CITY HALL, 100
LOCKVILLE ROAD
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER
30, 2006
PUBLIC HEARING
7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL: Mr. Wells called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M., with roll call as follows:, Mr. Wells, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Boruszewski were present. Mr. Cline and Mr. Linek were absent. Others present were Lance Schultz, Dawn Romine, Joe Henderson, Plez Booker, Larkin C. Dotson, Jon A Gastil, Sandy Gastil, Dan Horne, James L. Kopp, Rose Kirchner, David Mayer, Katherine Smith, and others.
A. Review and request for a motion to approve building, parking and boundary buffer setback variances for the Shoppes at Stonecreek located just south of Kohl’s.
Mr. Schultz presented the staff report: Zoning History of Planning and Zoning Commission approved Final Plat for Stonecreek Commercial Subdivision in October 2006. Service Committee and City Council will review the Final Plat in November and December respectively. Planning and Zoning Commission approved Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials and Landscaping on November 14, 2006. Proposed Use: The applicant is proposing to develop the 5.87 acre-site into a 48,882 square foot retail center. The development would require 245 parking spaces while 366 parking spaces are provided. The development would have three access points from proposed Stonecreek Drive that would connect with the Kohls development. Dumpsters would be located behind the building and mechanical equipment appears to be located on the roof of the building. Storm water would be detained in an offsite detention pond located just west of the building. Variances Requested: Boundary Buffer Yards Section 1296.02 (d) Buffer Locations – Type A buffer is required between a C3 commercial uses and a R4 residential use. The applicant is proposing a 25-ft setback with a 6-ft high solid wood fence and 6-ft high pine trees in a staggered alignment along the western property line. The property to the west is zoned R4 but likely will be a commercial uses in the future per the Growth Management Plan and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Front Yard and Rear Yard Setbacks Table 1 – Permitted Uses, Accessory Uses and Conditional Use: When commercial uses abut residential uses, a rear yard setback not less than 50-ft will be provided, subject to landscaping requirements. The applicant is proposing a 25-ft setback with a 6-ft high fence and 6-ft high pine trees in a staggered alignment along the western property line. The front yard building setback is 50 percent of the right-of-way width and the parking setback is 60 percent of the building setback. The applicant is proposing a 30-ft building setback with an 18-ft parking setback along proposed Stonecreek Drive South. The required setbacks along proposed Stonecreek Drive South are: East of the 1st access drive the right-of-way is 76 feet which yields a 38-ft building setback and a 22.8-ft parking setback. West of the 1st access drive the right-of-way is 64 which yields a 32-ft building setback and a 19.2-ft parking setback. Seven Practical Difficulties Standards for Area Variances - the Board of Zoning Appeals should examine the following standards when deciding whether to grant a landowner an area variance. 1. Whether the property will yield a reasonable return or whether there can be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. The property could be beneficially used without the variances but would not likely be developed to the extent as proposed in the City/Equity TIF agreement. 2. Whether the variance is substantial. The western boundary buffer variance would likely be minimal based on future commercial uses identified per the Growth Management Plan, Comprehensive Land Use Plan and market conditions for the property to the west. The building and parking setback variances along proposed Stonecreek Drive South would be between 1.2-ft and 8-ft and would be consistent with setbacks with other developments in the area. 3. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or adjoining properties suffer a "substantial detriment. "The property to the west is zoned residential but would likely be developed as commercial uses per the Growth Management Plan, Comprehensive Land Use Plan and would not likely cause substantial detriment to the adjoining property owners. The City required additional right-of-way along proposed Stonecreek Drive for turn lanes, boulevards, wider sidewalks, etc., thus creating the inconsistent building and parking setbacks along the roadway. 4. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of government services. The health, safety and general welfare of the subject property and adjoining properties would not likely be impacted. 5. Whether the property owner purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction. Staff would not have knowledge of this information. 6. Whether the problem can be solved by some manner other than the granting of a variance. Not without impacting the site plan, which would likely require a reduction in building area. 7. Whether the variance preserves the "spirit and intent" of the zoning requirement and whether "substantial justice" would be done by granting the variance. The variances approved would be minor based on likely future land use conditions and traffic engineering requirements, thus preserving the spirit and intent of the buffer, building and parking setback requirements. Staff Recommendation: Staff supports the Board of Zoning Appeals variances with the following conditions: 1. That the western boundary buffer shall be reduced from 50-ft to 25-ft. 2. That a 6-ft high wood fence and 6-ft high pine trees at installation located in a staggered alignment shall be installed along the western property line. 3. That the landscaping along the western property line shall be located on the subject property or a landscape easement shall be prepared and recorded with the affected property owners if not located on the subject property. 4. That the building and parking setbacks along Stonecreek Drive South east of the first access drive shall be reduced from 38-ft and 22.8-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 5. That the building and parking setbacks along Stonecreek Drive South west of the first access drive shall be reduced from 32-ft and 19.22-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 6. That additional landscaping shall be installed along proposed Stonecreek Drive South.
