HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-06-21 •
City oof Carmel
--:N-i ce
Carmel Plan Commission
COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE
Tuesday, July 6, 2021 Meeting Agenda
Location: Cannel City Hall Caucus Rooms,2'Floor, 1 Civic Square,Cannel, IN 46032
Members Present: Alan Potasnik(Committee Chairman),Nick Kestner,Kevin Rider,&Jeff Hill.
Staff Present: Rachel Keesling(Planning Administrator),Mike Hollibaugh(DOCS Director),Adrienne Keeling(Planning
Administrator),&Nathan Chavez(Recording Secretary)
Legal Counsel: Paul Reis
Time of Meeting: 6:00 PM
The Commercial Committee meet to review the following items:
1. 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
Cannel Plan Commission.
Petitioners: Adrienne Keeling(Department of Community Services):
• The outstanding issue from the June Pt Commercial Committee(Committee)was how the proposed
additional setback could apply to the Board of Zoning Appeals(BZA)petitions automatically. We have the
various business and industrial districts covered. There is now a paragraph at the bottom of page 2 of the
Submitted Packet(lines 45-47). It reads,"Applicability: In addition to the districts listed above,the
following standards shall also apply to any parcel of land in any district in which an Automobile Service
Station or an Automobile Filling Station is permitted by a Variance of Use granted by the Board of Zoning
Appeals."
• Along with that,we have rearranged the rest of the standards under subsection B titled Standards(Line 48).
The proposed setbacks and lighting standards are contained there.
• Staff recommends the petition is sent to Full Plan Commission(Commission)with Favorable
recommendation after discussion.
Kevin motions to forward Docket PZ-2021-00062 to Plan Commission with Favorable Recommendation,Jeff
seconds,motion passes 4-0.
2. Docket No.PZ-2021-00048 DP/ADLS: Napleton Auxiliary Lot and Detail Center.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a new auxiliary parking lot and detail and service center. The
site is located at 4538 E. 96te Street(north of the Napleton Hyundai dealership).It is zoned B-3/Business District.
Filed by Jon Dobosiewicz and Rick Lawrence of Nelson&Frankenberger on behalf of EFN Crossroads Property,
LLC.
Petitioners:Jim Shinaver(Nelson&Frankenberger),Rick Randstad(Napleton),Fredrick Dryer(Napleton),
Stephanie Day(Napleton),Tim Dament(Napleton Kia),&Bill Butz(Kimley-Horn):
Jim Shinaver:
• We appeared before Commission on May 18th and then appeared before Committee on June 1st
• Tab 2 of the Submitted Packet is the revised site plan. Sidewalk connectivity has been provided between the
southern property line across to the future building site to the proposed service center building.
• We have also added short term bike parking to both the proposed building and the pad that will serve a
future building. Both are located at the southeast corner of each building.
Commercial Committee Minutes 07-06-21 1
• The trash enclosure is located at southwest corner of northern building and does not face Randall Dr.
• The easement along the dry detention pond has been adjusted so that it does not extend into the 50-ft.
wooded buffer.
• The building elevations are included on Tab 3 of the Submitted Packet. The main change is to the east
elevation.Additional windows were added along the east elevation to provide visual interest.Also,the
concrete panels are shown in white, so they are consistent.
• Tab 4 contains the updated landscape plan. Changes include 24 additional evergreen trees along the north
property line. The sidewalk along Randall Dr. is now shown between the street trees and property line. This
was done in conjunction with the Urban Forester to take into account some of the existing trees along the
perimeter, so that the sidewalk will do as little damage as possible to the existing mature trees. Lastly,
additional shrubs were are added to the south along the entrance of Randall Dr.
• Tab 5 shows slight revisions to the lighting plan.The conflicts between the light poles and proposed
sidewalk were resolved. The plan is updated and is in compliance.
• Tab 6 includes the auto turn exhibit showing clearance, so that we may ensure truck transport and
emergency vehicles can access the site appropriately.
• Tab 7 shows the site lines and the differences between the proposed building parking lot, 50-ft. buffer area,
and the first existing house.
• We have worked with Staff to address their outstanding comments and ask for a favorable recommendation
back to Commission.
Department Report: Rachel Keesling:
• The petitioner reviewed all the changes and additions really well. Some other things we talked about
included rotating the building to see if that would help minimize the view of the building onto the
surrounding area.After discussions it was determined that the building is in best place in order to provide
the most parking possible.
