Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCM-04-10-00 CAR~IEL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, APRIL 10, 2000 -7:00 P.~I. COUNCIL CtLA_~IBERS / CITY tLA_LL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE MEETING CALLED TO ORDER 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. INVOCATION 10. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RECOGNITION OF CITY E~IPLOYEES AND OUTSTANDING CITIZENS APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. March 18, 2000 - Special Meeting b. March 20, 2000 - Regular Meeting RECOGNITION OF PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL COUNCIL, ~L~YORAL AND CLERK-TREASURER CO~I~IENTS/OBSERVATIONS ACTION ON MAYORAL VETOES CLAI~IS · Pa_~roll · General Claims · Retirement CO~I~IITTEE REPORTS a. Administration Committee b. Annexation and Land Use Committee c. Economic Development Committee d. Finance Committee e. Parks & Recreation Committee f. Public Safety Committee g. Rules Committee h. Utilities and Transportation Committee OLD BUSINESS Second Reading, Ordinance D-1453-00; An Ordinance Adopting and Adding Chapter Article 5, Section 8-70 to the Carmel City Code (re: Hauling of Rubbish, Waste Debris, etc.); Mayor James Brainard 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Second Readino Ordinance D-1454-00; An Ordinance Amending Chapter 8, Article 5, Section 8-47 of the Carmel City Code (re: Three-Hour Parking Limit in City Parking Lots); Mayor James Brainard Second Readin~ Ordinance D-1455-00; An Ordinance Adopting and Adding Chapter 9, Article 5, Section 9-217 to the Carmel City Code (re: Underpound Placement of Utility Lines); Mayor James Brainard Resolution CC-03-20-00-02; Authorizing the Amendment and Transfer of a Cable Television Franchise; Mayor James Brainard (Tabled at 3' 20' O0 ,~feeting) Resolution CC-03-20-00-03; Rejecting Request to Consent to the Transfer of a Cable Television Franchise; Mayor James Brainard (Tabled at 3'20'O0,~feeting) PUBLIC HEARINGS a. First Readina Ordinance D-1458-00; An Ordinance Providing for an Additional Appropriation of Funds from the General Fund Operating Balance ($245,916 from Genera3 Fund to Council, Police and Board of Public WorE); Diana Cordray, Clerk- Treasurer *published in the Daily Ledger Thursday ~farch 30, 2000 and Thursday April 6, 2000 b. First Readin~ Ordinance Z-344; An Ordinance Establishing the 146th Street and Ke_vstone Avenue Planned Unit Development District; Mark Monroe, Reis Law Firm *published in the Daily Ledger Friday ~farch 3], 2000 NEW a. BUSINESS First Readino Ordinance D-1459-00; An Ordinance Approving an Interlocal A~eement with Hamilton County, Indiana, and Approving a Joint Road Construction Project (re: 146th Street and U.S. 31 Project); Councilor Luci Snyder Resolution CC-04-10-00-01; A Resolution Approving Certain Changes to the Carmel.'Clay Comprehensive Plan (96th Street Corridor Study); Mike Hollibaugh, City of Carmel Long Range Planner OTHER BUSINESS ANNOUNCE~IENTS EXECUTION OF DOCU~IENTS 16. ADJOURN~IENT CAR~IEL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, APRIL 10, 2000 - 7:00 P.~I. COUNCIL CI-IA~IBERS / CITY HALL / ONE CIVIC SQUARE ME~IBERS PRESENT: Mayor James Brainard; Council Members Keyin Kirby, John Koven, Norm Rundie, Luci Snyder and Wayne Wilson; Clerk-Treasurer Diana Cordray and Deputy Clerks Cartie Groce and Robin Butler also artended. Councilors Bob Battreall and Ron Carlet were absent. Mayor Brainard called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. Councilor Wilson pronounced the invocation. Mayor Brainard led the Pledge of Allegiance. RECOGNITION OF CITY E~IPLOYEES AND OUTSTANDING CITIZENS There were none. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Councilor Wilson moved to approve the minutes of the March 18, 2000 Special Meeting. Councilor Koven seconded. The minutes were approved 5-0. Councilor Wilson moved to approve the minutes of the March 20, 2000 Regular Meeting. Councilor Snyder seconded. Mayor Brainard stated that the reference to stare law on Page 3, Para~aph 2, Line 4 under New Business should read federal law. The minutes were approved 5-0. RECOGNITION OF PERSONS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL: Barbara Richards of 934 Shea addressed the Council providing a public service announcement from the League of Women Voters regarding the Candidate Forums County Elections. Dick Frost of 507 Stonehedge Drive addressed the Council regarding Publication 17 and distributed copies to Council. George Meissner of 207 Rockberry Drive addressed the Council in opposition of Ordinance No. Z-344. See attached Exhibit Briane House of Indianapolis Power & Light asked to be heard regarding Ordinance No. D- 1455-00 