HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA Minutes •
- 57
CARMEL BOARD OF Z91TINd, APPEALS MINUTES APRIL 24„ 1989
•
TheTegtar 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,
Ile, Badger, Hal Thompson, and Jim Miller. Jeff Davis arrived at .
7 :30 •.M.
Staff members ,present were •Wes Bucher, Rick Brandau, Dave
Cunningham, Gordon Byers and Dorthy Neisier.
Mr, Hal Thompson moved to approve the minutes of the March 27, .
1989 meeting as Submitted:. -
Mr: James Miller secondeth,
Approved 4-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
pES ig and 2g MAY HE HEARD 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, Carm0-. .FetitiOnPr: is requesting special use
approval to allOW the existing structure to be sold as
, . .
individual dwelling units (proposal requires some
variances, see next agenda iteM) .
Parcel is zoned-R-4.
Filed by Steve Harlow, Attorney' for -Kensington .
Development Corp.
Zg. 7 :,00 P.M. Public Hearing on Docket No V 20-89 a.
, T
Developmental Standards Variance Applidation for
Kensington Development Corp, and their Cohdotinium
project lOdated 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 . 3 ,
10J.5-44 16. 5 . 5. -, 10,5 .,9, and 230. 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 6, -a
aide yard aggregate reduction from 10 feet to b, a rear
yard reduction from 20 to 15 feet, a lot coverage
increase from 40% to 50454 and a lot size reduction
requiring 5 acres for the tr,..p . 31 0-Verlay. Zone,
resPectiVely. Parcel is zoned R-4 .
Filed by Steve, Harlow, Attorney for Kensington
DOYelOPihent torp.
;r-• •
•
•
s.\
\
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS. MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989
The public hearing was opened at 7 :-09 P.M.
Mr Steve Harlow, Attorney, 4609 summerSet Way South, madea
presentation, a copy which is on :file at the Carmel Department of
Community Development.
Mr. Ken Sebree, 2001 E. 52nd- dt. , Indianapolis, owner of
development was present, spoke briefly on the situation with the
Kensington Development .
Mr. Kett •noted the staff redommendations .
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
residential(multi-famaly dwellings) where more than one family ,:is
living in a residential structure requires special use approvalt
R-4 zoning also requires side yard, tear yard and overall lot
size coverage. Therefore it is here for the variance . It will be
heard at Plan Commission for a primary and secondary plat
approval process.
There were no comments froth the Public.
The 'public hearing was closed at 7 : 22 P.M.
Mrs: Badger questioned bow many units are built, what is the
total number at completion, and how many of those units are being
lived in today?
Mr. debree stated that would have 22 at completion, 5 units now
complete and 3 being lived in
Mrs . Badger questioned what assurances do we have that the rest'',
of them will follow the plan?
Nr. Brandau they have to' come in .f .. .a. permit and make '
sure it is being adhered to, will have to check on primary and
secondary, plats .
Mr. miller, questioned if is there 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,
set backs are not being changed basically just giving
him relief ,trOt. 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 OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1989.
, .
• Mrs., Badger moved that Docket .No. Su-I9-89 end Docket No.V20-89
be approved as presented with the understanding that they will go,
through. the platting PtOcedtte and go through the Plan Commission
,
for Primary Secondary Plats . - -
Mr Jiti Miller Seconded,.
•
Findings of fact were completed by all board' members .
Approved 4-0 on both 'Docket items .
Mt. Jeff Davis arrived at 7: 10 P.M.
3g. 7 :00 PUbliclleating' of Docket ko, 'V 22-89 a
Developmental. Standards Variance Application for Mr.
and Mrs . James Madigan and their poi located at 11630
Valleybtobk Place, Carmel . Petitioner is requesting
' variances from section 53,2 of the Cannel/Clay Zoning
• required 6 ' fence Parcel is zoned
Filed by Dave Hill Of Scott Pools for Mr. and mte,
James Madigan
The public hearing was opened at 7 :34
Mt. David Hill, 904, W.. Main ,st. with Scott Pools made the
presentation, a copy which is on file at the Cannel Department of
Community bevelOpmeht,
Mr James 'Ma4igan. was Ptesent,.. .
