Board of Zoning Appeals

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES August 6, 2008 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Stires stated this property is located at 2309 Charles Street, it is the empty remaining Rudy Williams, President piece of property on the Wal-Mart site (Lot Connie Klungness, Member #9), and was originally going to be a gas Greg Spencer, Member station on the northwest corner. Mr. Stires Willie Rayford, Member stated the gas station was never built, so that land became available, and consists of .518 of MEMBERS ABSENT: an acre and is zoned B-4 Community Shopping Center. Mr. Stires added this Harold Smith, Vice President property is part of a (3) three-lot plat (Charles Street Addition, First Continuation) which OTHERS PRESENT: eventually led to the construction of the Wal- Mart Super Center. Michael Widing, Development Director Tim Stires, Assistant Development Director Mr. Stires stated the petitioner appears before Stephanie George, Board Secretary, the Board seeking Special Exception approval Dave Wilbur, Sr. Zoning Administrator; and as required in a B-4 zone district. This William C. Kreegar, Assistant City Attorney petition was continued last month at the request of the petitioner who needed ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF A additional time to complete some minor QUORUM: issues. Mr. Stires added the issues have been resolved and this matter is ready for Board Mr. Williams called the meeting to order at review and possible action. 4:35 p.m. Ms. George took roll call and declared a quorum with four members in Mr. Stires stated the site plan indicates the attendance. Mr. Williams performed the proposed store will measure 63.6 ft. by 90 ft. Invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance. by 21.83 ft. high and the 4980 sq. ft. multi- Mr. Smith arrived at 4:49pm. tenant commercial building easily meets all minimum setback requirements. MINUTES: Mr. Stires stated the site plan shows a total of The July 2, 2008 minutes were approved as 24 asphalt and curbed parking spaces (10 ft. presented. Motion passed unanimously; 4 yes, by 18 ft.) located on the north and west sides 0 no. of the proposed shoppes. The Figure 9 Requirements call for one parking space for BUSINESS: every 60 sq. ft. of sales area. Mr. Stires added the proposed building contains 4000 sq. ft. of PETITION #20-08 sales area which would require 66 parking spaces. Mr. Stires stated the proposed site Submitted by Dave Cravens for a Special plan falls short of the parking requirement, Exception for a B-4 Development Plan. but Staff notes that the parking requirements are out-of-date and are in the process of being PETITION #20A-08 amended. Staff would emphasize the Submitted by Dave Cravens for a petitioner knows the parking needs of his Variance from the Parking Requirement customers, and the petitioner is requesting a variance from the parking requirements. located at 2309 Charles Street. 1 Mr. Stires stated the submitted site plan Mr. Stires stated Staff is recommending indicates one point of ingress / egress to the approval of this special exception, variance project site. The site plan shows a 27 ft. wide (parking requirements) and waiver (cross- access drive in the southwest corner of the access), because the proposed project meets a project site. Mr. Stires added an existing 5 ft. majority of the applicable Figure 9 concrete sidewalk is shown along the north Requirements, Design Standards and side of the project, running along the south setbacks. side of Charles Street. Jim Dauss, 227 W. 11th Street, Anderson Mr. Stires stated the submitted lighting plan stated parking is being controlled by Wal- shows exterior lighting around the perimeter Mart and they have specific requirements of the parking lot. The lighting plan indicates based on usage of the building. Mr. Dauss there will be six (6) 20 ft. high pole lights. Mr. added he is not sure if they could even fit 62 Stires added the lights will be 250-watt metal parking spaces on a half an acre. halide lamps, and a satisfactory isolume plan is on file. Mr. Williams asked on the cross-access, have you had meeting with Wal-Mart in the past Mr. Stires stated the petitioner has indicated about cross-access, or do you think Wal-Mart he does not plan to utilize any pole or ground will not give you the cross-access? signage. The petitioner plans to erect wall signage on the front façade of each tenant Mr. Dauss stated they have given an space. Mr. Stires added the signage will meet easement and provided access to this piece of the requirements of the City Sign Ordinance. property at two (2) access points, and given an easement to the one. Mr. Stires stated the landscaping plan indicates 75.8 percent lot coverage for the Mr. Williams asked have the petitioners asked multi-tenant building project. The proposed Wal-Mart about cross-access? green or landscaping totals 24.2 percent. Mr. Stires added the maximum allowable lot Dave Cravens, 6389 Pheasant Court, coverage in a B-4 zone class is 75 percent, and