HomeMy WebLinkAbout Minutes PC 07-15-97CARMEL/CLAY PLAN CONVVHSSION
JULY 15, 1997
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission was called to order by the
President at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, One Civic Square,
Carmel, Indiana on July 15, 1997.
Members present were as follows: James Bolander; David Cremeans; Jay Dorman; Dick Klar;
Alan Klineman; Barry Krauss; Norma Meighen; James T. OrNeal, Sr.; Pat Rice; Sam Rinker,
Rick Sharp; Luci Snyder, Paul Spranger, and H.K. "Tom" Thompson.
Director Steve Engelking; Terry Jones; and Mark Monroe were in attendance representing the
Department of Community Services. Counsel John R Molitor was also present.
The minutes of the June 17, 1997 meeting were approved as submitted.
F. Legal Counsel Report
John Molitor reported that the City Council passed the Ordinance regulating Telecommunications
Towers which had been recommended for approval by the Plan Commission.
Mark Monroe reported that the Ordinance on Frontage Place and Alleyways had also been passed
by the City Council.
G. Reports, Announcements and Department Concerns
Mark Monroe reported that the following Agenda Items had been tabled: lh., Penn Mark Plaza•,
1i. under Old Business, landscape plan for Penn Mark and Meridian Mark Office Complex.
Item 2i., Saddle Creek Development Repiat, is requested by the petitioner to be tabled and sent to
Committee on August 5 for further review. A revised plan is expected to be submitted on Saddle
Creek Development.
Alan Klineman questioned re -noticing Saddle Creek for public hearing; John Molitor responded
that it was in the Commission's preroggative to re -open the public hearing at such time as the
matter comes back to the full Commission.
Tom Thompson announced the appointment of a Task Force to prepare the revision of the Open
Space Ordinance for writing and presentation to the Plan Commission and subsequently, to the
City Council. The Task Force will be chaired by Jay Dorman and consist of Dave Cremeans, Sam
Rincker, Luci Snyder, Ron Carter, and Chris White.
c:\minutes\pc\1997.jul
ti
Jay Dorman referred to a document stating a brief overview and objectives of the Task Force in
connection with the revision of the Residential Open Space Ordinance. Issues of likely
confrontation and background on the recommendations from the consultant, Randall Arendt, will
be examined as well as the existing Ordinance. The meetings of the Task Force will be open to
all members of the Plan Commission as well as members of the public --a schedule of the
meetings will be announced at a later date
H. Public Hearing:
2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 29-97 P.P., a Primary Plat application for Tom
Grannan. Petitioner seeks approval to plat 59 lots on 40 acres. The site is located on the
south side of 141 st Street, between Spring nill Road and Ditch Road. The site is zoned S-
1 /Residence.
Filed by Tom Grannan
Mark Fisk of Ter Horst, Lamson & Fisk, 2629 Waterfront Parkway E. Drive, Indianapolis
appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner. The parcel is currently zoned S-1
residential and positioned between Buckhom, Cheswick Place to the south and west,
Kingsborough on the opposite side of 141 st Street , and Ponds West to the north. The owner's
intent is to develop the parcel in a comparable single family neighborhood with the existing,
surrounding neighborhoods. The northern one-third of the property which fronts 141st Street is
heavily wooded, and the remaining property is surrounded by a fence row with mature trees. The
mature trees will be preserved and the natural habitat will be maintained.
A 20 foot deep common area will be installed along 141st Street behind the 40 foot one-half
right-of-way. Also decorative Fencing and additional landscaping will blend with the mature trees
and will maintain the natural setting. A detention pond is planned for the central portion of the
northern half of the parcel, the vegetation will be selected to establish the pond, control erosion,
and promote natural habitat for the wildlife
?. sidewalk will be installed along the south frontage on 141st Street which will connect into the
existing sidewalk at Buckhorn and the future sidewalk to the west. Sidewalks are also provided
on both sides of all interior streets and connecting to the adjacent neighborhoods including the
sidewalk to the south in Cheswick Place which leads to the existing pedestrian path to the Smoky
Row Elementary School.
