Board of Zoning Appeals

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES May 7, 2008 MEMBERS PRESENT: PETITION #12A-08 Submitted by Rickers, KT Sports LLC Rudy Williams, President and Kenneth Kocinski for a Variance Harold Smith, Vice President Connie Klungness, Member from the Front Yard Setback Greg Spencer, Member Requirement. Willie Rayford, Member PETITION #12B-08 MEMBERS ABSENT: Submitted by Rickers, KT Sports LLC and Kenneth Kocinski for a Variance OTHERS PRESENT: from the Lot Coverage Requirement. Tim Stires, Assistant Development Director Stephanie George, Board Secretary, Mr. Stires stated he received a late written Dave Wilbur, Sr. Zoning Administrator; and request asking that this petition be continued William C. Kreegar, Assistant City Attorney for another month, due to issues they want to work out over the next thirty days. Mr. Stires ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF A stated that the Staff is in agreement to allow a QUORUM: continuance on this matter, and it is the first continuance. Mr. Williams called the meeting to order at 4:31 p.m. Ms. George took roll call and Mr. Spencer made a motion to continue until declared a quorum with four members in the next scheduled Board of Zoning Appeals attendance. Mrs. Klungness was absent meeting for Petition #12-08, Petition #12A-08 during roll call, but arrived at 4:59pm. and Petition #12B-08. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed 4 yes, 0 no. Mr. Williams performed the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance. PETITION #13-08 Submitted by Steaks R Us LLC for a MINUTES: Special Exception for a B-4 Development Plan. The April 9, 2008 minutes were approved as presented. Motion passed unanimously; 4 yes, PETITION #13A-08 0 no. Submitted by Steaks R Us LLC for a Variance from the Sign Height BUSINESS: Requirement. PETITION #12-08 PETITION #13B-08 Submitted by Rickers, KT Sports LLC Submitted by Steaks R Us LLC for a and Kenneth Kocinski for a Special Variance from the Maximum Square Exception for an Automobile Filling Footage for a Sign Requirement. Station Mr. Stires stated this is for a Montana Mike’s Restaurant. This proposed restaurant will be located at the exit ramp at Scatterfield Road. 1 Mr. Stires stated it is the former location of Newport’s Outlet store, and before that it was Mr. Stires stated they have submitted a Tibbett’s Engineering. satisfactory lighting plan that shows lighting around the perimeter of the proposed Mr. Stires stated the site has recently been restaurant, as well as exterior lighting on the cleared, and is zoned B-4. Mr. Stires stated outside of the restaurant. Mr. Stires stated that anything in a B-4 does require special there is an adequate amount of lighting exception approval. throughout for this proposed restaurant. Mr. Stires stated the property is vacant. It Mr. Stires stated that the landscaping plan does contain a little over two acres. The does show a variety of trees and shrubs submitted site plan shows the square shaped throughout. Mr. Stires added it is a well- restaurant will be located in the center of the landscaped piece of property. property. Mr. Stires stated the restaurant will be roughly 75 ft. by 87 ft. by 20 ft. high, and it Mr. Stires stated the site plan is showing 67 will contain 6700 sq. ft., and employ up to 100 percent covered by building and hard surface, full and part time employees. while in a B-4 zone class you are allowed up to 75 percent of the property to be covered by Mr. Stires stated that Montana Mike’s has building and hard surface. They are well three existing restaurants in Indiana they are below the maximum allowable lot coverage. in Greenfield, Edinburgh and Vincennes. Mr. Stires stated they show 32 percent green There are a total of 25 of the restaurants in space, compared to a minimum requirement of the United States currently. 25 percent. They are very well developed and laid out. Mr. Stires stated the submitted site plan shows parking around all sides of the Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is working on proposed restaurant which totals 134 parking a drainage plan with the City Engineer’s spaces. The Figure 9 Requirements call for office. Mr. Stires stated the Municipal one parking space per 60 sq. ft. of sales area. Development Department will not issue any Mr. Stires stated the total sales area is 3500 permits until they get a drainage approval sq. ft. which requires 58 parking spaces. The from the City Engineer. site plan shows an adequate amount of parking, easily meeting the parking Mr. Stires stated the signage shows three (3) requirement. sides of the proposed restaurant will have wall signs. The front will have the Montana Mike’s Mr. Stires stated that some of the Figure 9 logo with the mountain peaks, and the Requirements for this B-4 development do not Montana Mike’s logo also on the sides of the apply in this case. The proposed restaurant