Pendleton, Indiana stated he has talked to the project is within a reasonable range for lot Wal-Mart during negotiations and at that coverage. The landscaping includes a variety point in time they did not want to grant the of trees and shrubs around the perimeter of easement he can go back to Wal-Mart and ask, the parking area and building. but can’t guarantee anything. Mr. Cravens stated he has owned and operated a business Mr. Stires stated the petitioner has submitted (GNC at the mall) in Anderson for fifteen (15) drainage plans for this project to the City years. He plans to move that business to the Engineer for review. If approved, no permits new location in about 6 to 8 months. for the multi-tenant building will be issued until a drainage permit has been issued by the Mr. Williams asked would that be one of the City Engineer. tenants? Mr. Cravens stated yes, and he has also talked to Zales Jewelry and Hibbits Mr. Stires stated Staff notes the project meets Sporting Goods about coming to the new a majority of the applicable Design Standards tenant space. Mr. Cravens stated he is going required by the Board of Zoning Appeals, to a retail trade show in Chicago to ask if any including curbing, landscaping, sidewalks and national retail tenants are interested in signage. The petitioner is requesting a waiver coming to Anderson. from the Board’s cross-access Design Standard. Mr. Stires added the petitioner is Mr. Williams asked what is the lead-time of requesting the waiver because the adjoining starting this project and getting it done? Mr. business (Wal-Mart) will not grant any cross- Cravens stated he would like to delay the access, except for delivery and trash pick-up start of construction until December due to on the southeast corner of the project site. the economy, and he thinks it will be better 2 after the election. Mr. Cravens added by then was not mentioned to do an A.L.T.A survey he would have less than one year left on his and had to hire a new company to perform the lease at the mall. Mr. Cravens stated he pays survey. It was hard for him to go back to the $82,000 a year for rent of a 1,050 square feet company and ask for more easement when he of tenant space. had 60 days to complete the surveys or he was going to lose $20,000. Mr. Cravens added he Mr. Williams asked is that a good time for has no problem going back to the company construction in December? Mr. Cravens stated and asking for more easement but he can’t it is “Indiana weather” and if you look at what make any guarantee. we had during the first quarter of this year, you had 70 degree weather one day and 30 Mrs. Klungness stated she thought he would degree the next. Mr. Cravens stated he would need cross-access and Mr. Cravens agreed and hate to build a building in October and it sit stated he wanted it. empty for 4 months. Mr. Cravens stated the cross-access would Mr. Williams asked you would want to chance benefit his development. Mr. Cravens stated it in December? Mr. Cravens stated he might he doesn’t have a problem going back to Wal- have two (2) tenants signed within 60 days Mart and asking, but I can’t make any and start building in October and be done in guarantees. Mr. Cravens added he might have December. a little leverage, one of their sewer lines is 18 inches onto his property and he gave them an Mr. Cravens stated it took him three (3) easement for that and also their sign is months to negotiate with Wal-Mart being an located on his property and he granted an individual, you have to spend a lot of money to easement there also. Mr. Cravens added since negotiate with Wal-Mart, along with a site the sale is final, he will go back and ask about and business plan. Mr. Cravens added Wal- the cross-access. Mart usually doesn’t deal with individuals. Mr. Cravens stated his shoppes are going to Mrs. Klungness asked does Wal-Mart own all look more upscale than the shoppes located of that property or does CSN? Mr. Cravens right on Scatterfield Road. He has done his stated Wal-Mart owns all of that and he dealt own traffic count, visualized from all with Rod Oberstein and Scott Seal from directions, and he is not going to lease out to Bentonville, Arkansas. some business that would not fit in the location and surrounding businesses. Mr. Williams asked how much land does Wal- Mart own here? Mr. Cravens stated the Mrs. Klungness asked Mr. Cravens if he is paperwork that he has seen values the land a going to go ahead and build part of the cross- little of 14 million dollars, and he bought three access on the property like it shows on the site (3) percent of it. plan? Mr. Williams asked how far down does Wal- Mr. Widing stated he is set up for cross-access, Mart own? Mr. Cravens stated all the way to but he needs to go back to Wal-Mart and ask the frontage road which is around 21 acres. for the cross-access. Mr. Widing stated they own everything except Mr. Williams could we get some type of for the frontage along Scatterfield Road. commitment that you would go back to Wal- Mart? Mr. Cravens stated he could e-mail the Mr. Williams