• Removal of the access easement on the north side of the pond was important. They are now showing where
most maintenance access will occur,which is in the middle of the drive aisle.
• The sidewalk connections have been added.
• Additional trees along the north side have been added.
• Bike parking has been relocated.
• Windows have been added to the east elevation of the building. They fit with the architecture but are still
very minimal in their impact. What is on the other side of the spaces, is it public space?I remember it was a
concern to have too many windows for the work that was done inside.Can you elaborate how this was
chosen?Fredrick Dryer: It is in part driven by the front elevation. With this design,we have been working
with the precast manufacturer to confirm this is all possible. Originally,we wanted no windows with just
clerestory glass, so that light is a minimal impact. It is important that there is not a glare or uncontrolled
light due to the interior work. That is the impetus. We have added the four windows in the center of the
panels,and they are really fake windows that can be replaced later. One is in the restroom,one is in the
breakroom,which will be an actual window,and the other two are in service bays.It is a security and
functional concern.Out of respect for the comments we received,we are willing to improve the elevation so
that they meet the requirements.Rachel Keesling: Which window is the real one?Fredrick Dryer: The
one to the right of the door. Ideally,they wouldn't exist,but we are willing to work with you all.They
would be spandrel glass.It is window but no light will shine through.Rachel Keesling: For reference,the
BraunAbility building has imprints in areas where windows could be added later if that building were ever
converted.I will welcome the spandrel windows even though they aren't real,they still look like a window.
It can give the illusion of more life. For an area that does not have any architectural standards,they are
doing the best they can to enhance the building.Fredrick Dryer: Again,this is not a public building.
• The final outstanding item is Engineering Department(Engineering)and Hamilton County Surveyor Office
approval. Bill Butz: All of this site drains to Marion County and there is not a Hamilton County regulated
drain. From a drainage standpoint with the City of Cannel,we have responded to all their comments and
there are still a few minor things left. The largest outstanding item is the compensatory storage,and we have
an offsite location in the counts.
• Staff recommends this item is sent back to Plan Commission with Favorable recommendation.
Commercial Committee Minutes 07-06-21 2
Committee Comments:
Alan Potasnik:
• In the Department Report it is mentioned that Engineering and Hamilton County Surveyor Office approval
is needed. Will that be a problem?Rachel Keesling:No.The Surveyors office is releasing their hold on it.
It is not their jurisdiction to govern,and Engineering is always a concern we bring up to remind everyone
that we will continue working through the review process.
Nick Kestner:
• I would still like to see pedestrian access from Randall Dr.Rachel Keesling: I think we could use striping
across the area but with the new sidewalk along Randall Dr.,we have the sidewalk connection which will
go from the building across the drive aisle,add more striping,and then connect to the existing sidewalk that
was installed when the Randall Dr. bypass was installed.Jim Shinaver: We will incorporate some cross
hatch striping on both of those areas for pedestrian safety.Nick Kestner: I know no pedestrian traffic is
planned but you never know.
Kevin Rider:
• I love the connectivity,but sidewalks and trails near trees is the reason I upgraded to suspensions on my
bike.Are we sure the roots from the trees won't tear up the sidewalk?Rachel Keesling: I don't know if we
could ever guarantee that.Kevin Rider: It is a concrete sidewalk or path?Rachel Keesling: Concrete
sidewalk. Kevin Rider: I would like to hear from the Urban Forester that he is confident that the sidewalk
will not be destroyed by the trees. The neighbors even said,"We would rather the trees survive and only
have the sidewalk on the other side."I understand putting a sidewalk on both sides,but unless the Urban
Forester can tell me that he is very confident that the sidewalk will not be destroyed by the trees,I don't
want the sidewalk. Otherwise, it is a waste of money.
• Unloading cars?Is that no longer going to happen on the street?Tim Dament: We are working through
that. Kevin Rider: That is not the answer.Jim Shinaver: The short answer is 'No".Tim Dament: We are
no longer going to unload into the street. Kevin Rider: I am going to come visit you the next time I get a
phone call that there is unloading in the streets. Tim Dament: There is a large distribution channel and there
are thousands of trucking companies and by habit some are unloading on the street. We are catching them as
much as we can to stop this behavior. The new site should help with this as well.Kevin Rider: Do you train
your sales drivers to not drive north?Tim Dament: Yes. I have given my number to the neighboring HOA
for whenever they see the plate back there. The human element is not the one thing I can't control. If they
decide to turn left instead of right.Jim Shinaver: I will email the Department of Community Services
(Staff)and you,Tim's contact information so it is on file.
Jeff motions to forward Docket PZ-2021-00048 to Plan Commission with Favorable Recommendation,Kevin
seconds,motion passes 4-0.
3. Docket No.PZ-2021-00040 DP/ADLS: Mexican Restaurant at Legacy.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a new restaurant. The site is located at 7299 E 146th St.
between Community Drive and Beallsville Drive. It is zoned PUD(Legacy Z-501-07).Filed by Tami Lakes of
Versatile Construction Group,LLC on behalf of Don Rigo Properties LLC.
Petitioners: Trent Baxter(Versatile Construction Group,LLC):
• We feel that we have answered almost all of Staff's comments.
• A variance(PZ-2021-00100 V)was applied for to allow a third sign.It was denied and now we are
proposing to move the sign along Hopewell Pkwy.to where the main entrance is. Staff is in favor of this.
• The only remaining issue is with the light packs illuminating the westside parking lot. There is an existing
light pole there from when the road was built. It is being removed.We are now determining the best way to
light that parking lot without spilling over into the neighbor.
Department Report: Rachel Keesling:
• Three variances were seen at the BZA. Two were approved.The first was for front yard setback(PZ-2021-
00105 V),similar to the Yellow Dog Veterinary Clinic(PZ-2021-00011 DP/ADLS). This building is pulled
a little closer to the street.The parking variance was also approved(PZ-2021-00105 V). They were only
Commercial Committee Minutes 07-06-21 3
seven spaces short for the restaurant. Signage was denied,but they are allowed two signs because they have
two Street Frontages.
• Staff still has a concern about the lighting. The petitioner did add the decorative wooden brackets
underneath the gable which adds a level of sophistication to the building design. The wall packs are still
there but they seem to take away from the ambiance that would be created by all of the sconces on the
building. Staff feels there is a different way to light this side of the parking lot because we typically don't
just have down lighting from the building. I propose that we don't install these lights now and if something
were to become an issue in the future with regards to lack of illumination,then we should look at it then.
Maybe it will need to cross over the property lines,which would be commercial to commercial.We would
be supportive of that. Since it is a shared entry,we could maybe relocate the light pole further into the
parking area. I think we could do something else beside the wall pack lights to light up this area. We can
design it to have the appropriate brightness without large lights shinning down into people.It is a shared
entry drive on the west side of the building. We could work with the next property owner over to relocate it.
Trent Baxter: We can do one on the north side landscape island or down on the south side.Our concern
was the foot-candles at the property line. If we are allowed to go over then we would be okay.Rachel
Keesling: Staff can work with you. Trent Baxter: We tried painting the wall packs to match the color of
the building so that they would only standout at night.Rachel Keesling: Maybe we could do less on the
elevation.
• Engineering final approval is still needed.
• Staff recommends approval, subject to the lighting concern and finalizing all the ProjectDox comments.
Committee Comments:
Alan Potasnik:
• Can you address the lighting issue again?Illumination of those wall lights,which I assume were added for a
reason,but I wonder if eliminating those, does that pose a security or safety issue?Trent Baxter: It will be
pretty dark if I eliminate those lights.There will be some sconce lighting but it is not enough. I think once I
am able to go across the property line with more foot-candles than allowed,that should work. Or if I could
work with the neighbor.Kevin Rider: We can get rid of the wall lights if you are allowed to put one or two
pole lights in?Rachel Keesling: The issue is,with the 0.5 foot-candles at the property line.Kevin Rider:
We can work with that. It is commercial and you are not shining it into someone else's living room.Would
it be on at each end?Trent Baxter: Yes.Kevin Rider: Would you be comfortable then without the wall
lighting?Trent Baxter: Absolutely.Kevin Rider: Staff?Rachel Keesling:Yes. If you look at the street
view,there are streetlights along Hopewell Pkwy. They are not on the north side of the site.Kevin Rider:
Are they going to install them on the north side?Rachel Keesling: Yes,as part of their project.
