Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 08-20-02o o �y�< ON H rl I City of Carmel CARMEUCLAY PLAN COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2002 MINUTES The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel /Clay Plan Commission met at 7:00 PM on August 20, 2002 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Plan Commission members present were: Marilyn Anderson; Jerry Chomanczuk; Dave Cremeans; Dan Dutcher; Wayne Haney (early exit;) Ron Houck; Nick Kestner; Dianna Knoll; Norma Meighen (early exit;) Maureen Pearson; Pat Rice; Paul Spranger; and Wayne Wilson (late arrival.) The Department of Community Services was represented by Michael Hollibaugh, Director; Jon Dobosiewicz, Kelli Lawrence; and Laurence Lillig. Adrienne Keeling, Code Enforcement Officer, was also present and well as John Molitor, legal counsel. The minutes from the July meeting were approved as submitted. F. Legal C'onnsel Report John Molitor reported on the Executive Committee meeting prior to the full Commission meeting this evening. John Molitor provided an up -date on litigation for the Leeper Electric property at 131 Street and US 31. Negotiations are continuing in looking for any possible way to settle that might also include participation by the State. The trial date is still set for November; unfortunately INDOT will not likely make a decision on the exact route of the roadway improvements or placement of the interchanges until later in the year or perhaps early 2003. Also, the procedure for Secondary Plat approval was discussed. There was a question as to what constitutes "substantial" changes from the Primary Plat, and whether or not the changes should go back to the Plan Commission for review. A change in procedure would also involve a formal change to the Rules of Procedure. G. The Department reports no concerns at this time. S:\PlanCommission\Minutes\PlanCommissioriMinutes\2002augMEMO H. Pnhlic Hearing 1h. Docket No. 70 -02 PP; Williams Ridge Subdivision (70 -02b SW Only) The applicant seeks approval toxlat a 6 -lot residential subdivision. The site is located on the north side of 116 Street,' /2 mile west of Gray Road. The site is zoned R -1 /Residence. The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 70 -02a SW SCO 8.9.1 sidewalks 70 -02b SW SCO 6.5.7 orientation of home Filed by Max Mouser of Weihe Engineers. Note: This item heard concurrently with item 7i. under Old Business. Max Mouser of Weihe Engineers appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Steve Miller of Connelly Homes was also present. The applicant is seeking approval to plat a six lot, residential subdivision on the north side of 116 Street, approximately one -half mile west of Gray Road. The applicant is requesting approval of subdivision waivers A seven foot masonry wall is proposed along 116 Street. Currently, there are three homes located on this site, and those will be removed. There are tree preservation measures provided in the covenants and restrictions, and those have been provided to the City's Urban Forester. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department. The request for subdivision waivers was discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting on August 6 In addition, on the plans, modifications have been made to accommodate off -site drainage issues with regard to properties to the west. It is anticipated that modifications to the plat will provide for better drainage to the homes that exist today on the western border of the property. The Department's request is for the Plan Commission to act this evening after Suspension of the Rules of Procedure on the waiver request for orientation of homes and favorable consideration of the Primary Plat. Dave Cremeans said these items were discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting and there was no public input at that time. The Committee unanimously approved the waivers requested. The Committee felt it was better to have the first lot face the street in the Subdivision. The incorporation of a 7 foot high brick wall, and the elimination of sidewalks on the east side where there are no homes, and off -site drainage for the neighbors was thoroughly discussed. The Committee felt this would be a good project, and voted unanimously to approve the waivers. Ron Houck moved to suspend the Rules of Procedure, seconded by Jerry Chomanczuk, approved unanimously. Dave Cremeans moved for approval of Docket No. 70 -02 PP, Williams Ridge Subdivision primary plat, and Subdivision Waivers 70 -02a and 70 -02b SW. The motion was seconded by Ron Houck and approved. (12 -0) S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 2 2h. Docket No. 92 -02 CA; Merchants' Pointe, Lot 6- Commitment Amendment Petitioner seeks Commitment Amendment approval to revise the retail square footage and number of tenants permitted on Lot 6 within the Merchants' Pointe Subdivision. The site is located at 2325 Pointe Parkway. The site is zoned B- 8 /Business. Filed by James J. Nelson of Nelson Frankenberger for The Linder Company. Jim Nelson, 12481 Medalist Parkway, attorney with Nelson Frankenberger, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Gary Linder and Buddy Hennessee, The Linder Company; and Barbara Eden, Carson Designs. The Linder Company is requesting the amendment of Commitments Concerning the Use and Development of Real Estate commonly known as Merchants Pointe, a mixed -use development at the southwest corner of 116 Street and Keystone Avenue. Specifically, the applicant is asking for the commitments to be amended to permit retail use of the three tenants on the first floor of the proposed two -story building to be located on lot number 6. As of today, the following stores are completed and operational: Borders Bookstore on lot 95; Macaroni Grill on lot #4; Longhorn Steakhouse on lot #3; O'Charley's on lot 92. Soon to be occupied on lot 92 is the small retail, service, office and restaurant facility. Under construction and soon to be completed is Forum Credit Union on lot #1 at the corner of Merchants Pointe Boulevard and AAA Way. The one exception to completion is the proposed, two -story office building located on lot #6. As proposed, this was to be a 30,000 square foot, two -story office building and was designated as the "flagship" building for Merchants Pointe. The financing for this building requires a pre- commitment from tenants and the applicant has been unable to find office tenants for this building. Interest has been expressed in the use of the first floor as retail use, high -end retail tenants. If this were to come about, offices would remain on the second floor and it would be the intention of The Linder Company to move its corporate offices into the space on the second floor. A provision for retail use on the first floor does require some modifications to the design of the first building that was approved. On August 6 a redesign of this building was presented to the Special Study Committee and approved subject to a commitment that up- lighting would be located in the median of the boulevard running through Merchants Pointe —this has been completed. Also, signage for the retail tenant was to be reduced by 20% and the applicant allowed 80% of that allowed under the Carmel Sign Ordinance. The re- designed building that accommodates retail on the first floor and approved by the Special Study Committee provides for the following: three entrances on the north side of the building, each to serve up to three tenants proposed for the first floor; the entrance to the second floor office suite is located on the west elevation of the building. In addition, planter boxes have been provided in the front of the building, and sidewalks leading to the three tenant spaces. Consistent throughout Merchants Pointe, the applicant has provided for the blue fabric awnings, each above the three, proposed tenant entrances. Implementation of this design as approved by the Committee requires an amendment to the commitments originally made providing for a S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 3 partial change in use. As originally presented, there was to be a minimum of 30,000 square feet of office space —there will now be 15,000 square feet. Secondly, no building was to have more than two retail tenants; the proposed building would have up to three retail tenants. Consistent with the re- design of the building, the applicant is asking for the Commission's consideration of an amendment to Commitments previously made to provide for retail use on the first floor of this building. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department. There is no objection to this request; however, the commitment was attendant to a rezone that was adopted by the City Council. The Plan Commission made a recommendation based upon that commitment and the City Council adopted the rezone. The Department does not have a good understanding as to whether or not this particular aspect of the commitments were made in large part to the decision of the Council to approve the rezone. The Department is asking that some position be gathered by the petitioner in relaying to the Plan Commission whether or not the Council had some concern regarding the request. Pat Rice reported for the Committee. The vote was unanimous to approve the amendments and there is no apparent reason for this item to be returned to Committee. Jim Nelson said he had presented this matter to the Council on several occasions and according to his notes, there were four primary concerns. 