HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 08-15-95 CARNIEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
AUGUST 15, 1995 CARMEUCLAY
PLAN COMMISSION/BZA
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 PM by the President with the Pledge
of Allegiance in Council.Chambers, One Civic Square, Cannel, Indiana.
Members present were as follows: David Cremeans; Jay Dorman; Judy Hagan; Ron Houck;
Dick Klar; Alan Klineman; Norma Meighen; Barbara Myers; Salim Najjar; James T. O'Neal;
Luci Snyder; and H.K. (Tom) Thompson.
A quorum was declared.
Members of the Department of Community Development present were: Dave Cunningham;
Terry Jones; and Mark Monroe.
Dick Klar moved for approval of the minutes of the July meeting, pending a correction noted
by Barbara Myers, seconded by Tom Thompson. The Minutes were approved as corrected.
F. COMMUNICATIONS, BILLS, EXPENDITURES, AND LEGAL COUNCIL REPORT
City Attorney Gordon Byers reported that the City Council passed the Sign Ordinance at its
meeting of July 17th. The Ordinance was passed with a few minor changes; nothing of
substance.
The Accessory Use Ordinance was presented as a means of resolving swimming pools in
front yards. The legislative body thought it was appropriate to bring Carmel closer to the
State Statute which requires either a fence or an automatic pool cover with required
landscaping. This Ordinance will be going forward to the City Council.
The 25 Criteria Items as Basis of Board Approval for Special Use will not go to Council until
the third meeting in September for public hearing.
G. REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND DEPARTMENT CONCERNS
Terry Jones reported that the public hearing on Agenda item 4i. had not been closed, and as a
result, this item will be heard this evening immediately following item 3h.
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
lh. Commission to consider Docket No. 57-95 Z, a Rezone Application for James
Schneider. Petitioner seeks to rezone approximately 2 acres located on the northeast
corner of 103rd and Pennsylvania Streets from R-1 to B-7.
Filed by E. Davis Coots.
1
4 44
Dave Coots of Coots, Henke & Wheeler, 255 East Cannel Drive, appeared before the
Commission representing the applicant, James and Karen Schneider, and Schneider
Management Corporation, owner of the property. The applicant met with adjoining property
owners of North Ridge Homeowner's Association on August 3rd and certain covenants and
restrictions have been agreed upon.
The buildings will be a single story, residential style, gabled roof, masonry exterior, frame
construction; the buildings will face west with one access off Pennsylvania. Mr. Coots did
present a rendering of the proposed buildings. Mr. Schneider agreed to covenant with the
City of Carmel and the Plan Commission that the property will be restricted by him (and
covenants that run with the land) to the use only of professional offices or general offices and
exclude all other permitted uses that are contained in the B-7 Ordinance. All other
requirements of the B-7 Zone would be complied with, including Parking, Signage,
Landscaping, the maintenance of a 30 foot buffer between the subject property and the
property to the east. Mr. Schneider has also agreed to construct an 8 foot tall, cedar wood,
shadow-box fence between the subject site and the property to the east, from 103rd Street to
the northern boundary (104th Street right-of-way).
In regard to drainage, the applicant has agreed to construct appropriate on site and off site
drainage facilities, unimpeded water flow on and off the site, and has also agreed to construct
the two buildings within a timely period. The applicant has agreed with the North Ridge
Homeowners Association that he will seek to retain the east side of Pennsylvania property as
professional office use or residential use and not support or seek to rezone any property so as
to include retail or other uses that are not consistent with what has been represented to the
owners by Mr. Schneider.
The recorded covenants will run with the land and will be conditioned upon the rezone
approval.
It is believed that the proposed use is consistent with the adjacent area and conserves property
values. The area homeowners support the rezone and are in support of the 30% vegetation
buffer; the landscape plan will be before the Commission for approval.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed project; the following
appeared:
Larry Wesner, 525 East 102nd Street, Indianapolis, vice president of the North Ridge
Homeowners Association, stated that the residents of North Ridge had reviewed the proposed
project within the last 30 days and were better informed and in a position to request that the
petitioner agree to certain conditions that would protect the integrity of the neighborhood.
The residents of North Ridge have entered into an agreement with the petitioner regarding
nine covenants; and are now in support of the B-7 rezone of the property located at 103rd and
Pennsylvania Streets.
2
The public hearing was then closed on this Docket.
