HomeMy WebLinkAboutDepartment Report 04-10-231
Carmel Plan Commission
COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE
Monday, April 10, 2023 Department Report
1. Docket No. PZ-2022-00238 ADLS: Tru Hotel Carmel.
The applicant seeks design approval for a new, five story, 126 room hotel on 1.13 acres. Development
plan approval was granted under Docket No. 19060018 DP and Use Variance approval was granted
under 18050007 UV. The site is located at 12164 N. Meridian Street, immediately north of the Ritz
Charles. It is zoned MC/Meridian Corridor and is not within any overlay district. Filed by Nathan
Winslow of American Structurepoint on behalf of the owner, Dora Hotel Group.
*Updates to the Report are written in blue
Project Overview:
The Petitioner proposes to construct a new hotel, whose general location and use was approved previously as
noted above. It is directly north of the Ritz Charles, zoned MC. North of the hotel site is the Carmel Medical
Arts Pavilion. West across Illinois Street is the Spring Lake Estates neighborhood zoned S-2/Residential, and to
the east across Meridian Street is the Wagner Reese office building, also zoned MC. Please view the
Petitioner’s informational packet for more detail.
Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Standards this project MEETS:
MC/Meridian Corridor:
• Permitted Uses: Hotel (through UV approval)
• Minimum Front Yard setback from US 31 for buildings and parking – 50’ required, about 67’ proposed
• Minimum Side Yard (south) – 15’ for principal building required, 24’ proposed
• Minimum Rear Yard (west) – 0’ for all buildings and surface parking if cooperative agreement is in
place, about 110’ proposed for hotel, 6’ for parking
• Maximum Lot Coverage – 80% allowed, about 68% proposed
• Minimum Building height –3 stories required, 5 story hotel proposed
Previous Variance Approvals on Oct. 29, 2019:
• Docket No. 19090015 V: Minimum Side Yard (north) – 20’ for surface parking required, 5’ proposed in
one area, 30’ proposed in another
• Docket No. 19090016 V: At least 2 primary buildings required for wide lot width covering at least 75%
of the lot’s width; 1 hotel and 1 office building proposed at about 45% lot width coverage
• Docket No. 19090017 V: Not meeting the Parking lot setbacks/bufferyards along future shared property
line between buildings.
• Docket No. 18050007 UV: UDO Section 2.39 Hotel Use on upper floors only allowed, hotel use
proposed on ground floor. Approved by BZA on June 25, 2018, 4-0 with a Condition* that the site plan
was not finalized and including attached residential dwelling units are a possibility. (*Background info –
the residential component was desired when there was a parking garage proposed as part of the project.
Surface parking is now proposed instead of the parking garage.)
UDO Standards NOT MET, therefore adjustments or variance requests are needed:
• 5.07.C.2. – Ground floor facades require 60% clear glazing, percent unknown
• 5.07.C.3. – Upper floors shall be designed to reflect character of an office building, may be achieved.
• 5.33 – Number of Parking spaces – 123 spaces now provided for the hotel and the office building (84
spaces on the medical office parcel and 39 spaces on the hotel parcel). This is 10 less spaces from
original site plan. Shared parking with Ritz Charles site previously approved – can 10 more spaces be
added to that agreement?
o Hotel requires 1 space per room (126) and 1 per employee per largest shift (25) – 151 required
2
• 5.29 – Requires hotels to provide long-term bicycle parking at a rate of 1 space per 15 guest rooms. 9
long term bicycle parking space are required to be included with this project.
Site Plan, Parking and Engineering:
The Petitioner is seeking design approval for the hotel building. It is still oriented west/east, fronting onto
Meridian Street. The vehicular drop off area has moved from the original plan (on the north side of the building)
to the west side of the building. The overall development plan (DP) and construction of the 3-story office
building provided the stormwater management, utility infrastructure, some parking/sidewalks, and access
drives. An access agreement with the Ritz Charles to enter the site from Illinois Street to the west is in place.
Staff has been working with the Petitioner to enhance the site circulation, which has improved from initial
submittals.
The MC district requires 1 parking space per unit plus one space per employee on the largest shift for hotels.
151 (126 rooms and 25 employees) spaces are needed for the hotel. The MC does allow for off-site parking to
count towards the total number of spaces for a site. A shared parking agreement was reached with the Ritz
Charles at the time of the DP approval. The office and hotel uses proposed for this site have compatible off hour
parking needs. Staff concluded that the 133 proposed parking spaces for this site, along with the shared parking
agreement of the Ritz, would be sufficient. The new site layout removes 10 spaces from the original plan.
Petitioner, are these lost 10 spaces able to be added to the agreement with the Ritz?
