Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 06-18-24 8 Plan Commission Minutes 6-18-24 perimeter of the site anywhere it would discharge into the existing pond there. Minnaar: You said the gravel driveway is part of the problem with runoff into the pond? Welch: It’s hard to say what is the cause of the silt build up in the pond. It certainly could be part of the issue, but we don’t have an objective way to measure that. I would say what we are doing is improving that condition. Minnaar: Paving the driveway will certainly help that situation. Welch: It will, and our underground detention system has capacity to let sediment settle out before it is released to the pond. We are installing an aqua swirl unit as well on the plans which does the same thing it is very effective at letting sediment settle out of the water before it discharges. Motion by Buckler and seconded by Kirsh to suspend the Rules of Procedure. APPROVED 8-1 Motion by Kirsh and seconded by Coleman to approve on condition of TAC and Engineering staff approvals. APPROVED 9-0 New Business 1. Docket No. PZ-2024-00070 ADLS: Tru Hotel. 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. Filed by Vince Dora, owner of Dora Hotel Group. Petitioner: Murry Clark – Law Firm of Faegre Drinker: • Clark provided a brief background on the previous version of the project submitted before the Plan Commission some years prior. He stressed that in the time since the first version of the project was proposed that the client had worked closely with staff to address all comments and concerns that had been raised and that 15 significant changes were specifically called out in the following presentation: o Increased the total number of parking spaces by 13 parking spaces (a net increase of 3 spaces from the approved Development Plan (19060018 DP): Relocated the main entrance and drop off from the west side of the hotel to the north side, retained all existing parking on the west side of the building, and utilized existing dumpster pad for proposed enclosure. o Re-designed the interior of first floor to accommodate the change in building entry location. o Eliminated the wedge-shaped brand feature and incorporated a custom designed metal blade sign on the east side of the building to function as the mounting surface for two brand identity signs. o Reduced the size of the branded signs on the new blade feature. o Eliminated the small sign at the secondary entry on the North side of the building. o Eliminated the branded dark EIFS band at the second floor. o Completely re-designed the roof line to provide a modern top cornice horizontally extended feature with soft concealed LED lighting to give it a floating appearance at night. o Completely re-designed East and West ends of the building to provide strong contrasting brick features. o Re-designed the NW corner to draw attention to the building entry location with the same strong contrasting brick accent language. o Added windows on the East and West ends of the building to add interest to the façade. o Incorporated short term (exterior) bicycle parking and long term (interior) bicycle parking. o Changed brand colors on the vertical bands. o Changed canopy colors to match the rest of the building. o Reduced the building façade lighting to only the minimum needed for safety on the side of the building that faces the residential properties. o Added as much clear glass on the first floor of the building as we possibly could considering the nature of this building type (ie. Not retail or office) • It was noted that a variance would be required for the proposed blade sign on the building due to its size being more than what is permitted by the UDO. 9 Plan Commission Minutes 6-18-24 Petitioner: Vince Dora, owner of Dora Hotel Group: • Dora gave a short statement on the intent of the design changes outlined previously by Clark indicating that the proposed changes such as ‘beefing up” exterior materials and toning down the colors were made to “Caramelize” the building and make it unique in comparison to the standard brand design. Petitioner: Nathan Winslow – American Structurepoint: • Winslow reiterated items of importance that had changed regarding the site design from the initial project proposal such as relocation of the main entrance and drop off from the west side of the hotel to the north side allowing for retention of existing parking on the west side of the building. He went on to showcase building elevations of the original and now the most up to date proposal to visually demonstrate the architectural changes outlined previously by Clark. Department Report: Rachel Keesling: • Keesling noted that the project had held off until now to satisfy its one year waiting period since rejection by the Plan Commission. The project has various variances still active as follows: o Use variance to allow the hotel to not be full service since the location is next door to the Ritz Charles conference center. The purpose of the hotel is to be complimentary to the facility thus not requiring its own conference center. o Development standards variance for the north side yard. o Development standards variance for the Merdian Corridor frontage requirement not at 75%. o Development standards variance for a parking lot setback and landscape buffer not met along the shared property line between the buildings. • Parking was a major concern when the first iteration of the project was reviewed by the Plan Commission since the proposed hotel would share parking with an existing medical office building. The proposed lobby and drop off area have been shifted from the west back to the north elevation of the building allowing for parking spaces to be readded to meet the required count. A reciprocal parking agreement is still active with the Ritz Charles for additional parking as well. There are 138 proposed spaces on site, 151 were required to be compliant with parking standards. The 13 additional spaces needed are gained through the agreement. • The building proposed is 43% brick, 30% glass and metal, and 26% EIFS. She reiterated Dora’s statement