Plans are currently under development with Buckhorn to jointly provide a neighborhood pool and
recreation facility to be located in Buckhorn and used by both neighborhoods.
Members of the public were irrvited to speak in favor of the proposed development; none
appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed
c:\minutesipc11997 jul
development; the following appeared:
Janice Sorenson, 910 Twelve Oaks, Carmel 46032, Cheswick Place appeared before the
Commission as a representative of Cheswick Place and Buckhorn. Ms. Sorenson submitted a
petition with 39 signatures in opposition to the proposed development. The main concern is a
lack of entrance to Hyde Park from 141 st Street which will increase traffic and reduce safety of
children who walk to Smoky Row Elementary School. Additional construction traffic will also
reduce safety and emergency vehicles cannot readily access the site. .-11so a matter of concern is
the price and quality of construction of the homes in Hyde Park and the effect of the proposed
development on existing, neighboring property values.
Mark Shaw, 926 Twelve Oaks, Carmel, expressed concern that he did not receive notice of the
hearing and was only aware through a neighbor. If notice requirements had not been met, Mr.
Shaw would like the matter to be tabled to allow time for him to better understand the issues.
Mr. Shaw purchased his property on June 13, 1997.
Beverly Leddy, 13830 Berringer Lane, Buckhorn Subdivision, stated that she had not had an
opportunity to sign the petition, but wanted to go on record as being in agreement with the
previous speakers as far as increased traffic which would change the character of her subdivision.
The public hearing was then closed.
Mr. Fisk responded that a traffic study had been conducted which indicated no adverse impact
from the additional 59 homesites proposed. The subject site was originally submitted as
Cheswick Place Section 5. The decision not to have an entrance off 141st Street was a choice
made for the benefit of seclusion and not to disrupt the mature trees on 141st Street. The
petitioner intends to maintain all construction traffic and access through 141st Street, through the
driveway of the existing farmhouse. Mr. Fisk stated that the petitioner has aligned Hyde Park's
covenants with the adjacent communities and the intent is to have similar homesites to Buckhorn
and Cheswick Place. Comments regarding emergency vehicle access are not felt to be justified.
Notice was sent according to the current tax listing of adjacent landowners.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department is currently working with the petitioner on the extent
of the tree preservation and landscape plan as well as working to satisfy concerns raised at the
Technical Advisory Committee several months ago. The Department is recommending that the
proposed project proceed to the Subdivision Committee which will meet .august 5.
Docket No. 29-97 P.P., a Primary Plat application for Tom Grannon was referred to the
Subdivision Committee which will meet at 7 00 PM August 5 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
3h. Commission to consider Docket No. 43-97 PP/SP, a Primary and Secondary Plat
application for Mike Keen. Petitioner seeks approval to plat and construct 3 lots on .58
c:\minutes',p6l997 jui
4
acres. The site is located at the northeast corner of 1st Street Northwest and 3rd Avenue
Nortwest. The site is zoned R-4fResidence.
Filed by Mike Keen.
Mike Keen, 5004 Wintergreen Lane, Carmel, appeared before the Commission requesting
approval to construct three duplex townehomes on 58 acres in Old Towne Carmel. The current
zoning is R-4 which allows for apartment buildings. The proposed development includes six
living units, each to be a three bedroom with a loft or four bedrooms, 2 1/2 baths, two car garage,
consisting of approximately 2400 square feet. A sidewalk will be installed on frontage on both
Third Avenue and First Street
The petitioner stated that he had met with City Engir:eer Kate Boyle and Dick Hill, John Duffy
and Paul Pace in the Utilities department, and with Mark Monroe in the Department of
Community Services in order to address concerns.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed project; none appeared.
Members of the public were invited to speak in remonstrance to the proposed project, the
following appeared:
Dennis Moon, 121 Third Avenue North West, Carmel voiced concern regarding utilities, more
particularly, Mr. Moon's electric and water lines cross the subject property and the water meter is
located on the subject site.
Phil Hinshaw, 320 West Main Street, Carmel stated that he owns the property directly across the
street from the proposed development and is opposed to the proposed construction. Mr
Hinshaw felt that a previous development (Heritage Square) exploited the neighborhood and Mr.
