Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 01-26-98 CARMEL/CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS JANUARY 26, 1998 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals was brought to order by the president at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana. Members present were: Dick Klar; James Quinn; and Charles Weinkau£ Director Steve Engelking and Terry Jones were also in attendance representing the Department of Community Services. The minutes of the November meeting were approved as submitted. F. Legal Counsel Report: As a point of information, John Molitor reported that there is a bill going through the State Legislature regarding the siting of telecommunications towers. (Senate Bill 160) The City of Carmel/Clay Township passed an ordinance last year regarding the telecommunications towers, and the current Bill does not seem to impair or pre-empt anything done in the City's ordinance. The City will continue to follow the legislation. G. Reports, Announcements and Staff Concerns: a) Terry Jones reported that there will be a Training Session scheduled for Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals members at a date to be determined in February. b) Items 8i. and 9i., Klain Office (UV-5-98 and V-10-98) were tabled by the Petitioner. H. To date, there have been no new members appointed; therefore the Swearing in and Election of officers was postponed to a later date. L Public Hearing: Note: Items li. and 2i. were heard together but voted on separately. li. Prairie View Clubhouse (SU-84-97) Petitioner seeks Special Use approval to construct a clubhouse and pool area for the Prairie View Subdivision. The site is located on the northwest corner of River Road and 131st Street. The site is zoned S-1/Residence (Open Space Subdivision.) Filed by David Warshauer of Brenwick Development. c:Aminutes\bza1998jan 1 2i. Prairie View Clubhouse (V-85-97) Petitioner seeks approval of a developmental standards variance of Section 27.5 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to decrease the number of required parking spaces for the proposed clubhouse from 26 spaces to 10 spaces. The site is located on the northwest corner of River Road and 131st Street. The site is zoned S-1/Residence (Open Space Subdivision.) Filed by David Warshauer of Brenwick Development. David Warshauer, Executive Vice President of Brenwick Development, 12722 Hamilton Crossing Boulevard, Carmel appeared before the Board representing the applicant. Also in attendance were Ken Alexander, project manager of Prairie View, and Dave Sexton with Schneider Engineering. The applicant is proposing to construct a 5,760 square foot clubhouse, including a walk- out lower level, with a swimming pool. Copies of the building elevation were distributed showing the building, the veranda on three sides, and the walk-out lower level. The proposed landscaping plan includes continuing the street plan on William Connor Way as well as adding additional trees and shrubs on site. The applicant also is proposing the construction of a stone wall similar in materials used in the round-about at 131st Street and River Road at the southwest corner of the Clubhouse area at the top of the levee. The Clubhouse will be located in an area set aside for that purpose at the time of primary plat. The recreational area was approved by the Plan Commission as part of the Open Space for the subdivision. William Connor Way runs along the south side of Prairie View Lake. There will be no access to the Clubhouse from 131st Street. The Clubhouse will be an amenity for the Prairie View Homeowners and will be maintained by the Homowners Association fees. The applicant feels that the addition of the Clubhouse will increase the values of the homes within the Subdivision. The Clubhouse is an integral part of the overall development. The development was reviewed by Technical Advisory Committee. The applicant stated that since the facility was specifically for the residents, most of the traffic to the facility would come from within the development and vehicular traffic would be at a minimum. Sidewalks and trails have been designed to facilitate pedestrian access to the area. Mr. Warshauer reported that the development had been reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee, and all issues are believed to have been addressed at this time. A sign is proposed for the wall of the levee and the applicant will work with the Department so ensure that signage is permissible and allowable under the Ordinance without requiring special exceptions. The variance from the parking requirements is being requested in large part because of aesthetics and that the parking lot should not be larger that reasonably required. It is the applicant's position that the Clubhouse amenity will be accessed mostly by pedestrian traffic, and a large parking lot is not needed. The parking area provided is off-street parking containing 12 spaces. If constructed under the ordinance, the parking lot would be 12 times larger than the Clubhouse. If additional parking is deemed necessary by the c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 2 Department, the applicant agrees to "landbanking" or setting aside ground for the construction of a second parking lot if needed. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed developments; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. Jim Quinn asked about the prescribed amount of parking in the Ordinance requirements and whether or not the Department felt the ordinance required too much parking. Terry Jones responded that when these types of facilities are used for parties, the parking becomes more of an issue. The applicant has shown areas on site that could be established for parking, and "landbanking" would be appropriate. The Department has recommended approval. Charles Weinkauf also expressed concern regarding the parking issue. The location of the amenity, rather than being central, is located quite a distance from some of the homes and Mr. Weinkauf felt that the applicant was under-estimating the amount of vehicular traffic. The parking situation was somewhat self-policing in that the residents would certainly complain and make it known if parking were a problem. Mr. Warshauer agreed with Mr. Weinkauf and stated that they would monitor the situation closely. Mr. Warshauer again referred to Brenwick's commitment for future parking. Mr. Quinn asked if the additional parking lot would be installed at the expense of the Homeowners Association; Mr. Warshauer's responsive was positive. Mr. Weinkauf stated that the size of the facility alone would warrant a larger parking area than 12 spaces; even 24 spaces would not adequately handle the needs of special situations and large parties. Terry Jones pointed out that there were no homes located along the south side of William Connor Way. There was further discussion concerning the parking location, the number of spaces and the requirements of the ordinance. The location of the parking lot was also an issue in that it was not close to the Clubhouse. Dick Klar was concerned with lack of direct access to the Clubhouse from Brooks Landing and Chapman's Claim. Mr. Weinkauf concurred. In response to questions from Mr. Weinkauf, Mr. Warshauer stated that it would probably be 4 or 5 years before the Clubhouse amenity would be turned over to the Homeowners Association. There was discussion as to whether or not an escrow could be set up that would provide for the construction of the additional parking lot prior to turning the amenity over to the Homeowners Association. Mr. Warshauer asked that Docket No. V-85-97 be TABLED to allow the applicant time to work with the Department for an alternate parking plan. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 3 Dick Klar moved for the approval of SU-84-97, Prairie View Clubhouse, seconded by Jim Quinn. APPROVED 3-0. 3i. Laikin Tennis Facility (V-86-97) Petitioner seeks a developmental standards variance of Section 5.3.1 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to increase the allowable height of an accessory building from 18 feet to 33.5 feet. The site is located at 9920 Towne Road. The site is zoned S-1/Residence. Filed by Jim Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Board representing the applicant, Dan and Jackie Laikin. Mr. & Mrs. Laikin are proposing the construction of a one court, indoor tennis facility in conjunction with their residence at 9920 Towne Road. Mr. Nelson pinpointed the location of the proposed facility which is in close proximity to the home and insulated from view by distance from the property by a wooded area on site. A developmental standards variance is being requested to permit an increase in height of the accessory building from 18 feet to 33.5 feet. The optimum height of a tennis facility is 35 feet from the top of the net. Mr. Nelson commented that the height of the proposed facility is no greater in height than that permitted by homes in the area; in fact, the Laikin residence approximates 35 feet in height. The tennis facility is architecturally pleasing and in keeping with the residential character of the area. Members of the public were asked to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed facility; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. Terry Jones reported that the Department is recommending approval of the proposed tennis facility. Jim Quinn asked if the facility would be used as an instructional facility or home business; Mr. Nelson responded that the facility will be private and not used to operate a home business. Dick Klar moved for the approval of Docket No. V-86-97, Laikin Tennis Facility, seconded by Jim Quinn. APPROVED 3-0. 4i. Delaware Trace Clubhouse (SU-1-98) Petitioner seeks Special Use approval to construct a clubhouse and pool area for the Delaware Trace Subdivision. The site is located on the southwest corner of Sioux Trail and Navaho Way within the Delaware Trace Subdivision. The site is zoned S-1/Residence. Filed by Richard Henderson of Schneider Engineering. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 4 Richard Henderson appeared before the Board representing the applicant. Special Use approval is being requested to construct a clubhouse and pool area at the southwest corner of Sioux Trail and Navaho Way within the Delaware Trace Subdivision. The facility will consist of a pool, parking area that provides for 10 spaces, and a Clubhouse approximately 2,000 square feet in size. The building will be red brick exterior; the pool will be fenced. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed project; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. Jim Quinn asked about possible chemical storage, since the site is close to a wellhead. The project was reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee and the Hamilton County Soil & Water Conservation indicated no problem. However, Jim Quinn was specifically referring to approval from the City Utilities and asked that a letter be submitted from them. Charles Weinkauf asked if children in the Subdivision would be crossing any major street to get to the pool facility; Richard Henderson's responsive was negative, since the pool is centrally located. Terry Jones reported that the Department was recommending approval; all Technical Advisory concerns have been addressed. Terry Jones agreed to ask for a statement from the Carmel Utilities in regard to on site chemical storage. Dick Klar moved for the approval of SU 1-98, Delaware Trace Clubhouse, seconded by Jim Quinn. APPROVED 3-0. 