HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings of Fact/Agenda/Minutes •
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COW'IITTEE •
MINUTES'
April 20, 1989
Committee Members Present; • Wes Bucher- , Dir. Dept. of Community
Development; Rick Brandau, Dept . of Community Development; Dave
Cunningham, Dept . of Community Development, Charlie Eldridg.e,.
•
Indpls. Power & Light; John South, Tom Schellenberg, Soil;
Conservation; Stan Puckett, Carmel Fire Dept; Tanny Triplett,
Indiana Bell, Randy Powell, Carmel Engineer' s Office; Roger King,.
PSI ; Barry McNulty, Hamilton Co. Health Dept.
CARMEL LUTHERAN
Committee to consider Docket No SU 32-89, a Special Use
Application and also a variance for height for Carmel Lutheran
Church located at 131st St . and Gray. Rd. Petitioner wishes to
construct an addition to the existing facility. Property is zoned
5-1
Petitioners Present:
Thor Miller, Atty rep. Carmel Luth. , Kalevi Hultilainen, architect
Comments : .
1) Signage variance request will be withdrawn. •
2) Swale along. 131st St needs to be. addressed from discharge
pipe to point where -water. goes into adjoining
subdivision;• proper elevation and slope,, regrading,
erosion- control, etc, a distance of approx 250' .
3) Mechanical equipment and dumpster will be screened with
a wall that will match building exterior, details will
be added to plans .
4) New lighting plan will comply. with . 1 • fo.otcandle at
property line, need lighting fixture detail .
5 ) TAC would request that sidewalks would be installed along
131st and Gray Rd with this project .
6) Parking lot should be curbed, but must be done in
conjunction with potential drainage changes, OR
petitioner must seek variance .
7) Need 5 additional copies of statement of request and.
statement of practical difficulty.
8) Petitioner will dedicate 30 ' half R/W on 131st and
40 'half R/W of Gray. •
9) TAC, asked Church to consider vacation of property line
that divides the property .
10) Need to install a 3" PVC conduit for phone service.
11) Show seeding plan and schedule for landscaping.
12) Need revised site plan .
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the TAC
and found to be satisfactory pending the above concerns being
addressed.
I
Page 2
•
•
BAS.TIAN MATERIALS
Committee to consider Docket No . SU 26-89 , a Special Use
Application for W.A.. - Bastian II, to be located on: the northeast
portion of Association Court, within the Bauer Commercial. Park,
Carmel . Petitioner is, seeking approval to construct an
office/warehouse facility of 9, 042 sq, ft . of office and 8 , 056 sq.
ft .- of •warehouse area.. Parcel is zoned B-3 .
and
Committee to also. . consider Docket. No. V277-8;9-, ' a. Developmental
Standards Variance .Application for W..A-. Bastian and his business
• Bastian Material Handling Corp. Petitioner is requesting variances
from Sections 14 . 1 and 3 . 6 to allow- a reduction in the required
number of parking spaces, . from 53 to 43 and as the contract
purchaser to waive requirement to plat the property.
Petitioners= Present:
Rick Conner, Paul Meyers, Dick Hoover, Archs; Bill Bastain,, owner
Comments :
. 1) Petitioner will reconstruct. discharge• pointy of .Bauer Park
pond, install rip-rap, and to clean up drainage area from
site to 96th Street..
2) Man-hole (storm structure #5 ) will be a 6 ' pre-cas't Man-
hole-
3 ) Agreed to participate in shared maintenance Of the Bauer
Park drainage facility (letter on file) .
4) Petitioner has agreed to request variance to require
• plat, petitioner has. agreed to the condition that parcel
will not be split for further development, such document
to be recorded.
. 5) Utilities shall not be in same trench (water & PSI ) .
6) PSI (? ) will serve parcel .
. 7) . Need Carmel BPW approval for curb cuts and sewer
availability.
8) Indy Water will serve parcel .
9) Petitioner will need to provide new set of plans for TAC,
- specifically new pages C-1, C-2 .
10) DOCD staff needs legal clarification on legal. notice to •
• adjacent property owners . -
11). Conduit for telephone will have to be provided, may
possibly be in conjunction with PSI .
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the. TAC
and found to be satisfactory pending the above concerns being
addressed. •
- r
•
• Pare 3
'KENS,I.NGTON
Committee to consider. SU 1.9:-89 , a Special Use Application for
Kensington Development Corp. and their condominium project located
on the south side. of Smokey Row. Road just east of Old Meridian,
Carmel . Petitioner-' is- requesting special use approval to allow the
existing structu`re- to. be sold as individual dwelling units . Parcel
is zoned R-4 . .
and
Committee also to consider Docket No V 20-89, a Developmental
Standards Variance application for Kensington Development Corp.
and their condominium project. Petitioner is requesting variances
from `sections 10, 5. 2, 10 . 5 . 3 , 10 . 5 . 4, 10 . 5 . 5 , 10 .5 . 9, and 23 ..01 . 9
of the- Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow a front yard reduction
from 25 to 5 feet, a side yard reduction from 5 feet to 0, a side
yard aggregate reduction from 10 feet to 0-, a. :rear yard reduction
from 20 to 15 feet,, a lot coverage increase from 40% to 50%, and
a lot size reduction requiring 5 acres for the U.S. 31 Overlay
Zone,. respectively.
Petitioners Present:
Steve Harlow, Atty, ; Ken Sebree, owner
Comments :
1) Petitioner must take legal steps. to make this change,
process will involve several steps .
