HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 04-20-99CARMEL /CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
APRIL 20, 1999
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission was called to
order by the President at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall,
One Civic Square, Carmel, Indiana on April 20, 1999.
Members present were: Marilyn Anderson; Kent Broach; David Cremeans; Leo
Dierckman; Madeline Fitzgerald; Ron Houck; Bob Modisett; James T. O'Neal, Sr.; Pat
Rice; Rick Sharp; Chris White; and Tom Yedlick.
Also present representing the Department of Community Services were: Director Steve
Engelking; Michael Hollibaugh; Terry Jones; Mark Monroe; and John Molitor, Counsel.
The minutes were approved as submitted.
John Molitor reported that the Executive Committee discussed limiting public hearings to
seven (7) in number per meeting and the impact such change would have on noticing
special meetings. Also discussed was the possibility of ADLS items being heard by
Subdivision Committee rather than Special Study, and the plausibility of Secondary Plats
being heard by the Department Director rather than Subdivision Committee or changing
the format and going to two formal Plan Commission meetings per month. John Molitor
agreed to draft appropriate language to present to the full Plan Commission.
Dave Cremeans will be out of town on April 27 Jim O'Neal, vice president, will chair
the additional meeting scheduled to accommodate the extremely long agenda.
Dave Cremeans reported that a letter had been received from Chris White stating his
intention to recuse himself from any and all discussion and voting on items lh. and 2h.,
Docket Nos. 17 -99 PP and 18 -99 PP /SP.
(Note: Chris White was absent from the Council Chambers during hearing and
discussion on Dockets Nos. 17 -99 PP and 18 -99 PP /SP.)
H. Public Hearing:
lh. Commission to consider Docket No. 17 -99 P.P., a Primary Plat application for
the Hazel Dell Summit Company. The petitioner seeks approval to plat 166 lots on 88
acres known as the Hazel Dell Summit Subdivision. The petitioner also seeks approval
of a variance of Section 8.9 of the Carmel/Clay Subdivision Regulations to eliminate the
required perimeter sidewalk along Cherry Tree Road. The site is located o the north side
of East 131 Street, between Cherry Tree Road and Hazel Dell Road. The site is zoned
S -1 /Residence.
Filed by Jim Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20
Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Commission representing
the petitioner. The proposed 166 detached, single family homes, located on the north
side of East 131 Street, between Cherry Tree Road and Hazel Dell Road, will be built by
Davis and Pulte Homes within the $150, to $350,000. price range and within an overall
density of 1.8 lots per acre.
The proposed plan includes a 12 acre park, that will be offered to the Carmel Parks
Department for dedication at an appropriate, future date. A primary objective of this
particular open space plan is to provide for a large, meaningful, and useful pocket of open
space that would be available and useable for park purposes. The proposed plan also
includes a pedestrian and bike trail system.
The real estate is triangular in shape and formed by the intersection of three existing
roadways: 131 Street, Cherry Tree Avenue, and Hazel Dell Road. To the west of the
subject site is the Trails at Avian Glen, a Davis Homes Development; to the east is
Delaware Trace, a residential community currently under development by Oakview
Associates, (co- petitioner), also to the east is a part of Plum Creek residential, and at the
northwest corner of 131 and Hazel Dell is an area referred to as Plum Creek
commercial, zoned B -3. Northview Christian Life Church, Carmel Dad's Club, and
Carmel Clay Schools own the property to the south of the subject site.
The prior use of the real estate has been agricultural and consists of rolling terrain. There
are a few stand of trees existing in narrow bands throughout the property, and at the north
end is a sporadic parceling of trees. The Mitchner Ditch dissects the real estate north to
south and provides an opportunity for a pedestrian trail system connecting the
developments to the west and east.
The apex of the triangular parcel is designated "park area" and is approximately 12 acres.
Another pocket of open space is adjacent to the Mitchner Ditch. Open space has also
been provided adjacent to Cherry Tree Avenue, 131 Street.
One change in the plan is the location of the northern -most entrance; the entrance now
aligns with the existing entrance into Delaware Trace. There is an existing asphalt
pathway, approximately 8 feet in width, adjacent to the eastern property line of the site
and adjacent to Hazel Dell Road. The Board of Public Works has abandoned a section of
Cherry Tree Avenue for roadway purposes; within this area, the pavement will be
reduced to 14 feet in width and resurfaced by Hazel Dell Summit Company for use as a
bike trail. With respect to this development, the petitioner is providing an 8 foot asphalt
pathway adjacent to 131 Street. Internal to the site, the petitioner is providing for 6 foot
asphalt pathways and a bike trail that would follow the Mitchner Ditch and provide a
connection between Cherry Tree Avenue, Hazel Dell. Another trail will provide a
connection between Hazel Dell Road and 131 Street.
