HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 03-15-22 010aN0,,
w 4
•
' +' City or Carme
/NDIANP
CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
MARCH 15, 2022 I MEETING MINUTES
Location: Council Chambers Room,2i d Floor,Carmel City Hall
Members Present: Brad Grabow(President),Dubbie Buckler,Alan Potasnik,Kevin Rider,Sue Westermeier,Christine Zoccola
Member Absent:Jeff Hill,Carrie Holle,Joshua Kirsh
Staff Present: Mike Hollibaugh,Adrienne Keeling,Rachel Keesling,Alexia Lopez,Joe Shestak
Legal Counsel: Sergey Grechukhin
Time of Meeting:6:00 PM
Declaration of Quorum: President Grabow: 6 members present,we have a Quorum
Approval of Meeting Minutes:A Motion made by Rider and seconded by Westermeier to approve the Feb. 15,2022, PC
meeting minutes. Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
Communications,Bills,Expenditures,&Legal Counsel Report:Veronica Schilb,Barnes&Thornburg LLP:
1. Plan Commission Resolution PC-3-15-22-a: CRC Resolution 2022-1 proposes to amend the Declaratory
Resolution and Development Plan for the City Center Redevelopment Area to 1)remove a parcel from the
existing Cannel City Center Amendment Allocation Area,2)remove a parcel from the existing Firehouse
Allocation Area,3)designate these areas as part of a separate allocation area to be known as the"Firehouse East
Allocation Area,"and 4)adopt a supplement to the Plan.
2. Plan Commission Resolution PC-3-15-22-b: CRC Resolution 2022-2 proposes to amend the Declaratory
Resolution and Development Plan for the Old Meridian Economic Development Area to 1)remove parcels from
the existing Old Meridian Expansion Allocation Area,2)designate this area as a separate Allocation Area to be
known as the"Old Meridian Apartments Allocation Area,"and 3)adopt a supplement to the Plan.
A Motion made by Westermeier and seconded by Rider to adopt PC Resolutions PC-3-15-22-a and PC-3-15-22-b.
Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
Reports,Announcements&Department Concerns:Rachel Keesling:
1. Outcome of Projects at Committees:
a. Commercial: Cancelled due to no items to review.
i. Docket No.PZ-2021-00205 DP/ADLS: 11335 N. Michigan Rd. Apartments—Tabled to March 29, 2022
Commercial Committee for additional review.
b. Residential: Cancelled due to no items to review.
Public Hearings:
Brad: Explained the Rules of Procedure for a public hearing under the Plan Commission.
1. Docket No.PZ-2021-00139 DP/ADLS: Oberweis—That Burger Joint—Woodgrain Pizzeria.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a restaurant on a 1.15-acre vacant parcel.The site is located
at 10920 N.Michigan Road,which is the SW corner of Weston Pointe Blvd. and Michigan Rd./US 421. It is
zoned B-3/Business and is located in the US 421 Overlay Zone.Filed by Joe Oberweis,owner.
Petitioner: Joe Oberweis:
• With me tonight are James Blaylock VP,Eric Longoria,Architect
• Business has been around for over 100 years,my great grandfather was a dairy farmer
• The Carmel location will be our third location of this combination of ice cream,burger,and pizzeria at one place
• Our ice cream has been around for a long time,but the burger and pizza operation is something new
Eric Longoria,Project Manager with DXU Architect
1
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 3-15-22
• Presented aerial map and site plan, our site is bounded by Redd Road to the west,Michigan Road to the east,and
Weston Pointe Drive to the north
• Access will be from the rear off of Redd Rd,with a shared entrance with KinderCare(to the south)
• We worked with P&Z Dept. on our exterior design to align with the US 421 overlay standards
• Materials will be unified,but the brick color will vary per building facade for our 3-combo restaurant
• Presented building elevations, one entrance to our building will be provided,with the building height being the
highest at this point at 25'8"
• Presented material palette to show the variation of brick colors and wainscotting
• Presented lighting details and specifications and photometric plan
• Presented floor plans, landscaping plan, and signage plan
Public Comments: None
Department Report: Rachel Keesling:
• 53 parking spaces are required,with them providing 47 parking spaces. The 6 additional spaces can be covered
through the shared parking with the adjacent daycare(KinderCare)lot,as it is within 300'.