Alan Klineman asked the size of the buildings on this particular site; Dave Coots responded
that the buildings will be rectangular, 118 ft X 64 ft. approximately twice as long as it is
wide. The initial building is intended to be to the southern end with required setback and
parking, not in the 30 ft buffer area.
Ron Houck asked about the use of the buildings and the height; Mr. Coots stated that one
building is for Mr. Schneider's use, Attorney/CPA; the other for rental space, general or
professional. The height of the buildings will be 16 to 18 feet. Ron Houck asked if the
applicant would commit to a development plan that would commit to buildings no higher than
22 feet. Mr. Coots responded that the intent is to commit to a development plan, but a plan
has not, as yet, been engineered.
In response to Dick Klar's questions, Jim Schneider stated that his management corporation
employs approximately two persons, and the building will be leased to Mr. Schneider's law
practice which employs approximately 13 persons. Mr. Klar felt that traffic would become an
issue in this particular area. Mr.Coots stated that there have been discussion with the DOCD
regarding additional right-of-way required for dedication to meet the Thoroughfare Plan for
Pennsylvania; the petitioner can do this and still meet the setback requirements.
Judy Hagan expressed concern regarding future plans for US 31 and whether or not there is
room to continue the divided boulevard.
In response to Jay Dorman's questions, Terry Jones stated that the rezone request does not
follow the Comprehensive Nan which shows medium density residential which is four units
per acre; the covenants/commitments do not change the fact that the project is still not in
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Judy Hagan asked about the number of parking spaces; an accurate reply will be forthcoming
at the Committee level.
Docket No. 57-95 Z, Rezone Application for James Schneider, was referred to the Special
Study Committee which will meet September 5, at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms.
2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 63-95 C.P., a Comprehensive Plan section titled
the Vision 2020 Document. The purpose of discussion is to confirm and re-affirm the
findings within the document.
Filed by Carmel/Clay Plan Commission.
Dave Wentzel of HNTB Corporation appeared before the Commission and gave a slide
presentation of the highlights of the Vision 2020 Document. A background of the Vision
2020 Document was given which included the origin, purpose, process, and findings. Another
item covered was how the 2020 Vision related to the Land Use Plan as well as the
3
Thoroughfare Plan which is currently beginning. The objective of the Vision 2020 was to go
through an extensive process to obtain input from the Citizens of Carmel.
Mr. Wentzel stated that there has been no formal presentation of the Document to either the
existing Council or the incoming candidates.
Gordon Byers commented that at some point in time, a final, working document that has
concept with respect to land use and Thoroughfare will come before the Plan Commission for
a public hearing; statutory notice must be given and a public hearing held. The Plan
Commission will be asked to vote on the Document in its form; the document will then be
subject to questions, amendment and reform. The Document will then go forward to the
legislative body who will approve or reject. The Commission also has the ability to adopt the
working document in segments, if so desired. What is before the Commission tonight is a
public hearing for input, not a statutory public hearing.
Terry Jones of the Department commented that if the Commission made changes in the
current document, they would be saying that they disagreed with the results of the
neighborhood meetings.
After much discussion, it was determined that the Vision 2020 Document should proceed to
City Council and that Dave Wentzel would be putting together a schedule of Management
Team meetings, etc.
3h. Commission to consider Docket No. 65-95 PV, a Plat Vacation for lots 20 and 21 of
the College Hills Subdivision. The petitioner seeks approval to vacate the lots and
covenants of the College Hills Subdivision for the property located at 9615 North
College Avenue. The site is zoned B-3 Business.
Filed by Charles Frankenberger.
Charles Frankenberger, Attorney with Nelson & Frankenberger, 3021 East 98th Street,
Indianapolis 46280, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Also in
attendance were Dave Lewis, publisher of The Topics Newspapers, and Jim Shinaver with
Nelson and Frankenberger.
The applicant is requesting the vacation of the plat and restrictions which were established in
the late 1920's and applied to a residential subdivision known as College Hills. The
development of the real estate and the zoning ordinance have evolved in a manner that was
not anticipated by the plat and restrictions and is essentially incompatible with the plat and
restrictions.
Mr. Frankenberger displayed the subject real estate and surrounding real estate on the
overhead projector. At the time College Hills was platted, I-465 did not exist; since its
construction, some of the lots in the subdivision were taken by condemnation. The real estate
immediately to the south of The Topics and adjacent to College Avenue is highly commercial
4
.
and contains a diverse mix of businesses uses. Mr. Frankenberger also displayed the original
plat of College Hills.