Kevin motions to approve PZ-2021-00040 subject to finalizing the lighting plan and completion of ProjectDox
comments,Jeff seconds,motion passes 4-0.
4. Docket No.PZ-2021-00075 DP/ADLS: Bank of America—The Bridges.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a new bank branch on a new outlot within The Bridges. The
site is generally located at the SW corner of Illinois Street and Zotec Drive,with a planned address of 11530 N.
Illinois Street. It is zoned PUD—The Bridges(Z-550-11). Filed by Jon Sheidler of Woolpert on behalf of JLL.
Petitioners: Jon Sheidler(Woolpert),Brian Ma(JLL),Trent Burchett(Woolpert),Bill Arnold(BoA),Laurie
Pfeiffer(CBRE Property Manager),Kevin Curry(RS&H),&Buzz Weisiger(Gerhman Partners):
Jon Sheidler:
• There was one small addition to signage on the building elevations. Kevin Curry: We added percentages
for signage and the Spandrel Panels to the elevations. We were also asked to add a prairie style detail to the
facade. We chose a prairie flower detail that will be added to the elevations, specifically at each transition
point and adjacent to the signage. The rear of the building looked a little plain, so we added two additional
windows and extended the canopy over them.
• We provided a colored landscape plan(page 10 of the Submitted Packet)to better illustrate what is
proposed.
• The biggest change is removal of eight parking spaces. There are four along the north and four to the south
of the building that were removed. It was asked by us to increase the green space because there is so much
Commercial Committee Minutes 07-06-21 4
parking.We especially emphasized the landscaping at the round-a-bout.
• Kevin Curry: Page 14 contains an elevation plan with the site lines/views. The plan is based on a recent
survey elevation height showing that the roof top units will be obstructed by the parapet. They will not be
visible from the main road or any of the drives.
Committee Comments:
Kevin Rider:
• Where is the water in the Bridges?Brian Ma: We purchased this development as is in 2017.I can't speak
to what was promised when it was delivered. There were no plans or requirements to add anything.Kevin
Rider: Staff,whatever did happen with the Bridges and the water?Rachel Keesling: There are power lines
running around the edges of the property where they planned on putting them. Kevin Rider: And we didn't
know that?Rachel Keesling: I am not sure but that is why the river rock design is there.Buzz Weisiger:
There was an easement there,but nobody knew the details about how it would be enforced. Duke wouldn't
allow anything in there. They even restricted the trees.
• I like the Lou Malnati's but I don't like driving into the site off of 116th St. It feels like I'm driving south of
96th St.Is there any intention to improve the maintenance of the entrances?Brian Ma: We are aware that
there are some pavers that require maintenance.Laurie Pfeiffer: We have been reviewing alternate product
for that. The pavers installed are smaller and have never fared very well. We have looked into stamped
concrete or a different kind of paver. This past winter was bad for the pavers because it warmed then froze
and warmed again.It also rained a lot.No maintenance was done last year because of COVID. Kevin
Rider: Is there a timeline to fix the issue?Brian Ma: I don't have an exact timeline at this time.Laurie
Pfeiffer: We are working with Midwest Landscaping on this.Kevin Rider: Mike is there any code
enforcement issue with the disrepair?Mike Hollibaugh: Enforcement of the pavement has been done in the
past and we can add it to the list.Kevin Rider: I would like to see a timeline due to the volume of
complaints.Is there a requirement for pavers or can another heartier product be used?Mike Hollibaugh:
They will need to work with Engineering for a right-of-way permit. Laurie Pfeiffer: I noticed at the Illinois
St. and Fidelity Way roundabout a similar brick paver was used. We are interested in that and it makes
sense to make it all the same. Kevin Rider: Let's get that process started. Buzz Weisiger: A similar issue
arose at Hamilton Town Center and we replaced them with clay.Jeff Hill: Is it reasonable to request that
this happen before the next winter?Kevin Rider: I would like to see it completed in this construction cycle.
