HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes SpecStdy 06-01-99
u
CARMEL/CLA Y . PLAN COMMISSION
SPECIAL STUDY COMMITTEE
JUNE 1, 1999
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Special Study Committee was called to order by
Rick Sharp, Chairman, at approximately 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall, One
Civic Square, Carmel Indiana.
Committee members present were: Kevin Kirby; Bob Modisett; Jim O'Neal; Pat Rice;
Rick Sharp; and Paul Spranger; Dave Cremeans, ex-officio.
Steve Engelking, Director, Michael Hollibaugh, and Terry Jones were present
representing the Department of Community Services.
u
Item 1. Committee to consider Docket No. 14-99 Z, a rezone application for
Duke Realty Investments. The petitioner seeks approval to rezone 55 acres from B-
5/Business and S-2/Residence to B-6/Business. This site is located at the northwest
corner of 96th Street and U.S. 31 and extends north ofI-465. Petitioner also seeks
approval to rezone 10 acres from B-5/Business to B-8/Business. This site is located at
the northeast corner of 96th Street and U.S. 31. The sites are currently zoned B-
5/Business and S-2/Residence and are located partially within the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone.
Filed by Steve Granner of Bose McKinney and Evans.
;;
..
Phil Nicely, attorney, 8888 Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, appeared before the
Committee representing the applicant. Mr. Nicely referred to a number of questions
raised at the previous committee meeting regarding commitments that were submitted on
Parkwood East.
,u
The existing Parkwood commitments provide that Development Plan and Site Plan
approval be left up to the Commission. A preliminary plan approval and any change in
the plan also require Plan Commission approval. The basics have stayed the same, i.e.
building height, setbacks; etc., only the buildings have been moved around a bit. The
cost of 96th Street roadway improvements is estimated at two million doIlars--funding to
be provided through tax increment financing bonds. Based on the last analysis of the
amount of taxes generated by Parkwood East, it is anticipated that at the completion of
the buildings, taxes will be over one million dollars. A similar amount of taxes are also
expected with the proposed development.
The timing of improvements on 96th Street at the intersection will commence
contemporaneously with the start of the development and will be pursued to completion.
The appropriateness of the proposed right-in/right-out for the retail portion of the
development depends on whether or not there is a median at 96th Street. However, the
petitioner is willing to delete the right-in/right-out, regardless of whether or not there is a
median.
s: \minutes\committees\spstjun
The traffic generated from the retail on the east side of the street will occur at different
times of the day than the office. As a result, traffic is the true issue--retail puts traffic on
the street at a different time. A substantial amount of the traffic generated by the center is
already on the road.
u
Steve Fehribach of A&F Engineering explained the computations for the traffic level of
service. Proposed are two thru lanes from 96th Street westbound and eastbound to
Meridian Street that are turn lanes onto Meridian and onto 1-465. Three right turn lanes
would be westbound to northbound, one of which would be hidden behind a concrete
median all the way to 465. The right turn lane would then be continuous and would not
stop for the light. A&F Engineering has filed an amended traffic report. Some of the
numbers have changed, but it does not change the overall recommendation. Mr. Nicely
referred to a traffic report prepared by HNTB. It is the petitioner's position that it is not a
matter of determining who caused what--only that the roadway improvements need to be
made.
Regarding the installation of a sidewalk along Springmill Road, Mr. Nicely stated that the
immediate dropoff on Springmill Road was not conducive to a sidewalk. It is not a
matter of cost-it just isn't appropriate.
The current setback of buildings from the existing right-of-way of 96th Street is 220 feet.
The setback from the new, additional right-of-way of35 feet, dedicated, would be 185
feet. Ifit ever became necessary to add an additional lane to 96th Street, it could be doneD.
within the right-of-way that is proposed to be dedicated for 96th Street. .
Commitments relating to the height of the buildings -- Two commitments exist. Any
office building constructed within 460 feet of the existing center line of 96th Street will be
no higher than 5 stories; no office building should be constructed within 200 feet of the
now existing center line of 96th Street and no office building will exceed 8 stories. These
commitments relate to the southwest quadrant ofI-465 and Meridian.
Regarding the architectural treatment of the parking deck on the south and west sides, the
same commitment can be made as was made on Parkwood East, which states: The owner
commits to architecturally treat the south and west facades of any parking garage that
have unrestricted sight lines to the neighborhood to the south and west sections, the
appearance of the parking garage as viewed from the homes south of 96th Street and from
the residential area that is west of Springmill Road would be aesthetically improved from
a standard, normal parking garage. Also, no parking structure shall exceed grade level
plus three. The owner commits that any parking area shall be a minimum of 60 feet from
the existing right-of-way of 96th Street.