2) If approved., must have new primary plat and secondary
plat, then legal documents must be filed to eliminate
Horizontal property act, and then establish new
subdivision..
3 ) All previously approved plans will remain the same, but
project be reviewed when plats are filed..
4) DOCD will review covenants to work with developers to
protect future property owners .
5) • Petitioner requested to deliver new set of plans to TAC
members, will be reviewed at May TAC committee .
6) Will submit site plans and extra copies of documents
prior to- meetings .
7 ) Site plan needs to show:
lot sizes, sidewalks, lot width on 10, 11, 12 .
8) Address DOCD, concerns see letter 2-22 (RB) and 2-13
letter (DC) .
9) Identify on site plan the US 31 Overlay zone .
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the TAC
and found to be satisfactory pending the above concerns being
addressed.
ORCHARD CROSSING, SECONDARY PLAT
Committee to consider a Secondary Plat Application for Orchard
Crossing. Site isc located at the northwest corner of 106th and
Westfield Blvd. Plat consists of: 2:5 lots on 13 . 8' acres of:. land.
Petitioners P:resent: . .
Jack_ Southerland and Bill Graut, Schneider; Dick ..Huffman
Comments :
.1) Need to show additional erosion control on slopes over
2% grade .
2.) Petitioner needs to address off-site drainage with. Kent
Ward.
3 ) Will tie in existing drain tiles .
4) Need to hook in 12 tile that comes across parcel .
5) The facilities will be regulated .drain.
6) Must show' utility easement on lot 11, 20, 21 .
7 ) Hydrant location are fine..
S) Will change street name to. Hill Valley Court (from Valley
Ct)
•
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the TAC
and found to he satisfactory pending the above concerns being
addressed.
LARKSPUR PHASE 2,, SECONDARY PLAT
Committee to consider a Secondary Plat Application for Larkspur-
Phase II . Site is located at the southeast corner of 116th and
Shelbourne Rd. and is zoned S-1 .- Plat consists .of 13 lots on 1.6 . 1
acres .
Petitioners Present:
Jack Southerland, Schneider
Comments :
1) Sub-surface drainage required on all lots .
2) Fence off both septic field areas .
3) Individual lot review' will be required for septic systems .
4) Add inlet between structures 214 and 215 .
5 ) Drainage facilities will be regulated.
6) All sub-surface drain tile needs to add risers .
7) All storm water outlets into John' Osborne legal drain..
8) Add hydrant between 23 & 24, 20 & 21, and at corner of
Shelbourne and Larkspur.
•
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the TAC
and found to be satisfactory pending the above concerns being
addressed.
•
, •
•
• •
• PP-ge, • • .
• . , •
CLAYBRIDGE AT SPRINGMILL, SECONDARY PLAT. •
Committee to consider Secondary Plat Application for Docket No 36-
89 S.P. , Claybridge at Springmill . Plat consists of 55 lots on 68 •
acres of land and is zoned S-1. Proposed site is located 1/2 miie:
south of 131st St on the east side of Clay Center Rd. •
Petitioners Present:
George Sweet, Ursel Cox' (Sweet & Co) , Darrell Edwards (Cripe) , Jim
Nelson, Atty. '
Comments : •
• 1) Person will be on-site during home construction for
clean-up.
2) R/W have been staked to take into consideration location
of all hardwood trees to preserve all possible trees in
the Southwest corner of the property- •
3 ) Access to lift station will be allowed at all •times to
Clay Regional Waste .
. 4) Met with Co. Hwy regarding paying bricks at entrance,
• maintenance will be responsibility of Homeowners Assn..
5) Landscape exhibit for entrance area will be provided..
• • 6) Drainage facilities will be regulated.
7) Need permission to outlet in Almond Ditch, show easement .
8) Maintenance of common lake area will be addressed in
coVenants .
9) Lake area as part of Elliot drain needs to be reviewed
by Kent Ward_
10) MOund will be -1 ' to 4 ' in height, will be installed with
proper drainage.
11) Show proper sub-sOrface drainage on plat.
12) Address drainage ,from gutters in testr±otions .
13) Need to provide individual 4" PVC piping to all utilities
across pipeline.
14) PSI want additional easements for certain lots (list to
•
be provided) .
• 15) Easement wall be provided for utility lines as per PSI
requests .
16) Need revised, covenants to be filed With DOCD.
17 ) Need ,above changes and committments to be filed.
18) Fire. Dept has approved.
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the TAC
and found to be' satisfactory pending the above, concerns being
addressed.
•
Page 6
KLAIN •
Committee to consider Docket. No. V-23-89, a Developmental Standards
Variance Application for Sarann- H. Klain and her property located
at 10646 Walnut Creek West ;D:ri,ve,Carmel . Petitioner is requesting
a variance from Section 5 .3 .2 and 25. 2. 7 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning
Ordinance to allow for only three sides of a swimming poo-1 to be
fenced and to allow a fence to encroach into an approved
subdivision retention/detention drainage facility easement : : Parcel
is- zoned" S-1 .
Petitioners Present :
Sarann Klain
Comments
1). Petitioner needs to furnish a hold harmless agreement .
2) • Co:. Surveyor believes the fence would not 'impede the flow .
of water.
3 ) Consensus of TAC members feel fence should not be located
in the easement.
4) If variance is granted, how far should the fence extend
into the easement?
TAC recommends that the fence/fencing not (encroach into any.
drainage easement.
