HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 12-18-18 interesting to see the different parking capacities of these properties. Jon: We can provide that at Committee.
• I agree with Laura to add more to the east and west elevations
• I believe out of town visitors need to be able to identify their destination and having an identity sign on the west
façade(facing 465/31)would help this.
• I believe the majority of exiting traffic would be trying to get back to US 31 and also head north towards Carmel.
There's only a right out onto Pennsylvania Pkwy, it's a divided boulevard,and you would have to make an
immediate U-turn at the entrance at Methodist Medical Plaza. With only one lane going out, if we proposed two
lanes going out;one lane directing traffic to make the U-turn to the north,and one lane directing traffic to stay to
the right to continue eastbound,would that simplify the morning exit from the hotels? The north entrance seems
like an unnecessary access point,except if it's there from a public safety standpoint. Jon: The north entrance
allows for a coach bus to access and exit the site. It also allows access to the dumpster enclosure that is located
nearby. We will have additional dialogue with the City about signage in the street ROW to direct them back to
US 31. We will consider those items you brought up.
Josh: The City understands parking requirements as it pertains to UBER and Lyft. What does your Hotel use as a
guideline for parking requirements? Seems to me more people would be getting dropped off then parking a rented car.
This could help us validate our parking concerns.
Alan: What's the distance of the north end of the building to the north property line? Jon: Between 15-20'. It meets the
setback. Rachel: The ordinance requires a 20' setback for the trash enclosure
A motion made by Susan Westermeier and seconded by Josh Kirsh to send Aloft&Element Hotels to Commercial
Committee on January 3,2019 and have it return to full Plan Commission with final voting authority.
Motion passes 7-0,2 absent Casati,Kegley
Old Business
1. Docket No. 18070015 Z: 2724 E 136th St.PUD Rezone
The applicant seeks approval to rezone 59 acres to PUD/Planned Unit Development in order to develop
approximately 100 single-family dwellings and 100 condominiums/townhomes. The site is located at the NE
corner of Keystone Parkway and 136th Street. It is zoned R-1/Residential within the Keystone Parkway Overlay
Zone. Filed by Justin Moffett of Old Town Design Companies LLC.
Petitioner: Justin Moffett:
• Passed out packets to members of the Plan Commission
• We will explain what has changed since the last hearing
• We filed as a PUD because there wasn't an underlying zoning classification that met all the product types we are
proposing in this development
• Our original filing had 235 residential units and now been reduced to 200 units to meet the requests of Staff and
adjacent neighbors for park space and additional bufferyards.
• Presented the current site plan
• We had five meetings with neighborhood groups to discuss their concerns
• We would have to go through the ADLS process for architecture and design standards
• We wanted to show what 100 multi-family units would look like
• All proposed condo structures will be located west of the main boulevard
• The townhomes are 3 stories,22' by 40',with parking located underneath
• The townhome is similar to a single family cottage home,except it's 4 units that are attached to each other
• The townhome and condos are low maintenance products
• We want to attract an older demographic for this development
• Presented topography of the site.The condos would be a similar height to the adjacent single family homes and
will not sit above the nearby residential homes.
• Presented an open space map. 47%of the site is open space,driven by the creek,the historic home,park space
and bufferyards.
• Presented site plan for signage location and trail access points
• We need approval from the DNR to cross the creek with a path/trail
• Presented a site plan for tree preservation areas and best efforts to preserve trees
5
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 12-18-18
• A number of commitments that were requested by the Plan Commission are included in the packet
o Roundabout will be constructed prior to 30%of homes being built,up to 60 residential units
o To acquire easements to build a path from our development to the Hagen Burke Trail
o Construction traffic access will be provided with the existing gravel road off of Keystone and not through
existing neighborhoods
o Design guidelines that discuss the minimum architecture standards for all housing types are attached to
the PUD
• We have made adjustments to our development plan to the best of our ability
• 0' is required as a bufferyard from adjacent properties,we initially gave 20' and now it's a 40' buffer
• We committed to no construction and open space east of the creek
• We committed to no condos east of the main boulevard
• We reduced the total number units by 15%
• We are proposing 3.3 units per acre
• We feel this plan provides a significant amount of green space and buffers, it preserves the historic home, meets
the need for senior housing,and it complies with the Comprehensive Plan
Department Report: Alexia Lopez:
• The petitioner has addressed our comments and concerns
• Based on the Comprehensive Plan,the townhomes/condos are considered a conditional fit and single family
homes are considered a best fit next to the existing single family residential homes
• They are providing large bufferyards and green space in the southern portion of the development which is the
townhomes&condos area
• Architecture standards will be included in the PUD
• PRIF should be used for the path and needs to be constructed first,before it is used for the historic home, if
public access is allowed to the historic home
• Staff recommends you forward this to City Council with favorable recommendation after all comments are
addressed
Residential Committee Report: Josh Kirsh
• Staff did what the committee asked for
• We want the ability to fine tune the architecture designs and guidelines when it comes to ADLS,and we thought
this was a good starting point
• We applied a lot of the comments in both meetings and the petitioner made great compromises
• We feel we are bringing a good compliant product to the City
Committee Comments:
Brad: In referring to the tree preservation area plan,why isn't the existing wooded area southeast of historic home area
not labeled for tree preservation? Justin Moffett: We knew that area would be a park space, and we wanted to define
the corridor of the creek. We can expand on preserving trees once that site plan is known. Brad: My same question
would apply for the area by the main entrance. Justin: The Engineering Dept.will let us know where they want the
access road and walking path. Once we have a final plan,we will expand on tree preservation.
