Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 11-15-94 CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION NOVEMBER 15, 1994 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, Carmel, Indiana. Members present were as follows: David Cremeans; Sue Dillon; Jay Dorman; Ron Houck; Dick Klar; Alan Klineman; Norma Meighen, Max Moore; Barbara Myers; Salim Najjar; Jeanne Reid; Luci Snyder; Paul Spranger; and Sharon Clark. A quorum was declared. Members of the Department of Community Development Management Team present were: David Cunningham; Mike Hollibaugh, Terry Jones; and Mark Monroe. Salim Najjar moved for approval of the October minutes, seconded by Dick Klar, MOTION APPROVED. G. Dave Wenzel of HNTB, consulting firm, appeared before the Commission to make a presentation on their recommendation for the Visioning process for Carmel's Comprehensive Plan. The main objective has been to provide direction for the physical development of the Community of Carmel which would also include the entire Township. Mr. Wenzel reviewed some of the techniques to be used for citizen input, presentation of the results, and then ending up with a product in summary form which would then be mailed to every participant. Based on comments, presentation would then be made at Plan Commission, City Council, and wrap up with a final Vision document. Completion of the process needs to be before school is out. HNTB recommended that one person from the Department of Community Development be designated full time to work on this project as well as utilizing public information officers within the city; the fee represents 40 hours per week for close to one-half year; the cost of the computer kiosks; survey/public relations consultants; and utilization of a traditional moderator. Questions and comments were invited from Plan Commission members and Council members present (Frank Fleming and Chris Painchaud.) Sue Dillon recommended that the Township Board, which shares 40% of the joint budget, be represented on the core management team. Jay Dorman felt that there was room for additional clarification as to what the Community would actually end up with in addition to the Visioning process. It was determined that there would be a meeting Saturday morning, November 19th at 8:00 AM in the Caucus Rooms, and City Council members as well as Plan Commission members would be invited to attend. 1 � n H. PUBLIC HEARINGS lh. Commission to consider Docket No. 82-93 O.A., a Zoning Ordinance Amendment replacing the current Sign Ordinance. TABLED. 2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 74-94 DP/ADLS, a Development PIan and Architectural Design, Lighting and Signage application for Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc The petitioner is seeking approval to locate an approximate 75,000 square foot storage facility on the south side of the intersection of US 31 and US 431 (commonly known as the point.) The petitioner will also be appearing before the Carmel Clay Board of Zoning Appeals for Special Use and Developmental Standards Variances. Filed by James Nelson for Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner. Also present for the petitioner were: Jerry Cleary, Vice President of Operations, Orvar Litsjo, Chief Architect for Shurgard, and Doug McAuley, local representative for Shurgard. Shurgard is proposing an enclosed storage warehouse facility on a triangular tract formed by the merger of 31 and 431. Mr. Nelson gave a brief statement regarding the operational history and philosophy of Shurgard, a series of photographs of existing Shurgard facilities was presented for review as well as drawings for the proposed Shurgard facility. The five acre tract has frontage on both US 31 (Meridian) and US 431 Keystone Avenue. The parcel is zoned B-3 Business District and lies within both the 31 and 431 Overlay Zone; an enclosed storage warehouse facility is a Special Use facility under B-3. Petitioner's plan is to preserve a significant part of the existing vegetation. The site is accessible by the extension of an existing frontage road that runs north of Lotus Gardens Restaurant; the roadway will be back-to-back roll curb and gutter, and will lead into the entrance area. The petitioner has provided for 53 parking spaces, most of which are located at the entrance; some throughout the site. Landscaping: 1) the petitioner will preserve a number of the existing trees; and 2) provide additional plant materials around the perimeter of the property where little landscaping exists today, and will preserve a significant part of the existing vegetation. The southern end of the property will be preserved; the area is identified as west of Cool Creek and between building #2 and Keystone for tree preservation. A second tree preservation is on the west side of the building between the building and Rangeline Road and/or US 31. In the northern area, very few trees exist and the petitioner is providing landscaping around the entire perimeter as well as decorative landscaping adjacent to the entrance to the facility. A definitive landscape plan is on file with the Department of Community Development as well as a tree preservation plan which describes the area of preservation and establishes the means, principally the fencing of those areas. The plan also identifies certain species of plant