The Topics real estate and the real estate to the north and south along College Avenue
developed in a manner that is consistent with the zoning, B-3, and in a manner consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan; however, it developed in a manner that was not anticipated by
the plat and restrictions of College Hills. The restrictions apply not only to The Topics real
estate but also the real estate which extends south to 96th Street.
The applicant appeared before the Hamilton County Commissioners and requested a vacation
of the 50 foot right-of-way. The Commissioners vacated the 50 foot right-of-way in exchange
for a 45 foot one-half right-of-way. At present, there is only 16 1/2 feet of right-of-way, and
in recognition of the Thoroughfare Plan, the applicant agreed to dedicate an additional 33 1/2
feet of right-of-way to a total of 50 feet. After dedication of right-of-way, the distance
between the edge of right-of-way and The Topics building will be 50 feet; the B-3 Zoning
Classification requires a setback of 60 feet. The petitioner will be appearing before the Board
of Zoning Appeals on August 28 to request a variance to bring College Avenue into
compliance with the Thoroughfare Plan.
The petitioner has appeared before the Technical Advisory Committee and no objections were
raised. The County Surveyor's office and Indianapolis Power & Light did express concern
regarding certain utility lines. The four foot easement created by the plat and restrictions
would be vacated if the plat and restrictions were vacated in their entirety. In this regard,
THE PETITIONER HAS AGREED THAT THE ASPECT OF THE COVENANTS WHICH
CREATES OR ESTABLISHES THE FOUR FOOT EASEMENT WOULD REMAIN
INTACT.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition; none appeared and the
public hearing was closed.
In response to questions from Dave Cremeans, Charlie Frankenberger stated that the request
for plat vacation is occasioned by the sale of the real estate and in part, is designed to clear
up title problems and to answer any questions by attorneys and title work.
Alan Klineman moved for suspension of the rules, seconded by Tom Thompson, MOTION
APPROVED.
Salim Najjar moved for the approval of Docket No. 65-95 PV, a Plat Vacation, seconded by
Dick Klar. The written Findings of Fact approved the motion by a vote of twelve in favor,
none opposed.
4h. Commission to consider Docket Nos. 60-95 DP amendment, 61-95 FDP, a Final
Development Plan, and 62-95 PP amendment, a Primary Plat amendment application
for a project called Carmel Station. The petitioner seeks approval to develop and
5
divide a 15.5 acre parcel into 126 single family lots. The site is located south of
Adams Street and on the east side of Clark Street, within the Carmel Science and
Technology Center. The site is zoned M-3 Manufacturing. The petitioner will be
seeking the following Subdivision Regulation variances:
6.5.3 - 20 Buffer 6.5.4 - Lots smaller than requirements
6.5.1 - 50' Frontage 6.3.20 - Private Streets
6.3.3 Stub Streets 6.3.21 - Acyl/Decal Lane
6.3.6 - ROW and Street Widths
Additionally, the petitioner will be appearing before the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning
Appeals for Developmental Standards Variances for this project.
Filed by James J. Nelson
Jim Nelson appeared before the Commission and reviewed the Amended Development Plan.
Mr. Nelson presented a signed petition in support of Carmel Station, signed by 120 residents
of the Timber Creek area; several members 'of the Timber Creek area were also in attendance
as a show of support for the project.
As a part of their development plan, the petitioner has agreed to extend Adams Street to a
point near the east property line; the result is the elimination of a cul-de-sac and an entrance
substituted therefor. The City Engineer requested minimum curb cuts from Adams Street;
therefore the previously proposed entrance was eliminated. Another minor change occurred as
a result of the extension of Adams Street, and that was the reduction in the number of lots
from 122 to 119. A bicycle path is being provided adjacent to Adams Street and Clark Street
pursuant to the standards recommended and established by the Department of Community
Development.
It is the petitioner's intention to commence construction of the project in the fall if approval is
forthcoming from the Plan Commission; otherwise there would be an unusual hardship
imposed. If the Plan Commission approves the petitioner's request and the Board of Zoning
Appeals would deny it, the project still could not go forward.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed project; the following
appeared:
Al Delbridge, 1074-3 Timber Creek Drive, a director of Timber Creek Homeowners
Association, stated favor with the proposed project. Of the Homeowners solicited at Timber
Creek, 120 persons were in favor of the project and only two were opposed.
