Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRemonstrance letters Conn, Angelina V From: Hollibaugh, Mike P Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 9:26 AM To: Conn, Angelina V; Hancock, Ramona B Cc: Holmes, Christine B Subject: FW: KROGER PROPOSAL ALTUM'S MICHIGAN ROAD SITE Ramona, will you please forward this note on to the PC? From: Brainard, James C Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:51 PM To: 'dotrushworth @yahoo.com'; Rider, Kevin D; Sharp, Rick Cc: cwic2 @yahoo.com; risusharp @att.net; Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: RE: KROGER PROPOSAL ALTUM'S MICHIGAN ROAD SITE Dot, I understand your concerns. As 1 have told several I would be happy to see the Kroger proposal go away entirely; however, it is not up to me. I will do what I can to make sure you are heard. I am passing along your message to staff for distribution to the Plan Commissioners. Jim Brainard From: Dot Rushworth [mailto:dotrushworth yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 11:07 AM To: Rider, Kevin D; Sharp, Rick Cc: cwic2 @yahoo.com; risusharp @att.net; Brainard, James C Subject: KROGER PROPOSAL ALTUM'S MICHIGAN ROAD SITE Gentlemen, I hope my plea for our Woodhaven Community will truly be listened to and shared with the Carmel Planning Commission and any other official /representative of necessity. My husband and I live on the very first lot in Woodhaven. When the meetings were held concerning the Aaron- Ruben- Nelson Mortuary (ARN), my husband pleaded for understanding and consideration to not allow this business to be so close to our residence and the neighborhood. Why the concern? At least it's not noisy? Our granddaughter has been fighting for her life for the last two years battling leukemia. Many of the reports concerning crematories claim that carcinogens are released into the air from cremations. We are concerned about her spending time outside and being exposed. What would you do if it were your child, your grandchild, you? The cremation /furnace "exhales" less than 25' from our property line! Would they want their children/grandchildren outside playing and breathing the air that contained particles released from the crematory? We feel that our plea was not seriously taken into consideration because if any member of the Planning Commission or legal staff supporting ARN asked themselves if they would want this in their backyard, they would certainly consider their families. When ARN first started, it seemed that several cremations took place at night and still do —you can hear the hum of the cremation furnace at our house. Do you think we don't notice? Sometimes, at night, we actually can see small "flakes" reflected by the outside light drifting down to the ground just outside our bedroom door. No it's not snow. That would certainly be better. What do you think it is? What will it be like when weather permits windows and doors to be open? Do you call that "fresh air" coming into our home. Would you want to breathe it? Would you feel comfortable in your home? Now add a Kroger store, gas station, several small stores etc,, we will be forced to add to the above problem vehicle noises, voices, car doors slamming, gas pumping, multitudes of lights at night, more traffic (not only on Michigan Road but right up 1 to the yards we have been able to enjoy), invasion of privacy and security. This invasion won't be just a 10 hour workday. It will be 24/7. How about invasive trash blowing onto our properties? Are there fences high enough to stop the wind? Would you want all this going on in your backyard when you want to enjoy a pleasant evening outside with family and friends? What do you tell guests when they ask what the humming noise is? "Oh, nothing, just a body being cremated." I could list all the development issues, zoning restrictions, promises made years back by developers now potentially not kept but that doesn't seem to matter. I have always believed that a person's "word" and handshake meant more than anything. What has happened to compassion and consideration for each other? What has happened to "do unto others Why is the "almighty dollar" taking place of the "Almighty What should matter is living up to ones word. Boards, Commissions, Politicians etc. are suppose to represent the people who elected them. Not the businesses who put cash into pockets. First, and foremost, decisions should ultimately consider what it will do to people's lives /quality of living. For those of you who had a mother or grandmother say "she wasn't mad at you...she was disappointed," you know what I mean. Those persons meant to world to us and being "disappointed" in us was the worst thing ever. It was so much easier if they just got mad. Please don't "disappoint" me or any of us who trust you and count on you. Sincerely, Dot Rushworth 4633 Woodhaven Drive 2 Page 1 of 1 Hancock, Ramona B From: Elizabeth Graves [elizabethgraves @ymail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 6:44 PM To: Idierckman @carmel.in.gov; Dutcher, Dan; Dorman, Jay; Grabow, Bradford S; Irizarrym Heather M; Rider, Kevin D; rripma @carmel.in.gov; Schleif, Carol; Stromquist, Steven R; Torres, Madeleine; Westermeier, Susan; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Hancock, Ramona B Subject: Zoning for Kroger on North Michigan Road Docket 09100009 I am a resident in the Townes of Weston Pointe that will be adjacent to the new Kroger store being developed on the land currently occupied by Altums. Since my residence is so close to the property, I have been following the zoning issues that are being proposed. I am against several and here is a list: 1. The full exemption from the requirement that no more than 75% will be retail. Having 100% will violate the current requirements that would help transition from retail use for the existing neighbors. 2. The outlot and gas station being allowed less that 120 feet from Michigan Road. 3. Signage variances for height, number of signs, total square footages allowed, signs not facing a right of way and the electronic signs for the gas station. 4. Drive -thrus that are planned for front and side of the buildings. All of these variances are objectionable and my choice for making Carmel my home was because of all of Carmel's high standards. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Elizabeth Graves 3939 Weston Pointe Dr Zionsville, IN 46077 1/25/2010 Page 1 of 1 Hancock, Ramona B From: SHARLETTE MORDOH [smordoh @sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 10:05 AM To: Idierkman @carmel.in.gov; Dutcher, Dan; Dorman, Jay; Grabow, Bradford S; Irizarrym Heather M; Rider, Kevin D; Tingley, Connie S; rripma @carmel.in.gov; Schleif, Carol; Stromquist, Steven R; Torres, Madeleine; Westermeier, Susan; Hancock, Ramona B; Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: Zoning for Kroger on North Michigan Road Docket 09100009 I am a resident in the Townes of Weston Pointe that will be adjacent to the new Kroger store being developed on the land currently occupied by Altums. Since my residence is so close to the property, I have been following the zoning issues that are being proposed. I am against several and here is a list: 1. The full exemption from the requirement that no more than 75% will be retail. Having 100% will violate the current requirements that would help transition from retail use for the existing neighbors. 2. The outlot and gas station being allowed less that 120 feet from Michigan Road. 3. Signage variances for height, number of signs, total square footages allowed, signs not facing a right of way and the electronic signs for the gas station. 4. Drive -thrus that are planned for front and side of the buildings. All of these variances are objectionable and my choice for making Carmel my home was because of all of Carmel's high standards. Thank you in advance for you attention to this matter. Sharlette Mordoh 4035 Weston Pointe Drive Zionsville, IN 46077 317 873 5251 smordoh @sbcglobal.net 1/25/2010 Page 1 of 1 Hancock, Ramona B From: danruba @gmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:46 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B; Dierckman, Leo J; Dutcher, Dan; Dorman, Jay; Grabow, Bradford S; Irizarrym Heather M; Rider, Kevin D Subject: 1/21/10 Docket 09100009 Concerns Dear Members of the Carmel Planning Commission: My name is Dan Ruba, my wife Heather and I live in one of the townhomes that currently borders the property line of Altum's Nursery (and the proposed Kroger /Retail location). I'm writing to express my concerns, not in anger or vengance or what have you. Rather I am writing because this proposed development poses some legitimate issues with regard to property value, and more immediately it poses a significant risk to the peacefulness of living in these townhomes. With daily food deliveries, trash pickups, parking lot and other associated lighting, it is no small stretch of the imagination to see how the noise, light and safety could prove to be very distracting and could likely be a turn off to prospective buyers. Some of us in this border area are starting families, including my wife and I, this year and the safety, noise and lighting are all concerns for us. Perhaps having a third grocery store all within a mile of the other two will ultimately be a good thing for the area, I don't see how, but if this development does go through, I would ask for some considerations to be made to: protect the tree line or improve the tree line that separates the properties (some of us chose this area because of having that tree line) protect the property line between the proposed development and the townhomes (perhaps a wall of some sort), have a noise reducing barrier (perhaps the aforementioned wall) have restrictions enforced for food delivery times and trash pickup times (perhaps no activity between 10p and 7a) position the lighting in such a way as to not disturb (as much as possible) the homes that border the property. Thank you for your help with this matter, I do hope this can be beneficial for all involved. Respectfully submitted, Dan Ruba 1/21/2010 Page 1 of 2 Hancock, Ramona B From: Tingley, Connie S Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 11:24 AM To: Conn, Angelina V; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Holmes, Christine B Cc: Hancock, Ramona B; 'John Molitor' Subject: FW: Docket No. 09100009 DP /ADLS: Long Branch Market w/ Kroger FYI From: Dale Ankrom [mailto:dea @deainc.us] Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 10:44 AM To: Dierckman, Leo 3; nkestner @carmel.in.gov; Dorman, Jay; Grabow, Bradford S; Irizarrym Heather M; Rider, Kevin D; rripma @carmel.in.gov; jhagan @carmel.in.gov; Stromquist, Steven R; mtorres @carmel.gov; Westermeier, Susan Cc: ctingley @carmle.in.gov; Tingley, Connie S Subject: Docket No. 09100009 DP /ADLS: Long Branch Market w/ Kroger To All: My wife Susie and our family live in the Woodhaven neighborhood and are extremely concerned with the proposed development and the upcoming zoning process. We believe the Plan Commission should, at the very least, uphold the standards of the Michigan Road Overlay Zone and refuse to dissolve the restrictions otherwise. In addition to being a neighbor in the immediately affected community, I am a commercial architect and real estate developer and have been involved in many developments such as this for over 30 years and have numerous concerns. 1. The Mich. Rd. Overlay Zone. I realize typically commitments can always be modified or changed, however, it should be binding (The existing in- place standards) and should be upheld in good faith. I would certainly hope, our neighborhood should have been protected from uncontrolled development growth, affecting our quality of life. 2. Have you truly analyzed the Overlay Zone documents and developer's requests, that addresses traffic, parking, etc, as well as typical developmental standards? We are very concerned about the impending potential disasters with increased traffic, the Woodhaven residents' other neighborhoods and importantly, emergency vehicles' ability to make a left /south turn onto 421. I'm sure there will be well over 300 500 parking spaces required and the typical turn -over ratio is based upon every two hours on an eight to 10 hr. day. This means potentially well over 3,000 vehicles per day could use the lot, entries, etc. to the property. Our neighbor, Tom Rushworth, identified that it may take a couple of fatalities to get someone's attention to do something. We want to be "on- record" as identifying this likely problem now. 3. Our neighborhood is home to some professional community- minded people who regularly make a positive difference for our local communities and our state. I would hope our show of unity would have some influence. We are also not opposed to signing a letter drafted to be sent to anyone on the BZA, Plan Commission, Carmel City (Mayor included) and even Gov. Daniels as it may relate to a state road and the likely potential hazards that will be created. 1/20/2010 Page 2 of 2 4. It sounds as if the process has progressed to the point where we have only a little chance to halt it and only a small voice in the ultimate developmental outcome. We certainly did not realize this potential development nighmare when we chose to live in the neighborhood. If this is to pass and become reality, we also want very many restrictions (lighting, noise, visual, traffic etc.) placed as possible to maintain our quality of life. We want, and would desire from zoning leaders such as you, to control: Percentage of retail; No gas stations; Limited or no Drive Thru's; Very stringent lighting controls; Adequate screening/ fencing controls; Stringent sign controls and some solution to the impending traffic debacle that will be created, endangering citizens and emergency vehicles in the immediate area. I/ we are out of town and will not be able to attend the meetings, however, be assured, we are extremely concerned about your positions and the outcome regarding quality of life and development growth for the sake of local revenue. How would you feel if this was in your back yard and neighborhood? We are part of your community. Please stand up for our rights. Dale and Susie Ankrom DEA, Inc. Architecture Westgate Crane Development Co., LLC 317 513 -8584 cell 317 257 -1880 office 1/20/2010 January 19, 2010 Ramona Hancock Administrative Assistant Plan Commission One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Dear Members of the Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals: We are deeply concerned about the proposed Kroger along Michigan Road between 106 Street and 116 Street in West Carmel. We live in the townhomes at 4105 Much Marcle Drive, just south of the proposed development less than 100 feet from the proposed south line. You have heard or will be hearing from several of our neighbors and we felt our voice should be heard as well. Our family includes 5 year old twin boys and they are the major reason for our concern. Our children go to bed at 8:OOpm daily and awaken at 6:45am for school. So we are very much opposed to truck deliveries, trash pick -up, construction noise pollution, large -scale HVAC systems, drive -thru pharmacy, Recycling Drop -off, barking dogs at the proposed Kennel, etc due to the immense level of noise these things present during times when children are sleeping. It is a major concern. Another point of concern is the proposed sidewalk into our neighborhood from the Kroger site. There has been a significant rise in the number of burglaries and robberies at the businesses around this corridor. A sidewalk would offer an "escape route" to someone running either from a business into the neighborhood or from the neighborhood into the parking lot. It is a major safety concern. The neighbors and residents of this area really need to be heard. There are many negative issues involved in this project the way it is proposed now. Can we take another look at this and find common ground between the people and the Kroger so that this could be a mutually beneficial situation. Thank you for your time. Gia and David McGill 4105 Much Marcie Dr Zionsville, IN 46077 317 432 -5114 Conn, Angelina V From: Hancock, Ramona B Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 11:22 AM To: 'Julia OMalley' Subject: RE: Proposed Long Branch Development/ Kroger 09100009 