1) The tree line was to be maintained along Keystone Avenue; 2) The property was to be developed in a series of buildings and there would not be a single building in a shopping center -type environment; 3) The City would obtain the right -of -way for the 116 Street project; and 4) The Council wanted assurances by Woodland Country Club that their remaining land would not be developed for other commercial uses. There is no proposal for signage on the office building at this time. More than likely, signage would be a single ground sign, and possibly a directory sign identifying tenants within. Dave Cremeans confirmed Mr. Nelson's characterization of the Committee's response to this proj ect. Ron Houck asked about the entrance on the end of the proposed building and whether or not it divided tenant space. Barbara Eden with Carson Design Associates explained the entrance on the west end of the building is to the first floor lobby that has an elevator to the second floor into the office space. The space for the last, west tenant wraps around from the middle of the space to the south side of the building and eliminates retail space on the first floor. Currently, if this were a single story, multi tenant building the Ordinance would allow all of the individual tenants with individual doorways to have signs on the face of the building. Because S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 4 of the fact that this is a two -story building, it can no longer be considered under our Ordinance under the same characteristic as a multi tenant, single story; the additional story takes it out of the category. The Ordinance does not really fully address the situation. It is anticipated that there will be modifications made to the Ordinance to address this type of use /situation. Pat Rice moved to waive the Rules of Procedure, seconded by Ron Houck, unanimously approved. Pat Rice moved for approval of Docket No. 92 -02 CA, Merchants' Pointe, Lot 46, Commitment Amendment. The motion was seconded by Ron Houck and APPROVED 12 -0. 3h. Docket No. 93 -02 PV; Shelbourne Greene, Section 8, Plat Vacation Petitioner seeks to vacate Section 8 of the Shelbourne Green Subdivision. The site is located on the east side of Shelbourne Road, 1/8 mile north of 96th Street. The site is zoned R- I /Residence. Filed by Charles D. Frankenberger of Nelson Frankenberger for the Evangelical Baptist Missions. Charlie Frankenberger, 5212 Carrington Circle, Carmel, attorney with Nelson Frankenberger, appeared before the Plan Commission representing the applicant. Also present are Larry Brevant and Dr. Paul Jackson, general director. The Evangelical Baptist Missions provides missions training and other administrative support to mobilize local churches on either side of the ocean. Evangelical Baptist Missions facilitates global ministry by assisting churches of different denominations with every detail of preparing and sending missionaries around the world. To carry out this purpose, they are acquiring as their office site, the real estate located on the east side of Shelbourne Road, 1/8 mile north of 96 Street, consisting of two parcels. The two parcels total 3.64 acres and zoned R -1 /Residence. Approximately 2 of the 3.64 acres are platted as lot 331 within Section 8 of the Shelbourne Green residential subdivision. This is the only lot within the plat; the balance of the real estate is approximately 1.64 acres and is occupied in part by the College Park Baptist Church. In order to building their office, Evangelical Baptist Missions needs two approvals. First, with respect to platted lot 331, the plat and covenants need to be vacated. Without the vacation, the real estate cannot be combined for a single use on which one building will exist. The second approval is for a Use Variance for the entire 3.64 acres and the applicant will be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals on August 26, 2002. At this time, the applicant is requesting that the vacation of the plat and covenants be conditioned upon three matters, all of which are specified in the proposed Findings of Fact. Those three matters are the 1) Granting of the variance by the BZA; 2) Acquisition of the Real Estate and 3) The commencement of construction of the building. The reason for these conditions is that absent the combination of lot 331 with the real estate to the south for one use and one building, it is unnecessary to vacate the covenants and the plat. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 5 At the time of BZA approval of the Use Variance, the applicant will detail his plans for the site, the landscaping and the buildings. Members of the public were invited to speak in Organized Remonstrance; the following appeared: Opposed: John Moody, president of Shelbourne Green Community Association Board of Directors, presented a petition objecting to the application for the vacation and change of zoning for lot 331, Section 8, Secondary Plat, Shelbourne Green. The objections are as follows: Those homeowners directly bordering the real estate paid a lot premium to Davis Homes of $6,000 to $12,000 per lot for ground zoned R -1. In the meantime, the ground was open green area until the lot was sold as a residential site. Davis proposed a home on this site in 19997, and it never did come to fruition. The proposed Evangelical Baptist facility is, in effect, a commercial building with a parking lot of approximately 55 parking spaces wrapping around 3 sides of the building. Those residents closely bordering the facility on the north side are threatened with a potential reduction in property value resulting from the construction of a commercial facility. The proposed office hours are 8 AM to 5 PM, but there were no assurances. Nightlights of an operating facility would provide a different situation and circumstance for residents bordering the site. Potential growth and expansion plans are uncertain and would only enhance the commercialization of the real estate. Shelbourne Road traffic has grown to the extent that there is quite a hazard at 96 and Shelbourne Road. Hamilton County has this intersection targeted for a stop /go automatic signal, and a widening. This has not taken place yet, but in the meantime, the proposed development would add to the traffic flow. Shelbourne Green is also curious to learn about any existing detrimental effects on the existing watershed caused by the proposed construction. There are potential problems with watershed, gas pipeline easement, and lack of a visual barrier. Mr. Moody suggested moving the facility farther south. There is no tree and shrubbery barrier adequate for visual screening. There is no real objection to the mission facility, but Mr. Moody requested that it be moved farther south, and not on the R -1 /Residence designated zone. Linda Perlstein, 3589 Seminole Drive, said the northern boundary of lot 331 abuts directly onto the back yards of a number of homes. Those are the very owners who paid a premium for their lots, expecting it to be an open space. The size of the proposed building is 20,000 square feet with 85 parking spaces; that would be a lot of asphalt and bright lighting. There is also concern with a gas pipeline that runs beneath the property. Ms. Perlstein asked the Commission to consider the residential nature of the area that the homeowners paid a premium expecting green space. John Trifano, 3593 Seminole Drive, abuts the proposed project except for the easement that runs through it. Mr. Trifano said he would be no more than 100 feet from the parking lot. Mr. Trifano stated he was told by Sandy Montgomery at the time he purchased his home in 1999 that the adjacent property would "........Never be developed by Davis Homes -Mr. Davis would never do that to you people." S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 6 Rebuttal: Charlie Frankenberger said the additional expansion and Use Variance would tie them into what is being requested and the buildings approved would be those built and changes would require subsequent approval. Regarding traffic at the intersection, as a part of this approval, one condition is that the College Park Baptist Church dedicate additional real estate on the intersection. Watershed and pipeline easements are matters for the Technical Advisory Committee and these matters would be resolved to everyone's satisfaction or they could not proceed. Mr. Brevard spent a lot of time in good faith conferring with the residents and homeowners of Shelbourne Green Homeowners Association. Until this evening, the applicant was unaware of the opposition and had not seen the petition in opposition. Jon Dobosiewicz said the Department is recommending the Plat Vacation be approved. The issue of USE is not one being considered by the Plan Commission this evening. If the plat is vacated, the use still remains residential and would allow the construction of a single family home. The issue of USE would be decided by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or a rezone request initiated by the petitioner. The Department will be making recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals regarding the proposed use of the property. This proposal has been reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee; easements are still maintained across the property and concerns have not been raised by Panhandle Pipeline or other utility companies that service the lot. The character