Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)

MEETING RESULTS- ZIONSVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS APRIL 9, 2019 The meeting of the Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals occurred Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 6:30 p.m. in the Zionsville Town Hall Council Chamber, 1100 West Oak Street, Zionsville, Indiana. The following items are scheduled for consideration: I. Continued Business Docket Number Name Address of Project Item to be considered Continued from January 8, 2019 to February 12, 2019 Meeting, Continued by Petitioner from February 12 to the March 12, 2019 Meeting, Continued from March 12 to the April 9, 2019 Meeting, at the request of the Board, Continued from April 9, 2019 Meeting to the May 14, 2019 2018-46-DSV R. Pabst 8090 E 550 South Meeting, at the request of the petitioner. Petition for Development Standards Variance in order to permit the establishment of a 1.83 acre lot. (Minimum lot size is 2 acres) in the Low-Density Single-Family Residential Zoning District (R1). II. New Business Docket Number Name Address of Project Item to be considered Approved as presented & filed w/exhibits – 4 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for Development Standards variance in order to 2019-08-DSV R. Shaffer 825 W Pine Street provide for the construction of a garage which: 1) Deviates from the required side & aggregate yard setbacks in the Urban Residential Village Zoning District (R-V). Approved as presented & filed w/exhibits – 4 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for Development Standards Variance to allow for Zionsville OMS 12036 N Michigan 2019-09-DSV the construction of a new commercial business to: Partners Road 1) Increase the maximum office square footage in the (B‐1) Neighborhood Business & Michigan Road Overlay Zoning District. Approved with Right to Farm Commitment as presented & filed w/exhibits & per staff report 2019-10-SE W. Myers 3250 S 200 East – 4 in Favor, 0 Opposed Petition for Special Exception to allow for new residential building(s) in an Agricultural Zoning District (AG). April 12, 2019  Approved as Amended (only canopy sign approved), w/exhibits & per staff report – 4 in Favor, 0 Opposed 7011 Whitestown Petition for Development Standards Variance to allow for 2019-11-DSV GetGo Signage Parkway signage of an existing commercial business which: 1) Utilizes the canopy to convey commercial message(s) 2) Exceeds the allowed square footage maximums in the Rural General Business Zoning District (GB). Respectfully Submitted: Wayne DeLong AICP, CPM Town of Zionsville Director of Planning and Economic Development April 12, 2019 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 In Attendance: John Wolff, Joe Kremp, Larry Jones, Julia Evinger. Absent is Steve Mundy. Staff attending: Wayne DeLong, Darren Chadd, attorney. A quorum is present. Wolff Good evening, and welcome to the April 9, 2019 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. The first item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance. All Pledge. Wolff The next item on our agenda is attendance. DeLong Mr. Kremp? Kremp Here. DeLong Mr. Jones? Jones I’m here in my brand new chair. DeLong Mr. Wolff? Wolff Present DeLong Ms. Evinger? Evinger Present. DeLong Mr. Mundy? Wolff Thank you ,Wayne. The next item on our agenda is the approval of, the review and approval of the March 12, 2019 meeting minutes. You should have gotten those in your packet. Any comments or discussion? Seeing none, I would entertain a motion. Evinger I’ll make a motion to accept the minutes as presented. Wolff Thank you. Is there a second? Kremp Second. Wolff All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Wolff Those opposed? [No response.] Page 1 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Wolff Motion carries. The next item on our agenda is continuance requests. Are there any petitioners here tonight looking to continue their petition to the next meeting? Seeing none, the next item on our agenda is continued business, which brings us to Docket # 2018-46-DSV. Will the petitioner please come forward and state your name and address for the record? Jacob Good evening. My name if Jeff Jacob. I am here on behalf of Reesa Pabst. I am an attorney with Hackman Hulett with offices at 1620 West Oak Street here in Zionsville. Mrs. Pabst is the owner of a 3.83-acre parcel located on 550 South in Zionsville. She is seeking a development standards variance in order to establish a 1.83-acre lot in the total 3.83 acres in a R1 district. You guys have heard this a couple times before, so I am not going to rehash many of the details, and since my involvement and reviewing what’s occurred, it appeared clear to me that we needed some data to support drainage on the split lot, the 2-acre lot. So, you have been supplied a storm water drainage evaluation report, and those findings were prepared by Ladd Engineering. Mr. Ladd was on site a couple of times and met with the property owner, and prepared some findings and recommendations should this site develop. It’s clearly being split for the development of a 1-acre, or excuse me, a 1-home residential lot. His recommendations were pretty consistent with what you would anticipate, but that all of the water be moved to the south out to County Road 550, and that would be by the installation of a 6- inch perimeter drain, and connecting up the septic if ever needed. So, we have memorialized those by way of written commitments that will be recorded against the property. And, we have also basically made a blanket statement, and if you’re not too familiar with this property, it is flat and then it crests into a peak on the north end of it. That’s clearly where the home site would be, and we have committed further that any further drainage that we create on site through impervious construction would be taken to the south. So, what we basically said is we are not going to cause any issues with the construction of a residential home. Plus, we’re taking down, and we have committed to this, the corn bin and shed will be taken down prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. So, we have made those commitments in conjunction with the comments that have been made. We believe that we have provided you sufficient justification to grant the development standard variance. My client and I are happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Wolff Thank you, Mr. Jacob. Any questions for the petitioner? Jones So, was any conversation held between you and the adjoining property owners to the north and the east? Jacob Relative to drainage or otherwise, no sir, since the last meeting. Jones Okay. Well, that was kind of the core issue is that there is a drainage issue on the east side of the property and in the northeast corner. Jacob Well, we provided the drainage report to the property owners, but did not have any conversation or feedback from them. We believe based upon the report that we are taking care of the drainage on our site. Jones No. You’ve agreed to run the downspouts to the south edge of the property. Page 2 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Jacob Well, the report, what we have, we’re not going to fix drainage that we don’t necessarily believe is a problem in the area. If the report, if you look, it intimates that there has been off-site drainage corrections made not on our property that we weren’t included in, that we don’t necessarily believe will enhance the drainage in the area. So, we have basically taken what we believe the charge was, and I understand it was to work with the neighbors, but we don’t have the ability to install some system. So, what we basically looked at is we’re going to take impervious area and take it off the site and to the extent we put in pervious area on the site. We’ll install drainage out to 500, or 550, and keep any water, or further water, from going onto their site, to and including to the northeast, which we have committed to. Evinger There is a perimeter drain that runs around what would be the proposed home, as well? Jones No, they said - - Evinger --There is a perimeter tile that runs around the house. Jones For the downspout drainage? Jacob Mr. Jones. Also, my client did, in providing the report, indicate to me that she provided the report to a few of the neighbors, and emailed them, and they did indicate that they did not wish to meet to discuss it. And, that included to meet with Mr. Ladd. Jones Well, I guess my concern is the remonstrance we had was regarding that there is a drainage issue that starts sort of in the northeast corner of the property and runs along the east edge of it, and that any further development of the site most likely is going to add to that issue and not really resolve it, so the charge was to come back with some sort of response that the remonstrators were satisfied that by us granting a variance it wouldn’t increase the issues that they have stated