Shelby County Board of Zoning Appeals

Meeting Minutes

October 5, 2010

Members Present:

Rachael Ackley

Kevin Carson

Ann Sipes

Richard Whelen

Members Absent:

Doug Warnecke

Staff Present:

Amy Dillon

Mark McNeely

Call to Order and Roll Call:

Kevin Carson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm in Room 208 A at the Court House Annex.

Approval of Minutes:

Ann Sipes moved to approve the minutes of the September 7, 2010 meeting, and Richard Whelen seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-0. The minutes were signed.

Public Hearings:

Kevin Carson began the public hearing portion of the meeting by explaining the proceedings for the petitions.

Old Business:

None

New Business:

BZA10-11…Robert and Sharon Crafton Use Variance: The owners and applicants are Robert and Sharon Crafton of 2764 North 350 West, Shelbyville, IN. The address of the subject property is 2764 North 350 West, Shelbyville, IN. The current zoning of the property is RE, Residential Estate. The existing use of the property is single-family residential. The petitioner seeks approval of a use variance to allow a residential dwelling unit to be constructed and inhabited in a detached accessory structure located on the same property as a single-family home.

Amy Dillon read the petition into the record and indicated that she had proof of publication in the Shelbyville News and proof of notification to the adjoining property owners. Dillon stated that the petitioner is requesting approval of a use variance to allow the construction and occupancy of a residential dwelling unit in a detached accessory structure that is located on the same property as an existing single-family home and is zoned RE. She noted that her office was informed that the petitioner was constructing the addition onto his existing pole building in August, and the Inspector went to the site and red tagged the building under construction. She noted that the petitioner promptly came to the Plan Commission office to resolve the matter. He obtained all of the proper permits, and he did indicate that he was planning to let his daughter and her family live in the addition. Dillon explained to the petitioner that he needed to receive approval of a use variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals prior to allowing anyone to live there. He set up an appointment to complete the variance paperwork, but because of a hurt back, he was delayed in appearing at the previous month’s BZA. She indicated that the building is not yet complete, thus the petitioner’s daughter has not moved into the structure yet.

Robert Crafton presented his case to the Board. He stated that the statements made by Dillon were correct. He indicated that the living quarters for his daughter were intended to be temporary. He noted that he would like for the Board to grant him approval to have the living quarters in the barn for the next three years.

The Board opened up the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition.

After questions and discussion from the Board, Rachael Ackley made a motion to vote on the petition with the following stipulations:

a)  Use of the residential quarters in the pole building must discontinue in three years (October 31, 2013). The kitchen of the temporary dwelling unit must be removed within three years.

b)  Only the petitioner’s daughter and her immediate family shall be permitted to reside in the temporary dwelling unit.

c)  A septic permit must be obtained.

d)  Should the petitioner’s daughter not be able to relocate from the temporary dwelling unit within the designated three-year timeframe, then the petitioner must re-file a use variance application for an extension of this approval.

Richard Whelen seconded the motion. The petition was approved 3-1 with Ann Sipes casting the dissenting vote.

Mark McNeely presented the Findings of Fact to the Board. They affirmed these were the basis for their decision. The Findings of fact were approved 3-1 (Ann Sipes no).

BZA10-12…Insight Engineering (United Energy, LLC) Development Standards: The applicant and project engineer is Donald Fisher of Insight Engineering of 9765 Randall Dr., Suite C, Indianapolis, IN. The owner of the property is United Energy, LLC of 141 West 500 North, Anderson, IN. The address of the subject property is 11650 N. Cooperative Dr., Fountaintown, IN. The petitioner requests approval of seven different development standards variances for various signs proposed to be placed at the subject location.

Amy Dillon read the petition into the record and indicated that she had proof of publication in the Shelbyville News and proof of notification to the adjoining property owners. Dillon stated that the petitioner is seeking approval of seven development standards variances for various signs proposed to be placed on the United Energy, LLC Fueling Center at 11650 North Cooperative Drive (NW corner of State Road 9 and US 52).

