HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 09-20-22 G`��OFcA
„MRTNEgyy,
Y
City
\ .::%ii.1:1- ,) of C
NDIAN%
CA IVIEL PLAN COMMISSION
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2022 I MEETING MINUTES
Location: Council Chambers Room,2'd Floor,Cannel City Hall
Members Present: Brad Grabow(President),Dubbie Buckler,Jeff Hill,Carrie Holle,Joshua Kirsh,Alan Potasnik(Vice),
Sue Westermeier,Christine Zoccola
Members Absent: Kevin Rider(virtual participant)
Staff Present: Mike Hollibaugh,Alexia Lopez,Rachel Keesling,Adrienne Keeling,Joe Shestak
Legal Counsel:Allison McGrath-Lynch, Sergey Grechukhin
Time of Meeting: 6:00 PM
Declaration of Quorum:President Grabow: 8 members present,we have a Quorum.Mr.Rider is participating virtually.
Approval of Meeting Minutes:A Motion made by Zoccola and seconded by Kirsh to approve the August 16,2022,PC
meeting minutes.Approved 8-0,absent Rider.
Communications,Bills,Expenditures,&Legal Counsel Report: Nothing to report
Reports,Announcements&Department Concerns:Rachel Keesling
1. Outcome of Projects at Committees:
a)Commercial: Docket No.PZ-2022-00118 DP/ADLS: The GOAT-4-0 favorable recommendation to the full
Plan Commission
b)Residential: PZ-2022-00117 PUD: 96th and Haverstick PUD Rezone-Tabled to Thursday,Oct. 6
Public Hearings:
Brad: Explain the Rules of Procedure for a Public Hearing in front of the Plan Commission
1. Docket No.PZ-2022-00119 DP/ADLS: Flora on Spring Mill.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a residential neighborhood consisting of 12 brownstones, 12
two-family homes, 10 single-family homes,and 86 townhomes on 18.31 acres. The site is located at 9950 Spring
Mill Rd.and is zoned Flora PUD,Ordinance Z-676-22. Filed by Jim Shinaver and Jon Dobosiewicz of Nelson&
Frankenberger on behalf of Pittman Partners,Inc. and Onyx and East,LLC.
Petitioner: Jon Dobosiewicz,Nelson&Frankenberger:
• Presented site location map
• Our site plan will fully comply with the components of the Flora PUD Ordinance
• Presented an illustrated site plan, includes greenspace,common areas,tree preservation area(TPA),pedestrian
walkways throughout the site,and vehicular access will be from the existing roundabout
• Presented illustrated site plan with the building types, this development will contain single-family homes,
brownstones,two-family homes,and townhomes
• Presented landscape plan, we will be including TPA along the northside, Springmill Road,and I-465
• Sound reinforcement measures will be included on the residential dwellings adjacent to I-465
Public Comments:
Mark Magda,City Center Drive: I'm against this development.Too dense and will create more traffic.I'm worried
about the type of building materials being used. Please use environmentally friendly building materials and solar panels.
Angelo Tatilo, 146th&US 31: I'm against this development.The woodland report identified the mature woodlands that
complies with the City of Cannel's Green-Initiative Plan.The soil erosion to Williams Creek can be a concern.In Dec.
2021, Indiana transitioned from Rule 5 detailing how builders must protect soil erosion during construction.The new
permitting process is a performance-based regulation.A storm water pollution prevention plan(SWPPP)is required.I
1
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 9-20-22
don't know if they actually visit and implement the plan. How will the project site owner hold the evacuation company
accountable to comply with the SWPPP?
Jennifer Christie,lives down the road: I work for the Indiana Forest Alliance. The project of this scope will change this
community forever and should have required more public notice than the bare minimum.We are taking out a century old
forest and currently protects the community from all the noise and pollution from I-465.The residents of Hussey Lane
were not notified,and this is their backyard.It doesn't make any sense for cutting down a century old forest since we are
experiencing a climate crisis. Cannel doesn't have many forests left.
Nancy Tatum,Lexington Farms: Impact of this project on the wildlife will be devasting. They will not be able to survive.
I'm asking to keep this area as natural as possible.I'm asking the Commission to require a nature and forest study of this
area. Show us evidence that Cannel will abide by the Climate-Action Plan.
Jill Meisenheimer,Williams Creek: We are not providing enough space for nature.This PUD crams housing that is 3
times greater than what is allowed. The wooded site has a few adjacent neighbors.The PUD only asks for a 15-ft tree
buffer along 465 and 10-ft along Spring Mill Road. Only 3 City Counselors voted against this PUD. Planting new trees
will not solve the removal of the mature trees.
Mark Douglas,Eden Glen: I'm not anti-development,but what has prompted me to come tonight, is what is happening at
161St and US 31. They eliminated an entire forest. What is Cannel going to look like in 5-10 years?The pace of
development has really picked up in the last few years. We need an environmental component built in our redevelopment
process and to keep the Climate-Action Plan into consideration.
Rebuttal to Public Comments:Jon Dobosiewicz:
• Building materials used are vetted through the Cannel Ordinances and there are architecture requirements that are
established by the PUD
• SWPPPs are enforced by Cannel Engineering Dept. We have obligations to comply with Cannel's requirements.
• All public notice requirements were met by the Plan Commission's Rules of Procedure
• We spent several Committee meetings during the Rezone process determining tree preservation
Department Report: Alexia Lopez
• This PUD rezone was recently approved by the Cannel City Council and will contain 120 residential dwellings
• The proposed site plan is in line with concept plan that was approved with the PUD
• The PUD requires 25%minimum open space,with 20%being TPA,that equals around 3 acres of TPA
• 15-ft tree preservation buffer is required along I-465 according to the PUD
• Proposed elevations are in line with the PUD,and we are still making reviews on some of the building elevations
• We will continue to work through the outstanding comments with the Petitioner
• Staff recommends this is continued to the Oct. 6 Residential Committee for further review
Committee Comments:
Dubbie: I live close to this site. When I moved here 22 years ago,there was a dense tree line along I-465. The trees
provided a sound barrier.Then IPL came along and removed a lot of trees due to the overhead powerlines. We are on
INDOT's long-range plan for a sound barrier wall along I-465. I have great concerns about the density and the removal of
the existing forest.
Christine: The SW corner of this site was supposed to be preserved as greenspace and limited TPA. I see some structures
here now.Did this area change?Jon Dobosiewicz: This area was labeled as limited TPA. We will be installing a retaining
wall,and because of grading issues,trees could not be preserved.I will ask my team to relook at this area to see if any
additional trees can be preserved.
Jeff: For the TPA that could be done along I-465,and the future widening of I-465,will some trees be removed because
of this?If so,how much of the TPA would be affected?Can you confirm that 40 MPH is safe for the round-a-bout
entrance?Jon Dobosiewicz: There have been some changes to the entry plan, so I will reconfirm with Cannel
Engineering.
2
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 9-20-22
Josh: I'm not aware of any long-term plans for a sound barrier wall along I-465. When is this going to happen?Dubbie:
We are on their long-range plan,20 years or more. When the trees were removed by IPL along 1-465,we lost that natural
sound and pollution barrier.It's really loud now.
111 Josh: Can you bring the percentage of trees that the property owner had a tree logging company remove in the last year or
so?Jon Dobosiewicz: We can bring those numbers to Committee.
Josh: The Plan Commission is an advisory board to the City Council(CC).We advise what is the best product for a piece
of land. I would like to see the stormwater plan and SWPPP.I want to see comparison of what it would look like for a S-2
verses a PUD. Bring an exhibit to show what is private streets and public ROW.I would like to see visitor parking remain
as visitor parking and not for someone who wants to store a bunch of stuff in their garage. Can you provide Visitor Only
Parking type signage?Brad: Explore this further but not to the detriment of creating empty islands of asphalt if no one is
using the visitor parking. Christine: Isn't it specified in the PUD that residents cannot convert their garage space to
storage space?Jon Dobosiewicz: This is specified in the PUD as a zoning requirement.
Carrie: How far is the crushed stone walking path by the pond going into the existing trees?Jon Dobosiewicz: It will not
go into the forest but run close to the pond. Carrie: Can you bring in physical examples of color pallets to the
Committee?Jon Dobosiewicz:Yes.
Alan: Is this site designated as a forest?If so,what is the definition and are there any restrictions for forests per the
Ordinance?Similar to what federal laws mandates for certain waterways. Has a species inventory been done?Jon
Dobosiewicz: We will work with Planning Staff on your questions.
Brad: For the on-street parking on the main street,along the pond,if those parking spaces are still necessary,what would
be the variance needed for the removal of the required parking spaces and to preserve more existing trees if possible.Jon
Dobosiewicz: The last exhibit in the info packet has our parking exhibit and refers to our on-street parking spaces. We are
meeting the minimum requirement of parking spaces.
IA Motion made by Hill and seconded by Zoccola to continue PZ-2022-00119 DP/ADLS to the Oct. 6 Residential
Committee,with the full Plan Commission having the final voting authority. Approved 8-0,absent Rider.
Commissioner Zoccola has recused herself from PZ-2022-00147 OA due to a conflict of interest.
2. Docket No.PZ-2022-00147 OA: Legacy PUD Amendment.
The applicant seeks approval to amend the Legacy PUD text in order to increase the number of permitted units in
the PUD and increase the number of apartments permitted. The site is located southwest of 146th Street and
Community Drive. It is zoned Legacy PUD Z-501-07 as amended. Filed by Nelson&Frankenberger,LLC on
behalf of Advenir Oakley Development,LLC.
Petitioner: Jon Dobosiewicz,Nelson&Frankenberger:
• Presented Site Location Map, We are proposing to amend portions of the Legacy PUD to construct a unique
residential community to be known as"LEO Living Cottages and Multi-Family"
• The subject site consists of approx. 32 acres, and is located south of and adjacent to 146th Street and west of and
adjacent to Community Drive
• Legacy PUD was approved by CC in Jan. 2007 and amended one time in Dec.2018
• LEO cottages community will be a single-family-rental and traditional multi-family development with a focus on
the new urbanism principle of walkability,incorporating pedestrian-friendly features that foster connectivity
• This will consist of 230 single-family attached and detached rental homes,and 120 traditional garden-style
apartments available in 1,2,and 3-bedroom residences located in 3 buildings adjacent to Community Drive
• Presented Site Zoning Map and Use Blocks, Permitted uses in the office use block include office and parking
structure uses.We will provide example site plan how this would be developed for just the office use block at
Committee.
• Original Legacy PUD permitted a max of 1,344 dwelling units, including a specific max number of permitted
attached dwellings and apartment units. The 2018 amendment reduced the max allowed to 1,250 dwelling units.
• Our proposed number of dwellings shall not exceed 350 dwellings(230 sf attached and detached, 120 apartments)
3
Plan Commission Meeting Minutes 9-20-22