• The drive-thru will be on the back side of the building,but it will need a variance since there are 3 front streets
that surround this site. 10 spaces are required for drive thru stacking,and they have room for 16 vehicles.
• Lot coverage is at 78%where 80% is allowed
• Pedestrian connectivity will be provided all around the site
• They will provide an outdoor playground on the north side of the building for their customers
• The architecture will be complimentary to Italianate theme to comply with US 421 overlay requirements
• They are working with the Cannel Urban Forester on the approval of their landscape plan
• They will need a variance for their signage proposal. They are proposing 9,where 3 are only allowed.
• Staff are asking for more details on the signage
• We ask this is continued to the March 29 Commercial Committee for further review and discussion
Committee Comments:
Alan: What are some of the architecture elements of the Italianate style?Rachel Keesling: The sizing and symmetrical
nature of the windows,dentil molding,and enhanced brick detailing. Eric Longoria: It tends to have more of a
conservatory feel,with large expanse of interrupted glass.
Alan: Is the signage package available to view online or in the info packet?I didn't see what they just presented.Rachel
Keesling: Page 13 of the info packet contain the sign details and specs and page 5 contains the elevations. Eric Longoria:
The menu and drive thru directional signage was submitted earlier today.Alan: Can you bring in all the updates to the
signage package to the Committee meeting?Eric Longoria: Yes.
Christine: Is there a shared parking agreement with KinderCare?Joe Oberweis:Both parcels are owned by the same
property owner. The have agreed to share their parking lot.I believe there's a recorded document stating this.
Christine: Can you explain the flow of the parking lot?Is there one drive-thru for all 3 restaurants?Eric Longoria:
Presented a site plan, once you enter the site,you have an access lane that is shared with KinderCare.Customers who are
using the drive thru will go left.Just one drive thru for the entire building.
Kevin: Staff mentioned only 3 signs are allowed for this site.Is this site considered as three individual businesses or just
one business?Rachel Keesling: This is considered as one business in one building. They want each of their brands to
have their own signage. An example would be a car dealership who proposes a variance for multiple signs of their brands.
Brad: I think their signage plan(9 proposed signs)feels a little overkill. Can you discuss this at the Committee?The
signage on the rear of the building(west elevation)isn't necessary. The proposed monument sign feels unnecessary since
there are wall mounted signs on the same side of this site. Make sure to look over the large signage behind the glass
window in the vestibule. Walgreens does a similar thing with their buildings.Joe Oberweis: The challenge we face is the
format of this building site.This building will be expensive to build.Our signage package was included to make sure our
large investment pays off.We can look at removing the signage on the back of the building. The screen signage in the
vestibule is designed to not be our primary signage but to educate our guests with the new things that are happening.
Alan: We take each petition seriously and scrutinize everything from top to bottom to make sure things are done right.
2
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 3-15-22
Brad: What approvals are needed for Boone County/Zionsville for stormwater detention.Rachel Keesling: These 4 lots
were developed together with an overall master drainage plan.The Petitioner's engineer will work with them,as well as
the Cannel Engineering Dept.
IA Motion made by Westermeier and seconded by Rider to send Docket No.PZ-2021-00139 DP/ADLS to the March
29 Commercial Committee with it coming back to the full PC for a final vote.
Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
2. Docket No.PZ-2022-00001 DP/ADLS: Culver's.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for new Culver's restaurant.The site is located at 431 E.Carmel
Drive.It is zoned B-SBusiness and is not located in any overlay zone.Filed by Bob Goins of K&J Investments
XVL,LLC.