The Development Plan includes two trailheads and will provide bike racks, sitting area,
and other amenities. Sidewalks will exist throughout the development. However, the
petitioner is requesting one variance for the relief of a sidewalk adjacent to the west
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 2
property line that is directly parallel and adjacent to the 14 foot bike path that will
accommodate Cherry Tree Avenue. The few areas of trees have been located within
common area and will be preserved.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; no
one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed
development; the following appeared:
Steve Boesen, resident of the Trails of Avian Glen, appeared before the Commission
representing a group of homeowners. Mr. Boesen stated that there is currently an on-
going dispute regarding control of the Homeowners Association at the Trails of Avian
Glen, to the extent that the proposed development affects the western-most part of the
Trails, more particularly Cherry Tree and the properties that abut. Ingress and egress
from the newly proposed development is certainly a concern, abandonment of Cherry
Tree, and to what extent the bike trail will continue along Cherry Tree. Mr. Boesen
asked that any decision or progression in the process be delayed to provide the home-
owners of the Trails of Avian Glen time to resolve the issue of control of the home-
owners association.
Greg Davis, 5780 Coopers Hawk, homeowner in the Trails of Avian Glen, appeared
before the Commission and stated that the current plan is not the same development plan
that was presented to the homeowners of Trails of Avian Glen over the past two to three
years. Residents are raising concern regarding property values and the continued
development of Trails of Avian Glen. Shared access to amenities currently available in
the Trails of Avian Glen is also an issue.
Terry Mattson, 13282 Bob White Lane, Trails of Avian Glen resident, appeared before
the Commission and stated concern that the closing of Cherry Tree and positioning of the
bike path would increase traffic into the neighborhood of the Trails of Avian Glen where
there are a number of small children. The City Council delayed the decision of closing
Cherry Tree until a traffic study could be done to determine the effects of the opening of
Hazel Dell to 146 Street, and Ms. Mattson was curious as to the status of the traffic
study. According to Ms. Mattson, Davis Homes is proposing production homes in the
one -half of the Hazel Dell Summit Subdivision called "Emerald Island" and will provide
114 additional families to be a part of the Trails of Avian Glen Homeowners Association.
Currently, the Trails of Avian Glen consists of 152 lots in a "custom home Davis
Development." Currently, there are 12 parking spaces in the swimming pool area at the
Trails and the 114 homeowners from Emerald Island would be driving to utilize the pool,
thereby increasing vehicular traffic in an area with a large number of small children. Ms.
Mattson also requested a delay in any decision by the Plan Commission in order to allow
the homeowners time to meet, discuss, and possibly seek legal counsel.
Dan Macek, 13276 Bob White Lane, Trails of Avian Glen resident, appeared before the
Commission and stated his object to the proposed development by reason of density.
Compared to the Trails of Avian Glen, the proposed development has smaller lot sizes,
smaller square footage homes, smaller set backs, (a minimum of 10 feet between homes),
and a 40 to 70% decrease in selling prices in the proposed development as opposed to
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 3
those in the Trails of Avian Glen. Mr. Macek stated that the proposed development
would decrease the property values of the Trails of Avian Glen, decrease the standard of
living, decrease the welfare and good of the Trails at Avian Glen neighborhood, and
increase safety issues. Mr. Macek requested that the Commission delay consideration of
the variance to eliminate the required perimeter sidewalk along Cherry Tree Road until
the results of the traffic study are made known.
Bob Cotton, 14535 Cherry Tree Road, asked if the closure of Cherry Tree Road was a
foregone conclusion. Steve Engelking responded that the closure of Cherry Tree Road is
currently before the Board of Public Works and is not a Plan Commission issue. The
City Engineer would know if a final decision had been made. Mr. Cotton felt that the
public hearing on the proposed development was premature, on the basis that the
developer's plan centers around the closure of a road that has not yet had final approval.
The public hearing on Docket No. 17 -99 PP will remain open.
Jim Nelson commented that it was his understanding that the decision has been made by
the Board of Public Works to abandon a section of Cherry Tree Avenue as a roadway, not
as a public right -of -way. In lieu of the roadway, when Hazel Dell Parkway is complete,
the 14 foot wide asphalt trail would then be in place. The abandonment of Cherry Tree
(at a different point) is a decision that remains open with the Board of Public Works and
Safety, pending the traffic study that has been referenced. With respect to the homes in
the informational booklet to be built by Davis -the homes are not front elevations of the
homes in the Trails at Avian Glen but taken from homes existing in Shelborne Village at
96 Street and Shelborne Road. The homes by Pulte represent front elevations of homes
being built by Pulte in the Brookstone section of Waterstone at 126 Street and Gray
Road. The density in the proposed development is 1.85; the Comprehensive Plan
supports a density of 1 to 3 in this area.
Mr. Nelson also commented that it was obvious that there was a disagreement between
Davis Homes and certain residents of the Trails of Avian Glen as to whether or not the
covenants for Avian Glen as well as the pool facilities may be expanded to adjacent real
estate -that is the issue. It was Mr. Nelson's belief that the issue was unrelated to the plat
and was an issue or disagreement between private individuals and should be resolved by
them privately. The plat does not require utilization of those services, it is presented
independently, it stands alone, and hopefully will be evaluated on that basis. The Plan
Commission should not be asked to be a mediator in a private dispute.