Barbara Myers asked for direction from the City Attorney as to whether or not the public
hearing could be closed prior to this Docket appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Gordon Byers recommended that a motion be made from the Plan Commission and discussion
take place prior to closing the public hearing, especially in view of the fact that the Docket
had not yet been heard by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
6
Jim Nelson commented that what was being presented was not a plat but rather an amended
development plan. As each block and parcel of Cannel Technology Park developers, a final
secondary plat will be presented to the Commission; at that time, the petitioner must appear
before the Subdivision Committee for final Secondary Plat approval.
Dick Klar moved to close the public hearing on Carmel Station, seconded by Jay Dorman.
In response to Judy Hagan's concern that the project was not done as a rezone, Jim.Nelson
said there was no zone classification that would accommodate the proposed development plan.
The vote on Dick Klar's motion was unanimous, and the public hearing was closed.
Salim Najjar reported the favorable recommendation of the Subdivision Committee on the
Carmel Station project.
Norma Meighen moved for acceptance of Docket Nos. 60-95 DP Amendment, 61-95 FDP, a
Final Development Plan; and 62-95 PP Amendment, a Primary Plat amendment, for Carmel
Station, seconded by Ron Houck.
Judy Hagan again expressed concern that this project is being done by variance rather than a
rezone. Ms. Hagan stated that she is not opposed to the project per se; however there is no
acyl/decal lane, the stub street situation could be questionable as far as Adams Street is
concerned.
Alan Klineman recommended incorporating approval of the Subdivision Regulation variances
in the motion.
Ron Houck rescinded his second to Norma Meighen's original motion. Norma Meighen then
re-stated her motion to approve Docket Nos. 60-95 DP Amendment, 61-95 FDP, a Final
Development Plan; and 62-95 PP Amendment, a Primary Plat amendment, and Subdivision
Regulation variances as follows: 6.5.3 - 20' Buffer; 6.5.4 - Lots smaller than requirements;
6.5.1 - 50' Frontage; 6.3.20 - Private Streets; 6.3.3 - Stub Streets; 6.3.21 - Acyl/Decal Lane;
and 6.3.6 - Right-of-way and Street Widths; seconded by Ron Houck.
In response to Ron Houck's questions regarding the 30 foot landscape buffer to the east that
abuts industrial property, and a pro-rata share of improvements to Clark Street due to the
traffic impact of the proposed project, Jim Nelson stated that the applicant has provided for a
20 foot landscape buffer on the east side of the property; in addition, the northeast corner of
the property has been re-designed so as to preserve the existing trees. Moving farther south
along the east property line, the streets have been realigned so as to provide additional
distance between home sites and property lines.
Jim Klausmeier of Pflum, Klausmeier & Gehrum responded to questions regarding traffic
impact as follows: The study of the intersection of Clark Street and Carmel Drive did not
7
.t _.
generate sufficient numbers to warrant an automatic signal; however, it was suggested that
this location be monitored for a traffic signal in the future. It was felt that if a signal were
warranted, it would be driven more by the development on the south side of Carmel Drive
rather than the north side.
As a point of clarification, Terry Jones of the Department pointed out that the Developmental
Standards Variances will be heard by the Board of Zoning Appeals; the Commission is voting
on Subdivision Control Regulations and the variances to those regulations. Terry asked the
Commission to keep in mind that with a residential development in place, the underlying
zoning for the development would be M-3 and the requirements of M-3 would be used to
regulate any accessory uses and structures that would be constructed on the lots in the future;
again, the Department does not support the project, and has expressed favor with the
legislative process to achieve the result rather than by variance. The M-3 classification does
lend itself to the apartment and condo-type of development.
In response to questions from Ron Houck regarding the need for variances, Jim Nelson stated
that the streets in Carmel Station will be 30 foot, back-to-back roll curb and gutter, built to
Carmel standards; the covenants provide that they are available to all residents, guests,
invitees, families, emergency vehicles, etc. The only reason the streets are not being offered
for dedication to the City is that all local streets accepted by the Board,of Public Works and
Safety must have a 50 foot right-of-way, and the set back of the homes is measured from the
right-of-way and not from the street. The street variance is the primary one; all others follow.