Petitioner:Jon Dobosiewicz,Nelson&Frankenberger
• Present with me tonight are Rick Lawrence of Nelson&Frankenberger,and Bob Goins,construction manager
• Presented aerial view, landscape plan, site landscaping will comply with the UDO
• Variances will be heard by the BZA in April. Details of the variances are listed in the Dept. Report
• There will be two access points,from E. Cannel Drive,and AAA Way
• Two stacking lanes of the drive thru will be in the rear of the site
• Presented elevations, building materials reflect input and suggestions we had with Staff
• All roof top mounted equipment will be screened by the parapet walls
• The digital reader board that is normally seen outside a Culver's is prohibited by the UDO.
• Detailed engineering plans are provided behind tab 9 in the info packet
• We will continue to work with Staff on the outstanding items
IPublic Comments:None
Department Report:Rachel Keesling:
• This was previously a car wash,and the drive thru will follow the same general flow
• The site has only room for 46 spaces where 70 are needed per UDO. They will seek a parking variance.
• They will seek a variance for lot coverage. They are proposing 68.3%,where only 60%is allowed
• We need to work on the location of their bicycle parking.It needs to be located within 50' of the front door.
• The building design has changed,and it now has more brick and stone,and less EIFS(stucco)material
• We will continue to work on the design. We would prefer to see bricked-in faux windows.We would like to see
them remove the large blue awnings that carry over the faux windows on the back half of the building. They do
not serve a function for shading the inside from sun or protection for a pedestrian over a sidewalk.
• They are requesting two signs,where one sign is allowed,They will seek a variance for the additional sign at the
April 25 BZA meeting
• Staff recommends this continued at the March 29 Commercial Committee for further review and discussion
Committee Comments:
Christine: The shared access drive needs to be marked better.It's very confusing. What can you do?What will you do
with the sidewalk?Jon Dobosiewicz: The sidewalk will be striped,and we will look into elevating it. We received
comments from Cannel Engineering,and we can share their comments at the Committee meeting.
Alan: Every Culver's I've been to has had an issue with traffic overflow.I have a concern for your request for a parking
variance. Can you explain the traffic flow throughout this site especially when the traffic is spilling over?Jon
Dobosiewicz:Presented the site plan, the drive-thru can accommodate two lanes to help accommodate with the stacking.
IThere will be post window stacking for 5 cars.The Ordinance states to provide parking per square footage.Typical
customers will have a full carload. We are providing more efficient drive-thru space instead of more parking spaces. Sue:
I share the same concerns as Alan. How many can you seat inside the building?Are customers using the drive-thru more
or going inside to eat?With the drive-thru and only 47 parking spaces, it seems like a tight design.Jon Dobosiewicz: We
can bring in exhibits to show the parking and inside seating area. We will bring the exact numbers to the Committee.
3
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 3-15-22
Dubbie:Are the awnings over the faux-windows part of a design and branding?There could be an opportunity for
depicting local artwork on each window. Brad: Are the awnings the new branding standard?Jon Dobosiewicz: Yes.
Brad: They are bigger than the awnings at the Culver's on Michigan Rd. The blue really stands out.I'm concerned it's
too much.Jon Dobosiewicz: The awnings are a design feature. We will take these in suggestions and look into a solution.
A Motion made by Westermeier and seconded by Rider to send Docket No.PZ-2021-00001 DP/ADLS to the March
29 Commercial Committee with them coming back to the full PC for the final vote.
Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
3. Docket No.PZ-2022-00009 DP/ADLS: MedVet Carmel Animal Hospital Addition.
4. Docket No.PZ-2022-00024 ZW: 101 parking spaces required; 97 spaces proposed=4% reduction
requested(up to 35% reduction may be requested).
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a 15,100 sq. ft.building addition and 56 additional parking
spaces to an existing animal hospital.The site is located at 9650 Mayflower Park Drive. The overall site is 4.52
acres. It is zoned I-1/Business and is not located in any overlay zone.Filed by Joe Kyle of M+A Architects on
behalf of the owner.
