PLAINFIELD BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AGENDA For November 16, 2009, 7:00PM

Transcription

1 PLAINFIELD BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AGENDA For November 16, 2009, 7:00PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL/DETERMINATION OF QUORUM The Plainfield Board of Zoning Appeals met on Monday, November 19, In attendance were Mr. Cavanaugh, Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Monnett. We have 3 members present, we have 1 absent, 1 vacancy. We have a Quorum for the purpose of conducting business. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES (October 19, 2009 meeting) Mr. Cavanaugh, made a motion to approve the minutes as written, I have a copy of that I would like to give to the secretary with some grammatical corrections, with some of my statements, which is nothing that changes the topic or the outcome of the. Board of Zoning Appeals submitted. Second by Mr. Gibbs Motion carried OATH OF TESTIMONY Those who are in attendance to present information to the Board must stand and take an oath of testimony. Mr. Monnett; Before I read a couple of rules I could ask Mr. Daniels to explain to the members, we have 3 members here, one absent, and we are missing a spot so explain their Mr. Daniels; This is a Board of Zoning appeals a 5 member board. To take any action on a petition requires a majority of the full board which would be 3 votes. We have 1 position on the board that has not been filled and we have one absent member, meaning we only have 3 members present tonight. So any action on a petition tonight would require a unanimous vote of the 3 members. So if anybody would like to continue their matter when more members of the Board of Zoning appeals are here to hear your petition, now is the time to make your motion. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are designed so as to allow public input regarding the subject matter. PREVIOUSLY CONTINUED PETITIONS FOR PUBLIC HEARING BZA Gary Callahan, 910 Andico Rd., requests a variance of use to allow a one day retail component in the I-2 District to allow for an auction house. WITHDRAWN Mr. James; Good evening members of the Board, that petition has been withdrawn. The petitioner has found another location that will meet their needs. -! 1 -BZA111609

2 PETITIONS FOR PUBLIC HEARING BZA Sagamore Dining Partners, Inc., 120 S. Perry Rd, requests a special exception to allow the serving of alcohol in a restaurant in the Marketplace PUD district. Ms. Sprague; This request is for the Noodles and Company which is in the former 96 th Street Steak burgers building just south of Culver s out on Perry Rd. in front of Metropolis. Their requesting to serve alcoholic beverages. They serve them out of the kitchen and there will be no bar. It is surrounded by commercial properties including Metropolis PUD and there are several locations that serve alcohol. Some of which do include bars. So the property is compatible for this land use. And then also I am not sure if there is a typo in their findings but I read that there is slightly more than 5% of their sales would be alcoholic beverages, I think they meant less than 5%. So that is where I got my 5% from, so based on those numbers and they are not going to have a bar and the surrounding properties there are other restaurants that serve alcohol it seems like a compatible use, and so I know the petitioner is here if you have any questions. Mr. Monnett; Thank you. Mr. Genrich; Good evening, Greg Genrich with Bradford and Riley, here for Sagamore partners which is the Indiana franchisee of Noodles and Company. This will be there 12 th restaurant in the State of Indiana for Noodles and Company all of them serve beer or beer and wine. I ve applied for a beer/wine application, the hearing for Hendricks County liquor board this coming up December 1, So we wanted to get with you guys before we go to the other hearing. It is a very small percentage of their service, alcohols basically a convenience, and the amenity will come in, but it s typically it is less than 5% more like 1% of their sales. Everyone goes through some sort of training program, the managers require a key to actually key in the alcoholic beverage. The manager delivers to the table, so there are no minors involved in the sale, everyone is over 21 except for the busers, who take away the bussed used glass or bottle. Mr. Cavanaugh; Is it my understanding that this would be for beer and wine only. Mr. Genrich; Yes. Mr. Monnett; And that has gone over pretty well with the other locations? Mr. Genrich; Yes, they have had no violations, very small percentage, it is primarily lunch/dinner, it s what they call a fast casual restaurant. But very small alcohol sales. Mr. Carlucci; Have they gone to the meeting with the Hendricks Co. Alcohol board? Mr. Genrich; That is December 1 st. -! 2 -BZA111609

