit of traffic, but it is an opportunity for kids to play. Remonstrance: Organized Tom Gjerde, 5406 Zoeller Circle, Carmel, Plum Creek ~idge Homeowners Associqtiol~' The~are opposed to the hammerhead at the end of Lochmere Dnve. He also has two daught~rs !J:1nd can S,ympathize with the Dad's Club. The, issue is intensit,y of use. The" D, ad's Club does ofl~r a CdJ., st benefit to the community, but this is about a specific use by the Dad's Ch.:lb. He talked about Shelbome fields ands~adger field being developed be~ore the sub~ivisions ~ere put in. T~e area betwe9r.126th ~nd 131 ,Street and Hazel Dell Parkway IS very heavIly populated. It was pOInted out thatlh.Is use IS consistent with the golf courses in the area. High School fields would be a fine use for I!he area, but Page 4 of 15 Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 . there is already traffic that goes along with golf outings and the fields at Hazel Del~ P I!fk. This would . ... ... be ad~ing to that traffic. They w~re conce~ed about tr~ffic and prop.ert~ values. H~ h~~ a chart showmg the number of cars commg and gomg for the SIX fields. He mdIcated there: co~ld be 420 potential cars in the area at the same time and up to 560 cars an hour circulatin~ ar~unFrthe proposed area. With a continuous traffic flow, the roundabouts on Hazel Dell Parkway wIll b:ac~ll.lp. The previous gentleman chose to move beside Badger Field, but he selected Plum Creek: ~dge because there was n'ot a lot of congestion. Plum Creek Ridge is landlocked by 126th and 131ist Sltreets and it will make it difficult to get in and out. He felt that would affect property values because! no lone would want to move into the area. The primary issue is the intensity of use and the option would bl' for the Schools I to go ahead with use, but not the Dad"sClub. . Remonstrance: General public Bill Foley, 5946 McKinges Circle, Carmel, Chapman's Claim. This is not about pro 0 I anti sports. Families with, children would be willing to buy property near a soccer field. But Chap!: an's Claim is mostlY. an, ~,,~Pty n~ster n~ighborho~d a~jo, ininga golf course. The park gets a littleJro III d"y, W, i, th the rugby, but It IS a faIrly qUIet, tranqUIl neIghborhood. A school would be an appropIiatd use for the I I' property. Parking lots and restrooms are not good selling points for a home. Everyo'ne~s familiar with the traffic at Badger field. He did not move into his neighborhood with the intention t91 move into that type of neighborhood. He knew this decision could be changed later, so if there are:no~ enough parking spaces now they could be added. But once it is a high-intensity sports field that's what it would stay. . Carolyn Stocker, 5942 McKingesCircle, Carmel, Chapman's Claim. Her husband pre~ented earlier in t, avor of the petition, but she is agains,t the 131 st Street area traffic. She did not feel all1,1he homeowners : '~I knew about this project, such as Moffitt Farms, part of Chapman's Claim and Brooks ~anding. After the March 17th meeting at Prairie Trace, she walked about half the neighborhood and gbt signatures of residents opposed to the usage and the Board should have, a copy of that list. Charles Shoop, 13045 Abraham Run, Carmel, Chap~an's Claim. He has been a Carm;l~l resident for about 38 years and he was concerned about the area east of Vestal ditch on River Roa J Soccer is not an issue, but Chapman's Claim was there first believing the zoning would be low dens~ty single family housing. He was concerned about the noise, traffic and housing values and no one in Ohapman's Claim would be using those soccer fields. Rebuttal: Mr. McMichael stated that Caffilel Schools appreciated the concerns of the neighbors ,nd recognizes the project would bring more traffic to the neighborhood. He believed they had shoWnlk good faith effort to try to minimize that as much as possible. He knows it would be less controver! ial if the School Board had elected to use it just for School use. However, he thought the Board bf Trustees felt that the comm~ty had invested severa~ m~llion dollars in the propert~ and it was nfe Fd not o~ly for School use, but It would also benefit a sIgnIficant number of commumty members. 