already exist. Jacob Well, and I believe we very squarely have done that. Jones No, you said you’d put a drain tile in to take the water off the downspouts. That doesn’t really include any of the other site improvements or changes that might be made. Wolff Mr. Jones, I think, and Mr. Paddock is here, so I’m sure we will hear from him in a moment, but I thought I heard him say that he doesn’t have a drainage issue currently because he has resolved the issue. And, so if he has resolved the issue, there isn’t one currently, if they add a house, a structure to the house, and they take the water from that structure and take care of it, then there should still continue not to be an issue. That may be the worst thing to say. But, I think that’s what I heard. I’m sure we’ll have an opportunity to hear that from the remonstrator. Jones Okay. That’s what I want to confirm. Page 3 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Jacob In reviewing the transcript from the meeting, that’s what I read, is that there was not a drainage issue. My client doesn’t believe that there is, and what we basically said is we’re going to take impervious area away, and we’re going to put in a perimeter drain to support a home. Our septic will be drained. But, more importantly, it’s something we’re going to take our downspouts and that would most likely occur anyway. It’s where we’re going to route it. We’re going to route it to the south, which is more costly, but we’re also indicating we’re not going to put more water to the north or northeast. So, that’s what I saw the charge was, is to provide a written assurance that, to your point, we’re not going to make any perceived or actual drainage problem, which we don’t think is there, in a site with fall, worse. We believe through our commitments, which are supported by the engineering report, or the storm water drainage evaluation, do just that. Wolff Any other questions for the petitioner right now? Kremp And, so your commitments run with the land. It can be enforced not only by the Town, but by the adjoining property owners? Jacob Correct. Kremp Okay. Jacob They’re your pretty standard language that you guys have used before. Kremp Would you be open to including some sort of clarifying language, this is my only request, that anything that’s stated in the commitments would be in addition to, and not in lieu of, any requirements the Town of Zionsville would impose in connection with the issuance of permits for the development of the property. I just want to make sure that it’s clear that we’re not making a statement here that what’s being done through these commitments is somehow adequate to address drainage. Jacob I’m not sure that I object to that, but I’m not quite sure I follow what your suggestion is. Kremp Meaning, if we would approve the petition tonight, the commitments that are being made with respect to what will occur in connection with the construction of a residential development, involves installation of certain drainage-related improvements, my request would be that there be some sort of a clarifying statement in your commitments that get placed on the record that these commitments are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any commitments that the Town of Zionsville may impose in connection with the issuance of permits. Jacob Yes. That is correct that this would be our voluntary commitments are above and beyond what would be consistent with the issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy. Kremp And, you’re willing to include that in the commitments, just a clarifying statement? Page 4 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Jacob Yes. Kremp I know we’re agreeing that that’s the case, but I’d like it to be on the record. Jacob Yes. Kremp Thank you. Jacob And, one clarifying point, you made a comment that this was, that there would be, you know, a residential development. I want to make sure that everybody is clear that that’s not our intention. This is a one-lot, one-home site. This would not be, we would not split this any further. I just want to make sure everybody, when they hear residential - - Kremp When I said residential development I meant the construction of a home. Jacob I knew what you meant, I just want to make sure everybody else did. Thank you. Wolff Thank you. Are there any remonstrators here tonight? Please come forward and state your name and address. We do know who you are, but it’s for the record. Paddock Jim Paddock, 8164 East 550 South. Okay, first of all we need to get a couple stuff clear because we were not notified of this new plan. We were notified to possibly meet with them, but we had an incident last meeting in the parking lot where we were threatened, you guys were threatened. So, I did not want to meet with them until I knew how to resolve this. And, I come up here to try to resolve this. I didn’t know I was going to have get a lawyer or an attorney or whatever to try to fight with this. So, we were not notified of the new plans for drainage. I’m not saying it hasn’t been done. We knew that they were going to have a meeting, but we didn’t know that there was plans being done, or was done. So, I don’t know, that was false. So, if we can sit up here and say false things all day, we can do that, but that’s not what happened. So, go ahead. I’m all ears. Wolff No, so you haven’t seen the plans? Paddock Absolutely not. Didn’t even know there was a plan. Wolff Should we go into more detail over those? Paddock I think I need to see it, and it looks like I probably need to get an attorney to look at it to make sure we’re all up front. I didn’t know this was going to be a big legal battle. So, if you’re wanting me to look at a set of plans, I need to have somebody look at them and see if they’re right. Wolff Well, so let’s - - Paddock We already have property lines that have been marked out that are wrong. I feel are wrong. So, I’m going to have to have a surveyor come out and check those too, because we’ve got a corner post on that property that’s two or three feet out of whack. Compared to the posts that were in the ground that they used half of them, and then they changed one. So, I’m going to have to pay for, you know, a Page 5 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 surveyor to come out and check that. You know, that’s not your problem. But, then you’re going to show me some engineering that somebody wants to put a pipe in the ground. You know, gutters only hold so much water. You’re still going to have rain-off on that roof that’s going to go to my property even more than what it already is. Because that land absorbs so much moisture, and drains it out on its own. We know that. You put a house there, buildings, garage, whatever else they do on these two acres, gutters and a pipe in the ground doesn’t cure all that. We know that. I’m fighting a problem behind me because of that problem. My sump runs non-stop now because they're building houses, and you guys had it all worked out on drainage. It didn’t happen. I fixed my own drain problems. Wolff I’m sorry. What was that last comment? We had it all worked out on drainage? Paddock Well, you know, everything was approved out back about drainage. Went through the Town. You know, perimeter drains, whatever you guys approved. Wolff I’m not exactly sure what you’re referring to. Paddock Yes. The houses being built behind me. So, therefore, I’m fighting that battle now. You know, I didn’t have a problem until they started building houses. Wolff So, Mr. Paddock - - Paddock -- Yes, go ahead. Wolff I think what we had, and you correct me where I go wrong. I know you will. Is I believe we have in the minutes that you said you currently don’t have a drainage problem because you’ve mitigated it. You’ve taken care of it. Paddock Yes. That’s the stuff behind me. Yes. Wolff Okay. Perfect. Paddock That has nothing to do with the property beside me. We have rain, we have moisture that drains off that property. You can’t stop all that. I’m not here to argue that, you know what I mean. There is issues there. I’m saying when you go building on that property, it’s going to double that problem. Does that make sense? Wolff So, what they have done, what they have stated, and I understand that you haven’t seen it. What they have stated is that, and you’re right. If you take the rain off of a roof, it should be absorbed in that area, but that area is now covered by a house. Paddock Correct. Wolff So, they’re taking that rain, and moving it to the south of the property away from you. Paddock That is not correct. I haven’t looked at your plans, but what I’m understanding, there is a pipe around the house that the gutters run in that’s going to cure the Page 6 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 problem. That pipe is not going to cure the problem. You have runoff of that roof that don’t go in the gutter. Especially if they build another building down the road. Somebody wants to build a big shop. No