1. Three Canopy Signs

The petitioner has requested a development standards variance of UDO 5.75 A.2.a.: Wall Sign Allotment and Size.

  1. UDO 5.75 A.2.a. provides the standard for number and size of wall signs advertising a stand-alone commercial use. It states, “The cumulative square footage of all wall signs shall not exceed one and one-half (1.5) square foot per lineal foot of primary structure that fronts a public or private street.”
  2. The petitioner has indicated that he desires to place three signs on the gas pump canopy.

Donald Fisher presented his case to the Board. He highlighted the signs in question on a set of plans, and he explained that the orientation of the canopy to the highways warranted the need for the three canopy signs.

The Board opened up the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor or opposition of the petition on the canopy signs.

After questions and discussion from the Board, Rachael Ackley made a motion to vote on the petition. Ann Sipes seconded the motion. The petition was approved 4-0.

Mark McNeely presented the Findings of Fact to the Board. They affirmed these were the basis for their decision. The Findings of fact were approved 4-0.

2. Canopy Sign Size

The petitioner has requested a development standards variance of UDO 5.75 A.2.a.: Wall Sign Allotment and Size.

a.  UDO 5.75 A.2.a. provides the standard for number and size of wall signs advertising a stand-alone commercial use. It states, “The cumulative square footage of all wall signs shall not exceed one and one-half (1.5) square foot per lineal foot of primary structure that fronts a public or private street.”

b.  The proposed square footage for the signage group (identity sign and three pricing signs) for the southeast elevation (the side of the canopy facing the intersection) is 73.25 square feet.

c.  Because the canopy is only 36 feet wide, the maximum allowable square footage for signage on this side of the canopy is 54 square feet.

Donald Fisher presented his case to the Board. He highlighted the signs in question on a set of plans, and he explained that the company has a standard size for its signs.

The Board opened up the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor or opposition of the petition on the canopy sign size.

After questions and discussion from the Board, Ann Sipes made a motion to vote on the petition. Richard Whelen seconded the motion. The petition was approved 4-0.

Mark McNeely presented the Findings of Fact to the Board. They affirmed these were the basis for their decision. The Findings of fact were approved 4-0.

3. US 52 Ground Sign Size

The petitioner has requested a development standards variance of UDO 5.75 B.4.a.iii.: Ground Sign Size (US 52 ground sign).

  1. UDO 5.75 B.4.a.iii. provides the standard for size of ground signs advertising a stand-alone commercial use. It states, “Ground signs on lots with at least seventy-five (75) feet of frontage on a public street shall not exceed forty-five (45) square feet in area per side.”
  2. The petitioner has indicated that he desires for the ground sign along US 52 to be 50 square feet in size.
  3. A ground sign is permitted to be erected along both State Road 9 and US 52.
  4. The petitioner has noted that a standard ground sign for the company utilizes two side-by-side 5 feet by 5 feet panels on a two-foot tall base. The total sign area is 50 square feet per side.

Donald Fisher presented his case to the Board. He highlighted the signs in question on a set of plans, and he explained that the company has a standard size for its signs.

The Board opened up the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition on the ground sign size.

Ann Sipes made a motion to vote on the petition. Rachael Ackley seconded the motion. The petition was approved 4-0.

Mark McNeely presented the Findings of Fact to the Board. They affirmed these were the basis for their decision. The Findings of fact were approved 4-0.

4. US 52 Ground Sign Height

The petitioner has requested a development standards variance of UDO 5.75 B.4.c.: Ground Sign Height (US 52 ground sign).

  1. UDO 5.75 B.4.c. provides the standard for the height of ground signs advertising a stand-alone commercial use. It states, “Ground signs shall not exceed six (6) feet in height.”
  2. The petitioner has indicated that he desires for the ground sign along US 52 to be seven (7) feet tall.
  3. A ground sign is permitted to be erected along both State Road 9 and US 52.
  4. The petitioner has noted that a standard ground sign for the company utilizes two side-by-side 5 feet by 5 feet panels on a two-foot tall base. The total sign height is seven feet.