'J'h~y regret It may be a negative on the part of some of the immediate neighbors, they will try their best iihe Dad's Club has demonstrated that they are sensitive to the neighbors and tried to balance that with I upervised recreational activity. ' Mr. Brown stated that homes in Avian Glen that surround the State softball site behind Cherry Tree, . move very rapidly in resale. There are precedents all over the City where these kind.s of uses exist harmoniously with each .other an~ it doe~n't s~em to have an impact in those nei~bor~loods on property values. Traffic IS becomIng an Issue In all parts, of Carmel. He thought RIver, oad Vo/as slated Page 5 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 for widening with the potential of another school in the future. Not all neighbors ar~ i agreement with their neighborhoods, but he felt they had worked with the surrounding neighbors. Ihe~are a non-profit group and if they invest the dollars they need to know they will be able to use the fiel~S. They have substantially cut back the hours of usage and submitted a parking plan involving u~ifo! traffic direction. If a school were there, there would be other uses at different times that woull! not be listed in commitments.' They have done a lot to substantially restrict the use of the site. I Mrs. Conn gave the Department Report. The Report sited only the main concerns t~at' ere brought up at th~ last meeting. The Department has a concern about th~ .Petition~r co~mitting to 11 date to install the sIdewalks and paths. The Department recommends posItIve consideratIon oftht? d ckets after all concerns have been addressed. Mr. Broach asked for details regarding the parking lot and comparison with the numb of fields at Badger and Shelborne and the number of corresponding parking spaces. Mr. Zboyovsky stated the 92-space parking lot at the northern field had been elimiriateitl. Mr. Little stated that Badger field has 10 soccer fields, 2 lacrosse fields and 2 baseball].~elds, but he was not sure ofthe number of parking spaces. At Shelbome there are 13 soccer fields ind a gravel lot is used. Mr. Dierckman asked about Carmel United Soccer and the agreement. Mr. Little stated that it is the premier travel soccer program in Carmel. The Dad's Clu1 offers recreational soccer. They partner for use of the facilities on the we,.st side. There is an dkportunity that they may use these fields. They are not a party in the commitment, but the hours ofusJj were listed so that no matte,r who was using the fields, the hours of availability are set. Therefore thel,le, Will.."be no stacking of fields. 1.. Mr. Dierckman felt they should be a part of the agreement if they are using the fiel4s. . I e wa~ under the impression it was the Carmel Dad's Club and the School using the fields. I ' Mr. Little reported that they were not introducing another party, but showing that the Dad's Club ~upports a lot o.f organizations. They were ~howing how ~e kids were cross-tied to otHI~r organizations m the co~umty; Dad's C~u.b, Carmel Umte~ and the HI~ ~chool teams. If there a n '~ed f~r the Carmel UnIted Soccer to utIlIze those fields, It would be wIthIn the parameters of tHe ciDmmltments. Mr. McMichael wanted to make it clear that the relationship was between the carm~l~ad's Club and the Schools and part of that agreement was that the Dad's Club was recognized as the ,Jarty to manage the field. A part of that management requires that the School Corporation has first righJs to the use of the property and then the Dad's Club. Any other use ofthe property requires use appro II al by the Dad's Club. Carmel United Soccer's relationship is with the Dad's Club. Mr8 Dierckman was not comfortable with that relationship. He alsp had concerns abiou the number of other soccer fields and the parking related to that. He wanted to se~ Mr. Gjerde's grapH with the number of cars using the area and hear Mr. Little's rebuttal. Page 6 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 Mr. .Littl~ sta~ed that they do not do st~tistics on the number of cars coming in and ~ut pf the: facilit~. TheIr estImatIon on ea, ch of the fields IS 15, cars per team, so 30 c~rs per field. On a,thi~,fe, -,' fie]d rotatIon at thirty minute increments 90 to 180 cars rotating in, the parking on the southern end ihould more than accommodate the traffic. The north end is small-sided fields for younger age grobs, so they are not teams of 10-15, but 4-6 kids usually primarily for practice, so possibly 80 cars ~h aid out at that location. ! I . Mr. Gjerde showed his graph again. He showed 180 cars on the south field and 80 ~n te north field which had been reported earlier at 10?