Brian Ma: We will do our best.Kevin Rider: I would like a commitment with a"Yes",not a"We will do
our best."Often that just means it won't happen. Brian Ma: I can't guarantee it,because it depends on
materials and construction,but we will get it done.Alan Potasnik: Are you worried about moving forward
with approval on this without some sort of commitment?Kevin Rider: I have an issue with approving when
I don't see the property being taken of appropriately,yes.Alan Potasnik: This is an issue we have dealt
with,perhaps not necessarily with your project,but we are here to approve additional items to the site. And
when we don't have commitment on something that needs to be maintained, it makes it troublesome to
approve something new if we don't know if that will go the way Committee would like to see. Brian Ma: I
hear you,but I cannot guarantee a timeline at this point. If we are unable to get this done in 6 months,do we
need to sign some document?It is our desire to keep this as a classic property and repair and maintain it as a
Class A retail center. We have started working on landscaping and the pavers our on our to-do list. We can
do it by the end of the year but again its my word at this point.Alan Potasnik: So,you are saying it will be
done by the end of the year.Brian Ma: I will.Yes.Kevin Rider: I have confidence on a working relation
from projects Buzz has worked on in the past.If you come and tell me"I cannot get the clay product by the
end of the year."I will understand that.Can you find out and let us know?Buzz Weisiger: Yes.
Nick Kestner:
• The water feature is not maintained really well,and it does gets ugly. Laurie Pfeiffer: Every year when we
turn the water back on there is something wrong with the pump. I have a few companies working to repair
them. The ponds are narrow and shallow which complicates things.Nick Kestner: Maybe it is time to
redesign it.
• At the northeast corner where the roundabout is,the path to the other side is not ADA compliant.Jon
Sheidler: We received a comment from David Littlejohn,the Alternative Systems Administrator,asking to
make that an ADA connection.There is one on the south side.Rachel Keesling: So,you will be doing that?
Jon Sheidler: I believe so,yes.Rachel Keesling: the path along the west side of Illinois St.will be
Commercial Committee Minutes 07-06-21 5
extended around the northeast corner of the site. All the parking spaces will be removed along the Fidelity
Way will be removed. The sidewalk will be 5-ft.Nick Kestner: It should be 6-ft.Rachel Keesling: The
minimum PUD requirement is 5-ft.Jon Sheidler: The path up to the intersection is wider to meet the path
requirement. It is 10-ft. and then a 6-ft. sidewalk.
Kevin Rider:
• Are you looking at many more outlots?I remember a bank being a part of the original concept.Are there
any other outlots planned for these large parking lots that the grocery store asked for?Brian Ma: There was
only one potential outlot when we acquired the property. The Bank of America opportunity presented itself
and Giant Eagle was on board as well. On the other side of the lot there is potential for a pad lot.At this
point in time there is nothing marketed and not contemplated,but there is potential down the road. Kevin
Rider: If there is potential, it is contemplated.Rachel Keesling: Can you be more specific of the location?
Brian Ma: It would be the exact opposite side of the parking lot along Spring Mill.
Alan Potasnik:
• Will there be a drive-thru,where it says, 'Do Not Enter'?Rachel Keesling: Yes.Alan Potasnik: Will that
be difficult to see?On Page 12 it looks like the same color as the building. Trent Burchett: Most likely it
will be white.It will be visible. Rachel Keesling: Staff will make sure it is visible and I would not be
concerned about it.
Jeff Hill:
• The Department Report includes Engineering approval as a remaining concern. Can you speak to those
specifically?Rachel Keesling: They are typically the last department that needs to sign off. I usually
always include Engineering as an outstanding comment to make sure everyone is aware that they still have
to review the final finish floor elevations,flood routing,and ponding elevations.Not major concerns
because the whole area was master planned and the site drains into one pond.
• You spoke about the site being overparked.Could further parking removal transpire to make it less intense,
help with drainage,and green up the space?We have heard some feedback but was not necessarily
addressed. Rachel Keesling: They did remove eight spaces, specifically on the north portion of the lot and
to the south of the drive-thru to screen the back side of the building. Could they lose more parking?
Probably. If we think they should we could recommend that tonight.I don't think we will get the overall
gathering green space with this project,but they can make incremental changes to have a greater overall
impact.
Alan Potasnik:
• I don't think anybody wants to see them make a gathering amenity,but to Jeff's point, if it is overparked
and we replace spaces for landscaping as you suggested,would that make a difference to the overall
aesthetic of the site?Rachel Keesling: I think it would certainly beautify the site.It could provide another
area for people to gather if it wasn't landscaped too much. They probably need some benches or picnic
tables.I don't know if the petitioner would want to do that?Or maybe they could provide amenities if the
landscaping was made available?Laurie Pfeiffer: That is something we need to discuss internally. Since
you are wanting some additional green space,we would want to collaborate on this.Alan Potasnik: It
would be nice to add this to this site.Jeff Hill: It would be a way to soften it up. My overall recollection is
the big parking lot is overparked and even this proposed parking lot is overparked. I am sympathetic to the
petitioner wanting as much parking as possible but if it is already significantly over what is required.