Mark Monroe reported that there are some minor, technical related issues that remain
with this project, and the Department is reviewing some of the minor changes presented
this evening. The Department is recommending that this Docket proceed to the
Subdivision Committee for further review on May 5 th
Paul Spranger inquired as to the maintenance of the asphalt pathways and asked that this
be answered at the Committee level.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 4
Ron Houck asked about the square footage in the covenants and restrictions and the result
of the aforementioned traffic study. Mr. Nelson responded that the minimum square
footage is set forth in the zoning ordinance. The minimum square feet is 1600 up to
3000; the covenants reflect the requirements of the zoning ordinance, but this will be
clarified. It is Mr. Nelson's understanding that there is a traffic study being undertaken,
but the breadth and scope of it and who is preparing it is not known -it is a matter left to
the Board of Public Works and Safety.
(Note: Apparently the traffic study was initiated by Mayor Brainard.)
Hazel Dell Summit Subdivision, Docket No. 17 -99 PP, was referred to the Subdivision
Committee that will meet on Wednesday, May 5 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of
City Hall. The public hearing will remain open.
2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 18 -99 PP /SP, Primary and Secondary Plat
applications for Davis Homes. The petitioner seeks approval to plat 1 lot on 2 acres
known as Shelbourne Green, Section 8. The site is located on the east side of
Shelbourne Road, 1/8 mile north of 96 Street. The site is zoned R -1 /Residence.
Filed by Li -Ching Wu of Davis Homes.
(Note: Chris White was absent from the Council Chambers during the hearing and
discussion on Docket No. 18 -99 PP /SP.)
Stu Huckleberry of Davis Homes appeared before the Commission. The site is a two acre
tract located on the east side of Shelborne Road. The developer is proposing to plat a
single lot on two acres with frontage and access on Shelborne Road. Public sewer is
available along Shelborne and water service will be by a single well location.
Mr. Huckleberry stated that the subject two acre parcel was acquired after the primary
plat of Shelborne Green had been approved and fully developed. Essentially, the parcel
is "left over" ground acquired from Twin Lakes Golf Course and has no internal access
from Shelborne Green Subdivision.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed
development, none appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending approval of the plat as
submitted; there are no outstanding Technical Advisory Committee issues.
In response to questions from Ron Houck and Tom Yedlick, Stu Huckleberry stated that
nothing would be built close to the existing pipeline area and no ingress /egress would be
granted over the pipeline area.
Rick Sharp moved to suspend the rules and vote on this Docket, unanimously approved.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20
Rick Sharp moved for the approval of Docket No. 18 -99 PP /SP, Shelbourne Green,
Section 8, APPROVED 12 -0.
3h. Commission to consider Docket No. 19 -99 PP, a Primary Plat application for
Estridge Development. The petitioner seeks approval to plat 32 lots on 25 acres known
as the High Grove Subdivision. The petitioner also seeks approval of a variance of
Section 6.3.21 of the Carmel/Clay Subdivision Regulations to eliminate the required
second entrance to the subdivision. The site is located on the east side of Hoover Road,
one quarter mile north of 116 Street. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence.
Filed by Steve Van Soelen of Estridge Development.
Steve Van Soelen, Vice President of Estridge Develoment Company, appeared before the
Commission representing the petitioner. The proposed development is located north of
116 Street on Hoover Road, south of Claridge Farms. The development plan was based
on the Residential Open Space Ordinance and the plat does conform to those
requirements. The average lot size is 16,970 square feet. The proposed density of High
Grove is 1.24 units per acre; the allowable density in this area is 1.3. The open space
required under the Ordinance is 33% and equates to 8.52 acres. The petitioner has
provided 9.11 acres or 35.3
The development will be served by Clay Township Regional Waste District sewer, and
Indianapolis Water. The natural features of the community include Clay Creek that runs
through two sections, and the preservation of heavily wooded areas along the creek lines.
The other area of tree preservation is along the fence lines on the east and the south of the
property.
The Hamilton County Highway Department is requesting a stub street to the south to
connect to future roadways or future development of the property. However, with the
existing stand of trees, and taking into consideration the goals and objectives of the Open
Space Ordinance, the petitioner would prefer to preserve the trees rather than tear them
out and install a street that doesn't really go anywhere to date. The petitioner also
believes that the size of the community, 32 lots, would not create a lot of traffic
congestion through one entry -way. In the event there would be a roadway to the south,
the petitioner does not want to create a "cut- through" for traffic to Hoover Road.
The petitioner has met with the neighbors in Clay Springs and has agreed to remove an
existing barbed wire fence. The petitioner will also create a ten foot landscape easement
to the rear of lots 20, 21, 22, and 23, in order to allow the development and eventual
maintenance by the Homeowners Association of the trees on each of the lots. The
petitioner has committed to the homeowners on the Clay Springs side that three large
conifer trees will be placed within the easement, to provide an effective screen for the
new homes that will be placed in High Grove and the existing homes in Clay Springs.
