Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)

Town of Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Pledge of Allegiance was said and attendance was taken by the Secretary. Present: Greg Morical, Chairman, Larry Jones, John Wolff, and Bryan Traylor. Al Wopshall was not present. Staff attending: Wayne DeLong, Carol Sparks Drake, attorney. A quorum is present. Morical Good evening and welcome to the March 10, 2015, meeting of the Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals. The first item on our Agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance. All Pledge. Morical The next item on our Agenda is attendance. DeLong Mr. Morical? Morical Present. DeLong Mr. Wopshall? DeLong Mr. Jones? Jones Present. DeLong Mr. Wolff? Wolff Present. DeLong Mr. Traylor? Traylor Present. Morical The next item on our Agenda is the review and approval of the February 10, 2015, meeting minutes which were distributed as part of the Board meeting packets. Are there any questions or comments from the Board? Hearing none, I would entertain a motion. Traylor I would make a motion to approve the February 10 minutes. Morical Is there a second? Wolff I will second. Morical All those in favor please say, aye. All Aye. Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Morical Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. The next item on our Agenda is continuance requests, and hearing none, we’ll move on to continued business of which we have none, so we are now with new business and the first item is Docket #2015-04-DSV, 801 North 1000 East. Mr. Achenbach, if you would please approach the podium, state your name and address for the record. Achenbach My name is Wade Achenbach. I’m requesting a Development Standards Variance for a property located at 801 North 1000 East in Zionsville. Morical Could you give us an overview of what it is you are requesting, please? Ackenbach Sure. Well, there are three variances being requested, and I know everybody received a package, and I’ll be brief and then kind of open it up for questions. But, the three variances are, the first is two primary structures to temporarily exist on the same premises, and a quick summary of that is there is no plan to actually occupy two. There would be, I think the reason that there’s a requested variance is because I would be pulling a permit with an existing occupancy at the time. So, there will not be two dwellings occupied simultaneously. The second one is, and the second and third are related, and they are in phase 1 of the project, which is simply the pole structure. The accessory will exceed the primary, as well as phase 2, which is once the home is built, accessory will exceed the primary. A quick review of it is the, again, it’s a two-phase project. Phase 1 is to go out and build a pole structure with a temporary 2,100 square foot apartment. The intent is to use it during construction, so we’re on site. With, obviously, my cheering team here in the audience, I have three kids, who are all in Union Schools. There’s no real good option for an apartment there. You’re basically renting a house. Our preference is to be on site while we’re there, so we’re not having to go back and forth and deal with working with the builder or whoever else on site on a daily basis and having to potentially live in an apartment that’s not in the same school system, so we’re constantly driving back and forth, so that’s one. Phase 2 is we build the house, and the plan would be to then obviously remove the apartment from the pole structure. Removing it would consist of getting rid of the bedrooms that are in there and removing the full kitchen that’s in there. The intent of the use of that is just to use it to become an accessory structure and use it as, I mean we’re not going to tear the entire thing out, that’s not the intent, to continue to use it as a gathering party area. Other things to note, I think, and I think this was in the packet was, you know, this is on an 8.2 acre lot; however, I do own the full 40 acres around it. It was carved out for various reasons related to the loan, the construction loan, because there’s a flood plain and some other issues, so the directly adjacent properties in the near proximity is me, directly adjacent. And, so, essentially this is a 40-acre site with a pole structure that’s pretty typical in that area. I’m sure, if you drove the area, you’ll see many, many big barns of similar size so, I think, you know, the accessory structure variance is reasonable for this area. Morical Thank you, Mr. Achenbach. A question for you. Are you familiar with the conditions Staff has recommended that we include as part of any variance? Achenbach Yes. Page 2 of 9 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Morical And are you willing to agree to those conditions? Achenbach Yes. Morical Are there any other questions for Mr. Achenbach? Thank you very much. Achenbach All right, thank you. Morical Are there any remonstrators here tonight? Seeing none, may we have the Staff Report, please? DeLong Thank you. Staff is recommending approval of the petition as filed. The proposed commitments that are outlined in the Staff Report generally find their roots from the actual petition packet and are, which is further described in Exhibit 2 of the Staff Report, at the petitioner’s request. Mr. Ackenbach described the petition for you. I’m certainly happy to go into