Ms. OMalley: Thank you for your letter regarding the proposed Long Branch Development and Kroger store. I will distribute your letter to the Plan Commission members at the meeting tomorrow eve and include a copy in the public file. Ramona Hancock From: Julia OMalley [mailto:juliaann2 ©yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 2:22 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B Subject: Proposed Long Branch Development/ Kroger 09100009 Ramona Hancock Administrative Assistant Plan Commission One Civic Center Carmel, IN 46032 Members of the Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals: I live at 4120 Much Marcle Dr. with my three children aged 8, 13 and 16. I am writing this in regards to the proposed Long Branch Development Kroger 09100009 project. I feel that it is important for me to voice my concerns in regards to this project. Obviously my main concern is for my children and their safety. I realize that I can't prevent Kroger from proceeding however, being that my family will be adversely affected by this project, I feel that my wishes and demands should be taken into consideration. Being that the Altum's property sits between two residential neighborhoods, the current zoning restriction of 75% retail should be kept and enforced. It is imperative that sufficient buffer between residential and commercial use be in effect. Having studied other retail developments up and down the Michigan Street corridor, this project is the only one that has a Big —box store (Super Kroger) but up against a residential neighborhood. Where is the usual buffer street or green space that is normally planned for a project of this size? If things go as the current plans show, Kroger and its HVAC units will literally be in my backyard. It goes without saying the significant amount of noise pollution, light pollution and safety issues that this will cause. My children are all of school age, it is imperative that their sleep schedule not be disturbed. My children's bedrooms all face the proposed Kroger site therefore; there should be no truck deliveries, trash pickup, construction times or drive thru hours between the hours of 8 pm to 7 am. Having read my neighbor Casey Carter's letter that he recently submitted to you, I will re- iterate the developmental requirements that we are requesting: 1. Mounding on the south of proposed development, north of the Townhomes of Weston Pointe must be 10' in height with an 8' fence built with masonry post and neutral color fencing. 1 o Landscaping facing the Townhomes will be dense with 8' 10' pine /spruce trees. o Trees will be replaced by developer if and when they die with trees of same height. o Tree line currently in place will remain protected and preserved during demolition /construction/grading /finishing with fencing of some sort. o Mounding /fencing /plantings to extend west of the northern most point of current Real Estate /Insurance /School Building to the currently proposed Weston Pointe road access. o Elimination of Southern most parking island (currently 8 spaces). Island to become a planting /tree /pine /spruce island. o Mounding shown on final plans with elevations consistent with above requirements. 2. Signage must be consistent with current tenants along 421/Michigan Road. Lettering must not be allowed larger than what currently exists at Marsh. Number of signs must be consistent with current tenants along Michigan road. In addition to the above requirements, I would also like to mention that the residents whose backyards face the Altum's property have had to deal with past drainage issue (I have pictures of ducks paddling in the "lake" in my backyard to prove it!). This problem shou e taken into consideration. Drainage must be kept on the Kroger development side with some type of drainage system to prevent future drainage issues. I am completelypposed to a sidewalk access from the Kroger parking lot into my neighborhood This proposed sidewalk would not connect to any existing sidewalk system so obviously it serves no purpose. What this sidewalk would create is an easy access to the back of our townhomes. This definitely creates a safety issue for all residents whose homes are near this proposed, unnecessary sidewalk. In conclusion, I am asking the Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals to consider my concerns and those of my neighbors. This planned development will affect our safety, health and well being. It does not benefit any of us in anyway. Please do not allow these plans to pass in their current form. Thank you for your consideration in these matters. Sincerely, Julia A. Price 2 From: CWIC2 [mailto:cwic2 @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 11:04 AM To: Tingley, Connie S Cc: Martin, Candy; Forwarding Email, Sharp, Rick; Rider, Kevin D Subject: Long Branch Market (Kroger) BZA Hearing Carmel has striven to set high standards via zoning ordinances. The Michigan Road Overlay Zone is an example of those high standards resulting in quality development, which in turn has made it a very desirable area. The proposed Long Branch Market w /Kroger seeks to benefit from locating within this thriving area, while attempting to avoid many of the very provisions that have resulted in the area's success. The filing of 11 variances points not only to an unwillingness to work within the rules, but a desire to be exempted from standards the other businesses met in order to locate in this highly desirable area. Of particular concern are the requests to be exempted from some of the most fundamental of requirements. The variances regarding maximum 75% gross floor area permitted for retail uses and the drive thru locations flout the very purpose of the Overlay Zone. What hardship exists that reasonably results in 6 variances for signage! Please consider that there are additional ramifications with granting these sign variances: it would encourage other existing businesses in the Overlay Zone to ask for their own sign variances. Please refuse to set a precedent for ignoring the sign standards of the Overlay Zone. Perhaps reasonable, small differences could be addressed regarding frontage on a public street, some signage issues, and perimeter fence designs. However, "small" differences could be expected to be worked out by the Plan Commission while they upheld as much as possible the high quality standards required of everyone choosing to locate in the Overlay Zone. As proposed, this development is asking you to make important standards just disappear for them. If variances can essentially make zoning ordinances go away, what is the point of establishing zoning ordinances to begin with? This property is desirable, within a highly desirable corridor, on a much traveled "gateway" road. There is no hardship to the property making these variances necessary, just a desire to be exempt from the very standards that have made this area so desirable they want to locate within the Overlay Zone. How ironic. We strongly urge you to refuse the variances so as to uphold the high standards as written and which already exist in this important corridor. Marilyn Anderson, President MaryEllen Bormett, Vice President Dee Fox, Secretary JAMES R. PARKER 1 1368 ROYAL CIRCLE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 -8699 January 16, 2010 TO: Nick Kestner, Jay Dorman, Brad Grabow, Heather Irizarry, Kevin Rider, Rick Ripma, Judy Hagan, Steve Stromquist, Madeline Torres, Susan Westermeier RE: Docket No. 09100009 DP /ADLS: Long Branch Market w/ Kroger (Altum's site) Dear Planning Commission Members, I am writing you in regards to the requested variances being proposed by the developer of the Kroger store and retail center along Michigan Road. Although I'm very pleased to hear that another grocery such as Kroger is being planned, I'm not happy to hear that the developer wants to over -ride a number of the requirements of the Michigan Road Overlay Zone. The other developers in this area have had to comply with these requirements, why should this developer be allowed to disregard them? In my opinion, loosening these requirements will ultimately result in this area looking similar to the retail area along Keystone just south of 156 street (which is an eye- sore). There are a number of residential areas that surround the Michigan Road Overlay. As a property owner, I want to ensure that the area stays attractive thus helping to keep the property value high throughout the western boundary of Carmel. When this topic is discussed in the next meeting, I urge you to reject the variance proposal and help keep this section of Carmel up to the standards of excellence that we expected when we moved to the community. Thank you. Best regards, James R. Parker E- mail. irparkerrindy. rr. com Phone: 317.873.9610 Hancock, Ramona B From: Hancock, Ramona B Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 4:46 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B Subject: FW: Long Branch Market Original Message From: MaryEllen Bormett [mailto:mebormett@me.