TARGET
Committee to consider Docket No 26-89 ADLS, an Architectural
Design, Lighting and Signage Application for a 15, 000 square foot
addition for the TARGET store located at Keystone Square . The
addition is to be located west of existing building. Site is zoned
• B-8 .
Petitioners: 'Present :
Stan Neal, Weihe; Beau Wilfong, owner
Comments:
1) Petitioner will get set of plans to CFD and shall discuss
their requests .
2) Drainage to be approved by City Engineer' s office .
• 3) Lighting detail shall be shown and comply with ordinance .
4) Landscaping plan will be presented to staff for the West
elevation of the addition.
5) Curbing was not required`on road to be .installed at rear
of Target as approved by Carmel Bd of .Works.
16) Owner will present letter about commlttments to planned
improvements to Keystone ,Square Center including facade,
signage, circulation and parking changes .
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the TAC
and found to be satisfactory pending the above concerns being
addressed.
page .
• •
CARTER, JACKSON: _
• Committee to consider Docket No 28-89 FP/ADLS, a Final Plat and
Architectural Design; Lighting and Signage Application for Carter
Jackson, Carmel SCi, 84. Tedh Park, Petitioner wishes to construct
a 70, 064. square foot building to house a recreational,. sport's
• facility.
- petitionerS:Present :
. . _ .
Steve, Morris, Carter: Jackson, *Jim Nelson, AttyrChris White, Cripe
Comments : ,-. •
II EntranCe Off Carmel_ Dr will be shared, entrance with
property to the South.
2) Signage to Meet. City sign ordinance .
3 ). RoUte, fOr Utility service need: to be determined.
. 4) 'Need parking, summary for development.
Detail of mechanical equipment screening and trash
enclosure heeds to be shown.
.6) Detail:. of roll curb should. be Shown.
7) "LOading dock area -Should •be shown,
B1 Sidewalks will be put in to the east to connect with the
'walks: at Guilford, requested walks . to be. put in td the
SOUth and east along Carmel Dr when adjOining . parcel
• comes, in, mill install walks on property to North edge
of site along Clark St,
9) QED had queStions on location' of hydrantS, Sprinkling of
building, number of curb cuts, parking in front of
building, occupancy level .
10) COntern for entrance' onto' .Carmel -Drive, suggest entrance
to be off Clark, with shared consenting access to parcel
to the South..
II) .Requested participation in light at. Carmel Dr and Clark
If such need demonstrated and requested by City.
12) Material to be dtiv-it.
The technical aspects of this, Project, have been reviewed by the TAC
and foil/1d 'to be satisfactory pending the above. concerns being
addressed.
S.T. VINCENTS
COmmittee to consider Docket No. 29-89 ADLS (Amend) , an
Architectural Design, Lighting and: Signage Application for St .
, Vincents Hospital. Petitioner seeks approval for, a temporary
diagnostic facility to be, located on the southeast aide of the
existing St, Vincent' s HoSpital .
Petitioners. Present :.
None
Comments,:
1) Tabled to return to TAC prior to issuance of permits .
•Pa. e 8
LYNNWOOD PRELIMINARY
Committee to consider Docket No 1.8-89 P .P . ,. a Preliminary Plat
application for Lynnwood Farm, Phase .One The plat consists of 197
lots on 9:8 . 2 acres of land, located- one mile east .of Gray Rd . on
131st. St . . Site is zoned S-1 . The petitioner is requesting
subdivision variances from the following sections.:;
6 . 3 . 6 City streets to -be 30 ft . in width as measured from back
to back curb.
6 .3 . 3 Certain proposed, streets shall be extended to the
boundary line of the tract to be subdivided to provide
access to: adjacent undeveloped tracts- of ground.
6 . 3 . 20 No private streets platted in any residential
subdivision .
On October 24, 1988, the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning •
Appeals granted variances from Sections 26 . 2 ,2- in regards
to minimum front yard,, minimum aggregate side yard',
minimum lot width, and minimum lot sizes for the proposed
area.
Petitioners Present :
None
Comments : .
1) Petitioner requested tabling at Plan Commission.
WOODGATE SECTION IV
Secondary plat Approval for Woodgate; Section IV, Docket :No..12-.89
S.P , 15 lots on 7 . 7 acres- located 1/2 mile east of . Gray Rd. on
146th St. Property is zoned R-1 .
Petitioner
Stu Huckelberry, Gripe
Comm ents
1) I-Bell and PSI have no to serve this parcel as shown,
easement and grading work must. be granted to property.
2) Seeding and 'erosion control must be done on roadway.
ditch.
3 ) . Road improvements 146th Street must be worked out and
approved by CBPW and City Engineer.-
4) Sub-surface needs to be shown on each lot .
The technical aspects of this project have been reviewed by the TAC
and found to be satisfactory pending the above concerns being
addressed.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS to be discussed dealing with Development in
respect to the Technical Advisory Committee .
S. S . . _
57
• CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989
' •
The regular meeting of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals was
• called to order by Gilbert Kett on April 244 1989 at 7 : 05 P.M. at
• the City Meeting Hall. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of - ! .
Allegiance.
Roll was called and members present were : Gilbert Kett, Chairman, .
• Ila Badger, Hal Thompson, and Jim Miller. Jeff Davis arrived at .
7 :30 P.M. •
Staff members present -were We Bucher, Rick Zrandau, Dave
•
Cunningham, Gordon Byers and Dorthy Neisler.
. .