additional details if required, but again Staff is recommending approval of the petition as filed, and I will be happy to answer any questions. Morical And, just to clarify, as filed, but with the conditions that you’ve recommended? DeLong Correct. Morical Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions for Wayne? Jones Yeah, I’ve got a question down here. Looking at the, I think, Exhibit 2, where they were talking about the house, it says that the final certificate of occupancy wouldn’t be issued for the main, the new main house, until the kitchen and everything is sort of removed from the old, from the accessory building. Am I reading that correctly? DeLong On page 2? Jones Correct, temporary variance for the ability to have two single-family residences on the same parcel. In that paragraph, the second line, “The apartment would only be occupied during the construction of the primary residence, and the bedrooms will be removed, and the kitchen will no longer be a full kitchen prior to a final CO being issued on the house.” I really don’t think the owner would want to do that. I think you would want to make sure you’ve got the CO on your new house, so that you can actually occupy it. I just – Morical Thank you. Achenbach Well, correct me if I’m wrong. Would I not be able to get a temporary CO, move into the house, then get the permanent upon removing? That was my thinking, the thought behind that. If I can’t get a temporary, then I would agree, I would not want to do that. Page 3 of 9 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Morical Wayne, are the proposed conditions that you’ve provided in the Staff Report flexible enough to address what Mr. Achenbach is seeking to do? DeLong Yes, they are. Morical Thank you. Any further questions for Wayne or the petitioner? Hearing none, who is willing to make the really long motion required for this matter? Wolff I will take a stab at it. I move that Docket #2015-04-DSV, Design Standards Variance, to allow a) the temporary presence of accessory uses which exceed the size of the primary use by 47 percent, temporary nature ceasing no later than 18 months from the date of the issuance of the improvement location permit associated with the contemplated 10,100 square foot home; b) accessory uses not being subordinate to the contemplated 10,100 square foot home, and c) two primary structures to temporarily exist on the same parcel for a period not to exceed beyond 18 months from the issuance of the improvement location permit associated with the contemplated 10,100 square foot home, all with the timing maximums as outlined below: a) by March 10, 2018, if the 8.2 acre site has not been issued an improvement location permit associated with the contemplated 10,100 square foot dwelling, the 6,284 square foot pole barn is required to be removed from the 8.2 acre site by no later than June 10, 2018; b) by March 10, 2018, an improvement location permit associated with the 10,100 square foot home with 7,528 square feet of living space is required to have been issued by the Town, and requires that the petitioner has filed all the requirements associated with such a submittal with the Town by February 12, 2018, in order to insure a timely review; c) by September 10, 2019, construction of the new 10,100 square foot home is to have been completed and the 6,284 square foot pole barn is no longer to contain a 2,180 square foot dwelling unit; and finally, d) regardless of the above criteria at no time shall two or more valid certificates of occupancy be in existence when each is associated with a Primary Structure as defined by the Zoning Ordinance for the 8.2 acre site. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Traylor Yeah, I’ll make a second. Morical Well, thank you. All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Achenbach. The next item on our Agenda is Docket 2015-05-UV, MS Zionsville LLC. Would the petitioner or the representative please approach the podium? State your name and address for the record, please. Page 4 of 9 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Frandsen Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. My name is Kent Frandsen, last name is spelled F-r-a-n-d-s-e-n. I’m an attorney with the law firm of Parr, Richey, Obremskey, Frandsen, and Patterson. Our office is at 225 West Main Street in Lebanon. I’m here tonight on behalf of the applicant, MS Zionsville LLC which is an entity affiliated with Mainstreet Investment Company. With me here tonight is Doug Pedersen and Kara Strickland, on behalf of MS Zionsville. Also, Aaron Hurt with CEC, who is the site engineer, and Alonso Arambula, who is the architect with Arc Design, and they are happy to answer any questions that you might have of a technical nature. I’m going to summarize the request and then turn it over to them for any other detailed questions that you might rather hear from them on. This is an application for a use variance to allow a transitional care facility on a 7-acre parcel of bare land located at 6460 South County Road 700 East. It’s on the south side of 334, Whitestown Parkway, and it’s on the west side of 700 East as it extends through there before you get to Royal Run. The land is zoned General Business. It’s been that way since 2009. The reason we’re seeking a use variance is because the Zoning Ordinance does not contain a category or use of transitional care facility. In working