Keen's proposed development would do the same. It was Mr. Hinshaw's feeling that multiple
housing is not needed in this particular area and he invited the Commission to visit the proposed
site before a vote is taken on the petition. Mr. Hinshaw felt that the loss of greenspace would
destroy a neighborhood that has been in existence more than 80 years; the property owners have
worked very hard to preserve their neighborhood and Mr. Hinshaw felt that Mr. Keen's
development would encroach on the existing neighborhood.
Mr. Keen responded that Mr. Moon's utility has been taken into consideration and a utility
easement is being created to resolve the situation; a new water main is being installed. Mr. Keen
was sympathetic to Mr. Iiinshaw's position, however Mr. Keen stated that the proposed
development is not maximizing the zoning and the development will be done tastefully and will
not detract trom the neighborhood.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending approval of the proposed
development; all outstanding concerns of the Technical Advisory Committee have been addressed.
The property is zoned R— /Residence which allows single family housing, two family housing and
c:lminutes+.pc11997 jul
inLvi uc�C-Gf
multi -family housing with Special Use approval through the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Rick Sharp moved to suspend the rules in order to consider Docket No. 43-97 PP/SP, seconded
by James Bolander; the vote was 4 in favor, 8 opposed, MOTION DENIED.
Docket No. 43-97 PP/SP, a Primary and Secondary Plat application for Mike Keen was referred
to Subdivision Committee which will meet August 5 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hail at 7:00
PM.
I. Old Business:
li. Docket No. 20-97 DP Amend, ADLS amend, TABLED BY PETITIONER
2i. Docket No. 12-97 PP Amend., Saddle Creek Development, TABLED BY
PETITIONER, (to be reviewed at Subdivision Committee August 5, 1997 )
3i. Commission to consider Docket No. 27-97 P.P., a Primary Plat application for Paul
Shoopman. Petitioner seeks approval to plat 279 lots on 153 acres. The site is located
south of 121st Street and north of 116th Street, just east of the intersection of 116th
Street and Michigan Road. The site is zoned S-1/Residence.
NOTE: Rick Sharp abstained from discussion and voting on Docket No. 27-97 P.P., a primary
plat application for Paul Shoopman.
Bill Stober, attorney at law, 8555 North River Road, Indianapolis appeared before the
Commission representing the petitioner, Paul Shoopman, and the Eagle Ridge Subdivision. The
plat has been reduced by one lot and will consist of single family, detached, individually owned,
conventional construction homes. Mr. Stober reported that the plat has been redesigned in two
respects: the entrance into the subdivision has been shifted to the west so as to alleviate any part
of the deceleration lane being in front of the "cutout" property owned by Mr. Biggs; a recreation
and common area has now been provided within the subdivision at the 116th Street entrance,
immediately west of the entrance and the lake has now been set aside as recreation/ common area.
Mr. Stober reported that the major concern expressed at the Subdivision Committee in June was a
traffic concern, however, this was not felt to be an issue by the petitioner. Mr. Stober referred to
a Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared by Steve Fehtibach of A&F Engineering which
demonstrated that the level of service is more than adequate and fully consistent with the
approvals that have been granted by the Commission previously. The A&F Traffic Impact
Analysis is the only analysis that has been presented to the Commission that has been prepared
and submitted m conformity with the Plan Commission's guidelines for traffic impact studies and
c:\minutes\pc\ 1997 jul
d
was done exactly as all earlier studies done by A& F Engineering. Mr. Stober stated that the
Traffic Impact Analysis had been presented to the County Highway Department who had
requested certain improvements of Mr. Shoopman, Mr. Shoopman has agreed to do everything
that the County Highway Department has asked and has even gone beyond those requested.