Rachel Keesling: Per the standards,yes. 16 spaces are required per our standards and 40 spaces are
available in this acre site.Alan Potasnik: Can you work with them before we go to back to Commission on
this?Rachel Keesling: First we should make sure the petitioner is agreeable to losing three additional
spaces. Trent Burchett: I don't see an issue with this.Rachel Keesling: Staff will look at converting the
western parking spaces to green space.And then work together to adjust the landscaping to create a small
amenity area.
Jeff motions to forward Docket PZ-2021-00075 to Plan Commission with Favorable Recommendation subject
to the addition of additional green space and finalizing of outstanding Staff comments,Nick seconds,motion
passes 3-1,Kestner.
Commercial Committee Minutes 07-06-21 6
5. Docket No.PZ-2021-00110 ADLS Amend: Schwab Investment Office—Remodel.
The applicant seeks design approval to remodel the former Rodizio Grill restaurant into an office.The site is located
at 2375 East 116th Street within the Merchants Pointe development.It is zoned B-8 and is within the Keystone
Overlay District. Filed by Jerry Williams of Strongbox Co. on behalf of the owner.
Petitioners:Jerry Williams(Strongbox Commercial):
Jerry Williams:
• This property was initially a Macaroni Grill and most recently a Rodizio Grill.
• This petitioner is primarily refacing the building. There are some mechanical reworks but is interior.
• We are reusing the existing landscaping.
• The lighting will exist as is.The current pole colors will remain.
• Everything else on the building will change. It is all metal panels,glass,and stacked stone.
• We did show signage locations but those will be produced for approval at a later date.
• Staff's only question was the back regarding the tan panels.If the owners are willing to switch to a light
grey panel would that be acceptable?There is a lot of white currently.Rachel Keesling: Light grey would
be better than tan.What was the reasoning behind it?Jerry Williams: It is one of their corporate colors.
Rachel Keesling: If we incorporate it more somewhere else,then it wouldn't seem out of place.Jerry
Williams: It was at one point,but they changed things around. This is revision one of about 20.
• A lot of glass was added to the building for the storefront.All the field stone is gone. The parapet metal cap
is shifting another 3-ft.higher.We did not go much higher on the front.It is as high as the existing building.
• We are going to mill and resurface the parking lot,restripe,patch,and repair all the bad spots as well.
• We will probably lose all the landscaping along the side of the building because we are refacing the building
but will replant to the existing landscaping plan.
• One comment in ProjectDox was that there is an existing landscaping plan other than what we've shown.
This is what we found from the old prints.
Department Report: Rachel Keesling:
• Where is the bike parking?Jerry Williams: It is on C-100 right in front of the entrance.Rachel Keesling:
Perfect.
• Jerry Williams:ADA parking was reduced to two because that is all that is required by code for this use.
We will restripe all the standard stalls.
• My second comment concerns the tan colors on the rear of the building which will be switched to light grey.
That will look much better,and I'll be happy to work with you on that.
• This area of town has no architectural guidelines. It is within the Keystone Overlay but has no architecture
standards.
• It will be a great use for the area and nice to have an active tenant.
• They meet the parking standards.
• Signage will have to come back at a later date.Only three signs are allowed.If they choose to use the
Ground sign,then they cannot have three Wall signs.Jerry Williams: They will probably ask for a
variance.
• Staff recommends approval of this project tonight.
Committee Comments:
Jeff Hill: I saw parking was dimensioned at 18' x 9'. Is parking supposed to be 18' x 10' or 20' x 9' for 180 sq. ft.
or this okay?Rachel Keesling: 18' x 9' and 10' x 20' is okay.
Nick motions to approve Docket PZ-2021-00110 subject to addressing all outstanding Staff concerns&
finalizing all ProjectDox comments,Jeff seconds,motion passes 4-0.
14 eeting adjourned at 7:18 PM.
Al/CPP.
Nathan Chavez Recording Secretary A n Po snik Committee Chairman
Commercial Committee Minutes 07-06-21 7