with Staff, it was felt that it would be cleaner to seek a use variance for this particular use than to try to go through the process of establishing a use and then coming back later. So it’s a transitional care facility. It’s a 90,000 square foot building, two stories. It would host 90 beds. Transitional care is for people who are recently released from the hospital and needing to engage in a form of therapy or rehabilitation. They need a temporary place to stay rather than going home. Typically, they are there at this facility for a short term, 20 or 30 daysis common. This is not a long-term facility. These people aren’t nursing home patients. They are typically there for a month or less to make it easier for them to get to and from their therapy. People who live in these facilities on a short-term basis do not have access to vehicles. They’re picked up by ambulance or by family members, taken to their therapy or doctor’s appointment and then returned to the facility. It is a professional staff, though, licensed, fully licensed. It’s felt that this location is an excellent transitional location for this site. Land to the west is so far developed as retail, and the site right across the road immediately adjacent to the site is likely to be retail in the near future. The land to the south is Royal Run, single- family residential, and land to the east is a multifamily residential construction that’s now underway. The view is that this facility, and you can see the boards here, provides a nice transitional use between the commercial, retail uses to the west, the multifamily to the east, and the single family to the south. It’s a quality structure using a lot of brick, stone. This is the building that you will see. The site has been moved about 40 additional feet from the original plan to provide even more of a buffer from the Royal Run homes bordering the south boundary, and there would be additional landscaping put in as shown on the plan that you have in front of you. It’s a low-traffic use facility, as I indicated. The residents don’t have vehicles. There are visitors, usually from four to six p.m., not a high volume of traffic in and out of the place. It’s being designed and will be constructed in accordance with the all applicable codes and building standards. We do not anticipate any adverse effects of drainage. Drainage will actually be improved by this project. There will not be traffic injection or other Page 5 of 9 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 objectionable characteristics. The use, as planned, is a less intense use than what the General Business zoning would allow, and I’m not going to go through your list of permitted uses as a matter of right in the GB district, but a number of uses that would be approved without even this process will entail more lights and more traffic, more activity, noise, than this use would be. We do not believe this will provide, have any adverse impact on neighboring property values, and it’s a site that’s particularly well-suited for this transitional use, and, especially given it’s in the vicinity of the additional healthcare facilities that already exist out there. The comprehensive plan of the Town, the current comprehensive plan contemplates that this site is a transitional use. They were not sure whether it would be commercial or higher density residential, but this is an excellent transitional use. There would be approximately 100 employees working there, three shifts, 24 hours a day, approximately 30 at a time. They have a professional staff that fixes meals. These are primarily private pay and Medicare patients. We have presented proof of publication and notice to the required property owners. We have presented findings of fact that have been revised a bit with the input from your Staff. We have the building and the site layout there. I’m going to stop talking because now we get into the details of the project, and I’m not as familiar with them as the architect, the engineer might be or the operator, Mr. Pedersen, so I’d be happy to let them address any questions you might have about the operational or site issues. Thank you. Morical Thank you for the explanation, Mr Frandsen. A quick question for you. Frandsen Yes. Morical Our meeting packet shows that the parcel goes all the way to Oak Street. Is that an accurate understanding of what the actual size of the parcel is? Frandsen I can’t answer that question, but somebody can. Morical Thank you. Can you please state your name and address for the record? Hurt Aaron Hurt with Civil and Environmental Consultants. I’m the civil engineer. We’re at 530 East Ohio Street in Indianapolis. Yeah, the parent property is 13 acres, and what we’re purchasing from that owner is the 7 acres, and we’ve got an agreement with that owner, and they’ve signed the additional disclosure or the waiver of the property owner’s rights. Morical Okay, so it would be partitioned and the portion that you would purchase is the portion that’s shown as to – Hurt That’s correct. The southern 7 acres, basically. Morical Okay, that’s helpful. Thank you very much. Are there any other questions for the petitioner? Page 6 of 9 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Jones Yeah, I’ve got a quick question. The retention pond, then, on the north side of the building, is that devoted just to the, or the dry pond, is that just to this site, or would it additionally