David Cremeans, chairman of the Subdivsiion Committee, reported that the Committee had
decided to hear additional public input. The number one concern voiced was health, safety, and
welfare of the residents in the area of the proposed development. The Committee had voted not
to approve the development. Since Committee meeting, a letter had been received from the
Boone County Sheriffs Department which further verified the committee's concerns regarding
health, safety, and welfare at intersections of U.S. 421 and 116th Street and 121st Street. One of
the Boone County Commissioners spoke of a major concern with 121 st Street and it enters Boone
County and asked that the Carmel Plan Commission reject the petitioner's request. There were
also concerns expressed regarding proper passing blisters being able to be obtained --apparently a
letter is on file with the Department from Gene Baker stating that the property in question had
been in his family for 100 years and he had no interest or desire in selling any part of his land. The
Committee felt that the proposed development was not one that is in the best interest, especially
health, safety, and welfare, of Carmel -Clay residents.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending approval of the project as re-
submitted, and that it meets all the applicable zoning and subdivision regulations at the time the
project was filed and docketed.
Tom Thompson commented that a letter had been received from the Boone County Sheriff
expressing professional concern about the traffic issues surrounding the development. Ken
Campbell of the Sheriff s Department had requested to be allowed to speak. Jay Dorman moved
to allow Ken Campbell an opportunity to speak, seconded by Dick Klar. There were additional
comments from other members of the Plan Commission. The Commission voted 11 in favor, Tim
Bolander and Jun ONeal opposed, to allow Ken Campbell to address the Commission.
Ken Campbell, Captain with the Boone County Sheriffs Department, relayed the following
remarks from Sheriff Hudson. At the direction of the County Commissioners, the matter of traffic
accidents on Michigan Road (U.S. 421) between the area of State Road 334 and 121st Street
were reconstructed over the last 5 years. Included in the study was Coventry Ridge and
Clarkston Subdivisions, Willow Road and O'Neal Avenue. The Indiana Dept. of Transportation
was contacted for the most current traffic count statistics, however, those figures were
unavailable when the report was compiled. The Boone County Sheriffs Department views the
issue as one of health, safety and welfare. Mr. Campbell reported that there had been a significant
increase in overall traffic accidents in the subject area within the last 5 years; the six month total
for this year alone almost totals the 1996 total for the immediate area. The most current statistics
available from INDOT is 1991. At 121st Street and Michigan Road in 1991, there were 9, 840
cars per day traveling through the area Since that time, there has been a significant in accidents;
c-\minutes\pc\ 1997 jut
there is three times the total number of the first six months of 1997 overall in 1993 two years after
the traffic count from LNDOT. Common sense would dictate that with an increase in the traffic
flow, the number of accidents will also increase. .as currently set up with the traffic coming out of
the Eagle Ridge Subdivision onto 1 16th Street and 121st Street, the next thoroughfare is
Shelborne Road, but it is not a major thoroughfare --the next major thoroughfare is in Boone
County which is N ichigan Road. The traffic coming from the Eagle Ridge 2', 8 single family
dwellings will spill out into Boone County and increase the traffic flow; the intersection of 121 st
Street and U.S. 421 is a grave concern because it is a dangerous intersection. Ken Campbell
recommended that the Commissioners drive the indicated intersection for an idea of the poor
visibility at this particular intersection --even with acceleration and deceleration lanes. In Boone
County, 46% of the households maintain two cars; 24% have three cars. The numbers at these
intersections will increase substantially when Hamilton County is added in. Ken Campbell asked
that the Plan Commission please consider Boone County's concerns and stated that the Sheriffs
Department did not approve of the subdivision as currently planned, since it would be a detriment
to the citizens of the area.
Pat Rice asked if any recommendations had been made to deal with the safety issue and what the
responsibility of the Plan Commissioners is in terms of health, safety and welfare issues in making
a decision on this development.
Mark 'Monroe spoke to the safety concerns. There have been a number of roadway improvements
committed to by the developer above and beyond any improvements to be done by the State
Highway Dept. on Michigan Road and/or the Boone County government within their jurisdiction.
The passing blisters can be accomplished one of two ways: either by the developer purchasing
the property from the adjacent land owner or the County government condemning the property —
the developer is committed to pursuing either purchasing the property and/or working with the
Hamilton County government on condemning the property.