3 Mr. Monnett; If anyone in the audience would like to speak on behalf this petition for or against you can come forward now. If not I m going to open it up to our board for any discussions or possible motion. Mr. Cavanaugh; I move to approve the zoning appeals approve BZA as filed by Sagamore Dining Partners, Inc. requesting a special exception to serve alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption at Noodles and Company at 120 S. Perry Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. Limiting this approval to Noodles and Company, this approval will not be transferable to any subsequent owner/operator in another site. 2. Alcohol sales will be limited to beer and wine only. 3. That this special exception is contingent upon receiving approval from the Hendricks County Alcohol Board. Motion was made by Mr. Cavanaugh Seconded by Mr. Gibbs Mr. Carlucci would you please poll the board: Duffer- is absent tonight Cavanaugh- yes Gibbs- yes Monnett- yes 3-ayes, none opposed, 1 absent The motion carries BZA The Pep Boys- Manny, Moe, & Jack, 807 Perry Rd., requests a variance of use to allow a retail component in a warehouse in the I-2 District. Mr.James; Good evening, this request is variance of use to allow a retail sales component at the Pep Boys warehouse distribution center at 807 S. Perry Rd. The retail sales component will be in about 1,500 square feet of the warehouse building next to their office in the southwest corner of the building our zoning ordinance does not allow a retail sales component in the I-2 district where a lot of ordinances do a lot of this by right or special exception. The site is at the intersection of 2 main thoroughfares or secondary arterials. It s at the southeast corner of Perry Road and Stafford Road, it is not like it is located that deep in the industrial district. This could be the first request of its kind, not sure if Griot s garage received a similar variance for use. (Here is the site on the corner of Stafford and Perry. In the middle of the I-2 district. So warehouse distribution is. One thing that, this site does have it s, it is at the intersection of two secondary arterials. Here is the aerial of the building, customers enter through the existing employee/visitors entrance to come down to park in this area right here. This is the door to the retail component. We got 172 parking spaces on site. The largest shift has 94 employees, so there is more than enough parking. We will require any parking that is currently done in this site will be -! 3 -BZA111609

4 moved to the west of the building. They already have 6 parking spaces right in here, put a mark for customer parking. This is the floor plan of the southwest corner this will be the retail area. We looked at this at TAC last Thursday. The Fire Marshall did make some comments, what they need to do to make sure they are in compliance with the fire codes. They do have a sidewalk to walk to the entrance from parking area. This parking lot is separated from the daily operations the loading docks and truck entrance, this is the entrance for trucks. It is separated by a fence so there s no way people can cross over into the loading docks. All vehicles and employees and customers. What are important development standards for this request, the park parking and the traffic circulation. Make sure we avoid potential conflicts with daily operations. There is more than enough parking on site to accommodate the retail component. The retail entrance is separated from daily operations. I did the plan the plan commission last week. I had only 1 reply with an answer and they thought it should be reviewed on a case by case basis that way we can see if it is appropriate for the site. Instead of allowing it outright we probably allow it by special exception that way we can require to review on a case by case basis. In this case a variance of use is similar to a special exception which would require a notice of a public hearing and it is site specific. More signs will be added to the employee/ visitor entrance. Two factors that make this site more attractive that other sites in the I-2 district, is the location at the corner of the intersection, in fact the parking lot is separated from the daily operations based on the parking lot is separated from daily operations largest shipped, there is more than enough parking, 6 spaces have already been marked customer parking. They did have a 1 day sale last Saturday on November 7 th. They called me a couple weeks ago to ask if they could do this, I said yes as we ll do it as a temporary use with ILP show me the site plan and where the parking is going to be. I don t know if you saw the banners up on the buildings. Which were too large. They said it was very successful and they had no issues, based on the TAC meeting they did need to comply with some fire codes. Do you feel anymore conditions are necessary to give you an adequate comfort level for this? And we need to add the condition that a certain certificate of occupancy shall be obtained with compliance of all fire codes. Their attorney is here and I m sure he will be glad to answer any questions you might have. Mr. Monnett; Someone here representing the petitioner? Mr. Joe Calderon; Believe me this is not going to be any fancier than what Joe provided for you, showing you the information. My name is Joe Calderon and I am an attorney with Bose, McKinney, and Evans in Indianapolis at 111 Monument Dr. I brought Scott Davis from Pep Boys here with me tonight. Scott is the area director for this region. He s here to answer any operational questions you might have. One thing before we get too far ahead, and Joe is aware of this. We would ask that the board consider a 2 day waiver of your notice requirements. The notice was due to be sent out certified mail on Friday October 30 th. We had a -! 4 -BZA111609

