HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 10-22-01
1
City of Carmel
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
OCTOBER 22, 2001
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals met October 22, 2001 in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, One Civic Square, Carmel, Indiana, at 7:00 PM.
Members present: Leo Dierckman; Michael Mohr; Earlene Plavchak; Pat Rice; and Charles
Weinkauf, thereby constituting a quorum.
Department Staff in attendance: Laurence Lillig; Adrienne Keeling, Code Enforcement Officer.
John Molitor, Counsel, was also in attendance.
Legal Counsel Report: John Molitor reported on the Executive Session of the Board held at
6:30 PM this evening, prior to the regularly scheduled meeting, in which pending litigation was
discussed. Items on tonight’s Agenda listed as 1h through 8h, 9h, and 1i. relate to proposed
zoning ordinances pending before City Council. Amendments have been discussed and Mr.
Molitor is optimistic that the model homes and swimming pool items will be passed by City
Council.
Laurence Lillig reported that item 14h is TABLED until resolution of the Director’s
determination regarding another matter on this site. Item 1i. is also tabled.
H. Public Hearing:
These Items Currently Tabled Pending Action by the City Council
1h-3h. :
Lakes at Hazel Dell, Section 1, Lot 16 (UV-133-00; V-156-00; V-157-00)
Petitioner seeks a Use Variance of Section 5.1: Permitted Uses in order to establish a
temporary model home/sales office. Petitioner also seeks Developmental Standards
Variances of Sections 25.7.02-7(c): Maximum Sign Area; and 25.7.01-7(d): Maximum
Sign Height. The site is zoned S-1/Residence – Low Density.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker & Daniels for Zaring Homes of Indiana.
This Item Currently Tabled Pending Action by the City Council
4h. :
Lakes at Hazel Dell, Section 1, Lot 17 (UV-134-00)
Petitioner seeks a Use Variance of Section 5.1: Permitted Uses in order to establish a
temporary model home/sales office. The site is zoned S-1/Residence – Low Density.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker & Daniels for Zaring Homes of Indiana.
S:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
Page 1
These Items Currently Tabled Pending Action by the City Council
5h-8h. :
Lakes at Hazel Dell, Section 1, Lot 237 (UV-135-00; V-153-00; V-154-00; V-155-00)
Petitioner seeks a Use Variance of Section 5.1: Permitted Uses in order to establish a
temporary model home/sales office. Petitioner also seeks Developmental Standards
Variances of Sections 25.7.02-7(b): Number and Type of Signs; 25.7.02-7(c): Maximum
Sign Area; and 25.7.02-7(d): Maximum Sign Height. The site is zoned S-1/Residence –
Low Density.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker & Daniels for Zaring Homes of Indiana.
This Item Currently Tabled Pending Action by the City Council
9h. :
Lakes at Hazel Dell, Section 1, Lot 238 (UV-136-00)
Petitioner seeks a Use Variance of Section 5.1: Permitted Uses in order to establish a
temporary model home/sales office. The site is zoned S-1/Residence – Low Density.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker & Daniels for Zaring Homes of Indiana.
Leo Dierckman moved to re-order Agenda items 16h & 17h. in order for these items to be heard
in conjunction with items 10 through 12 h. APPROVED 5-0.
Shell Station (V-92-01; V-93-01; V-94-01)
10-12h.
Petitioner seeks the following Developmental Standards Variances:
V-92-01 ZO 25.7.02-7(b) 3 Special Use Signs
V-93-01 ZO 25.7.02-7(c) (i) 43.34 square foot ground sign
V-94-01 ZO 25.7.02-7(d)(i) 6’10.75”-tall identification ground sign
th
The site is located at 3202 East 96 Street and is located partially within the SR
431/Keystone Avenue Overlay Zone.
Filed by David George of Insight Engineering for Shell.
Shell Station (V-109-01, V-110-01)
16-17h.
Petitioner seeks the following Developmental Standards Variances:
V-109-01
ZO 25.7.2.02-7(c) (i) 43.34-square foot identification ground sign
V-110-01
ZO 25.7.02-7(d)(i) 6’10.75”-tall identification ground sign
th
The site is located at 3202 East 96 Street and is located partially within the SR
431/Keystone Avenue Overlay Zone
Filed by David George of Insight Engineering for Shell.
David George of Insight Engineering, 650 East Carmel Drive, Suite 310, Carmel, appeared
before the Board representing the applicant. Currently, there are two signs existing on the
property, a pole sign that can be seen from the interstate, and a monument sign towards Keystone
Avenue. The two existing signs total a little under 210 square feet. The Ordinance allows one
sign at 10 square feet with a height restriction of 5 feet within the Keystone Overlay Zone.