Alan Klineman commented that he had always heard that the County government did not use its
power of condemnation in order to obtain passing blisters. Mark Monroe responded that there
have been a few instances where condemnation has occurred, not in Clay Township, but in other
parts of the County eminent domain has been used to acquire property. The developer has
committed to reimburse the government for any condemnation costs incurred in acquiring the
property
In response to questions from Tom Thompson, Bill Stober stated that in the formal written
commitment executed by the petitioner, he has agreed to install the passing blisters and do
everything within his power which is either to purchase at fair value on the private market or to
reimburse the governmental agency for any costs involved in acquiring the real estate. The
ordinance states that the'passing blister must be installed if the right-of-way is available; however
the petitioner cannot commit to something beyond his power to do.
c:\minutes\pc� 1997 jul
9
Tom Thompson stated that the Commission had listened to the public's concerns on this particular
petition via public hearing, two committee meetings, and this evening's meeting. There has been
no input som the School regarding this subdivision and there does not appear to be a problem as
far as the school is concerned. :mother concern mentioned was potential flooding, especially
along Long Branch Creek. There are drainage laws in effect that require developers to control
the storm outflow from their property to no greater than it would be normally. The high density
does remain a concern --in fact the Plan Commission and City Council recently upgraded the S-1
density ordinance for this area west of Springer ll Road to assure continuation of the lower
building densities that have been necessitated previously in the area because of the large lots
required for the septic system; however, this particular petition was filed and submitted before
that ordinance took effect, and the sewers are now available. The traffic safety and congestion
remain a concern. The petitioner has agreed to every road improvement requested by the
Hamilton County Highway Department. Tom Thompson proposed making any approval by the
Plan Commission conditional upon the developer's agreement to provide their fair share of the
Hamilton County Highway Department's required improvements for traffic safety, and also pass a
resolution to the Hamilton County Highway Dept, requesting that they work with the Boone
County Highway Dept. to assure that all road improvements necessary to ensure safety are in
place at the time of development of this particular subdivision.
-Alan Klineman commented that while he was in agreement with Tom Thompson's comments, he
felt that the people surrounding this plot had some reason to believe that Mr. Shoopman was
creating an estate atmosphere by the installation of a magnificent layout with mounding, shrubbery
and trees The idea that some day the property might be subdivided and developed was
something that cannot be anticipated. One can anticipate that a vacant piece of ground might be
developed. In the last few years, Mr. Shoopman has been upgrading his parcel and creating an
atmosphere that was very enjoyable for him as well as his neighbors, and then to slip "under the
wire" as S-I is coming along and go for a subdivision as tiled —it is very bothersome. fir
Klineman felt that there was some reliance on the part of the neighbors and he was hopeful that
the situation would be reconsidered.
Jay Dorman commented that he had voted to approve the petition: it was ' -Mr. Dorman's opinion
that the petitioner had done everything requested by the governing and reviewing agencies and
also his opinion that the traffic from the proposed development will certainly have a higher impact
on the immediate area because of its proximity to vfchigan Road --however the traffic in the area
will continue to increase because of other developments in the area, especially cross -county traffic
not specifically generated from the proposed development.
Jay Dorman moved for approval of Docket No. 27-97 PP, conditioned upon the receipt of a
positive review from the Hamilton Counry Sheriff from the comments made by the Boone County
Sheriff, Mr. Hudson, concern Boone County's safety issues in the immediate area, and if the
Hamilton County Sheriff still believes that the health, safety and welfare of the area is not
jeopardized by this development, :he issue would be resolved within 90 days; if not_ the petitioner
c: vmnutesipc11997 jui
would return to the Commission with a request for a variance for passing blisters and this
Commission take action to either approve or deny that particular variance, seconded by Dick
Klar.
Luci Snyder asked if there were any comments from the Sheriff at the time the development went
through Technical Advisory Committee. Mark Monroe responded that the plans were submitted
to the Hamilton County Sheriffs office and exact comments would have to be researched.
Typically, the Sheriffs office does not attend Technical Advisory, but comments are submitted by
letter.
Jim Bolander requested that the matter be Tabled to allow for the review of the components
contained in Jay Dorman's motion.
Dick Klar withdrew his second, Jay Dorman removed his motion.