5 runner miscommunication within our firm and therefore those letters went out on November 2 nd. Joe was aware of that, he didn t seem to think there was a problem, still well within the state statutory time frame for those requirements. So I would ask that the board as part of its deliberation entertain a waiver and make a motion if it deems it appropriate. Mr. Daniels; I think the board should make a motion one way or another on the 2 day waiver on notice requirements. Motion is made by Mr. Gibbs Seconded by Mr. Cavanaugh Motion carried. Mr. Calderon; Thanks very much. As Joe had mentioned this request might come before this board in a different fashion than many other jurisdictions as a special exception, in fact I ve done a number of industrial special exceptions whether it be for what I would call incidental retail or in many cases you might find a recreational use such as a gymnastics facility or a kids entertainment facility that like the high ceilings but it is not necessarily a designated permitted use within an industrial zone. In what the boards and ordinances usually require, and it is important for you all to consider is that: 1) There is enough parking and 2) there is no conflict between the passenger car traffic and the truck traffic. In this case that is kinda the over riding theme and I think Joe pointed that out. And one of the things that we re able to do maybe a little more neatly since it is all controlled by the same company such is that we have dedicated and separated truck and passenger car entrees, which is fully fenced as you can see on the aerial and in the photos that I have attached in tab 4. Further we have a separate entrance to the retail portion so there does not need to be a conflict between employees and customers. We think those are very important considerations for you this evening. As Joe had mentioned this is 1,558 sq ft of retail which is not a lot considering how large the warehouse is. This warehouse is a significant operation in Pep Boys distribution, I think they have twice as many SKU s as the typical DCs. They feel they are serving a need that not all of their retail customers can get within this warehouse. Nevertheless, they are not displaying all 70,000 or so they have in the retail but it is largely available. Their normal retail operation might include a service center and is about 14,000 sq ft. So this is pretty small, provides a convenience for the community and we believe the way the parking situation and ingress and egress, there won t be any real threat to the public health or safety which of course is a major finding, whether it be a special exception or variance. The other thing that I wanted to point out that Joe had mentioned. There are 94 employees, most of those folks arrive before the retail will open which is a 9-6 kind of operation and the first shift is 7:30 and that is the largest one and most of those folks go home at 1. Only conflict would be a little bit in the evening. But generally speaking there s no conflict to where there would be a shortage of parking spaces, and as Joe had pointed out there is designated parking for the customers very near the entry door. Additional signage to identify the retail area and to also direct -! 5 -BZA111609

6 customers will be provided. Most importantly in what came out of TAC with the fire chief and his comments, and we agree with the staff conditions including the final one to allow certificate of occupancy to be issued upon inspection by the fire chief. We got the exits, we just need him to inspect it. We may have to change the partitioning a little bit to make it work from a fire code perspective. The use itself adding a retail component to a warehouse, you don t need to make any structural changes, any changes to the sprinklering or anything like that, it s mostly making sure that the exits are spaced appropriately that the partitioning works from the fire and safety codes. With that, we think this is a pretty innocuous request, although it is unique perhaps to your board. We hope that you agree with us that in this case it s designed safely and will be an appropriate addition to the existing warehouse operation. Scott and I are here to answer any questions that you might have. Mr. Monnett; Is this done at other locations or is this going to be the first in this area? Mr. Calderon; They had the test last week, obviously worked with Joe and it did prove that it went successful. Mr. Scott Davis; We had about 300 customers initially come in and then another 100 following that throughout the day. We ended up doing about $60,000 in one day. Mr. Monnett; Your hours, you re wanting to have it Monday through Friday 8AM- 6PM, Saturday 9AM-1PM. Mr. Carlucci; I think this is kind of an interesting approach myself. It s kind of interesting to put it there, you could go out on 40. we are different than just a special exception, it s just a different approach. I was actually excited about that Mr. Calderon; It s a pretty productive use of the building. Mr. Cavanaugh; Where is the closest Pep Boys retail store? Mr. Gibbs; Joe I just have a few more things to run by you, are we concerned about traffic flow entrance there coming south on Perry? Mr. James; I m not sure what the new lane configuration is going to be with the new construction that is going on right now. Mr. Carlucci; There is already 4 lanes right there, as you come up towards that intersection. They haven t torn much that far -! 6 -BZA111609

