HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Plan Commission 06-18-91 CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18 , 1991 1
The regular meeting of the Carmel Planning Commission was brought
to order by Vice President, Sue McMullen on June 18, 1991 at 7 : 40
P.M. at the Carmel City Council Chambers . The meeting was opened
with the Pledge of Allegiance .
The board members present were : Sue McMullen, Caroline
Bainbridge, Henry Blackwell, Ron Houck, Richard Klar, Henrietta
Lamb, Max Moore, Jim O'Neal, Michael Nardi, Annabelle Ogle, Alan
Potasnik, Tom Welch, Tom Whitehead and Sharon Clark of Hamilton
County. Jeff Davis and Norma Meighen was not present .
The staff members present were : Wes Bucher, David Cunningham,
Terry Jones , Rick Brandau, Mike Hollibaugh, Wm. Wendling, Jr. and
Dorthy Neisler.
Mr. Richard Klar moved to approve the May 21, 1991 minutes as
presented with the following corrections : Page 5 , line 12 should
read: is basically at a material balance . As to the question of
The Corps of Engineers we have received approval from the Corps
of Engineers as to wet lands . I believe what Greg was referring
to perhaps is mining areas that are treated somewhat differently
than non-mining areas, in that we don ' t have I guess good laws
here in Indiana as to how mining is done. Instead of continually
doing something as you mine as it is done in many other areas,
the mines here are allowed to just let it happen till there is
use; Page 5 , last line should read: asphalt . The lake is
approximately 13-15 feet deep. Mr. Sweet stated that he could
not recall the issue to a stoplight, there was a comment made
regardless of the data we had gotten tonight that at this point
or for at least a while into the project none would be required
on per basis of traffic count . I believe the Comprehensive Plans
calls for 126th Street to eventually be four lane and we are
prepared to do a lane on our side the whole width as to the
timing of that, etc . will be some of the conversation that we
will have . Later on we have committed to do traffic
improvements on 116th Street in accordance with that traffic
study.
Mr. Nardi seconded.
Unanimously approved.
Mr. Wes Bucher stated that the last City Council Meeting the
question was raised as to the Springmill Corridor Amendment that
was passed both by the Plan Commission and by the City Council
and is part of the current Comprehensive Plan. Because it was an
amendment obviously it was not scanned at the time the document
was scanned while beginning this process it did not get included
in the draft of the Comprehensive Plan that you voted on and that
was advertised and voted on by the City Council . Several times
during the several years that they studied this the question was
asked and the reply of the Steering Committee was yes, the Spring
Mill Corridor Amendment should be part of that document, however,
CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1991 2
it is not contained in the draft . It was discovered obviously,
now when it was at City Council , and so the Council last night in
discussing this rather than just to insert it wanted this to come
back to the Plan Commission, then to ascertain your feelings and
to see whether or not this should be inserted into the draft . If
that was your intention and if that is so then by resolution or
vote then that could go back to City Council and be included in
the version that you passed and they are now studying. That is
one part of it . It has also been pointed out on Page 68 of the
draft the very top line talking about the Spring Mill Corridor,
the draft that we did approve, if you read that it says Spring
Mill should develop with a predominantly residential character.
The question would be, if you look at the ordinance under the
goals, number 2 says continuation of Spring Mill Road as a
residential corridor. The question would come up, does the word
predominantly on page 68 does it conflict with the Spring Mill
Corridor Amendment . So if you vote you put this amendment in as
I believe it was the intention of the Steering Committee, then
are you creating a conflicting statement on page 68 with that
word predominantly. So if the Commission votes to put it in"you
may want to consider leaving the predominantly in or if you don' t
think that effects that leaving it stand as it was prepared.
Mr. Potasnik asked if in order to do this , if this was something
that was inadvertently left out the Comprehensive Plan Update
what would be staffs recommendation in order to make both of
these items coincide .
Mr. Bucher stated that staffs recommendation would be that it was
inadvertently left out of the Comprehensive Plan and it should be
included and to delete the word predominantly from page 68 .
Mr. Potasnik moved to include what was referred to as the Spring
Mill Road Amendment and in line with the staffs recommendation
remove the word predominantly.
Seconded.
Unanimously approved.
G. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Items lg and 2g were heard together but voted on separately.
1g. Commission to consider Docket No. 26-91 PP, A Primary
Plat application for Hamilton Business Park, located at
the southeast corner of 106th and US 421 (Michigan
Road) . The plat includes streets, easements, right-of-
ways and 7 blocks for future commercial development on
84 . 83 acres of land . Site is zoned B-3 and B-5 and is
partially located within the US 421 Overlay Corridor.
Filed by James J. Nelson for Wurster Construction
Company, Inc.
CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18 , 1991 3
The public hearing was opened at 7 : 50 P.M.
Mr. James Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, IN, made the
presentation, a copy of which is on file at the Carmel Department
of Community Development .
An aerial view and a rendering of the primary plat .