materials that are worthy of preservation and intended to be re-planted on site. 2 Signage: one wall sign, visible from Keystone; one ground sign located near the entrance. The site lighting plan consists of four, pole mounted, single lamp fixture area lights. The cylindrical, down lights will be wall mounted on and around all buildings for the security and safety of Shurgard customers. Orvar Litsjo, director of design for Shurgard, 1201 Third Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, described in detail the landscaping plan for the proposed warehouse facility. The proposed facility contains Shurgard's signature lighthouse which is located in the office area and identifies the center of operation for the facility. The lighthouse has a light within the top which resembles lighting fixtures used in actual lighthouses and electronically controlled from full brightness to darkness six times per minute to simulate the beacon of a lighthouse. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed project; none appeared. The public hearing was then closed. Comments were then invited from members of the Plan Commission. In response to questions from Barbara Myers, Jim Nelson undertook to submit a letter specifying the amount of footage allocated to the tree preservation area on the west and east property lines. There were also comments and questions regarding construction fencing for tree preservation, an explanation of internal site circulation, and the area designated as floodway and flood fringe. Paul Endris of Paul I. Cnpe, Inc. explained that a portion of the site will be filled from the floodway to the fnnge to an elevation of two feet above the 100 year flood elevation, but there will be no encroaching. In response to questions from Jeanne Reid, Mr. Litsjo stated that there are two existing Shurgard facilities in the Indianapolis area; however they are deemed "older generation" facilities which were built by other developers and subsequently acquired. (Neither facility contains a lighthouse) The existing structures are not representative of the current design details. The proposed lighthouse structure is approximately 35 feet in height. Ms. Reid also asked about certain outstanding items at the previous TAC meeting, namely the landscape buffering, and accessibility from the Fire Department's standpoint. Mr. Nelson stated that the petitioner will be re-appearing before Technical Advisory Committee to address outstanding concerns; however an approval letter was received from the Fire Chief; a letter was also received from the City Engineer's office approving all aspects of the plan. Mike Hollibaugh spoke of landscaping concerns due to variances in the overlay zone and the fact that the project is so close to Keystone Avenue and Meridian Street. Mike stated he has been working with the petitioner for a more complete buffer and balance with visibility and will continue to do so. The project site is a difficult one at best. Mr. Klineman asked for a revised submission from the petitioner so that there would be a full record and no misunderstanding; Mr. Nelson responded in the affirmative. 3 Docket No. 74-94 DP/ADLS was referred to Special Study Committee which will meet December 6, 1994 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms. 3h. Commission to consider Docket No. 87-94 PP, a Primary Plat application for proposed subdivision to be named Sycamore Farms. The petitioner is seeking approval to plat the 47.4 acres of land into 65 single family lots. The site is located on the south side of 116th Street and west of Gray Road. The site is zoned S-1 Residential. The petitioner will be filing for a subdivision variance of Section 6.3.22 to reduce the required accel lane for the subdivision entrance. Filed by Mark Boyce for C.P. Morgan Development. Mark Boyce of C.P. Morgan Development Co., 301 East Carmel Drive, appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner and gave an overview of the proposed project. Also in attendance were: Christy Starr and Scott Twitty; Paul Claire of Schneider Engineering Co., and Tom Ford, traffic engineer from Pflum, Klausmeier & Gehrum. An aerial photograph was displayed showing the subject site as well as a site development plan. The surrounding land uses were made known. Proposed is a low density, (1.37 homes per acre) single family residential community of 65 homes, ranging in size from 15,875 square feet to 31,706 square feet. Typical home sites would be 130 feet wide and 125 feet deep. C.P. Morgan is planning to build homes ranging in size from 2,800 to 3,600 square feet with a selling price in excess of $250,000. The prominent feature of the site development plan is a 7 acre community common area adjacent to 116th Street; this is also a tree preservation area which will include perimeter sidewalks, a detention pond, seeding areas, and a neighborhood access path from the internal streets. The Sycamore Farm community will connect to the Kingswood Subdivision at the existing road stub of Regency Lane. The existing Savidge homestead on the property will be upgraded, preserved, and incorporated into the Sycamore Farm development; the existing barns will be relocated off- site. C.P. Morgan's plan for construction traffic is to direct traffic into the development utilizing the existing drive to the Savidge