that the building design had been “Caramelized” with significant design improvements and modifications from the standard brand building. • Vehicular canopies have been expanded in size and an additional canopy added on the east elevation. • An artistic element was desired for the US 31 facing elevation. Staff worked with the petitioner to come up with a decorative blade sign. The signs design is too wide per the sign standards so a variance shall be required. Staff indicated support for such a variance. • Staff is supportive of the petition on condition of sign variance approval and finalization of TAC staff review comments. Committee Comments: Campagna: Page 19 are we looking at an LED feature near the top? If so, is that needed? Keesling: The one thing I could add for that is as long as the lighting is completely concealed it is not against the ordinance to have a light feature like this. Winslow stated that while nothing is required regarding the lighting they believe it is a pleasant architectural feature that enhances the building. Grabow: The two buildings to the north also have a light feature that are neither architectural nor functional, well I guess you could call it architectural. On the east elevation the canopy extension at that entrance what is the clearance along that sidewalk when you take out the space occupied by the two columns? Winslow did not have the exact measurements on hand but noted that the width of the sidewalk would be at least 5 feet to be in compliance with ADA requirements. Buckler: My concern remains the amount of parking. When the Ritz has a big event, I think I have mentioned this last go 10 Plan Commission Minutes 6-18-24 around I have had to park at IU North and walk down. So, I was very interested to see that a parking garage was at least discussed. Is that indeed a possibility at some point? Keesling: I would say anything is a possibility. We did have a parking study done. It is not 100% complete in that it is still in draft form, but we did have one done and included it in the department report. I would say the most obvious solution to parking for those events is a parking garage. She [parking study consultant] stated that the parking needs will only grow as the Ritz’s business grows, and that those types of events could probably still need 400-600 spaces if we were really going to fully accommodate parking needs on those days. The solutions that she offered were obviously a parking garage or no parking garage and you find other ways to get people to the building that has the event. Or you could assist in funding a parking garage and that would take a lot more from the City and the Ritz to go into some form of an agreement to make that happen. There were talks of other non-parking solutions such as coordinating when events are held or work on making agreements with other parcels in the area, which we talked about last time. She even mentioned a monitoring system for the hotels to be able to use their shared spaces during that time. But then there were other things not mentioned like shuttles or on-street parking that could be constructed. On the south side of the Hyatt and between IU Health there is a large easement area that has flat ground. Perhaps we could build a road with parking there. There are lots of other ideas that were not really vetted or put into this report. So, the report essentially told us what we already knew – they have a need for excess parking on certain event days. Westermeier: But no solutions? Keesling: Solution ideas were given, but we do not have a solution that has been fully decided and agreed upon. That has not happened. Yet for this project, the hotel changed their site plan so that it is giving the most parking that they can have on their site and requiring the least amount to be overflowed into the neighboring parcel. Commissioner Grabow inquired if the parking study took into consideration non-patron parking and Keesling confirmed that it did. Clark reiterated that large events with parking issues like Commissioner Buckler alluded to were rare, that the Meridian Corridor plan contemplates shared parking for the dense style development in the area, and that the owners of Ritz Charles were comfortable with the shared parking plan. Grabow expressed his relief that even if parking did become an issue at some point that it would be an issue for commercial businesses in the area, not residential properties having cars parked on their streets. Kirsh still expressed concern that if they approved this plan and it led to a parking issue, it would then be on the City to work to alleviate the problem. Grabow agreed with Kirsh that the situation was not ideal but that the businesses in the area could work together towards a shared solution if they had to. Bill Nichols, owner of the Ritz Charles, spoke briefly to the Plan Commission about how the days that parking pressure points are reached due to high volume are still rare. There are options for parking expansion for the next five to ten years of growth. Such possibilities included expanding into wooded lots nearby to make new parking areas for the business’s trucks or relocation of the trucks on days of very large events. Zoccola: On the Ritz Charles shared parking, how is that going to be? Are these spots going to be labeled? Will the guests know where they need to park versus parking somewhere else? Nichols mentioned some signage on the southern edge of the Ritz Charles property that abuts the other hotel that he is not a fan of, but did not provide a direct answer to Zoccola’s question. He just said that he and the other business owners in the area were willing to work together to find parking solutions and would even entertain working with the City one day to get a parking garage if growth continued in the fashion it is now. Motion by Buckler, seconded by Campagna to approve on condition of variance approval for proposed signage. APPROVED 9-0 Meeting adjourned at 8:32 PM. _____________________________________ ________________________________________ Bric Butler PC Secretary Brad Grabow President