Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes June 27, 2005 HO C~rmel Advisory Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing Officer JUIle 27, 2005 Page 5 ~f6 4d. Hahn & Associates' (Rear Parking Area) Petitioner seeks the ,following development standards variance approval: Docket No. 050300~7V ZO Chapter 27.03.02 curbed parking The site is located at the 2850 E 96th:St and is zonedS-2/Residence. Filed by Mark Monroe of Wooden & McLaughlin. P-resent for the:~~titioner: Mark Monroe and Frank 'Hahn, owner and developer of the site. They will be paving the rear,site'behind the office with no, curbing on the exterior'edge~ The parking lot will not be seen from the street. The storm water drains to the north to a swale through the site and into the office complex to the~~st. The' Urban Forester had sugge~ted' additional shade trees behind the existing parking. Mr~ Monroe shared .pictures of the mature trees onthe site and felt there was no need for additional landscaping. Mr.: Hahn pointed o'ut that the existing ,front p~rking,dpes not have curbing and drainage comes across to the catch basin:at the property line to the east. It goes to the pond in theb~ck of that property which was designed to take all the storm water in the area. Members of the public were invited to speak in favofQr opposition to the petition; no one appeared. Mrs. Conn gave the Department.Report. To not have curbing on this parking lot would aid in the drainage. However, the Urban Forester did recommend a planting strip adjacent to the parking area. He felt it would help with storm water control and shade for the ,parking area.; The Department recommended 'p()sitiv~ consideration with the condition that the Petitioner come to a compromise with the ,Urban Forester for the landscaping. Mr. Hahn stated the storm water drains to.the front or the back. There is no drainage to the side. The primary slope is to the rear of the lot. Mr. Monroe stated ,they had.had some discussions with the Urban Forester. Mr. Monroe did not feel the 'Urban Forester :,und,erstood the size and number of the existing trees. He felt there was no need for more trees. Mr. Hahn did not see how the trees would'help with the'drainage. Mrs. Conn brought up the email that had been received from a local homeowner concerning the lack of care given by Hahn & Asso'ciates to keeping their properties looking residential. The letter was shared with the Petitioner. Mr. Hawkins did nQt feel he could apply anything at this time. Mr. Hahn stated they had cleaned up the large dead tree that had been,taken down earlier. They would be in contact with the resident. Mr. Hawkins APPROVED Docket No 05030027, Hahn & Associates.