asked with the cross-access, did gentleman and request it in writing and then you bring it up during negotiations? Mr. give Mr. Widing a copy of what he sent, so the Cravens stated he presented it to them. Mr. Board knows he followed through with it. Cravens added he needed to have an A.L.T.A survey done and had some problems with the original survey because he hired someone that 3 Mr. Widing stated that we should leave it up proposed special exception is consistent with to Mr. Cravens to negotiate with Wal-mart the spirit, intent and purpose of the zoning about the cross-access. ordinance because it will allow for needed job Mr. Widing stated the cross access is part of creation within the community. Mr. Rayford the Design Standards and the Board could seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 no. continue this, but he is not in favor of that and just wanted the Board to know all of the PETITION #24-08 options. Submitted by Christ Lutheran Church for a Variance from the Maximum Mr. Williams asked if Mr. Cravens would need the waiver tonight to continue on with this Square Footage for a Ground Sign. project? Mr. Widing stated yes he needs the waiver. PETITION #24A-08 Submitted by Christ Lutheran Church Mr. Spencer made the motion to approve for a Variance from the 5 ft. Setback Petition #20A-08 based on the following Requirement for a Ground Sign. findings of fact. The approval of the proposed variance would not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of PETITION #24B-08 the community because the development is Submitted by Christ Lutheran Church located in an area where a gas station was for a Variance from the Maximum going to go and the current parking Allowable Ground Sign Height located at requirements are out-of-date. The approval of 716 Rainbow Boulevard. the proposed variance would not affect the surrounding properties because the area is Mr. Stires stated the property is located in the surrounded by other businesses and a Wal- 700 block of Rainbow Boulevard on the north Mart parking lot. The strict application of the side of the street. This property consists of terms of the zoning ordinance would result in 8.25 acres and is zoned R-2 Residential. Mr. practical difficulties in the use of the property, Stires added this property is the current site if the proposed variance were denied because of Christ Lutheran Church. the petitioner knows the parking requirements of his customers and requiring Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is seeking to more spaces would hinder his development replace and update the church’s exterior and would cause an issue with Wal-Mart’s signage in the front (east) yard. The petitioner parking requirements which play into this is proposing to construct an 11.875 ft. by 12.83 scenario. Mrs. Klungness seconded. Motion ft. by 14.33 ft. high ground sign with a 3.16 ft. passed 5 yes, 0 no. by 7.08 ft. L.E.D. message board. Mr. Stires added the sign will be placed on or supported Mr. Spencer made the motion to approve on a 3 ft. by 11.5 ft. by 1.5 ft. high brick wall Petition #20-08 based on the following base. findings of fact and with a waiver of cross access. The proposed special exception is in a Mr. Stires stated Staff notes the maximum’ proper zone district. The requirements of allowable square footage for a ground sign is Figure 9 have been met or variances been 32 square feet. The proposed 76 square foot granted. The proposed special exception will ground sign is 2.3 times the maximum serve a public need and convenience because it allowable size for a ground sign. Mr. Stires will bring needed economic growth into the added the petitioner wants the larger sign so community and provide a useful service to the it can be viewed more easily from the nearby community. The proposed special exception busy North Scatterfield Road and that is why will not injure the appropriate use of the the petitioner is requesting a variance from surrounding properties because it will be the maximum square footage for a ground located in a shopping area among other sign. businesses and a Wal-Mart parking area. The 4 Mr. Stires stated Staff notes the maximum incline and with the trees it is hard to see the allowable height for a ground sign is five (5) church. foot high. The proposed 14.33 ft. high ground sign is 2.8 times the maximum allowable Mr. Dauss stated they also have a visibility height for a ground sign. Mr. Stires added the problem coming from the north, but not as petitioner is seeking approval for the taller nearly as bad as it is on the south. sign so it can be viewed easily from the busy North Scatterfield Road and that is the reason Mr. Dauss stated they are asking for the for the petitioner seeking a variance from the increase not just because of our parishioners, ground sign height. but for potential parishioners and for people we hope to get there. Mr. Stires stated the submitted site plan shows the proposed ground sign will be Mr. Williams asked Mr. Widing on the sign, constructed along the east property line of the they