A site plan was thoWn.
There ,were, no comments from the public.
The public hearing was closed at 7 :36 P.M', •
Mr. 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 Aubmitted.
Mrs. Badger Seconded,.,
Findings of- facts were completed by all board Members,
,
Approved 5-0 . 10:
4g, 700 Public Hearing, on Docket Na,. V 23-89 a
Developmental Standard e Variance Application for SarePP
H Klein and her property. located at 10646, Walnut Creek
West Drive, CarMel . Petitioner is requesting a
"Avariance from section 5 . 3% 2 -and 25 .2 -7 'Ct the
:Parmel/Clay Zoning 'Ordinance to allow for only three,
sides of a swimming pool to be fended 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. Klein
60
• CARMEL BOARD 'OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES —APRIL 24, 1989
The public hearing was opened at 7 : 39 .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 hearin"g '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 5from Mike Verb'le who is. =th'e
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-
a adequate deterrent to keeping children .and animals from h,
entering into the pool. Staff is not sure that, that is adequate4 ,
enough,. She has agreed to sign a hold harmless agreement where would take full 'responsibility. TAG committee did review
this and TAC:. .still stands that no fence should encroach into a
drainage facility easement. ` Kent Ward did give hit 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 O.
Mr Kett questioned how wide is the drainage ditch'.. •
Mr. Brandau stated it would bé' 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
chain link° fence installed. Would` not an automatic pool cover 'be
better. -
Ms . Klein stated that it is a vinyl lined pool and could not put.
a 'automatic 'pool. cover on ;it.
Mr. Jim. Miller you can install a pool cover maybe at a,'little
more expense for;safety,. A solar cover is not a safe cove'r.
,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 - - '
.
,
- •• •
• 1.;
Mr. Byers stated that the trouble would be If lt, was delayed or . . • - .I',!
I.!
, . . tabled the legal hdtice, will have to be r686na,, The options k
would be tti . tibte or withdraw. We would have to redo .a legal _ . -• . :
- - • -• - - _
mOtice, This one seeks relief to leave an open end'. 'Petitioner . .
mould have to Withdraw or ask ustb:vOte On
. .
_
Mr, Davis, easements are not to be used to put a fence in.,
playground equipment, etc. . This could be solved only with an
- *.I• OMatid. pool Cover.. Thit is a great, es:incarn.
. . . .!
The Petitoner requested withdrawal of this, petition. - • -
. .
. • , .
5g, 7f00 1'!M, 1 Public Hearing on DoOketNO-, V 24-89 a . -
. .
PavalOPMehtal Standards Variance Application for . - • . .
1,-
Francis B. Quinn, 4r. and his pool located at 11930. .
•
Forest Drive, Carmel . Petitioner a
, _ , .
variance from section 7 . 3 . 2 of tha Carmel/Clay Zoning
Ordinance to- allow an automatic pool cover in lieu of
the required 6 ', lenca. Parcel IS 2oned. .R-1.,
Filed by Francis 'Pc. Quinn, Jr. .
. •
. . .,!
,.. - • - i,
_
' The public 'hearing Was- Opebed• at 813.E, • ...
ri. ,
. . . r.„
Steve Granier, Zoning Consultant at .8888' 'Keystone Crossing made . .,
the presentation, a copy which Is on file at the Carmel ,
Department of Community DeVeiopmenti
A site plan was ,shown.„ , ,:•
. - •!'';
Mr. Kett read two letters which were received, one from Mr. -
WerslAY- E. Chalker, Jr andbne . from. Mr. And Mrs William C Fry .
(which is a part of the official minutes and attached to the •
. . Easter Copy),. - •
, • . _ . .