~ So that's 280 cars per hour,.' divided in halqs 11f,O at S"ta:t time of the day, then 140 at the next start tIme. At the first three game tImes (8:00, 8:30 andll~:oO)WIth overlapping there would be 420 cars each hour. Each half hour there would be 140 [eahng and another 140 arriving. Using Mr. Little's numbers it would be 260 each half hour for a total or 120 each hour. Mr. Zboyo.vsky stated there were 300 par~ing spaces. in the s~uth area wit~ an overpofon tl)le grass for approxImately 100. They are also lookmg at possIbly addmg overflow m the north1rn area as well. The traffic officers will be off-duty professional officers. Mr. Hawkins asked the Department if they had an opportunity to look at the agreemen I and was it generally acceptable or did it come in too late to be reviewed. Mrs. Conn state, d that personally sh~ had not had ti~e to f~lly review it. She receive, d ].I~a COU,' pIe of hours before the meetmg. It seems lIke the unorgamzed neIghbors and the Carmel DaJrs Club have come to some sort of an agreement. It is up to the Board ifthey want to accept it or ha ! e some changes made. Mr. Hawkins asked about any improvement to River Road. Mrs. Conn thought there was something slated either this year or next year. Mr. Hawkins asked <about the sidewalks and paths and crossing a creek that ,can notiha.re a bridge. He was concerned about the kids' safety. He wanted to know the time frame and the delinl~tion on the site. Mr. Zboyovsky stated the asphalt sidewalks will run around all the borders of the prop irty and they were asking for a delay to when the northern fields are constructed. Mr. Hawkins pointed out that one of the remonstrators' stated that there is always a heen for something down the road. There seems to be a need already for overflow parking. Maybe this is tl~O intensive of a use for what is currently planned. Mr. Zboyovsky stated the overflow parking was a recommendation from the Planning Department. Mr. Broach wanted to r~view the site again. In the southern portion t~ere were six fiel1l with a parking lot. He wanted to know Ifthere were any structures south ofthe parkmg lot. He also wAnted to know about the buffer area between the fields and the adjoining neighborhood and the hamml!brhead. Mr. Zboyovsky stated there were no structures south of the parking area. The approxi~Le 20-foot buffer would be landscaped. At the present time, one of the roads dead ends he thoughl to provide Page 7 of 15 . '. . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 access to a future housing area. At the request of the City, they were providing the ha I merhead turn around. I Mr. Broach asked if there was fence or anything to prevent people from parking in the neighborhood and walking over. I Mr. Zboyovsky stated the subject had been brought up but there was nothing at this time. Mr. Dierckman asked about the north section and its parking. Mr. Zboyovsky stated that at this time the plan was to eliminate the northern 92 par-ki g spaces and leave the remaining 108 spaces for a total of 300 parking spaces. It is a single soccer fl~ld that can be broken into eight. Mr. Hollibaugh discussed the River Road improvements. The City has applied for Fed; ral funds as part of a larger propo.sal, inc1u?ed in the, bill that is bel,. ng discussed betwee~ the J:IO,~s~ an', d th" e Senate. They do not have a hIghway bIll yet, so they do not have the money yet. It IS a pnont~lfor th~ Mayor similar to River Road north of the roundabout. The sharp angle would be smoothedou~. The 'City . already has right-of-way that was obtained when the golf course was installed. There }ill be ,a roundabout ,:here Medalist and River Road wou!d intersect an~ ~hen the bo~levardcr1ss sec~ion . would bebUllt between the roundabout at MedalIst andwhere It mtersects WIth 116th ~~reet. tie felt If the Citydid not receive Federal Funds, it was still a high priority. The Mayor has a nrnhber of roadway improvement projects that will be funded through future bond issues for the annexatiol areas in the west. This project could get wrapped into one of those. Worst timing would be 3 ye:ars from now, but it would likely be sooner. Mr. Zboyovsky stated the sidewalks were planned when the north field was built. The,: outhern portion will be constructed immediately up to the driveway entrance. The