The petitioner is willing to make the following commitment in regard to the size and
scope of the hotel and restaurant: A limitation to 710,000 square feet of office space,
plus a 300 room hotel and two, sit-down quality restaurants approximately 14,000 square U.
feet. This commitment relates to the property south of 96th Street and west of Meridian
Street.
s:\minutes\committees\spstjun 2
u
The maximum height restriction to apply to the office buildings is none higher than 4
stories. If the buildings are within 460 feet of 961h Street, none will be higher than 5
stories.
The list of excluded uses within B-8 zoning has been expanded to eliminate: auction
room; auto tire center; billiard parlor; bowling alley; car wash; cold storage locker; dance
hall; gunsmith; indoor theatre; meeting hall; motor bus terminal/station; self-service.
laundry; shooting gallery; and skating rink. Already in existence in the commitments is a
limitation of fast food operation and gasoline service station.
The retail space will comply with the design standards set forth in the US 421 Overlay
Zone, with the exception of the height. The 421 Overlay will be used as a guideline for
submission of any ADLS approval.
Mr. Nicely stated that the petitioner has reduced the density of the development
substantially. In regard to the hardship designation, there may be a question as .10
whether or not a hardship designation in the Overlay Ordinance really fits this
development. However, the petitioner is continuing to work with the State in order to
satisfy the concerns of all parties.
Paul Satterly and Dee Swindel from HNTB were in attendance to address any questions
generated by the review of the traffic report.
u
At the request of Pat Rice, Steve Fehribach of A&F Engineering responded to
recommendations made by HNTB. There was much discussion regarding the roadway
improvements necessitated by the development with the change in zoning as opposed to
the existing zoning under the Comprehensive Plan. A comparative analysis of roadway
improvements was made between how much the taxpayers' cost would be to upgrade "as
is" as compared to the taxpayers' cost taking into account the impact of the Duke
development. Steve Fehribach pointed out that the traffic report did not say that the
intersection at 96th and Meridian would ever work at an acceptable level of service
based on the Comprehensive Plan OR the proposed development.
The HNTB report recommended a traffic signal be installed at the intersection of 96th
Street and Springmill Road. Springmill Road is an alternate route to Meridian. HNTB
could not render a professional and accurate analysis because of the lack of comparative
data.
u
Terry Jones commented that what the Comprehensive Plan does or does not allow is
under the approval of the Plan Commission and eventually City Council. The
Comprehensive Plan is a guideline.
There was general discussion regarding the amount of right-of-way available on 96th
Street; Carmel only has jurisdiction over the north side of 96th Street. If 96th Street is a
primary roadway under the guide of the Comprehensive Plan, the required right-of-way
would be 60 feet of dedication of either side for a total of 120 feet. If it is a secondary
s: \minutes\committees\spstjun
3
roadway, it would be 50 feet on either side for a total of 100 feet, or 45 feet on either side
for a total of90 feet. The discussion has been to push all of the right-of-way to the north. 0
Because of jurisdictional boundaries, there is not the ability to pull right-of-way from the....
south side, whether it is developed or not. The general discussion thus far has been to
allow for right-of-way only from the north side of 96th Street with this project.
Kevin Kirby commented that there is plenty of room to accommodate four lanes. The
chances of 96th Street becoming a 5 or 6 lane road are remote. The County is planning
on improving the bridge slightly to the west as a two-lane road, based on an 80 year life
span. Springmill Road will probably not be four lanes across 96th Street.
Bob Modisett concurred with Kevin Kirby. The four lanes in front of Parkwood East
work adequately. The intersection at 96th and College would be a similar intersection to
96th and Springmill--4 lanes should lead into it, but you could live with three lanes. The
amount of buffering and landscaping should be adequate. In the southwest quadrant,
there seems to be an issue with the power lines--if96th Street is expanded on the north
side, the power lines will have to be re-Iocated and it would be ideal to bury them at that
point. The petitioner again stated that they had discussed the situation with IPL and this
may be worked out at a later date.
Withthe rezone application is a commitment for the proposed development--at a later
date, the Development Plan and Preliminary Plat will need to be looked at. Bob Modisett
felt that the Commission was missing a great opportunity to delineate a gateway to 0
Carmel at the 96th and Meridian intersection--either a fountain, nicely landscaped, or .
some sort of signage. The petitioner responded that the right-of-way is not being
dedicated at this time.
