Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 05-18-21 also an additional 10' setback. We will have a 100%TPA for this 50' wooded area. Christine: What will be done at this site? Is there a show room?Will repairs be done? Jon Dobosiewicz: This is simply for storage and detailing.No repairs will be done. Christine: Is there anything that can be done to enhance the architecture design of the building, so it does not look like a warehouse?Jon Dobosiewicz: We can discuss this further with the Committee, but we need some input in what they want. We've done an extensive review of the other buildings in this area and got our ideas from the existing buildings with similar uses as us.Jeff: Are there ways to enhance the architecture and elevations that face 96th Street?Jon Dobosiewicz: We will look into that. Christine: For the detention, will you be creating a new pond? Jon Dobosiewicz: Our detention will be a dry pond. Christine: How is this going to be done and look?The tendencies of a dry pond is to have standing water after a large rain.Jon Dobosiewicz: We will now propose to have this as a wet pond instead of a dry pond. Alan: Can you explain where the drainage and detention will be located(on and off site)and how they will work together?Jon Dobosiewicz: Presents site plan, water will be detained to the new onsite detention pond and transfer to the existing detention pond just north of the Hyundai dealership and it will discharge to an off-site detention at 116' and the Monon. The existing off-site mitigation is north of this area by the Apostolic Faith Church(1212 E 116' St.). Jeff: Is this a legal drain or is there any permit needed from Hamilton County?Bill Butz, Engineer: We are converting the long, linear dry pond,to a wet pond. The site does not drain into a county regulated drain. We have been in communication with the Hamilton County Surveyor's office. Jeff: It looks like the NW dry pond encroaches into the 50' wooded buffer area. I want to make sure there's no conflicts with the TPA. How will these detention ponds be managed? Jon Dobosiewicz: We will address these questions at the Committee meeting. Brad: Will this be open to the public?Any public services done? Or no? Jon Dobosiewicz: Correct, it will not be open to the public. Brad: Functionally, what will be conducted on the south side of the building with the canopy? Jon Dobosiewicz: It's a drop-off area for vehicles to be detailed. We will ask our client to be at the June Committee meeting to further address your question. Brad: For traffic circulation for this site,this drop-off area presents a tight U-turn to exit the site via Randall Drive.Jon Dobosiewicz: We will ask our client to be at the June Committee meeting to address your question. Brad: Can you bring in physical examples or color photos of the colors that will be used on the exterior. How Ihigh are the lighting fixtures?Jon Dobosiewicz: II' in height. Brad: What's the grading difference of this site and the average home site in Williamson Run: Jon Dobosiewicz: It's about a difference of 4'-5'. The LED lights will be facing directly down and will not spill over the north property line. Brad: The Ordinance controls the spill-over of the foot- candle at a property line. Brad: Will the signage only face 96' Street?Can something more attractive be done with the font of the signage instead of large block letters? Something more consistent and complementary to the other buildings in this area would be helpful. The east elevation facing Randall Drive is also important since a lot of people use this street. Josh: I would love to see some naturalized treatment at the bottom of the basin. I appreciate the 50' tree buffer but I would request a naturalized wall of mature arborvitae along the north side and east side of Randall Drive, creating an "L" around this area?Can any percentage of this parking area be pervious instead of impervious? A Motion made by Hill and seconded by Rider to forward PZ-2021-00048 DP/ADLS to the June lst Commercial Committee with the full Plan Commission having final voting authority. Approved 8-0,absent Holle. 