Mk, William C Fry, 11921. Eden 'Glen Pr-117a, spoke in opposition of
• the pool cover, rather than putting up a feriCe., The fence that . •
• Is currently in badly In need of repair and would not stop a four' •.
' year :old' chilci. .
._
- ,
. _
The public' hearing was closed at '8,: 08HP.M. • ' .
_ . _
. , .
. .
. :
Mr, HalThompson, Moved to approve Docket NO V 24-89 as
Presented.- - •
- Mit . Badgertectindadl. ' .• •
. ,
. -
-
• Era: Badger questioned 14t-: Byers what do we need to incorporate
in our motion to make sure the board is_notheid responsible but
the homeowner 4e held. -teSponsible for _liability,
,..-
• Mr. Gordon Byers feels you do need a hold harmless agreetent. -
l',..
. . .
•
• ,.
. .
. . . ..
. .,
••-,
.:..,
•
•
• . . o!--1
if4
- • ;10,-
. .,
, ..
CARME S'
L BOARD OF ZONING - APRIL 24, 1989 62
The trouble with a hold harmless agreement gives; you a false
sense :of security in that it is just a contract between the city
and the homeowner if there is a litigation 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 beset 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 withhis •neighbors?
Mr Grander stated yes he is aware of it and didbot ,know if
there was an attempt to work it ;out. :
Mr Granier responded if you, raise the fence to ',6 ' are you
provid=ing the same amount of safety as there .would belt you had0
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 s; :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 ',
precedent setting that each and every 'petition that is brought
before this board stands on its own- Merits-
Mr. Thompson amended his potion to include that the owner would
sign a hold harmless agréemerjt .
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 CP,,, Inc. located .at 4000
East 96th Street; Indianapolis . Petitioner is
requesting a variance from section 25 . 7 . 04-lb.iiI. of
the Cannei'.Cla Zonin '
Cat-Pei/Clay g/;Sign �,Qrdnance 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 Equipment, Inc .
• : e'T
63
CARMEL BOARD. OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES, - APRIL 24,, 1989
•
1.;
The public hearing l'./As opened at a: 20 P.M.
Mr, Wm. Maddick, _Attorney, 2 Songbird Court, Carmel made a
presentation, a, dopy which is on file at the Carmel Department of
Community DeveldpMent.
• Mr: Ron, Beck, °Whet was present,
A rendering of the building was shown,
Mr. Paul Rosenberg, 9953 Lakeshore, Dr. East, feels that Action
• -
Business have been very poor heighbOrt, He feels the office
should be kept neatly as' other business oWners,
The public hearing was closed at 8 :25 p .-M,
_ .
_
mr,.. Branded- stated our sign ordinance cross -references the
setback of the sign versus the width of the tenant frontage. The
tenant frontage on the east is considerably longer than
the south elevation so It is-alioWed 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 lOr, •
billboard advertiSing. .
Mk: Beck stated that the 35 sq,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 El square foot ,
, .
sign as opposed to the 35 square foot that is allowed by
ordinance.
Mrs. 'Badger commented signs in cannel are used for identification
• not adVertising. What 1S- the .setback from 9.6th St?
_
Mr. Beck, stated that the setback is 734 .
Mr. Davis moved to ,approve Docket No SV as submitted.
Mr Hal Thompson seconded. •
Findings of fact were completed by all board members .
Denied
•
ITEMS 79. & 8g,. MAY HE HEARD 'TOGETHER.-
7 :0D Public Hearing on Docket No SO 26-89 a
•
. .
64
•
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS411NUTES - APRIL 24, 1989
Special Use Application for W.A. Bastian' 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. T:DO 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. t-0 be locate:ion 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 H-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 DeveloPiIlent.
A rendering was shown..•Mr. Bill Bastian, Sr. owner"Vat present .
There., were_ no comments from the :pblic.