building. Mr. Stires stated that all three (3) does not abut any residential use, so the signs do meet our Sign Ordinance regulations requirement for a screen buffering does not as far as size. apply. Mr. Stires stated that the proposed restaurant will not have an unloading docks, Mr. Stires stated that the pole sign is where so that does not apply for this project. the two (2) variance come in to play. In a B-4 development, you are allowed to either have a Mr. Stires stated that the site plan shows an individual pole on each outlot or the developer access drive “Pirdy Lane” that runs along the can choose to build one large pylon sign and east side of Culver’s Restaurant. The driveway all the businesses in the shopping center will access the drive to the right which is complex would be able to put their sign on the Hampton Drive which goes back to the pylon. Mr. Stires stated that the developer in Hampton Inn. Mr. Stires stated the driveway this case, chose to let each of the is 29 ft. wide. Mr. Stires stated the site plan developments to have their own pole sign. does show 24 ft. wide aisle ways between the parking rows. 2 Mr. Stires stated in this case, on outlots you waiver (sidewalks). Staff feels that this are allowed 20 ft. tall pole signs. They are proposed restaurant does meet a majority of proposing a 40 ft. tall pole sign. Mr. Stires the applicable Figure 9 Requirements in a B-4 stated it is twice the height they are allowed zone class. Mr. Stires stated it meets all the in a B-4 zone class. They are asking for a setback requirements and the majority of the variance from the sign height requirement. Design Standards. Mr. Stires stated on the square footage or the Mr. Stires stated that Staff feels the variances face of the sign, the actual material that has should be approved for the signage as he the name of the restaurant, they are showing mentioned before they are at a competitive an l.e.d board below the sign. The sign has a disadvantage being located down in a low total square footage of 160 sq. ft. on a pole area. The taller sign would benefit them as far sign in a B-4 zone class, while the maximum as trying to compete with the other you are allowed is 125 sq. ft. Mr. Stires stated restaurants in the general area. Mr. Stires they are asking for a variance from the total stated that the smaller 20 ft. sign would be square footage for the proposed sign. blocked at times by vegetation depending on the time of year and other buildings. Mr. Stires stated the reasons for the variance are, the location of this proposed restaurant is Mr. Stires stated that since two other right by the exit ramp of I-69, this is a low businesses in the area have been granted spot, below the grade of I-69. Mr. Stires stated similar variances, one being the Hampton Inn, they are at a disadvantage as far as visibility. which stands at 50 ft. and the Quality Inn, Being down in this low area a 20 ft. tall pole which is to the west, also received approval for sign probably won’t cut it as far a visibility for a 40 ft. tall sign as well. traffic on I-69 being able to see their sign. Mr. Stires stated that in the line of sight there are Dick Donnelly, 1615 Broadway stated he also some buildings and vegetation (trees) in the has Tim Rohrer who is the developer/ owner of way of the pole sign for it to be seen by Montana Mike’s and Steve Servies of Rayl motorist on I-69. Engineering for any serious questions. Mr. Stires stated that other restaurants in Mr. Donnelly stated on the sidewalk waiver this general vicinity, Lone Star and Cracker this is limited access with the fence, so there Barrel have sought similar variances for taller is no practical use of the sidewalk at all along signs to attract motorists off the I-69 this place. Mr. Donnelly stated the sign is 10 interchange. Lone Star has a 70 ft. pole sign ft. shorter than the Hampton Inn is and the and Cracker Barrel has a 105 ft. pole sign. Mr. best he can guess the height of the roadway of Stires stated in order to compete with other I-69 over the overpass is about 25 ft. above surrounding restaurants they would like to grade level where the sign would be. The sign have a taller sign to benefit from the higher will stick out about 15 ft. above the roadbed of visibility for the motorists on I-69. I-69. Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is also seeking Mr. Williams asked on the signs, has there a waiver from the Board’s Design Standards been a study on sign height or what it actually in regards to sidewalks. Similar waivers have does to enhance business to come in? Mr. been granted for other projects along Donnelly answered every developer can make Scatterfield Road, mainly from a safety a case they need higher visibility and higher aspect. Mr. Stires stated they are asking just signs. Mr. Donnelly added you are all to be treated the same as other developments. undergoing a major zoning ordinance rewrite, and he is absolutely sure that sign height will Mr. Stires stated that Staff is recommending be one issue that will be addressed. Mr. approval of the special exception (B-4 Donnelly stated when the current zoning Development) both variances ( sign height guide was written 15 years ago, it was and sign square footage requirements) and thought that this is zoned a shopping center 3 which would have one major sign and a bunch the inside of the fence won’t do anyone any of littler signs. Although it is zoned for a good. Mr. Donnelly stated that is why they are shopping center, it is not a shopping center, asking for the waiver. this is a collection of restaurants and hotels, which have totally different needs than what Mr. Williams stated every business that comes the B-4 contemplated. before the Board, they make a case that they don’t need sidewalks, cross access and at some Mr. Donnelly stated that once the zoning point in time, somebody is going to have to do ordinances are updated, he is sure that the some sidewalks. sign heights and the relationships on lots like this one will be totally different than what you Mr. Donnelly stated they have cross access, so have now. we are starting at 50 percent. Mr. Donnelly agreed with Mr. Williams. Mr. Donnelly Mr. Williams asked on the pole sign, you want stated that for example, this and the horse to go up to 40 ft. on the pole sign from the track are two where sidewalks just don’t base? practically work. This one, the interstate has a fence, Scatterfield Road has a fence, and the Mr. Donnelly responded yes and it is 10 ft. State won’t let you put a sidewalk on the less than the Hampton Inn, which is right outside of the fence and if you are trying to beside it. make public sidewalks, that is where it should go, without the State’s permission, you can’t Mr. Williams stated that is going to be a busy do it. gateway coming into the city, right there, and it looks like the landscaping plans and Mr. Williams stated what he sees on the site everything looks real good on that. plan and everything, it will really look good. That is what most people will see when they Mr. Donnelly stated that the Board will be make the turn to the north head to the casino. real proud of what it will look like, and you will be proud of the quality of product that Mr. Donnelly stated not talking too harshly will be served. Mr. Donnelly stated people about the previous building, that started out that have been to the restaurant at as an engineering type building and then it Edinburgh, he has talked to them and they was the outlet center, that never really fit are real happy and say they are a notch above there, but with Culver’s and the Hampton Inn Lone Star and Texas Roadhouse. nearby, you will be very proud at how it fits in. Mr. Williams asked if the 134 parking spaces, would be adequate, since many things are Mr. Williams asked what are the hours of coming to the south side? operation and how well lit will the facility be? Mr. Donnelly stated that he thinks it will be Mr. Tim Rohrer, 2572 Greasy Creek Rd., more than adequate. These guys do not want Nashville, Indiana. Mr. Rohrer stated that the to pave more than they are going to use. Mr. restaurant opens everyday at 11am, closed on Donnelly stated the actual piece of ground, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve and Christmas because of the way it is configured, we could of Day. They close down during the week at put more spaces but 134 should be more than 10 pm and 11 pm on the weekend, and we do enough at their busiest time. shorten it by 30 minutes in the winter. Mr. Williams asked why not sidewalks? Mr. Rohrer stated they leave the parking lot lights on for about three (3) hours after they Mr. Donnelly stated there is a fence along the close, that is always enough time for the last highway and along the interstate ramp, a person to be out of the building. Mr. Rohrer sidewalk, the State will not allow you to put it stated that the lights will be on a timer. on the outside of the fence, and putting it on 4 Mr. Williams asked the pole sign will be lit 24 Mr. Stires asked why Mr. Rohrer chose this hours or at night? corner and why he chose Anderson? Mr. Rohrer stated he was the franchise owner Mr. Rohrer stated that they shut off the pole for Sirloin Stockade of Marion and Muncie, sign off when they close. It would be set on a and actually years ago, he had Anderson as timer to turn off at 11pm. part of his development agreement for Sirloin Stockade. Mr. Rohrer stated he has always Mr. Williams asked there is going to be 100 liked this market, but when Ryan’s full and part time employees, is this Steakhouse and Old Country Buffet first came restaurant going to be a proto-type or going to to Anderson before he did, and he chose not to be smaller or bigger than your average do it because of competition like that. restaurant? Mr. Rohrer stated that he owned the Sirloin Mr. Rohrer