2. Docket No.PZ-2021-00062 OA: Gas Station Setback& Standards Amendment The applicant seeks to amend the Unified Development Ordinance in order to amend the standards for Automobile Service Stations and associated definitions. Filed by the Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission. Petitioner: Adrienne Keeling, Department of Community Services: • The purpose of this proposed Ordinance Amendment(OA) is to increase the setback distance of new gas pumps and vent pipes from underground storage tanks from residentially zoned or used properties • DOCS was approached by the Carmel Healthy Neighborhood Alliance about establishing a public health safety zone around new gas stations at a minimum of 500' setback from residentially zoned properties, schools, and other locations where people regularly spend extended periods of time • Proposing to amend UDO section 5.65, automobile service stations. Proposing to add automobile filling station 3 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 5-18-21 • We will amend and streamline several of the definitions in the UDO to help bring consistency across each • The addition of a definition of fossil fuel is intended to encompass several petroleum-based fuels • We are proposing to delete the definition of a convenience store with or without gas pumps. There's no use or zoning district associated with convenience store. We would consider a stand-alone convenience store as retail. • This Ordinance amendment only implies to the B1, B2,B3,B6,B8,and I1 districts because these are the only the zoning districts in the UDO that allow automobile service stations as a permitted use • It will not amend an existing PUD,but these standards could be used for any future PUDs • To date, Staff has received 46 support letters for this OA • Staff recommends that this is continued to the June 1 s"Commercial Committee for further review and discussion Brad: I will summarize the 46 letters we have received to date.All are in support of the proposed 500' safety/buffer zone. Others were concerned of the health risks of the gas vapors. Some reference the State's lack of measures for new gas stations to control the release of vapors. All letters can be viewed in Laserfiche in PZ-2021-00062 OA Public Comments: Alison Brown, 600 W. 106th St.: I'm in favor of this. It is very important we listen to the scientific effects of fossil fuel vapors.It is important we include fossil fuels in the language of the OA. Jackie Phillips, Cannel Healthy Neighborhoods Alliance: I'm in support.Ms. Phillips passed out handouts to PC members. See handout in Laserfiche. Lung cancer,non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,chronic lymphoid leukemia,multiple myeloma, chronic myeloid leukemia, acute myeloid leukemia,and childhood leukemia are all linked to benzene. Benzene is a natural byproduct of gasoline,and it is released at the vents from underground storage tanks, car exhausts,and at gas pumps. I was surprised that Cannel has very limited protections from preventing gas stations from being built near residential areas. Dr.Heather Misra,VOWC resident: In support.As a physician for over 20 years,I've seen firsthand devastation that cancers can cause to individuals and their families.Avoidance is the best medicine. I ask all of you to keep Cannel residents safe by approving this OA. Committee Comments: Kevin: Why can't this OA cover the entire City?Adrienne Keeling: In my opinion, it does cover the entire City. The way the Ordinance is structured,if we were to list all the residential districts in this OA,then that would be contrary in how we list all the other specific uses and guidance. It might give the idea they might be permitted in those districts. Kevin: If someone proposed a PUD,they still could ask to allow a gas station within 500'. I don't want to list specific zoning districts,just make it applicable to the entire City. They would have to ask for a Variance.Adrienne Keeling: We have no other prerequisites or standards that are just City-wide in terms for PUDs.Kevin: This OA is being proposed because of what is happening at the VOWC and the use for a gas station is already permitted in their PUD. So,this OA will have no effect on the VOWC PUD? Adrienne Keeling: Correct. Brad: If we had a city-wide ordinance,prior to granting a building permit,certain standards about the construction of a new gas station have to be met. There are still opportunities and avenues to have the City intervene effectively. Josh: Since we are all in agreement of this OA,can we suspend the Rules of Procedure,vote on it tonight,and send it off to City Council?Christine: I want to make sure the scope is broad enough as possible. I want to make sure we are covering everything that we are intending to encompass.As drafted,the set back is 500 feet from residentially zoned and used property. I think we want to include other types of properties as well such as schools, long term care facilities and day cares. Would there be a way to revise the UDO for a PUD proposal to not waive the 500' setback?Jon Oberlander: I can look further into this.Nick: I want to include schools in this OA. Nick: The gas pump's light flush mounting really doesn't stop the glare. We need recess lighting