• Mr. Hal Thompson moved to approve the minutes of the March 27,
1989 meeting as submitted. •
Mr. James Miller seconded. •
Approved 4-0
G. PUBLIC HEARINGS ' •
ITEMS ..1 and 2g MAY BE HE,,ARDS TOGETHER:. -
• lg. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing, on Docket No. SU 19-89 a
Special Use Application for Kensington Development
Corp. and their condominium project located on the
south side of Smokey Row Road just east of Old
Meridian, Carmel. Petitioner is requesting special use
• approval to allow the existing structure to be sold 4s '
. individual dwelling units •(proposal requires some
variances, see next agenda item) .
• Parcel is zoned R-4.
Filed by' Steve Harlow, Attorney for KenSington
Development cor,p.,
• 2g. 7 : 00 P.M„ Public Hearing on :Docket NO. V 20-89 a '
Developmental Standards Variance Application, for
Kensington Development Corp. and their condominium
project located on the south side of Smokey Row Road
just east of -Old Meridian, Carmel : Petitioner is
• requesting 'variances from sections 10 . 5 . 2, .
10 . 5 .4, 10 . 5 . 5, 10,.. 5 . 9, and 23 . 01, 9 of the Carmel/Clay
zoning Ordinance to allow a front yard reduction from'
28 to 5 feet, a side yard reduction from 5 feet to 0, a
side yard aggregate reduction from 10 feet to 0, a rear
yard 'reduction from 26 to 15 feet, a lot coverage
increase from 401 to 50%, and a lot size reduction
- requiring acres for the U..S . 31 OverlaY- Zone,
• respectively., Parcel Is zoned R-4 . .
•
Filed by Steve Harlow, Attorney for Kensington
Development Corp.
•
•
•
•
•
58
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES APRIL 24, 1989
•
The public hearing was opened at 7 :09 P.M.
Mr.Steve Harlow, Attorney, 4609' Sürnmérset 'Way South, made a
presentation, a copy which is `on file at the Carmel Department of
Community Development.
Mr. Ken Sebree, 2001 .E. 52nd St. , Indianapolis, :I,N':. , owner.of
development was present, spoke briefly on the situation with the
Kensington Development.
Mr. Kett noted the staff recommendations .
1. 'Platting'procedure and approval through 'Plan Commission.
of Primary and Secondary Plat..
2. Due to the ;precedent this may set, staff would request
Board to be specific in its reasons for approval if
they approve of this ' petition
Mr. Brandau briefly explained basically what is to be done.
The petitioner is zoned R-4, residential, which in the R-4
g
residential(multi diaelli
family n s) where more than one familys
living zoning also residential structure re
living in a xesi 'quire special use approval:
g a requires side yard, rear yard and, overall lot , .
size coverage. Therefore it is here for the variance.. It will bye
heard at Plan Commission for a primary and- secondary plat
approval 'process .
There were no -comments from: the public
The public hearing was closed'.at 7:22 P.M.
Mrs . Badger. questioned 'how many units are built what is the
total number at ` completion, and 'how many of those units are being
lived in y'-toda
Y have 22` at completion,Mr. Sebree stated that would � p n,, 5` units now`
complete and .8 being lived - in.,
Mrs .• Badger questioned what assurances do we have that the .rest
of them Will follow the plan:?.
Mr. Brandau they have to .come in, for a building permit and make
sure it is being adhered t°, will have to check on primary and
secondary plats:
Mr. Miller questioned if is the any precedent for this, have
you heard of a situation ,like this for mortgage purposes we make
this kind of Change.
Mr. Gordon Byers stated that we are not changing density or
setback from what .is existing. . They are not increasing density,
setbacks are not being changed. You are .basically Just giving
him relief from 'the zoning ordinance. You. are allowing him' °to
draw legal description and draw ownership that way,. The precedent
I would 'disagree, with.
•
59
. -. " CARMEL BOARD 0F• ZONING;V "APPEALS MINUTES. APRIL 2.4, 1989'. - ,
Mrs_. Badger- moved that Docket NO. SU 19-89' and Docket No.V20-,B9 .
be approved as presented with the3 understanding that they will go • , `'
- through the platting -procedure and go through the Plan: Commission . f.
• for Primary and Secondary .Plats .. I ;
•
• Mr.Jim Miller s_ec:onded,..
Findings of fact were completed by all board members .
Approved 4-0 on both Docket items -
Mr." Jeff Davis: arrived at 7 : 3`:0 P..M.." ,
.3g. 7 : 0,0 P_,M." , `Public Hearing of. Docket No V 22-89 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for Mr.
and Mrs . James Madigan and their ,pool located at 11630
. Valleybrook, Place Carmel. Petitioner is requesting,
- variances from 'Section 5". :
3 '2: o-f the Carmel/Clay Zoning•• required' '6 ' fence, Parcel 1s' .zoned B-1 .
• Filed by Dave, Hill of Scott Pools for Mr. and Mrs .. •
James "Madigan. -
. . ;The public hearing was opened at 7 : 34 P.M.
-Mr, David. ,Hill, 904 W., Main St with -Scott Pools made, the, ' •
presentation, a copy which is •^on file at the Carmel -:Department. of
Community Development..:
Mr- . James Madigan- was present . - -
A site; ,plan. was ,shown.. . •. There ;were no comments from the Public. •
The public hearing was closed at 7 : 36 P.M;: .
Mt. 'Kett noted the staff `recommendations .
1, Staff recommends denial to-uphold ordinance and safety
concerns,
Mr, Miller. moved to .approve Docket No V 22-89 as submitted, .