Sandy Gastil, after being duly sworn, stated she is a property owner in the Fairfield Square Condominiums. Mrs. Gastil requested further explanation of the project. Mr. Schultz identified the development, pointing out where the road would be, new building placement, existing buildings, tree lines and detention pond placement. The need for this variance is because the adjacent property is zone residential and a buffer of 50 feet is required; if this property was zoned commercial there would be no need for a variance. This property is recommend to be commercial per the City’s Growth Management Plan. Mrs. Gastil stated her concern on the staking of the property all the way down to the creek and the preservation of the tree line. Mr. Schultz stated the staff engineer and or the applicant could answer the questions regarding the drainage placement, ditch line, and removal and replacement of trees. Mrs. Gastil also asked the details of the TIF. Mr. Schultz provided a brief summary of the TIF details.
Jon A Gastil, after being duly sworn, stated he is a property owner in the Fairfield Square Condominiums. He asked about the requirements for the new street as opposed to Postage Drive. Mr. Schultz stated that the requirements are different since Postage Drive is a private street and extended Stonecreek Drive would be a public street.
James L. Kopp, after being duly sworn, stated he is a property owner in the Fairfield Square Condominiums and had a few questions. What is the size of the new street? Mr. Schultz stated that it is proposed to be a five lane commercial street and is planned to ultimately connect St. Rt. 256 to Refugee Road to alleviate congestion at the St. Rt. 256 and Refugee Road intersection. Mr. Kopp also asked what is the reasoning on the placement of the detention pond. Mr. Schultz stated that the applicant would have to answer the question.
Dan Horne,
after being duly sworn, stated he is the representative for Equity. The buffering is more then identified because
the rest of buffering will be on the adjacent property. The Fairfield Square
residents would be looking at trees and then a fence. The water would drain
west to the Blacklick Creek. The tree line along Fairfield Square Condominiums
will not be touched. Mr. Schultz stated the construction drawings would
identify if any trees would be removed along the creek. There will be an
easement with the Nicodemus property holder for
the detention pond. Mr. Horne stated that this is the best location for the detention
pond for both today and future development. A professional commerical property
association will be maintaing the detention basin.
Plez Booker, after being duly sworn, stated he is a property owner in the Fairfield Square Condominiums and voiced his concerns about the development. Mr. Schultz stated the development complies with the City Thoroughfare Plan and Growth Management Plan. Mr. Schultz stated the road would be constructed in phases.
David Mayer, after being duly sworn, stated he is a property owner in the Fairfield Square Condominiums. He asked about what area is flood plain and how will it be developed. Mr. Schultz stated there may be flood plain area on the Nicodemus property and any development would have to comply with minimum development standards.
Mr. Wright verified the pine tree buffer requirements, along the western perimeter of the site.