remaining will be c .hstructed when Phase 2 begins. The plans for the restrooms have been submitted. They will be brick. Mr. Dierckman felt this was one-third too intense of a use given the number of parkin I spaces and other uses in the area. His vision would be 4 fields to the south and 4 on the northern plart. He felt they did not give sufficient rebuttal for the parking analysis. The remonstrators had present,ld a good case for the intensity of the use and impact on the area. He reminded them it would take 3 votes for approval. He thought they might want to table to work out the intensity. It was obviou there would be a parking problem and a lot of traffic. It is also obvious these fields are needed. Mr. Hawkins agreed with Mr. Dierckman. He appreciated they had a commitment Jnd~ad worked on the process, but ~e felt there were a lot of unanswered q~estions ~d some other plans 1~ey had not seen. He would lIke the Department to have an opportumty to reVIew the agreement. Siccer fields seem to be a good use for this piece of land, but he was not certain this plan was haw hious to the community around it. Mr. Broach agreed. Discussion followed regarding the parking spaces and the number of fields at the site. Page 8 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 Mr. McMichael stated they would ask for it to be tabled. The reason for the six fields as to replace the ones the schools were losing. Mr. Dierckman stated that was not the issue. But the agreement needed to be worked out with the Dad's Club and other clubs. Mr. Hawkins' issue was the sidewalks and paths and people walking from the nort~e portion to the south. I I I I Mr. McMichael stated there was no intention for the program on the north side of tfu.e ~reek to have anything to do with the program on the south. The south parking tot should support] th il six fields. The games will be staggered so that initially the first three games would bring 90 cars 10 the ~ite. At the end of that game the next 90 cars will begin to come in, so there will be some over Ilap in the cars coming and going. If all six were used at the same time, there would be 180 cars. At t ~. City's request, they, are showing P, rovisions for off-pavement parkin, g. If it would be 0, f i,nterest to th" e ~,: :oard) they would be willing to pave more parking, but they would really not want to pave more Pfking: than needed. The Schools would not be satisfied with having consistent parking in the ~as~1 and would be happy to pave it as part ofthe commitment. They would not want the project to be vot1d down, not have practice fields. Mr. Brown stated that Carmel Dad's Club gets to use the field through a written agree luent with the S,ChOOIS for U, se and, management rights. With the agreement with the home, owners, !th~llY,i h, av~ worked out for hypothetically 50 hours of use per week. If they let Carmel United use some ofl~hose 50 hours, then that is that many fewer hours of use for the Dad's Club. It would not be Dad's 'Clmbuse:and additional use by Carmel United. I Mr. McMichael asked if approval could be given for development of the six fields for he School's use 'and not approval at this point for the Dad's Club usage. Then the Dad's Club could,co~e back for approval. Mr. Molitor stated that the petitioner could amend their petition to lessen the usage for ~he School system. It needs to be initiated by the Petitioner. Mr. McMichael stated they would amend their petition to provide for the school's use :~fthe property and come back for the usage by the Dad's Club. Mr. Dierckman moved to approve as amended by the Petitioner Docket Nos. 0501004 'SU and 05020006 V, Carmel/Clay Schools, Soccer Fields at River Rd, for utilization by the ICannel School System. The motion was seconded by Mr. Broach and APPROVED 3-0. Mr. Molitor stated that the commitments should be revised to indicate use only by thefarmel/Clay School System and the provisions referring to the Carmel Dad's Club would be stricke~. (This was noted on the ballots.) Also, he assumed the vote carried instructions to him and the Sta1fto revise the commitments submitted by the Petitioner in line with the discussion. He will pursue th~t and have it executed by the Petitioner and have it recorded. Page 9 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 A five minutes recess was taken. The Petitioner for Items 3-7h requested to be last