Kevin Kirby stated that he would like to see a dollar commitment on the roadway
improvements, using the TIF money. It has been proven that roadway improvements
cannot be funded using the meager gas tax dollars. If Duke donates the right-of-way and
works with the City constructing the improvements, it will reduce the amount of the total
expenditure by the City through the TIF program.
Phil Nicely referred to the Parkwood East development and stated that Parkwood had
committed to make improvements to 96th Street by adding lanes; the County required
Parkwood to tear up the entire street and rebuild it. The petitioner had not planned on
tearing up the street, but the County required it and the petitioner funded it out-of-pocket.
In regard to the commitments on the southwest quadrant, item 1., Rick Sharp asked that
the petitioner insert language to commit to "No access to Springmill Road without Plan
Commission approval." The petitioner concurred.
Rick Sharp invited comments from the public in attendance.
Mark Rattermann inquired as to the total square footage in both quadrants as of today and
the proposal for the number oflanes. Phil Nicely responded that the southeast quadrant
u
s: \minutes\conunittees\spstjun
4
.1:.:,
u
proposal is for approximately 100,000 square feet, retail. On the southwest quadrant, the
proposal is 710,000 square feet of office space, a 300 room hotel, and two restaurants
aggregating approximately 14,000 square feet. On the northwest quadrant, the proposal
is 475,000 square feet.
There were additional comments and questions from the general public relating to
density; signage; clarification of the "proposal" by the City of Indianapolis for .
intersection improvements at 96th Street and Meridian, (actually an engineer's drawing of
what could be done); HNTB's comments; traffic reports; greenspace/buffer; and the large
amount of retail space. Also, the original commitments to Parkwood East restricted retail
use to the hotel building.
Rick Sharp, point of clarification: The proposal is a rezone request, and although retail is
proposed, there are still several hurdles, not the least of which is a variance from the U.S.
31 Overlay standards.
Bill Wendling, attorney, appeared on behalf of his clients who were also concerned with
the amount of retail space, density, and traffic and roadway improvements.'
[J
Paul Spranger moved for the approval of Docket No. 14-99 Z, Duke Realty
Investments, contingent upon inclusion of commitments to date in effect on
Parkwood East which are: building height; architectural treatment of parking garages
& grade and setback from right-of-way; and definition of "fast food" on the southeast
quadrant. Also, in regard to the southwest quadrant, the petitioner commits to: no
access to Springmill Road without Plan Commission approval; an additional 12 feet of
right-of-way dedicated by the petitioner on 96th Street from Springmill to U.S. 31; and a
submission to the City Council of recommendations made by HNTB as to analysis, cost
of improvements, differential between established base line and incremental cost of
improvements generated by the Duke proposal. APPROVED 5 in favor, Pat Rice
opposed.
NOTE: Items 2 and 3 were heard together.
Item 2. Committee to consider Docket No. 24-99 D.P./ADLS, Development Plan
and Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage applications for BK
Partners. The petitioner seeks approval to construct a 5,000 square foot retail complex
on 1.5 acres known as the Carmel Convenience Center. The site is zoned B-2/Business
and is located within the Michigan Road (U.S. 421) Overlay Zone. (Petitioner will also
be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals for consideration of three
Developmental Standards Variances.)
Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers.
u
Item 3. Committee to consider Docket No. 25-99 PP/SP, a replat application for
BK Partners. The pettioner seeks approval to replat 2 lots into 1 lot on 1.5 acres known
as lots 8 and 9 of the North Augusta Subdivision. The site is located at the northeast
s: \minutes\committees\spsuun
5
comer of Michigan Road and 97th Street. The site is zoned B-2/Business and is located
within the Michigan Road (U.S. 421) Overlay Zone.
Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers.
There is a change in the site plan from the original orientation of the building toward
Michigan Road and one curb cut onto 97th Street. As the building was shifted on the site
plan to allow access for petroleum truck, it necessitated adding a right out only onto 97th
Street. The main curb cut was moved as far to the east side of the property as possible.
A variance will be required for the drive-thru exiting on the side of the building rather
than the rear of the building, due to the 10 car stacking requirement.
The canopy was also redesigned to remQve some of the architectural issues and allow the
brick and shingled building to be more visible. Along the northern property line will be a
10 foot landscape buffer. A more complete landscape plan will be presented.
Rick Sharp commented that perhaps the parcel was too small to accommodate both a gas
station and a Burger King. Even with the re-orientation of the building, the drive-thru is
still on the side of the building. If gas islands were not being accommodated, the drive-
thru could be located to the rear. Do we want to waive the standards in place, or tailor
the development to the parcel and keep the standards in place?