gutters. Well, I’m going to have a problem. Wolff We don’t have that in front of us. So, what they’re proposing - - Paddock --That’s what, go ahead. Wolff No continue. Paddock No. Well, that’s what I’m suggesting. You know. We need to have this all up front before you guys okay, you know, somebody to build a house on here, that we don’t have a drainage problem afterwards. Because then it just gets pushed down the road. Wolff Okay. Any questions for the remonstrator? Sorry. Poor English. Jones To me, it’s not so much a question. What we talked about at the last meeting was for the Pabsts to work with Mr. Paddock to come up with a solution that Mr. Paddock would not show up here tonight and speak in remonstrance of. I agree, I don’t agree. I can accept the fact that there has been development north of Mr. Paddock’s property that is creating him problems. We have no way of addressing that. It is what it is. Paddock It is what it is. Jones But, we do have ways of addressing what goes on downstream, and part in parcel of that is the Pabsts are asking for a variance to sell off a developable lot. What my intentions were of the conversations last month was for the Pabsts and the Paddocks to come to some agreement as to some possible solution to prevent what Mr. Paddock is saying that’s going on currently, because while a 6-inch pipe off the downspouts may handle whatever comes off the downspouts, it doesn’t particularly alleviate whatever problems are there and what might be increased by whatever potential development goes on in the lot. Whether it is, just changes in the grading. So, the Pabsts, if they would like a variance, need to work with the Paddocks so that there is no remonstrance to what they’re wanting. Paddock Can I add something to that? We have been working on this for two months to work something out with the Pabsts. Now, I don’t have a problem working something out, but the first time the attempt was, is was to attack on the property draining behind me, and thinking I had a problem. And, I came up here and told you, they come and confronted me. I don’t have no problem with that drain. I fixed that drain. We’re addressing the problem on the driveway. This last month, I don’t know anything about it. We did get an email. Supposedly everything is hunky-dory, but we had some issues at the meeting last time. So, we didn’t know how to handle this too well. I even came here and they said that’s a civil matter. So, I’m trying to be a nice guy, but I’m just not going to meet some people out in the parking lot. You know? Try to hash out a drainage problem. I don’t know what she’s turned into you guys. I’ve never seen it. Never heard of it. Didn’t even know it was done. So, you guys sit up there with a set of plans. I had no idea. I Page 7 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 think if that’s the case that’s going to be dropped on me, I need to have probably something legal to look at it and make sure it’s going to work. If it’s going to be good. If you guys are going to back it, we all should. Kremp Just a point of clarification for me. Paddock Yes. Kremp I think that Mr. Jacob had said that he or his client had provided the report. And, now you’re saying, I just want to make sure, that you’re saying you never received it. Paddock No, that’s right. There was no letter. There was no nothing. We didn’t get anything. And, I’m the one that they’re supposed to be dealing with. Matter of fact, I was kind of shocked there as a meeting tonight because I didn’t hear nothing about it. Now, we did get an email. Wolff Yes. These were public notices. They’re, you know, they’re always there, and when we continued it, we did continue it to this meeting. Paddock You were told that she was going to get with me, and was going to work it out. Wolff Yes. Paddock Now, when I got an email a few days after, or a day after the incident in the parking lot. Wolff I do want to address that. I don’t know what happened in the parking lot. I’m not aware of anything about the parking lot, so I can’t speak to it. Paddock Do you want me to tell you what happened in the parking lot? Wolff No, I don’t. I don’t want you to. Paddock Okay. Wolff I’m really focused on about what we’re talking about in this room, and what’s right in front of you. That’s what I want to focus on. Paddock When I stopped in a week later after the parking lot incident. So, I understand. Wolff Yes. I have got to deal with the facts I have right here, and you’re part of it. You know, you’re part of the evidence here, so that’s part of this conversation. I accept that. But, I don’t - - Paddock --Carry on. Wolff All right. Any other questions for the remonstrator? Evinger What would satisfy you with this, other than her not dividing the land? Page 8 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Paddock Well, that ain’t gonna happen. But, drainage. Some kind of drainage to make sure there is no more water that comes on my property that’s not already coming on my property. And, when you build on that property, you can’t just put a perimeter drain in for the downspouts. It’s going to happen. I had to put swales in on my property to get some of that water when it did come off, to work towards the south. Most of the property drains towards the, it’d be towards the east. It don’t drain off towards the south. Now, there is some big hills in front of their property, but my whole driveway stays wet because that all drains towards my driveway on that side. So, that has to be, I don’t want it any worse. I am going to have to do some work down along my drive this summer to straighten some of that up, because the dirt moves over time too. Everybody knows how dirt works. So, I’ve got to, you know, dig that back up and get that drained on my property going towards the south. But, it’s always going to happen. If you keep building on it, it’s going to be worse. So, you’re okaying a house, but who’s to say down the road they’re going to put a shop or a garage. We don’t know. Wolff We’re not okaying a house. Paddock I know that. So, that’s my, any other questions? Wolff Any other remonstrators? Mrs. Paddock, I would ask, because we have had this conversation a lot, add value to it, but don’t repeat it. Perfect. Thank you. And, name and address. S. Paddock Shelly Paddock. Wolff Thank you. S. Paddock 8164 East 550 South. I have just a question. I need to know how we can work with Mr. Pabst at this point without getting an attorney, because we were physically threatened. We have it on camera and recording some of the things that Mr. Roberts said. Physically, I mean, threatened us. I don’t know how to work with them. And, then the next, two days later, I got an email from her as if nothing had happened. No, “I’m so very sorry that this,” you know, emotions got out of control. I understand. It’s emotional. I don’t have a problem with them splitting the lot. Please understand that. I’m a realtor. I sell real estate. I live here. I don’t want to close the door. We don’t have a problem with that. The problem is right now there is standing water in my driveway in spots. There is a tree that is falling over on her property line, our shared property line now. We have worked with the former property owner for 25 years that we have lived there without a problem to manage the water and the drainage. I need from you direction how we can, because I am fearful in my own house now because whenever I see those people, the man, he stated here in the meeting that he was six foot two. And he came and towered over us. Happened to be a police officer that pulled into the - - Wolff --Mrs. Paddock - - S. Paddock --I know you don’t want to hear it, but I need direction. How do you want me to deal with her? Page 9 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Wolff I’m not sure it is in my role, or our role, to provide that direction. S. Paddock Okay. So, then here’s the issue. I don’t know how we can solve this problem then, other than she brings something to you, you give it to us, and then next month we talk it through. Wolff Okay. If you are incapable, what you’re saying is you’re incapable of working with your neighbor, that’s fine. S. Paddock Well, I’m afraid of my neighbor now. I’ve been physically threatened by my neighbor. I mean, would you not be? I’m not trying to be - - Wolff --I can’t speak to a scenario that I wasn’t involved in. S. Paddock I understand. Wolff I’m going to avoid that. S. Paddock I’m not asking you for legal advice. I’m just asking you for this specific issue, how do we handle it? You tell me exactly what to do here, and we’ll try to work through it. Wolff I don’t have a suggestion on that. And, I’m not going to provide one. Jones Well, I’ve got a suggestion. Mr. Jacob, can you take the microphone please? So, you represent the Pabsts? Jacob I do, at this juncture, yes. Jones They have, at a certain point, hired Mr. Ladd as a professional engineer. Jacob Correct. Jones Do you think Mr. Ladd has the capacity