because he was still at the Plan C?m I ,ission Committee meeting in the Caucus Room. i Ih. Mohawk Crossing, Sec 4, Lot 94: Suder pool I The applicant :seeks the following development standards variance approv,l: Docket No. '05030008 V Chapter 25.01.0 1.C.8.a pool's side yard se :back The site is located at 4925 Jennings Dr. and is zoned S-l/Residence. Filed tby I s. Kim Suder. I Present for the Petitioner: Rick Suder, 4925 Jennings Drive, Cafl11.el. They are looking for a Felieffrom the side yard setback for the installation of a pool. They are restricted by the 65-foot stl' OIl water retention easement. Trying to keep away from Gray Road, the only place left for the p ,101 is where their patio and deck are currently located. Pictures of the site were shown. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition: no II ne appeared. Mrs. Conn gave the Department Report. Considering that most of the rear yard is take .I~ up by the 65- foot drainage and utility easement, it makes sense to place the pool where they have pli~posed. The Department recommends, positive consideration. Mr. Hawkins asked if the neighbor next to the pool had any objections. Mr. Suder stated they did not and they could even build on their property. M, r. Dierckman,moved to approve Docket No. 05030008 V, Mohawk Crossing, Sec I, Lot 94: Suder pool. The motion was seconded by Mr. Broach and APPROVED 3-0 by a verbal vote (Paperwork was signed later.) 11-13h. 1301 S. Range Line Road - Commercial Building The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approvals: .1 Docket No. 05020040 V Chapter 19.04.02 building set ack Docket No. 05020041 V Chapter 27.07.02-09.b number/type!signs Docket No. 05020042 V Chapter 27.05 number p:arkil.ng spaces The site is located at 1301 S. Range Line Rd. and is zon,ed B'-8/Business, no. WWII . ithin the Carmel Dr/Range Line Rd Overlay. i Filed by E. Davis Coots of Coots Henke & Wheeler forthe Fineberg Group, LC. Present for the Petition.er: Dave Coots, 255 ~armel Driv.e, Carmel. Two ofthe variapc~l ~e made necessary by the adoptlOn of the Carmel Dnve/Range Lme Road Overlay Zone. Th1s ptoJect commenced six months prior to the initial passage of that Ordinance. The setback v~dhce islmoot by the adopted Overlay Zone. However, since they have the application pending and td c1bfy th.e record, they would like it to be considered at this meeting. He was asked to provide a site p1anlkhowing the 25- foot setback per the old Ordinance and the present proposal for the new building. In kebping with the pedestrian-friendly urban design for this site, they have been asked to move the buirdin~ to Carmel Drive and Range Line ~o~d eleva~ion~ and insert the parking and courtyard behi~d thel~uildi~g t? the south and east of the bUIldIng to gIve It more of an urban appeal from Carmel Dnve an i Range LIne Page 10 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 Road. The building is proposed 15 feet off the Carmel Drive right-of-way and 15 feet II ff thei Range Line Road right-of-way. The second variance is for parking. The site provides 76 PfITk~Jng spa~es. Because they are doing a building that is partially two-story, it necessitates 106 parkin: spaces. The applic,ant owns Carmel Walk, the development immediately to the south and by a cros~1 parking agreeme~t, they ~elieve they will have more than adequate par~ing to the sou~h an~ thf unused prn:king area behmd the FIrst Merchants Bank, ' also a tenant of the apPhcan,., t. The parkmg e~seml! "ent rn, ns wIth the land and will be made part of the record. The third variance pertains to the sign:!tgejlon the second ~tory. The Sign Ordinance pe~its one si~ per te~~t per elevation: They seek to ~e Pfrmitted t~ mstall a second story tenant SIgn per the SIgn restnctIons of the Ordmance. The other Sl[gns are SIgnS that will face the rear ofthe building facing the parking area. They are asking that ~ac~ tenaI\t be permitted an eighteen square foot sign at their rear entrance toward the parking are~ tOllllhelP Customers locate the tenant within the development. They will not be visible from Range Line Road or tarmel Drive. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition: nOli)ne appeared. Mrs. Conn gave the Department Report. She asked Mr. Coots to elaborate on the bladl sign. The Department recommended positive consideration of all dockets. Mr. Coots stated that the facility had received Plan Commission ADLS approval. As apart of that process, they were requested to install a blade sign on the very corner of Range Line ~bad and Carmel Drive. The vertical two-sided sign will be used to identify the tenant on the first floor ~fthe lower corner. In addition, that tenant will have a wall sign on the Carmel Drive and the Rangb Line Road elevations. He felt they were asked to put it there to give the building an urban design. Mr. Broach stated that it was a very well done project. He had a question regarding the parking. He wanted to know if the parking lot was connected to Carmel Walk and customers could walk over if the parking lot was full directly behind the building. Mr. Coots stated there is a pedestrian walkway ~onnecting them along the west side o~~he . development, and then the customer could use eIther the rear entrance or walk around 10 the Range ,Line Road or Carmel Drive entrance. Mr. Dierckman agreed that it was a great project and a big improvement. Mr. Hawkins asked if the blade sign would replace the second story sign or just to affi (ill that there would be a blade sign. Mrs. Conn stated that it was to make the Board aware of the sign. ! Mr. Broach moved to approve Docket No. 05020040 V, 05020041 V and 05020042 rl~1301 S. Range Line Road - Commercial Building. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dierckman an~ all dQckets were APPROVED 3-0. 2h. Fidelity Plaza, Tower 3 The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval: Docket No. 05030015 V Chapter 26.04.05 bufferyard requir~ments Page 11 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 The site is located at 11590 N Meridian and is zoned B~6/Business and S-2/R",sidence. Filed jointly by Carmel DOCS and REI Investments. I i I : presen, t for the Petitioner: Mike Hollibaugh, Directo, r, Department" of Community Se j.' C, es (flQCS). For the past several months the City has been designing roadway improvements for 1116th Street, inclu~ing desi,gn and construction for I1~in~is Street as part of ~he :Clarian Hospital fro~llect. As a part of the CIty'S desIgn for 116th Street and Illm,Ols, they purchased nght,-of-way from RE,I ~v,estments. The City is encroaching on the land and parking owned by REI. As a part ofthe right-of-\\Jy sale, REI's lender was concerned about non-confonning issues created by the project. Therefol]e, ~he City was working with REI for a variance for the bufferyard. A map was shown of the area ~itHI the p1foperty lines. The bufferyard requirement along 116th Street is fifteen feet, but the City is ebcrtachi11ig onto three feet plus or minus. Along with the engineering components of these improveme ~s, the: City is creating a landscape plan for the streetscape of the median and roundabouts. I Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition: no re appeared. Mrs. Conn gave the Department Report. The Department recommends positive consid lration. Mr. Broach moved to approve Docket No. 05030015, Fidelity Plaza, Tower 3. The moton was seconded by Mr. Dierckman and APPROVED 3-0. A five-minute recess was taken while Mr. Shinaver was at the Plan Commission com ,idttee meeting in the Caucus Room. 3-7h. Companion Animal Hospital Applicant seeks use variance & development standards variance approvals I for veterinary hospital. Docket No. 04090009 UV Chapter 19.01 permitted uses Docket No. 04090010 V Chapter 27.05 number of parking S laces Docket No. 04090023 V Chapter 26.04.05 b~ffer yard requi~em~nts Doeket No. 04090024 ,r Chapter 19.01.03 side yard setbaolc$ ITHDRAWN Docket No. 04090025 V Chapter 19.04.02 front yard setback The site is located at 1425 S Range Line Rd and is zoned B-8/Business. Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson & Frankenberger for Dr. Buzzetti. Present for the Petitioner: Jim Shinaver, attorney, Shawn Curran, architect with Curran Architecture and Matt Maple, engineer with Roger Ward Engineering. The hospital is currently IPC]lted at 180 E. Carmel Drive. The site location maps were shown ofthe existing vacant building. 1ihe~roject has received Plan Commission and ADLS approval. These applications were filed befofe t Ii e Range Line Road Overlay was enacted. They have worked closely with the Staffto design a sitd thlh works with the intent ofthe new Overlay. B-8 Zoning does not pennit a veterinarian hospital. 