if said Ordinance was to be acted upon at this meeting. COUNCIL~ ~L~xYORAL AND CLERK-TREASURER CO~I~IENTS/OBSERVATIONS: There were none. CLAI~IS: Councilor Snyder moved to approve Claims in the amounts of $220,102.26, $247,836.23, $269,600.26, $25,853.13, $410,584.82, $6,193.89, $226,959.44 and $1,030,113.87. Council President Rundle moved to amend the second and third claim amounts to reflect $247,981.23 and $262,760.26. Councilor Wilson seconded the motions to change and approve. Claims were approved 5-0. CO~I~IITTEE REPORTS: Councilor Koven stated that the Administration Committee will have its first meeting on Thursday, April 13, 2000 at 10:00 a.m. inthe Caucus Room. Councilor Snyder reported that the Annexation and Land Use Committee met with Woodland Country Club and asked them to address the 116th Street changes. Councilor Snyder then presented her observations to the Carmel Plan Commission. Councilor Wilson stated that the Economic Development Committee will meet on Monda_v, April 17, 2000 at 6:00 p.m in the Caucus Room. Council President Rundie stated that the Finance Committee met regarding the special appropriation which will be discussed later in the meeting. Councilor Koven stated that the committee also tabled an ordinance regarding special fees for building permits. Council President Rundie stated that the Chairman for the Parks and Recreation Committee was not present. He said that the committee discussed the fact that the City is now in a development phase and not an acquisition phase in regards to ParE. He stated the committee also discussed re-evaluation of Park Impact Fees. Utilities and Transportation Committee. Councilor Kirby stated their first meeting is Friday, April 14, 2000 at 8:00 a.m. in the Caucus Room. He also requested that a meeting of the Rules Committee meeting be scheduled, perhaps early next week OLD BUSINESS: Council President Rundie introduced Ordinance D-1453-00; An Ordinance Adopting and Adding Chapter 8, Article 5, Section 8- 70 to the Cannel City Code (re: Hauling of Rubbish, Waste Debris, etc.); Ma_vor Brainard distributed an amended copy of the ordinance and reviewed the changes. Councilor Wilson stated that the Public Safety Committee requested this ordinance be tabled because it wouldn't be effective until an uncertain later date. There was Council discussion regarding the ordinance. Councilor Kirby moved to disapprove, then withdrew the motion after discussion of the appropriateness of such a motion. Ma_vor Brainard stated that his intent by introducing this ordinance was to draw attention to this issue. Ordinance D-1453-00 was defeated 0-5. Councilor Kirby expressed his disapproval of the Ma_vor using the Council for publicity. Council President Rundie introduced Ordinance D-1454-00; An Ordinance Amending Chapter 8, Article 5, Section 8-47 of the Carmel City Code (re: Three-Hour Parking Limit in City Parking Lots); Councilor Wilson reported that the Public Safety Committee Recommended passage of this ordinance. Ordinance D-1454-00 was approved 5-0. Council President Rundie introduced Ordinance D-1455-00: An Ordinance Adopting and Adding Chapter 9, Article 5, Section 9-217 to the Carmel City Code (re: Underground Placement of Utility Lines); Councilor Snyder moved to introduce the ordinance into business. Council President Rundie seconded. Ma_vor Brainard explained the ordinance and asked that the ordinance be tabled. Councilor Wilson reported that the Public Safety Committee asked that this ordinance be transferred to the Utilities and Transportation committee. Councilor Snyder recommended that the Ma_vor work with the Utilities and Transportation Committee and the Utility Company. There was Council discussion regarding the appropriateness of tabling the ordinance. Council President Rundie referred Ordinance D-1455-00 to the Utilities and Transportation Committee. Council President Rundle introduced Resolution CC-03-20-00-02; Authorizing the Amendment and Transfer of a Cable Television Franchise; Mayor Brainard delivered an amended version of the resolution and a letter from Comcast (Exhibit B) to the Council members and explained the amendments. David A. Wilson, Area Vice President of Comcast was available for questions. There was Council discussion regarding the change of the City's cable company. Councilor Kirby proposed that a separate fund be maintained for cable revenue and expenses. Clerk-Treasurer Cordray stated that a separate fund is not necessary and that the amounts can be easily tracked. Resolution CC-03-20-00-02 was approved4-1. Councilor Wilson voted against the resolution. Resolution CC-03-20-00-03; Rejecting Request to Consent to the Transfer of a Cable Television Franchise was not entered into business. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Council President Rundie introduced Ordinance D-1458-00; An Ordinance providing for an Additional Appropriation of Funds from the General Fund Operating Balance ($245,916 from General Fund to Council, Police and Board of Public WorE); Councilor Kirby moved to introduce and to waive the reading of the ordinance. Councilor Koven seconded. Council President Rundie reviewed the amounts listed in the ordinance. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:10 p.m. Seeing no one who wished to speak the Public Hearing was closed at 9:10 p.m. Clerk Treasurer Diana Cordray stated that the amounts advertised did not match the amounts listed in the ordinance. Councilor Wilson moved to delete the Regional Transportation Authority amount since it was omitted from the total advertised. Councilor Snyder seconded. The amendment was approved 5-0. Councilor Snyder moved to amend the total to $245,916 to reflect the aforementioned change. Councilor Wilson seconded. The amendment was approved 5-0. The amended amount will be considered in a separate ordinance. Council President Rundie introduced Ordinance Z-344; An Ordinance Establishing the 146th Street and Keystone Avenue Planned Unit Development District; Councilor Wilson moved to introduce the ordinance into business. Councilor Snyder seconded. Paul Reis, Reis Law Firm, explained the ordinance and made a presentation to the Council. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:35 p.m. Seeing no one who wished to speak the Public Hearing was closed at 9:36 p.m. Councilor Kirby spoke for the Plan Commission Special Study. Council President Rundie wants something in writing from the Plan Commission. There was Council Discussion. Councilor Koven commended the Kite Corporation for their hard work on the proposal. Councilor Rundie asked Mr. Meissner to submit a copy of his notes to the Clerk-Treasurer for inclusion in the minutes. Councilor President Rundie referred Ordinance Z-344 to the Annexation and Land Use Committee to be broupdat back to Council at the April 17th meeting. NEW BUSINESS: Council President Rundie introduced Ordinance D-1459-00: An Ordinance Approving an Interlocal A~eement with Hamilton Count_v, Indiana and Approving a Joint Road Construction Project (re: 146th Street and U.S. 31 Project); Michael Howard, on behalf of the Hamilton County Commission, explained and gave a presentation to the Council. Mr. Howard stated that when Hazel Dell Parkway was built, the Mayor pointed out that there needed to be a contribution from the Cum Bridge Fund. The County had set the abandoned bridge for repairs in 2001 in the amount of $392,000.00. This A~eement requires payment from the County to the City of C armel. There w as further C ounci 1 dis cuss ion of the ordinance. The A~eement was si~ed by the County Commissioners this evening. Si~ed copies were distributed. Council President Rundie referred Ordinance D-1459-00 to the Annexation and Land Use Committee to be brought back to Council at the April 17th meeting. There was discussion regarding the TIF area. Council President Rundle introduced Resolution CC-04-10-00-01; A Resolution Approving Certain Changes to the Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan (96th Street Corridor Study); Councilor Kirby moved to introduce the resolution. Councilor Snyder seconded. Mike Hollibaugh, Department of Community Services, explained the content of the resolution. Questions from the Council were addressed by John Myers with Parsons Brinkerhoff and Sharon Clark, County Commissioner, District 1. Resolution CC- 04-10-00-01 was approved 5-0. OTHER BUSINESS: Councilor Kirby commented on the article from the Daily Ledger regarding the Arts Festival. There was Council discussion. ADJOURNMENT: Councilor Snyder moved to adjourn the meeting, pending the execution of documents. Councilor Koven seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 10:37 p.m. Attest: ~C/jor Clerk-Treasurer Diana L. , C Respectfully submitted, C1 . y, IAMC /g~ayor James rainard ,/ EXHIBIT A pg 1/4 April 10, 2000 Members of Carmel City Council, Mayor Brainard, and guests: I am here tonight to speak out against the proposal to locate a Lowes retail store in the overlay zone along the northern boundary of Keystone up to 146th st. The plot is currently zoned for residential use and limited commercial that meet the restrictions on the Meridian and Keystone overlay zoning. I have lived in Carmel for the past 8 years, not as long as some of you but longer than others. In that time, there have been many many attempts to build nonconforming retail outlets along these two major north south highways. Each time, Planning