Ron Houck also asked about the necessity of acyl/decal lanes; Jim Klausmeier rendered his
opinion that an acyl/decal lane is a device to be used on higher speed, rural highways to get
the slower moving, turning vehicle out of the path of the higher speed, main line. The streets
are 30 MPH and Mr. Klausmeier felt that it was more important to accommodate the left turn
vehicles; more could be accomplished by re-striping the street with center left turn lanes than
by installing acyl/decal lanes on a 30 MPH street.
The vote on Norma Meighen's motion for approval was 7 in favor, Tom Thompson, Judy
Hagan, Dick Klar, Luci Snyder and Ron Houck opposed; NO DECISION VOTE. This
Docket will return to the Commission in 30 days.
I. OLD BUSINESS
li. Commission to consider Docket No. 52-95 ADLS, an Architectural Design, Lighting,
Landscaping and Signage Application for the Performing Arts Center of Carmel. The
petitioner is requesting approval to place a changeable copy sign at the southwest
corner of Carmel Drive and Chase Court. The site is zoned M-3. The petitioner will
•
be appearing before the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals to seek a variance to allow
the changeable copy sign on July 24, 1995.
Filed by Dennis Brust.
8
Theresa Brust, 3531 Rolling Spring Drive, Carmel, appeared before the Commission on behalf
of the applicant. An up-date on the sign detail was submitted to the Special Study Committee
and the main concern was the brightness of the sign. Mrs. Brust expressed a willingness to
work within the guidelines of the Department if specifics were provided to her.
Comparative illustrations were submitted of existing signs and the proposed signage for the
Arts Center which showed changeable copy signs and the approximate size of the sign.
Tom Thompson gave the report of the finding of the Special Study Committee; the
Committee voted 6-0 to approve the signage contingent upon Mrs. Brust being able to satisfy
the Committee's concerns regarding the brightness of the sign, and the depiction of the final
design and colors.
The red on the sign will show through; the gray will not transmit light; below the red will
appear "Carmel Dance Center" and "Academy of Gymnastics" in smaller white letters which
will show through. During the day, the gray will show through--at night only the red and
white will project.
Tom Thompson moved for approval of Docket No. 52-95 ADLS, seconded by Luci Snyder.
Judy Hagan asked about outstanding sign violations on the property at present and asked for
assurance that the violations would be taken care of once the new signage is in place.
Terry Jones of the Department stated that there is a series of flags and banners along Cannel
Drive between what would be the sidewalk and the curb, (7 or 8 in number) and a makeshift,
temporary sign in front of the building which displays dates advertising specific performances.
The aforementioned signage was never issued a permit.
Mrs. Brust agreed to do so (tomorrow).
Tom Thompson then incorporated into his motion that the petitioner come into immediate
compliance with the Sign Ordinance and that the violations be cleaned up.
The vote was unanimous approval.
2i. Commission to consider Docket No. 58-95 PP amendment, a Primary Plat amendment
application for Reserve at Springmill. The petitioner seeks approval for a private
street within the previously approved subdivision named The Reserve at Springmill.
The site is located south of 106th Street on the east side of Springmill Road, and is
zoned S-2/Residential.
Filed by Steve Pittman.
For purposes of clarification, Alan Klineman relayed to the Commission a prior discussion
with Mr. Pittman regarding whether or not the recreational area was to have been included
9
based upon representations made at the time of original plat submission. Mr. Klineman was
of the impression that the recreational facility was to have been included in the development;
according to the record, there was no representation to that effect, and the recreational area
remains the property of Steve Pittman's parents.
Mr. Klineman stated his intention to abstain from discussion and voting because of his
involvement in the development.
Steve Pittman, 10469 Spring Highland Drive, Carmel, appeared before the Commission and
gave a brief re-cap of the original presentation of this Docket on July 18.
The vote of the Subdivision Committee was a negative recommendation for private streets.
Mr. Pittman explained that it was the intention of his parents to withhold the lots around the
cul-de-sac from the market and the lots would be for family use only. The reason for the
private street would be to control access and maintenance. Private streets would also allow
the petitioner to plant street trees immediately behind the curb and not have to accommodate
right-of-way and utility easements.
Mr. Pittman stated that the private street will be built to County standards and specifications,
with performance and maintenance bonds in place; inspection and maintenance agreements
have been signed; and a waiver to request public street has been signed and submitted. Mr.