will have an electronic message center, church property and with a zero setback. Staff on that board it cannot flash? Mr. Widing notes the maximum front setback requirement answered yes, it cannot flash. for a ground sign is five (5) feet. Mr. Stires added the petitioner is seeking approval of the Mr. Williams asked why the reason for the requested zero setback so the proposed ground new sign? Mr. Dauss stated the current sign sign can be more easily seen from North was built in the early 1960’s shortly after the Scatterfield Road, and why they are church started in the 1950’s. The sign has requesting a variance from the front setback been repainted a couple of times since then requirement. and just to give an idea of the property line, the “v” of the current sign is five (5) ft. away Mr. Stires stated Staff is recommending from the line. approval of the requested variances (ground sign square footage, ground sign height Mr. Spencer asked when the State took some allowance, 5 ft. front setback requirement) of your property, did they take it by eminent because the proposed ground sign will give the domain or was that an easement that they Christ Lutheran Church increased visibility used? Mr. Dauss stated they took the land. and exposure along North Scatterfield Road There is a large drainage swale that the and it should not cause a vision block for church maintains. Mr. Dauss added some anyone nearby. people think it is church property, but it is not. Jim Dauss, 227 W. 11th St., Anderson, stated he is the architect and chairman of the church Mrs. Klungness stated there must be some congregation, and wanted to clarify why they ratio for the viewing of the sign as you pass it? need more visibility is because when the State Mr. Dauss yes there is a ratio and when widened Scatterfield Road they took about 35 people are driving on Scatterfield Road at a ft. from the church for a drainage swale. Mr. speed of 50 mph, the minimum size is an eight Dauss stated the property line is back already (8) inch letter. Mr. Dauss added that is why 35 ft. away from the normal property lines they went to the bigger sign to produce that along Scatterfield Road. size lettering. Mr. Dauss stated the church has visibility Mr. Williams asked who designed the sign? problems for those approaching from the Mr. Dauss stated they worked with a couple of south, because the property to the south side sign companies and they came up with the of Rainbow Boulevard has trees that extend design along with a committee from the out to the property line. Mr. Dauss added church. when you come from the south, you are in the long stretch of Scatterfield Road, so speeds are Mrs. Klungness asked there is no way you can already up and you are coming up a slight meet that five (5) ft. requirement, or if you could would you have to make the sign bigger? 5 Mr. Dauss stated they are already back 35 ft. ft. away from Scatterfield Road. The strict from the normal property line, and another application of the terms of the zoning five (5) ft. would hurt our visibility, because as ordinance would result in practical difficulties you are traveling from the south you would in the use of the property, if the proposed have to travel farther to see the sign. variance were denied because if the sign were placed farther back it would interfere with Mr. Williams asked if this petition were foliage and could result in a bigger sign. Mr. approved tonight, when would the church Rayford seconded. Motion passed 4 yes, 0 no. start erecting the sign? Mr. Dauss stated they would sign the contracts by Friday and it Mr. Spencer made a motion to approve would take six (6) weeks to manufacture the Petition #24B-08 based on the following sign, so it would be up in seven (7) weeks. findings of fact. The approval of the proposed variance would not be injurious to the public Mrs. Klungness made a motion to approve health, safety, morals and general welfare of Petition #24-08 based on the following the community, because the sign will be findings of fact. The approval of the proposed bigger and make it a little safer for motorist to variance would not be injurious to the public read at a fast rate of speed and that is who the health, safety, morals and general welfare of sign will be directed at those driving on the community because the sign will be bigger Scatterfield Road. The approval of the and make it a little safer for motorist to read proposed variance would not adversely affect at a fast rate of speed and that is who the sign the surrounding properties because there is will be directed at those driving on an existing sign already there, but will be Scatterfield Road. The approval of the removed. The strict application of the terms of proposed variance would not adversely affect the zoning ordinance would result in practical the surrounding properties, because there is difficulties in the use of the property, if the an existing sign already there, but will be proposed variance were denied because the removed. The strict application of the terms of location and for