The petitioner will return to Committee in July with design standards to meet the 421
Overlay.
Item 4. Committee to consider Docket No. 30-99 DP/ADLS, Development Plan
and Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage applications for the C&C
Realty Company. The petitioner seeks approval to construct a 62,500 square foot office
and warehouse complex on 5 acres. The site is located on the west side of Michigan
Road, 1/8 mile north of 96th Street. The site is zoned l-llIndustrial and is located
partially within the Michigan Road (US 421) Overlay Zone. (Petitioner may also be
appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals for consideration of Developmental
Standards Variances.)
Filed by Reed Carlson of the C&C Realty Company.
Reed and Stephanie Carlson appeared before the Committee reporting changes made in
the Site Plan. The access points to the rear of the building have been changed. The
building materials are consistent with the existing which is brick with TIll signboard
and cedar shake. There are dormers over the door for signage.
The landscaping plan has been varied with flowering crab, low-lying shrubs, and day-lily
type flowers in a planting berm.
According to the requirements of the Overlay Zone, the parking was deficient. There are
now 260 parking spaces provided and the requirement is now met.
s: \minutes\committees\spstjun
6
D
o
u
u
The building setback requirement of 120 feet is still an outstanding issue. The front yard
needs to be clarified. The building materials are split-face block. Also, the wall around
the warehouse building encloses the entire storage section, except for the entry which is
wrought iron and electrically operated.
Mike Hollibaugh reported that the Department feels the goal is closer to be achieved,
even though it's baby steps rather than giant steps. The plans were not received until late
Friday and there has not been adequate time to fully evaluate. The Department still needs
a landscape plan, lighting & signage plans, and full architectural plans at least 10 days
prior to the meeting in order to adequately review the project.
The petitioner will return to the July 6th Committee meeting.
Item 5. Committee to consider Docket No. 31-99 Z, a rezone application for
Glenwood, LLC. The petitioner seeks approval to rezone less than one acre from R-
3/Residence to B-l/Business. This site is located at 10820 North College Avenue. The
site is currently zoned R-3/Residence.
Filed by Leonard Voigt of Glenwood, LLC.
The Committee voted to lift this item from the Table for discussion.
[J
Rick Sharp commented that the Committee should move forward and explore the idea of
creating a "central business district" in the area of 106th and College Avenue. However,
in fairness to the petitioner, Glenwood, LLC needed to be disposed of in some fashion at
this time.
Kevin Kirby commented that he would like to see the area looked at as a "central
business district, " but thought it would take some time. Kevin stated that at this time, he
would not vote for the rezone. A lot more work and information needs to be gathered on
this case.
Pat Rice concurred with comments made by Kevin Kirby.
Pat Rice moved to recommend approval of Docket No. 31-99-Z to the full Plan
Commission at its meeting on June 15,1999. APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY
DENIED.
Item 6. Committee to consider Docket No. 36-99 Z, Rezone application for
Gibraltar Properties. The petitioner seeks approval to rezone 71 acres from S-
2/Residence to R-4/Residence. The site is located on the northwest corner of 96th Street
and Westfield Boulevard. The site is currently zoned S-2/Residence.
Filed by Jim Nelson of Nelson & Frankenberger.
u
Jim Nelson, attorney, appeared before the Committee representing the petitioner. Also
present on behalf of Gibraltar Properties were Harry Todd, general counsel for Gibraltar,
and Ed Elliott, development director, and Steve Fehribach of A&F Engineering.
s: \minutes\committees\spstjun
7
The petition was presented at public hearing in May with the support of the neighbors.
There were some questions in regard to the commitments and those were reviewed as U'~
follows: With respect to the site plan, the commitments were revised to eliminate the ..
word "substantial" in response to comments from Rick Sharp, except for such changes
that would result from further review by Technical Advisory Committee and/or other
governmental agencies. The petitioner is providing internal sidewalks and those are now
reflected on the drawings. With respect to the Monon trailhead, the commitments were
revised to provide for dedication of the trailhead to the Parks Department without
compensation. Also, with respect to the neighborhood park and the pedestrian pathway
that provides access to the park from the trail, the commitments were revised to say that
the petitioner will offer to the Parks Department that parcel ofland for a neighborhood
park; the petitioner agrees to equip the park to the extent of $48,000. Should the offer of
dedication not be accepted by the Parks Department, the petitioner will maintain the area
as a public park at its cost and expense.