These will be 12 foot trees of spruce or some variety that will stay green and provide a
barrier in all seasons. The homes will range in price from $300, to $500,000 and will be
comparable to the homes in both Clay Springs and to the north in Claridge Farms as well.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 6
The petitioner is planning the installation of a path in Block F that will connect with the
sidewalk and back into the community.
Members of the public were invited to speak in support of the proposed development; the
following appeared:
Joe Lazzara, 1379 Clay Spring Drive in the Clay Springs Subdivision, appeared before
the Commission as an appointed representative of the 52 homes in the Clay Springs
HomeOwners Association. The Clay Springs HOA is in complete approval of the High
Grove Subdivision and supports the petitioner's request for primary plat and the variance.
Members of the public opposed to the development were invited to speak; none appeared
and the public hearing was closed.
Mark Monroe reported that there are a few significant TAC issues outstanding, including
the potential location of the second entrance, pending the Commission's review of the
variance request. Also, the continuity of the various open spaces within the subdivision
are an issue; they are not connected in any way. The Department is recommending that
this Docket proceed to Committee on May 51h
Rick Sharp stated concern regarding opening the Subdivision to a second entrance. The
vacating of Hoover Road and where it will end is an issue. Mr. Van Soelen stated that
Hoover Road will be vacated north of the back Claridge Farms entrance, (way north of
the proposed entrance to High Grove.) Mr. Van Soelen will research prior to Committee,
but thought the Village of WestClay committed to have their north/south access open
prior to the vacation of Hoover Road. There will be some sort of traffic control, be it an
automatic signal or a sign.
In response to questions from Ron Houck, Mr. Van Soelen stated that as currently
proposed, 126 Street borders the south side of the High Grove development all the way
to Hoover Road.
There was discussion regarding cut through traffic prompted by comments from Ron
Houck. There may have to be some lot configuration to accommodate a second entrance,
and at the same time, minimize concerns about pass through traffic. Steve Van Soelen
stated he would look at the situation before sub committee on May 51h
Docket No. 19 -99 PP, High Grove Subdivision, was referred to the Subdivision
Committee that will meet on Wednesday, May 5 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
4h. Commision to consider Docket Nos. 20 -99 DP /ADLS and 21 -99 SP,
Development Plan, Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage and
Secondary Plat applications for Carmel Drive Associates. The petitioner seeks approval
to construct an 18,000 square foot office and retail complex on 4 acres known as
Lakeview Landing. The petitioner also seeks approval to construct 2 lots on 8 acres
known as lots 1 and 2 of Block 4, Carmel Science and Technology Park. The site is
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20
located at the southeast corner of Carmel Drive and Hancock Street. The site is zoned M-
3/Manufacturing.
Filed by John Altman of Carmel Drive Associates.
Christine Altman appeared before the Commission representing Carmel Drive Associates
LLP. The petitioner is seeking approval of a Development Plan and Secondary Plat
application for the construction of an 18,000 square foot office /retail complex on lots 1
and 2 of Block 4, Carmel Science and Technology Park.
The proposed plan divides 8 acres into two lots. A significant portion of Block 4 is
comprised of a drainage retention pond for storm water. Lot two will consist of 4.5 acres;
lot one will consist of 3.7 acres. The plat provides for one common drive for
ingress /egress onto Carmel Drive directly between lots one and two. The plat also
contains maintenance covenants to ensure that the ingress /egress drive is maintained.
The petitioner is dedicating an additional ten feet of right -of -way adjacent to Carmel
Drive to the City of Carmel.
The plan provides for a single story, two building project on lot two with a gross square
footage of 18,000 square feet. The net useable development space on lot two is 1.7 acres
and currently zoned M -3. There will be a 5 foot concrete path along Carmel Drive that
will connect with other developments and provide for pedestrian traffic; there is also a 5
foot paved path to the buildings to connect the buildings to the parking area.
Dale Anchrum, architect, pointed out the common drive between lots 1 and 2. The
petitioner has provided a 45 foot setback and right -of -way, the 5 foot concrete walk, and
a turn- around area for the bank that encroaches into the landscape easement by
approximately 4 feet. Additional plantings have been provided along Carmel Drive. The
parking provided exceeds the requirement by two spaces. The maintenance easement
along the lakeside is provided for in the Secondary Plat. The exterior of the buildings is a
combination of split -face block, concrete brick, pre- stained. The roof is metal, standing
seam and dryvit along the facia. The windows are wooden with a grid; the aluminum
storefront system is white, pre- finished. The drive -thru canopy is only proposed at this
time and is not definite.
Signage consists of a ground monument sign for the Bank is wood, sandblasted, with a
brick base; the colors are navy blue and grays -the bank has its own identity as far as
colors. The building entrances will have identification signs, 2X3 feet with vinyl letters
for the tenants, changeable as needed, bolted to the buildings, and one and one -half inch
deep, with a surrounding box of baked -on enamel finish in the grays complimentary to
the split -face block.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; no
one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition; no one
appeared and the public hearing was closed.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 8
Mark Monroe reported that there was one TAC issue relating to comments from the City
Engineer. The Department concurs with the City Engineer's recommendation to include
an accel /decel lane along Carmel Drive for the entrance to the complex. As a part of the
curb cut approval from the Board of Public Works, it is the Engineer's recommendation
that a condition be placed on the approval to include an accel/ldecel lane along Carmel
Drive.