visibility reasons the square the zoning ordinance would result in practical footage of the sign is needed based on difficulties in the use of the property, if the scientific studies performed by sign companies proposed variance were denied because the to determine this is the size of sign needed in location and for visibility reasons the square order for the messages to be read by footage of the sign is needed based on parishioners and guests. Mr. Rayford scientific studies performed by sign companies seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 no. to determine this is the size of sign needed in order for the messages to be read by PETITION #25-08 parishioners and guests. Mr. Spencer Submitted by Nestle USA and Young seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 no. Electric Sign Company (YESCO) for a Mr. Spencer made the motion to approve Special Exception for an Interstate Petition #24A-08 based on the following Freestanding Identification Sign. findings of fact. The approval of the proposed variance would not be injurious to the public PETITION #25A-08 health, safety, morals and general welfare of Submitted by Nestle USA and Young the community because there is Electric Sign Company (YESCO) for a approximately 35 ft. from the location on the Variance from the Maximum Sign Face sign to Scatterfield Road that is owned by the Square Footage Requirement. State and it is an easement as well as a drainage swale and they want to post this as close as Scatterfield as possible to be read by PETITION #25B-08 motorist. The approval of the proposed Submitted by Nestle USA and Young variance would not adversely affect the Electric Sign Company (YESCO) for a surrounding properties because there is an Variance from the Maximum Sign Height existing sign and the placement of this is 35 Allowance Requirement. 6  notes the amending ordinance specifies the interstate identification sign should not exceed 500 square feet and there is a 120 ft. difference. Mr. Stires added the petitioner is PETITION #25B-08 seeking a variance from the sign square Submitted by Nestle USA and Young footage or area requirement. Electric Sign Company (YESCO) for a Variance from the Maximum Digital Mr. Stires stated the proposed interstate Billboard / L.E.D. Board Square Footage identification icon sign includes a digital Requirement located at 4301 West 73rd L.E.D. board measuring 14.75 ft. by 21.66 ft. by 18.41 ft. high, or 320 square feet in size. Street. The amending ordinance specifies a digital L.E.D. board is limited to 200 square feet. Mr. Mr. Stires stated this property is located in Stires added the digital board exceeds the the 4000 through 4600 blocks of West 73rd maximum square footage by 120 feet and the Street on the south side and is bounded on the petitioner is seeking a variance from the south side by Interstate 69 and on the west maximum allowable digital L.E.D. board side by Layton Road and it is Anderson’s square footage requirement. Nestle Manufacturing plant. Mr. Stires added it is nearing completion and will employ Mr. Stires states the Nestle sign meets or approximately 300 workers and is zoned I-3 exceeds the ordinance requirement of a Industrial Reserved. minimum distance of 500 feet for any off- premise billboard sign. The Nestle sign meets Mr. Stires stated the petitioner is seeking the ordinance requirement of a minimum 50 special exception approval for an Interstate ft. setback from the right-of-way line. Mr. Free-Standing Identification Icon Sign. The Stires added the petitioner, to date, has Plan Commission in March 2008 received verbal approval from Indiana recommended approval of an amending Department of Transportation (INDOT) which ordinance requiring special exception approval stated the Nestle sign is not under their to allow industrial, manufacturing and high jurisdiction because its an on-premise sign as technology business located along I-69 to have opposed to a billboard. one additional identification (Icon) sign. Mr. Stires added the City Council approved the Mr. Stires stated the petitioner understands amending ordinance in May 2008. the proposed interstate sign cannot flash, blink, flutter, pulsate, revolve or have chasing Mr. Stires stated the petitioner’s submitted lights. Mr. Stires added the proposed site plan indicates Nestle is proposing to interstate identification sign is easily more construct a 34.83 ft. by 45.91 ft. by 50 ft. high than 500 feet from a residential zone, school, Interstate identification icon sign on the far church or institution of human care. south side of their property as it fronts Interstate 69. Staff notes the amending Mr. Stires stated the submitted landscaping ordinance specifies the interstate plan shows a landscaped island around the identification sign should not exceed 45 ft. base of the Nestle sign to buffer the base. Mr. height. Mr. Stires added the proposed Stires added the buffer area will be at least 10 interstate icon sign is 50 ft. high, and exceeds ft. in diameter around the base. the maximum height allowed by five (5) feet. The