Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 04-27-98 CARMEL/CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS APRIL 27, 1998 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals was called to order by the president at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers, One Civic Square, Carmel, Indiana. Members present were: Jay Dorman; Dick Klar; Jim Quinn; and Charles Weinkau£ Director Steve Engelking, Terry Jones and Mark Monroe were in attendance representing the Department of Community Services. John Molitor, Counsel, was also present. Mark Monroe reminded the Board that the May meeting was rescheduled to Wednesday, May 27th due to the Memorial Day holiday. H. Public Hearing: lh. Kahn's Sign (V-16-98) Petitioner seeks approval of a developmental standards variance of Section 3.0 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow a sign to be located within the vision clearance triangle. The site is located at 313 East Carmel Drive. The site is zoned B-8/Business. Filed by Joe Husar of Kahn's. Joe Husar appeared before the Board representing the applicant. The sign variance was continued from the March meeting to allow Board members an opportunity to visit the site and make a determination regarding vision clearance for the location of the proposed sign. Jim Quinn commented that because of the unique layout of the building, the placement of the sign is troublesome. Mr. Quinn raised the possibility of a pole sign and whether or not public safety would be better served by a pole sign rather than a ground sign. Mr. Weinkauf reported the results of the on-site visit and possible locations of the sign. Mark Monroe reported the Department's position that the sign does not block vision for motorists driving north on Medical Drive. The City Engineering staff had even looked at the site to determine if any public safety problems were created. The only issue that the Department was concerned about was the long-term possibility of the widening of Carmel Drive to accommodate a right turn lane or a full blown intersection at Medical Drive and Carmel Drive. The Department is asking that if the Board approves the variance, a condition be placed on the approval that if the widening of Carmel Drive occurs, the site distance is to be maintained at the intersection. It may be necessary for the ground sign to be moved to a different location at that time. s:minutes\bza1998apr 1 Mr. Husar stated that the applicant is aware that the City is looking at different plan changes in the area. If Medical Drive or Carmel Drive changes, the sign location may no longer be safe; the petitioner is prepared to move the sign at a future date. Jay Dorman commented that there are trees in the front that will be removed and replaced with trees that do not restrict vision. Mr. Dorman was comfortable with the final proposal as originally submitted with the condition that if Carmel Drive is widened and a right turn is added to Medical Drive, the same sight distance is to be maintained; the City Engineer is to validate the placement of the proposed sign. Jay Dorman made a formal motion to approve V-16-98, Kahn's Sign, as originally proposed with the condition stipulated; seconded by Dick Klar. APPROVED 4-0. 2h. Windsor Court Sign (V-17-98) Petitioner seeks approval of developmental standards variances of Sections 25.7.02-8(b) and 25.7.01-4(1) of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow an additional off-premise sin that fronts on 116th Street. The site is located at 11610 Technology Drive within the Meridian Technology Center (116th Street and College Avenue.) The site is zoned B-6/Business. Filed by Christine Wright of Windsor Court. Chris Oswald, director of Marketing & Development for Liberty Health Care, owner of Windsor Court, appeared before the Board representing the applicant. Approval is being sought for an additional off-premise sign that will front on 116th Street. Mr. Oswald stated that the present sign cannot be seen due to the mounding. Mr. Oswald believes that the additional sign is needed for identification to the community. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed variances; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending approval; however, location of the proposed sign is critical and the Department proposes that the sign not be placed on the landscape mound and be at least five feet from the street right-of-way. In response to Mr. Weinkauf s question as to why the assisted care facility would need street advertising as opposed to a market, Mr. Oswald stated that they do a lot of marketing through advertising in the community and word-of-mouth, but a lot of business is generated by people driving by the facility. Jay Dorman asked a number of questions concerning percentage of occupancy, attrition rate, absorption rate, and referral or external marketing business. Mr. Dorman thought that granting a sign on 116th Street would establish a precedent; however, Mr. Dorman was willing to grant a limited time variance for an approved sign to be placed at a mutually agreed upon location, for a period not to exceed a specified number of months. s:minutes\bza1998apr 2 John Molitor confirmed that there is no obstacle as to putting a limitation of time or ownership or location, etc. Jim Quinn commented that the mounding on 116th Street was placed there in order to keep the commercial development inside the Technology Park and not have it spill out onto 116th Street. The signage is highly regulated and controlled. Mr. Quinn felt that to grant an exception to this petitioner would be unfair to the other businesses in the area. Dick Klar stated that at the time the property was developed, the mounding was to be in place to protect the residents across the street. The current application, if approved, removes the protection afforded the neighbors. Mr. Oswald suggested a placement of signage on the building that could be seen from 116th Street. Jim Quinn suggested that the petitioner table until May 27, 1998. Mark Monroe commented that if the Board chooses to consider a wall sign on the building, it will require Plan Commission approval for the Architectural review. The proposed ground sign has been previously approved by the Plan Commission as far as ADLS review. Mr. Oswald requested that final determination on the sign be TABLED until the May 27th meeting; approved by the Board. NOTE: Items 3h. and 4h. were heard together and voted on separately. 3h. Dellelo Pond (SU-18-98) Petitioner seeks special use approval to construct a pond. The site is located one property west of Shelborne Road, south of 126th Street and north of 121st Street. The site is zoned S-1/Residence. Filed by Dave Coots of Coots Henke & Wheeler. 