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 3:11 PM To: Tingley, Connie S Subject: Long Branch Market Hello. I am a resident of western Clay Township. A proposed zoning or ordinance change has come to my attention that I would like to share my input on. I am active in my community and am the HOA president of my neighborhood, Laurel Lakes. I believe that the look and feel of our community is important to all of us and thus want to express my feelings regarding the proposed changes for the Altium's property. It is my understanding that when the zoning change was granted to Altiums to be built there, there were some stipulations put on the property to limit the uses. I believe this was a good decision as it is in a transition area and has immediately surrounding residential property. This was a smart move not only to be considerate to the immediately surrounding properties but also for the general good of the community to organize our city into logical areas of commercial, industrial and residential areas for obvious reasons. I feel that nothing unforeseen has happened in our community to warrant a change in position for the limitations on that property. The commercial located farther south on Michigan road provides two options for groceries, several restaurants, several banking options, clothing stores, home improvement stores, several pharmacies and all general services that our community needs to service the surrounding area. To approve the change in zoning to add yet another grocery store seems to just be looking to add more commercial and not to be looking at the overall needs or desires of the community as a whole. If there was a goods vendor of needed service that was not located within an easy drive of the area homes, I think at that point a zoning change could responsibility be considered if that store could not be accommodated in the existing commercial area. But that appears to not be the case regarding this proposal. Thus I believe this proposed change should be denied as it does not add any needed services to our community and would stretch out the commercial area on Michigan road unacceptably far to the north into the residential and rural area. Finally I want to share with you that I recently took a poll of my neighborhood asking all residents to respond with their input on a vast majority of topics regarding our area from residential density to commercial sites being added to our community so that I could adequately know my communities sentiments when representing them regarding the newly proposed Comp Plan and regarding other zoning considerations that arise from time to time. The unanimous opinion was that the responding residents of Laurel Lakes were not interested in increasing the density of the zoning and were not interested in seeing commercial development outside of the already defined commercial areas. Thus, as I write to you I am sure my letter represents the sentiments of not only myself, but also many more residents in this area. Thank you for your time and service to our community! Sincerely, MaryEllen Bormett HOA President, Laurel Lakes 2430 Hopwood Drive Carmel IN 46032 1 January 15, 2010 2 3 s Ramona Hancock 89 Administrative Assistant RC RECEIVED Plan Commission One Civic Square, JAN 2 0 2010 Carmel, IN 46032 DOGS Members of the Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals: 3 9 1 E I am writing concerning the proposed Long Branch Development Kroger 09100009. _I live at 4132 Much Marcle Drive with my two children ages 5 and 8. I have many concerns over the plans for this development and have outlined them below. 75% Retail Use The current zoning restriction of 75% retail should be kept and enforced. The property sits between two residential neighborhoods, and there should not be such and abrupt divide between residential and commercial. The current plans do not provide sufficient buffer between residential and commercial use. The current plan pushes the retail use to every corner of the lot, using just about every available square foot of land. The current proposal puts my home within mere feet of a Big -box store (Super Kroger). It is so close, that the HVAC units on top of the proposed site will likely affect my children's sleep as their bedrooms face the Altum's property. This is drastically out of character for the current retail establishments already in place along the Michigan Rd corridor. Most if not all large stores have a buffer street between residential areas and retail stores with plenty of green space. The close proximity will cause significant, detrimental light pollution, noise pollution, and safety concerns. Pharmacy Drive -thru There is no need for a pharmacy drive -thru in such close proximity to residential housing. A pharmacy drive -thru will cause significant light and noise pollution. As a pharmacist myself, l have experienced working a drive -thru. Drive -thru customers cannot see how busy it may be on —the inside of the store and impatient customers will honk to gain attention. This would happen more often at night because there is only one person on staff to field the phones, pickup and drop off windows, and drive -thru. Customers seemed to often be less understanding and more prone to honking at night. The honk of a car is an extremely loud abrupt sound, even more than delivery trucks or trash pick up. We do not want to be disturbed by the loud honking of impatient customers and our children should not be awakened by this sort of disturbance. Therefore, I oppose the variance allowing a pharmacy drive -thru. Noise pollution Quiet Hours Below is an excerpt from the National Sleep Foundation's website www.sleepfoundation.org Haw'Macli Sleep Da Yo Re lly Need ?kv 4 40 d ox., Age Sleep Needs Newborns (1 -2 months) 10.5 -18 hours Infants (3 -11 months) 9 -12 hours during night and 30- minute to two -hour naps, one to four times a day Toddlers (1 -3 years) 12 -14 hours Preschoolers (3 -5 years) 11 -13 hours School -aged Children (5 -12 years) 10 -11 hours Teens (11 -17) 8.5-9.25 hours Adults 7-9 hours Older Adult 7 -9 hours According to the above chart, my two children ages 5 and 8 should have 11 hours of sleep per night. They awaken at 7am to board the Carmel Clay bus which arrives at 7:40am. This puts bedtime (quiet -time) at 8pm. Therefore, the proposed .Kroger going in adjacent to my children's bedroom windows should have quiet hours of 8pm to 7am not the proposed midnight to 5am schedule. The store should have no truck deliveries, trash pickup, construction times, or drive thru hours during this time period. I am asking this not only for my own two children, but for the nine children extremely close to the development (ages 1, 5, 5, 5, 8, 8, 14, 16, 16) most of whom have bedrooms facing north toward the proposed Kroger. I would also like to mention the many adults who will be disturbed and the children and residents further down the streets who will be affected to a slightly lesser degree (there are 130 units in our neighborhood). Signage The proposed sign is out of character for the area. The Marsh sign less than '/2 mile away is approximately 5 feet high. The Kroger sign does not need to be 9 feet high. It is out of character for the area. This variance should not be allowed. Outlots Crime has been increasing over the last year, especially among the strip malls and outlots along