Petitioner: Jennifer Brogan,Senior Real Estate Project Manager
• We are growing constantly,and this expansion will allow us to grow and help assist our clients
• We are open 24/7,365 days a year
Chris Pluming,Project Architect
• The zoning district allows this use
• We are meeting all building setbacks and lot coverage
• Presented site plan, parking will be available on three sides. We are adding 56 parking spaces,bring the total to
97 spaces. We reached out to the business across the street and have agreed to a shared parking lease.
• We will install a multi-use path along both frontages
Joe Kyle,Project Architect
• Presented aerial views and elevations, the addition is taking place entirely behind the building
• The addition will match the existing architecture as best as we could
• Presented landscape plan, our plan is to screen the parking and dumpster encloser with landscaping. We will keep
as many existing trees as possible.
• Presented floor plan and roof top mechanical enclosures
Public Comments: None
Department Report: Rachel Keesling:
• Staff is in favor of the parking waiver,with the shared parking agreement across the street
• Their addition will put them at a 35.4%lot coverage,where 90%is allowed in this district
• They will install the multi-use path along both street frontages
• The building addition materials will match the existing building materials
• They adjusted their lighting plan to meet the footcandle requirements
• The signage will remain the same.Joe Kyle: We will move the existing ground sign 10-ft to stay within the
landscape easement. We will keep the sign the same.
• Staff recommends that the PC votes to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to vote on this item
Committee Comments:
Kevin: Will the multi-use paths lead to anywhere?Should they just pay into the fund so the City can build all the paths in
this area all together.Rachel: We would really like them to install the paths as presented.
Brad: Does the sidewalk extend to the door of the grieving room? Joe Kyle: Yes, it extends to the door.
A Motion made by Rider and seconded by Potasnik to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to vote on this item
at tonight's meeting. Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
4
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 3-15-22
A Motion made by Rider and seconded by Zoccola to approve Docket Nos. PZ-2021-00009 DP/ADLS and PZ-2022-
00024 ZW.Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
Old Business:
1. Docket No.PZ-2020-00081 DP/ADLS: The Steadman Apartment Community at The Bridges.
2. Docket No.PZ-2021-00247 V: Bridges PUD Z-550-11 Sec. 13.9.D: Right-in/Right-out access only onto 111th
St.,Full Access onto 111th St.Requested.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval and a variance for a new apartment community consisting of
263 units in 5 buildings. The site is located at the northeast corner of Springmill Road and 111th Street,on about
12.5 acres. It is zoned The Bridges PUD,Ordinance Z-550-11. Filed by Jim Shinaver and Jon Dobosiewicz of
Nelson&Frankenberger on behalf of Cityscape Residential,LLC.
Petitioner:Jon Dobosiewicz
• Presented aerial view, landscape plan,
• Bridges PUD was approved in 2011,the multi-family dwellings are a permitted use within the residential use
block of the Bridges PUD.A DP/ADLS review and approval of the site plan is required.
• 263 dwellings are being proposed
• The southernmost building was modified into a L-shape to help break up the building that faces 111t Street. We
added a 3200 sq.ft.outdoor courtyard(greenspace)adjacent to this building.
• Bicycle storage has been incorporated into every building
• Crosswalks were eliminated behind buildings 1 and 2 moved internally for safety reasons
• All light fixtures are downlighting with 90-degree cutoffs
• Additional evergreen trees were added to the berm.Per the Urban Forester's request,the evergreens will be
placed on the outside side of the berm,and the shade trees will be placed on the interior side of the berm.
• We worked with Staff on the signage package,with a condition that the sign located at the north entrance is
moved 5-ft from the internal drive
• The Residential Committee voted 3-0 to send it back to the full PC for approval
• Staff recommends approval,conditioned for final Engineering approval of the round-about design
Department Report: Alexia Lopez:
• Petitioner has made many changes based on the Staff and neighbor comments
• Staff and Engineering both support the variance request of the roundabout installation at 111th Street entrance
• The Urban Forester is comfortable with the buffer landscaping along Spring Mill Road and 111th Street
• The proposed north end sign is too close to the easement,and the Petitioner agreed to move it
• Staff recommends approval with the condition of the Engineering approval and the sign is setback 5-ft
Residential Committee Recap,Christine Zoccola:
• We recommended approval condition upon final approval of the landscaping, lighting, pedestrian access plans,
and the Engineering approval of the roundabout design
Committee Comments:
Sue: We received feedback from Commissioner Kirsh about an 8' path on both sides of the north/side the access drive off
of 111th Street.Jon Dobosiewicz: We don't have control of the owner of the real estate on the eastern parcel. We have
communicated this to the owner,and this will be addressed when the eastern parcel is developed.
