Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report CARMEL BOARD OF ZpNING APPEALS HEARING OFFICER: DEPARTMENT REPORT April 25, 20bs 3-6d. Wagner Reese & Crossen Petitioner seeks the following development standards vamance approvals: Docket No. 05010014 V Chapter 27.03.02 parking lot curbing Docket No. 05010015 V Chapter 23B.10.02.C(2) planting adjacent to building Docket No. 05030011 V Chapter 25.07.02-08.c sign area Docket No. 05030012 V Chapter 25.07.02-08.d sign height The site is located at 11939 N Meridian St, and the site is zoned B-6/Business within the US 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by Paul Reis of Drewry Simmons & Vomehm for Wagner Reese & Crossen LLP. General Info: The petitioner is requesting approval to eliminate curbs on the parking lot and reducing the 10-ft plantings at the building foundation from 10- ft to 0- ft. The site was formerly a residence, then a dental office, and has since then been converted into a law firm. Analysis: This parcel lies within the US 31 corridor and overly zone, which means that this property is highly visible by drivers. The image this property keeps contributes to passersby the image of Carmel. The property has three frontages, and signage will face two of the roads. The property sits lower than its adjacent roadways. Findings of Fact: parking lot curbing 1.) The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: I uncurbed parking aid in drainage/infiltration better than a curbed parking area, and it will help preserve a existing group of trees. 2.) The use and value of the area adjacent to the p~operty included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: I uncurbed parking will aid in drainage/infiltration better than a curbed parking area, and it will help preserve an existing group oftr~es. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property b~cause: The petitioner will have to provide curbed parkidg and subsurface drainage, which is not the optimum option for this residential-looking propertJy. 3.) Findings of Fact: plantings adjacent to building . 1.) The. approval of this variance will not .be injrtrious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community becaus~: the petitioner has provided landscaping on two sides of the building that faces US 31 and Old Meridian Street; this plan has been approved by the Urban Forester. I . The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner becJuse: I the petitioner has provided landscaping on two side of the building that faces US 31 and Old Meridian Street; the Urban Forester has approved this plan. The strict application of the terms of the zonilg Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property .because: The petitioner will have to provide landscaping) around the whole building, even where it cannot be seen from the major roads. 2.) 3.) Findings' of Fact: sign area and height 1.) The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: I the.property sits lowers than the streets, and the. ground signage height and wall signage area will aid in drivers identifying the site sooner, allowing for less last minute brake lights and quick turns off US 31, thus increasing drivers' saf~ty. The use and value of the area adjacent to the p~operty included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner becarse: the property sits lowers than the streets, and the ground signage height and wall.signage area will aid in drivers identifying the site sooner, allowing for less last minute brake lights and quick turns off US 31, thus increasing drivers' safJty. The strict application of the terms of the zoniJg Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of theprop~rty'because: The petitioner will have smaller signage, possibly causing a hardship to drivers trying to locate the site. The lower grade of the property may make signs seem.lower the ground and smaller. 2.) 3.) Recommendation: The Department recommends positive consideration of Docket Nos. 050100141V and 05010015V, 05030011V and 05030012 V.