stated they only have one size Stockade in Muncie for fifteen (15) years, so proto-type and it will be the same size as the he has driven past, and buys his cars from Ed one in Edinburgh. That is one of his Martin in Anderson. Mr. Rohrer stated he has restaurants and he also has the one in always liked this market, this is a good town, Greenfield. Mr. Rohrer stated the restaurant and a restaurant town. in Greenfield, they remodeled an existing building, but spent several hundred thousand Mr. Williams asked are the prices pretty dollars on the remodel. Mr. Rohrer stated that competitive at Montana Mike’s? he wants it to look as good as everyone wants it to look. Mr. Rohrer added 6700 sq. ft. is the Mr. Rohrer stated they are value orientated, normal size for the restaurant. their prices are probably very similar to Texas Roadhouse. They are known for really large Mr. Williams asked the restaurant will seat, portions, a small steak is like a 12 oz. Sirloin, feed or hold how many people at one time? $12 - $14 will get you a really good meal. Mr. Rohrer stated the number of seats in the restaurant is 208, but you might not have Mr. Rayford asked out of the 100 employees, more than 70 percent of those seats actually how many would be full time? full. Mr. Rohrer stated there will be areas up front where people will be waiting for a seat. Mr. Rohrer stated that about 35 employees would be full-time. Mr. Williams asked is it strictly walk in the door, and wait or like Cracker Barrel where Mr. Williams asked what is the reason for they have a little store where customers can needing the additional maximum sign square shop? footage? Mr. Rohrer stated no they do not have any Mr. Rohrer stated the top part of the sign is kind of a store. They do have a waiting area all right, but they want to add the reader up in the front, in the vestibule there are a board. It will display the time and couple of benches on each side, go in the doors temperature. Mr. Rohrer stated that is why and there are a couple of more benches. they need the extra square footage. Mr. Williams asked is there a bar area when Mr. Williams asked Mr. Servies about the you come in? drainage, does it look good so far? Mr. Rohrer stated they will have a bar and it Mr. Steve Servies, Rayl Surveying and will be adjacent to the kitchen, which is Engineering, 1940 E. 53rd Street, stated the towards the back of the restaurant. drainage that they propose is a long narrow dry bottom under-drain detention area, on the east side of the property. Mr. Servies stated 5 their outlet would lead into the State Road Mr. Williams asked from a builders stand 109 right-of-way. They have applied for a point, if this is approved, how long will it take drainage permit with the City Engineer, and to build it? applied with INDOT for the outlet permit into their right-of-way. Mr. Donnelly stated based on the time it took to tear down Newport’s, it was not very long. Mr. Williams asked is there a pretty good size Mr. Rohrer stated they are anticipating ditch there right now? starting the project in mid to late June, and they will have it built in about 90 days. It will Mr. Servies stated yes it is, and they are more be ready by mid-October. than meeting the minimum requirement of the city’s drainage ordinance, they are Mr. Spencer made a motion to approve discharging at the one to two year rate and Petition #13A-08 based on the following they can hold in excess of a 100-year storm. findings of facts. The approval of the proposed variance would not be injurious to the public Mr. Williams asked are you going to run a health, safety, morals and general welfare of fence down to the detention area? the community because it is going to provide a needed service to the community, the approval Mr. Servies stated he doesn’t believe they will of the proposed variance would not adversely do that. affect the surrounding properties because it is already located in a business area that has Mr. Williams asked they didn’t see a need for similar businesses adjacent to it, the strict that? application of the terms of the zoning ordinance would result in practical difficulties Mr. Servies stated it is going to be dry, so in the use of the property, if the proposed there is no need for a fence around it. It will variance were denied because the property is be shallow. located in a low area, making visibility difficult. Also, the competitors to this business Mr. Stires stated it is not required when you have signs that are already similar in size to have a business backing up to another what they are wanting in their variance. Mr. business. Smith seconded. Motion passed, 5 yes and 0 no. Mr. Stires stated that Staff has toured the Montana Mike’s restaurant located in Mr. Spencer made a motion to approve Greenfield. Mr. Stires asked Mr. Rohrer to Petition #13B-08 based on the following explain the décor inside the business. findings of facts. The approval