Bob Modisett questioned the curb cut opposite the main entrance from the proposed
development; also the drive -thru lane is not particularly appealing, aesthetically, and
landscaping would improve the site. Also, another curb cut might work better. Mr.
Modisett also questioned the maintenance arrangement on the lake.
Mark Monroe responded that the preference along Carmel Drive is to limit the number of
curb cuts, especially along this particular section that is on a curve that poses some public
concern for safety. The shared curb cut is thought to be a better situation than having one
curb cut for each lot on Carmel Drive. The curb cut opposite the main entrance does
align.
Christine Altman reported that the petitioner is willing to commit to the installation of an
accel/decel lane in conjunction with the curb cut approval from the Board of Public
Works. Ms. Also also stated that maintenance for the lake is a shared obligation for the
land owners abutting the lake, specified in the covenants of the Carmel Science
Technology Park.
John Oberlies, consulting engineer, reported that a lighting plan has been submitted to the
Department. The petitioner has corrected some minor spillage onto Carmel Drive. The
lighting is typical, pole mounted fixtures. The ground sign will be lighted; the building
will have up- lighting.
Leo Dierckman questioned the adequacy of space provided for turning radius; the
petitioner stated that the turning radius is practical. If it is determined that there are
stacking problems, the street could be converted to a one -way or drive lane. According
to Mr. Oberlies, at this time, it is not definite that the drive -thru will be constructed.
Access to the ATM is on the building itself. If the drive -thru is not constructed, the turn-
around will most likely revert to landscape area and perhaps a small area for parking.
Christine Altman stated that if the drive -thru is not developed, or until such time as it is
developed, the petitioner commits that the area will be landscaped and green space.
Rick Sharp questioned whether or not there is more than one lane for the drive -thru
window; also, the dumpster appears quite small in relation to the size of the building.
Mr. Oberlies responded that the drive -thru would be one lane only and the area for the
dumpster is 16 feet in width and can accommodate two dumpsters.
Ron Houck asked the petitioner to consider re- positioning the building on the parcel to
provide for parking in the rear and the building closer to Carmel Drive, from an aesthetic
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 9
standpoint. Ms. Altman responded that if the buildings were reconfigured, the parking
would be on the water area that is the major amenity area -it would be a major cost factor
at this point to re- position the buildings.
Rick Sharp moved for the suspension of the rules; Unanimously Approved.
Ric Sharp moved for the approval of Docket Nos. 20 -99 DP /ADLS and 21 -99 SP for
Carmel Drive Associates (Lakeview Landing). APPROVED 12 in favor, Tom
Yedlick opposed.
5h. Commission to consider Docket No. 22 -99 DP Amend /ADLS, Development
Plan Amendment and Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage
applications for Duke Realty Investments. The petitioner seeks approval to construct a
128,000 square foot office building on 9 acres known as Hamilton Crossing, Building 5.
The site is located at the southwest corner of U.S. 31 and 131 Street. The site is zoned
B -2 /Business and is located within the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone.
Filed by Steve Granner of Bose McKinney and Evans.
Phil Nicely, 8888 Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, attorney with Bose McKinney and
Evans appeared before the Commission representing Duke Realty Limited Partnership.
Development Plan and ADLS approval is being requested with respect to an additional
office building to be constructed within the Hamilton Crossing on the west side of U.S.
31 and north of 126 Street.
Also in attendance was Steve Granner of Bose McKinney, and Blair Carmissino, director
of development for Duke. The petitioner has appeared before the Commission in the last
few months for ADLS approval for Buildings 4 and 3. The current request is for ADLS
and Development Plan approval for Building 5. The property is zoned B -2, consists of
approximately 9 acres, and is located within the Overlay Zone. The property is zoned to
permit the proposed use, but because of the Overlay Zone requirements, ADLS and
Development Plan approval is required.
According to Mr. Nicely, the site plan for Building 5 meets all of the requirements for the
U.S. 31 Overlay Zone. In order to provide for the 90 foot setback from U.S. 31, visitor
parking has been provided in that area; otherwise, the entire front is landscaped. The
petitioner has provided a pedestrian walkway that will run in front of the building and
transverses the entire development. The landscape plan is thought to be quite extensive
and hopefully acceptable to the Commission.
According to the details of the signage, there are only 3; one is an identification sign, the
other two are tenant signs located on the front of the building. The building is four
stories, consisting of approximately 128,000 square feet. The building will be
constructed in a similar manner to the existing buildings with pre -cast concrete and glass.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 10
Mr. Nicely stated that the petitioner is in the process of designing Meridian Corners
Boulevard that runs behind Building 5 up to 131 Street. This section of Meridian
Corners should be constructed and completed by fall of this year.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department has not yet received the public notice
documentation for items 5h and 6h. The Department is recommending delaying any
action until such documentation is received.
At this time, voting was delayed on item 5h until the evidence of public notice is
received, and the public hearing was continued.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; no
one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed
development; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending approval, pending receipt
of the public notice documentation.
In response to questions from Paul Spranger, Blair Carmissino stated that there are no
plans to illuminate the sign or the building.
Mark Monroe reported that this particular project does not require a traffic study to be be
performed by the petitioner. It is the Department's position that the existing, adjacent
roads and the future construction of Meridian Corners Boulevard will properly handle the
traffic generated by the Hamilton Crossing Development. In regard to 131 Street and
U.S. 31, the current plans indicate a tunnel under the highway rather than a ramp over;
there is adequate right -of -way to accommodate either situation.
Rick Sharp moved to temporarily table Docket No. 22 -99 DP /Amend /ADLS,
Hamilton Crossing, Building 5, until such time as the proof of Notice of Publication
could be provided. APPROVED 12 -0.
6h. Commission to consider Docket No. 23 -99 Z, a rezone application for the
Skinner and Broadbent Company. The petitioner seeks approval to rezone 4 acres
from B -8 /Business to B -3 /Business. The site is located northwest of the northwest corner
of Carmel Drive and Keystone Way. The site is currently zoned B -8 /Business. (Pending
rezone approval, the petitioner will also be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals
for Special Use approval and consideration of two Developmental Standards Variances.)
Filed by Steve Granner of Bose McKinney and Evans.
(NOTE: Due to a conflict of interest, Kent Broach recused himself from discussion and
voting on Docket No. 23 -99 Z.)
Phil Nicely, 8888 Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission
representing the applicant. A rezone is being requested of 4 acres north of Carmel Drive,
west of and behind the Campbell Kyle Proffitt Office Building and west of Keystone
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 11
Avenue, from its current zoning classification of B -8 to B -3, in order to provide for the
construction of a self storage facility.
Also in attendance for the applicant were: Dave Cheslin, William Cooper, and John
Stuckey of Skinner and Broadbent; and April Hensley, architect.
The subject parcel consists of approximately of 4.5 acres and is without real frontage or
exposure to any streets. Mr. Nicely read a list of permitted uses within the B -8 zoning
district. The B -8 category does not include the use of the property as a self storage
facility, hence the reason for the rezone request.
The subject site actually consists of two parcels and is owned by two different parties.
The Skinner and Broadbent Company is purchasing both parcels and it will be developed
as a whole. This site sits behind the office and bank buildings and is an "in -fill" piece of
property. Access to this site is provided by Keystone Way, the same access to
McDonald's as well as the office building at Carmel Drive and Keystone Way. The
amount of development that has occurred on Carmel Drive and the close proximity of
Keystone Avenue hinders access to the subject site. The intersection of Carmel Drive
and Keystone Way is an unsatisfactory intersection and is not amenable to a large amount
of additional traffic and is hazardous for turns to the east.
Mr. Nicely understood that the City is contemplating eliminating the left turn at this
intersection and providing a "loop road" through Merchants Square and exiting at the
traffic light. If the "loop road" becomes a reality, Mr. Nicely felt it did not make a great
deal of sense to develop the subject site in a use that would generate a large amount of
traffic. According to Mr. Nicely, traffic from a self storage facility is virtually nothing
compared to an office building of 60,000 square feet.
It was Mr. Nicely's opinion that the most desirable development for this piece of property
would be a use that could be developed as a nice looking facility and at the same time,
would not create a strain on the infrastructure. The proposed use does not create a
substantial traffic problem.
The entire perimeter of the property will be landscaped. There is an indention provided
that will accommodate parking for the office building at the corner of Carmel Drive and
Keystone Way. The proposed development will contain climate control and non climate
control storage units. There will be no outside storage. The frontage exterior facing the
new road through the old Marsh Center will be all brick; around the balance of the
development would be a wall of split -face block.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; no
one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed
development; the following appeared:
Gordon Byers, attorney in Noblesville, appeared before the Commission representing
Fidelity Keystone LLC. Mr. Byers commented that historically, the Meridian Corridor
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 12
and Carmel Drive areas have always been protected and zoned B -8. Due to the
economics of the area, Carmel Drive has developed as a high -class area of Carmel and
has been protected that way. The individuals being represented have substantial
investments that are dependent upon surrounding zoning, and they are satisfied that the
B -8 zoning should remain. Traffic is an issue, but with a little creativity, there are others
who could put office to use on this site, especially with the steps the City is taking toward
analyzing re- aligning the road issue. This proposal must also go before the Board of
Zoning Appeals who would have to make a finding that there is substantial property
value and that the proposed change of zoning and special use will not have an anticipated
effect on surrounding property values. Mr. Byers thought it was obvious that the office
use and the predictability of the office use, bank developments, and the viability of the
old Marsh center turning around is dependant upon very few changes to the zone map.