Tim Bolander then moved to Table Docket No. 27-97 PP to allow for additional inputiconcems
from the Hamilton County Sheriff in support of his position, and also to research the passing
blister acquisition, and that a time limit of 30 days be imposed until the next Plan Commission
meeting, seconded by Dick Klar.
Mr. Stober responded that in addressing the questions of the passing blister, the time constraint
imposed for the petitioner to somehow demonstrate his ability to acquire the property is
inconsistent with the entire road commitment that the petitioner has made to the Hamilton County
Highway Dept. in that it is triggered by the development of the property and not by the present
time. Mr. Stober stated that there is no question of a traffic situation on Michigan Road and that
is what is being addressed by INDOT, particularly at 121st and Michigan Road. The intersection
at 116th and Michigan will be undergoing improvements; the Sheriffs representative is referring
to 121st Street. The Subdivision is a long way from development at 121st Street; development
will commence at 116th Street and there is a period a years before there is access onto 121st
Street. Mr. Stober also commented that he was troubled by comments made by Man Klineman.
The vote on Jim Bolander's motion to table was i 1 in favor, Jim ONeal and Norma Meighen
opposed, Rick Sharp abstaining. Docket No. 27-97 PP TAJ3LED for 30 days, until the next
meeting.
I NEW BUSINESS:
lj. Commission to consider Docket No. 48-97 ADLS Amend., an amended Architectural
Design Lighting Landscaping, and Signage application for Ameritech Wireless
Services. Petitioner seeks approval to attach antennas to an existing office building. The
site is zoned B-!/Business. (The petitioner will also be appearing before the Carmel/Clay
Board of Zoning Appeals for Use Variance approval.)
Filed by Matt Price of McHale Cook and Welch.
c `minutes\pc11997 jul
10
Matt Price, attorney with McHale Cook and Welch, 320 :North Meridian Street, Suite 1100,
Indianapolis appeared before the Commission representing Ameritech Wireless Communications,
Inc. also in attendance was Brian Wilson, project manager for Ameritech Wireless
Communications in Indiana with an office in Indianapolis. Mr. Price stated that with the passage
of the new ordinance, Ameritech Wireless Communications had received notice by letter from the
Department that they are now a permitted use under the new zoning ordinance; hence, the Use
Variance application will be withdrawn.
Mr. Price gave a brief overview of the project. The site is subject to the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone
requirements. The system will consist of antennae attachments to the parapet wall and inside the
mechanical penthouse which is a structure on top of the Hewlett Packard building. In order for
Ameritech's PCS system to function, sites must be located within cells. Ameritech's system has
been designed so that no towers will have to be built within the City of Carmel. The only two
sites within the City of Carmel are an amennae to be placed on the water tower which has already
been approved, and the Hewlett Packard Building. It is believed that the visual impact of these
antennae attachments is virtually negligible, and approval is being requested as submitted.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending approval as submitted.
Dave Cremeans asked if it were possible to share the facilities with a competitor such as Sprint.
Mr. Price responded that it depends on how their system is designed, but it is possible to share
locations.
Dick Klar moved for the approval of Docket No. 48-97 ADLS Amend, for Ameritech Wireless
Services, seconded by Paul Spranger. The vote was 12 in favor, none opposed, Luci Snyder, no
vote, MOTION APPROVED.
2j. Commission to consider Docket No. 56.97 ADLS, an Architectural Desist, Lighting,
Landscaping, and Signage application for REI Investments. Petitioner seeks approval to
construct a 120,000 square foot office budding and a 22,000 square foot office building on
10 acres. The site is located on the west side of Illinois Street within the Meridian at 465
Office Complex. The site is zoned B-3Business and B-1Business. (The petitioner .vill
also be appearing before the CarmeUClay Board of Zoning Appeals for Special Use
approval.)
Filed by Phil Nicely of Bose McKinney and Evans.
Phil Nicely, 8888 Keystone Crossing appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner.
