PLAINFEILD BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
For October 18, 2010, 7:00 PM

CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Monnett: I will now call to order the Plainfield Board of Zoning Appeals meeting for October 18, 2010. I will now ask our Board Secretary if you would please have a roll call for a determination of a quorum.

ROLL CALL/DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM

Mr. Carlucci: Ms. Duffer- here
Mr. Cavanaugh is absent tonight
Mr. Gibbs- here
Mr. Monnett- here
We have a quorum for the purpose of conducting business.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Mr. Monnett: Would you all please rise for the pledge of allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINTUES (September 20, 2010 meeting)

Mr. Monnett: I will now ask our Board members for approval of our minutes from our September 20, 2010 meeting or corrections to be noted.

Mr. Gibbs: I move that we accept the minutes as recorded with the exception of the correction so noted by Kevin Cavanaugh's notes.

Mr. Monnett: Which that is on page seven of our copy.

Ms. Duffer: Second.

Mr. Monnett: Motion is second, all in favor say aye.

All: aye.

OATH OF TESTIMONY

Mr. Monnett: I will ask our Board secretary to give the oath of testimony tonight.

Mr. Carlucci conducted the oath of testimony.
Normally we have a five member Board, we have three members here tonight, we have one absent and we have one vacancy. For the purpose of approving any action by the Board tonight you will have to have all three votes one way or the other. If you still desire to move forward please let me know, if not we will continue into the next meeting. Would you like to move forward tonight? Ok, thank you.

Mr. Monnett: Thank you Mr. Carlucci.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Mr. Monnett reviewed the guidelines governing the conduct for public hearings.

PETITIONS REQUESTING CONTINUANCE

Mr. Monnett: Tonight we have a petition that is a continuance and it is BZA-10-015 Rainbow Child Development, Mr. James.

Mr. James: Good evening Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. We are going to instead of withdrawing this petition we are just going to continue it until the Plan Commission hears the proposed amendment to allow child care centers in the general commercial district. They will hear the amendment November 1st. So we will just go ahead and continue it until the November meeting, knowing that the amendment will be heard on the first.

Mr. Monnett: Ok, thank you.

Mr. Gibbs: I make a motion that we continue the petition BZA-10-015 filed by Rainbow Child Development.

Ms. Duffer: Second.

Mr. Monnett: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Carlucci, would you please poll the Board?

Mr. Carlucci: This motion was made by Mr. Gibbs, seconded by Ms. Duffer.

• Ms. Duffer- yes
• Mr. Cavanaugh is absent
• Mr. Gibbs- yes
• Mr. Monnett- yes

Motion carries 3-0

PETITIONS FOR PUBIC HEARING

Mr. Monnett: Our first petition tonight is BZA-10-016 Branham signs.

Mr. James: We only have one petition for public hearing tonight and I will let Jill explain it to you.

Ms. Sprague: This one is for the Plainfield Crossing pole sign. The Plainfield Crossing is next to the Walmart to the east. It is zoned general commercial and the Value City Furniture is in this building and then they are putting in the Planet Fitness right now. As you can see it is primarily surrounded by general commercial. There is a little bit of R-6 to the south that is Gladden Farms I believe. The pole sign however is where the arrow is on these drawings. It is actually in an easement on this lot where the Jiffy Lube used to be and is vacant right now, the sign is still there, and the Jiffy Lube is not. The request is to allow a variance to have supports wider than two feet. The ordinance allows the two feet in width for an ornamental shell as it is called, and that is what is already out there. They want to put brick around those supports in order to update it to go with the updates from Value City Furniture. Normally what we would have to do with the size being larger is we would add that extra area in there what is allowed is a sign surface area and what they've already got out there is the allowed maximum so this is the variance they have decided to ask for. On the left, this is the existing sign and then on the right is what they are proposing and you can see where the brick would go and how it makes a pretty nice looking sign compared to the older style that is out there. Then this is what the Value City looks like and then you can see how they are working on the Planet Fitness right now. Just with those in mind, they are working to update the existing sign and so reducing the size in order to get rid of the second idea could be difficult and also obviously reducing the size of the supports would be even more difficult. They intend to update it to match the new façades going up out there and in light of that do you guys think that this request is acceptable? I know the petitioner is here and can answer any questions.