Mr. Byers strongly suggested that the Commission give the proposal a negative
recommendation. The best development for the site is thought to be office.
John Proffitt, 3683 Carmel Drive, Carmel, appeared before the Commission as a partner
in a law firm that occupies most of the fourth floor of the office building adjoining the
property to the south. Mr. Proffitt felt that the proposed use would not affect his
business, but it would affect Carmel. Storage units, walled or not walled, do not fit in
with what the current administration plans to do with Carmel Drive in making it a
"gateway to Carmel." Mr. Proffitt did not feel that the proposed use was right for
Carmel.
Steve Wilson, owner of the office plaza immediately to the east of the proposed site,
reported that one of his office buildings looks directly at the site that would be storage
units. Mr. Wilson was highly opposed to the proposed use. There is potential for office
buildings on this site. At the time the property was sold for the Bank and Office
Building, it was obvious that there would be difficulty in developing the subject site
because of limited access and traffic. Adding a storage place or even an office building
would hinder traffic entering and exiting the Wilson Office complex. Before the property
is rezoned, some additional access needs to be worked out. Mr. Wilson expressed
opposition to the proposed storage units.
Mr. Nicely called upon Jim Bremner, real estate office developer, for his opinion.
Jim Bremner, 250 East 96 Street, office developer, spoke about the virtues of a self
storage facility in close proximity to commercial or office type product. Mr. Bremner
cited some personal experiences in the industry and stated that he saw the proposed
development as a potential benefit and not as a detriment to the area.
Mr. Nicely commented that traffic is definitely a problem in this particular area, and
responding to Steve Wilson's remarks, Mr. Nicely stated that an office building would
generate substantially more traffic than a self storage facility. The property is zoned and
can be developed under the current guidelines, regardless of the amount of traffic such
use might generate.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 13
Mark Monroe reported on the access and traffic related issues; the City is looking at
improving access to the rear properties, probably in the form of a loop road that would
connect Keystone Way with Carmel Drive. In addition, the City is also looking at
making the intersection of Keystone Way and Carmel Drive essentially a two way
intersection with right in -right out only with no left turns exiting the intersection. The
question of aesthetics, traffic generation, and the highest and best use of the property.
The Department recommends that this Docket be referred to the Special Study
Committee that will meet on Wednesday, May 51h
Pat Rice asked if the petitioner were donating the right -of -way for the proposed loop road
and where the road would be located in relation to the property. Mr. Nicely responded
that a plan had been submitted to the Department that would accomplish the road and
also accommodate the development together with the right -of -way.
In response to questions from Madeline Fitzgerald, John Stuckey stated that the buildings
will be metal on the interior of the development with the exterior units constructed of
brick. The climate controlled building will have interior hallways.
In response to questions from Ron Houck, Phil Nicely stated that the proposed
development could not be done under the current zoning except by a Use Variance.
Docket No. 23 -99 Z was referred to the Special Study Committee that will meet May 51h
(At this point, Jim O'Neal exited the meeting and did not return.)
Rick Sharp moved to take from the Table item 5h., Docket No. 22 -99 DP Amend /ADLS,
for Duke Realty Investments. Unanimously approved.
Mark Monroe reported that all public notice documentation is now complete and the
Department's recommendation remains for approval.
Paul Spranger moved for the approval of Docket No. 22 -99 DP Amend /ADLS, for
Duke Realty Investments, Hamilton Crossing, Building 5. APPROVED 12 -0.
NOTE: Items 7h. and 8h. were heard together.
7h. Commission to consider Docket No. 24 -99 DP /ADLS, Development Plan and
Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage applications for BK Partners.
The petitioner seeks approval to construct a 5,000 square foot retail complex on 1.5 acres
known as the Carmel Convenience Center. The site is located at the northeast corner of
Michigan Road and 97 Street. The site is zoned B -2 /Business and is located within the
Michigan Road (U.S. 421) Overlay Zone. (Petitioner will also be appearing before the
Board of Zoning Appeals for consideration of three Developmental Standards Variances.)
Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 14
8h. Commission to consider Docket No. 25 -99 PP /SP, a replat application for BK
Partners. The petitioner seeks approval to replat 2 lots into 1 lot on 1.5 acres known as
lots 8 and 9 of the North Augusta Subdivision. The site is located at the northeast corner
of Michigan Road and 97 Street. The site is zoned B -2 /Business and is located within
the Michigan Road (US 42 1) Overlay Zone.
Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers.
Don Stafford of BK Partners, appeared before the Commission along with Jamie
Poczekay and Mark Harris of American Consulting Engineers. April Hensley, architect,
and Fred Kauffman, intended operator of the Burger King portion of the convenience
center were also in attendance.
The proposed project is located on the northeast corner of 97 Street and Michigan Road.
The petitioner is proposing to construct a 5,000 square foot building with adjacent drive,
parking, and fuel islands, consisting of a restaurant and convenience store /gas station.
The site consists of approximately one and one -half acres. The petitioner has met with
the Technical Advisory Committee and the plans currently reflect requested changes.