Donald Fisher presented his case to the Board. He highlighted the signs in question on a set of plans, and he explained that the company has a standard size for its signs.

The Board opened up the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor or in opposition for the petition on ground sign height.

Richard Whelen made a motion to vote on the petition and Rachael Ackley seconded the motion. The petition was approved 4-0.

Mark McNeely presented the Findings of Fact to the Board. They affirmed these were the basis for their decision. The Findings of fact were approved 4-0.

5. State Road 9 Ground Sign Size

The petitioner has requested a development standards variance of UDO 5.75 B.4.a.iii.: Ground Sign Size (State Road 9 ground sign).

a.  UDO 5.75 B.4.a.iii. provides the standard for size of ground signs advertising a stand-alone commercial use. It states, “Ground signs on lots with at least seventy-five (75) feet of frontage on a public street shall not exceed forty-five (45) square feet in area per side.”

b.  The petitioner has indicated that he desires for the ground sign along State Road 9 to be 50 square feet in size.

c.  A ground sign is permitted to be erected along both State Road 9 and US 52.

d.  The petitioner has noted that a standard ground sign for the company utilizes two side-by-side 5 feet by 5 feet panels on a two-foot tall base. The total sign area is 50 square feet per side.

Donald Fisher presented his case to the Board. He highlighted the signs in question on a set of plans, and he explained that the company has a standard size for its signs.

The Board opened up the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor or opposition on the ground sign size.

Ann Sipes made a motion to vote on the petition. Rachael Ackley seconded the motion. The petition was approved 4-0.

Mark McNeely presented the Findings of Fact to the Board. They affirmed these were the basis for their decision. The Findings of fact were approved 4-0.

6. State Road 9 Ground Size Height

The petitioner has requested a development standards variance of UDO 5.75 B.4.c.: Ground Sign Height (State Road 9 ground sign).

  1. UDO 5.75 B.4.c. provides the standard for the height of ground signs advertising a stand-alone commercial use. It states, “Ground signs shall not exceed six (6) feet in height.”
  2. The petitioner has indicated that he desires for the ground sign along State Road 9 to be seven (7) feet tall.
  3. A ground sign is permitted to be erected along both State Road 9 and US 52.
  4. The petitioner has noted that a standard ground sign for the company utilizes two side-by-side 5 feet by 5 feet panels on a two-foot tall base. The total sign height is seven feet.

Donald Fisher presented his case to the Board. He highlighted the signs in question on a set of plans, and he explained that the company has a standard size for its signs.

The Board opened up the meeting for public comment on the ground size height. No one spoke in favor or opposition of the sign height.

Richard Whelen made a motion to vote on the petition. Rachael Ackley seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-0.

Mark McNeely presented the Findings of Fact to the Board. They affirmed these were the basis for their decision. The Findings of fact were approved 4-0.

7. Accessory Building Sign

The petitioner has requested a development standards variance of UDO 5.75 A.2.a.: Sign on an Accessory Structure.

  1. UDO 5.75 A.2.a. provides the standard for location of wall signs advertising a stand-alone commercial use. It states, “The cumulative square footage of all wall signs shall not exceed one and one-half (1.5) square foot per lineal foot of primary structure that fronts a public or private street.”
  2. The petitioner desires to place a sign on the façade of one of the accessory structures on the site. He proposes to place a United Energy sing on the front façade of the mechanical building.
  3. The Unified Development Ordinance states that signage may only be placed on the primary structure. It has been determined that the primary structure for this site is the fuel canopy; therefore adding additional signage to another structure requires approval of the requested use variance.

Donald Fisher presented his case to the Board. He highlighted the sign in question on a set of plans, and he explained that the company believes that the proposed sign would give the site uniformity.