boards, Board of Zoning appeals and sometimes even eventually this body has seen fit to deny the proposal. The community has always backed these decisions, even in the face of some fierce opposition by developers. Even as we speak, there are several proposals under way in addition to the one we are speaking to tonight for more commercial development along these corridors. Tonight you have the opportunity to once again vote your individual and collective conscience about the future of this community. You can vote this proposal to a second and final reading at the next meeting or you can say NO! No to this kind of encroachment on our limited land yet to be developed. To date we have encouraged development of campus style office buildings along these highways. That has brought us good jobs, people who earn incomes sufficient to allow them to live in the community, jobs having good benefit packages. Compare that to what we are being offered tonight, a big box retailer offering lots of minimum wage part time jobs with no benefits. It is conceivable that not even the Lowes store management team will earn enough to buy a home here in Carmel. Do we really want to have this kind of development when we have so little virgin land left to develop? Some history of the Lowes stores. Lowes operates over 500 stores at last count in some 35 states. They plan to open over 100 stores in the next 2 years mostly in the West but also in some of the larger communities in their existing locations. Since 1990, Lowes has concentrated on getting rid of their smaller stores and building stores that are considerable bigger, Today Lowes strives to build stores in excess of 115,000 sq ft with another 35-50,000 sq ft of enclosed area devoted to lawn and garden merchandise. Compare these numbers to those proposed here tonight. The proposal is for a store approximately 10-15% smaller than Lowes typical new store. They'normally carry over 40,000 items. Do they promise to reduce their stock or inventory by . 10-15%? No I think despite what we are told tonight, Lowes has many years of experience in how to build and stock their stores. They know what they want. Tonight not Lowes, but a developer is here to tell you what a few of you want to hear. The records from the many presentations made to the Planning Commission speaks for itself Each time the developer came back with a new proposal until finally, he was able to convince 9 members, not a unanimous decision by any stretch of the imagination to act on this with a favorable recommendation. City staff in the Department of Community Development sent the proposal on to you with a negative recommendation, and 1 quote " Character and use proposed by this petition are 2/4 disparate with the planning policies for the US31 corridor as well as fundamentally inconsistent with the deliberate limitation of pure retail in the Corridor." These are strong words coming from a city planning department. They would seem to say in the strongest way possible NO to this proposal. . Yet here we are tonight still talking about it. We should remind Council that they were elected to provide the community with leadership and vision for the future. Tn 1993, city council passed an ordinance to allow developers to submit requests for rezoning to allow for multi-use development. The ordinance was intended to permit homes on smaller plots but with more open common areas instead of large lots; some other types of housing was allowed as well. It made sense then and still does today. The term to describe this type of development "Planned Unit Development" just happens to be the one used tonight to describe the proposal to build a Lowes retail store in the Keystone SR431 overlay zone. Don't be mislead for one minute. This is a proposal to build a big box retail store on a piece of vacant land that for 30 plus years has been held sacrosanct from this type of retail operation. It in no way meets the intent of the ordinance passed in 1993 for a P.UD. lfit looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck. Well this proposal looks like a proposal to build a retail store in the overlay zone so lets not be fooled by trying to pass it off as a P.U.D. In phase two, there is a plan to build another retail store on this site. At first we were told it was to be a Kroger store. On your plans it shows as a grocery store of 60,000 sq ft. Most grocery stores being built today are in excess of 100,000 sq ft. Maybe this site could contain a Village Pantry type store but nothing akin to a Marshor Kroger. Tn addition we already have all major b'Tocery chains located in nice new large stores. Do we really need another one on this site? Some people on the Planning Commission visited one of the newest Lowes stores located here in Indianapolis. A Lowes store is not hard to find. They spend millions of dollars annually to make sure that customers will recognize their store and not mistake it for a competitors. Do you think for one minute they will deviate from that concept? 