the Michigan Road corridor. More specifically, there has been an increase in the number of robberies and burglaries. Having two outlot stores next to Kroger will increase the crime in our area. We also have many vacant outlot stores near us. There isn't a significant need for these types of establishments in our area and it will only bring in more crime. A more detailed crime report is in the works and will soon follow this letter. Sidewalk The proposed plan has a sidewalk from the Kroger parking lot into our neighborhood. This is a security concern. This proposed sidewalk also does not connect to any existing sidewalk system. We do not want access to our neighborhood from the proposed Kroger parking lot and store. On August 15, 2009, Lovely Nails at 4000 W 106 St, Carmel, IN was robbed at gunpoint. This store is less than V2 mile from our neighborhood. The suspect fled through the back door and into the neighborhood behind the store (the Westons the connecting neighborhood to the south of us). The police locked down the neighborhoods looking for the suspect. This recent incident is a terrifying example of what we are trying to avoid in our community. The sidewalk also opens the possibility of crime in the opposite direction with a robbery occurring in our neighborhood and the suspect fleeing into the Kroger parking lot. I object to the proposed sidewalk due to safety concerns. On -site Recycling Areas I absolutely object to on -site recycling areas. I am personally an advocate for recycling. I currently pay for recycling services from Republic Waste Services. Recycling bins cause significant noise when persons drop off glass and metal objects. Most importantly, these containers are available 24 hours a day with no control over when a person can drop items off. This has high potential for disrupting mine and my young children's sleep. It is a hazard to their health and well- being. These types of drop off recycling areas are more appropriate for a commercial or non residential area. Kennel Similar to the Recycling Area idea, there is little control over the noise a kennel can generate. Kennels are noisy, and dogs do not generally stop barking to follow ordinances. A kennel should not be an allowed use for this area. In summary, my objections to the proposed Kroger development are significant and will affect my family and my neighbors' safety, health, and well- being. The current plans are also an aberration to the current character of West Carmel. I am asking the Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals to consider my concerns as a citizen and neighbor to this development. Please do not allow the plans to pass in their current form. Thank you for your consideration in these matters. Sincerely, CCUSI-Uv` Catherine Jones (r e t ap arYIUIIr1 Ointment),1 L p)/1 t6 0-(-) r u r 0 IA fig I f 1 4 www. altabax com ce py Conn, Angelina V From: Tingley, Connie S Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 4:39 PM To: 'MaryEllen Bormett' Subject: RE: Long Branch Market Thank you for your comments. I will give a copy of your email to the BZA Board members. Connie Tingley BZA Secretary 571 -2419 Original Message From: MaryEllen Bormett [mailto:mebormett @me.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 3:11 PM To: Tingley, Connie S Subject: Long Branch Market Hello. I am a resident of western Clay Township. A proposed zoning or ordinance change has come to my attention that I would like to share my input on. I am active in my community and am the HOA president of my neighborhood, Laurel Lakes. I believe that the look and feel of our community is important to all of us and thus want to express my feelings regarding the proposed changes for the Altium's property. It is my understanding that when the zoning change was granted to Altiums to be built there, there were some stipulations put on the property to limit the uses. I believe this was a good decision as it is in a transition area and has immediately surrounding residential property. This was a smart move not only to be considerate to the immediately surrounding properties but also for the general good of the community to organize our city into logical areas of commercial, industrial and residential areas for obvious reasons. I feel that nothing unforeseen has happened in our community to warrant a change in position for the limitations on that property. The commercial located farther south on Michigan road provides two options for groceries, several restaurants, several banking options, clothing stores, home improvement stores, several pharmacies and all general services that our community needs to service the surrounding area. To approve the change in zoning to add yet another grocery store seems to just be looking to add more commercial and not to be looking at the overall needs or desires of the community as a whole. If there was a goods vendor of needed service that was not located within an easy drive of the area homes, I think at that point a zoning change could responsibility be considered if that store could not be accommodated in the existing commercial area. But that appears to not be the case regarding this proposal. Thus I believe this proposed change should be denied as it does not add any needed services to our community and would stretch out the commercial area on Michigan road unacceptably far to the north into the residential and rural area. Finally I want to share with you that I recently took a poll of my neighborhood asking all residents to respond with their input on a vast majority of topics regarding our area from residential density to commercial sites being added to our community so that I could adequately know my communities sentiments when representing them regarding the newly proposed Comp Plan and regarding other zoning considerations that arise from time to time. The unanimous opinion was that the responding residents of Laurel Lakes were not interested in increasing the density of the zoning and were not interested in seeing commercial development outside of the already defined commercial areas. Thus, as I write to you I am sure my letter represents the sentiments of not only myself,, but also many more residents in this area. 1 Thank you for your time and service to our community! Sincerely, MaryEllen Bormett HOA President, Laurel Lakes 2430 Hopwood Drive Carmel IN 46032 2 Y RECEI j s z t i 2.YY) r i EIS j oEC<< I .J L L s 71. L• c v� 1 4 7 �,v JiP rte. �'cL �N �1. t L.%S t.Ka (!L.'>� L ....'c -x '41.- ..-r .�.,'U C?-1. -L.:'t CI E, C'?- 1-1-C-11'\-r4-17-LA-5-14 Jtr� l.^.i t C-'� L`�S -fir 0 Ct t.L.CLQ- it C; 1x CI.o,Ck 1 r-"� l .L Y-,c- l Z. ck.- -l..l _i1-y..l._ C., i ='1.{•1 V c .2 (jam- "L h.i- r�i•a.1a- rr. ^1�.. K�.�� c L���CCC...k ,�G�`?�. 1 Ll. -.t-- Lk V- e "'L_—.- 1 U^!v .�Y't.- L.C_._Y"L CC. -.3' YY \C t C L-l. 0 L,LU,',.._. c LAi`C'ti- -a k_c ,.-ax.Cl i i L L4` '.a.7v,- t '1_{ C xi l..' _tay..k:.- C:.. "t'\ CL. C- G'n Ck c.= L �2 _,�.-:-L, f L, Y. "LL:-r. j� r I (I ,Q j C L.k... i..0- -6-fL• .L.i C `-L' Jo.. C� y h ft ..L .VV� C1 1 '.�9' C 'r2(� l t 1 t f C `J k U �r j 1 ct 75 C/ ICA.. f -1-Z ;2�L.- 4 ?�`1 -L", J.... C c:C' 1.i.'C:u C <2,1 Y L.i",I f; 1 .,4-,:_ 1,. t.,„ 1-- Crs HeN.A,:_, r i__c_.....2.s._ 0 r tk,Jo- .i_4 6 ,A.,,.,i__Y,..0,. Lc:-ac ,is2- J ,S' v-€., _F_...c c',., cl C_ -C't %-t., C C r,/ l l t f�- -e- C G--C.. C- n L v'v1�' f 1 j yy tom p /I 1.:0 ti 4- 7 l _._e_i �La: %T-1 11''' r---t ti- -L, _CL-, r n� u r�_L 1 tt. t- C .y1_fr%�\. rY>, i fr1 "l, vL.k. -i.. C a -C_u C ax 1 Y V t- r. qr C "mil w Y \-Cr c�.Z4 130 i L 4 �S�• .._1 �-,n- .r te, a -11,-,k D y`I-.i'I W J C L t_ ..,c; -r L C u-s T Js v p. .12.iv -kc. c L c b �1, 4i .L� L c: f U c 1,. .ta.,�' /--L.- „,,fi. -L v\..�.-. �i, CU rl ✓d 1 '1 L.Ye' ts, b U'u` 1C A 1f( !%°L,-v Q .c= 1 -L� -t cr- a.. =u. yo t. -J-ec k\s:',_,2. VCS tY ----f--v- -A--t \./..D_A_ v 1j t 1 1�t -y\c C`� l \L C .G� B z i L� c' �l tv sF z V� 1 �y Jl 1 p V v U.:4-1 E Cy. 1 L c� 71 41 CYt 'L Cz Tom n z_ G y [i p 1� a-1,1-1 n.� 4 C:L.L/ 1 C v L a 6,,, e ,i vl.c 1 k YL.c. ,43`L�_Ytk A.,, M% t4_ k-.. ..i +'aC i-.. LL.L :L u .L- ,_„2._ CLS\4u t., t 2 ,YVl i oo t 1. -C_`. 4-�'� <1...!' a[.- \t- "1 JJ. '1IL L C t j'.., (.4.