Without the Overlay Zone, the petitioner would be allowed two signs, one for each frontage
th
along Keystone and 96 Street.
The petitioner has appeared before the Plan Commission for ADLS review. In working with the
Department and with Shell, an alternate proposal is planned. The petitioner would like to
replace the pole sign with a monument sign along Keystone Avenue, and also have a monument
th
sign along 96 Street. There is also a food mart sign on the building that would be eliminated as
well. Any canopy signs would also be taken down.
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
2
In summary, the petitioner is asking for two monument signs, one along Keystone Avenue and
th
one along 96 Street. The signs are a brick base and bricked on both sides. The total signage
would be 85 square feet, and the petitioner would be removing 210 square feet of signage. The
lights on the canopy are up, inside the canopy and lights will not be seen below the canopy at all.
Department Report, Laurence Lillig. In respect to V-92-01, the Department recommends
approval of two identification signs, not three. Regarding V-93-01, the Department is
recommending approval of signage for an area up to 40 square feet. Regarding V-94-01, the
height of the ground sign along Keystone Avenue, the height is recommended for approval up to
6 feet. Regarding V-109-01, the Department is recommending approval as requested for 43.34
th
square feet of signage along East 96 Street. Docket No. V-110-01 is recommended for
approval up to 6 feet, the maximum allowable per the sign chart for a sign in this location.
Questions and Comments from the Board:
Chuck Weinkauf asked for clarification between the 40 square feet of signage allowed on
th
Keystone Avenue, visible north/south, as opposed to the 45 square feet allowed on 96 Street,
visible from east/west. Laurence Lillig explained the criteria in the Sign Ordinance for
determining the size of signs a business is permitted and the sign charts governing signs along
freeways and along other classes of streets.
Pat Rice asked if the petitioner had any problems with the sizes and dimensions of the signs.
Mr. George said the only problem is that the signs for Shell are all standard size panels and he
was hoping to utilize the same sign—any difference in the size of the signage would mean that
he would have to retro-fit the sign or make some special modifications.
The public hearing was then closed.
of V-92-01, as amended, to provide for two (2) special use
Pat Rice moved for the approval
signsAPPROVED
, seconded by Earlene Plavchak. 5-0.
V-93-01 to allow for a 43.34 square foot ground
Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of
sign on Keystone AvenueAPPROVED
, seconded by Michael Mohr. 5-0.
V-94-01 to allow a 6’10.75” tall ground sign
Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of ,
including the base and the sign, at grade level, APPROVED
seconded by Pat Rice. 5-0
V-109-01 to allow a 43.34 square foot ground sign
Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of
th
on 96 StreetAPPROVED
, seconded by Pat Rice. 5-0
V-110-01 to allow a 6’10.75” tall identification
Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of
th
ground sign on 96 StreetAPPROVED
, seconded by Michael Mohr. 5-0.
J.C. Sipe Jewelers (UV-96-01)
13h.
Petitioner seeks a Use Variance of Section 6.1: Permitted Uses in order to establish a
jewelry store on 1.16± acres. The site is located at 9610 Day Drive. The site is zoned
S-2/Residence.
Filed by E. Davis Coots of Coots Henke & Wheeler for Sipe Family, LLC.
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
3
th
Note:
The Carmel Communications Department has assigned an address of 3000 East 96
Street to this property rather than Day Drive.
Dave Coots, attorney, Coots Henke & Wheeler, 255 East Carmel Drive, appeared before the
Board representing the Sipe Family, LLC, a limited liability company, comprised of Laura and
Same Sipe who are present this evening. Also present and assisting in the presentation is Fred
Simmons of Simmons Architecture.
The petitioner is requesting a Use Variance for a 1.16 acre tract located on the northwest corner
thth
of 96 and Day Drive. Day Drive is a fairly unimproved street running north off of 96 Street
to a dead-end to the north. The property to the east is Tom Wood Ford; to the north is
S-2/Residential, as is the subject site; the property to the west was recently granted a use
variance by the Board for Paragus, General Office Development; and to the south in Marion
County is a commercial development.
The petitioner is proposing a single user, owner-occupied Sipe family jewelers, retailers of fine
jewelry. The Sipe family jewelers has been in the Indianapolis community since 1884, and has
chosen this particular site because of its close proximity to the Carmel market and the north side
of Indianapolis.
ADLS is not a requirement of the Use Variance, but Mr. Coots wanted to describe the site plan.