Active Transportation:
Sidewalk along the frontage road has been installed with the overall development. Additional sidewalks will be
added around the proposed building and will provide connections to the Ritz Charles building to the south.
Short-term bicycle parking is now within 50 ft. of the front door, but long-term bike parking is still missing.
Architectural Design:
The Petitioner has provided updated elevations for review and consideration and has worked with staff to make
some changes to the elevations. There are a few areas around the building that project out from the rest of the
façade. These areas now have brick siding as the exterior material, rather than EIFS. This is a step in the right
direction of reducing the amount of EIFS. The base is now brick as well and is all one color and matches the
color of the brick on the bump outs. The petitioner also toned down the colors on the vertical color bands so
they are not so bright. They also removed 2 of the bands from the north and south facades and relocated them
on the east and west to help reduce the amount of color bands on those facades and break up the large expanse
of plain EIFS on the east and west. Petitioner, what happens in the future to the color bands if the
branding changes or another use goes into the hotel? Can they be changed out? Please frame out these
color bands so they look like they have been designed into the building, almost like inset columns.
Lighting:
Site parking lot lights are existing. Building accent lights are proposed around the hotel on all facades.
Petitioner, please provide more information regarding these lights, and if they will be directed up or
down, as well as if any other lights are proposed for the building. Will the color bands be lit?
Landscaping:
Landscaping is provided all around the building base. Parking lot islands will have trees in them, as well as the
long island separating the drop off area. The Urban Forester has reviewed the landscaping plan and made
comments regarding changing the proposed tree species chosen. Trees have been added to the grass area in the
parking lot at the west border of the site, to help provide additional buffer for the neighbors.
Signage:
Large wall signs are now proposed only towards US 31 – on each side of the “wedge” architectural feature.
They will be back lit instead of internally lit. The back-lit style is preferred over the previously proposed cabinet
3
style full internal illumination. Directional signs are proposed at 5’ tall, which is over the 3’ height allotment.
Modifications are still needed to avoid variances.
January 17, 2023 Plan Commission meeting recap:
The Engineer and Architect presented the project to the Plan Commission. The brand design calls for strong
bold, clean lines, and asymmetrical features. It is a simple, economic hotel. They are here to listen to feedback
and go back to make revisions. The Plan Commission members had concern about the quality of the hotel,
concerns regarding parking, could the number of floors be reduced, use this as an opportunity to create
something unique and attractive. Plan Commission members voted to have this item go back to the Full Plan
Commission for final approval.
February 7, 2023 Commercial Committee meeting recap:
Petitioner presented some changes to the plans. The biggest outstanding items are the architecture and the
shared parking analysis. The shared parking analysis was presented and the peak time for the hotel is at night
when the other parcels don’t have a need for the parking. Petitioner stated lighting adjacent to the neighbors is
existing and this use is not adding any more parking lot lights. New lighting will be directed away from
residential, more towards Meridian St. Petitioner presented changes made to the architecture to try to address
comments from staff and Plan Commission. Petitioner stated Hilton had a few hallmarks they had to include,
which were the entry feature, multi color vertical bands, and wedge feature. The Committee discussed the color
bands, materials, EIFS, buffering for the neighbors, and branding on the building. The Committee voted to
continue the item to the March 7th Committee Meeting.
March 7, 2023 Commercial Committee meeting recap:
Petitioner tabled the item to the April 10th Committee.
DOCS Remaining Comments/Concerns:
Staff has worked with the petitioner on changes to the architecture. Several improvements to the building
design have been made including: changes to the building materials to include brick and less EIFS, reduction of
the number of color bands on the north and south facades, and a coordinated brick base color that ties into the
brick on the other areas of the building.
Responses to review comments from other TAC members have not been submitted, nor the official task sent
back to Carmel to continue the next round of reviews and edits. Staff will provide an update at the committee
meeting regarding the status of the overall project review, but some outstanding comments are listed below.
1. Are the 10 lost parking spaces from the approved DP able to be added to the agreement with the Ritz?
2. 9 long term bicycle parking spaces are required, please show where these are on the plans.
3. What percent is the 1st floor glazing? 60% minimum is required.
4. Petitioner, what happens in the future to the color bands if the branding changes or another use goes into
the hotel? Can they be changed out?
5. Please frame out these color bands so they look like they have been designed into the building, almost
like inset columns or inset mural areas.
6. Petitioner, please provide more information regarding building lights, and if they will be directed up or
down, as well as if any other lights are proposed for the building.
Recommendation:
The Department of Community Services recommends the Commercial Committee discuss this item, then
continue it to the May 4, 2023 Commercial Committee meeting for further review. Please note, the Plan
Commission voted to have this item return to the full Plan Commission when it is ready for a final vote.