1 rather doubt it. I think that regardless of any commitments made here tonight by people not from Lowes management, Lowes will operate this store and any other store they may build in exactly the same manner as they do today. Why not? It has proven to be a successful strategy and we would be naive to think otherwise. Their comments as quoted in the Star after visiting the store were interesting and to some extent reflects their over all confidence in the promises and commitments of the developer and owners of the land. Do not rely on these promises. They may be made in good faith but they are not made by the people who will have the ultimate say so in operating this store. One quote was regarding Mr. Kite and his willingness to answer complaints over store operation. His answer was that he was fully prepared to do so. My response is that once the complaints start to come in Mr. Kite will be unavailable to any and all, including the press and even you councilors. His job is to get this approved and once that is done he will go on to bigger and better assignments. He might be returning to ask for a Super Wal-Mart or maybe a Home Depot or even a Super K-Mart, none of which is out of the question. We have none of these in Carmel yet but r have no doubt they would be willing to locate here. . . 3/4 Another quote: "If this were the Lowes store in Glendale, [' d vote against it. Well for all we can say for certain, it is the same company Lowes and I am willing to bet that they will operate this store in Carmel as they do aU the other 500 stores they control. Another quote; "They have goods spread over a vast area. It seems almost impossible for Lowes to be able to keep all the promises that have been made once they open for business. Isn't that interesting. Two people on the Planning Commission, one is a councilman I might add, even say they have reservations about letting Mr. Kite the developer build the store. They don't even restrict their comments to this location. They specifically say Carmel, the whole city. The commitments made in this proposal are quite interesting and I would trust that each of you are familiar with all of them. As a matter of law they are promises, not binding under law. The one about no deliveries between 8 PM and 8 AM. How would you enforce that? Another one states that the buildings wiU be constructed in substantial compliance with the plans on file with DOCS. What exactly does that mean? Who will make the determination that they are in compliance, you, me, another citizen? and if they are not, then what? There is a statement regarding an off ramp and an on ramp from Keystone to serve this development. Why was this information not included in their proposal? To date there has been nothing publicized about any new road construction coming off Keystone. There was a traffic study done in November 99 to show the impact of additional traffic into and around this proposed development. It attempted to do projections out into the future as far out as 2020. The conclusion was that there is already a bad situation there with below satisfactory levels of service especiaUy during the morning and evening rush hours. I hope we did not spend much money for the study. It only confirms what many of us could have told you today. That the intersection and merging roads in the area of SR43 I , US31 and 146 st and Greyhound Pass are overloaded today and will only get worse as each day passes until such time as US 3 I and 43 I become upgraded to Interstate status. If you permit additional retail activity in this area, you will only exacerbate the problem. Even the concept of the ramp system being proposed will not help matters, the ramps are only 75% of the lenl,>th recommended in the study. In every case, the levels of service as determined in the study were from level C to level F, i.e. vehicle wait time from 15 seconds with a significant number being in the queue to delays over 60 seconds, a condition referred to as over saturation with long cycle delays. I realize that you may not be concerned about this but we who must travel this intersection daily and sometimes frequently are very much concerned. In fact I intend to petition DOT to lower the speed limits in this area because of the number of traffic accidents occurring there today. In the past month we have had two very serious accidents involving 18 wheelers who are not able to stop in time at the intersection. Another commitment I question is the one regarding Cart Corrals. The promise is they will be constructed out of concrete block. I have seen such ugly corrals and believe me they are definitely worse than open corrals. At least with open corrals, there is no place for dirt and debris to coUect. The rain and wind blow it away until someone picks it up. With a block corral, the dirt stays inside and is never removed. Soon the corrals are so bad people ignore them because of the . . 