Pittman then read into the record a Ietter from the Mayor in agreement with the private street
with conditions in place as agreed to by Mr. Pittman. As a point of clarification, Mr. Pittman
stated that legal counsel had advised that the primary plat can be amended until such time as
the secondary plat is recorded.
In summary, neither the County nor the Mayor of the City of Carmel opposes Mr. Pittman's
request for a private street; the surrounding homeowners also do not oppose Mr. Pittman's
request, and approval of the petitioner's request is being asked of the Plan Commission
members.
Salim Najjar, Chairman of the Subdivision Committee, reported that the request for a private
street did not receive a favorable recommendation by the Committee.
Luci Snyder commented that she had spoken with the Mayor and although it has been the
City's position not to accept private streets, the current request is for a street that will be built
up to Code. The owners have stated that they will never, at any time, (nor will their heirs),
petition the City to take over the Street.
Dave Cremeans asked for clarification; all streets within the subdivision will not be private,
only the approximate 200 feet closest to the recreational facility; Mr. Pittman responded in the
positive.
Jim O'Neal moved for the approval of Docket No. 58-95 PP, a Primary Plat amendment
10
application for the Reserve at Springmill, seconded by Salim Najjar.
The vote on the 6.3.20 Private Street Variance was 8 in favor, David Cremeans, Ron Houck,
and Dick Klar opposed, Alan Klineman abstaining, MOTION APPROVED.
The vote on the 6.5.1 variance for lots having access to public streets was 8 in favor, David
Cremeans, Ron Houck, and Dick Klar opposed, Alan Klineman abstaining, MOTION
APPROVED.
The vote on the primary plat amendment was 9 in favor, Ron Houck and Dick Klar opposed,
Alan Klineman abstaining. MOTION APPROVED CONTINGENT upon construction of the
private street in accordance with those terms and conditions heretofore agreed by Steve
Pittman.
NOTE: Barbara Myers announced her intention to abstain from any discussion or voting on
item 3i., Delaware Trace Subdivision, and the meeting was turned over to Salim Najjar.
3i. Commission to consider Docket No. 59-95 PP, a Primary Plat application for Delaware
Trace Subdivision. The petitioner seeks approval to subdivide a 152.7 acre parcel into
215 single family lots. The site is located south of Cherytree Road on the east side of
proposed Hazeldel Road, and is zoned S-1/Residential.
Filed by James J. Nelson:
James J. Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Cannel, appeared before the Commission representing
the applicant. For the record, Mr. Nelson pointed out that the acreage involved is actually
125 and the number of lots is 177. This matter was presented to the Subdivision Committee
on August 5, 1995.
Salim Najjar reported that the Subdivision Committee had recommended approval of
Delaware Trace.
Judy Hagan asked about the accessibility of the nature trail and whether or not it was
intended for use only by the residents of Delaware Trace.
Jim Nelson explained that the nature trail is in the floodway of the Vestal Ditch Legal Drain
which runs along the east property line. The nature trail is accessible from the internal
sidewalk system by way of a pedestrian easement that exists between lots 82/83 and 90/91.
The easements will be public; however because of the location of the trail, it will probably be
used predominantly by the residents of the area. There is no intention to privatize the trail.
Judy Hagan asked about the possibility of the Parks Department connecting the Centex and
Delaware Trace neighborhoods via a bridge across the Vestal Ditch at some future date.
Dave Cunningham stated that if a Bridge were to be constructed, the DNR would have to
11
give their approval and all adjacent property owners would have to be notified. The common
area in both subdivisions will be owned by the Homeowners' Association.
NOTE: Jim O'Neal exited the meeting before the votes were cast.
Tom Thompson moved to approve Docket No. 59-95 PP, a Primary Plat application for
Delaware Trace Subdivision, seconded by David Cremeans. The vote was 9 in favor, none
opposed, Barbara Myers abstaining, MOTION APPROVED.
5i. Commission to consider Docket No. 66-95 ADLS, an Architectural Design, Lighting,
Landscaping, and Signage application for Metro Bank. The plan consists of a 2,656
square feet building on 1.15 acres of land located east of Range Line Road and south
of Medical Drive. Site is zoned B-8/Business.
Filed by Metro Bank.