:Mrs Badger seconded: , .
Findings Of-facts were completed: by- all board "members , . .
Approved, 5.-0.
• 4g.. 7 .00 P.m., Public Hearing -on Locket NO. V 23-89 a
Developmental :Standards Variance Application for Sarann;
• H`__. K1a ri .and. he.r prop erty located at 10:646' Walnut Creek.
• Meet Drive, Carmel... Petitioner is requesting -
. - •. V variance from section •5.. 3 2,, -and 25 . 2. 7 'of the
• Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to: allow for only three -
• . sides :of a swimming pool to, be fenced and to allow a
• fence to encroach- into an approved subdivision .
retention/detention .drainage facility easement:. Parcel
. is zoned S-1.
' . Filed by Sarann H. Klain .
•
•
•
60
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989 •
The Public hearing was opened at 7439 P.M. •
Sarann H. Klain, 10646 Walnut Creek West Drive made the
presentation, a copy which is on file at the Carmel Department of
Community Development.
There were nO comments from the public.
The public hearing was closed at 7 : 45 P.M.
Mr. Brandau the petitioner would like to enjoy the detention
facility at the end of her property. She feels the fence that
would be placed between her pool and the detention facility would
interrupt her esthetics value of the detention facility and the
berm. A-letter was received from the county surveyor states that
the type of fencing that she proposed would not inhibit or affect
the drainage in any manner. She has a .statement from a engineer
of the same and an agreement from Mike Verble who is the
developer of the subdivision would be the controller of the
covenants. The concern staff is that one end of the pool will be
without a fence. Ms . Klain feels that the detention facility is.t.
a adequate deterrent to keeping children and animals from entering into into the pool. Staff is not sure that that is adequateilk
eriou4h.. She has agreed to sign a hold harmless 'agreement -where ,,i,r,
she would take full responsibility. TAC committee did review
this and TAC still stands that no fence should encroach into a
drainage facility easement. Kent Ward did' give his approval on
this type of fencing. Staff recommend denial because one of
safety, don't real know how far to put fence into easement, if we
have a summer like last summer who knows how low the drainage
facility will go. - •
Mr. Kett questioned how wide' is the drainage ditch?'
Mr. Brandau stated it would be approximately 60 ' wide.
Mr. Kett questioned if the fencing was installed as of yet and
approximately what the cost would be in having a vinyl coated ..14,),
chain' link fence installed, Would not an automatic pool cover be ,
better.
Ms . Klain stated that it is a vinyl lined pool and could not put
a automatic pool cover on _lt.
Mr. JiM Miller you can install ,a pool cover 'maybe at a little
more expense, for safetY. A solar cover is not a safe cover.
A gentlemen from. Automatic Pool 'Covers stated that an automatic
pool cover can be installed.
Mr.Gil Kett stated, that you could successfully- Put an automatic
pool cover on for safety'. We find that the open end is difficult
to deal with and it goes against what we have continually said in
the Past. •
61
• CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989
•
''
• Mr. Byers stated that the trouble would be if it was delayed or '
tabled the legal notice will have to be redone . . The options 1i
would be to vote or withdraw:. We would have to redo a legal
notice. This one seeks relief to leave an open end. Petitioner
would have to withdraw or ask us to vote on it.
•
Mr. Davis, easements are not to be used to put a fence in.,
playground equipment, etc. . This could be solved only with an
automatic pool cover. This is a great concern. •
The petitoner requested withdrawal of this petition.
•
5g. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket No. V 24-89 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for •
Francis B. Quinn, Jr. and his pool located at 11930
Forest Drive., Carmel. Petitioner is requesting a
variance from section 7 . 3 . 2 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning
Ordinance to allow an automatic pool cover in lieu of
the required 6 ' fence . Parcel is zoned R-1 .
Filed by Francis B. Quinn, Jr-.. •
The public- hearing, was. opened-, at 8 P.,M. . . • ir
• Steve Granier, Zoning Consultant at 8888 Keystone Crossing made
the presentation, a copy which is on file at the Carmel
Department of Community Development .
A site plan was shown. . is
Mr. Kett read two letters which were received, one from Mr. .
Wesley E. Chalker, Jr. and one from Mr. and Mrs . William C. Fry
(which is a part of the official minutes and• attached .to the
Master Copy)
Mr. William .C:. Fry, 11921 Eden Glen Drive, spoke in opposition of
the pool cover, rather than putting up a fence . The fence that
isacurrentlylin badly in need of repair and would not stop a four
The public hearing was closed at 8 :08 P.M. .
Mr. Hal Thompson moved to approve Docket No. 'V 24-89 as
presented.
Mrs . Badger seconded.
Mrs . Badger questioned Mr. Byers what do we need to incorporate
in our motion to make sure the board is not held responsible but
the homeowner is held responsible for liability.
Mr. Gordon Byers feels you do need a hold harmless agreement.
•
•
•
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989 62•
•
The trouble with a hold harmless agreement g gives you a false
sense of security in that it is just a contract between the city
g
and the homeowner- if there is a lit anon that the applicant
would seek to hold the city harmless . The homeowners policies
have limits . You have no way of enforcing whether or not the
hold harmless policy is backed 'up' by an effective homeowners •
policy. The . homeowner could let his policy lapse and not have
one. If you see fit, one way trying to obtain the most assurance
is to extract as a condition of the variance a commitment by the
applicant to execute a written hold harmless agreement. That
does not give you the absolute assurance that there is going to • •
be effective insurance or the insurance will cover that type of
liability. It is just the• best step to take to attempt to
extricate the City from this type of litigation.