property. Signage and physical barriers will be placed along Regency Lane to curtail construction traffic. C.P. Morgan and the Kingswood Homeowners Association are petitioning the City for a 3-way traffic sign at the intersection of Pendula Drive, English Ivy Drive, and Regency Lane. There is currently a Deed Gap on the south end of the property adjacent to Kingswood that consists of approximately 35 feet which runs along the common border between the Sycamore Farm property and Kingswood; this situation will be corrected by way of Quit Claim Deeds from the appropriate homeowners. The landscape treatment for the entrance and for the development is a concern. Along Gray Road, there is an issue of consistency in landscaping and fencing, namely initial installation and long term maintenance. A specific landscape plan has been submitted to DOCD for the entire 4 • Gray Road frontage which will include "generous" landscaping as well as a consistent fencing detail of wood with brick columns; the fence will be offset so as not to provide a continuous, straight line. The fencing and landscape will exist within a 10 foot landscape easement area to be maintained by the Homeowners Association of Sycamore Farm. Sidewalks will also be placed along the Gray Road frontage of the Sycamore development. The entry into Sycamore Farm will be by divided median which will include accel/decel lanes as well as a passing blister on the west side of Gray Road. A variance will be sought in regard to the taper length of the acceleration lane; the City Engineer's office is not opposed to the variance. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; the following appeared: Chris Prevel, 11273 Regency Lane, Kingswood Homeowners Association, appeared before the Commission and stated that he is one of the homeowners whose property abuts the southernmost boundary of the Sycamore Farm Development. Dr. Prevel distributed copies of a letter written to Councilman Tom Kendall regarding the three-way stop sign and asked that it be entered into the public record. Dr. Prevel was complimentary of the developer in coming up with a plan that is sensitive to both the City of Carmel, adjacent homeowners in Woodcreek, and homeowners in Kingswood. Dr Prevel felt that the homeowners' concerns had been addressed. Scott D. Moren, 11276 Williams Court, Kingswood, agreed with Chris Prevel; however concern was expressed regarding the pond and the safety factor. Jan Gross, 4943 Regency Place, Kingswood, expressed concern regarding traffic flow from the northeast corner of the project and was curious as to why another entrance was not utilized through Woodcreek to allow for east/west traffic. Stan Sipple, 11378 Woodcreek Drive, questioned the tree line along the bordering property; no statement was made as to whether or not the tree line will remain. There are existing trees within the boundaries of the Subdivision, and it looks as though they will be removed. Bruce Heldt, 11265 Regency Lane,Kingswood, was complimentary of the developer and previous projects; however of particular concern is the construction traffic in view of the number of children in the area. Mr. Heldt asked for more information regarding the pond; the function and the depth. The public hearing was then closed on this Docket. Mark Boyce addressed the concerns as follows: The pond will be a minimum of 8 feet and as much as 15 feet in depth and will include safety ledges and may even include a wetland ledge. There will be a fence at the south and east edges of the pond to discourage children from entering the area. The entry way off Gray Road and the connection off Regency Lane are felt 5 to be sufficient. There is no abutting right-of-way or "spite strip" for the property lines to connect between Woodcreek and Sycamore Farm. There is a fence row on the eastern boundary shared with Woodcreek and the southern boundary shared with Kingswood, and the perimeter trees will be saved, even though they are low quality. Barbara Myers questioned a white area shown at the intersection, and also questioned the channeling of construction traffic through lot 50, that it appeared to be too close to the intersection of 116th and Gray Road. Paul Claire of Schneider Engineering stated that the white area in question is an existing, 16 1/2 foot statutory right of way; the construction drive is an existing drive and curb cut, and was not felt to be a problem. Dick Kiefer, Kingswood Homeowners' Association, questioned the installation of a fence on the eastern and southern boundaries, and commented that this had not been mentioned previously and they were not aware of the proposed fence. Mr. Kiefer asked that this item be looked into by any type of committee prior to approval and that the matter be clarified. Mark Boyce responded that the intent was to have a four-board equestrian fence, and the developer would continue conversations with the Kingswood Homeowners to ensure acceptability. Alan Klineman questioned accessibility to the retention pond in the south corner. Mark Boyce responded that the pond was not a community amenity but rather for homeowners in lots 43 through 36, and will be paid for by all homeowners. Alan Klineman asked that the developer consider redesigning the pond so that it would become an amenity accessible to the entire community. Jeanne Reid agreed