petitioner is seeking a variance from the Mr. Stires stated Staff is recommending sign height requirement and Staff notes the approval of the special exception (interstate proposed sign is being placed on a five (5) foot identification icon sign) and variances (sign high aluminum base. square footage, sign height and digital L.E.D. board square footage) because the placement Mr. Stires stated the submitted plans indicate of the Nestle sign will provide an Interstate 69 the proposed interstate identification icon sign presence and visibility. Mr. Stires added the is approximately 620 square feet in size. Staff 7 Staff notes the Nestle sign is along the Mr. Williams asked where is the entrance interstate will provide an economic where you will be able to access the sign to development benefit to the City, as more and take care of the landscaping? Is it on the more people discover Nestle, a worldwide drawing? Mr. Shear stated there would be an company, has a facility in Anderson. access drive to get to the sign for maintenance and the landscaping. Bob Shear, 5370 W. 84th Street, Indianapolis, stated to add to the INDOT side, it is a little Mrs. Klungness asked if this sign is an more than a verbal, the lady at INDOT interstate identification sign, but is an on- referenced Mr. Shear to their website and premise sign, why are we considering it under their regulations stated that on-premise signs an interstate sign? Mr. Widing stated it still are not covered by their jurisdiction. The copy fits into our City Ordinance. Mr. Kreegar of the sign is allowed to be Nestle related and stated we have a separate definition for an public service messages. interstate sign which is different than what INDOT has. Mr. Kreegar added we have to Mr. Widing stated to confirm what Mr. Shear follow our ordinance instead of INDOT. is speaking about and he has had a discussion with legal counsel of Nestle and they have Mr. Widing stated in the ordinance they also confirmed that INDOT had stated the needed to get INDOT approval before they same thing. come before the Board, and INDOT is saying they don’t make approval for an on-premise Mr. Shear stated relative to the additional 5 signs. Mr. Widing stated they still have to ft. height, the sign would be placed on a 5 ft. comply with our ordinance. high base, the ground is not level out there and when they get the landscaping with all Mrs. Klungness asked if the sign were going the other things felt the bunny should be to be placed behind a fence? Mr. Shear stated placed on something rather than just dirt. yes, there would be a fence behind the right- of-way fence along the interstate. Mr. Widing Mr. Shear stated the need for more square stated all of the Nestle property would be footage on the electronic board in part is fenced at some point behind the interstate because the sign will be placed on the fence. interstate and with the rate of speed that the motorist travel for them to read it, they need Mr. Widing stated the Nestle bunny is the to increase the square footage to allow for the company’s marquee and this plant is the 18-inch lettering about 900 ft. down the road. biggest plant in North America, and this sign will tell the motorist you have arrived in Mr. Williams asked since the sign will be Anderson and our biggest plant in North placed on their property, could the sign flash, America. Mr. Widing added it is identifying or have chasing lights on it? Mr. Widing there flagship plant in North America and stated the sign won’t flash, it will only display that is why Staff is supporting this interstate messages or images and then change, it identification icon sign. cannot flash, or having chasing light on it. Mr. Shear stated the sign is not built to pulsate. Mr. Widing stated there are some concerns about possible vandalism, but Nestle will take Mr. Williams asked about landscaping. Are the appropriate steps if there is vandalism in you going to keep the landscaping and shrubs the future to protect this marquee icon. Mr. down? Mr. Shear said the area will be slightly Widing added Nestle has security and if more angled so you have rows leading up to the security needs to be in place, Nestle will take sign, so you can see all the landscaping. Mr. those steps. Shear added that is another reason why there is a 5 ft. base. Mr. Spencer asked when Mr. Shear stated Nestle wants to use their L.E.D. board for both Nestle products and community 8 messages, do you know what percentage will mostly be made out of fiberglass and steel be split between the two? Mr. Shear stated it framing. was too hard to predict how many messages that each side wants and layouts. Mrs. Klungness asked how the bunny was Mr. Rayford asked does Nestle have another going to be illuminated? Mr. Shear stated the sign like the proposed sign located anywhere bunny will be illuminated by ground lighting near an interstate? Mr. Shear stated he is not and it will not be internally illuminated. sure. Mrs. Klungness made a motion to approve Mr. Williams asked as far as servicing and Petition #25A-08 based on the