The public hearing closed at 8 :40 P.M.
Mr. Kett questioned what is the customer traffic?
Mr, Pastain .stated that they May have 5 over the counter sales,
per daY-
MX. 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 ol the brown strip is to be .16"and
•:•4'; -
•
' CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES -- APRIL 24, 1989 - 1551j,
wili be located at the Very top. The parapet is high enough and . ,
unit is set back fat enough so the angle from the street it .
•cannot be see n.
Mr;. Bastain stated that -there, will be landscape and fencing
around trash receptacle.
• The :lighting plan and landscape plans were shown.
Mrs, Badger stated we have had some problems from the glow of
light fixtures, is 30 ' the standard height and could these lights
be lowered -any?
•
mr. Brandau the typical standard runs anywhere from 25 ' , 28 ' to
30 ' . The technology they have now a lottouldbe done, would
have to confer with their architect, I feel that the lighting
could be brought down and decrease the wattage, andstill 'heet
their needs and requirement,
Mr. Bastain stated that he would be willing to meet, with the •
staff regarding these needs-.
Mit. Badger ,questioned will the reserve parking be put into
landscaplhg, is it shown on the plan as reserved for possible
future parking.
Mr. Brandaunstated they don' t plan, on having it in reserve they
just 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 IOt Will have to come, back to the board-
Mr Bastain statedthatthey will put on the plant, marking the
'plan that reserve parking is there if needed, ift the fUture .
Mrs Badger questioned if there were loading docks and if they
have landstaing 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.
id-
, Mr Miller complimented the petitioner on the excellent job that
they have presented.
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 27-69 as presented.
Mrs. Badger seconded.
Findings of fact were completed by all board mei-abets:
Approved 5-0.
9g,- 7 : 0-0 P.M. , Public Hearing on Docket. No: 17 28-89
'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 . -
E:ilad ,bY,doseph W Eke, Attorney for R. Stephen Lehman
'and, Maureen. Toth Lehman.
The public hearing was opened at 8 : 53 P.M. 4
Mr. Joseph W, Eke, Attorney, made a Presentation, a copy which is
on file :4 the Cannel 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.
10g. 7100 P,M. , Public Hearing on Docket No V 29-69 -a
Developmental Standards Variance App,iidationl for Joseph
C. Butterworth & Donna G Butterworth and their 18 '
acres of real estateLiocated ,East of NOtth 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 stteet.
Parcel is zoned 8-1.
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 Driver Carmel hade -apresentation,
a copy which is on file at the Carmel Department of Community,
Development.
-
, . .
...- t :7 .
• ' '07, .. ''
CARMEL BOO) OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES - APRIL 24, 1089
An aerial map and site map was shown. : ti
, .
There Were no comments from the puhlio.
The public hearing was closed at 9 : 12 P.M,
Mr, Miller questioned If this is 10 acres for one residende . . • ?
.- -
Mr. Nelson stated yet one home on 10 acres .
,
Mr, Davis questioned the condition of the bridge,
• Mr. Nelson stated the only approval asking for a building permit
tor one house What approvals are required for the bridge? The
bridge was approved in 1977 by the County Commissioners . " - '
. ,
Mr,Brand4u. explained to the Petitioner he needed to send papert
to TAC members arid 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
and make sure all their concerns are addressed, . . ,•
Mr, Miller moved to approve Docket No V 22-89 as presented. . .
Nrs, .Bad4er seconded..
Findings of fact were completed by all board. meMbers„
• II.
4pproVed 5- 0 .
1..,
11g, 7 : 00 'P.M. , Public Hearing on, :Docket No. V 30-29 a
Developmental Standards Variance Application for
Everett E, Developmental Standards Variance Application
.,1
for Everett El. Cox and Pamelia. .2 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 ... • ' ii,..