5i. Pro Care (UV-2-98) Petitioner seeks use variance approval to allow an office expansion to the existing facility. The site is located on the northeast corner of 98th Street and North Augusta Drive within the North Augusta Subdivision. The site is zoned S- 1/Residence and is located within the Michigan Road Overlay Zone. Filed by Mort Rolsky of Pro Care. Lowell Rolsky, 9801 North Augusta Drive, Carmel appeared before the Board representing the applicant. Approval is being sought for office expansion to the existing facility as well as additional storage. The site is located on the northeast corner of 98th Street and North Augusta Drive. The office space will be consistent with the existing structure. In response to previous comments made at the Plan Commission meeting, the petitioner stated that he is not proposing a change of the existing variance, but rather seeking approval for adding office space. Mr. Rolsky commented that Pro Care has enjoyed a good relationship with the neighborhood to the west and most concerns have been raised by the new neighborhood to the north. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 5 Mr. Rolsky addressed some of the issues raised by the neighbors. Noise Level from an exterior phone and/or radios--these have now been disconnected to allow for a quieter environment. Decreasing property values due to the expansion--Mr. Ralsky thought it difficult to believe that property values would decrease considering the fact that no noticeable difference will appear in the neighbors' current, existing use. In regard to fertilizer, pesticides and fuel storage on the property, Mr. Rolsky stated that Pro Care has met the requirements for fuel storage on site; currently, no more than 10 to 12 bags of fertilizer and no more than 20 to 25 gallons of pesticide-type chemicals are stored on site. Pro Care has a standing storage agreement with Park Northwestern so that excessive storage of inventory on site can be avoided; also, any chemicals stored conform to current requirements. Mr. Rolsky reported that according to the police and fire departments, the recent fire on the property was started by kids, most likely from the neighborhood to the north, the closest proximity to the fire. In regard to the generation of dust from activity on site, the activity is limited to the coming and going in the morning and afternoon with minimal activity at other times outside of routine maintenance on site. On-site offices would eliminate miscellaneous trips to the site for various reasons throughout the day. Saturday and Sunday work was a concern by some of the homeowners--Pro Care does work on Saturdays during the season, generally 8 to 9 months, and on occasion Sundays during May and June. The Sunday work is very limited. Another concern raised by the neighbors was the winter view of the subject site from the existing homes. There is a substantial amount of vegetation that exists in the summertime and a fair amount that remains in the winter. Mr. Rolsky reported that due to the size and location of the proposed expansion and addition, there will be no visual change to the current view. The view was in existence before the neighbors decided to purchase their homes and live next door to Pro Care. Mr. Rolsky stated that Pro Care had maintained a good relationship with the neighbors to the west and their goal is to do the same with their neighbors to the north. Mr. Rolsky also stated that he had met with the neighbors following the Plan Commission meeting and tried to impress upon them Pro Care's desire to co-exist. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition; no one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the petition, the following appeared: Jeff Merritt, 10210 Bosloe Drive, Carmel stated that he had sent a letter to the Board expressing concerns. The neighbors also wanted to be good neighbors and co-exist; however they were concerned about their properties, their children, and safety. Mr. Merritt was concerned about the noise on Saturday mornings from equipment at the site, and declining property values. Note: John Molitor explained to the remonstrators the five criteria the Board will use to determine their findings. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 6 John Pinacci, 10224 Bosloe Drive, Carmel requested clarification of the petition, if it was for additional office space only or for office space AND a storage facility. Mr. Pinacci agreed with the comments made by Mr. Merritt. Mr. Pinacci did not feel that the proposed construction was in the best interest of the community. Terry Jones of the Department referred to the application which was to add to buildings to accommodate additional office space and receive approval for future enclosed storage space so as to remove unsightly equipment and supplies from neighbors' vision. No change is being requested in property use, only in size of the existing building approved in 1980 and the future equipment storage facility. Lee Moran, 102 Tamra Drive, Carmel stated that the view from his home is of an unsightly property and he, too, was concerned about deteriorating property values. Debbie Norris, 10206 Tamra Drive, Carmel also stated that she was also opposed to the noise from the business and said that from her second story window, the Pro Care site looked like a "dumping ground." Tim Alshire, 3702 West 98th Street, Carmel, was opposed to the proposed development because of trash on site, weekend traffic and noise, and felt that safety was an issue. Lowell Rolsky reiterated Pro Care's intention to co-exist. Mr. Rolsky commented that the proposed development will enhance the Pro Care property, will help keep the property policed, and provide an opportunity for Pro Care to be more pro-active. Charles Weinkauf reiterated the criteria the Board would be voting on. Mr. Weinkauf pointed out that Pro Care had been in existence for 18 years and prior to the construction of the adjacent homes; also, the Board could not tell Mr. Rolsky that he could not grow and expand his business. Mr. Rolsky has said that Pro Care