The Planning Department has requested that the access drive be integrated into the hotel's
traffic pattern into Michigan Road. The petitioner's position is that it is not practical to
integrate the requested change into the site plan. The petitioner does not want the gas or
Burger King customers as a part of his traffic pattern. The other option is to relocate the
two sites at the property lines and share a mutual entrance -the petitioner is not open to
this alternative. The petitioner has contacted INDOT regarding the proposed
ingress /egress shown on the site plan, and they have indicated that they would be
favorable to a drive permit.
The architectural design is consistent with the 421 Overlay theme, and utilizes the
Georgian architecture as well as the building proportion requirements, the height, the one
and one -half story guidelines. The overall building elevation has been broken -up with
the off -sets as recommended by the Ordinance. The roof top design is a pitched roof,
simply sloped and hipped to lessen the mass of the building. The main entrances have
been defined with the use of fabric awnings, colors will be contiguous with the style. The
building materials are red brick, split -face masonry, and dryvit.
The petitioner will be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals for three variances:
1) three parking rows in the front yard; 2) a drive -thru in the front yard; and 3) a lot size
of less than three acres.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development: the
following appeared:
Fred Kauffman, 10530 Hyde Park, Carmel, current owner of three Burger King locations:
Carmel Drive, Westfield, and 96 and Keystone, appeared before the Commission as
intended tenant for one -half of the proposed facility. Mr. Kauffman was hopeful of an
approval for the proposed location.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 15
Stan Evans, Realty Advisors, 429 East Vermont Street, Indianapolis, appeared as a family
member of one of the lots being sold. One open issue is the access directly onto
Michigan Road. Mr. Evans expressed favor with the proposed development and asked
that the petitioner be allowed the requested access onto Michigan Road.
Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed project; no
one appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Mark Monroe reported that there are issues of access, additional site planning issues not
previously addressed, including drainage, and additional architectural requirements.
There are also some minor TAC issues to be resolved. The Department is recommending
that these two items proceed to the Special Study Committee.
Ron Houck agreed with limiting the access onto Michigan Road and asked for copies of
any backup correspondence between INDOT and the petitioner. Ron expressed concern
with the specific location of the site in that currently, two lanes of 421 merge into one at
the proposed access. In view of the up- coming improvements for 421 to provide for four
lanes, Mr. Houck questioned wisdom of having an access point onto 421 so close to a
major intersection at 96 Street. Mr. Houck stated that the Plan Commission has
authority over the curb cut on 421, regardless of what INDOT or the County may say.
Marilyn Anderson commented that between the intersections of 86 and 106 on 421, if
approved, this will be the 8 th gas station; between 96 and 106 this will be the third or
fourth gas station connected with a full convenience store. Ms. Anderson expressed
disappointment that this gas station is even being proposed.
Madeline Fitzgerald asked about the positioning of the fuel lanes. Mark Harris with
American Consulting Engineers reported that the drive -thru motion for the gas islands
will be perpendicular to 421 and in front of the building.
Tom Yedlick asked for an explanation of the request for the three rows of parking
variance sought from the BZA. Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers
explained that the three rows of parking are located immediate to the landscaping, the
fuel lanes qualify as a row, and a third row adjacent to the building.
Rick Sharp questioned the proposed curb cut onto Michigan Road, its proximity to 97
Street, whether or not the 30 foot landscape buffer will be retained upon the widening of
Michigan Road, and the reasoning for locating the drive -thru window at the front rather
than the rear as required by the Overlay Ordinance.
Mark Harris stated that the curb cut is a new cut, approximately 300 feet from 97 Street,
and the proposed plan accounts for the additional right -of -way that INDOT is acquiring;
the site layout is based on setbacks from the proposed right -of -way. Rick Sharp asked
that the petitioner be prepared to discuss in depth at the Committee level. Jamie
Poczekay stated that the most functional place for the window is at the side of the
building and stacking requirements could not be met if it were moved to the rear.
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 16
Bob Modisett asked about rights of landowners' rights along Michigan Road regarding
access to 421. John Molitor stated that only INDOT can grant a final curb cut; however,
the Plan Commission can approve a plan that does not allow a curb cut and INDOT
would not be able to override the Plan Commission's decision.
Mark Monroe commented that the way the new Overlay Zone Ordinance is written, it
actually requires connection between adjoining properties and access drives, and has the
ability to eliminate some of the perceived "necessary" cub cuts.
Dave Cremeans asked that the petitioner seriously look at re- locating the gas pumps to
the rear and a possible ingress /egress onto 97 Street rather than Michigan Road.
Docket Nos. 24 -99 DP /ADLS and 25 -99 PP /SP, BK Partners, were referred to the
Special Study Committee that will meet on Wednesday, May 5 th at 7:00 PM in the
Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
Due to the lateness of the hour, the balance of the items on the Agenda will be heard on
Tuesday, April 27, 1999.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 PM.
David A. Cremeans, President
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
s\minutes \plancomm\ 1999apr20 17