pick up the remaining five acres or six acres? Hurt Yeah, as part of the agreement with the property owner, we are planning that detention for the northern property as well to master plan that drainage, and we’ve had multiple meetings with the Boone County Surveyor’s office and the Town of Zionsville engineers, and we had a meeting together actually, so we’re working through those details. We actually have another smaller pond on the south side of the parking lot, a swale that will pick up drainage, so there will be very little, if any, water going directly south so, yeah. Morical Thank you. Any other questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, are there any remonstrators here tonight? Seeing none, may we have the Staff Report, please? DeLong Thank you. Staff is recommending approval of the petition, certainly noting the amendment to the site plan that’s presented for you this evening. It’s different than the site plan that’s attached to the packet. The petitioner’s presentation covers the same points that Staff would indicate to you, that the comprehensive plan for the area does not delineate a specific land use for this transitional area. The comprehensive plan that is in use is the Whitestown sub area plan, and that area again does not clearly delineate a particular land use. The area itself, as already indicated in this hearing, is bound by single-family, multifamily, and commercial, and certainly rises to the idea of a transitional use between the commercial and the residential areas. Again, Staff is recommending approval of the petition as filed and as amended this evening, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. Morical Thank you, Wayne. Any questions for Staff? Hearing none, I would note just one item which is, I think, there is some language in the proposed findings of fact that we may want to adjust before we were to actually approve these findings. So, I think, if we are going to approve this tonight, we would want to base it on the discussion that we’ve had tonight and the meeting packet, but not the proposed findings of fact. So, we’ll review and finalize those at our next meeting. May I have a motion? Wolff I’ll make a motion. I move that Docket #2015-05-UV, use variance, for the property located at 6460 County Road 700 East, be approved as presented. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Morical All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Frandsen and MS Zionsville. Page 7 of 9 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Frandsen Thank you very much. Morical The item on our Agenda is Docket #2015-06-SE. Mr. Harvey at 1875 North 1100 East. Please approach, and state your name and address for the record. Harvey Shawn Harvey, 20205 Horton Road, Sheridan, Indiana. I’m asking for a special exception to build a new single family dwelling in an agricultural area. Morical Thank you, Mr. Harvey. Are you familiar with the right to farm? Harvey Yes, I am. Morical Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the petitioner? Traylor I’ve just been driving by the property, and I wanted to make sure I was looking at the right property. Is it a yellow trailer that’s sitting on the property, now? Harvey There’s two parcels. The trailer sits on one. The other is a larger horse pasture. Traylor Okay it was back – Harvey Back behind the pond. Traylor Okay. Harvey I propose the house be built in the larger section and the mobile home be removed. Morical Thank you. Any further questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, are there any remonstrators here tonight? Seeing none, may we have the Staff Report, please? DeLong Thank you. As the petitioner indicated, this is a request seeking special exception to provide for a new single-family dwelling in this agricultural area. The driver behind the ordinance, the ordinance stipulation of the special exception hearing, is to take effort to provide for agricultural preservation. As this particular parcel has been used for single-family residential purposes for some time, and the petitioner is proposing to merely replace, if you will, an existing dwelling, the Staff is recommending approval of the petition as filed, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. Morical Thank you, Wayne. So, just to clarify, the petitioner would be required to execute the right to farm acknowledgment? DeLong That is correct, and we will provide that to the petitioner at a later date, in the next few days. Morical Okay, thank you Wayne. Any questions for Staff? Hearing none, any discussion? Okay, then I would entertain a motion. Page 8 of 9 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals March 10, 2015 Traylor I move that Docket #2015-06-SE, Special Exception petition in the Agricultural District for property located at 1953 North 1100 East be approved, based on the Staff Report, as presented. Morical Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Morical All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Morical Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Harvey and good luck. So, we’ve got several findings of fact to work on tonight. We still need to address 2014-25A-DSV, 2015-02-DSV-M, and 2015-03-DSV. Do we have those in front of us? DeLong We will send these all down for signature. Morical Great, thank you. I hereby declare this meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned. Page 9 of 9