Mr. Rich Knipstein, 10550 Green Tree Dr. , spoke in opposition to
this project . He stated his concerns regarding the curb cuts and
the traffic congestion at the intersection on Michigan Road and
106th Street where there has been many fatalities .
Mrs . Judy Hagan, 10946 Spring Mill Lane spoke in opposition to
this project . Mrs . Hagan supported Mr. Knipstein' s comments .
She had no objections to there being right turn only lanes if
there are accel decel lanes for people to get off there . Is that
being provided? Is the board approving the road layout? Would
like a light at the southern most tip of the property. She spoke
in opposition to the curb cuts .
Mr. Randy Shultz, 3796 Shelborne Ct . stated his concerns
regarding the traffic situation and the curb cuts .
Mr.Nelson spoke in response to the comments addressed by the
remonstrators . He stated that they will be prepared to address
these concerns at the Technical Advisory Committee on Thursday.
He would report that any curb cuts on Michigan Road is under the
jurisdiction of the State Highway Department and they have
submitted preliminary plans to the State Highway Department and
they have received their approval . The approval that they
received is for the curb cuts that are shown on the plans . They
felt that since they have the ultimate jurisdiction in this
regard that it would be premature to appear before this Plan
Commission without their prior preliminary approval . Basically
what their preliminary consists of is that they review our
concept design, which is what is shown here, they approved that
concept design subject only to the final approval of the
construction plans . With respect to the curb cuts off of 106th
Street, those are under the jurisdiction of Hamilton County
Highway Department and they are in the process of discussing
these cuts with them. They did previously on the west side had
three curb cuts and that is what is shown on the drawings that
the board has before them. They have reduced that to two by
consolidating two of them that was at the request of the Hamilton
County Highway Department. They will be further prepared to
address this at the TAC Meeting.
There was further discussion regarding the curb cuts .
Mr. Blackwell asked if there was a request put in for another
CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18 , 1991 4
stop light at any of the cuts .
The petitioner' s engineer stated that the traffic signals from
our projections would not be warranted.
This was sent to the Subdivision Committee meeting on the 2nd of
July, 1991 at the City Caucus Rooms .
2g. Commission to consider Docket No. 27-91 PP, a Primary
Plat application for Hamilton Center, located at the
southwest corner of 106th and US 421 (Michigan Road) .
The plat consists of one block for future commercial
development on 16 . 89 acres of land. Site is zoned I-i
and is partially located within the US 421 Overlay
Corridor.
Filed by James J. Nelson for Wurster Construction
Company, Inc.
This item was sent to the Subdivision Committee on July 2, 1991
at the City Caucus Rooms . s
H. OLD BUSINESS
lh. Commission to consider Docket No. 4-91 O .A. , an
ordinance amendment to Ordinance Z-160, the proposed
amendment is to regulate outside storage and displays .
Filed by Wm. Wendling, Jr. for the Carmel/Clay Plan
Commission.
This item was tabled at Land Use Committee .
2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 21-91 ADLS/DP,
Architectural Design, Lighting & Signage and
Development Plan applications for Pearson Ford, located
at the northwest corner of 106th and US 421 (Michigan
Road) . The development includes the expansion of the
current facility to a total of 63 , 077 sq. ft . for new
and used automobile sales . Site consists of 9 . 17 acres
and is zoned B-3 and is located within the US 421
Overlay Corridor. The petitioner will be appearing
before the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals for
Special Use approval and developmental standards
variances .
Filed by E . Davis Coots for Pearson Ford Dealership.
Mr. Dave Cunnningham stated that the Commission members attention
at the committee level it was requested that variances that were
sought and approved at the Board of Zoning Appeals be addressed
to you . If you would refer to your Land Use and Commercial
Committee Minutes pages 3 , 4, 5 respectively are those items and
CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1991 5
his understanding the petitioner will be explaining those to you .
Those are for your reference .
Mr. John Pearson for Pearson Ford and Barbara Conrad who is the
Engineer with Paul Cripe were present .
Ms . Sheila Marshall of Coots,Henke and Wheeler, 255 E . Carmel
Dr. , made the presentation, a copy of which is on file at the
Carmel Department of Community Development .
An aerial view and an elevation of buildings displaying the
signage package on the buildings .
The staff recommendations were noted (which is a part of the
official minutes and attached to the Master Copy) .
Mr. Dave Cunningham stated in relationship to our recommendation
to have it removed mainly. The main reason they request it to be
removed is in the purpose and intent of the Sign Ordinance . It
does state and quote, "The intent of this ordinance is to bring
all existing signs into compliance with the code and insure that
all future signs are in compliance . " The staff feels at this
time this would be the applicable time to bring this in to
compliance .