Larkin C. Dotson, after being duly sworn, stated he is a business owner further south of this site. He verified if there are going to be anymore variances to this property. Mr. Schultz stated this is for the property located just south of Kohl’s. Mr. Horne reiterated that this is not a request for less buffering since the remainder of the buffering is on the adjacent property. Mr. Wells stated that the detention pond should keep the flow of water at a desirable rate.
Mr. Wright moved to approve with the following conditions: 1. That the western boundary buffer shall be reduced from 50-ft to 25-ft. 2. That a 6-ft high wood fence and 6-ft high pine trees at installation located in a staggered alignment shall be installed along the western property line. 3. That the landscaping along the western property line shall be located on the subject property or a landscape easement shall be prepared and recorded with the affected property owners if not located on the subject property. 4. That the building and parking setbacks along Stonecreek Drive South east of the first access drive shall be reduced from 38-ft and 22.8-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 5. That the building and parking setbacks along Stonecreek Drive South west of the first access drive shall be reduced from 32-ft and 19.22-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 6. That additional landscaping shall be installed along proposed Stonecreek Drive South. Mr. Boruszewski seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Wells, Mr. Wright and Mr. Boruszewski voted “Aye”. Motion carried 3-0.
B. Review and request for a motion to approve building, parking and boundary buffer setback variances and a parking space variance for the Offices at Stonecreek located just south of Kohl’s.
Mr. Schultz stated the staff report: Zoning History: Planning and Zoning Commission approved Final Plat for Stonecreek Commercial Subdivision in October 2006. Service Committee and City Council will review the Final Plat in November and December respectively. Planning and Zoning Commission approved Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials and Landscaping on November 14, 2006. Proposed Use: The 6.98-acre site currently accommodates three office buildings encompassing 16,343 square feet. The applicant is proposing to develop five 8,000 square feet office buildings on the remainder of the site. The development would yield 325 parking spaces. The development would have two access points from proposed Stonecreek Drive South. Two dumpsters would be located near proposed buildings 3 and 4 and one near existing building 3. The location of the mechanical equipment is not identified. Storm water would be detained in an offsite detention pond located just west of the building. Variances Requested: Boundary Buffer Yards Section 1296.02 (d) Buffer Locations – Type A buffer is required between a C3 commercial uses and a R4 residential use. The applicant is proposing an access road for the office development that would actually encroach 5-ft on the adjacent property. The applicant is proposing a buffer of pine trees and ornamental trees on the adjacent property. The property to the west is zoned R4 but likely will be an office/commercial uses in the future per the Growth Management Plan and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Front Yard and Rear Yard Setbacks Table 1 – Permitted Uses, Accessory Uses and Conditional Use When commercial uses abut residential uses, a rear yard setback not less than 50-ft will be provided, subject to landscaping requirements. The applicant is proposing an access road for the office development that would actually encroach 5-ft on the adjacent property. The front yard-building setback is 50 percent of the right-of-way width and the parking setback is 60 percent of the building setback. The applicant is proposing a 30-ft building setback with an 18-ft parking setback along proposed Stonecreek Drive South. The required setbacks along proposed Stonecreek Drive South are: East of the 1st access drive the right-of-way is 76 feet which yields a 38-ft building setback and a 22.8-ft parking setback. West of the 1st access drive the right-of-way is 64 which yields a 32-ft building setback and a 19.2-ft parking setback. Parking Space Variance The entire office complex (proposed eight buildings) would encompass 61,343 square feet of office space, which would require 307 parking spaces for professional offices (61,343/200). The plan identifies 325 parking spaces. Professional office space requires 1 parking space per 200 square feet of office space while medical and health related office uses require 3 parking spaces per examination room plus 1 parking space per 200 square feet of office space. The developer cannot pre-determine the office mix between general and medical office and has successfully parked similar projects at the rate of 1 parking space per 200 square feet of office space. Seven Practical Difficulties Standards for Area Variances - the Board of Zoning Appeals should examine the following standards when deciding whether to grant a landowner an area variance. 