Mr. Monnett: Can you go back to picture where you showed the two signs please. I didn't see that on the plans. The overall height is thirty-five feet, what is the height of the existing.

Ms. Sprague: Actually, I don't know. I didn't think to look up to see if we had an old permit from that one. I don't know if we would.

Mr. Carlucci: Is that the first Walmart?

Ms. Sprague: Yes.

Mr. Carlucci: That actually was developed in Hendricks County so we had annexed it in later so it wasn't something we had jurisdiction on.

Mr. Monnett: I may wait till the petitioner to come forward maybe that is the appropriate time, but I guess I am curious if we are cutting off that overall height. You might mention what you are planning on doing with that.

Mr. Brown: I am Gary Brown and I represent the landlord Schottenstein Property Group. I honestly don't know if the overall height is reduced or stays the same. I'm here representing them not the sign company basically. I again I believe the idea is the same structure. I can find that information out for you. My address is 2227 Westwood Northern Blvd., Cincinnati, Ohio 45225.

Ms. Sprague: Just to clarify, what they are proposing besides the three foot supports meets what the ordinance allows so if they are taking off part of the structure, thirty-five feet is what is allowed now for a pole sign. The only thing that does not meet the ordinance is this three foot dimension right here.

Mr. Monnett: That helps, thank you.

Mr. Brown: I brought the brick mason here because the high beam is actually sixteen inches wide depth wise and to get it down to the size we want to use with a brick sub base is allowing for moving the sign. We can't even achieve the twenty-four inch base to begin with. It matches the (inaudible).

Ms. Duffer: Thank you.

Mr. James: Just to clarify a few things that they had already submitted a sign permit and they are going to add the required landscaping down at the bottom as well.

Mr. Monnett: I certainly think that is a huge improvement.

Ms. Duffer: I agree.

Mr. Monnett: Would like to ask if there is anyone else in the audience that would like to speak for or against this petition you can come forward now if you would please. Seeing none, I will close this to the public and open it up to our Board if there is anymore discussion or a possible motion.

Ms. Duffer: I am prepared to make a motion. I move that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve BZA-10-016, as filed by Branham Sign requesting a Variance to the Development Standards of the Sign Regulations to allow pole sign supports to exceed the allowed 2' in width on the Plainfield Crossing integrated center sign at 2427 E. Main Street with substantial compliance with the sign specifications file dated September 13, 2010.

Mr. Gibbs: I second.

Mr. Monnett: I have a motion and a second. Mr. Carlucci, would you please poll the Board?

• Ms. Duffer- yes
• Mr. Cavanaugh is absent tonight
• Mr. Gibbs- yes
• Mr. Monnett- yes

Three ayes, none opposed, motion carries.

OLD BUSINESS/NEW BUSINESS

Mr. Monnett: Old business/ new business Mr. James?

Mr. James: Just sort of old business just to update you on what is going on with the Rainbow Child Care petition that we heard last month and it was continued. We did discuss the request at the October Plan Commission meeting and Jill prepared a comparison of what other communities do with child care centers where they allow them and which zoning districts. We found out that most of the surrounding communities do allow child care centers by right in the general commercial districts, which is equivalent district to ours in commercial districts. They also allow them by right in light districts. After hearing that, the Plan Commission thought we should move forward with the amendment to change the zoning ordinance so child care centers by right in general commercial districts. So that is going to be heard at the November meeting and assuming it gets approved the Town Council will then vote on it and if they amend the ordinance then the petition will be withdrawn.

Mr. Monnett: How about the LED lighting?

Mr. James: The LED lighting, we discussed that at a previous Plan Commission meeting and because these are becoming more common they thought it would be best to amend the ordinance to allow they thought it would be best to amend the ordinance to allow them in the gateway corridors.

Mr. Monnett: That is what we have on US40 correct?

Mr. James: That is what we are going to have. That is all I have.

Mr. Monnett: Anything Jill?

ADJOURNMENT

Ms. Duffer: Motion to adjourn.

Mr. Gibbs: Second.