and not flush mounting. Brad: Does the UDO's use table need to be amended?Adrienne Keeling: The use table is an appendix that follows what is applicable in zoning districts.The use table should remain the same. Brad: The language of this OA lacks a distinction between dispensing and selling.The goal is to address dispensing,which brings in additional uses besides just retail gas stations such as the City's fueling stations for school buses,police dept., or any other departments that needs to fuel its fleet. What about auto dealerships?Do we want this OA to encompass these situations? A filling station that operates in 4 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 5-18-21 conjunction with a grocery store or superstore, is typically a separate business. Those situations are different from a standalone service station and we want to make sure that none ride on the coattails of a grocery store and state they operate as a grocery store. INick: Fossil fuels may have to be explained more in detail since fossil fuels provide the electricity involved in electric car charging stations. Brad:Nick is referencing line 76 of the proposed ordinance, the definition of a filling station, any place of business with pumps and underground storage tanks,having as its purpose of motor fueling fuels, fossil fuels, and lubricants at retail. A Motion made by Kirsh and seconded by Rider to forward PZ-2021-00062 OA to the June Pt Commercial Committee with them having final voting authority. Approved 8-0,absent Holle. 3. Docket No.PZ-2021-00065 OA: Silvara PUD Amendment,Gallagher Parcel 4. Docket No.PZ-2021-00066 Z: Gallagher Parcel Rezone to Silvara PUD 5. Docket No.PZ-2021-00067 PPA: Jackson's Grant Sec 7 Lots 324 and 325 Amendment The applicant seeks a PUD Ordinance Amendment, Rezone, and Primary Plat Amendment approval to add a 0.5- acre piece of property into the Silvara PUD and combine it with lots 324 and 325 of Section 7 at Jacksons Grant. The site is located directly south of 523 Cornwall Ct. It is zoned S-1/Residential. Filed by Doug Wagner of Republic Development on behalf of the future lot owners. Petitioner: Will Turner, future owner of Lot 325: • I'm also speaking on behalf of the future lot owners for lot 324 • It was apparent the half-acre parcel should logically be part of our future lots in Jackson's Grant • I reached out to the property owner and our interests were aligned • On May 6, 2021,the home builders(McKenzie) acquired the parcel on our behalf • There's a 30' tree preservation area(TPA)we agreed to that will follow along the Gallagher perimeter • We agreed through a private deed restriction for an additional 15' landscape buffer just south of the TPA along the subject half acre Brad: In summarizing the two letters that were submitted for this public hearing. One letter stated that the two other adjacent property owners wanted to be treated equally to the seller as related to the landscape easement and buffer. They also stated concerns of the stormwater runoff from these two lots. The other letter was a support letter from Republic Development. These two letters can be viewed in Laserfiche. Public Comments: Bill McComb, 12727 Devon Ln.: We live in the adjacent subdivision, Springmill Streams. I'm also speaking on behalf of the Broderick's(12703 Devon Ln.)We knew the Gallagher parcel existed and it would give us the additional buffer from the Jackson's Grant development. We are asking to be treated equally and would like to have the 15' landscape easement along the rears of our properties. I spoke to Doug Wagner about the drainage. I wanted to make sure there's no runoff from the newly developed lots in Jackson's Grant and there's adequate drainage swells and lines in place. John McKenzie, Homes By McKenzie: I'm going to be the builder on lot 325. We are working with Stoeppelwerth Engineering to ensure that all the stormwater drains in the storm-system and it will not runoff into any neighboring properties. This is a win-win for all surrounding property owners. The landscaping will be done in the newly acquired parcel. We will have trees and it will be properly landscaped and maintained. Chris Lozano: future owner of lot 324. To clarify,the 15' additional landscape buffer was a private agreement with the Gallagher's. The 30' TPA was a preexisting commitment with the Silvara PUD. I Rebuttal to Public Comments: Will Turner: • We did forward the drainage comments from Stoeppelwerth to Staff and it will meet the City's requirements. The City Engineering Dept. will have the final approval before the final plat is completed. Department Report: Alexia Lopez: 5 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 5-18-21