Sue: Were there any discussions about a pedestrian mid-walk crosswalk that crosses Spring Mill Road to Williams Mill?
Jon Dobosiewicz: That wasn't included in our proposal. The Cannel Engineering Dept.and Board of Public Works
would be in charge of that.
Sue: Is the size of the berm restricting the visibility of drivers entering and exiting the proposed mini roundabout?I don't
feel comfortable the roundabout being installed until the eastern parcel is redeveloped. 111t' Street is designated as an
arterial road. Will sidewalks be installed in this area?I would recommend denying this variance as of now and be revisited
5
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 3-15-22
at a later date.
Sue: Can you show the line of sight from Spring Mill Road and 111th Street(from the subdivision entrances)?Jon
Dobosiewicz: Presented an exhibit. The 5-story buildings will not be visible from the sidewalk on Spring Mill Road.
Kevin: We can make the developer pay for the roundabout. If we deny it,then the City will have to pay for the
roundabout. Engineering is going to build it no matter what. Sue: I'm not sure if it's the wiser decision.Kevin:
Engineering won't build it if it's not safe.It has to get final approval from Engineering.
Brad: Did Engineering explain the rational of the mini roundabout on 1116'Street?Jon Dobosiewicz: It's been a decade
of development since the PUD was approved.Roundabouts didn't exist on Illinois Street and Spring Mill Road as they do
today.We asked Carmel Engineering,and they believe it's the right decision and the safest.Alexia Lopez: Reads letter
from the Carmel Engineer about installing this roundabout-this letter will be attached to the minutes and is also
viewable in Laserfiche. Brad: So,Engineering's position is right-in,and right-outs don't work without a median. I'm
struggling with the access here and the fact the Petition came to us with a more modest proposal for that access.I wish
Engineering were here to defend the argument there are negative benefits of a right-in,and right-out.Alexia Lopez: From
a Planning perspective,the roundabout aligns with Spring Mill Lane.It will slow traffic down. Left turns out of Spring
Mill Place would be easier and safer.
A Motion made by Rider and seconded by to Zoccola approve Docket Nos.PZ-2020-00081 DP/ADLS contingent
upon the changes to the signage.Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
A Motion made by Rider and seconded by Zoccola to approve PZ-2021-00247 V contingent upon Engineering
approval.4-2,Grabow,Westermeier,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.Motion fails,due to lack of majority
• PZ-2021-00247 V will be heard again at the Apri119, 2022 Plan Commission meeting.
3. Docket No.PZ-2021-00177 CP: Carmel Clay Comprehensive Plan Update.
The applicant seeks to update and reformat the Carmel Clay Comprehensive Plan.Filed by the Department of
Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission.
Petitioner:Adrienne Keeling,Department of Community Services:
• We had five committee meetings and one public hearing. This will be the seventh meeting in front of the PC
• We conducted an online survey and had several pop-up meetings throughout the City
• Our team have spoken at 14 additional meetings,that included the Cannel Neighborhood Association Network,
Council sponsored Town Hall meetings,HOA meetings,Cannel Small Business Network,One Zone Business
Issues Committee,and Cannel City Council
• With the help of the Community Relations Dept.,we released mailers to over 4,100 email subscribers. The Plan
Commission agendas were sent out to everyone who submitted a letter or comment. Three quarterly print news
mailers were mailed out to approx. 75k addresses.We streamed and recorded all of our meetings and those can be
viewed on the City's social media and website.