following maintenance will The Sign Group take care of findings of fact. The approval of the proposed it? Mr. Shear stated they are a local sign variance would not be injurious to the public company out on Indianapolis and we will most health, safety, morals and general welfare of likely be taking care of the sign. the community, because of the location of the sign will be in an industrial area. The Mrs. Klungness asked if Mr. Shear could approval of the proposed variance would not compare this sign to something that she has adversely affect the surrounding properties already seen? Mr. Shear stated it is pretty because it is an industrial area. The strict unique, but Hamilton Town Center is half the application of the terms of the zoning size of the proposed Nestle sign. ordinance would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property, if the proposed Mrs. Klungness asked if Mr. Shear’s company variance were denied because it is going to did that sign. Mr. Shear stated YESCO did promote a new business in the community and the sign. it will be used for community service announcements and since it needs to be bigger Mrs. Klungness asked would the sign be to accommodate speeding cars on the constructed like the Hamilton Town Center interstate to read as they pass. Mr. Rayford sign? Mr. Shear stated it would have the same seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 no. technology. Mrs. Klungness made a motion to approve Mr. Spencer asked could the Board require a Petition #25B-08 based on the following certain amount of time for community findings of fact. The approval of the proposed announcements? Mr. Kreegar stated you variance would not be injurious to the public could, but it would be up to the petitioner if health, safety, morals and general welfare of they would accept. Mr. Shear stated it would the community, because the height and width be difficult to sit down and predict the amount of the sign will be proportionate for the of time per each announcement. interstate and it would meet the original ordinance if the 5 ft. base were not there. The Mr. Stires stated he had a follow-up to a approval of the proposed variance would not question that was raised by Mr. Williams. If adversely affect the surrounding properties the sign were approved tonight, Mr. Stires because of the same reasons mentioned above. told Danny Ramirez from YESCO that a The strict application of the terms of the covenant needs to be filed promising zoning ordinance would result in practical maintenance and any future improvements to difficulties in the use of the property, if the be taken care of by the owners. Mr. Stires proposed variance were denied, because it is added that Staff has boilerplate documents the best location for this sign and it is going to that we can give YESCO as a guide if the sign promote a new business in the community. were approved. They need to file the covenant Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 before any permits can be issued. no. Mrs. Klungness asked what material the Mrs. Klungness made a motion to approve bunny will be made out of? Mr. Shear stated it Petition #25C-08 based on the following would be a 3-D effect on the sign and will findings of fact. The approval of the proposed 9 variance would not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community, because the sign is going to be shown to travelers on the interstate and the size is being dictated by the amount of comprehension of the drivers at a fast rate of speed. The approval of the proposed variance would not adversely affect the surrounding properties because it is surrounded by an industrial area. The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property, if the proposed variance were denied because to get the message out to those it is intended to reach. Mr. Rayford seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 no. Mrs. Klungness made the motion to approve Petition #25-08 based on the following findings of fact. The proposed special exception is in a proper zone district. The requirements of Figure 9 have been met or variances have been granted. The proposed special exception will serve a public need and convenience by community messages and a new business to the community. The proposed special exception will not permanently injure the appropriate use of the surrounding properties because it is an on-premise sign and it is surrounded by the interstate and industrial area. The proposed special exception is consistent with the spirit, intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance because it will promote a new industry and community messages given out to those driving past the community to get interested in our community and also Nestle. Mrs. Klungness stated also a covenant must be on file for future maintenance and improvements on the sign. Mr. Rayford seconded. Motion passed 5 yes, 0 no. Meeting adjourned at 6:18 pm BY: ______________________________ Rudy Williams, Chairperson ATTEST: ___________________________ Stephanie George, Board Secretary 10