1. Whether the property will yield a reasonable return or whether there can be a beneficial use of the property without the variance. The property could be beneficially used without the variances but would not likely be developed to the extent as proposed in the City/Equity TIF agreement. 2. Whether the variance is substantial. The western boundary buffer variance would likely be minimal based on future commercial uses identified per the Growth Management Plan, Comprehensive Land Use Plan and market conditions for the property to the west. The building and parking setback variances along proposed Stonecreek Drive South would be between 1.2-ft and 8-ft and would be consistent with setbacks with other developments in the area. The parking space variance would likely be minimal if needed at all. 3. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or adjoining properties suffer a "substantial detriment." The property to the west is zoned residential but would likely be developed as office/commercial uses per the Growth Management Plan, Comprehensive Land Use Plan and would not likely cause substantial detriment to the adjoining property owners. The City required additional right-of-way along proposed Stonecreek Drive for turn lanes, boulevards, wider sidewalks, ect., thus creating the inconsistent building and parking setbacks along the roadway and would not cause substantial detriment. The parking space variance would likely be minimal and would not cause a substantial detriment. 4. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of government services. The health, safety and general welfare of the subject property and adjoining properties would not likely be impacted. 5. Whether the property owner purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction. Staff would not have knowledge of this information. 6. Whether the problem can be solved by some manner other than the granting of a variance. Not without impacting the site plan, which would likely require a reduction in building area. 7. Whether the variance preserves the "spirit and intent" of the zoning requirement and whether "substantial justice" would be done by granting the variance. The variances approved would be minor based on likely future land use conditions and traffic engineering requirements, thus preserving the spirit and intent of the buffer, building and parking setback requirements. Staff Recommendation: Staff supports the Board of Zoning Appeals variances with the following conditions: 1. That the western boundary buffer shall be reduced from 50-ft to 0-ft without a Type A Buffer. 2. That a landscape easement shall be prepared and recorded for installation of landscaping on the adjacent property. 3. That the building and parking setbacks east of the first access drive on Stonecreek Drive South shall be reduced from 38-ft and 22.8-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 4. That the building and parking setbacks west of the first access drive on Stonecreek Drive South shall be reduced from 32-ft and 19.22-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 5. That the existing office buildings and parking lot would be a legal nonconforming use and be “grandfathered” from any new setback requirements. 6. That the 61,343 square foot existing and proposed office building development shall require 307 parking spaces.
Mr. Wright verified the location of Picktown Beverage and National City Bank and access to their properties . Mr. Schultz stated there will be a traffic signal at the St. Rt. 256 and the Stonecreek Drive intersection.
Mr. Boruszewski moved to approve with the following conditions: 1. That the western boundary buffer shall be reduced from 50-ft to 0-ft without a Type A Buffer. 2. That a landscape easement shall be prepared and recorded for installation of landscaping on the adjacent property. 3. That the building and parking setbacks east of the first access drive on Stonecreek Drive South shall be reduced from 38-ft and 22.8-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 4. That the building and parking setbacks west of the first access drive on Stonecreek Drive South shall be reduced from 32-ft and 19.22-ft to 30-ft and 18-ft respectively. 5. That the existing office buildings and parking lot would be a legal nonconforming use and shall be “grandfathered” from any new setback requirements. 6. That the 61,343 square foot existing and proposed office building development shall require 307 parking spaces. Mr. Wright seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Wells, Mr. Wright and Mr. Boruszewski voted “Aye”. Motion carried 3-0.
4. ADJOURNMENT There being nothing further. Mr. Wright moved to adjourn; Mr. Wells seconded the motion. Roll was taken: Mr. Wells, Mr. Wright and Mr. Boruszewski voted “Aye”. Motion carried 3-0. The Board of Zoning Appeals meeting adjourned at 7:51 P.M., November 30, 2006.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________________________
Dawn-Elizabeth M. Romine, Administrative Assistant
ATTEST
_________________________________________
Lance A. Schultz, Director of Planning and Zoning