4/4 debris there. [ don't think we really are getting a better deal just because we get block cart corrals. Another Commitment or prmise made was that Lowes would not have storage or display areas that were outside the store, I really don't see how you could enforce that one. Every grocery store and hardware store in Carmel does that and I don't recall ever seeing anyone in law enforcement try to make them stop doing that. However if you are really serious about this, then may I suggest that this proposal be tabled and no further action taken until you as the council have enacted an ordinance that addresses this malter. This proposal is so bad there is nothing good or in its favor. As responsible citizens of this community. you owe it to the residents to just say no. We don't have to !,.;ve any explanation for so doing. the request is not guaranteed under any zoning ordinances. The developer made a request and we voted it down As simple as that. We don't need this store in the overlay zone. They can come back when they find more suitable space. Once we disregard the overlay zoning, where do we stop? We know from past experience that there willi always be other developers coming forward with requests to build another store. So your vote tonight is not fatal. The overlay has served the community well and good for many years. Don't destroy it tonight by voting to build a retail store in the overlay zone. Thank you George Meissner APR 10 '00 02:06PM COMCAST.INDIANAPOLIS P.2/3 . . Comeas, Cablevision ~ , -or IndiMapolis, Inc. 5330 EaslllSlh Street po. Sox 2091' Indlanapolis, IN 46220 317-872.2225 EXHIBIT B (@)CDMCAST@ April 10. 2000 The Honorable Jim Brainard Mayor, City of Carmel One Civic Square Carmel, Indiana 46032 Dear Mayor Brainard: Section 3 (j) of the City of Cm.mel's resolution authorizing transfer of Time Warner's cable franchise to Comcast states that Comcast is to meet or exceed FCC engineering specifications on all channels, lhereby improving signal quality. This letter clarifies how wc will achieve such improvement. Currently, Time Warner is serving Carmel residents via a fiber run from its Roosevelt Avenue headend near downlown Indianapolis. The signal is transmitted using a 13 J 0 laser. Comcast intends to serve the City from our 65th Street location on thc northeast side using a 1550 laser and split band technology. We firmly believe that using a stronger laser over a shortcr distancc will dcanlatically improve picture quality in the city, except on thc two aeccss channels. The signals on the two access channels are being [cd from remote locations (City Hall, Carmel High School) to Time Warner's headend in Carmel. Thus, the manner in which we deliver our signal tolhe head~nd will not affect thc picturc quality on those channels. 5ti 11, measures can be takcri to ensure a quality picture on those channels. First, we will inspect all production and recording equipment to ensure that all programming is bcing produced at al) acceptable quality level. We will make recommendations to the Council if we find Iltat equipment is not funclioning adequatcly. Sccond, it is possible that broadcilSt signals from WISH-TV (over-the.air channel 8) are intcrfering with the Govel11ment Access Channcl (cablc channel 8). As we move through Cannel upgrading our system, we will move YOllr governmcnt channel to cable channel 16. If there is indeed intcrfcrencc [rom WISH-TV, relocating the channel will solve the problem. If a customer finds they have inlerfer~nc~ due to any broadcast signal, we will perform free selvice calls to fix the source of the problem. If the interference is du~ to the customer's television set (unshieJded tuner), we havc converters available at a nominal cost that can resolvc that issuc as well. Finally, as wc upgrade our system in the city, we will inspect and measure signal quality at every home to ensure each customer is receiving our signal at the appropriate level for clear pictures on all channels. * .....____e-t..... APR 10 '00 02:06PM COMCAST.INDIANAPOLIS P.3/3 If you have any questions ahoulthis process or any other matter, please do not hesitate to call me at (317) 841-3660. Sincerely, ,.- ,~..J a_UJ~. " David A. Wilson Area Vice President