of the proposed variance would not be injurious to the public Mr. Rohrer explained that the inside décor is health, safety, morals and general welfare of a rugged-outdoors theme, almost like a lodge the community because this will provide a feel. Mr. Rohrer explained that they do have needed service to the community, the approval some animals hanging up in the restaurants of the proposed variance would not adversely and some of them are actually his that he has affect the surrounding properties because it is hunted in the past. already in a business area with similar type of businesses adjacent to it, the strict application Mr. Williams asked if there are going to be of the terms of the zoning ordinance would aquariums or anything of that nature in the result in practical difficulties in the use of the restaurant? property, if the proposed variance were denied because it is in a low area, it requires Mr. Rohrer stated no, but that is a good idea, additional visibility because of that and the and that he would mention it to his wife who competitors to this business already have is the decorator of the restaurants. similar signage to this. Mrs. Klungness seconded. Motion passed, 5 yes and 0 no. 6 Mr. Spencer made a motion to approve Mr. Stires stated that the original site plan Petition #13-08 based on the following showed the business on the east side of the findings of fact. The proposed special property, now they have flipped it over to the exception is in a proper zone district, the west side of the property. The parking was on requirements of the Figure 9 have been met or the west side, and they flipped it over to the variances have been granted. The proposed east side. special exception will serve a public need and convenience because it is going to provide a Mr. Stires stated what was the issue centered new restaurant to the community that the on two things. Issue one, a utility pole that public can enjoy. The proposed special was going to cause a problem for the western exception will not permanently injure the driveway, so they moved the drive and now appropriate use of the surrounding properties. you see an eastern access drive. The other This affected property is in an area with issue dealt with the cross access. Mr. Stires similar type businesses. The proposed special said there was some confusion by the exception is consistent with the spirit, intent developer about cross access. He added and purpose of the zoning ordinance because apparently they were not aware that they had it is going to provide a needed economic agreed to cross access. development to our community, a piece of property for the entry way off of the highway Mr. Stires stated when he sees a site plan and grant the waiver of the sidewalks. Mr. with turn-outs, similar to this site plan, he Smith seconded. Motion passed, 5 yes and 0 considers that a cross access. There were turn no. outs on both sides of this proposed site plan. Mr. Stires stated that the developer took it as a back-up area for parking spaces for the cars PETITION #14-08 to use. Mr. Stires stated that the developer did Submitted by Uhl Keith Stone and not want to have any part of having a cross Timothy Stewart for a Variance from the access on the property. Rear Yard Setback Requirement. Mr. Stires stated he told the developer that in the past few years this Board has made a PETITION #14A-08 concerted effort to emphasize cross access Submitted by Uhl Keith Stone and between businesses, especially on busy Timothy Stewart for a Variance from the roadways like 53rd Street. After a few days of Lot Coverage Requirement. discussion, the developer decided they would like to go before the Board again. Mr. Stires PETITION #14B-08 stated that they would need to submit a new Submitted by Uhl Keith Stone and site plan (which they have done). They are going for the same idea or concept, just Timothy Stewart for a Variance from the inverted. Mr. Stires stated they are asking for Parking Requirement. a waiver from cross access with this site plan. Mr. Stires stated they are seeking approval Mr. Stires stated they are seeking the same again for three variances, these variance are variances (rear setback, lot coverage and Rear Yard Setback, Lot Coverage and Parking parking). They have improved upon, at the Requirements. This site should be familiar to request of the neighbor to the south, on the the Board, this came before the Board back in amount of landscaping. The site plan showed March, and this is for a Dollar General Store. they’ve gotten rid of the fence in favor of the Mr. Stires stated upon further review by the five (5) proposed Norway Spruce trees across developer, they found some issues with the the back. Mr. Stires stated they will also have previously approved site plan, to the extent a row of shrubs that will disguise the trash they felt like they needed to take a second look enclosure. at this, and now they are back before you with a similar site plan, but flipped. 