to meet with the Paddocks to come up with a suggestion? Jacob So, as I was trying to articulate earlier, I’m sure that he does. But, here is the problem. We don’t believe we can fix drainage problems that may or may not exist on other people’s property. Jones Do you think Mr. Ladd could give us an explanation of why or why not that could happen? Jacob I believe he tried to, but - - Jones --No, he provided us a letter saying that we could run the downspouts to the front of the property. Jacob Correct. And, he ran drainage calculations to indicate that we were not going to impact the, we’re not going to change the drainage in the area. But, what he did intimate to is that, well, okay, so what we’re saying is that we’re going to take Page 10 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 any impervious area connected to the home, move it to the south. Septic will be, will move to the south, and we’re not going to move drainage to the north. East or north. What the issues is, is that there has been offsite work done that we don’t believe is consistent with good engineering practices. And, we can’t go onto their property and fix that. So, if I’m hearing you say, “look, we’re not going to approve this, you’ve got to figure out some way to fix their offsite,” I’m happy to talk to my client about that. I’m happy to get involved and speak to remonstrators. I’m happy to charge Mr. Ladd with that. But, I think we’re going to be right back in here telling you that there has got to be offsite stuff done that we can’t control. So, I can’t speak to any of the other - - Jones --But, at that point you’ve given the remonstrators some confidence that whatever is being developed on this adjoining property isn’t really causing their issue, that they need to seek relief from people north of their property, which is a different issue. That’s something the Paddocks need to go pursue. Jacob I believe based upon my review of the meeting minutes from the last time, and again, just as a comment. I have no idea about the parking lot stuff, but I’m always happy to have these discussions, but I thought the report did just that. Is it we’re not going to make this problem worse, to the extent there is a problem. I think that told them that your problem is coming from the north, or it’s coming from your own site. Wolff Well, that’s fair. And, I’m not a drainage expert, but I also did hear the remonstrator say that he hasn’t seen the report. Jacob Fair enough. I can’t speak to that issue, and I don’t know that that’s, those are commitments we’re making to you tonight in a written form. And, I hear there is no objection to the split by at least one remonstrator. I’m also suggesting that we’re going to connect any structures. We’re going to connect the residential structure, and septic and move it away to alleviate any problem that any additional impervious area would cause. We’re taking impervious structures off the site. I frankly thought I was coming here tonight and that that resolved it based upon my review of the transcript from the meeting. And, hearing that’s not the case, I understand. Wolff Well, as you know, Mr. Jacob, we have had conversations on the previous petitions. And, we do value the neighbors’ input. That’s important to us, and so that’s, I think, kind of the crux of the issue right now at this point. Jones And, this is not new territory. We’ve had other projects come before us where there has been drainage in an area, unrelated, and the people requesting variances, approvals, or whatever, have found a way to work with adjoining unrelated property owners to resolved things so that we got, as a Commission, people standing in front of us saying everybody is happy. And, that’s all we’re looking for. Wolff And, I would add the I don’t necessarily need everyone to be happy, but I want everyone to have a piece of information, or defendable information that we made a decision on that was sound and logic. Page 11 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Evinger Just looking at the report, and again, I’m not an engineering expert either. But, if you look at Exhibit 8, and look at the drainage patterns, and then look at what you’re, you know, overlay, what you’re suggesting. I think that that would give a little bit more sound picture maybe to the neighbors to give them comfort. Because, the way this looks like it’s draining, it definitely, just the fall, from Exhibit 8, looks like it is draining to the south. I don’t see anything that’s overlapping onto the other property, but if you have the perimeter drain, and perhaps overlay that on Exhibit 8, that might help. Jacob One of the things we looked at was installing, and that’s a great comment. We looked at installing a swale along the eastern perimeter of this property, and Mr. Ladd said, “You know, that’s not going to do anything. That’s just wasted space, time and energy. Don’t bother.” Jones That’s not part of this report, though. Jacob It’s not part of this report. Absolutely not. No. Jones So, it’s just hearsay. You know that word. And, that’s kind of what we’re looking for. If Mr. Ladd, a professional engineer, says there is no fix for the Paddocks’ problems, and the Paddocks’ problems are the Paddocks’ problems, then okay. We’ve done our due diligence for everybody. Jacob Well, and I think based upon the development of this particular lot, and placing the residential structure on it, I believe that that’s what his report says. Relative to this, he’s not performed an off-site drainage evaluation. He’s not tried to fix other people’s drainage problems that have been self-fixed, as we have heard even this evening, that there has been mounding and changes that have been not professionally done. And, I’m not suggesting that somebody doesn’t know what they’re doing, but we just, he looked at that and said, “I don’t know what’s going on on that site.” So, without stepping off site onto somebody else’s property, he provided this report as what we felt was the appropriate direction. Jones Can I make a motion? Wolff I will entertain a motion. Jacob So, if I’m hearing that that’s our charge, is that this is going to get turned down, or you have got to address this or provide additional data, I hear what you’re saying. Is that what you want to do? Pabst I just want to say that I have tried everything to work with the neighbors. Jacob So, hold on. That’s not what the question - - Pabst I understand what the question to me is, but I just, you know, I understand that. But, my thing is, is that if they won’t work with me. Jacob Again, I just want to be clear, that’s not what we’re talking about. Okay? Pabst Okay. Page 12 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Jacob So, how do you want to proceed? Pabst So, are we saying that this is going to be turned down? Wolff I don’t know that we’re saying that. Jacob How do you want to proceed is what we’re asking? Pabst I mean, I’m not sure if a continuance is going to work with what I can’t, if I’ve given you the report you asked me for, and I’ve tried to do everything I’ve been asked, and I’ve tried to work with them. I mean, I asked them to come and meet with the engineer. Jacob So, based upon the feedback I’ve received this evening, and Mrs. Pabst’s comments, I would request that this be continued to the next meeting. With that, my charge will be to not put my client in a situation given some of the discussions, but Mr. Ladd and I will step into the middle of this and we’ll have some discussions about how to proceed, but I think that’s the best course of action for the time being. Jones That’s acceptable to me. If we can get just a little round of closure. If it truly comes back from the engineer that we cannot resolve Mr. Paddock’s issues, Mr. Paddock, you’re going to have to go deal with it. That fair enough? Jacob And just, I mean, what we can’t do, and what my client’s not willing to do is to step offsite and address these issues. If somebody says, hey, do you want an easement or drain to hook in? Yes, let’s talk about that. But, I just want to, understood. Wolff Mr. Paddock, I guess my ask to you is, we’ve had a lot of conversations. I expect you to make yourself available to Mr. Jacob and Mr. Ladd, to the best of your abilities. Paddock Yes. Once we get an attorney to get involved, because obviously she had to get one to take care of this. So, yes, I’ll have somebody to contact him and see if we can work this thing out. And, when you go attacking somebody else’s drainage issue without even being on the property supposedly, we don’t have a drainage issue. So, for him to bring stuff up in the meeting here of what’s going on on the property beside me. I know we’re continuing this, but I will get an attorney or lawyer, whatever, and I will do this game that you guys want to play. So, not a problem. Kremp Being an attorney, it’s not a pejorative thing to, I think that you can help that Mr. Jacob. And if you choose to retain counsel, I’m not sure that you