--:.1, COL l.- C. V rn L- ■.ti_..L C' .1\:i-., C� i..: -t! lr� ,24....r-t__ l.; Vv'L �L'T'3'Y��m f4 r.ti._.. t� .D- L ,n,.x_. C5\ 1��i -r.... 6 �1 V 11 C?.% LL' ^).'L ':tJ C _tV- ��i-, :,e-. -y.. ..c_,, p-%- r\_cS -i(••U ("t r L'`1 -0, \tf, q t J1 l V V n t l n 1 1+.._ U....y i ce L- L Sy r 0 e r;,. f C C �t,.J.L.L.._._y „.4),-'2 I a k--z -r_ -,e: ,L.•'_. 6•-•,D t2 c` ,:,,,„.-,A `0.. 1 ,r_ l -7 3 t j c VD w kv f. r c -fl., C..'' h F� f1r i_ r t .'t ..i :3= _.f.r v'.-i. ,,d1_, i .h' ,:t.„.1 1 j Yk,. _'1 r 3 C'"\.1' -'1D A r_) C —'L t.- .A. CAS_ l_ Y\ L .1).t Ca F -)Vr .j_ L 0 -2 i k C2.1-,..0..1,1/4_,LQ erk_. C --L.-. -f- 1 -L-, Q i„ P, )C i... .,...try. f TY c... .1_ .C cw...,._ ct_t_ 1,,,,:,-L.,-,..4 t cC: it, (k.7 LA7-,..:-_, L.L.....r ci n 0 0,..,.',.3i:(..._ ci-i q. C-fr\t_12..g.. 5 ic.) e Ail. 2-1 f ...I —4 r Q Rf■6 KE 1-_-__ v --i-t,,,,,, 1 „.2 ,1 1__ n. 7 7 L cy,, _,..A..,, .01.,D-rtsid, i Cr_ 0-1 V CA.......— ,...5- VA_C,• i ri...0d:._?, i 0 -r• a y ou 1.4-ta ti )--t c7 T --uft 2 9 h A ft., 7 ...7 I 1 7 --S to [..)(•b t 0 2... t; -,ci ii-LoLt 0 0,..._ ....krL...2..--(j)::::.-LL-y-- frt-i----n% ual.z..r r\--CY1 1 Ct--C_I j- 7 7 t71:". Cl. C A.L.- 1 q,_ 1.k.„-...Q.__. 0 k.c -crt:C b i- e c_c ,,.-„,--2P----- (..e, I ',Lk .c, 1,..-0, e x.._ Llit ct.,,ci, 4 .01 d i C C C-'•--<0.-- ii:Ts2-t...1:::_,Z7 fir OC__ ,43 C 1 -A-.4...;—< 4- Cu P 0-- (R.CZEZ.irrt-. 1 i 1 cZ(1-7;:t --1- L K 5 a L... v ,...-1.4.....p...Q. Q---, 4... C3.1.1 cl-Crbt. hi- A Ltyl... ;ft,a_ t, 1.-a---C. q .4, Je...., 2-1 h T1 \i 7 5 s 7 niu--c■... ......tics z" Ck._ i'l._;L' c2--e-(1- 1 1., A," 1/1.9,..-,r1_,1-,.1 8 0, n 4 c k) ji z r 11, ,--a, is,„-L,,_t_,>l 1„,,,—,,,s,,o_....._ -k 0,_ c L-t.....--a— C tA-i- a ...0 67.) a.....__ 6 adl--1-0 ct-e.--&,....L —1 C!"ri-Lt_k ..j2_, C.,,, cL L, Ttz i re-1)11 4 i g -?112 ri s v....E.:: a A' ...A.--n., 41-- 1 0..... V -i)-_ i FLii-j-4- 0 a .0...a,-,..,-LA, t iL£-z.0_ c10 VIZ, c_.1,-, --i-k ct-y. k .1.. 01.1).(z---)..„.,-=—,,.....1_ /N.t...,--t.....-oLz--,.. re2A V \-Q-A-'1-g- L\_) k A.k..ck.CI rA_Q,_■2 IS. 1.-t7 1 LA G LCLI"), C. i_'. YU._ (I t T .)°t v■- t,tfe 4' LI--- C °VON. NVE>11-4Cal `N 9,.`i: I. i., P 1 3 I, tcic t ir er 13907::-.D4 1 Itt t EIMEIMIE 1.1911-Dcg It/P:13V NOLLV001 BitS A... ‘2 _c 1 0 i,... 0.07 e..: n 1 i I re 411 a t 1 V SO ...'",4 1 '14' :o l ,k2 s. 4 4 1, ONP C ell 2 2 i k i -4=-4. r 1 z s A. 1/ 0 ■D i t /41 'f, 511 a i`A< et VP. .7.7'''' j. `4 1 7 i 001 A tp dab. C 1 1 7.- "4" ■17.' L'' 4... ,t't 1 r ,i t 0 ,s i 010 ,4 "V .r 11 t.1 I/ 00 4. ci''' a 44 t? K Tti/ 0 *Ii C.*" -'2 4/ d 1 'SI ta V ,-1 t 1 4 I 'tt'AV 'A l l j 011 010 100 .41. r• .,:j. 1,Y,.',;, f, 1 „:5 'v, C7, ,1 1% 17 'Sri' •7. 3 1,, (1. r,'." LOIS wr- 5 c C C r r 01.11:i a--,---- ..et ._--At:i. ..i• ...34 `2..-..... ..:,...1'" ,A,.. 7 77 C g. y. 3, 7 •,..,,,,i,7,47z1g;', 41 .c ....7. 1. i" 1 ''S, 1 4 4 7 .A 4,..-- 1 4' "....--a,„ A c S'-.4 --'7_,,, 1,...-* c 47.." "'s 4 .7 5' 7"* k.,,,,,: ,A 5f.....7" 7 c A t r i c k 1 c. ,4'" t k C i 0 40 i 1, ...P7 L i..\ o 0 'to k x."' .444, 0441 a 4V Vi i .....77 e I 7 7 .7 114 iv f Ji \r i°141t" .4' 4 :4 N. i .........aoggiolrssMMWmsgia...V.,.".•.r"...Y.,atvr.x..vrA,slna,-euzraz.AeBokr.ositon.npk-aeettpeo-Ao..e.nas.14. Timber Ridge Home Owners Association Scott Herbst 910 Tillson Drive Zionsville, IN 46077 (c) 317 709 -6843 (w) 317- 814 -6784 December 15, 2009 Via Fax (317) 571 -2426 Plan Commission 56789 3 y and Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals City Of Carmel �o N One Civic Square ��G� Carmel, Indiana 46032 1 N cet Vi®G RE: Development Plan t {rode(/ 1-D nj Brant mar kt O� 9911 ADLS Docket No 09100009 DP /ADLS 4 To whom it may concern: I am the president of Timber Ridge Home Owners Association "TRHOA and am providing comments on plans for a Kroger, fueling station and the eventual development of two out -lots at the real estate commonly known as 11335 North Michigan Road and currently occupied by Altums (the "Development Several members of TRHOA attended an informational meeting hosted on Wednesday December 2, 2009 and our comments are based on material presented in that meeting by the developer and Nelson Frankenberger. Based on that meeting, our members share and support the concerns raised by the Woodhaven Home Owners Association "Woodhaven as articulated at the informational meeting. We understand those concerns include, but are not limited to: Lighting pollution, Noise pollution, including restrictions on nighttime deliveries, mitigating the noise caused by the compressors supporting the refrigeration equipment, which run 24/7/356, and noise from testing of the emergency generator (perhaps limiting for only one hour between the hours of 10 AM 4 PM each week and excluding weekend and holidays), Dumpster location and pest control, Traffic (we understand a light will be added at Bennett Parkway and that the drive at the North end of the development will be for ingress only which are both absolute minimums to address our issues on traffic and safety), The appropriateness of a gas station on this project, and Esthetics, including visual and physical buffers. We understand that the developers also seeks variances on the mix of businesses that can occupy the out -lots and some members of Woodhaven have suggested a prohibition on fast food leases and have reminded the developer that the intention of the zoning regulations was to provide lower intensity transition zones that abut residential neighborhoods. We again support Woodhaven's views on these matters. We also have a unique issue that was not adequately or accurately addressed in the informational meeting. We believe that the Development may exacerbate severe erosion issues on several of our property owners' land via the Long Branch Creek (the "Creek By way of background, we believe the Development will drain into Long Branch Creek that cuts under Michigan road and across the northern edge of our subdivision and the southern edge of Pittman Farms. Since the widening of Michigan Road, this waterway has seen severe erosion and is threatening property owners' homes in our subdivision. We are in discussions with both INDOT and the County regarding these problems and have had informal discussions with the Pittman family. INDOT and the County will need to perform studies before any remediation can be performed. Our concern is that water from the development will further exacerbate this serious erosion issue. We understand retention ponds will be located at the back (far east side) of the Development. Our fear is that the natural slope of the land will allow water to flow toward Michigan Road and this creek. The developer mistakenly reported that the Long Branch Creek flowed west to east and was unable to address our concerns in the informational meeting. If you have any questions, please call me at 317- 709 -6843. Very truly yours, S 244/ Scott E. Herbst, President, Timber Ridge Home Owners Association cc: Nelson Frankenberger (via fax 846 -8782) Steve Pittman (via e -mail steve @pittmanpartners.com) Conn, Angelina V From: Hollibaugh, Mike P Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 10:40 AM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: FW: Kroger fyi From: Julie Camden mailto :juliecamden @sbcglobal.net] Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 7:40 AM To: 'Brian Shapiro'; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Brainard, James C; risusharp @att.net; Rider, Kevin D; schleif @indy.rr.com Cc: kthomas321 @aol.com; 'Ted Robinson'; 'Luci Snyder'; 'Steve Pittman' Subject: RE: Kroger Mike, Attached is a copy of the email I sent out on behalf of our neighborhood. I would like to reiterate Woodhaven's top three concerns about the project, ALL of which have NOT been addressed: 1. The ordinance allows for 75% to be retail. This was done to encourage a nice transition to the adjoining residential zoning (such as Woodhaven). Currently, on the other part of Weston Point, they transitioned to offices and then townhomes. Woodhaven believes this is necessary. This requires that Kroger be moved forward, which Kroger has no intention of doing. As such, we will oppose the variance. Please realize that satisfying this request, would solve the two other main issues Woodhaven has due to the fact that the dumpsters would be further, and now the mound with trees on it, would have plenty of space and drainage. It also helps, as the lighting would be further from the subdivision, and there would be less chance of nuisance odors due to the food preparation of Kroger. We believe KROGER needs to prove that it's in our best interest to waive the variance. 