4h. Dellelo Variance (V-19-98) Petitioner seeks approval of a developmental standards variance of Section 2.4 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow a lot without frontage on a public street. The site is located one property west of Shelborne Road, south of 126th Street and north of 121st Street. The site is zoned S-1/Residence. Filed by Dave Coots of Coots Henke & Wheeler. Dave Coots, attorney, 255 East Carmel Drive, Carmel, Indiana, appeared before the Board representing the applicant. The Special Use application for the construction of the pond was submitted to the Technical Advisory Committee . There were some revisions made to the size of the pond to pull the inlet pipe further to the north away from the south property boundary. The pond will be dug rather than dammed, and therefore any natural water flow will not be accumulated and then discharged to the south; instead, the sheet s:minutes\bza1998apr 3 drainage will be directed into the dug pond. There is a field tile that goes from the north to the south to the west of the pond and the discharge will be picked up at the discharge point of the pond. Therefore, all drainage from the pond will be at its current, undeveloped rate of flow. The beehive inlet was added downstream to receive the low flow and areas of construction activity have been designated. The limits of mounding are denoted to the west of the pond. The pond will serve two purposes: recreational and to supply barrow for purposes of constructing the mounding. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed development; the following appeared: Janice Kielty, 4010 West 121st Street, Zionsville, stated no opposition to the pond but did want to express concern regarding the closeness of the proposed pond to their home and also to the diverted water flow across their property. Mrs. Kielty requested that precautions be taken now to ensure no water problems in the future. Mr. Coots stated that the Technical Advisory Committee had reviewed the discharge and it was determined that the petitioner did not increase the rate of flow or the volume. The shores of the lake will remain level. According to Mr. Coots, the calculations do not show any increase in water outflow. Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending approval upon all TAC issues being resolved. Confirmation has been received from the Soil & Water Conservation Office; however no input has been received from the Hamilton County Surveyor's office and any approval should be made contingent upon receiving a sign off from the Hamilton County Surveyor's office. The public hearing was then closed on Docket No. SU-18-98. Jay Dorman moved for the approval of SU-18-98, Dellelo Pond,pending positive comments from all TAC members, seconded by Dick Klar. APPROVED 4-0. Dick Klar moved for the approval of V-19-98, Dellelo Variance, seconded by Jim Quinn. Jim Quinn suggested a condition of the approval, i.e. non-remonstrance in the event the City or County might want to acquire additional right-of-way for the extension of 126th Street. Jeff Dellelo, petitioner, appeared before the Board and stated his willingness to waive his right to remonstrate against the City or County in the event of a taking of the property for s:minutes\bza1998apr 4 the purpose of extending 126th Street. Mr. Dellelo said he had already talked to the Department about the 25 foot right-of-way. In response to questions from Chuck Weinkauf, Mark Monroe stated that there is adequate access for emergency vehicles in regard to the safety and welfare of the residents of the area. The public hearing was then closed. Dick Klar then amended his motion to provide for approval of Dellelo Variance V-19-98 upon condition of waiver of remonstrance from the petitioner in regard to future taking of right-of-way, seconded by Jim Quinn. APPROVED 4-0. 5h. Union Federal ATM (V-20-98) Petitioner seeks approval of a developmental standards variance of Section 14.4.2 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow a decrease in the required front yard setback from 60 feet to 25 feet. The site is located at 9609 North College Avenue. The site is zoned B-3/Business. Filed by Dave Coots of Coots Henke and Wheeler. Dave Coots, 255 East Carmel Drive, appeared before the Board representing the petitioner. Steve Pidgeon of Union Federal and Mike Beesley of Blaze Construction were also in attendance. The petitioner is requesting approval to install an ATM in the southwest corner of the tract thereby permitting a circular flow of traffic around the site. There are no encroachments on anything public; however, the petitioner is requesting permission to encroach upon the 60 foot building setback line that was a part of the original plat. The petitioner is proposing an ATM 4 feet, 8 inches by 4 feet wide, and Mr. Coots presented a photograph of a similar ATM. Mr. Coots explained the practical difficulty to comply with the ordinance by virtue of the angle of turn to access the ATM. The ATM is not an extension of any facility presently in the center, however it will provide a convenience to users of the center as well as area residents. Steve Pidgeon of Union Federal Savings Bank appeared before the Board and explained the proposed turning radius to access the ATM in relation to the 60 foot setback requirement. Marketing issues are involved: visibility, lighting and safety. Upon completion of the lease term, the ATM can be easily moved with the aid of a forklift. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed project; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. In response to questions from Jim Quinn, Mr. Pidgeon stated that if the ATM were located behind the 60 foot setback, prime parking would be disrupted for the retailers in s:minutes\bza1998apr 5 the center and there would be problems for the customers in regard to the turning radius to access the ATM. The Department suggested placing the ATM due east of the current proposal, right on the building setback line, and it would disrupt fewer parking spaces than seen on the drawings. Also, there are truck deliveries in the center that can make the turning radius and it is possible for motorists to do the same. Jay Dorman also questioned the proposed location of the ATM. There was considerable discussion regarding relocating the ATM to the south property line, and allowing a decrease in the front yard setback from 60 feet to 40 feet instead of the requested 60 feet to 25 feet. Jay Dorman moved for the approval of V-20-98, Union Federal ATM. MOTION DENIED 0-4. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:10 PM. Charles W. Weinkauf, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary s:minutes\bza1998apr 6