would need to, but if you would choose to, that you can work this out. I mean, I really, I am new to this. But the two meetings that I have been to, one concern that I have, and the thing that I would not want to see happen, is that the next time we have a meeting that there was any sort of resistance to actually trying to work this out. Because, I believe you. I think that you’re sincere. Page 13 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Paddock You are correct. Kremp But, I think the parties should try to work it out. I understand that there is some interpersonal issues here, but now with Mr. Jacob, and if you think you need someone else, and again, I’m not sure that that’s necessary, but somebody to help resolve this, we’d like to get past this. Paddock Well, and that’s fine too. And, I know Mr. Jacob. But, I think some stuff that was told to him was not correct. So, I need to come up here and address those, what was said that I was notified, information or plans, from the drainage. I was not notified, and I was not. If I was given these plans like I was supposed to, we may not even have another meeting. So, I’m just saying, I didn’t know how I should handle this since we have no attorney. So, thanks for that. DeLong Before we jump into that, I do want to clarify a point that was made. Mr. Paddock was speaking to, I believe, the potential delay for him to decide if he wishes to retain counsel, or if he and his family retain counsel. So, I think if that’s going to be an additional time frame, you probably want to articulate that this evening. Are you looking at a 30-day continuance, a 60-day continuance, 90 days. I mean, you probably want to have some clarity. Wolff Absolutely. Mr. Paddock, do you think, I’m asking, putting you on the spot. Will you be ready, and are you willing to work with Mr. Jacob and Mr. Ladd, I believe was the other name, and can you get that done in 30 days? Essentially 30 days. I think the next meeting is April, or May, or do you need more time than that? Should I continue - - Paddock --If I have to get legal, you know, legal counseling in here, I need to talk to them first. So, you’re asking me to make decisions on the spot. Wolff Mr. Paddock. Please, let’s work together. Paddock I’ll give you 60 days then. Wolff You would like 60 days. Paddock Yes. Wolff Okay. Mr. Jacob, you had a petition, you had a motion - - Jacob --To continue it to the next meeting. Wolff Yes. Jacob Was my request. And, why don’t we do this. Continue it 30 days. If Mr. Paddock comes to me and says, listen, we’re not ready. We don’t have it. Then we’ll put that back in front of you. You know, we have, I don’t know how long this needs to - - Wolff --Believe me - - Page 14 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Jacob --And, my hope was to bring this to a resolution this evening. So, my request is to continue it to the next meeting. Wolff Okay. So, I’m going to turn to me fellow Board members here. If we grant this motion to continue to the May meeting, and Mr. Paddock hasn’t had adequate time, it would be up to our discretion if we wanted to allow him to continue to the June meeting. I open the floor for discussion on how you wanted to proceed with this. Jones I guess Mr. Paddock has never made any request for continuance on this, correct? Wolff He has. Paddock I have not. Jones He has. Okay. I’m sorry. Okay, never mind. So, we’re kind of burnt through those. What we’re asking is the normal. Kremp We recognize it would be in your purview and discretion to continue it again if Mr. Paddock indicates with cause that he didn’t have time to review. That’s fully in your discretion. Jones If somebody comes back and says they have not had time to complete whatever study that needs to be done, I don’t have a problem with granting additional continuance of it. I personally. I don’t know about anybody else. Wolff I think we have a motion to continue to the May 14th meeting of the BZA. Mr. Paddock, if that is not enough time, we’ll discuss that, and we’ll make sure that you have enough time. But, I would encourage you, please, do your best to work with Mr. Jacob and Mr. Lead, or whatever. Evinger Ladd. Wolff Ladd. Sorry, I’m going to screw that up all night. Thank you. Is there a second for that motion? Jones Second. Wolff We don’t need one. I guess we don’t need one. Do we just vote on it? Chadd Mr. Jacob has made the request. You just need to decide on his request. Jones So, do we need to make a motion to accept Mr. Jacob’s request for continuance to the May 14? Evinger I believe one of us needs to make the motion because we’re the Commission, and then we’ll have a second amongst ourselves, and then we go forward from there. Wolff Before we entertain a motion, I would add for our audience’s benefit that we are short a member, and so, if a motion is tied, it is automatically continued to the following meeting. Thank you. I’ll entertain a motion now, then. Page 15 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Evinger Okay. Here, let me get my Docket number. I make a motion that Docket # 2018- 46-DSV, be continued until the May 14 meeting. Wolff Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Wolff All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Wolff Those opposed, please say no. [No response.] Wolff Hearing none, motion carries. Jacob Thank you for your time. Wolff Thank you. All right. Moving on to new business. On our agenda, Docket #2019- 08-DSV, Mr. Shafer. Will you please state your name and address for the record, and briefly describe what you’re asking for tonight? Shafer Randall Shafer, 825 West Pine, Zionsville. Just requesting a variance to build or replace the present garage that I have on the property now. It’s probably 80 to 90 years old. So, it’s just replacing it in the same spot it is now. Wolff It looks like it adds a little more square footage. It looks like the current structure is kind of an odd shape, as I saw it. Shafer We’re just going to fill in the back corner, and that’s pretty much it. Wolff Mr. Shafer. You look familiar. Have I seen you recently? Shafer I’m a builder in Town. Wolff Okay. Any questions for the petitioner? Seeing none, are there any remonstrators tonight? Seeing none, I will look for the staff report. DeLong Thank you. Staff is supportive of the petition as filed. We did include the procedure in there related to the construction, distances, fire ratings, dependant if the building gets more than 6 feet, closer than 6 feet to the existing residential structure. Other than that, staff is supportive of the petition as filed, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. Wolff Thank you. Mr. Shafer, did you see the staff report, and understand what he was referencing, the staff was referencing, when they talked about the power lines and things like that. Shafer Yes. Page 16 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Wolff Perfect. Thank you. Any further comments or discussion amongst the group? Evinger Just one more question, and I’m sure that you’ve already taken this into account, but it will be like within character of your home? It’s not going to be some odd- shaped building? Shafer It’s going to be same size siding, the whole, you know. Evinger Okay. Thank you. Wolff Without any further comments, I would entertain a motion. Jones I move that Docket # 2019-08-DSV, design standard variance, in order to provide for the construction of a garage which, one, deviates from the required side and aggregate yard setbacks as further described in the exhibits to this report, and the residential Village zoning district RV, for the property located at 825 West Pine Street be approved as filed, and as presented. Wolff Thank you. Is there a second? Kremp Second. Wolff Thank you. All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Wolff Those opposed, please say no. [No response.] Wolff Motion carries. Good luck. Next item on our agenda is Docket # 2019-09-DSV. Will the petitioner please come forward and state your name and address for the record? Andreoli Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, my name is Mike Andreoli, 1393 West Oak Street. I am here on behalf of Zionsville OMS Partners. As you will recall from our prior application that we had made several years ago, there a surgery center and we received approval for a rear-yard setback before, and a variance for the size of the building then, which was 7,000 square feet. Due to some changing economics and some re-shuffling of locations and practice, that particular building would need to be increased. So, we have gone ahead and re-requested a variance to increase the size of that building to 12,000 square feet. Ironically, it will not change much on the site. We will not have to ask for an increased variance to the rear. We made certain of that when we did our construction plans. Essentially all we’re doing from an economical standpoint is we’re just going up a story. So, the actual footprint of the building, which