of this lot is not consistent with what is typically found in subdivisions—it was not platted as an open, common area. The fact remains an owner could purchase this lot and construct a home on it today—if the Plan Commission approves the Plat Vacation, they could do that tomorrow. The public is encouraged to appear at the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting on August 26, 2002. Jon Dobosiewicz reiterated that there is no inherent approval of anything, other than the vacation of the plat. Pat Rice asked about the current titleholder to the real estate and was told it is owned by Davis Homes. That being the case, Pat Rice said she would like to hear from a representative of Davis Homes Dave Cremeans said he has some history on the Shelbourne Green original petition that was greatly opposed by the neighborhood. It was contentious and caused the Commission to change its Rules of Procedure. At that time, the petitioner made it clear that the 331 -lot subdivision was exactly according to the Ordinances and not one variation or variance was required. The current proposal is a grave departure. The subject lot has been "for sale" for 7 or 8 years and has not been sold; therefore it is coming back as a commercial lot. The underlying question is "Do we want an office building in the middle of a subdivision Dave Cremeans was not in favor of the proposal. Ron Houck was in favor of sending this item to Committee and requested a larger map with more of the adjacent areas shown for review. Charlie Frankenberger stated Davis Homes owns the real estate, Evangelical Baptist Missions is the purchaser, and one of the conditions of the Purchase Agreement is that the real estate be used S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 7 for the intended purpose. In order to permit the intended use, Davis Homes had to consent to the vacation of the plat and covenants, and they did so. Pat Rice said she concurred with comments made by fellow Commission members and would not vote for the office use in the middle of a residential community. Marilyn Anderson encouraged the petitioner to meet with the area community and work out some issues prior to the Committee meeting. Ms. Anderson asked the Committee to determine how many homes could be built on this property if the plat were vacated. Nick Kestner asked that the gas pipeline be clearly marked on the aerial. Marilyn Anderson requested additional information on the proposed additional right -of -way from the Church and what stage that process is in. Docket No. 93 -02 PV, Shelbourne Greene, Section 8, Plat Vacation was referred to the Subdivision Committee for further review on September 3, 2002 at 7:00 PM. 4h. Docket No. 94 -02 PP; Lakeside Park Subdivision (Primary Plat) The applicant seeks approval to plat a 215 -lot residential subdivision on 154.8± acres. The site is located on the southwest corner of West 141 Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned S -1 (Very Low Intensity Residential). The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 94 -02a SW SCO 6.3.15 minimum street radius Filed by Dennis Olmstead of Stoeppelwerth Associates, Inc. for Roehling Enterprises, Inc. Paul Reis, attorney, 5013 Buckeye Court, Carmel, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Ray Roehling, developer, and Mark Monroe, land use planner, were also in attendance. The applicant is requesting approval to plat a 215 -lot residential subdivision located at the southwest corner of West 141 Street and Towne Road on 154.9 acres. The site is currently zoned S -1 /Residential. The plan has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Residential Open Space Ordinance as well as Subdivision Regulations. The proposed development dovetails with the adjoining subdivisions to the south and to the west with connecting roads. Consistent with the traffic analysis, the applicant is in the process of addressing the necessary commitments to be made concerning the improvements to be made or provided for in the future with the staff. The applicant is requesting a waiver of one section of the Subdivision Control Ordinance concerning the minimum street radius. The southeast corner of the site has a road around the common area, the radius of which is at 100 feet—the requirement is 150 feet. In response to comments from the Department of Community Services and the Urban Forester, the applicant is in the process of revising the landscape plan and it will be available in advance S:\PlanCominission\Minutes\PlanCommissionMinutes\2002augMEMO of the Committee meeting on September 3 Lakeside Park was reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee; the applicant is in the process of resolving some minor issues raised at that Committee. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Jon Dobosiewicz of DOCS said that earlier this year, a plat went through public hearing and committee and was withdrawn. That particular plat was similar in design to the current proposal and accommodated both the north /south and east/west collector roads. The Department has some concerns regarding the landscape plan; in addition, there are items unresolved regarding the level of necessary improvements to be in compliance with the Ordinance. The applicant has been asked to meet with the property owner to the north in acquiring additional right -of -way to complete a minimum level of improvement across the site. The Department is requesting that the right -of -way situation be looked into by the developer so there is no gap in roadway width. The Department is recommending this item be forwarded to the Subdivision Committee for further review on September 3ra Dave Cremeans commented he had received a letter from Tom Ellen Watson and a telephone call. Dave Cremeans referred the Commission members to the letter and asked that they read it. One of the questions raised was that the original proposal was for 197 home sites, the current plan is for 215 and this is definitely a concern. Ron Houck asked for clarification between a Traffic Impact Study and Traffic Operations Analysis. Commission members only received an executive summary, and Mr. Houck would like to see the entire traffic study. Marilyn Anderson commented the intersection of 116 and Shelbourne is scheduled to be looked at by the County, but Marilyn wanted a time -table of when improvements would be made to this intersection. Dan Dutcher requested more information for Committee review regarding road improvements, how it complies with the Thoroughfare Plan, trail network, etc. Jon Dobosiewicz reported that earlier this year, the Department provided the Plan Commission with a traffic study of the entire area when all of the subdivisions came in. The Department can request that the applicant provide additional copies of the original study and how it relates. In regard to the intersection at 116 and Shelbourne, it was Jon's understanding that the County is in a position to move forward once the dedication of right -of -way is made; this was put in place when the Long Branch Subdivision was reviewed and approved by the Plan Commission. Docket No. 94 -02 PP, Lakeside Park Subdivision Primary Plat was referred to the Subdivision Committee for further review on September 3, 2002 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 9 5h. Docket No. 105 -02 PP Amend; Shelborne Park (Primary Plat Amendment) The applicant seeks amended Primary Plat approval to plat a 57 -lot subdivision on 42.189± acres. The site is located on the north side of West 131 Street approximately one quarter mile east of Shelborne Road. The site is zoned S- I /Residential. Filed by Dennis Olmstead of Stoeppelwerth Associates, Inc. for Roger L. Kessler. Roger L. Kessler, attorney, appeared before the Plan Commission representing Shelborne Park LLC. The applicant is requesting primary plat amendment for Shelborne Park located on 131 Street, east of Shelborne Road and west of Towne Road. The Roehling Enterprises petition relates to this property. The City of Carmel has purchased the Lacy property to the west of Shelborne Park; the property to the east of Shelborne Park is being developed as Sedgwick Subdivision. The City of Carmel is developing the property to the west as a maintenance facility and will include a water tower. Shelborne Park plat shows a stub street to the west on the southern portion of the property —this stub street now dead -ends into the proposed pond for the City's maintenance facility. The City has requested that the applicant vacate the stub street to the west. Also, Sedgwick is being developed on the eastern border. The developer has attempted to combine the two retention ponds into one large pond so that is will be more aesthetically pleasing and it will be under one ownership and maintenance. The Sedgwick plat was approved with one large pond at the southern portion of the property. The stub street has been vacated (lot 5) and under ROSO, a total of 4 more lots have been added. Nothing has changed on the roadways, they are exactly as originally approved other than the deletion of the stub street. The Hamilton County Surveyor's Office has approved one large pond as a drainage detention area for both Sedgwick and Shelbouorne Park. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department. There are several characteristics of this development that require it to be returned to the Plan Commission. The applicant has done a good job of explaining those changes, but to summarize: The elimination of the stub street to the property to the west is one condition under which this would automatically return to the Commission and would require amendment to the primary plat. This is not an issue that could go to Committee for summary review and administrative interpretation and approval. The pond under one ownership for purposes of maintenance and control is another issue that demands return to the full Commission as a public hearing item —that is addition of real estate to the primary plat. Neither the Department nor the Plan Commission has the ability to approve a plat with additional lots after the primary plat has been reviewed and approved. An additional public hearing and amendment would be required. The proposed plan appears to conform with all of those requirements, including the ROSO requirement that allows the addition of 4 lots to the subdivision. The Department is recommending a suspension of the Rules of Procedure and vote. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 10 Ron Houck was concerned about the combined pond and whether or not it affected any trails or walkways and if so, have they been re- configured and do they inner connect the subdivisions. Roger Kessler said there was no change to the walking paths; they were designed to be along the collector road and that is still the case. There was never an access proposed from 131 Street to Sedgwick and there still is not. Sedgwick's only access is from the collector road —there is a walking path on one side of the collector road and a sidewalk on the other side. Marilyn Anderson commented that because of the consolidation of the two ponds, 4 lots were added, but that was part of the open space for Sedgwick. Have lots been reduced? Roger Kessler responded that Sedgwick was platted without the benefit of ROSO as far as density requirements, and they are less than one unit per acre. Ron Houck asked for further explanation as to the addition of the 4 lots. Roger Kessler said one lot is where the stub street would have been, another lot backs up to the lot at the farthest, southern portion of Sedgwick, the other two lots were added at the top of the elipse, but the location of the street has not changed. Ron Houck's concern was that there was potentially a useful open space on the end of the 50- foot strip, probably a landscape strip. Roger Kessler said there is still 5.61 acres of woods being preserved on the northern part of the elipse above the street that will have walking paths. There is also a large open space area near the pond. Jon Dobosiewicz said that prior to bringing this before the Plan Commission, Sedgwick was reviewed and it was determined that the proposal would not affect approval granted to Sedgwick. Sedgwick is now 26 houses on 27.odd acres. Sedgwick was developed as exempt from the ROSO requirements; they did not provide open space and in lieu thereof, they developed the subdivision at a density of less than one gross unit per acre. Docket No. 105 -02 PP Amend, Shelborne Park Primary Plat Amendment, was referred to the Subdivision Committee for further review on September 3, 2002 at 7:00 PM 6h. Docket No. 96 -02 Z; Mohawk Place Rezone Petitioner seeks a favorable recommendation of a rezone from I -1 /Industrial to C- 1 /City Center on 9.17 acres. The site is located northwest of the intersection of City Center Drive and Range Line Road. The site is zoned I -1 /Industrial. Filed by the Department of Community Services for the Carmel Redevelopment Commission. Rick Roesch, 832 Spruce Drive, Carmel, president of the Carmel Redevelopment Commission, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Some of the property has been sold in the City Center Development and there are a number of potential businesses looking at developing in City Center site. There is a lot of interest, but persons looking at the area want to S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 11 know what is going to happen to the north of City Center. Currently, the area to the north is zoned industrial, and there is uncertainty as to what will be developed at that location. The Redevelopment Commission at the present time is an adjacent property owner to the Mohawk Place development, and it behooves the Redevelopment Commission, as a city and a community, to let people know what to expect in this area. At present, there are no plans to build or develop in this area, but it would allow the Redevelopment Commission to have a "say" in the development of the area in the future if the land re -sells and what type of design standards would be applied. Jon Dobosiewicz said the Department received a request on behalf of the owner to table this item so they would have an opportunity to review the request and participate in the public hearing. The Department has considered opening the public hearing to allow individual comments, and then table until next month to allow the property owner an opportunity for input prior to forwarding a recommendation to the City Council. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposal; the following appeared: Remonstrance, Favorable: Harry Elliott, owner of Mohawk Shopping Center, built in 1974 under the Industrial Zoning at that time. Mr. Elliott has no objection to the rezone and has discussed it with the Mayor, however, Mr. Elliott would like a copy of the report from Carmel Redevelopment Commission so that he can have his attorney review and discuss it. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposal; the following appeared: Opposed, Individual: Bill Wiggam, Jr., 550 South Range Line Road, Carmel, spoke as co -owner of Carmel Welding Supply and a lifelong resident of Carmel. Mr. Wiggam's family has owned and operated Carmel Welding since 1948 at its present location, zoned I -1, and a retail outdoor power equipment company specializing in sales and service of lawn and garden equipment. The decision of the Carmel Redevelopment Commission to label Mohawk Place area as "Blighted" has Mr. Wiggam concerned about the future of existing businesses in the immediate area. What does it mean to be "Blighted Does someone think your business is not viable or profitable? Does it mean that someone does not like the appearance of your building because it is not brick or Georgian Architectural standards? Does it mean that someone would prefer to see established, locally owned businesses displaced by out -of -state franchise businesses with no ties to the community? Mr. Wiggam said he agreed with the Carmel Chamber of Commerce that the City of Carmel should not be engaged in the development aspect of private business or to assume the role of a private developer. Furthermore, the City Center should not negatively impact existing businesses in the area. Mr. Wiggam was also concerned that the property values of adjacent parcels will diminish as a result of labeling the neighbor's property as "blighted" and rezoning it to C -1. Will the adjacent property owners be able to conduct business and expand from time -to- time within the rights based on current zoning? Any expansion or changes at a future date should not require the businesses to do something over and above what the present zoning S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 12 requires. Any business in the proposed rezone area that has been conducting business as a legal, conforming business will be immediately reclassified as a legal, non conforming business and that is not considered an honor. The property values will diminish for those properties rezoned from the current zoning of I -1 to C -1. Property values increase as the number of potential buyers increase; likewise, property values decrease when the number of buyers go down. By eliminating the I -1 zoning, these property owners will be faced with a decreased number of buyers, should they decide to sell and it is not the City's job to put into place an Ordinance that will diminish property values. Questions and Comments: Barbara Landry, 3760 Coachman Drive, Carmel, employed by Harry Elliott, was asked to read a letter from Harry Elliott, 13584 Continental Way, Carmel, owner of Mohawk Place located at 126 Street and Rangeline Road, subject of the rezone petition. Mr. Elliott formally requested a continuance of the rezoning petition until the September 17 Plan Commission meeting in order to review the proposal. Mr. Elliott was not in agreement that his property is "Blighted" and requested more time in which to evaluate his position on the rezone petition and its implications, and request this item be tabled for one month until September 17, 2002. Ron Carter, Councilperson, 1311 Ridge Road, Carmel, and also a member of the Redevelopment Commission, commented that the Redevelopment Commission, through the development of the City Center Complex, has increased the value of property dramatically in this area. The City just recently sold eight acres to two different developers for $250,000 per acre far more than the land was valued at four years ago. Contrary to Mr. Wiggam's assertions, there are a number of buyers now looking at this area and making proposals to redevelop under the private sector. The Redevelopment Commission has served a very useful purpose and has done a good job of bringing economic vitality to an area that for many years was an eyesore to the community (meaning the old Kroger center,) and was not going to develop. With that said, Mr. Carter pointed out the Amli development, Shapiro's Delicatessen, and other