HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket for CC 02-07-221
CITY OF CARMEL
DOCS DEPARTMENT REPORT TO THE COUNCIL
January 27, 2023
2023 Rosie’s Garden Rezone (Z-680-23):
• Plan Commission Docket No. PZ-2022-00191 Z; Petitioner has been in business on the site since 1982.
• Zoning change request from R1 and B1 to B3 and removing the HP Business District Sub-area designation.
• Surrounded primarily by residential uses and some small commercial offices.
Planning and Zoning Analysis:
• Comprehensive Plan (C3 Plan) Analysis:
o The proposed rezone area is classified as Suburban Residential which only allows for
single-family detached residential (Red outline in image to right).
o The South-Central Policies and Objectives section states careful integration of
neighborhood service nodes to the advancement of the commercial area is a priority.
o Protecting single family homes through buffering and transitional design is key.
• “Home Place Sub-area Plan” of the Comp Plan:
o The sub-area is to “encourage more mixed-use development that provides a more
bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly environment that provides goods and services to the
residential community within walking distance.”
o Petitioner’s land is not included in the proposed “Mixed Use Center” (purple area in the image above).
• Transportation Plan analysis:
o The Thoroughfare Plan identifies College Ave. as an Arterial Street and a Conservation Corridor.
o This means protection of environmental features by having new facilities constructed with the lowest impact
necessary to meet current and future demands.
o The Carmel Engineering Dept. is currently working on improvements to College Avenue.
• Home Place Overlay, Business Sub-Area District analysis:
o “To provide site design requirements that orient buildings to the street and are pedestrian in scale.”
o The Petitioner proposes to remove the property from this sub area.
o The Department supports this request, as the proposed site improvements will not alter the existing character
significantly nor can they meet majority of the requirements listed, such as architectural requirements (of
existing buildings), setbacks, and gross floor area.
• B-3/Business District analysis:
o B3 chosen over B1 as Plant Nursery is allowed in B3 and requires Special Use (BZA) approval in B1.
o Please note that the Petitioner did receive Special Use approval in 1988 under Docket No. 71-88 SU.
o Plant Nursery: the growing of plants outside of a structure, intended for wholesale or retail sale.
o General Retail and General Service are permitted primary uses in B3.
o Outdoor storage and display occurs today in addition to growing of plants = Storage and/or Warehousing,
Outdoor, which is not allowed in B3 as primary or accessory use.
o Storage and/or Warehousing, Indoor is allowed as an accessory use in B3.
o UDO Article 5.03.4 – Accessory Buildings cannot be more than 1/3 of the Gross Floor Area of all buildings.
Negotiations with Petitioner during Plan Commission process:
• Staff and PC members expressed concerns regarding complete removal from the Home Place Overlay.
• After discussions, the Petitioner has agreed to retract their request to be removed from the overall Home Place
Overlay and only request to be removed from the Business District sub-area. Staff and PC supported this request.
Concerns discussed by the Plan Commission:
• Neighbors spoke regarding the Petitioner’s need for additional parking, better traffic flow, and lighting concerns
• Plan Commission members stated that Rosie’s has been a great neighbor and economic driver in the area, but they
also need to consider limiting some B3 uses in case ownership or site usage changes hands in the future.
• The Petitioner understands variances will be needed to bring the site into compliance regarding existing outdoor
storage/display, parking, and future renovations, which may not meet the Home Place Overlay requirements.
The Petitioner requested to rezone to B3 to codify the existing business use of the site and prepare for future
improvements. The proposed plans should not have a negative impact on the surrounding area, intention is to
improve site conditions. These plans/changes to the site must come back to the PC for DP/ADLS approval when the
Petitioner is ready. The Commercial Committee voted 4-0 to send this to City Council with Fav. Recommendation.