wants to be a good neighbor and in order to co-exist, this must be worked out. Dick Klar commented that the Board of Zoning Appeals has the power to approve the use. The Plan Commission regulates the other aspects of the development such as development plan, architectural design, lighting, landscaping, and signage, etc. Mr. Klar encouraged the neighbors to attend the Plan Committee meeting scheduled for February 3rd at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. In response to questions from Jim Quinn regarding the type of use that was approved in 1980, Terry Jones stated that it was for a lawn care business. In response to questions from Mr. Weinkauf, Mr. Rolsky stated that Pro Care would be storing equipment such as lawn mowers, tractors, etc. in the facility; six to eight months is anticipated for completion of construction. The office expansion will be started as soon as possible after Plan Commission approval and should be completed within 12 months. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 7 In response to comments from Dick Klar regarding a fence, Terry Jones stated that if the petitioner were to stay off the side setback of 10 feet, Pro Care could install a 9 foot fence on the north property line. Mr. Rolsky stated that the fuel storage tank on site is surface and holds 500 gallons. The above ground storage tank comes under the review and inspection of the Carmel Fire Dept. Dick Klar moved for the approval of Docket No. UV-2-98, Pro Care, conditioned upon completion of construction within 12 months of the office expansion and storage facility, seconded by Jim Quinn. APPROVED 3-0. 6i. MacMillan Publishing Sign (V-3-98) Petitioner seeks approval of a developmental standards variance of Section 25.7.02-10 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to establish a sign on a building frontage not entitled to signage. The site is located at the northwest corner of 96t Street and College Avenue. The site is zoned B-6/Business. Filed by Jim Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel appeared before the Board representing the applicant. MacMillan is requesting approval for the placement of an identification sign on the north facia of Parkwood No. 3 for the purpose of identifying the building and the primary entrance to the building. The building is actually located at the northeast corner of 96th Street and College rather than the northwest corner as stated in the Agenda. Parkwood No. 3 faces both 96th Street and I-465, at the center of Parkwood Crossing. MacMillan Publishing is the principal tenant for the building and will occupy over 50,000 square feet, or two of the available five stories. Under the sign ordinance, the proposed sign is permitted both as to number and size, because there are no other signs identifying this building. The sign consists of internally illuminated letters, off-white in color. The back of the sign is almost identical to the one located on the northwest quadrant. The variance is required to establish the sign on a building frontage not entitled to signage under the Ordinance. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed signage; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Weinkauf asked if there would be a future request for signage on the south side of the building; Mr. Nelson responded that a request for additional signage would require a variance, since the applicant is only allowed one sign. Terry Jones reported that the Department is recommending approval. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 8 Dick Klar moved for the approval of Docket V-3-98, MacMillan Publishing Sign, seconded by Jim Quinn. APPROVED 3-0. 7i. Ameritech Signs (V-4-98) TABLED for 30 days due to inadequate notice under the Rules of Procedure. 10i. Parkwood Crossing Office Complex, Building 5 (V-6-98) Petitioner seeks a developmental standards variance of Section 17.4.2 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 60 feet to 56 feet. The site is located at the northwest corner of 96th Street and College Avenue. The site is zoned B-6/Business. Filed by Craig Flandermeyer of Duke Construction. Craig Flandermeyer of Duke Construction, 8888 Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, appeared before the Board representing the applicant. The petitioner is seeking to reduce the minimum front yard setback by 4 feet to allow construction of the five story building. Parkwood Crossing 5 is a mirror of Parkwood 4, currently under construction. The construction will include a four story glass atrium, five story building and parking garage, and consist of 128,000 square feet. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed project; none appeared. In response to questions from Dick Klar, Craig Flandermeyer stated that this particular petition deals with perimeter; item 1 li. deals with internal setbacks within Parkwood. Terry Jones gave the Department's recommendation which was for approval. Jim Quinn questioned why the petitioner felt that granting the variance would be in the best health, safety, and welfare interest to the community; Craig Flandermeyer responded that the building makes for a more aesthetically pleasing facade, and the four foot encroachment is toward the interstate highway, not onto the neighbors to the west, and does not detract from property values or sight lines. Also, it would be in the best interest of the City's tax base for Parkwood to be successful. Charles Weinkauf permitted a remonstrator to speak, inasmuch as she did not understand the procedure and did not speak out at the appropriate time. Carol Marlin, 501 East 96th Street, neighbor across the street, was definitely not in favor of the proposed development. Ms. Marlin commented that there was no point in having regulations if they were not going to be enforced. Ms. Marlin felt that if she wanted to build a residence in this manner, it would be denied and she felt the same rule should apply to the office building. Mr. Weinkauf explained to the petitioner that any decisive vote had to be in the majority; otherwise it could be tabled. Mr. Weinkauf asked if the petitioner would like to request c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 9 that this item be tabled rather than take a chance on a vote for denial of the development; Craig Flandermeyer opted to request a tabling of item 10i. Docket No. V-6-98, Parkwood Crossing Office Complex, Building 5 was TABLED until the March meeting. I li. Parkwood Crossing Office Complex (V-7-98) Petitioner seeks a Developmental Standards Variance of Sections 17.4.2, 17.4.3, 17.4.4, and 17.4.5 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to eliminate the required building setback requirements internal to the site. The site is located at the northwest corner of 96th Street and College Avenue. The site is zoned B- 6/Business. Filed by Craig Flandermeyer of Duke Construction. Craig Flandermeyer of Duke Construction appeared before the Board representing the applicant. Approval is being requested to eliminate all internal setbacks in Parkwood 5. As a point of interest, Craig Flandermeyer commented that the Indiana Insurance owns its property and is not a part of the Parkwood Crossing development and not contiguous land mass. Parkwood Crossing was developed as one large, contiguous land mass. As a singular owner, the interior set back lines were ignored at the developing stage for functional reasons. Parkwood is now requesting permission to allow internal setbacks between buildings and also, to give Parkwood the flexibility to subdivide. Duke is continuing to attract corporate headquarters and uses. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; no one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed development; the following appeared: Carol Marlin, 501 East 96th Street, Indianapolis 46240 raised concern regarding the elimination of the required setback, how much space Parkwood buildings could actually take up on the balance of the land, and what it would look like upon completion. Ms. Marlin understood how tall the building would be, but was concerned about the view she would have of the building from her home. Terry Jones reported that the development could cover up to 75% of the total land mass. In order to allow for a larger building, the developer is creating a parking garage. The entire development was originally presented as a rezone and at that time, the developer committed to total size of buildings, parking areas, and a construction schedule. As long as the developer stays within the general ballpark of the conceptual plan, it is acceptable. However, the ordinance does allow for development up to 75% of the total land. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 10 Mr. Quinn commented that the placement of the buildings on the property will provide for greater flexibility of ownership. Maynard Cox, 9540 Broadway, Indianapolis 46240 stated that he was more concerned with the density of the proposed development and eliminating internal setbacks would allow the buildings to be closer together, and perhaps more buildings being constructed. Terry Jones commented that the property lines, or parcel lines were added after approval of the conceptual plan and as lots were sold off The petitioner still must be guided by the U.S. 31 Overlay requirements which provide for 45 foot setbacks. The issue is a reduction from a 60 foot setback to a 45 foot setback. There was further discussion regarding blanket variances; the Board's position is not favorable to blanket variances. Craig Flandermeyer responded that with Building 5, the applicant is at 775,000 square feet; Parkwood is approved at s total of 950,000 square feet. The development is probably at 75% completion at present. In regard to the density issue, Mr. Flandermeyer stated that the petitioner is not asking for any more square footage than originally proposed; the original site plan for Parkwood included the parking garage. Craig Flandermeyer requested that this Docket be tabled in order to work with the Department and come to some sort of resolution. Docket No. V-7-98, Parkwood Crossing Office Complex, was tabled until the March meeting. 12i. RCI Sign (V-9-98) Petitioner seeks a developmental standards variance of Section 25.7 of the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance to increase the allowable proportion of a logo from 25% to 60%. The site is located northwest of the intersection of 96th Street and Michigan Road. The site is zoned I-1/Industrial and is located partially within the U.S. 421 Overlay Zone. Filed by Jamie Browning of Browning Investments. Jamie Browning of Browning Investments, 250 North Illinois Street, Indianapolis, appeared before the Board representing the applicant. Approval is being sought for a variance from the Sign Ordinance to increase the allowable proportion of a logo from 25% to 60%. The sign is 9 feet tall, 8 feet, 4 inches wide and does comply with the sign ordinance; however, the variance is for the proportion of the logo to the overall sign. The logo is used on all RCI business activities and is synonimous with the RCI name and recognizable. Mr. Browning reported that he had appeared before the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission and received ADLS approval. c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 11 Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed sign; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. Terry Jones reported that the Department's recommendation was for approval of the sign. Dick Klar moved for approval of Docket No. V-9-98, RCI Sign, seconded by Jim Quinn. APPROVED 3-0. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 PM. Charles Weinkauf, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary c:Aminutes\bzal998jan 12