• Our Comprehensive Plan will be used by current and future residents
• We are on our 3`d draft of the Comprehensive Plan
• Any City Council amendments will come back to the Plan Commission for review and approval
• Staff recommends the Plan Commission certify the proposed Comprehensive Plan to the City Council
Committee Recap,Christine Zoccola,Chair:
• We spent collectively hundreds of hours reviewing and did,a very through detailed review.In the end we
requested a lot of changes and those are marked in the current draft of the Comp Plan.
• Some changes are not shown. We removed the term"hospitality"in the Estates section. Maps were updated.
• The changes we made were reflective of the comments we received.Generally,the public are supportive of the
traditional neighborhoods,preserving greenspace,and a vibrant urban core.
• We received concerns that the designations of typical corridors would be in high density,and we removed some
of those corridors
• We added in language for tree preservation and incorporated language to preserve greenspace and conservation
6
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 3-15-22
corridors
Brad: The public hearing was closed at the initial hearing of this docket.Per request,I will ask for a motion to re-open it.
IA Motion by Rider and seconded by Westermeier to suspend the Rules of Procedure to re-open the public hearing
for this item.Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
Brad: The public hearing will resume. How many are here tonight to state any comments that were not previously
received or given?3 people raised their hands. I will give 4 minutes per speaker.
Public Comments:
Jill Meisenheimer,Williams Mill: I appreciate that each objective was read,and the public was invited for input.After
reading the 3`d draft, it still feels like the single-family homeowners are not valued and not included in this document.The
public is left out in the early decision making by the developers and should be allowed to be more involved. Many of the
comments submitted by the public were not addressed by the Plan Commission.
Nathan Smith,Homeplace: We have invested in this community.We look forward to mindful development. We have
concerns on the drafted Comp Plan of the proposed mobility lane and cycle track on the south side of E. 106th Street,just
east of College Ave.The front yard of these homes along this stretch of 106th Street will be impacted. The proposed
arterial road that would connect E.96th Street from Westfield Blvd to all the way to Pennsylvania Street,would be a
drastic change to the existing neighborhoods along this stretch.
Alison Brown,W.106th Street: There are citizens that do not want the additional growth and taller buildings.There are
limits on growth and we shouldn't push so hard. I have concerns with the loose parameters describing single-family lots.
Committee Comments:
Christine: Can Staff address the comments and concerns stated about 96th& 106th Streets.Adrienne Keeling: The
Imobility and pedestrian lane was a misprint along 106th Street.If the cycle track would be installed, it would be in
sections. It will be all up to the Engineering Department. The 96th street connection mentioned was listed in the C3 plan. It
doesn't show the exact alignment,but the future plan is to make a connection between Westfield Blvd and Penn. Street.
The Engineering Dept.,and any future development would be involved in the planning process of this stretch.
Brad: Was the edit to the maximum height in the downtown area the same to the Monon Urban area?Adrienne Keeling:
It is shown on the Downtown and Downtown West as 6-stories as the max height and 3-stories at intersections. We are
asking you to consider matching this language to the Monon Urban area(page 38). Christine: We had multiple
discussions on the max height since it wasn't specified along the Monon. Brad: It would help with any the deficiencies in
similar development patterns.
Dubbie: I have been following this since you started your review.I have watched all the meetings and read all the recent
letters.I concur the edits that were made.The main concerns that were observed are mixed use and high-density
developments within and nearby established neighborhoods but are fine with this in new developments.Adrienne
Keeling: This Comp Plan acts as a guide for change to new developments and modifications to an existing development.
It's not put forth or needed until there's a proposal brought forward.Kevin: We removed the typical corridors that
specified these concerns.
A Motion made by Westermeier and seconded by Zoccola to certify the Comprehensive Plan to the City Council.
Approved 6-0,absent Hill,Holle,Kirsh.
Meetin Adjourned at 9:18 p.m.
NI9\1 _
Joe S eitak PC Secretary Brad Grabo President
7
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 3-15-22