was 7,000 square foot before, essentially, is now 6,000 square feet, but the gross square footage of the building gone up a floor is now 12,000 square feet. Page 17 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 You should have, and I’m sure Chrissy did deliver to you, a rendering of the building, and we provided all elevations. North, south, east and west. So, that you are aware, obviously we have to provide notice of what we’re doing here today, and all of that has been done in compliance with your rules and procedures, as well as state law, but we took a little extraordinary step in this situation. When we had the renderings done on February 7, I sent a letter out to the homeowners immediately to the west, which is the Lost Run Farms property owners, with substantial homes there. The property immediately to our south, and then to our north, as being the most contiguous of those particular properties to give them an idea of what the new dimension of the building would be, as well as a color rendering. So, they have had that even well before we filed our application. Just because we wanted to make sure that the neighborhood understood what we were doing. We weren’t changing necessarily the footprint. In fact we were lowering it, and we weren’t going to make it any closer to their, for them, their east property line. So, we have had no concerns raised. We’ve had no comments from any of the neighbors or any of that, so I don’t know if we’ll get any tonight at the public hearing, but essentially, those renderings have been sent out, and they have not been changed or modified. We originally were thinking about doing an additional story perhaps, that would raise it up a little higher, and in looking at the overlay district, talking with staff, and talking with Mr. Cosmos, who is here tonight, who is a builder, we really don’t need that, and so we decided not to seek any additional variances. So, the height requirements meet your B1 classification as well as the Michigan Road Overlay District. So, we’re squarely within that, so we didn’t want to ask for any more variances that were necessary, and that’s the long and short of the project. We also have filed for development plan approval, which we need in order to go ahead because of some additional changes to the site. So, that will be heard hopefully next week at the Plan Commission meeting. All of those filings have already been made. Thank you. Wolff Thank you, Mr. Andreoli. So, I have a couple of quick questions for you. Did the footprint of the building shrink? Andreoli Yes. Actually, I think the actual footprint of the building, Frank, you could help me with that. Yes, so the actual footprint on the site is slightly - - Wolff --So, about 400 square feet smaller footprint than we were prior? Andreoli Yes. And, it essentially goes up. So, our total square footage is 12,000 square feet. Wolff Understood. Andreoli But, It’s located essentially the same place the other one was located. We have the same entrances. Drainage calculations are affected because with the new square footage we have to have new parking. We’re able to accommodate that on the site without any variances or plat waivers. So, we still have some drainage calculations, as I understand it, that are being reviewed from a platting standpoint, but other than that, it is coming together quite nicely. Thank you. Wolff Thank you. Are there any questions for the petitioner? Page 18 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Evinger Actually, I think Mr. Andreoli just explained it, but I’m just going to ask Wayne. So, with the extra square footage, we’re still in compliance as far as for parking? DeLong Yes. Evinger Okay. Jones Quick question. Just regarding the site. To the south of this property, that’s all the, was it Miller Brooks, the marketing? Andreoli Yes. It is Miller Brooks, right there. Jones So, this property then, let’s call it the north end, abuts that. Farther north up Michigan is another kind of freestanding, it’s been used, it’s kind of an immediate care quick clinic kind of thing lately. Is there a parcel of land left in- between? Andreoli We bought all of that land in there. Obviously we didn’t buy the immediate care, or the emergency care, but I think there was a building out there that was either torn down or is going to be torn down. There were several different parcels that were cobbled together for this 1.49-acre site. Jones So, our Exhibit #2 kind of shows what looks like to be a lot line going through an existing house. All those houses are going to go away. So, basically we’re going to end up with a series of professional buildings down that west side of Michigan Road. Andreoli Yes. Jones Does that sound right? Okay. We’re not going to keep any funny, oddball lots around in the middle. Andreoli We’re not going to keep any of those buildings. Jones Okay. Andreoli They are all going to go away and in its place will be this nice building which we hope you find to be attractive. Kremp Will the building be occupied exclusively by the medical practice, or is there other space that is going to be held up for lease? Andreoli There potentially could be some other tenants in that building. I don’t think that’s been decided yet. The likelihood is it may not happen. Depends on how many, with this restructuring, how many of the dental surgeons will be occupying and how much additional staff. But, we’ve included the additional information even in our road impact fee requirements with the filing of our development plan, so that the Town has a pretty good handle on what additional staff might be at that particular building at full occupancy. If there is some additional tenants, it may be more short-term than it is long-term, because eventually the plan was going to be to occupy the entire structure with the dental surgery center. Page 19 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Kremp Thank you. Evinger And, I know you notice the neighbors, but again, and I didn’t see anything on here, but is there any other illuminated signing or anything else that might cause like light pollution that would interfere with the neighbors in the evening? Andreoli We haven’t had one phone call, or one email, from any of the neighbors across the street on any of our contacts. As I said, our biggest concern given the fact that we’re going up, and the building changed in terms of what it looked like, still very nice brick, and those types of things, but it changed a little bit. We wanted to make sure the neighbors immediately to our west had that early off and so that they could digest that because they’re the ones that would be most impacted with those big houses there in Lost Run Farms. We have not heard a word. Evinger Okay. Thank you. Wolff Is there anyone here tonight to remonstrate? Seeing none, I’ll take the staff report. DeLong Thank you. Staff is supportive of the petition as filed. The main oddity with the area, if you will, is the ordinance protection of Eagle Village. Eagle Village, the reasoning behind the ordinance language is, originally it was conceived that this area could potentially develop out, and directly compete with the Village of Zionsville. That is, we all know and are familiar with, being your downtown area. That simply is not the case. That activity has not happened. And, so your Michigan Road Overlay, staff would view, is your over-riding language that we would look to see in this area, and ultimately the Plan Commission will be entertaining some ordinance changes here in the future, and one of those, staff will propose, is the elimination of the additional layer of the Eagle Village requirements in this very reduced small node, but that’s immaterial to tonight’s conversations. Certainly you recall the history for this petition. The property is bounded by residential to the east, which is separated by the landscaped berm, and the homes are somewhat distant from that berm, and immediately adjacent to the site are two-story buildings, be it Miller Brooks, or across the street is The Hearth, so the theme of this area is building out with a more urban-type feel to mimic the remainder of the Michigan Road corridor. With all those thoughts in mind, staff is supportive of the petition as filed, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. Wolff Thank you, Wayne. Just a point of clarification. When we’re referring to Lost Run Farms, that’s to the west. Correct? DeLong I’m sorry. To the west. Yes. Wolff Perfect. And to double check, it looks like Mr. Andreoli notified the neighbors correctly, and it sounds like they worked with them. So, we certainly appreciate that. Any further comments or questions or concerns? Seeing none, I will entertain a motion. Page 20 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Kremp I will make a motion. I move that Docket # 2019-09-DSV, design standards variance, to allow for the construction of a new commercial business to increase the maximum office square