developments going in, and said the Redevelopment Commission has been extremely helpful from an economic standpoint. Gene Pratt, Midas Franchise owner on Rangeline and a resident over 30 years, said he does not own raw land—it is a business -worth more than mere land value if allowed to continue in a profitable service business and he, too, was concerned about declaring the area "blighted." The business owners would not have the benefit of selling an established business with a stream of customers —they would have one -half or three quarters of an acre of land that would only sell for raw land because the buildings would have to be torn down and totally re- developed. Rick Roesch said the intention is not to force businesses out, merely to protect the area against a re -use. Things have changed over the years Industrial use is no longer viable. Businesses along Range Line Road will benefit from the development of the area. In addressing property values versus business values, the businesses are certainly worth more than just the land value. The Redevelopment Commission is not driving values down, they are driving values up and values of businesses up. Service businesses along Rangeline Road will benefit from residential type development that will happen in City Center and some of the adjacent areas. "Blighted" under S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 13 the legal definition is something that is not up to an adjacent piece of property. None of the businesses along Rangeline are believed to be blighted. Jon Dobosiewicz said there is no need for rush to judgment. All of the discussions need to occur between the owner asking questions of the Department and of the Redevelopment Commission and availing themselves of all of the information before a decision is made. The Commission can send this item to Committee and leave the public hearing open or continue the public hearing and re -visit this matter next month at the full Commission meeting. There is no action this Plan Commission could take that would require a business to shut down. If the City were to rezone the property, they are not in a position to remove those businesses that exist today —the concern is to protect the integrity of the plans laid out and what could happen in the future. The I -1 standards contain uses that the City may not want to see developed along the Rangeline corridor, if Redevelopment has an opportunity on those parcels. The uses the City would like to see are more consistent with the requirements both development and use wise, as are contained within the C -1 Zone. Jon asked the Plan Commission to review those standards contained within the I- 1 district and make a determination as to what we would want to see as a future use, given the requirements and uses permitted under the C -1, and make a decision that would be best IF an opportunity for redevelopment on the site presented itself. Wayne Wilson welcomed the Tabling for 30 days. Mr. Wilson agreed that declaring the area "blighted" does have a negative impact on the property values of the businesses in residence. There is a world of difference between an empty, abandoned, burned -out shopping center and a shopping center that is basically 100% occupied with viable businesses surrounding it that represent 50 years of history in this City. Perhaps the problems about to be faced are simply those of communication. The City Center is a very viable project and it does not need to become the "giant that will eat the existing businesses." If it is, Mr. Wilson would want to hear from the City as to where the money will come from. Dave Cremeans asked how a business owner in the area could sell his property without having it impacted—at what point does it become limited? Jon Dobosiewicz said there would be no discernable impact. The business could continue to be operated under the same parameters and the rezone would not have any impact on whether the business could continue under any number of different owners. Jon said he would have a more exact answer at the Committee level. Mike Hollibaugh, Director of the Department of Community Services, explained blighted area under terms of the law. Rezoning to C -1 /City Center should not threaten existing shop owners who would only stand to gain in increased market values from rezoning in the same way the area has benefited from the current construction of townehomes, and Shapiro's, etc. I -1 /Industrial zoning carries very little predictability and very little process. The Redevelopment Commission is trying to strengthen the area —not weaken it. The intent is not to exert a huge amount of government force, only to protect the new investments that are occurring and not threaten the existing shop owners. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 14 Ron Houck asked about TIF Districts and Blighted Designation. Rick Roesch responded that the two have to work together. Pat Rice also asked about "blighted area" and what that would mean in terms of "eminent domain." Rick Roesch said it is not the intention of the Redevelopment Commission to do anything with eminent domain in the area. Pat Rice commented intentions, and what is legal are different. The intentions may not hold 5 years from now. If an area has a blighted designation, does that open the door for eminent domain? John Molitor said that one of the things a Redevelopment Commission must do before pursuing eminent domain is to declare the property a blighted area. Wayne Wilson reported the activity in the City Center only conforms to whatever the Redevelopment Commission wants in the City- Center area. Nick Kestner was concerned that some of the vital services could not move anywhere else in Carmel right now if there were a change in zoning. There needs to be a plan in place so that if the vital services are moved, there is someplace in the community they could go and still be prosperous. Dan Dutcher said he looked forward to continuing this discussion at the Committee level. Everyone needs to recognize the momentum from an aesthetic and economic standpoint that the City Center project is generating. Inevitably, it will not always be easy to deal with, but it is necessary for the City as a whole to deal with the "fall out." It does not mean that any of the businesses that ultimately may be affected by some of the rezoning are not valuable or viable. It does mean that in the best interests of the City, Carmel needs to deal with these issues and the long -term ramifications of the City Center. Rick Roesch said that a planning session was held last February, and those businesses were discussed. There will be pressure on those businesses to sell the property because the City Center has created value; those service businesses are needed in Carmel. The Redevelopment Commission has been exploring various ideas and looking at potential pieces of property for service businesses to inhabit. We need the service businesses to continue to be a part of the Community of Carmel, and we are addressing that. Pat Rice commented that some of these businesses are not only viable because of the service they perform, but because of the very character of their building and service they present. If one of these businesses were moved to a nice brick building, they may no longer be a viable business. It is important to protect the integrity and character of the service businesses. Rick Roesch said the fear was that there would be some profit taking and the City does not intend to change the character of those service businesses. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 15 Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department. It is recommended this item be sent to the Subdivision Committee for further discussion, sent back to the full Commission for the September 17 meeting, and continue soliciting public input. In order for the petitioner to be prepared and to allow additional time for public input and further review, Docket No. 96 -02 Z, Mohawk Place Rezone, was TABLED to the September 17 Plan Commission meeting; however, the Public Hearing Remains Open on this item. At this time, the Department requested a Tabling of Docket No. 99 -02 Z, Southeast Old Town Rezone, to the 17 of September Public Hearings, and this was granted by the Commission. 7h. Docket No. 97 -02 Z; Plum Creek Rezone Petitioner seeks a favorable recommendation of a rezone from S -1 /Residential to P- 1/Parks and Recreation on 207.5 acres. The site is located north and south of 126th Street between Hazel Dell Parkway and River Road. The site is zoned S- 1 /Residential. Filed by the Department of Community Services. Jon Dobosiewicz of the Department of Community Services appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. A request for Tabling until September 17 was received from the owners of Plum Creek Golf Course. At this time, members of the public will be allowed an opportunity for input. Jon Dobosiewicz summarized the petition from the Department of Community Services. As it was with the Brookshire Golf Course Rezone, the City is in a position to rezone the Golf Course to P -1 /Parks and Recreation. The rezone would allow the operation of the facility as a golf course without change. Primarily, the rezone would prevent the existing owner from re- platting to a subdivision. This is not to say that the owner does not have existing, private covenant restrictions on the property that would not allow the platting of the real estate or that some of the portions of the real estate fall within the flood plain that would prevent it from being platted. The proposal is a measure that is undertaken to provide individuals who have purchased real estate adjacent to the golf course, additional assurance and predictability in the future that their investment in their home and the investment made in the operation of the golf course are maintained. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition; the following appeared: Remonstrance, Favorable: Dick Stine, 12414 Medalist Parkway, Plum Creek Village, adjacent to golf course, strongly supports the rezone. The homeowners purchased their lots "on the golf course." That is how the lots were marketed, the homes were built with the golf course as a focal point, and the decks and patios were situated to view the golf course. Mr. Stine is also a member of the Parks Board and stated the Board has spent all of its time and money acquiring parkland. What was done with Brookshire Golf Course and the current proposal will preserve green space in areas that have already been developed and the Parks Board could no longer provide parkland. Mr. Stine was not in favor of tabling, but if the Commission felt it was necessary, the residents would return. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 16 Robert Jones, 12525 Medalist Parkway, Plum Creek, supports rezone and asks the Commission to do the same. Jack Tier, Plum Creek Farms, north of 126 Street -on the southwest portion of the golf course. The Subdivision contains 225 homes, 70 of which are directly on the golf course. The Buyers were told they paid a premium to be in the area and another premium if they were on the golf course. The zone change would be a way to preserve the natural habitat and beauty of the area and would maintain green space. Tony Gates, 12340 Medalist Parkway, Plum Creek, said the area represents 4 or 5 subdivisions in addition to the two mentioned. Most all persons purchased homes with the understanding that the golf course would be there permanently and would never become residential property. Mr. Gates is not in favor of Tabling, but wanted to go on record as being in favor of the rezone in order to preserve the golf course. Norm Rundle, 12120 Windsor Drive, Carmel, Brookshire Subdivision, Councilperson, District 4, includes Plum Creek Golf Course. Mr. Rundle agreed with previous remonstrators, but expressed opposition to Tabling this petition. Conversations have been held with the owners of the golf course and the City, and there are efforts underway to sell Plum Creek Golf Course for the purpose of residential development—exactly what this Council in the creation of the P -1 District was concerned about and opposed to. Similar circumstances existed with Brookshire Golf Course earlier this year. The desires of the members of this community are pretty well known as well as the position of the City Council in respect to the creation of the P -1 zone classification, and the unanimous passage of the rezone with respect to Brookshire. The intentions have been publicly stated to rezone each and every golf course within Clay Township in addition to all of the parklands that are owned by the Parks Board and /or the City of Carmel. Norm Rundle urged the Commission to be expeditious in their dealing with this matter and stated he was also opposed to Tabling this matter and recommended action be taken this evening. The item could then be forwarded to the City Council and action taken as quickly as possible. John Rogers, 12549 Medalist Parkway, said most comments have referred to the financial impact on home sites. More than 50% of the persons who moved to this community are retired and spend a lot of time at home. The quality of their life would decline dramatically without the golf course in existence and losing the panorama for which they paid a premium. Ron Carter, 1311 Ridge Road, Carmel, Councilperson, said there was no question that in this particular case, representations were made to buyers of lots, whether written or oral, and the purchasers bought for golf course views and golf course lots, and a large premium was paid. Ron Carter agreed with Norm Rundle and said he, too was opposed to Tabling this item and recommended the Commission move forward expeditiously. This recommendation is not only for the instant case, but to send a message to other developers or holders of golf courses and other property of this nature, that this is not something we want to see happen within the community. We will take steps each time as expeditiously as possible to make certain that we protect the rights of the people who have purchased property surrounding a golf course for premium prices. Ron Carter urged the Commission to proceed and not Table this item. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 17 Bob Battreall, 1319 Cool Creek Drive, Carmel, Councilperson, agreed with fellow City Council members. Carmel is taking a strong stand to provide protection for those persons who have purchased lots and paid premium prices. Bob Battreall also does not support Tabling and recommends a vote and forwarding to Council this evening. Questions /Comments from the public: Nathan Mowry, 12558 Lynnwood Boulevard, opposite Medalist Parkway on the opposite side of the golf course. Mr. Mowry was concerned about what could happen within the next 30 days if this item were tabled. Jon Dobosiewicz responded to Mr. Mowry's question. There is nothing that prevents change last week anymore than next week—if a primary plat were filed with the Department until the Council can take action on the rezone request. Once a primary plat is filed, chances are the rezone would be in place before a primary plat could come before the Plan Commission. The Department of Community Services shares the concern. At the September 17, 2002 meeting of the Plan Commission, there will be 4 additional Public Hearings that will include the Twin Lakes Golf Course, Woodland Golf Course, Crooked Stick, and Prairie View. The recommendation will be the same, and that is, after due deliberation, the Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. The request for tabling was made by a member of the ownership of Plum Creek. Marilyn Anderson asked John Molitor, counsel, if there were any issues if this item were not Tabled and if it were forwarded on to the City Council. John Molitor responded there were no legal issues; the Department is the petitioner and has control over the petition. With respect to the issue of whether or not "grandfathering" occurs before a rezone, Indiana Law is somewhat unsettled on this. If the developer were to apply for a building permit before a rezone occurred, their rights would vest at the time they make the application for a building permit. It is not as clear if they made an application for a primary plat for a residential subdivision and the primary plat was still pending at the time of rezone whether or not they would have the right to continue through the process and obtain primary plat approval. This is an unsettled issue in Indiana, although one that we could defend, but there would be no assurance of the outcome. Dave Cremeans commented there was no reason to postpone this. Legal notice was given to the owner, and this needs to go forward to the City Council. Wayne Wilson commented he would be in favor of waiving the Rules of Procedure to allow a vote this evening. Also, as current president of the Carmel City Council, Mr. Wilson wanted to assure the Commission and the public that if this requires a special Council meeting, they will have one in order to have action on this. The Council will move swiftly. Ron Houck asked if the owner of the golf course is local, and whether or not the requirements for notice were met. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 18 Jon Dobosiewicz responded that process was met in regard to notice, and the notice was mailed to a Fishers address. Mike Hollibaugh, Director of the Department, said he had spoken with Michael Browning today and he is part of the ownership of the golf course. Mr. Browning requested a tabling. Dan Dutcher commented he clearly favored doing whatever needs to be done as soon as possible to move this on to the Council. Dan Dutcher commended the Department for moving forward, and was not in favor of tabling this item. Pat Rice moved for suspension of the Rules of Procedure, seconded by Wayne Wilson, and Unanimously Approved. 11 -0 Wayne Wilson moved for the approval of Docket 97 -02 Z, Plum Creek Rezone, and forwarding to City Council with a positive recommendation, seconded by Ron Houck, Approved 11 -0. Following a short recess, the meeting continued with the business at hand. 8h. Docket No. 99 -02 Z; Southeast Old Town Rezone Petitioner seeks a favorable recommendation of a rezone from B -1 /Business, B- 2 /Business, and R -2 /Residential to C -2 /01d Town. The site is located southeast of the intersection of Main Street and Range Line Road. The site is zoned B- 1 /Business, B -2 /Business, and R -2 /Residential. Filed by the Department of Community Services for the Carmel Redevelopment Commission. Tabled li. 