that the pond should be accessible to all homeowners if they are going to share the cost of maintenance. Ms. Reid also commented that for locating places and safety practices, the street name of Regency Lane should continue and not be changed; also connecting neighborhoods so that fire, emergency vehicles and school buses would have easy accessibility has been a goal. Ms. Reid asked if the agreements between the developer and homeowner's association had been reduced to writing; Dave Cunningham responded that most of the agreements are private between the developer and property owners, similar to a covenant situation, and the Department would not be involved, however, the DOCD is aware of them. Also, the Communications Center approves the street naming and addressing. Dick Klar specifically asked about the fence along Gray Road and whether or not homeowners would be allowed to build a fence against or above the one on Gray Road. Mark Boyce asked for suggested language from DOCD that would restrict the building of fences by homeowners; the fence along Gray would be brick columns with shadowbox type fence, 6 feet high. Docket No. 87-94 was referred to Subdivision Committee which will meet December 6, 1994, at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms. I. OLD BUSINESS 6 IL Commission to consider Docket No 78-94 Z, a Rezone application for 3802 West 96th Street, Carmel The petitioner is seeking a rezone from S-1 Residential to B-7 Business to locate an office at 3802 West 96th Street. Filed by Mitch Sever for Maid Rastegar. Mitch Sever, planning consultant, 1837 North Meridian Street, Indianapolis, 46204 appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner and requesting a rezone of the site located at 3802 West 96th Street, from S-1 Residential to B-7 Business. The present structure on the site will be razed and an office building will be constructed. The petitioner has complied with all requests, with the exception of the septic tank permits which is still outstanding. The petitioner does not, however, anticipate any problem with the septic permit and a favorable recommendation for rezoning is being requested. Dave Cunningham of DOCD stated that approval would be conditioned upon Council approval and septic permit from the State. Max Moore moved for approval of Docket No. 78-94 Z, Rezone, conditioned upon septic permit approval, seconded by Norma Meighen. The vote was 12 in favor, none opposed, MOTION APPROVED. (Enter Ron Houck) 2i. Commission to consider Docket No. 79-94 DP/ADLS, a Development Plan and Architectural Design, Lighting and Signage application for Church Brothers. The petitioner is seeking approval to locate a 23,415 square foot collision repair facility at 9800 North Michigan Road. Filed by Phil Nicely for Church Brothers. Phil Nicely, attorney at law, 8888 North Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, 46240, appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner Also in attendance were Dan Hall of Church Brothers and Adam DeHart, engineer. Phil Nicely relayed the primary concern of the Special Study Committee which related to landscaping to the rear of the property, and the fencing. The petitioner has identified the existing trees on his property which will be retained, and crabapple trees are proposed to be planted in certain areas along the north and south border; the fence is felt to be appropriate for the area and is necessary from a security standpoint. Jeanne Reid commented that the picture of the currently proposed fence was nice looking, good quality, and not objectional; however there was still a question as to whether or not the barbed wire would be at the top of the fence. Mr. Nicely responded negatively to the barbed wire. In response to questions, Mike Hollibaugh of the DOCD stated that the lighting for the project was pretty well controlled and not deemed to be an issue There did appear to be a conflict 7 between the location of the fence and the location of a number of trees identified by the petitioner. The fence goes through a large Cottonwood tree and several others on the south property line; it was hoped that the location of the fence could be shifted. Mr. Nicely responded that the drawing was misread and the fence does not go through the trees. There was much discussion regarding the type of fence, chain link as opposed to opaque; Jeanne Reid suggested landscaping in conjunction with the fencing. The petitioner reiterated that the fence, as proposed, (black, with vinyl strips between the chain links) is appropriate for the area and is necessary from a security standpoint. In response to questions from Sue Dillon, Mr. Nicely stated that a tree preservation plan was on file with the DOCD. Terry Jones stated that as yet, there had been no inter-action with the petitioner regarding the tree preservation plan. Mr. Dorman asked that the Department and the petitioner work out a tree preservation plan while the next Docket was being heard. 3i. Commission to consider Docket No. 80-94 ADLS for Steak and Shake. The petitioner is seeking approval to remodel the existing Steak and Shake located at 635 East Carmel Drive, Carmel Filed by James Nelson for Steak and Shake, Inc. Mr. Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner. The petitioner had appeared at the Special Study Committee on November first and presented its plan for the renovation of its existing facility on Carmel Drive. The Special Study Committee voted to forwarded this Docket to the Commission with a favorable recommendation. Max Moore moved for approval of Docket No. 80-94 ADLS, seconded by Dick Klar. The vote was 13 in favor, none opposed. MOTION APPROVED. 4i. Commission to consider Docket No. 81-94 Z, a Rezone application for Frederick and Ann Day. The petitioner is seeking a rezone from R-1 Residential to R-3 Residential on a 10.74 acre tract located south of 116th Street on the west side of College Avenue. Filed by Ron Wright for Frederick and Ann Day. Ron Wright, attorney at law, 8800 Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing Frederick and Ann Day, and Kirkpatrick Homes. This Docket was referred to the Special Study Committee on November first. The petitioner committed to plant approximately 113 trees as a part of this development; at the entry will be monument signs indicating the name of the development, similar to those in Woodpark. The perimeter fence has been reduced from 8 feet to six feet in height. The Committee made a favorable recommendation to the full Plan Commission. Jeanne Reid reported that the Committee had indeed approved this Docket with the fence height 8 at six feet; the street is recommended to be continued into Northern Heights, and this will be looked for at platting process. Dave Cunningham reported that all outstanding concerns had been addressed. Alan Klineman moved for approval of Docket No. 81-94 Z, seconded by Paul Spranger. The vote was 11 in favor, Dick Klar and Jay Dorman opposed. MOTION APPROVED. J. NEW BUSINESS lj. Commission to consider Docket No. 82-94 ADLS for Lexington Leasing and Leer Accessory Center. TABLED 2j. Commission to consider Docket No. 86-94 ADLS for Oxford Financial Advisors Corporation. The petitioner is seeking approval of a sign to be located on the Meridian Mark II building at 11711 North Meridian Street. The petitioner will also be appearing before the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance on this sign. Filed by James Nelson and Charles Frankenberger. Charles Frankenberger, 4983 St. Charles Place, Carmel, appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner who is a tenant in the Meridian Mark II building located north of 116th Street and east of Meridian Street. The petitioner is requesting a wall identification sign on the south facade of the building; there are two signs already in existence. The requested sign complies with the requirements of the Sign Ordinance, and will be consistent with other signage in the Meridian corridor and on the building. The petitioner feels the proposed is needed for identification and direction. There were questions and comments from the Commission members regarding the percentage occupancy by this particular tenant. Dave Cunningham stated that the current review is for ADLS and the variance will be heard at the Board of Zoning appeals. Ron Houck moved to send Docket No. 86-94 ADLS to committee, seconded by Dick Klar. The vote was 12 in favor, Alan Klineman opposed; MOTION APPROVED. There was much discussion as to the timing/sequence on this Docket; whether or not it should appear before the Board of Zoning Appeals for variance approval first or the Plan Commission for ADLS approval. Luci Snyder moved for RETRACTION of Plan Commission's vote to send Docket No. 86-94 ADLS to Committee, seconded by Ron Houck. The vote was 13 in favor, none opposed; MOTION APPROVED. 9 Ron Houck moved for suspension of the rules to vote on Docket No 86-94 ADLS for Oxford Financial Advisors Corporation, seconded by Barbara Myers. The vote was 13 in favor, none opposed, RULES SUSPENDED. Barbara Myers moved for approval of Docket No. 86-94 ADLS, seconded by Ron Houck. The vote was seven in favor, Jeanne Reid, Dick Klar, Alan Klineman, Ron Houck, Jay Dorman, and Sue Dillon opposed, NO DECISION VOTE. The petitioner will return in 30 days. 2i. Revisited: The petitioner commits to planting six, additional, ornamental trees along the north side of the site, and include a small picnic area for employees; Mike Hollibaugh of DOCD concurs. Dick Klar moved for approval of Docket No. 79-94 DP/ADLS, a Development Plan and Architectural Design, Lighting and Signage application for Church Brothers, seconded by Norma Meighen. The vote was 13 in favor, none opposed, MOTION APPROVED. Mike Hollibaugh addressed the Commission in regard to the Comprehensive Plan process. The current proposal from HNTB was discussed from a cost factor standpoint, and the growth management policy plan highlighted. There were concerns expressed regarding duplicating information that was already available from various reports on file. After much discussion, Gordon Byers commented that the key factor was in being able to translate the reports and together with community input, come up with a usable format for devising a Comprehensive Plan. Gordon recommended that HNTB be challenged to provide the Commission with specific language that will modify the subdivision ordinance and a PUD ordinance or a regional shopping center as it relates to a specific location; there needs to be an action document. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 PM. Jay Dorman, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary 10