footage in the neighborhood business in Michigan Road Overlay zoning district for the property located at 12, excuse me, 12036 North Michigan Road be approved as filed. Wolff Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Wolff Thank you. All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Wolff Those opposed, please say no. [No response.] Wolff Motion carries. Thanks you, Mr. Andreoli. The next item on our agenda tonight is Docket # 2019-10-SE, Mr. and Mrs. Myers. Thank you. Will you please state your name and address for the record? Myers Bill Myers, 3535 South 200 East. Wolff Thank you, Mr. Myers. What are you coming here before us tonight to talk about? Myers I own 160 acres. There is an older house there. I plan to, I would like to build a new house to replace it. I’m requesting a special exception for agriculture with a residence. Wolff Thank you, Mr. Myers. Can you tell us, so the old house, your intent is to replace it with a house that is similar in size? Myers Yes. Wolff Approximately, and then - - Myers --Roughly 2900 to 3000 square feet. Wolff Great. And, what is the intent to happen with the old house? Myers It will be destroyed. Wolff Okay. So, upon completion of the new structure, you’ll get rid of the old structure? Myers Right. Well, I don’t want to tear it down with no place to live. Page 21 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Wolff Yes, exactly right. Upon completion. Yes. No one likes sleeping in tents for very long. And, as I saw the area, is your intent to keep the home in a similar area to where the current structure is? Myers It would be to the west. I would like to build it to the west, next to the driveway, which would be approximately 225 feet from the road. Wolff Thank you, Mr. Myers. And, this may sound as a surprise, but I’m not sure, did you see the staff report for this particular, that you put together? Myers No. Wolff One of the things we do talk about is that you and your neighbors have the right to farm in that area. Were you aware of that? Myers We do. Wolff Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for the petitioner? Jones Just real quick, so the idea is you’re going to build a new house behind the existing one? Is that? Myers To the west. Jones To the west of it. Okay. Myers Well, depending on where they make you put the septic. Wolff Seeing no other questions, are there any remonstrators here tonight? Seeing none, I’ll take the staff report. DeLong Thank you. Staff is supportive of the petition as filed, and as the BZA has noted, it is very much a procedural nature, and also recognized and required by the zoning ordinance that a right to farm commitment be executed as a part of any petition process that’s just like this. This is a very unique set of circumstances where you actually are being approached by someone who is actually actively farming the property, and is going through the same process and also needs to commit that they can continue with their own livelihood, but that is the requirement nonetheless, and I think that can be easily taken care of, and Chrissy in our office will help facilitate that process. Speaking to facilitating the demolition of the home, that is also a very typical and standard process that we facilitate though our office where a building permit is issued for a home to be constructed while the other home is eventually will be decommissioned, if you will, during the normal course of residential build, and ultimately a time frame is assigned at the end of the build where the home has moved into, where the other home then becomes ultimately destroyed as the petitioner has indicated. Wolff Thank you, Wayne. So, we don’t need to address the removal of the old home? DeLong Not at this time. No. Page 22 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Wolff Okay. Great. Thank you. Any comments, questions, or concerns? So, Mr. Myers, it was a poor joke, but what it was, I feel obligated. Some people move into agricultural areas and do not realize that their neighbors may be farmers, and so we ask them to sign a right to farm, which allows their neighbors to farm the area, and maybe there is dust or smells that come with farming, and it’s just our way of protecting everyone involved. I assumed you knew that farming was going on in that area. So, that was my poor joke. I apologize. Jones Should I ask about drainage? Wolff No. No you may not. Nope. With no drainage questions, I will entertain a motion. Evinger I move that Docket # 2019-10-SE, W. Myers, special exception petition in the agricultural district for the property located at 3250 South 200 East be approved as presented, and with the staff report and proposed findings. Wolff Thank you. Is there a second? Jones And then the motion, well, you need to add the - - Evinger --Oh, and, yes, with the addition of the right to farm commitment to be signed. Wolff Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Wolff All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Wolff Those opposed, please say no. [No response.] Wolff Motion carries. Myers Thank you. Wolff Thank you. Good luck. The next item on our agenda is Docket #2019-11-DSV. Will the petitioner please come forward and state your name and address for the record? Sattfield Hey everybody. I am Jeffrey Sattfield with CPH. We are the A&E consultant for Giant Eagle, representing the property at 7011 Whitestown. Wolff I’m sorry. Will you say your name one more time for me? Sattfield Jeffrey Sattfield. Wolff Jeffrey, thank you. Page 23 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Sattfield I’m here, Barry Porter had a family vacation, so I'm here for him. Wolff Good for him. Sattfield So, I think his name is down there right now. I’ve got a very brief PowerPoint if you all would like to look at that. Wolff Thank you. Sattfield With my ugly team mascot up right now. So, this will be brief and no drainage comments, hopefully. So, the site is located there at the southwest corner at Whitestown. Just an overall aerial of the commercial corridor. The blue square over there to the west is the closest C-store with fuel nearby. Essentially the competition for the site would be in the Get-Go property. Again, just some reference photos of the area, signage, the commercial nature of the structures. The bottom right corner down there is the fuel C-store. That’s down the way there, with the canopy showing at that location. And, then this is the site as it is today. So, it’s an existing Get-Go, and basically we’re looking to relocate one sign, which is not discussed in the staff report because it’s basically a swap, and we have requested to add two signs. One on the canopy and one on the building. And, again, you see the canopy here. There is no signage reference whatsoever there. Which, again, from what we’re finding on this particular location, is something that’s highly desirable given the surrounding areas and the competition that we’re facing in that area is to have some canopy signage. So, and this is the site plan and the layout of the area there. So, the canopy signage will be located right here, S4. The additional signage that was requested was on the rear of the property, S7, and we’ll discuss that here in just a bit. And, that’s what the canopy sign would look like. It’s basically the Get-Go logo with a café and market on the northern piece there, and the size is to scale for that size of a canopy. This was the other signage that was going to be requested. We want to, as we’ll get to the staff report, we want to be in step with staff. This one is not being recommended for approval by staff, so we’re withdrawing that from consideration tonight. So, basically I’m here to say that we are in full agreement with staff’s recommendations, including the need to provide a photometric plan prior to the permit to show that we’re not spilling undue light off-site, and I’m available for questions. Wolff Thank you. Any questions for the petitioner? Jones Just to clarify, we’re going to add a sign over the pumps, and then is there a second sign that’s being - - DeLong They asked for a second sign in their original petition, but staff was not supportive of that, and it sounds like the petitioner is saying they would like to remove that, as well. Sattfield We’ll remove that sign. Wolff It was a large sign on the rear of the building. So, it’s just the one over the canopy. Page 24 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Jones And, then the third sign that was referenced was the one that was going to be relocation. Sattfield From one side of the building to the street side. Let me go back to that site plan to clarify. There is currently a building signage at this location, moving it to the street side. Jones I got it. Kremp When the property was developed, was there no requests for, or did the concept of canopy signage come up then? Sattfield I wish I was engaged at that time. Kremp Okay. Sattfield Yes. I mean, we certainly, if we were engaged at that