Brad: For enhanced architecture for the end units of townhomes, is that a redline addition to the commitments or PUD?
Justin Moffett: Four-sided architecture has always been a standard in our single family projects. We did include this for
the townhomes and condos. Same quantities of windows and materials per level and sides are required. Josh: The
Residential Committee has always emphasized on the side facing architecture and details.
Laura: I've always had concerns about the density and traffic. Even if you say it's just during rush hour,those are the
most critical times for people trying to get to their destination on time. How will the newly constructed roundabout
resolve this? Justin Moffett: Our traffic engineer presented this at the first meeting. We asked the traffic engineer to
look at paths of travel. The feedback we got is we will not be pushing traffic out of our neighborhood throughout the
adjacent neighborhoods. Because of our connections,existing neighborhoods will use this development to cut through to
Keystone. The traffic at 136th and Keystone will not go away. The new Lowes Way extension from 146th to Keystone
will hopefully eliminate some of the traffic that travels southbound on Carey and Gray Roads to get to Keystone via
6
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 12-18-18
136th. The proposed wishbone design extends the roundabout which potentially can change the condition that causes the
stacking that occurs on the Keystone ramp. It's not the private land owner's ability to come up with a traffic plan. Our
traffic engineer answered all the traffic questions to the best of his ability. I can't answer if we can resolve this by
Ireducing density by a certain percentage.
A motion by Josh Kirsh,and seconded by Alan Potasnik to forward Docket No. 18070015 PUD Rezone to City
Council with a favorable recommendation. Motion fails 4-3,Adams,Campbell,Kestner,2 Absent Casati,Kegley
Brad: 4 out of 9 votes does not constitute majority of the body, so no action is taken. Is there another motion? Does
anyone want to make a motion for an unfavorable recommendation?Nick: We can motion for no recommendation.
Josh: The Council asked us not to forward it with no recommendation. Brad: The Chair is looking for a motion to
forward with a negative recommendation. Josh: What happens if no one gives us the second motion that we are looking
for? John Molitor: It's automatically continued to the next meeting. Ultimately,the case law indicates we must
forward it on so the Council can take jurisdiction on it. It's not proper for us to hang onto this indefinitely.
Justin Moffett: I would you request you forward it with no recommendation,and record stands there was a 4-3
favorable vote.
Josh: May I ask the President of City Council,who's in attendance tonight a question? Brad: Yes. Josh: Councilman
Rider, in the past you have requested that we do not send with no recommendation. Kevin Rider: I have said in the past
that you aren't doing your job if you send it with no recommendation. As Mr.Molitor stated,you can't just let it sit here
forever. I think the petitioner's comment to send it with no recommendation,but it's on record the favorable
recommendation vote was 4-3,would be taken into consideration when it is in front of City Council. ,
Brad: The fact is we haven't sent it to Council with any recommendation. It remains with this body until we take action.
IAlan: What was the vote in Committee? Josh: 3-1 with positive recommendation. Alan: Are there any issues that
were not resolved to the Committees' favor, if this went back to the Residential Committee,to work things out and return
it back? Nick: I was the one who voted no for traffic concerns. They did an outstanding job with the rest of the project.
Alan: It sounds like there's no reason to send it back to Committee and to have it come back to generate a new voting
result.
Josh: I understand the concern for traffic. I am happy to discuss our comments about traffic. We have addressed traffic
concerns there with traffic metering. Traffic pressure occurred due to the construction on Gray Rd.The new Lowes Way
overpass that will be completed in near future should address those concerns. The City Engineer's opinion with the
additional wishbone extension to the existing roundabout should alleviate some concerns. Making this a two lane
roundabout would address those concerns during the rush hours. The age demographic in which this development will
attract can address those concerns. All of these things can be factored in. The traffic situation could get better with all of
these factors. Laura: I appreciate the explanation,but I still have concerns about the traffic and I will not change my
vote.
A motion by made by Josh Kirsh and seconded by Susan Westermeier to forward with no recommendation
Docket No. 18070015 PUD Rezone to City Council.
5-2 Motion passes,Campbell,Potasnik,2 absent,Casati,Kegley
2. Docket No. 18100007 OA: UDO Patch Amendment
The applicant seeks to amend the Unified Development Ordinance in order to(A)amend the standards for
Fences,Bufferyards,Parking,Bicycle Parking,General Yard Standards and Waivers of Development Standards;
(B)amend Article 9: Processes and Article 11: Definitions; and(C)correct a variety of errors and omissions from
the conversion to the Unified Development Ordinance format. Filed by the Department of Community Services
on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission.
Petitioner: Adrienne Keeling:
• We discussed the amendments line by line and only a few changes were proposed at the Commercial Committee
7
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 12-18-18