ADLS approval is being requested for the construction of two office buildings; one a three story,
120,000 square foot building, the other a two story, 22,000 square foot building. Bob Olson,
engineer for the development, and Kevin Foster, landscape architect, were also in attendance.
c:\minutes`,pc,,1997 jul
The property is zoned three different categories: one small portion is zoned B-6; the middle
section is zoned B-3; and the section to the south is zoned B-1. The proposed office uses are all
permitted uses within the zoning classification, however the B-3 zoning does require a Special
Use before the Board of Zoning Appeals. In 1985, the entire property was zoned to be a
development of an office business complex. A covenant was made at the time of zoning to
develop the property as an office business, and that all buildings would come back before the
Commission 'or ADLS approval.
The petitioner has appeared before Technical Advisory and believes all concerns to be addressed.
The petitioner has met with the neighbors as well.
Bob Olson explained the construction materials of the buildings which will be precast panels, buff
color, with blue/grey type glass with aluminum frames. On the larger building, the HVAC will be
located on the roof, screened with a parapet wall. There will be one transformer on the site itself -
The larger building will contain a dock area and a recessed area for a trash compactor.
The petitioner has invited the neighbors to a meeting to make them aware of the proposed
development. The neighbors requested more pine trees along the property line for a more dense
appearance and buffer; REI is willing to comply. The two story building setback requirement was
smaller and neighbors requested plant material between the fence and the parking area; the
petitioner will comply and a revised landscape plan is on file with the Department.
There are two signs on the property indicating the two buildings. The bottom portion will be a
precast panel, the upper portion will be green.
Jay Dorman asked if there were any concerns expressed regarding the illumination of the parking
area and how that was to be addressed, Mr. Olson responded that the light fixtures would be of
the same type of fixture as those in existence, however the first row of lighting along the
residences is reduced from a 30 to a'_5 foot pole. The petitioner will comply with the
requirements of a one -tenth foot candle. Along the property tine is an 8 foot masonry fence as
well as an 8 foot wooden tence, together with high plant material will provide an adequate buffer.
Jay Dorman was complimentary of the sensitivity shown to the neighbors by the petitioner.
Parking lot requirements: less than 500; 625 are provided.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending that the project be referred to the
Special Study Committee on August 5 The Department has been working with the petitioner on
landscaping, parking, and curb cuts, there are some outstanding TAC issues at this time
Alan Klineman asked that the petitioner compute the land area that the smaller building is to be
built on before Committee date. Also..Alan questioned the dimension of the parking area and the
c \minutesipc, l 997 jul
12
additional parking provided. More particulars were requested on the landscape plan with regard
to the trees on site at the present time.
Docket No. 56-97 ADLS, for REI Investments, was referred to Special Study Committee
which will meet August 5 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at
9:35 PM.
H.K. Thompson, President
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
c: \minutes\pc\ 1997. jul
la Z
_ rL l .J6 � t. it r f � '•r, .
•�
G+y
rn� Xk. _�.. , , ••� L�',l•. '.a .[a`.: + sue- .!- �.
lo
711
1
Y2 l •ti X
-r .�'�Yv � � %'ari'i`�. ��:. � Z�S '' `� �+�•+�� �(,�i; ,7�y ra��[!r k
a•/a. •icy, w 1� � �~� �' ��„ � '�x:'� _
Ac
IL
•'i�� _ J
�s a: '.
e A
Y.
�7i� • � N r y .. '�.- 14'- '-fir ii r • rr. f?T.�, x•.a/.. -.r. q+ + 7 '
^1,i`a jr+''; f
� ` ,y1�.��Ejj� c •� Pr �Y 1. 1 `_ J[y', il. -5 r� 'p s� =4 •,'.i r S y� . y'
-L ♦ ' 1�. r'• '� ✓�4 YIa_.� ice• ' r-
�
� r F .F f1i .t n i 4^'t` � 9 �' -.� wr-"�' 'i.�•y„ :�t
`h r. a� Z r ./: it i`J "• r-.r•'. ,pi' �� � � f r .,k 'l,yn.;
�:. tl > l."' -T..rt � � r ♦ i,> �?i' �'�•+'��II►Y '� � aY�'� �. � lr'f * '{'ijw
1' r[rf! 'V_ 7i �. ��� + ��,y�i u�t r- •�, ,� .�:�i' r'�"[ 'F L�.. IA,.
+ , "
Yy.