2. Our second concern was the dumpsters and rodent control. Currently, the dumpsters are directly in our backyard, where a nice pond sits. The dumpsters need to be moved to a place where the noise of the trucks will not disturb the residents of Woodhaven. Also, a pest control program needs to be put into place, as neighborhoods similarly situated are experiencing rat problems. We do not want to hear dumpsters clanking and waking us up. While originally promised no trucks between 7 P.M., and 7 a.m. (Brian and I both believe this to be the case), you have now decided to change this from midnight to 5 a.m. Our children need to sleep during these times and don't want dumpster noises waking them up. 3. Finally, our final concern is the buffering. We require a ten foot mound with 8 foot spruce or fir trees on top, similar to the former Krogers on 96 and Meridian. We need this so that Woodhaven can stay in the woods. We do not want to see semis, 38 foot tall buildings, etc. Plus, this will help with the noise. A four mound with a fence simply isn't tall enough or consistent enough with our surroundings. It will also help to cut out the lights, noise, etc. Julie A. Camden Camden Associates, P.C. 9000 Keystone Xing, Ste. 660 Indianapolis, IN 46240 (317) 770 -0000 Phone (888) 339 -9611 Fax 1 From: Brian Shapiro [mailto:brian @shapiros.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 9:10 PM To: Hollibaugh, Mike P; Brainard, James C; risusharp @att.net; Rider, Kevin D; schleif @indy.rr.com Cc: kthomas321 @aol.com; juliecamden @sbcglobal.net; Ted Robinson; Luci Snyder; Steve Pittman Subject: Kroger Mike, We met with the Kroger people tonight. I believe that Kevin or Julie will give you a summary. They altered some of the commitments. However, I think that the gas station needs a variance. It does not need one for the use, but for it does not have anything to screen the sea of cars. The existing gas stations on Michigan Road were preexisting to the overlay and there should be a building that screens the pumps. When I explained the position to Charlie and Jon, they started to understand the issue. Also, the connecting road that goes from Marsh to the Williams development does not cut thru to the Kroger. This is an important alternative street that should continue. The developer might claim that they can not force this, but the city will have eminent domain powers of which the developer can reimburse the city if Williams does not cooperate, which should not be the case. Thus, one can get from 96 street on the future road to the Home Depot and to the Kroger by going behind the Marsh to the St. Vincent health center road. Sincerely, Brian Shapiro 2 Conn, Angelina V From: Hollibaugh, Mike P Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 3:33 PM To: Conn, Angelina V; Holmes, Christine B; Littlejohn, David W Subject: FW: Kroger remonstrance email Shapiro Follow Up Flag: Follow up Due By: Monday, December 07, 2009 1:30 PM Flag Status: Flagged Fyi (for meeting tomorrow, etc) From: Brian Shapiro [mailto:brian @shapiros.com] Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 9:33 PM To: Hollibaugh, Mike P; Brainard, James C Cc: Steve Pittman; kthomas321 @aol.com; Luci Snyder; risusharp @att.net; schleif @indy.rr.com; Rider, Kevin D; Ted Robinson; juliecamden @sbcglobal.net; Ibarbrick @aol.com; irwin -knott@umbaugh.com Subject: Kroger Mayor, We support the Kroger, but there are many details that are not being properly addressed. We do not want any truck traffic between 7 pm and 7 am including trash pickup. We do not want the gas station. We do not want noise and odors. The screening needs to be similar to that of Clay Terrace and the Marsh at 82 and Allisonville Road. Additionally, the Michigan Road Overlay Zone needs to be followed. Westin Point used transitional zoning with office space to buffer retail. Also, the lighting is still an issue with Tight pollution. The funeral home puts off too many lumens and the purpose of the Michigan Overlay Zone was to eliminate the night glare into the neighbor's windows. I am afraid that the present site plans will dramatically impact the neighborhood. The plan commission has hybrid rezoning ability to override commitments that Mr. Altum made to the Carmel Council. Bob Altum died a few years ago. This is supposed to be transitional business. I believe that the developer was told that this was a slam dunk. Possibly, the price of the 22 acres will need to be renegotiated to make it work, or the Plan Commission will see West Clay create a remonstrance. Hopefully, you can assist the future residents of Carmel. Brian From: Maria Montessori International Academy [mailto:indymontessori ©msn.com] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:03 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: Hello Angelina Conn, I am writing to you as a concerned Montessori School parent and business owner who will be impacted by the Kroger proposed plan to occupy Altum's Nursery current lot along US 431 (Michigan Road) between Weston Pointe and 116th. As the Executive Director of the private Montessori School, parents have expressed concern of the gasoline station close proximity to the school. The parent body at large is concerned about the Kroger Gas Stations' production of toxic fumes and smog- causing pollution that are harmful for their children to inhale. As a business owner, I am afraid that clients will not want their child to attend the Montessori School due to the gas station proximity to the school which will ultimately drive the school out of business. No matter how great the academics, parents always put their child's health and safety first and this very concern just might cause the Montessori School to close its doors. We have been opened for a few months and the financial viability is of great concern, and a gas station brings about greater concerns of the future economic viability. Can you please advise me on the federal, state, and local regulations regarding gas station proximities to school (public versus private)? Thank you. Vivian Cain, Executive Director Maria Montessori International Academy 4370 Weston Pointe Zionsville, IN 46077 317 769 -2220 ma riamontessori intl.org TLtru-c,-6-Gv 30 2,009 To +L p i at AIL, f_ t Oat S L o h -p -1-AA-g- c� tle�st.- t‘' "TX• �.61n, a-,-,� ,Lo-ii-A_'.,, ce 1 3 0 c_e-y.G1-0 h-D cLcy Of\i,._ ).-L.0--rL Tkot „la, I-EP cr t (r e ,e, c,-1, a_c__,D, 6, Iv, r o r -._,LIL GOL cdp c.,._ c_Q„..„ A, L12 „.e__ uk,-R___ 0-As__ ek_._ kb-mg_ c _ory,,,,, c,...< 1 c „j i iA) _e_ 4 ',,t \J cCutt-i-c-4- ±o LA--kcLo-- LA)- Cs us rn At s e_ -e Le_ ci_A e 1 w-t- U rl 1 ,c Ii ol._e� .se re c�� n o t ---,-,,-.--ts-,Ji-- LJ2-4-----ro-p-o-a-e-A-, (a_ r a_.,amter,.... L,,y loc-cit_. u_. to 0. i 5 „KLJA i lc, a-c_Vz_ to 0,--, do ot c-A.H\A trylt2„.,_ sc-twte_ i) 63 c „..,,k) C9--1,,A V D )V' 0.Q�C r 0 +ten cec,„_ QJtlZ_ ,y--k a t-,rtrt-c.t. s-Q-AAA \)1A--A. -.A C) oN_ e .s: cLci0, &IL ,,,,er,9,4 vi, ,,,,LIL_dcL.,,,__Y cL„c(uv, F 0 (ip-eLL.±-n&- -''Orrik_ Crt Owl_ k_Z ,.k_ t e Qcs_c.). (<,,r i-4-■9 ■e,Z fp �is� a 1 p-rL a „m ci_„4 (O 0„...,. l 1 �"t3,dl I t 1A. ctn new e- t c Qz a 1 1 t-(- q �Gce., c C ,_;I +.,,_k-c-2,-..-&-w c itn_ 0- -Lko, -b.A 4 .-��.a,,, w''a t c--1_ Vv.---A---- /W 1 p °4r- CY‘Al' kej)-i)--- Q----C-- 4 \,„z-,_ Lo6,40k_ ajt -0, 2 1M,..., k :Lc,, 0,. k-Ac, tAk/LcuL.tr- Z -.L.k.Aiv., er j--e-4_ cL al cn..r4- _kio b o—e-Ot_ 'L,- Ftw_ as e„,,t-- T a j +o -Or r •a- T 5- 1\ krt. i-trry.-4 tnu- �k, Lam, m-c I 1 r s e>J -w.B.. s a-m..e.cm -e. t� c�� aCLY Ca-/L n Q HA_� -__9 RECEIVED -c DEC -1 2009 o� ffi 3 I UJ Po) 4 5.(. l- '46.