7 south but as soon as you get close to the intersection they won t take the lanes out because it is already wide enough. Mr. Gibbs; Has the staff given any other considerations as far as, I know they kind of have an ideal of a location for retail, but what the chain reaction might be. Mr. James; It s possible we could get more requests, but again it would be a case by case basis site specific. If we feel like it produces a negative impact to general welfare to the public or to the surrounding properties, we can always deny that request. Ms. Sprague; I think Perry road going south right there, that s where the right lane that keeps going the left lane is intended to turn at that point. Mr. Gibbs; And then the other question that I have here, if we approve this motion, does that go with the building or will it be restricted to Pep Boys occupant? Mr. Daniels; That would be up to the board here, you can do it either way. If you want to restrict that to just the Pep Boys business there, if it ever became a different kind business there, this variance would go away as far as operating a retail operation. Mr. Calderon; Just from our stand point, if you want to lock us into what we said we are going to do as far as our plan of operation and that it is for Pep Boys operation that s fine with us. We are not interested in doing this and selling the business to someone else and saying we got your retail. Mr. Gibbs; I didn t take it that way, we are trying to think long term. Mr. Calderon; No, we understand that. Mr. Monnett; I d like to close the public portion of this petition and open it up to any discussions or motions by the board. Mr. Cavanaugh; I d like to get my sentiments on the record. I appreciate the approach the petitioner s taken, I have to say for the record, I am opposed to this. I think this amounts to a spot zoning use, I believe it gives an unfair business advantage for retail sales through the motor retailers if not having this same event. I feel that if your able to get the $50,000 worth of sales in one day, due to limited advertising you may have stronger business potential at a free standing retail site. And I am not going to be in favor of this request. Mr. Calderon; Let me add just one thing, just to make sure you knew, that was basically a warehouse clearance event. It wasn t -! 7 -BZA111609

8 what they would be doing everyday day to day stuff. mentioned it and I just wanted to make sure. Just he had Mr. Cavanaugh; I would not expect that $50,000 everyday with 2 or 3 retail establishments, but that is very strong sales, I have some concern about the precedence, we have other retailers in our community that have warehouse spaces here, and it may to be to their advantage to close up their retail establishments and become a warehouse based retailer store front if you will. I am not in favor of that. Mr. Monnett; Mr, Gibbs, any thoughts or motions? Mr. Monnet; I want to make a motion to deny BZA Pep Boys, requesting a variance of use to add a retail sales component of 1553 sq ft to the Pep Boys warehouse distribution facility zoned I-2 at 807 S. Perry Rd. Motion was made by Mr. Monnet Seconded by Mr. Cavanaugh Ms Duffer is absent tonight Mr. Cavanaugh- yes Mr. Gibbs- yes Mr. Monnet- yes Motion carries 3-ayes, none opposed, 1 absent It is approved. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS Adopt negative findings for BZA ; Thornton s sign variance Mr. Monnett; Mr. James, do we have old business or new business. Mr. James; We have 1 matter under the old business, we need to adopt negative findings for the Thornton s sign variance case, I forgot to include those in your packet, but I did them and hopefully you got a chance to look at them. Mr. Gibbs; I make a motion to adopt the negative findings BZA for a sign variance. Mr. Cavanaugh; Second. I have a motion and a second, Mr. Carlucci will you please poll our board. Mr. Carlucci; the motion was made by Mr. Gibbs, seconded by Mr. Cavanaugh. Mr. Cavanaugh- yes Mr. Gibbs- yes Ms. Duffer-absent Mr. Monnett-yes 3-ayes, none opposed, 1 absent The motion carries. -! 8 -BZA111609

9 ADJOURNMENT Mr. Monnett; motion for adjournment by Mr. Cavanaugh. Motion was seconded by Mr. Gibbs Mr. Greg Monnett, President -! 9 -BZA111609