Mrs. Badger questioned if your client is aware of the neighbors
concerns? Did he attempt to work this out with his neighbors?
Mr. Grander stated yes he is aware of it and did not know if
there was an attempt to work it out.
Mr. Grapier responded if you raise the fence to 6 ' are you
providing the same amount of safety as there would be if you had '
the 4' fence and the pool cover? With both we feel that we are
maximizing the safety.
Mr. Davis feels pool covers are much safer than fences . All
situations are not the same and it must be considered. We
normally have not had any objections .
Mr. Miller objected to this pool cover, 4 ' fence is not adequate
to keep children out. This is not a very safe situation..
Mrs. Badger commented that. what we have done in the past, is not;'`'4
precedent setting that each and every petition that is brought
before this board, stands on its own merits .
Mr. Thompson amended his motion to include that the owner would
sign a hold harmless ,agreement .
•
Denied 5-0. .
6g. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on -Docket No, SV 25-89 a
Developmental Standards Sign Variance Application for
Action Business Equipment Co. , Inc. located at 4000
East 96th Street, Indianapolis . Petitioner is
requesting a variance fr:om section 25 . 7 . 04-1b. iii of
the Carmel/Clay .Zoning/Sign Ordinance to allow an
increase of sign area from 35 to 81 square feet.
Parcel is zoned B-3.
Filed by William A; .Waddick;, Attorney for Action
Business Equipment, Inc.
•
' 63
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989 •
•
•
•
. •
The public hearing was opened at 8 : 20 P.M. • .;
•• : •
Mr. Wm. Waddick, Attorney, 2 Songbird Court, Carmel made a
presentation, a copy which is on file at the Carmel Department of
Community Development. •
Mr. Ron Beck,0 owner was present . 1
A rendering of the building was shown.
Mr. Paul Rosenberg, 9957 Lakeshore Dr. Eat,,, feels that Action
Business have been very poor neighbors . He feels the office ,
should be kept neatly as other business owners . 0 •
The public hearing was closed at 8 : 25 P.M.
Mr. Brandau stated our sign ordinance cross references- the
setback of the sign versus the width of the tenant frontage. The
;
tenant frontage on the east elevation is considerably longer than 6
the south elevation 'so it is allowed a larger sign.
Mr. Miller stated that he does not see any reason' why the
petitioner would need a larger sign, we are not looking for
billboard advertising- .
Mr. Beck stated that 'the 35 sg.ft . sign is not that large when
you use individual letters . You figure a 4' x 8 ' sign this far
from the street is hard to read. Does not feel sign requested is •
out of place.
•
Mr. Kett noted staff recommendations . -
This second sign is allowed by ordinance.
Staff recommends denial of the request for an 81 square foot
sign as opposed to the 3.5 square foot that is allowed by
ordinance.
Mrs. Badger commented signs in catmel are used for identification
not advertising. What is the setback from 96th St?
Mr. Beck stated, that the setback is 73 ' .
Mr. Davis moved to approve Docket No. SV 25-89 as submitted.
Mr. Hal ThOmpson seconded.
Findings of fact were completed by all board members.
Denied 5-0 .
• ITEMS 7g. & 8g. MAY BE HEARD TOGETHER.
7g. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket No SU 26-89 a
•
•
•
64
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES- APRIL 24, 1989
Special Use Application for W.A. Bastian II and his
business Bastian Material Handling Corp. to be located
on the northeast portion of Association Court within
the Bauer Commercial' Park, Carmel . Petitioner is
requesting special use approval to construct an
office/warehouse facility consisting of approximately
9, 042 square feet of office and 8, 056 square feet of
warehouse area (proposal requires some variances, see
next agenda item) . Parcel is zoned B-3 .
Filed by W.A. Bastian ,II .
•
8g. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket No. V 27-89 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for W.A.
Bastian II and his business Bastian Material Handling
Corp. to be located on the northeast portion of
Association Court within the Bauer Commercial Park,
Carmel. Petitioner is requesting variances from
sections 14. 1 and 3 .6 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning
Ordinance to allow a reduction in the required number
of parking spaces from 53 to 43 and as the contract.
purchaser to waive requirement to plat the property.
Parcel is zoned B-3 ..
Filed by W. A. Bastian II .
The public hearing was opened at 8 : 35 P.M.
William Bastian II , 511 Stoney Creek Circle, Noblesville, made a
presentation, a copy which is on file at the Carmel Department of
Community 'Development.
A rendering was shown.
Mr. Bill Bastian, Sr. owner was present. ,;
There were no comments from the public.
The public hearing closed at 8 : 40 P.M.
Mr. Kett questioned what is the customer traffic?
Mr. Bastain stated that they may have 5 over the counter sales
per day.
Mr. Gordon Byers stated that the petitioner had done everything
. that he was required to do regarding the legal notice.
Mr. Kett noted staff recommendations .
Mrs. Badger questioned the width of the maroon strip and where it
was to be located and if any equipment will be visible on the
roof of the building, where is the trash receptacle?
Mr. Bastain stated the width of the brown strip is to be 1,6'"'and
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989 - 65
will be, located at the very top. The parapet is high enough and
unit is set back far enough so the angle from the street it
cannot be seen.
Mr. Bastain stated that there will be landscape and fencing
around trash receptacle.
The lighting plan and landscape plans were shown.