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 131 Street and Towne Road. The site is zoned PUD /Planned Unit Development. Filed by Jose Kreutz of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC. Jose Kreutz of Brenwick Development, 12821 East New Market Street, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Approval is requested for an amendment to the Primary Plat for an 83 acre parcel that is within the confines of the Village of WestClay. Jon Dobosiewicz said this item was filed at the same time as two other requests: one was a rezone, the other was a text amendment. The Plan Commission forwarded the petitions to the City Council for consideration approximately 60 days ago. Two weeks ago, the Council approved the rezone request, and the item was subsequently placed on the Commission Agenda. S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 19 This item was reviewed by the Subdivision Committee, forwarded to the full Commission, and Tabled pending favorable action by the City Council. At this time, the Plan Commission is in a position to certify that the Primary Plat conforms to the newly adopted text and rezone that was approved by the City Council. Dave Cremeans confirmed the action of the Subdivision Committee. This item is more of a "housekeeping" nature. Dave Cremeans moved for approval of Docket No. 12 -02 PP Amend, Village of West Clay, Primary Plat Amendment, seconded by Jerry Chomanczuk and APPROVED 11 -0. 2i. Docket No. 45 -02 DP Amend, ADLS Amend; 103rd Street Medical Building Expansion The applicant seeks Development Plan and ADLS amendment approval to construct a building addition and site improvements. The site is located at 200 West 103 Street. The site is zoned B -3 /Business. Filed by Rich Kelly of EMH &T for Kite Construction Company. Paul Reis, 5013 Buckeye Court, Carmel, attorney for the Kite Construction Company appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Mark Monroe, land use planner, was also in attendance. Mr. Reis reported that he met with the Special Study Committee on August 6 At that time, the petitioner reviewed with the Committee the improvements proposed being made to the sound emitting from the existing HVAC equipment currently located at the building. The proposed improvements to the HVAC equipment have been approved by the Reserve I and II Home Owners Association. Also, the landscape plan was approved by the Staff, the Urban Forester, and the neighbors as to planting of certain species of trees. With that, the Committee voted unanimously to send a positive recommendation to the Plan Commission for approval, subject to the dedication of additional right -of -way. The documentation for the right -of -way is being finalized with the City Engineer's office, and will be presented to the Board of Public Works and Safety for their approval. Jon Dobosiewicz said the petitioner is in agreement that any approval would be subject to the condition recommended. In response to comments made by Ron Houck, Paul Reis said a sound engineer was hired from California who took readings from around the building, into the neighborhood, and into the actual residences. Basically, the solution proposed will lower the sound approximately 40% (about 3 to 8 decibels.) As a note of interest, this is the same equipment used at the new Public Library that caused a lot of noise. Wayne Wilson moved for approval of Docket 45 -02 DP Amend, ADLS Amend, 103 Street Medical Buildiing Expansion, subject to the Department Report's recommendations and S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 20 dedication of additional right -of -way; seconded by Ron Houck, APPROVED 11 -0. Note: Items 3i., and 4i., were heard together. 3i. Docket No. 46 -02 DP /ADLS; Carmax Auto Superstore The applicant seeks Development Plan and ADLS approval to construct an auto superstore. The site is located at the northwest corner of Gray Road and 96th Street. The site is zoned B -3 /Business. Filed by E. Davis Coots of Coots Henke Wheeler for Carmax Auto Superstores. 4i. Docket No. 47 -02 PP; Carmax Auto Superstore Primary Plat The applicant seeks approval to plat a 2 -lot subdivision. The site is located at the northwest corner of East 96 Street and Gray Road. The site is zoned B- 3 /Business. Filed by E. Davis Coots of Coots Henke Wheeler for Carmax Auto Superstores. Dave Coots, attorney, Coots Henke Wheeler, 255 East Carmel Drive, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Also present was Tony Kirp with Carmax. These items were first presented to the Commission in May and there have been two meetings at the Special Study Committee level since then. These meetings resulted in considerable changes to the plan, the most noticeable of which is the change from a split -face block, painted structure to a structure that on the south and east elevations (96 Gray Road) has a quick brick product in a two -tone mixed with an EFIS product that caps all four elevations. The two -tone brick breaks up the expanse of the sides of the building on the visible elevations. The entry structure, the large blue roof that was part of the original plan, has been reduced dramatically and lowered. At the suggestion of the Committee, it was added as an accent over the service entry on the east elevation. All of the plans have been submitted and approved by the Committee, including the landscaping, lighting, and signing. The primary plat was approved by the Committee, conditioned upon approval from the City Engineer of the road improvements agreed to by the petitioner. Secondary Plat approval will not be forthcoming and no permits will be issued until written approval from the City Engineer. Pat Rice was complimentary of the petitioner in working with the Committee for a dramatic, different design that is now a win /win for both the City and the petitioner. Jon Dobosiewicz said that in an effort to provide the Plan Commission with the full benefit of what occurred at the Special Study Committee meeting, four conditions have been made and the petitioner's plans amended to reflect those conditions. A revised elevation has been received showing the entry doors flush with the facade of the building. The EFIS column on the smaller building was omitted, and this has now been added. The guardrail surrounding the sales lot will be painted black and surrounded with landscaping as approved by the Committee. The pole height on the south side of the building is a maximum of 20 feet. The Department is S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 21 recommending approval as amended. Dave Coots confirmed the amendments and said the plans now reflect those amendments. Ron Houck moved for approval of Docket No. 46 -02 DP /ADLS, Carmax Auto Superstore. The motion was seconded by Pat Rice and APPROVED 11 -0. Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department on the Primary Plat for Carmax. There was one concern and that has been addressed. The plans are to be ultimately approved by the City Engineer. The Primary Plat will go through Secondary Plat stage. The Department is recommending approval with the condition of approval by the City Engineer. Ron Houck moved for approval of Docket No. 47 -02 PP, CarMax Auto Superstore, Primary Plat, subject to City Engineer's approval. The motion was seconded by Dave Cremeans and APPROVED 11 -0. 5i. Docket No. 66 -02 DP Amend /ADLS; Hamilton Crossing Building #5 (Revised) The applicant seeks amended development plan and ADLS approval to construct an office building. The site is generally located at the southwest corner of 131 Street and U.S. Highway 31. Filed by Blair D. Carmosino of Duke Realty Corporation. Blair Carmosino of Duke Realty Corporation appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. The petitioner appeared before the Special Study Committee on August 6, 2002, and the Committee approved the ADLS portion of this Docket. The Development Plan was also reviewed by the Committee and approved. Paul Spranger reported for the Special Study Committee. Changes were made in the elevation to the building that brought the design element of the building into a better proportion and perspective. Computer generated sight -lines were submitted to the Committee, and at this point, the building fits the intent of the ADLS. The Committee voted unanimously to approve the Development Plan as amended. Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department. Favorable consideration is being recommended at this time. The ADLS portion was approved; the Development Plan portion does need approval by the full Commission. Pat Rice moved for approval of Docket No. 66 -02 DP Amend, Hamilton Crossing Building 45 Revised. The motion was seconded by Ron Houck and APPROVED 11 -0. 6i. Docket No. 67 -02 DP Amend /ADLS; West Carmel Center, Block D, Lot 2- Fifth Third Bank The applicant seeks amended development plan and ADLS approval to construct a financial institution. The site is located at the northeast corner of US 421 and Retail Parkway. The site is zoned B -3 /Business and is subject to the requirements S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 22 of the US 421 /Michigan Road Overlay Zone. Filed by Jeffery Hartley of Klump Associates Tom Engle, attorney with Barnes Thornburg, 11 South Meridian Street, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission on behalf of Fifth Third Bank. The project is a branch bank facility located at US 421 and Retail Parkway. A cross connection has been added from the bank to the adjacent outlot as requested by the Department. The landscape plan has been modified to reduce the number of yews and submitted to Scott Brewer, City Forester. The elevations have been modified as follows: The canopy height has been lowered; the main part of the building has been changed from a tapered roof back to a gable so that the building is symmetrical, front and back; a limestone band has been added to the building, and the block band at the bottom of the ATM also matches the building. Clarification: The signage is back -lit, not red but white. Paul Spranger reported for the Committee. The petitioner was cooperative with the Committee and has met their request. Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department. It appears as though the applicant has addressed the conditions under which the plans were amended. The Department is modifying its recommendation that the Plan Commission approve this item subject to the amended version as distributed this evening as opposed to conditioning approval based upon changes necessary to comply with the position of the Special Study Committee. Paul Spranger moved for approval of Docket No. 67 -02 DP Amend /ADLS, West Carmel Center, Block D, Lot 2- Fifth Third Bank, subject to the amended version as presented this evening dated August 20, 2002. The motion was seconded by Ron Houck and APPROVED 1I- 0. 7i. Docket No. 70 -02 PP; Williams Ridge Subdivision The applicant seeks approval toxlat a 6 -lot residential subdivision. The site is located on the north side of 116 Street, 1 /2 mile west of Gray Road. The site is zoned R -I /Residence. The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 70 -02a SW SCO 8.9.1 sidewalks 70 -02b SW SCO 6.5.7 orientation of home Filed by Max Mouser of Weihe Engineers. See Notes on item lh. under Public Hearings APPROVED 12 -0 8i. Docket No. 81 -02 PP; Laura Vista Subdivision (Primary Plat) S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 23 The applicant seeks approval to plat a 54 -lot residential subdivision on 34.94 acres. The site is generally located south of Danbury Estates subdivision between SR 431 and the Foster Estates Subdivision. The site is zoned R -1 /Residence. The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 81 -02a SW SCO 6.5.1 50' of frontage 81 -02b SW SCO 7.6.3 2 points of access to open space 81 -02c SW SCO 7.6.3 open space 75' in width 81 -02d SW SCO 6.3.7 cul -de -sac 600' in length 81 -02e SW SCO 6.2.1 subdividing within floodway Filed by Brandon Burke of The Schneider Corporation for Primrose Development, LLC. Charlie Frankenberger, 5212 Carrington Circle, Carmel, attorney with Nelson Frankenberger appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. The applicant met with the Subdivision Committee in August and was voted out with a favorable recommendation. The public hearing remains open on this item. The changes are as follows: Within Common Area A, a 30 foot easement for the re- location of a sanitary sewer interceptor, assuming the ATP path is actually required to be on the applicant's real estate. The applicant will dedicate 20 feet of land for an ATP path, and Primrose will either pay the cost of installation or they will install the path. Finally, Primrose Development will convey to the Fausts an access easement after the Fausts have vacated their easement on Faust Drive. Dave Cremeans reported for the Committee. A lot of public input was taken at the Committee level. There were persons from the adjoining neighborhood, and the Fausts. This started as a 54 lot subdivision—it is now a 55 lot subdivision, the difference being lot 55 is the Faust's home. The Committee voted 6 -0 to recommend approval of this primary plat. Jon Dobosiewica said the Department would like to make one modification to their recommendation, and that is the applicant's desire to have flexibility in whether or not they construct the path or commit to pay the cost of installing the path to the City, either at the time the segments are completed or at the time of the City's request. The Department does not have a preference. There is one other issue, and that is the crossing over the creek. It is not the Department's expectation that the applicant bear the cost of constructing the crossing —when the trail is constructed, we will address the costs at that time. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition; the following appeared: Remonstrance/Public Comments George Bell, 2902 Hazel Foster Drive, president of Foster Estates HOA, said most all concerns have now been addressed—commended petitioner for working with the residents and making concessions. Cynthia Faust, 1301 North Rangeline Road, spoke in favor of proposed development, however S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 24 was vehemently opposed to the location of this portion of the trail. The sewer interceptor has been resolved, and the APT apparently does not need to be moved. Ms. Faust was concerned how the Plan Commission could take down wetlands, 20 feet wide through a mature forest, after the desecration with the building of the US 431 ramps north to 146 Street. Taking down the wetlands will be insult to injury. Ms. Faust was hopeful the development could proceed without including this particular location of the ATP trail. Ms. Faust thinks this is a mistake and arrogant of the group to insist that the builder must build this path in this location. Ms. Faust said she would definitely monitor the situation and if need be, call the Environmental Protection Agency to check permits, etc. Ms. Faust said she has not been contacted regarding her easement to her property or any compensation; her liability issues will be affected. This is the fourth time Ms. Faust has had to re- locate her entrance. Ms. Faust looked forward to associating with the proposed development and disassociating herself with Danbury Estates. The public hearing was then closed. Dave Cremeans said the issues were discussed in great detail at Committee. The Committee has great empathy for Ms. Faust and the points she raised, but the Commission is not in charge of the Alternative Transportation Plan, the US 431 ramp to 146 Street, or any of the items raised by Ms. Faust. The ATP plan was approved in 94 or 95 as a part of the Thoroughfare Plan and has been in the planning stages ever since. Pat Rice wanted to clarify that she personally sympathizes with Ms. Faust, but the Commission cannot do anything, it is not their decision. Jon Dobosiewic commented the role of the Plan Commission is to ensure that this developer, because it is encumbered by the location of the trail, does provide for the construction of the trail. That is the Plan Commission's role in the process as it relates to the ATP path. In addition, the Fausts are now faced with an opportunity to improve the value of their property. The position the Department is putting the Fausts in by asking that the application be approved subject to condition 42, is that the Fausts have this opportunity, but we don't want to see them have two accesses, one off Vista Drive and one into Danbury that crosses the trail. The Department is not requiring access off Vista Drive, but if the Fausts choose access off Vista Drive, they would vacate the existing access that crosses the ATP path. There are venues for expressing those opinions; in fact, Ms. Faust has appeared before the ATP committee, and that is the appropriate body to address those concerns. Paul Spranger asked if there were really only one access to this subdivision; the response was positive. There is no other way to get to this property. Ron Houck moved for approval of Docket No. 81 -02 PP, Laura Vista Subdivision Primary Plat, and Subdivision Waivers 81 -02aSW through 81- 02eSW, subject to the applicant financing and constructing the ATP trail but not the bridge; and restricting access on lot 55 to the existing ingress /egress easement to Danbury Drive until such time as the City vacates the easement, at which time a drive may be installed within the proposed easement of access for lot 55 onto Vista Drive as shown on the primary plat; seconded by Dave Cremeans. APPROVED 10 in favor, 1 opposed (Paul Spranger) S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 25 9i. Docket No. 84 -02 PP; Carey Lake Subdivision (Primary Plat) The applicant seeks approval to plat a 12 -lot residential subdivision on 6.19 acres. The site is located on the south side of 146 Street, 1/8 mile east of Carey Road. The site is zoned R- 1/Residence. Filed by David Barns of Weihe Engineers, Inc. for Springmill Builders, Inc. Kent Shipley, 1550 Old Mill Circle, Carmel, and Marvin Taylor of Springmill Builders appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Corey Meyer of Weihe Engineers was also in attendance. The name of the development was changed just after application was filed. The project is to be known as Taylor Trace. The project was reviewed by the Subdivision Committee August 6 th The only open item is a revision to the landscape plan. Corey Meyer, landscape architect, has not yet had a chance to totally revise the plan; however, the applicant has met with the neighborhood association and no negative feedback has been incurred. Dave Cremeans confirmed the action of the Subdivision Committee that recommended approval 6 -0. Jon Dobosiewicz reported the Department is recommending favorable consideration. Dave Cremeans moved for approval of Docket No. 84 -02 PP, Carey Lake Subdivision (Primary Plat), subject to Scott Brewer's final approval of the landscape plan; seconded by Wayne Wilson and APPROVED 11 -0. J. New Rusiness None K. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 PM. Marilyn Anderson, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary S:\P1anCommission\ Minutes\ P1anCommissionMinutes \2002augMEMO 26