7 Mr. Stires stated that the neighbor to the either on the east side, then they would have south made a request that the fence be to remove several parking spaces; therefore, removed, so that she could see through to the not providing enough for the tenant. It would traffic on 53rd Street. The petitioner has made make that lease void, and allow the tenant to a big effort to try and improve the appearance up and leave. of the proposed site with landscaping. Mr. Rossell stated one of the main reasons is Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is seeking a for liability. From past experience with waiver from the cross access. Mr. Stires accidents from cross access, it would be more handed out the letter requesting the cross of a frontage drive, and they would have their access be waived. Mr. Stires stated to the customers backing up into that. public that they are seeking the waiver due to liability with having customers coming from Mr. Williams stated they applaud businesses other side of the neighboring property, coming into Anderson, locating in Anderson, possibly hitting other cars, or hitting the but it seems to him that it is a slap in the face store, was a concern for them. Mr. Stires with the Planning Department talking to the stated the other concern dealt with their petitioners and tells them how the Board feels competitor possibly purchasing the land next about cross access, and they still come in with to them, building a store and using the cross their hand raised up and say they want cross access to gain customers, and benefit from access. Mr. Williams stated that on 53rd them. Street, when you are in and out of the businesses, and you are talking about liability Staff likes the site plan, and are by cross access, there is more liability for the recommending approval of the three (3) customer, going in and out of businesses on variances, but as Staff we ask the Board, to 53rd Street than there ever would be with the deny the waiver for the cross access request. cross access. Mr. Williams stated that he Mr. Stires states he believes they have made a cannot buy any of the explanations that they concerted effort, along 53rd Street, to help have said in the letter that is appropriate to reduce traffic along the busy roadway. Mr. not having the cross access. Mr. Williams Stires stated that Staff is saying yes to the stated he wishes that we could deny it at that variances, but no to the waiver. stage where you could not get a petition to come in to the Board until that is already Andrew Rossell, Hurley and Stewart Civil satisfied. Engineers, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Mr. Rossell stated that on the site plan they did add Mr. Rossell stated he understands Mr. landscaping to the south, as requested by the Williams opinion, he is an engineer, and he neighbor. This is essentially the same site knows from a traffic standpoint, however this plan that they had before, however, once we is based on past experience with the cross received the survey, after this was initially access from our tenant. The developer agrees approved, they found a utility pole right where with Mr. Stires, but it is more from a tenant they wanted to put the drive. Mr. Rossell and their needs and their desires. stated that is when the whole cross access was determined by the tenant (Dollar General). Mr. Williams stated that when he goes to a store like that, he doesn’t want to go back out Mr. Rossell stated there are a few reasons on the main thoroughfare getting from one that are stated in the letter that was given to store to another. Mr. Williams stated that the the Board. They would like a waiver on the public needs to be taken care of or people cross access based on the reasons that Mr. interested in this. Mr. Williams stated that Stires mentioned. Mr. Rossell stated another when petitioners come in here and don’t want reason for this site plan for the cross access cross access, when you know that the Board was with the lease they signed with the wants cross access, it doesn’t make sense. tenant. It would void the lease if for some reason in the future there was a development 8 Mrs. Klungness asked Mr. Stires the Board going to deny the waiver, you are going to has already granted the variance for the deny the waiver first, and then ask the parking requirement, so technically with Plan petitioner if he wants to proceed with option A, you are asking for more parking spaces or B. Mr. Kreegar stated to act on the waiver less than what they granted back in March? first. Mr. Stires stated theoretically they have Mrs. Klungness made the motion, concerning presented the Board with a new plan, they the waiver in regard to the Petition #14-08, flipped it, so you have a new site plan, they that the request for waiver of cross access be have to make something different with the denied. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5 plan, and they have done that. yes, 0 no. Mrs. Klungness stated let’s go to Plan B, it is Mr. Williams asked Mr. Rossell if he wants to basically the same, or is it flipped? proceed with option B. Mr. Rossell stated yes. Mr. Stires stated the plan that is in your Mrs. Klungness asked Mr. Rossell if he called packet? That is a second proposal should this the utility department to see if the pole could fail that they would like to have as an be removed from your original plan? alternative. It is similar to what was approved on March 5, 2008, but it is different in that Mr. Rossell stated yes, and they said it was the parking has been reduced, it does show out of the question. cross access and revised landscaping. Mrs. Klungness asked will the number of Mrs. Klungness stated that it has fewer parking spaces shown on Option B meet your parking spaces than the Board originally needs at this point? approved in March? Mr. Rossell stated yes, but it will have to go Mr. Williams asked is it three (3) less? back through Dollar General, because they require thirty spaces, because in the past that Mrs. Klungness asked option A is three (3) is what has worked for them, because of the less than what was approved in March? circumstances there have been times when they have accepted less. Mr. Rossell stated Mr. Stires stated the only major difference is that Dollar General has seen this plan and they are asking for the waiver from the cross they have commented on it. If this is the last access, and that the building has been moved option, they will approve it. from one side to the other. Mrs. Klungness asked how many spaces is Mrs. Klungness stated assuming, if we have to that? do an approval, we need to decide what plan the Board is going to approve, one way or the Mr. Rossell states it is five less than you other. Mrs. Klungness stated she personally approved before, which was 25, so five less, would look at Plan B, since Plan A is not an but it increases the landscaping by option for her, because she wants cross access. eliminating them. Mr. Kreegar stated that he needs to make a Mr. Stires stated that he would give a quick suggestion, because this is something different rundown of Option B for the Board. than what the Board normally acts on, and usually you throw the waiver into the special Mr. Stires stated that Option B has the exception, and normally before you even adopt petitioner going back to March 5th where the this special exception, the waiver is granted. building is back on the east side. Some of the Here you have two (2) options, and if you deny changes from March 5th to now, the drive is the waiver, you cannot even act on Option A. almost in the same location as before, but they Mr. Kreegar made the suggestion if they are have shifted the drive to the east a little to 9 avoid the pole. Mr. Stires stated they still and it will provide a popular new business to have two lanes going out, turning left and Anderson’s south side. right, and one lane coming in off of 53rd Street. Mr. Stires stated that in the front row they Mr. Stires stated that the Staff wants to have reduced the number of spaces from six remind the Board, that if this is approved, the (6) to five (5), because the driveway has been City is expecting the petitioner to follow moved slightly. The storefront row of parking through with their promise to grant right-of- has been increased from seven (7) to eight (8). way of 15 ft. along the south side of East 53rd Mr. Stires stated that the spaces that were Street, as discussed early on in this project. along the west property line, the 17 spaces there have been reduced by five, and the Mrs. Klungness asked if the petitioner is remaining 12 spaces have been moved over so requesting a variance from the amount of they adjoin or abut the west side of the store parking that is required, which is 36, and are building. Mr. Stires stated the missing five they asking for a reduction? spaces now create the room for the open cross access between this property and the one next Mr. Stires stated yes, they are asking for 25 door. parking spaces, but the Board is getting more green space and cross access in return. Mr. Stires stated that parking variance-wise they are reducing the number of spaces from Mr. Williams asked is that the standard size 36 required spaces down to 25. The previously store for a Dollar General? Mr. Williams approved plan from March 5th had a total of 30 stated it looks awfully tight. spaces. Mr. Rossell stated it depends on if there are Mr. Stires stated that with the lot coverage, public utilities available, and what the they are boosting the green space slightly. parking requirements are. Mr. Rossell stated They are going from 19.5 percent, which was typically they shoot for about an acre, and this approved on March 5th, to 21 percent. They site is a little more compact because the are getting closer to the required 