HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 05-17-22 The plat was recorded.Kevin: How did the deed restrictions not get recorded?Jon Oberlander: The restrictions are on
the plat but didn't getting placed in the deed. This is why this is complicated. Christine: Everyone was aware of these
deed restrictions. People bought their homes on the knowing these lots were undevelopable.I'm uncomfortable with
allowing this. Can the Petitioner bring their landscape plan and tree preservation area(TPA)to the Committee?
Carrie: If the deed restrictions were actually recorded on the deed,how would this process work?Jon Oberlander:
There would be statutory provisions that were mentioned before would have to be followed. There are deed restrictions as
part of the plat.
Dubbie: Does a recorded plat trump a recorded deed?Or does a recorded deed trump a recorded plat?Jon Oberlander:
The point of both is to provide notice to protentional buyers. It's an interesting case,and I'll do more research and have a
memo written for the Residential Committee.
Alexia Lopez: To remove a deed restriction,does someone else need approval besides the owners of the land?Jon
Oberlander: I'll look into that.
Jeff: Is there some of sort of access easement to the lot with the carriage house? Tom Lazzara: Currently there's not a
formal access easement,but there's an existing gravel drive.
A Motion made by Hill and seconded by Zoccola to send Docket Nos. PZ-2022-0002.5 PPA and PZ-2022-00053 SW
to the June 7 Residential Committee with the full Plan Commission having final approval. Approved 9-0.
3. Tabled to June 21-Docket No.PZ-2022-00045 DP/ADLS:Jackson's Grant Village Section 2.
site:.. lee..ted„t the N-W a of 1 1 6th .
Old Business
4. 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.Cannel
Drive. It is zoned B-8/Bus.and is not located in any overlay zone. Filed by Bob Goins of K&J Inv.XVL,LLC.
Petitioner:Jim Shinaver,Nelson&Frankenberger:
• Present with me tonight are the petitioner and project engineer
• Presented aerial view of the site location
• Presented site plan, it was fully reviewed by Staff and the Commercial Committee. We recently received approval
of the landscape plan from the Urban Forester
• Presented the Landscape Plan, Elevations,
• Modifications were done to the tower elements,roof line,and color schemes
• Presented illustrations of the menu board
• We will contribute money to the Non-Reverting Thoroughfare Fund for the construction of the multi-use path
along Cannel Drive.
Department Report: Rachel Keesling:
• Staff is pleased with all the changes and modifications that were made
• Urban Forester has approved the landscape plan
• The Petitioners will contribute into the Non-Reverting Throughfare Fund for the future construction of the multi-
use path along the street frontage
• Staff recommends approval contingent upon the monetary commitment to the Non-Reverting Thoroughfare Fund
and to finalize their review process on ProjectDox
Commercial Committee Recap,Alan Potasnik,Chair:
• We worked on the design of the menu board base,the restaurant's entrance,and setback of the columns
4
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 5-17-22
• We went over the drive-thru canopy and one of the concerns is that traffic would stack up to Cannel Drive.We
made sure that no advertising will be allowed on the canopy,columns,or menu board
• The monument sign will not be electronic,and instead they will have a manual change sign
ICommittee Comments:
Christine: Did Engineering look over the design of the crosswalk at the entrance of the parking lot?Will it be raised?Jim
Shinaver: Engineering reviewed it and had no concerns with the function,design,or alignment of the entrance.
A Motion made by Kirsh and seconded by Rider to approve PZ-2022-00001 DP/ADLS. Approved 9-0.
5. Docket No.PZ-2021-00205 DP/ADLS: 11335 N.Michigan Rd.Apartments.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a new development with 4 future outlots and an apartment
complex(236 units).The site is located at 11335 N.Michigan Road. It is zoned B-3Business&Residential and
is located within the US 421 Overlay zone. Filed by Ryan Wells of REI Real Estate Services,LLC.
Petitioner:Jon Dobosiewicz:
• Present tonight are Ryan Wells and Rick Lawrence
• Altum's Landscape Nursey business recently occupied this site and left this site last year
• Variance requests for this site will be heard at the May 23 BZA meeting
• The Commitments placed on this site in 1988 requires approval of the proposed use of multi-family use from the
Plan Commission
• The updated site plan now shows the four 2-story buildings will be located closer to the adjacent residential
properties,and the six 3-story buildings will be located interior of the site and adjacent to the commercial outlots
• Building 7 was repositioned to provide more screening to adjacent neighbors to the south
• A traffic impact study indicated that a traffic light should be placed on Michigan Road at the intersection of the
entrance drive,and this is supported by INDOT
• We will provide an outdoor dog park,pool,park benches,a trail around the pond,and a fishing pier at the pond
• An 8-ft cedar with brick columns privacy fence will be placed on our property around the site perimeter that is
adjacent to residential properties
• Building architecture now conforms to meet the standards of the Federal style architecture
• Brick coverage on the buildings was increased to 90%masonry and stone and we now meet the requirements of
the US 421 Overlay
• Eight 6-bay car garages will be located internally throughout the site
• A/C and mechanical units will be placed on the roof-tops of the buildings and will be screened from view
• Unique feature of building 2 will have glass doors and windows that will face the pool
• Presented landscape plan, it was approved by the Urban Forester and fully complies with the UDO
• 20-25-ft tree preservation area(TPA)along the property line of the existing trees will be provided,and we have
worked with the Urban Forester on this
• The landscape buffer yards exceeds the requirements of the UDO in regard to buffer widths,TPA,and the
addition of the 8-ft screened fence
• The closest building setback from the property line is 52-ft
• Presented illustration of the privacy fence, Staff advised the Petitioner that vinyl fencing is not allowed for this
location,so we will provide an 8-ft privacy fence of cedar plank with masonry columns located every 26-ft.
• Over the past several months,the applicant continued to work with Staff and the Commercial Committee to
address outstanding items.The Commercial Committee voted 3-0 with a positive recommendation.
Department Report: Rachel Keesling:
• We have been working on this project over the last nine months.The Petitioner did a great job in summarizing all
the changes that were done.
• The commitments placed on this site in 1988,gives the Plan Commission authority to approve or deny the
proposed multi-family use
• The Petitioner has proposed a list of uses that would not be allowed for the commercial outlots that have been
proposed as a part of the overall development plant. The list can be seen in the info packet.
5
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 5-17-22