The entrance is off of Day Drive. The petitioner is dedicating a 75 foot one-half right-of-way
th
on 96 Street. There is an outstanding item with the Urban Forester, and Fred Simmons has
agreed to meet with Scott Brewer for purposes of working out the details.
There are two signs being requested: the ground sign on the southeast corner of the tract, and the
wall sign on the south elevation of the building. Both signs comply with the Sign Ordinance.
Samples of the building materials were displayed: two colors of brick, fiberglass shingle, and
decorative limestone.
The rationale for the Use Variance has been visited by this Board on a few other occasions, most
recently the Paragus Use Variances that were granted, as well as the dental office to the west of
the subject site and the Hahn Survey and Engineering office. The residents in the area have
been participatory in the requests that have come before the Board for various uses established
thth
along 96 Street, recognizing that 96 Street is not necessarily premiere residential development.
The use variance assures the adjacent properties that there will not be a blanket re-zoning of the
properties that would permit uses other than those represented to the adjacent properties. Before
the Sipe family could vacate and sell the building to another business, it would necessitate
another appearance before the Board for approval for a use variance. With the restriction on the
use, the adjacent properties are afforded protection more so than a rezone process that would
permit a multiplicity of uses.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; the
following appeared:
James Alred, 2519 Pleasant Way West, Lakewood Garden Subdivision, north of Paragus and
north of Day Drive, spoke on behalf of Lakewood and Chesterton residents, previously
represented by Mr. Kassebaum. Historically, the residents have been opposed to auto
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
4
th
dealerships and retail development along 96 Street. The residents would prefer the area to be
used solely for one or two-story office and professional buildings. However, the residents do
not oppose the Sipe Jewelry Store due to the fact that it would not be a big traffic generator, the
business is up-scale, and does not abut any existing dwellings in the Subdivisions. On the issue
of a use-variance as opposed to a rezone, a Use Variance is preferred for the reasons presented
by Mr. Coots.
Department Report, Laurence Lillig. The Department is recommending Tabling this item until
such time as the Plan Commission and City-Council have had time to consider a rezone for this
property. The utilization of a Use Variance in an effort to mask the existence of commercial
property in proximity to residential property on the official zone map is inappropriate. There is
no condition peculiar to this property that makes a use variance an appropriate course for this
project. Rezoning by Use Variance circumvents the proper legislative authority for making
such land use decisions.
There are options available in rezones for limiting the number of uses allowed—one would be to
rezone into a Planned Unit Development; another would be to rezone to a district with binding
commitments that would limit the uses allowed on the property. There is no hardship
developing this property as single family. The surrounding uses are an ideal argument for
rezoning the property, not for granting a use variance. The Department feels that this proposal
is a matter of expedience—simply a shortcut for circumventing the legislative body.
Laurence Lillig reviewed the Rezone process for the Board.
Pat Rice gave some background and history of this particular area and comments of
non-opposition by Mr. Kassebaum who represented the neighboring community at that time.
There was discussion and conversation regarding sending this item to the Committee of the Plan
Commission to review the ADLS aspect of this development.
Pat Rice expressed concern regarding setting a precedent by allowing retail in this area. Board
members were reminded that each case is looked at on its own merit and is not a
precedent-setting body.
John Molitor commented that the Board does not bind itself in the future by making current
decisions—it does not set a precedent. However, if retail were to be approved here, and there
were a parcel next door that was undeveloped, it might related to whether or not a hardship
existed for that parcel if it becomes impossible to develop for a residential use. It does not set a
legal precedent, but perhaps a trend in terms of what might be a hardship or a viable use in the
neighborhood. There is concern with referring an item from the BZA to a committee of the Plan
Commission. Neither the Rules of Procedure of the Board nor the Plan Commission allow for
this course of action. The Board cannot insist that the Plan Commission accept such a referral
unless it is willing to do so.
Mr. Coots said timing is a definite consideration in this instance. Mr. Sipe’s lease expires in 6
months and it will be winter months soon. However, this course is not being taken as the most
expedient to get around the system. The petitioner has appeared before the Technical Advisory
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
5
Committee twice and the Department has reviewed the plans and made suggestions and changes
have been made in the plans.
Mr. Dierckman noted that the proposal is attractive as presented and Technical Advisory review
twice is significant.
Laurence Lillig clarified that the Technical Advisory Committee does not accomplish any type
of aesthetic review.