25 percent, property extends to the center line, while but they are still asking for the variance from some only go up to the right-of-way. Mr. green space. Mr. Stires stated that Rossell stated it gives them a lot of land they landscaping-wise, it is the same plan, only cannot use, based on the right-of-way, as Mr. flipped. They have the trash enclosure back Stires pointed out. Mr. Rossell added they are where it was, the five arborvitae shrubs and willing to grant an additional 15 ft. for the five Norway spruce trees along the back side, right-of-way. to make the neighbor to the south happy. Mr. Williams asked is this a standard size Mr. Stires stated they are seeking the rear store? yard setback. The rear setback remains the same at 14.87 ft. as they are encroaching a Mr. Rossell stated yes, it is the proto-typical little over five (5) ft. into the 20 ft. setback. store. Mr. Stires stated that cross access is shown Mrs. Klungness asked with granting the right- from east to west, through the property. of-way, and you are saying by granting that, it Lighting and signage will remain the same as has taken away more of your spaces as well? what was approved back on March 5, 2008. Mr. Stires stated it has affected this project’s Mr. Stires stated that the Staff is green space. recommending approval of the three (3) variances (rear setback, lot coverage and Mrs. Klungness asked would the 25 parking parking). Mr. Stires stated that Staff feels this spaces shown meet your needs? is a good use of a blighted piece of property, 10 Mr. Rossell stated that the tenant believes it back of the building that would abut the will meet their needs. residential side and it would not adversely affect the surrounding properties for those Mr. Stires stated that we should ask the same reasons, and the strict application of the neighbor to the south if they are happy with zoning ordinance would result in practical the landscaping that has been proposed. difficulties. The grant right-of-way to the City has taken up some of their building area, Ms. Betty Farler 1214 Paul Drive, stated yes, green space and parking it would require, so she will be able to see 53rd Street. giving them every benefit of the doubt and since it is already existing hard surfacing Mrs. Klungness made a motion to approve there, Mrs. Klungness made the motion to Petition #14-08 based on the following approve Petition #14A-08. Mr. Smith findings of fact. The approval of the proposed seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 no. variance would not be injurious to the public health, safety morals and general welfare of Mrs. Klungness made the motion to approve the community or affect the surrounding Petition #14B-08 based on the following properties. The Board previously granted the findings of fact. The approval of the proposed rear setback but now we are flip flopping it variance from the parking requirement allows and the Board has established in early the petitioner 25 spaces which would meet meetings that setting it back will allow more their needs and by having the 25 spaces it parking and things that will be needed for this allows for the cross access that would be business, and it be an improvement on the needed, and also includes the granting of the property there. The strict application of the right-of-way to the City. If we impose the terms of the zoning ordinance would result in zoning ordinance it would result in the practical difficulties in the use of the property, practical difficulties because there is not any if the proposed variance were denied in that place to put parking spots on this piece of the frontage and side drive is needed for property. Based on those findings, Mrs. additional parking and provide a little more Klungness moved to approve Petition #14B- green space. Mrs. Klungness moved to 08. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, approve Petition #14-08 and also request that 0 no. we continue or do they need another thing for the grant of the right-of-way? Meeting adjourned at 5:43pm Mr. Stires stated they still have the forms they presented to them several weeks ago. They need to fill them out and return them to him, and then recorded. They will take care of that independently. Mrs. Klungness stated that based on those finding of facts, she moves to approve Petition #14-08. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passes 5 yes, 0 no. BY: ______________________________ Mrs. Klungness made a motion to approve Rudy Williams, Chairperson Petition #14A-08 based on the following findings of fact. The approval of the proposed ATTEST: ___________________________ variance would not be injurious to the public Stephanie George, Board health, safety, morals and general welfare of Secretary the community because everything is already hard surfaced there, we are making improvements, and they are attempting to add a little more green space and plantings to the 11