1he l~llrrOtmding parcels that are zoned B-1, B-2 and B-3 all pennit a veterinarian hospital. This use is sfPported by the Comprehensive Plan because this area is low intensity regional community emPIOyme~lt. This use would be consistent with the surrounding businesses. Elevations of the building wer,e S,.! own. They were unanimously approved by the Plan Commission and the building was designed tolllcomply with the spirit and intent of the new Range Line Road Overlay. The Overlay requires thebui[ding to have second floor with occupant space. A portion of the second floor will have residential q#arters for a staff member to stay on site to care for any pets boarded in the facility. The remainder I! [the second Page 12 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 floor will be designed for storage and offices. The approved site plan calls for phase 1 and phase 2 developments for this site. A majority, of the existing ,structure Wil,l be utilized in Ph.as~ll and" would occur immediately. Since the building needs to be pulled closer to the front property, t J e Staff suggested phase 2. The phase 2 expansion takes up the western portion adjacent to Ral~ge Line Road. It was n~te~ that although ~ phase 2 exp~sion was shown, i~ is unlikely that Mr. Buzzeti~ would expand the bUIldmg any further IIi the future. Smce the,y h, aV,e outlmed the phase 2 developm,', e~.~t for th, e future, it prevents parking onthe western portion of the site. The one-acre site presents limita~~ons and constraints. He noted a couple of typographical errors on the Department Report. Theilrst one relates to the required number of parking spaces and the second to the bufferyard plant requirllments. Due to the square footage of the proposed bu~ld~ng, they are requi~ed to have 62 parki~g spac lis. ~he s~te plan that was approved by the Plan CommIssIon shows 29 parkIng spaces. They desIgne~ tll e sIte.wlth the Overlay in mind, W, hiC,h prohibits parking in front ofthe building 0, n the, western POft., ia,lr, of th: e site. If they could use that area, they would have an additional 15 to 1 7 parking spaces in thatlrrea. ]-1<;: believed the parking requirements in the Code did not necessarily translate to the use ;Jhd intent ofthe Overlay. The secon~ story ?~ occupant. space combined with the ph.ase 2 expansion ,wdlrld be 9500 squ~e feet and reqUIre addItIonal parkmg. If they were not attemptmg to co.~ply wIth ~e Overlay by addlng,the second story as well as the phase 2, they would not need the addItIonal parkbng spaces. They would like to keep the eastern portion of the site open for a fenced grass area so ~~at the pets could be taken outside periodically. However, Dr. Buzzetti has agreed to land bank:so~be of the eastern portion of the site for future parking which could result in 10 additional parking space l If cli'ents or residents complain about parking availability, then the Staff has the ability to send 1)odhe to the landowner that they un-bank the parking. This is not a high-volume veterinarian ho~pilk1. At the busiest time, he may have 5-10 employees on a shift. That would still leave 19 of the ~f spaaes available parking spaces for clients. They should treat 4 to 5 customers in a one-hoUr t~be period. Currently the bufferyard planting requirements would require approximately 26 sha:de .~~,ees, ~ 7 ornamental trees and 77 shrubs for the site. Because of the site constraints, the approv~r landscape plan from the Plan Commission includes ! 5 s~ade trees, 15 orn~ental tr~es with 63 dfcidu~us shrub~ and 56 evergreen shrubs. Too manyplantmgs m a small area wIll not survIve. The froJf yard'setback m this zoning classification is 25 feet. The phase 1 expansion will be 45 feet from the pr~berty line. H?wever, i~ ~hase ~. is constructed in the future, they are requesting a setback of zero iet to co~ply wIth the spmt and mtent ofthe new Overlay. The Staff requested that they respond to Jny negatIve impact associated with the outdoor area for the pets. This area is fenced for the protecdpn of the animals. They are not adjacent to any residential area, so occasional barking should: no j be an issue. Any fecal matter or waste will be immediately removed by the Staff, so there should n ~t be any odors. It is important in an operation like this to have a sanitary site and the staff be trained in hovv to take care of such samples. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition: no ne appeared. Mrs. Conn gave the Department Report. She confirmed that there were the two errors i! . the Department Report regarding the number of parking spaces and the bufferyard requIre !Ients. Mr. Shinaver stated the correct numbers. The landscape plan was approved by the Urban F'~restet. The Department recommends positive consideration of the 4 dockets. Mr. Broach asked for details for the commercial kennel for boarding. Mr. Shinaver stated that they may board 10 to 15 animals. He thought the boarding wa~ designed primarily for the animals that needed to stay over for treatment. There would be occ;asil! nal boarding Page 13 of 15 . . . Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 i for clients~ pets for vacations. He did not know exact numbers. If there was a concdrn, they could try to reach Dr. Buzzetti by cell phone. I . I Mr. Broach was concerned about the noise element. Shawn~urr~, Curran Architecture, 853 Co~or Street, NO?lesville, ~. The back rOI~i~n ofthe. kennel IS desIgned for kennel space for overnIght and occaslOnal boardmg. They are s~~n evaluatmg the area for size of runs. At the maximum, it would accommodate 20 to 25 animals. They ire allindoor runs. There is no outdoor access unless a pet is taken outside on a leash. The walls are bade pf load- baring concrete block to help mitigate the sound. ! Mr~ Shinaver noted that the site is surrounded by commercial activity. The closest r~esi 'ilentia] area is an apartment complex. Mr. Dierckman asked if they would be doing any procedures outside or what kind of s : mple~ would be collected. Mr. Shinaver stated there would be no procedures done outside and they would only b ;;~ collecting fecal and other waste. Mr. Hawkins asked if the building could be moved further west so that the parking wOlldn't ~e so constrained for any future use. I I Mr. Shinaver stated they were trying to maintain some of the existing structure for 60S reasohs and I I they had worked with Staff and Plan Commission. He stated the p1etitioner would agre'l to lamd bank for future parking. I Mr. Boach moved to approve Docket Nos. 04090009 UV, 04090010 V, 04090023 V and 04090025 V, Companion Animal Hospital. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dierckman. I Mrs.' Conn reminded the Board members to be specific with the location of the landl ba, on the ballot sheets. I Mr. Hawkins read the statement for the Tecord. The Petitioner will land bank at least 1011 additional parking spaces of typical size on the northeastern portion of the site. ' I All dockets were APPROVED 3-0. Mr. Molitor stated that with the Board's approval, he could draft a change for the Rttlef of Procedure that would make the handling of the signing of the Findings of Fact an easier procedur~. 8-10h. Office - Hahn Surveying The applicant seeks the following use variance and development standards 'var'lance approvals: Docket No. 05020030 UVChapter 6.01.01 permitted uses Docket No. 05020031 V Chapter 27.03.03 parking lot curbing Docket No. 05020032 V Chapter 26.04.05 buffer yard requir~mrtts The site is located at 9639 Haverstick Rd. and is zoned S-2/Residence. Page 14 of 15 Carmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes: March 31, 2005 . Filed by Mark Monroe of W oaden & McLaughlin for W &D Land Co, LLC. This item was TABLED to the next meeting due to lack of a quorum. Mr. Broach recu :ed himself for this item, leaving two Board members. 17h. TABLED l\1artin l\iarietta 1\faterials 1\fueller Propert)7 North Petitioner seeks speoia.l use approTlal to establish a sand/gra:v:el extraetion opertJltlon ort l04:i: aores, T,Ty"ith artifioiallake reola.mation. JII Doel(~t ~9. 05010021 SU Chapter 5.02 speoia] use in th~ S 1 ~one 'I The SIte IS 10eated at the Rerthwest earner ef Bast 106t1t 8treetand Hazel Dell ,arkway. The site is zoned S l,'Residenoe Low Density. Filed by' Zeff'~leiss orl06 Miller for 11artin 1farietta 11aterials, Ino. H. Old Business. . Ii. 5/Business T,~,ithin the US 31 QT.,:erlay. Filed b)p Sherry 1farohbanlcs of11azda Sign, Ino. for C~fC. J. New Business. There was no New Business. K. Adi Qum. Mr. Broach moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dierckman and AM"II PROVED 3-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 PM. . "I I // C\ .~''F.:: ~ James R. Hal! kins, President I .&~ Connie Tingley, Secr ary S:\Board of Zoning Appea1s\Minutes\B Minutes - 2005\bza200S-0331.rtf Page 15 of 15