Fred Simmons, Simmons & Associates, Architects, said they had been working on this particular
project for over three months with the Department and Staff regarding the site plan and the
th
building. The front elevation on Day Drive is similar in character to that on 96 Street and the
building was re-designed to reflect that. The design is more residential in character than retail.
This is an urban forest area and the petitioner must mitigate and do some other things, and this
will be worked out with Scott Brewer, Urban Forester. The site is 1.16 acres; effectively, it is
th
.65 acres of use with the right-of-way dedication on 96 Street and Day Drive as well as the
easement along the north edge of the property. The building is approximately 4200 square feet.
Two shades of gray brick are being used with some limestone accent panels; the glass will be
clear with white aluminum framing, and gray, architectural, blended shingles. Any trim would
be painted white.
UV-96-01, J.C.Sipe Jewelers,
Pat Rice moved for the approval of seconded by Leo Dierckman.
APPROVED
5-0.
This Item Currently Tabled at Petitioner’s Request:
WTF - Sprint Spectrum (A-97-01)
14h.
Appellant (an Interested Party) wishes to appeal the decision of the Director regarding the
collocation of a WTF antenna on an existing private radio tower. The site is located at
1388 Queen’s Way. The site is zoned S-1/Residence – Very Low Density.
Filed by J. Taggart Birge of Bose McKinney & Evans for Richard Deer.
Northview Christian Life (SUA-108-01)
15h.
Docket No.
Petitioner seeks Special Use Amendment of the approval granted under
SU-7-93
in order to establish three (3) temporary classroom units on 81.66± acres. The
st
site is located at 5535 East 131 Street. The site is zoned S-1/Residence – Low Density.
Filed by James J. Nelson of Nelson & Frankenberger for Northview Christian Life.
Jim Nelson, 12481 Medalist Parkway, Carmel, appeared before the Board representing
st
Northview Christian Life Church located at 5535 East 131 Street. The Church continues to
grow and its membership now approaches 1650 members. The growth is desirable; however it
has placed a demand on its facilities, especially the space allocated and available for religious
education.
Temporarily, the petitioner plans to accommodate its needs by the placement of three (3)
modular buildings or classrooms, each 1,050 square feet in size, for a period not to exceed three
years. In fact, the application requests a Special Use Amendment for only a period of three
years. Permanently, the Church intends to address the need by filing with the Department of
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
6
Community Services, plans for a permanent addition to the Church which would again be
presented to this Board, hopefully within a year, in the form of another special use amendment.
st
An aerial photograph was displayed showing the round about at 131 and Hazel Dell Parkway,
and in the southwest corner of the area is the 80 acres campus known as Northview Christian
Life Church. The photograph identified the existing Church, the parking area, and the two
st
entrances that serve the Church, one from Hazel Dell, and one from 131 Street. The location
of the three modular classrooms is also identified as being on the eastern end of the Church in the
area of the existing playground. The modular classrooms would be placed side-by-side, and
screened from view by two mounds, three feet in height, containing 15 pine trees.
The modular classrooms are considered to be located in an inconspicuous spot, considering the
size of the parcel, the distance of the classrooms from the abutting roadway, the existing
topography and vegetation around the Church, especially on the south side, and the landscaping
proposed. The modular classrooms are not new to Carmel, and have been used mostly by the
school system.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the petition; no one
appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Department Report, Laurence Lillig. The Department recommends favorable consideration of
the petition, and asks the Board to cite the time period as a condition of approval.
Michael Mohr was concerned about buffering to visually screen the modular classrooms from
Hazel Dell Parkway. Mr. Nelson explained the topography of the area, the mature trees, and the
two, 3-foot mounds containing 15 Austrian Pine trees that will provide substantial buffering.
SUA-108-01, Northview Christian Life,
Leo Dierckman moved for the approval of
conditionedupon removal of the modular classrooms by December 31, 2004
. The motion
APPROVED
was seconded by Pat Rice and 4 in favor, 1 opposed (Michael Mohr.)
I. Old Business:
This Item Currently Tabled Pending Action by the City Council:
1i.
Lakes at Hazel Dell, Section 1, Common Area 3 (SUA-63-01)
Petitioner seeks to amend Commitment 2(B) (lifeguard) of Instrument No. 199909969620
relating to the Special Use approval granted for the Lakes at Hazel Dell Amenity Arunder
Docket No. SU-37-99
. The site is located at 12474 Dellfield Boulevard West. The site
is zoned S-1/Residence – Low Density.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker & Daniels for Zaring Premier Homes
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00
PM.
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
7
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
8
s:\\BoardofZoningAppeals\\Minutes\\2001oct
9