-. Ramona Hancock January 6, 2010 Administrative Assistant Plan Commission One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Ms. Hancock and Members of the Plan Commision and Board of Zoning Appeals: 1 am writing in regards to the currently proposed Kroger along Michigan Road in West Carmel between 106` Street and 116` Street. I feel that it is important for me to state some of the concerns that I have about this development. I live at 4138 Much Marcie Drive within feet of the south line of the proposed development. 1 have tried to outline my concerns in this letter. 1 have organized it into three categories: developmental requirements, design concerns and zoning commitments. I feel that these issues are important to this proposed development. I feel that these should be addressed before proceeding toward a possible approval. Developmental Requirements 1. Mounding on the south of proposed development, north of the Townhomes of Weston Pointe must be 10' in height with an 8' fence built with masonry posts and neutral color fencing. a. Landscaping facing the Townhomes will be dense with 8' 10' pine /spruce trees. b. Trees will be replaced by developer if and when they die with trees of SAME height. c. Tree line currently in place will remain protected and preserved during demolition /construction/grading /finishing with fencing of some sort. d. Mounding/fencing /plantings to extend west of the northern most point of current Real Estate /Insurance /School Building to the currently proposed Weston Pointe road access. e. Elimination of Southern most parking island (currently eight spaces). Island to become a planting /tree /pine /spruce island. f. Mounding shown on final plans with elevations consistent with above requirements. g. Fence /guardrail (1 -3' high) around wet pond to prevent another person from driving into pond similar to accident on Nov. 2, 2009 at the pond at the entrance to the Townes of Weston Pointe. 7 2. Signage must be consistent with current tenants along 421/Michigan Road. Lettering must not be allowed larger than what currently exists at Marsh. Number of signs must be consistent with current tenants along Michigan Road. It must be enforced!! Design Concerns 1. Sidewalk access at the Eastern most point near townhomes to be eliminated. There is not a need for a FOURTH access point at this location. Currently proposed three other access points will suffice. Proposed townhome access point would create a path to nowhere as no other sidewalk system exists close by. Location would create an easy path to the back of our townhomes becoming a safety hazard by inviting unwanted trespassers onto our areas. 2. There are currently only two drive -thrus viewable from US421, the Burger King in front of Home Depot and the drive thru for the Goodwill, current zoning does not allow for these types of drive thrus. The drive thru should be located on the back of the proposed Kroger. if it is allowed access to the drive -thru pharmacy on the south of the proposed Kroger would enter north toward the building and exit toward the west, reversing the currently proposed drive thru plan. This would prevent light pollution, possible traffic interference from deliveries /trucks /etc. It is understood that the North drive thru follows this pattern of driving towards the building. a. Area at the south of the building and around the drive thru will be heavily landscaped. Currently states on Sheet C2.0 "S29" -see Landscape Plan. Landscape plan shows no plantings there. Require heavy landscaping in this area. b. Car stacking in the pharmacy drive thru is not shown. How many cars can this drive thru currently hold at one time? 7 D N�i 1'VL r 4 c. Without satisfying these demands I cannot waive the variance to allow the Drive Thru on the side of the building, put it on the back where the ordinance says it is to go. 3. Loading dock to face East instead of south, preventing light pollution to developments to the north and the south. 4. Traffic plan (page C2.1- (truck route)) must be better stated, eliminating any reference to usage of the north drive. Turning radius noted at each area where a truck will be turning. Explanation of how truck will make turn just north of fuel station and turning south along current proposed "truck route Are trucks turning from the left turn and then turning right? Is this the best the developer can come up with? Does this not seem dangerous? 5. How will drainage on the mounded sides facing current residential areas be addressed? Won't it drain towards the townhomes and other residences? Drainage must be kept on the Kroger developmental sides by storm structures of some sort; this must be shown on a detailed drawing before approval is given. 6. Is a gas station necessary for this site? Why the current location? If it is to be allowed it must be moved between the two outlots or not at all. 7. By allowing another grocery store, (by my count 10 currently exist within a 5 mile radius!!!) Carmel will NOT allow another one in the area, specifically saying no to a future Wal -Mart proposed on the west side of 421. 8. Concern over the INDOT contract for a light in front of proposed site. Numerous residents of the Townhomes as well as tenants /owners of the Commercial area along Weston Pointe Drive stated that a light was proposed and promised at the intersection of Weston Pointe and 421 /Michigan Road. A request submitted with Planning and Zoning to find the plans for the Townhomes at Weston Pointe and the commercial area along Weston Pointe Drive; no plans have yet been disclosed to me. Current traffic patterns make it incredibly difficult to turn South onto 421 from Weston Pointe Drive. How will the proposed light in front of the proposed Kroger alleviate this difficulty in exiting Weston Pointe Drive? In the developmental plan for the townhomes a light was suggested and encouraged, yet never put in. I have discussed this with Planning and Zoning, Engineering and INDOT and no one can give me an answer as to why this was not put in. This needs to be revisited. 9. Current lighting plans show a bubble down type of globe (Tab 11 page 2), where will this go? We were told at neighborhood meeting at Zionsville Presbyterian Church that the street lights would be "shoe box" lights with no bubble down type of globe. 10. Why is there no B -shop separation proposed? Wouldn't this be a more attractive option to the community? Zoning Commitments 1. Commitment for Grocery Truck Food Delivery/Trash Pickup no later than 7:OOpm and no earlier than 7:OOam. 2. Commitment made to remove /demolish Kroger structure if it were to ever become vacant or empty and return site to its original condition before any development existed. 3. A written pest/rodent plan. General Concerns with this Process Better communication with residents and ad joiners. The tabling of meetings and rescheduling has become difficult to stay informed, the developer is not required to renotice? Was two separate meetings with neighbors to the north and neighbors to the south necessary? Why no contact with the Home Owner's Association about the neighborhood meeting for the Townhomes? Does Carmel not require contact with HOA's? Why not? a. The developer's "Explanation of Request" states that the "applicant has worked diligently with surrounding property owners..." The only diligence that has been taken is buffering. They presented their information and plans to us and as of the final packet that is currently available that is what they are "giving" us as neighbors. When will all of this construction begin if approved? Initial application stated immediately upon approval of permits, yet 1 have heard that Altum's will continue its operation through 2010 which is different than the initial application. Who will enforce the approved commitments? How are these commitments enforced? This development is not sufficient for the area. It does not benefit the residents the way that it is being promoted. To many issues exist that need to be remedied before this is allowed to be passed. There is too much at stake to not take a step back and take another look at what it is that the neighbors and residents are asking for. This is not the best design for the area and should be reconsidered. The commitments that currently go with this property do not allow for this type of 100% retail development. Thank you for your time, Casey M. Carter