Off-street parking has been provided and the commitments state that these parking spaces
will be reserved for park visitors and so noticed by appropriate signage in that area. The
commitment with the park as well as the trail is with respect to public access and
maintenance at the petitioner's cost and expense if the Parks Department does not accept
the neighborhood park. The park area includes the trail system leading to the Monon
Trail. The petitioner also agrees that the neighborhood park will be completed prior to
the Certificate of Occupancy being issues for the first building. The distinguishing
feature of the proposal is the architectural design of the buildings which is intended to D'
simulate large, luxury homes. The petitioner has committed to the architectural design .
and attached drawings to the commitments. The exterior building materials will be brick,
or cobblestone, dryvit, cedar siding or hardy plank siding.
The first commitments presented were signed by the owner of the real estate; if the
rezone is approved, the commitments can be recorded. There is no condition of any kind
to the owner's consent.
Rick Sharp referred to a letter dated June 1 stating that the County would like to run 96th
Street under 1-465 through the Monon. The drawing depicts 96th Street running through
the neighborhood park area.
Terry Jones referred to a letter dated March 17th from Les Locke with the County
Highway to Eric Todd of Gibraltar. The letter refers to United Consulting Engineering's
basic design of 1992 that shows the loop utilizing the Monon. The County Highway's
position is that until something can be determined as far as an alternative, the option or
future opportunity to use the Monon at a future date should not be eliminated. Terry
Jones stated that the use is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan; the problem is with
the Thoroughfare Plan. As laid out, there has been no consideration for 96th Street; for a
rezone, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Thoroughfare Plan. There is a 150 foot "no U
build" area, and the neighborhood park is located specifically where 96th Street would be
located. In essence, the development, as laid out, has a certain problem with the
Thoroughfare Plan.
s: \rninutes\comminees\spstjun
8
u
Terry Jones stated the County Highway's position that the area shown as right-of-way on
the plans prepared by United Consulting needs to be preserved as such for a future
extension of 96th Street, not just an area where nothing will be built. Terry stated that
96th Street extended, in whatever fashion, is a part of Carmel's Thoroughfare Plan, the
same as for the County.
Kevin Kirby commented that the County would like to reserve all options. The County
wants to preserve the possibility of snaking over and under the Monon; according to Pat
Rice, it was recommended in a study that this option be removed--that recommendation
passsed the Plan Commission and City Council. The 150 foot no build area appears on
the plan to provide for future extension, if any.
Jim Nelson stated that in the June, 1997 report, the recommendations that were adopted
were transportation alternatives 2.,3., and 4. be removed as improvement options;
number 2 was the "S" curve.
Bob Modisett commented that the "S" curve plan was way out of bounds with the Parks
Board's vision for this area.
o
Pat Rice asked to see the kinds of leases and wording involved, and how the additiona~
off-street parking will be handled. The counsel for Gibraltar responded that those leases
have not yet been drafted. Also, the total count for parking spaces, including garages,
drives, and additional parking per the site plan, there are 1280 parking spaces. The
petitioner stated a willingness to restrict parking to no more than two cars per unit
without written consent of the management.
Terry Jones commented that as far as required parking for apartments or multi-family, the
Department has previously not included two spaces in a garage because of the storage
capability.
Kevin Kirby moved for the approval of Docket No. 36-99 Z, rezone for Gibraltar
Properties.
Bob Modisett questioned if the petitioner were willing to commit to voluntary annexation
and also, what provision had been made for dedication of the Monon Trail itself in terms
of right-of-way. The petitioner stated a willingness to commit in writing to annexation.
As explained to the petitioner, the City will own the Monon Trail and the Parks Board
will own the Trailhead.
Kevin Kirby commented that at the very least, some agreement as to the fair market value
of the land should be,budgeted for the trail. Jim Nelson agreed to formalize a separate
commitment.
u
Mike Hollibaugh suggested that the possibility of the 96th Street extension be clearly
demarcated on the plan for future use.
s: \minutes\committees\spstjun
9
Terry Jones commented that as of this moment, the proposal does not meet the
Thoroughfare Plan.
There was further discussion regarding the identification of right-of-way. It was decided
that the proposed right-of-way should be delineated as a 45 foot one-half along the
southern edge of the park.
The motion for approval on Docket No. 36-99 Z, Gibraltar Properties, was
APPROVED 6 in favor, none opposed.
There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:45 PM.
~~PCt
ona Hancock, Secretary
s: \minutes\cornmittees\spstjun
10
o
o
u