time with Giant Eagle, we would have requested that. It’s typical we would like to have a pricing of the canopy. I particularly, you know, obviously C-stores and fuels, it’s a business of convenience, and price on the fuel, and so if you can’t get that message out while you’re driving 35-40 miles an hour quickly, somebody is just going to pass you and go right down to the next one. So, we would typically ask for, like, a fuel price and a logo up there for that very reason. Wolff Any other questions for the petitioner? Seeing none, are there any remonstrators here tonight? Do you have any drainage concerns? Wayne, can we have the staff report please? DeLong Certainly, staff is certainly supportive of the petition as it’s been amended this evening. Certainly from a history point of view, when this petition, when this site was first developed, one land owner controls this site, as well as the same acreage to the west, and so this is a land lease, and so when the property was developed out, Get-Go was ultimately the entity that moved forward with that, the building of the new gas station, convenience store. There was a decent amount of lag-time between the time of the approvals through the Plan Commission and the commencement of construction, and I think that’s where some of this learning curve has been created in the meantime. The Meijer has come online with its C- store out front and its gas component, and there has been some other changes along that corridor. So, what you have along that corridor are two different zoning ordinances. You have the Town of Zionsville’s rural ordinance, and you have the Town of Whitestown’s ordinance, and our objective as staff is to look along that corridor and if there are opportunities to advance the standards to match what other jurisdictions are doing along the corridor, we should have that conversation to sort of, you know, to lessen that competitive disadvantage with this area. And, certainly what you find out there is there is much older dated gas stations, just chronologically that have been there for, you know, many, many years that enjoy a certain level of standards, and as you move closer to the core of Zionsville you find newer facilities such as this one. So, we’re trying to raise that bubble a little bit, and that’s where the ordinance does not allow for canopy signage, however, every other gas station and convenience store enjoys a canopy Page 25 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 sign. So, certainly that’s why staff is supportive of that request. So, when the petition first came in for development, the signage was very limited. Since that time, it actually sought a modification to allow for the changeable copy EVMS sign that’s out there now, the pricing panel that’s actually in the ground. So, there has been some evolution of the thought process, and so I think it’s only natural to come to this point where there is a little bit more illusion to get a little bit closer and understanding better what the market is looking for out there. Certainly staff is, you know, finds obviously very helpful to not focus on the sign on the back. When this area builds out, the motoring public that is on Maple Grove Pass, is the name of that road, will be, the visibility will be very restricted by the number of buildings that are on the south side of that lane. The residential traffic that’s going to be traversing that road. I’m not sure, we’ll totally gain the benefit of a large wall sign on that iconography will not even ben visible any more once that area is build up to the curvature of the road. Sattfield They should surely understand what it is at that point. DeLong They get it by that. Or Josh will be talking to them about something else. But, at any rate, what we would encourage, and certainly it’s something that came up when the project was first proposed, if there is a need to provide directional signage at the entrance, at the entrances to this property, that is certainly something that could be done. Certainly would function to serve a lower speed clientele, and certainly those signs routinely have some sort of commercial message on those, and they would not require a permit. You know, two to three- foot tall, the small typical signs you all do, I know that different Get-Go facilities have them in the metro Indianapolis area, 146th and Gray Road, for example, in Carmel, and other facilities. So, that’s an opportunity to provide some additional signage, some additional copy area. Not require a variance and certainly not entertain any other real, you know, big changes. Probably provided way too much information for you this evening on this particular topic. Staff is supportive of the petition as it’s been amended, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. Wolff Wayne, thank you. As I reviewed this petition, and as I look at the recommended motion, it looks like the motion reflects our conversation tonight. Is that the way you read the motion? DeLong Correct. We broke out the motion to support the canopy sign, and to not support the wall sign. Wolff Perfect. Thank you. Any comments or questions for the staff? Kremp One quick question. The, this is a groundly structure, so you’re required to have the owner’s approval. The memorandum of the lease that was provided shows the landlord as 7105 East SR 334, LLC and the owner’s authorization is by John W. Demaree. Has the property been conveyed or what explains the difference? DeLong John Demaree is the managing partner of the LLC. I’m not sure if he fully completed a title block on that document to show that information. Kremp I think it’s clear, his intent. Page 26 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Wolff Thank you. Any other comments, concerns or questions. Seeing none, I’ll entertain a motion. Evinger I move that Docket # 2019-11-DSV, development standards variance for the property located at 7011 Whitestown Parkway to allow for signage of an existing commercial business, which utilizes the canopy to convey commercial messages, and exceeds the allowed square footage maximums all within the rural general business zoning district be approved as presented, and as recommended by staff. Wolff Thank you. Is there a second? Jones Second. Wolff All those in favor, please say aye. All Aye. Wolff Those opposed, please say no. [No response.] Wolff Motion carries. Sattfield Thank you, guys. Wolff Thank you. DeLong I would note just before we stepped away from this petition just to make sure that the findings of fact that have been submitted do not embrace anything about the wall sign, as it’s proposed. I mean, the only thing you have in your findings is it speaks to the plural nature of signs. We could just simply make that adjustment for the additional wall sign, singular, and just strike that out. Wolff Okay, thank you. Next item on our agenda. I’m going to turn to my fellow BZA members. We were supposed to receive some training tonight, but I failed and I did not read it and Mr. Chadd didn’t see it on it, so we are not going to receive training tonight, but we will plan on it on our agenda next month. And, I think next month should be shorter, although we did continue one petition to next month. Evinger What is the training for next month? Chadd It’s our annual update. Evinger Okay. I will not be here. I will not be present, just so you know. Chadd Okay. We normally have some written materials. Wolff We’ll take good notes. Evinger Okay thank you. Page 27 of 28 Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals April 9, 2019 Wolff Wayne, do you have any other updates for us? DeLong I can provide a plethora of updates for you. Wolff Spectacular. DeLong So, the first item on your list there, the special exception, those folks are still working through getting that document executed. They are not in possession of the property yet, so we typically do see a delay in the submittal of the document until the property is ready to switch and go through a closing. Rottmann Collier’s petition, 06-DSV, those are currently in review in-house. The 03-SE has been recorded for the Soffa petitions. Those are as well in-house for review. The Wheat Holdings matter, they have actually recorded their commitments. We await a copy of the recorded document. Zionsville underground, petitioner is still working on finalizing that document. Wildwood Designs, there has been a lag in the communication from the petitioner, so we’re working on re-establishing that communication. And, Fisher Homes, I know this has been on your Docket for probably 2 years now as we await that petitioner’s wrapping up that project. Uniquely, we did hear from that landowner today. They anticipate re- commencing with the re-commencement of the re-commencement of the work within about 45 days. Jones Who would have guessed. The re-commencement of the re-commencement. Wolff Thank you, Wayne, for the update. Seeing no other items on the agenda, this meeting is adjourned. Page 28 of 28