• Mr-s. Badger stated we have had some problems from the glow of i '
light fixtures is 30 ' the standard height and could these lights
be lowered any?
Mr. Brandau the typical standard runs any where from 25' , 28' to
30 ' . The technology they have now a lot could be done, would
have to -confer with their architect, I feel that the lighting . -
could be brought down and decrease the wattage and still meet
their needs and requirement.
Mr. Bastain stated .that he would be willing to meet with the
staff regarding these needs .
Mrs . Badger questioned will the reserve parking be put into
landscaping, is it shown on the plan as reserved for possible
' future parking. !'
Mr. Brandau . s.tated they don't plan on having it in reserve they
lust don't want it and plan on using it as greenbelt in lieu of
the spaces . Right now they don' t feel they need the parking. Any
expansion larger than 10% will have to come back to the board.
Mr. Bastain. stated that they will put on the plans -marking the
plan that reserve parking is there if 'needed in the future.
Mrs.. Badger questioned if there were loading docks and if they
have landscaping around, them?
Mr. Bastain pointed out on the plans where the loading docks and
the landscaping will be. Will have semi 's and UPS trucks
entering.
Mr. Miller complimented the petitioner on the excellent job that :
they have presented. . <;1;;
•
Mrs . Badger moved that Docket No. SU 26-89 be approved with the
understanding that the petitioner will put reserve parking in the
green area on their plan and also work with the staff on their
lighting plan.
Mr. Thompson seconded. •
Findings of fact were completed by all board members .
Approved 5-0. . .
CARMEL. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989 66
Mr. Thompson moved to approve Docket No. V 27-89 as presented.
Mrs. Badger seconded.
Findings of fact were completed by all board members.
•
Approved 5-0 .
9g. 7 :00 P.M. , Public Bearing on Docket No. V 28-89 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for R.
Stephen Lehman and Maureen Toth Lehman and their
property located at 5022, Deer Ridge Drive, Carmel.
Petitioners are requesting variances from sections
5 .3 .2 and 25 . 2 .1 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to '
allow a pool and a 6 ' fence to be located within a
required front yard. Parcel is. zoned S-1 .
Filed by Joseph W. Eke, Attorney for R. Stephen Lehman
and Maureen Toth Lehman..
The public hearing was opened at 8 : 53 P.M. .
to
Mr. Joseph W. Eke, Attorney, made a presentation, a copy which is •
on file at the Carmel Department of Community Development.
•
• An aerial view was shown.
• There were no comments from the public.
The public hearing closed at 8 : 58 P.M.
Mr. Davis moved to approve Docket No. V 28-89 be approved as
presented.
Mr. Thompson seconded.
Findings of Fact were completed by all board members
Approved 5-0 .
ate:,
10g. 7: 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket No.. V 29-89 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for Joseph
C. Butterworth & Donna G. Butterworth and their 18
acres of real estate located East of North .Gray:.Road
and North of East 136th Street, Carmel. Petitioners
are requesting a variance from •section 2 . 4 of the
Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance that requires platted or
unplatted lots to abut to a publicly dedicated street.
Parcel is zoned S-1.
Filed by James J. Nelson, Attorney for Joseph C.
Butterworth and Donna G. Butterworth.
The public hearing was opened at 9 : 00 P.M.
Mr.. James Nelson, 3663 Brumley Drive, Carmel made a presentation,
a copy which is on file at the Carmel Department of Community,
Development.
•
67.
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES. - APRIL 24, 1989 .
An aerial map and site map was shown.
There were no comments from the public.
The public hearing was closed at 9 : 12 P.M.
Mr. Miller questioned if this is 10 acres for one residence.
Mr. Nelson stated yes one home on 10 acres . • .
• ?i
Mr., Davis questioned the condition of the bridge.
Mr. Nelson stated the only approval asking fora building permit
for one house. What approvals are required, for the bridge? The
bridge was approved in 1.977 by the County. Commissioners .
Mr.Brandau explained to the petitioner he needed to send papers
to TAC members and responses from TAC members were the condition
of this bridge. The main objective is to grant approval and when
building permit is submitted run them through all concerns of TAC-:r.
and make sure all their concerns are addressed.
Mr. Miller moved to approve -Docket No. V. 28-89 as presented.
Mrs. Badger. seconded.
Findings of fact were completed by all board members-. .
Approved 5-0 . ij
•
11g. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket No. V 30-89 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for
Everett E. Developmental Standards Variance Application
for Everett E. Cox and Pamelia S . Cox and their 9 . 29. ,
acres• .of real estate located on the east side of Hoover .
Road between West 116th- Street on the South and West
131st Street on the North. in Carmel. 'Petitioners are tl'
requesting a variance from section 5 . 4.6 of the
Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow a reduction in ,'
the minimum lot width from 120 feet 'to 30 feet. Parcel is zoned . S-1. +1 ;.
Filed by James J. Nelson, Attorney for Everett E. Cox
and Pamelia S. Cox.
The public hearing was opened at 9.: 20 P.M.
Mr. Jim Nelson, 3.663 Brumley Way, Carmel made a presentation, a
copy which is. on file at the Carmel Department of Community
Development.
•
Mr. and Mrs . Everett E. Cox were present. .
An aerial map and site development plan was shown. .
Mr. Szynal, 12410 Hoover Road, spoke in opposition of this ' •
project. He objects to the property being botched up. The
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989
• .
access to the Cox's property is right at his front door. •
The public hearing closed at 9: 30 P.M.
Mr. Everett Cox, 310 Second St. , stated that -the property was
given to him by an aunt.