Mr. Wm. Wendling stated that he was at the BZA meeting and his
recollection was that it was in the application, but the
application addressed the four signs . Certainly the pole sign
was discussed as reflected in the minutes but there was nothing
in there to sway one way or the other. Secondly, as whether this
Plan Commission can request or require a commitment from the
property owner to take this sign down . I believe so frankly, as
much as it does pain me to say that I guess , but 3674613 states
that if developmental plan is required by zoning ordinance which
this does, because of the overlay zone, then the Plan Commission
may permit or require the owner of a parcel to make a written
commitment concerning the use or development of that parcel .
This is the use or the development of this parcel . However, I
would caution you not to go to far out on that because like
everything else it has to be somewhat reasonable, you just can
arbitrarily make decisions . This statue does indicate that you
can ask and you can require commitments that the property owner
would enter into to conform to the desires of the Commission.
Mr. Potasnik moved to approve Docket No. 21-91 ADLS/DP as
presented.
Seconded.
There was further discussion regarding the signage .
The vote was 8 members voted to approve and 5 members voted
CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18 , 1991 6
against .
3h. Commission to consider Docket No. 22-91 ADLS/DP,
Architectural Design, Lighting & Signage and
Development Plan applications for Meijer, Inc. to be
located at the northwest corner of 126th (Carmel Drive)
and Old Meridian. The development includes the
construction of a 208 , 600 sq. ft . facility for all-
purpose retail and service center. Site consists of 31
acres and is zoned B-3 . The petitioner will be
appearing before the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning
Appeals for Special Use approval and developmental
standards variances .
Filed by James J. Nelson for Meijer, Inc.
Mr. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, made the presentation,
a copy of which is on file at the Carmel Department of Community
Development .
Mr. O'Neal moved to approve Docket No. 22-91 as presented. •
Mr. Klar seconded.
Unanimously approved.
4h. Commission to consider D. - 23-91 PP, a primary
plat application for 'aterstone . The primary plat
consists of 417 lotsN. - - = = . -s of land located on
the north side of 116th treet, east side of Gray Road
and the south side of 126th Street . Site is zoned S-i,
S-2 , & R-1 residence districts . Petitioner requests
approval to subdivide the property into 417 single-
family residential lots . Petitioner is requesting
subdivision variance :
8 . 9 Installation of sidewalks within and
bordering the subdivision.
Petitioner has also filed a request to amend the
Commitments concerning the Use and Development of the
Real Estate executed on 16th day of October, 1990 and
recorded on the 5th Day of February, 1991, in the
Office of the Recorder of Hamilton County, Indiana as
Instrument No. 9102729 .
Filed by James J. Nelson for Brenwick Development Co .
Mr.Dave Cunningham stated that the staff would inform the Plan
Commission as part of the commitment change would need to be
voted on first .
Mr. Blackwell moved to amend commitment .
Ms . Caroline Bainbridge seconded.
Unanimously approved.
CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1991 7
Mr. Blackwell moved to approve the variance as presented.
Mr. Klar seconded.
Findings of facts were completed by all board members .
Unanimously approved.
Mr. Blackwell moved to approve Docket No. 23-91 Primary Plat as
presented.
Seconded.
Findings of Facts were completed by all board members .
Unanimously approved.
5h. . Commission to consider Docket No. 24-91 PP, a primary
plat application for Williamson Run, Section 6 . The
primary plat consists of 11 lots on 7 acres of land
located on the south side of 106th Street, approx. one
half mile east of Keystone Avenue, south of the
existing Williamson Run Subdivision. Site is zoned S-2
residence district . Petitioner requests approval to
subdivide the property into 11 single-family
residential lots .
Filed by Mark Boyce for C.P.Morgan Co. , Inc.
Mr. Blackwell moved to approve Docket No. 24-91 PP as presented.
Seconded.
Findings of Facts were completed by all board members .
Unanimously approved.
I . NEW BUSINESS
41i . Commission to consider Docket No. 28-91 ADLS/DP
(Amend) , Architectural Design, Lighting & Signage And
Development Plan Amendment applications for Duke
Associates . Site is located within the existing
Parkwood Development located north of 96th Street, east
of Meridian Street, south of I-465 and west of College
Avenue . Petitioner request approval to amend
previously approved Development plan for Parkwood and
request approval for the construction of a 4 story
building with a total of 176, 000 square feet . Site is
zoned B-6 Entrance Corridor.
Filed by Philip Nicely for Duke Associates .
Mr. Philip Nicely, Attorney at 8888 Keystone Crossing, made the
presentation, a copy of which is on file at the Carmel Department
of Community Development .
Mr. Bob Faulk from Duke Development and is in charge of
construction, Brent Davis, Les Hulls from the Architect, Debbie
Smucker who is the Landscape Architect and Mr. Joe Yaeger who is
the Senior Vice President of Indiana Insurance Company.
CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1991 8
A site plan, a landscape plan, south and north elevations, a
signage plan and a lighting plan was displayed.
This will go to Land Use and Industrial & Commercial Committee on
July 2 , 1991 at the City Caucus Rooms .
The meeting was adjourned at 9 : 30 P .M.
Vice President Secretary