Dave Coots of Coots, Henke & Wheeler, 255 East Carmel Drive, appeared before the
Commission representing the petitioner. Also present were Marc Burcope, John Rigsbee, and
Mike DuBois representing Metro Bank. The petitioner appeared before the Special Study
Committee on August 5. The major concern of the committee was the access to the site off
Medical Drive. The original presentation provided for an entrance and exit on the west entry
way and an entrance and exit on the east. The Board of Works approved the plan that was
made at original presentation. However, the Special Study Committee expressed a different
idea and requested that the petitioner work with the Department of Community Development
and return before the Commission with a plan approved by the Department.
As a result of a meeting among the petitioner, Weihe Engineering, and Dave Cunningham,
the plan now calls for right in/right out on the western most curb cut entrance, and left
turn/right turn on the eastern most curb cut.
Terry Jones of the Department stated that a copy of the drawings had just been received today
and the petitioner has complied with a right in/right out request.
Tom Thompson, Chairman of the Special Study Committee, reported that the major concern
expressed was the addition to the traffic congestion on Medical Drive and Range Line Road
as a result of the curb cuts; for that reason, the Committee chose not to accept the proposal.
At the request of Mr. Coots, a vote was taken to allow the Docket to return to the full
Commission.
Judy Hagan reiterated the position of the Committee and stated that she would not vote in
favor of the proposed development plan. Ms. Hagan felt the configuration of the building
would cause a traffic problem and a different configuration would minimize the traffic.
Alan Klineman concurred with Judy Hagan.
12
Mr. Coots commented that if indeed there is congestion, it is created on the Bank's property
and not on Medical Drive.
Jay Dorman moved for the approval of Docket No. 66-95 ADLS, seconded by Ron Houck.
The vote was four in favor, Dick Klar, Judy Hagan, Tom Thompson, Ron Houck Norma
Meighen and Barbara Myers opposed. There was no majority vote and the petitioner will
return to the full Commission in September.
J. NEW BUSINESS
1j. Commission to consider Docket No. 70-95 ADLS, an Architectural Design, Lighting,
Landscaping and Signage Application for the Valleybrook Subdivision. The petitioner
is requesting approval to place a subdivision entrance sign at the Gray Road entrance
of the Valleybrook Subdivision. The site is zoned S-1/Residential.
Filed,by Michael Shepherd.
Mike Shepherd appeared before the Commission representing the Homeowners Association of
Valleybrook Subdivision. The neighborhood is desirous of constructing a masonry type
identification sign made of stone with a limestone insert announcing the name of the
Subdivision. The sign would be lighted and consistent with other signs for similar
neighborhoods.
In response to questions, Dave Cunningham of the Department stated that under the
Ordinance, subdivision entrance signs must meet two requirements: 50 square feet in total,
and at the entrance; anything otherwise would be by Plan Commission approval. The 50
square feet can be split between two signs, separately shared on either side, as long as the
total does not exceed 50 square feet. The proposed sign is a double facet on the southeast
corner: one side faces north, one faces south and well under the 50 square feet.
Jay Dorman moved to approve Docket No. 70-95 ADLS, seconded by Dave Cremeans. The
vote was ten in favor, none opposed, MOTION APPROVED.
2j. Commission to consider Docket No. 61-95 ADLS ( Amend), an Architectural Design,
Lighting, Landscaping and Signage Amendment Application for St. Vincent Carmel
Hospital. The petitioner is requesting approval for a small expansion to the existing
surgery wing of the facility. Site is zoned B-6 and is located within the US 31
Overlay Zone.
Filed by James J. Nelson.
Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Cannel, appeared before the Commission representing the
applicant. Also in attendance were Charles Jeffers and James Schroeder from BSA Design.
St. Vincent is requesting approval of its plans for an addition to the surgery wing of the
existing hospital located at 13500 North Meridian Street, Carmel. Upon completion, the
addition will provide 2,350 square feet of additional area to the first floor which will be
13
allocated within the surgery wing for the enlargement of one, existing surgery area and also
an increase in size of the support areas. The plans also provide for a slight re-configuration
of the entrance drive located to the rear of the property.
Mr. Nelson displayed an aerial photograph of the site which depicted the existing hospital and
two office buildings commonly identified as POB 1 and POB 2. The surgery expansion area
will be a part of the area currently used for physician's parking.
The proposed project has been before the Technical Advisory Committee and it is believed
that all TAC concerns have been addressed.
Norma Meighen moved to approve Docket No. 71-95, seconded by Jay Dorman. The vote
was eleven in favor, none opposed. MOTION APPROVED.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned
at 11:05 PM.
Ramona Hancock, Secretary Barbara Myers, President
14