Mrs. Badger commented that this does, far exceed the minimum
requirements for S-1 Zoning Ordinance.
Mrs Badger moved to approve Docket No V 30-89 as presented. •
Mr. Thompson seconded. •
Findings of fact were completed by all board members . ' •
Mr. Kett noted staff recommendations .
Approved 5-0.
12g. 7 : 00 Public Hearing on Docket No UV 31-89 a Use
Variance Application for Four Square Co. , Inc. and
proposed tenant at 889 West Carmel Dr. , Carmel.
Petitioner is requesting a variance to allow The Church,
of Today to be located within the Carmel Science and .4.
Technology Park-, church is not listed as a permitted
nor special use within the M-3 zone. Parcel is zoned M-
3 .
Filed by Charles C. Jackson for Foursquare Co. , Inc.
This item was not heard as they had a defective noticd.
ITEMS 13g. AND 14g. MAY BE HEARD TOGETHER.
13g. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket No. SU 32-89 a -
Special Use Application for Carmel Lutheran Church,
Missouri Synod, Allen Weihe, Trustee located at 4850
East 131st St. , Cannel. Petitioner is requesting
special use approval to construct a 16,800 square foot
addition to the existing church. Parcel is zoned S-1.
Filed by Thor R. Miller, Attorney with Michael C. Cook
for the Carmel Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, Allen
Weihe, Trustee (proposal requires some variance, see
next agenda item) .
14g. 7 : 00 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket No V 33-89 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for Carmel
Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, Allen Weihe, Trustee
located at 4850 East 131st St. , Carmel. Petitioner is
requesting variances from sections 5 .4. 1. and 25 . 7 .03-
2(a)ii of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow a
structure taller than the maximum allowed (35 feet) and
to permit an existing "V" shaped double-faced sign to
be relocated to Gray Road entrance . Parcel is zoned S-
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - .APRIL. 24, 1989 '691 j`t
1. ,
Filed by Thor R. Miller, Attorney with Michael C. Cook ,"
for the Carmel Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, Allen .
Weihe, Trustee.
The public hearing was opened at 9•: 35 P.M.
Mr. Thor R. Miller, Attorney, 1600 S. Capital Center.,. ';:
Indianapolis made a presentation, a copy which is on file at the r
Carmel Department of Community Development.
Pastor Cosberg, Bob Snyder and other church members were present.
A site plan;, rendering, actual replica of the church structure
was shown
Mr. Richard Carriger; 13099 Tarkington Common, spoke in
opposition of the size of the proposed construction of the
church.
i
'M r.James 'Richmond,, 13088 'Tarking.ton Common spoke in opposition of. ::
this project regarding the traffic and the height of the
building. ,
The hearing, closed at 9:46. P.M. i
Mr. Miller complimented the petitioner on the structure and the BFI
fact on the growth of the church and the design of the addition. . Ji`
Mr. Kett questioned -the height of the building? .
Mr. Thor Miller stated the height of the building is 57 . 8 ' .
Mr.Brandau stated primarily curbing for churches have been
required in the past.. It is' one of the items covered by the
special use. approval.
Mr. Thor Miller stated the churches are not at addressed in the
ordinance., The churches are not a commercial use. The unique
drainage of this site; if was curbed mould cause a problem.
The permit for an existing "V" shaped double-faced sign has been
withdrawn
Mr. Gordon Byers stated that if you vote in favor to approve the
special use your approving the project as presented without curbs'
so they won.'t be required to deal with that issue. If. 'you agree
and grand their developmental standards variance your giving them
a variance only for the height requirement. ,We can bring the
sidewalks and curbing issues to head. .I think you can review
those under the special use and that way as a board make a
decision on that issue tonight. •
ii
l
•
.,��.
• •
70
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989
Mr. Davis stated that he has concerns of the objection of the
public. Would like for the board members to consider what their
feelings would be if a 55 ' tall commercial building, in an area
that was zoned for commercial such as Brookshire Strip Center.
Would an architectural attractive 55 ' tall building be reasonable
if it were in a commercial center not a church. Feels that this
should be considered. This is a residential structure,.
Mrs. Badger questioned the remonstrators, what is the objection?
The remonstrators stated the height is the objection.
Mr. Kalevi Huotilainen, 1106 W. Banta, architect, spoke in
regards to the height of the church.
Mr. Davis stated this will be the tallest building East of
Keystone in Clay Township.
Mr. Huotilainen the greater- mass of the church is much lower. than
35 ' ,
•
Mrs. Badger requested that the petitioner prove the practical ■
difficulty.
Mr. Huotilainen stated the design is a balcony and an organ
installed in that. portion. You get much better acoustics .
Mr. Jim Miller feels this is not any different than the churches
on North Meridian. It is quite a hasty comment to state that
Keystone can't have large beautiful churches .
Mr. Mike Cook, colleague stated that. St. Elizabeth Seaton is much),
taller than 35 ' . n ,
Mr. Miller moved to approve Docket SU .32-89as presented.
•
Mr. Davis seconded.
Findings of facts were completed by all board members .
Approved 4-1, Hal Thompson voted against.
Mr. Davis moved to approve Docket No. V 33-89 as presented.
Mr. Thompson seconded.
Findings of facts were completed by all board members .
Denied 4-1, Jim Miller approved.
Mr. Davis moved meeting to be adjourned.
:Mrs Badger seconded. •
Meeting adjourned at 10:13 P.M.
• •
Chairman Secretary
•