Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING OFFICER: DEPARTMENT REPORT June 27,2005 Id. International Montessori Petitioner seeks the.following special use amend & development standards variance approvals: Docket No. 05050058 SUA ZO Cha.pter 21.02 expansion of special use Docket No. 05050059 V ZO Chapter5.04.03.F over 350/0 lot coverage The site is located at 2150 W. 96th St. and is zoned S-I/Residence - Very Low Density. Filed by Stuart Shade of SRS Architects. General Info: The petitioner seeks ~pproval to expand the school building with 2 building additions, a front walk, and to rotate the sign 90 degrees, so that it may be viewed more easily from the street. Analysis: The original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner will dedicate 96th Street right of way to the county. Lot coverage is determined by the percentage of paving and building footprint on the site. The site, as proposed will have 46% lot coverage, when the ordinance requires less than 35% in an S-l zoning district. The"lot coverage is in excess of 11 %. The Urban Forester has requested some updates to the landscape plan regarding buffer yard plantings on-site. The Department is requesting the dedication of road right of way as required by the Hamilton County Thoroughfare Plan. Findings of Fact: Special Use amendment 1. The premises in question is particularly physically suitable for the proposed Special Use because: the. original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by 1,695 square feet. 2. The SpecialUse will not injuriously or adversely affect economic factors, such as cost/benefit to the community and its anticipated effect on surrounding property values because: the original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by.l,695 square"feet. 3. The Special Use will be consistent with social/neighborhood factors, such as compatibility with existing uses and those permitted under current zoning in the vicinity of the premises under consideration and how the proposed Special Use will affect neighborhood integrity because: the original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by 1,695 square feet. A school is a compatible use with the residential uses surrounding it. 4. The Special Use will not injuriously or adversely affect the adequacy and availability of water, sewage and storm drainage facilities and police and fire protection because: the original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by 1,695 square feet and will not put a burden on utilities. 5. The Special Use will not adversely affect vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and around the premises upon which the Special Use is proposed because: the original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by 1,695 square feet. The increase in traffic will be minimal with parents dropping off their children in the morning and picking them up in the early evening. 6. The Board has reviewed the requirements of Ordinance Z-160, Section 21.03 (1-26) as they relate to this Special Use, and does not find that those criteria prevent the granting of the Special Use: the original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by 1,695 square feet. Findings of Fact: lot coverage 1.) The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because: the original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by 1,695 square feet. The proposed lot coverage percentage is 11 % greater than what the ordinance requires. 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 original special use was approved in 1996. The petitioner is expanding the building square footage by 1,695 square feet. The proposed lot coverage percentage is 11 % greater than what the ordinance requires. 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 petitioner will have to reduce the size of his building or reduce the paved parking area, possibly causing a hardship on patrons to the site/school. Recommendation: The Department recommends positive consideration of Docket No. 05050058 SUA and 05050059 V with the dedication of road right of way for 96th Street, as required by the Hamilton County Thoroughfare Plan.