131st Street on the North in Carmel.-+ Petitioners are
•
requesting a variance from section_5,4, 6 of the •
Carmel/clay Zoning Ordinance to allow a reduction in . • ::J
the minimum lot width from 1.20 feet to 30 feet . Parcel
....
is zoned S-1. ' •: - :111
Filed James J. Nelson, Attorney for Everett' E . Cox
.. ...,,
..:
_ ,
•and • amelia, S. Cbx. :..'
•
, .
The public hearing was opened at 9 :e20R.M.
. -
Mr: Jim Nelson, 3663 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 Ptesent .
An aerial map and site development plan was shown. • I.
Mr. Szynal, 12410 Hoover Road,. spoke In opposition of this
_ project. He ObjectS 'to the- Property being botched up. The
. . .
•
- .
r -
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 930 P.M.
Mr. Everett Cox, alo 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 secdnded.
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 31-09 a Use
Variance Application for Four Square Co Inc. and
proposed tenant at 889 West Carmel: Er, . Carmel
Petitioner is requesting a variance to allow The Church,:
Of Today to be located within the Cannel Science and
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 notice.
ITEMS 13g. AND • 4g. MAY BE HEARD TOGETHER.
7 : 00 Public Hearing on Docket No SU 32-89 a-
Special Use Application for Carmel Lutheran Church, .4.
Missouri Synod, Allen Weihe, Trustee located at 4850
East 131st St. , Carmel. Petitioner is requesting
special use approval to construct a 16,800 square foot
addition to the existing church'. Parcel is ioned, 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 DoOket 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(e)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-
Iiiiiiirr ,
CARMELBOARD of ZONING APPEALS MINUTES APRIL 24 198.9'. • •- 694 j ;
1,.
Filed b • Thor R. Miller' „,
y _- , `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, 160'0 S.. -Capi=tal Center,
. •
Indianapolis made a presentation, ' a copy which is on file at the ,;
Carmel Department of Community Development:. ^ ,L .
Pastor Cosberg, Bob Snyder and other 'church members were present;. , . •
A site plan, :rendering, actual replica. of they church structure . . ..
was shown. i.
Mr Richard Carriger, 13099 'Tarkington, Common, spoke in
opposition of the size of the proposed construction of the .
church. •
Mr James :Richmond; 13.088 Tarkington Common `spoke in opposition of
this project regarding the traffic and the 'height of the . 11
building, 4,
The public hearing closed at 9,:461 P.:M..
n I.
Mr. Miller complimented the petitioner on the' Structure and the . , . . V
fact on the growth of 'the, church and the design `of the addition. '��s
Mr. Kett, gues;tioned the height of the, build=ing? '
Mr.. Thor Miller stated ;the 'heght, of the buldi•ng is 57 . 8 ' ,.
Mr.Brandau•:`stat'ed '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 would cause a-problem*. ''
The permit f'or ;an ;existing "V shaped 'double-faced sign, has been . '
Withdrawn-
Mr. Gordon Byers stated that if you vote in. :f`avor 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: ',lie- 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,. i-,.
. .1
.
s R 1;■[;'
If
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS. MINUTES = APRIL 24, 1989
Mr. Davis stated that he fia-e concerns Of the Ojjeotion of the..
public. Would like for the board members to consider what their
feelings would be if,a 55 ' tall commercial. 'huilding, 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 etructure.
Mrs. Badger questioned the' remonstratora, what is the objection?
The remonstrators stated the height is the objection.
Mr, Kalevi Hu° ilainen, 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 mast of the church is much lower than
4
Mrs, 'Badger requested that the petitioner provethe practical
difficulty.
Mr: Huotilainen stated the design is & 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 estate that
Keystone can 't have large beautiful churches .
Mr- Mike Cook, colleague stated that St . Elizabeth, Seaton is much:,
taller than 35'' .
mr Miller moved to approve Docket SU 32-89 as 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- .
M;.. '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 . BaclgerHseconded, •
Meeting adjourned at 10413 P.M.
Chairman Secretary