Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Sub 05-14-021,1`I y G`'`y of Cq,9y C ity CARMEL /CLAY PLAN COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM OF MEETING MAY 14, 2002 The Subdivision Committee of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission convened at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall on May 14, 2002, Carmel, Indiana. Members present were: Dave Cremeans; Ron Houck; Norma Meighen; and Maureen Pearson. Marilyn Anderson was in attendance as an ex- officio officer. The Department of Community Services was represented by Jon Dobosiewicz. 1. Docket No. 127 -01 Z; U.S. Highway 31 146 Street PUD (Rezone) Petitioner seeks favorable recommendation of a rezone from the B -3 (Business) and R -1 (Residence) districts to a PUD /planned unit development district on 56.79 acres. The site is located at the southwest corner of US Highway 31 and East 146 Street. Filed by Paul G. Reis of The Reis Law Firm for the Lauth Property Group. Paul Reis, 5013 Buckeye Court, Carmel appeared before the Committee representing the petitioner. Matt Brown of A &F Engineering was also in attendance as well as Joe Downs from the Lauth Property Group; and Jeff Gunning, RTKL Architects. Most all of the issues regarding the rezone of this property have been resolved. A revised Ordinance was distributed, and as of this evening, a final agreement has been reached with Scott Brewer, Urban Forester, concerning the tree preservation and reforestation plan. Matt Brown of A &F Engineering has supplied traffic information to John Myers and all of John's concerns have been addressed. The petitioner is awaiting final approval of the design from the Hamilton County Highway Dept. Once the final design has been approved, it will be sent to John Myers; it is not anticipated that anything will change concerning traffic flow and traffic study previously sent to John Myers. One of the issues being reviewed is the signage, in particular the monument signage. The signage shown is for a height of 7 feet rather than the 12 feet previously requested, 360 square feet. Joe Downs explained that the signs are intended to mark the entrance to a "district" or "town" and not as a shopping center. The signage is an important part of the concept of creating the main street, pedestrian shopping environment. S:\PlanCommission\Minutes\SubdivisionCommittee\2002mayl4 Dave Cremeans said he was uncomfortable with signage on the interior of the project; there is no signage on the facade facing US 31; there would be way finding ground signs. Ron Houck had additional signage questions, and Section 10.3.2 was specifically discussed. Paul Reis had the following comments: There are potentially two to six tenants. When it is decided exactly what will go on the sign, it will go through the ADLS process. What is shown is a graphic exhibit. The font will be identical and way signage would all conform in order to make it more readable. The multi- tenant ground floor buildings along Range Line Road will have signage only on Range Line Road. As long as a tenant is within the ADLS approved for the building, they can go through the process quickly. If they want to change colors, they can, but they must go through the ADLS process for change. Awning signs: Signs may be imprinted on permanent awnings pursuant to ADLS approval with total area not to exceed In the case of a single tenant building, signage shall be permitted by Ordinance Z302. Dave Cremeans commented that the Committee is re- inventing the Sign Ordinance and would rather the wording say, "in accordance with whatever the Sign Ordinance says." The 200 square foot sign permitted on the big box on three sides is something the Department cannot live with. Lowe's was permitted 75 and 90 square foot signs. This proposal allows 200 square foot signs on three sides. Window Signage was also discussed; the Ordinance permits a maximum sign area not to exceed 30% of the total window area. The Department is not opposed to window signage, and it is felt to be appropriate for the character of the area. The draft PUD was gone over page -by -page, and comments and questions were addressed at that time. It was decided to have the Committee meet on Monday, May 20, 2002 to continue reviewing this item, picking up with Section 6.4, in the hope that a recommendation could be made to the full Commission at its meeting on Tuesday, May 21, 2002. 2. Docket No. 151 -01 PP Amend; Spring Run Estates, Section 1 The applicant seeks approval to amend Spring Run Estates, Section 1 Subdivision to exclude Block A as identified on the plat. The site is generally located at the northeast corner of West 106 Street and Crooked Stick Lane. The site is zoned S- I /Residence. Filed by Dennis Olmstead of Stoeppelwerth Associates for Glenn E. Christian. Zeff Weiss, attorney and principal of Manchester Properties, LLC, owner of the subject property, appeared before the Committee. As a matter of clarification, Mr. Weiss stated Dennis Olmstead is the engineer and Glenn Christian is the consulting assistant on this project. Request is being sought to amend the primary plat of Spring Run Estates, Section 1, in order to exclude Block A as identified on the plat. The site is located at the northeast corner of West 106 Street and Crooked Stick Lane. A preliminary plat was filed providing for 23 lots. There are 28 acres that front on 106 Street and Ditch Road, on the northwest corner. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes \SubdivisionCommittee \2002may14 2 The petitioner is requesting vacation of Block A, a strip of land approximately 12,000 square feet from the end of Lot 1 of Spring Run Estates to the north right -of -way line of 106 Street. Mr. Weiss said if anything is done smaller than 5 acre tracts, the petitioner does not have to return to the Plan Commission. No doubt variances will be required at a future date. Normally, nothing would need to be done until the property is platted; however, the neighbors have been fairly aggressive in their discussion as to what they would like to see and they seem to think this is an issue for them. The sole purpose in appearing before the Commission at this time is to be in a position to plat this later. To the extent the neighbors would file a lawsuit, it is preferable for them to do that now rather than later at the time of permitting. If this property were developed as a Subdivision, the petitioner would return to the Commission for approval of the location of the street dedicated for access. Both the planning staff and the County highly recommend that if this is developed as a Subdivision, the access should be located somewhere along Crooked Stick Lane, not on 106 Street and not on Ditch Road because of the traffic pattern. Jon Dobosiewicz said it is prudent on behalf of the petitioner and property owner to resolve the issue, if any there be, as opposed to bringing in a plat, having the Plan Commission consider it, and then having the Court decide something different, and then going through the process again. The Department is in support of the petitioner's request in regard to Block A from a planning standpoint. Ron Houck moved to recommend approval of Docket No. 151 -01 PP Amend, Spring Run Estates, Section 1, seconded by Norma Meighen. The motion was approved 4 -0. Note: Items 3, 4, and 5 were heard together. 3. Docket No. 10 -02 Z; Village of West Clay Rezone The petitioner seeks approval to rezone an area on the West side of Towne Road (within the existing PUD) from Secondary Area to Primary Area. The site is generally located at the southwest corner of West 131s' Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned PUD /Planned Unit Development. Filed by Jose Kreutz of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC. 4. Docket No. 11 -02 OA; Village of West Clay PUD Text Amendment Petitioner seeks favorable recommendation of a text amendment to a PUD /planned unit development district. The site is generally located at the southeast corner of West 131s Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned PUD /Planned Unit Development. Filed by Jose Kreutz of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC. 5. Docket No. 12 -02 PP Amend; Village of West Clay Primary Plat Amendment Petitioner seeks approval of an amendment to the Primary Plat for an area of the Village of West Clay on the west side of Towne Road. The site is generally located at the southwest corner of West 131S Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned PUD /Planned Unit S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes \SubdivisionCommittee \2002may14 3 Development. Filed by Jose Kreutz of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC. Jose Kreutz of Brenwick Communities appeared before the Committee representing the petitioner. George Sweet was also in attendance. The petitioner is requesting rezone of an area on the west side of Towne Road, favorable recommendation of a text amendment to the Village of WestClay PUD, and amendment of the Primary Plat for the Village of WestClay. Mr. Tom Neal, 2555 West 131S Street, adjacent to the Village, submitted a letter representing himself and his wife, Wendy Fortune. Ms. Fortune owns the real estate constituting the entire western boundary of the property cited in Docket No. 12 -02 PP, and is the intervening property owner between that and the property cited in Docket No. 10 -02 Z. Ms. Fortune is clearly the most affected and the only adjoining property owner in the area for both of these Dockets. There are two items that were brought to the attention of the Plan Commission addressing concerns raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting in April. The first item was a discussion regarding the retail or commercial use of the project west of Towne Road. The petition has been amended to provide for 41 lots on the west side of Towne Road within the existing Village of WestClay project that are permitted to be used for primary use /mixed use. The petitioner is precluding the use of any commercial activity west of Towne Road. The second amendment refers to definitions. The architectural building guidelines were proposed for review and approval by the Department rather than the Plan Commission. Review and approval rights have been restored to the full Plan Commission. Also, the proposal is to permit home -based offices only on that portion of the Village that is zoned primary area /mixed use. Currently there are 344 lots or homes within the project that are permitted to have a home -based office area. By virtue of the proposed change, the number of home -based offices is reduced to 224 lots. There was discussion regarding commercial areas west of Towne Road—currently that is a possibility. Also, an Inn or a Bed Breakfast with no more than 100 bedrooms or suites is permitted west of Towne Road. The caveat is that only one Bed and Breakfast or Inn is permitted anywhere on the 686 acres of the Village. Jon Dobosiewicz clarified that the proposed uses could not front on Towne Road and in all likelihood, an Inn would go on the large, centrally located, crescent shaped lot by virtue of its size and how it would fit into the area being requested as mixed use. There will be no commercial use that fronts on Towne Road. Also, the Department encouraged Brenwick to make some of the changes because it was felt to be prudent design -wise, and prudent to provide additional clarification. No one is trying to "sneak" anything in —these are suggestions made by the Department to make the development better. There was discussion involving a service station. George Sweet said whether it is allowed or not, he would not want the service station on Towne Road or 131S Street, and he would not want gas pumps to be visible. Marilyn Anderson asked if a filling station is already permitted. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes \SubdivisionCommittee \2002may14 4 Jon Dobosiewicz referred to the PUD which reads "One automobile service station, including the sale of gasoline or other automobile It does not make it clear that we are talking about filling station pumps—it is a housekeeping matter. What we are trying to say and make clear is that we may have a service station, and it may have pumps in it. The discussion went on to cover two car garages —every home within the Village must have two car garages with two parking spaces available, whether through a home or a two- car garage. Tom Neal addressed the Committee with the following, outstanding concerns: The placement of the power lines and the sub station at 141S Street on Towne Road. There are existing power lines on Towne Road now, but there would be new, high transmission lines from the new substation and this is a major concern. The retention pond should also be built as shown on the amended plat to ensure space and privacy between their property and the Village. Tom Neal has previously worked with Brenwick's staff regarding street lighting and the Church. Jose Kreutz said the power lines are currently 4 feet from the edge of pavement. Towne Road is to be a parkway, and Brenwick dedicated 140 feet of right -of -way with landscaping along the roadside and in the median. The intent at that time was for the poles to stay in the median of the right -of -way. Cinergy has now informed us that that is not feasible —the poles should go on one side of the road or the other. From an aesthetics standpoint, not having the poles along Towne Road was not a bad thing. Brenwick has agreed with Tom Neal to leave them and take into account the future right -of -way of Towne Road and place them along the edge, one side or the other. This issue has been settled. Tonya Guererro, northwest corner of 131S and Towne Road, still has problems with the density. There are 50 more units than were originally agreed upon. Jon Dobosiewicz referred to the original primary plat in which 12 lots would be directly visible from Ms. Guererro's property —under the proposed primary plat, there would be 9 lots directly visible and 5 of the lots along the east side are farther away due to the larger detention area. Jose Kreutz commented they are not changing the density, the permitted density of 2 units per acre remains. It is how the lots are distributed. If the place of worship is approved, 29 lots will be deleted. Dave Cremeans referred to two remaining issues —the hotel (Inn) on the west side of Towne Road, and automobile repair. The desired situation is no commercial expansion west of Towne Road. Dave said he would be comfortable with a 10 room Bed Breakfast, NOTHING over 10 rooms. Jon Dobosiewicz commented Brenwick is trying to create something that terminates a vista, and that something does not want to be a single family house but rather something with some mass and draw to it something that creates a sense of community and attachment to what is on the east side of Towne Road. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes \SubdivisionCommittee \2002may14 5 George Sweet said the original PUD Ordinance let the Village do things outside the center that were concentrated in the center, but they have chosen not to do that. Brenwick is trying to create a good living environment on every lot and it is in their best interest to do that. We are asking for a Vista that ties the two sides together. Dave Cremeans consistently said he had trouble with a hotel or Inn concept. Also, an automobile repair center /service station was an issue. Brenwick volunteered to eliminate this language, already in the Ordinance. Dave Cremeans said he would be more comfortable with the entire Plan Commission voting on the elimination of the language. Maureen Pearson moved for the approval of Docket No. 11 -02 OA, Village of WestClay PUD Text Amendment, with the exception of a 100 room Inn west of Towne Road, a change in language clarifying automobile service station; and 4 -unit, attached homes. Motion Died for lack of a second. Maureen Pearson moved for the approval of Docket No. 11 -02 OA, Village of WestClay PUD Text Amendment, conditioned upon striking Section 5.1H, the 100 bedroom Inn west of Towne Road, and eliminating the 4 -unit, attached homes west of Towne Road. The motion was seconded by Ron Houck and voted 3 in favor, one opposed. (Norma Meighen) Motion Denied. Norma Meighen moved to recommend approval of Docket No. 11 -02 OA, Village of WestClay PUD Text Amendment, conditioned upon striking Section 5.1H, the 100 bedroom Inn west of Towne Road, and eliminating the 4 -unit, attached homes west of Towne Road. The motion was seconded by Ron Houck and voted 4 in favor, none opposed. MOTION APPROVED. Ron Houck moved to recommend approval of Docket No. 10 -02 Z, Village of WestClay Rezone. The motion was seconded by Maureen Pearson and approved 4 in favor, none opposed. MOTION APPROVED Ron Hock moved to recommend approval of Docket No. 12 -02 PP Amend, Village of WestClay Primary Plat Amendment. The motion was seconded by Norma Meighen and approved 4 in favor, none opposed. MOTION APPROVED 6. Docket No. 38 -02 OA; Amendments to the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance The petitioner seeks to add new provisions and make several corrective amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Filed by the Department of Community Services. This item was moved to Monday, May 20, 2002 for discussion. There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 PM. Ramona Hancock, Secretary Dave Cremeans, Chairperson S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes \SubdivisionCommittee \2002may14