Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 05-18-99CARMEL /CLAY PLAN COMMISSION MAY 18, 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 May 18, 1999. Members present were: Marilyn Anderson; Kent Broach; David Cremeans; Leo Dierckman; Madeline Fitzgerald; Ron Houck; Kevin Kirby; Norma Meighen; Bob Modisett; James T. O'Neal, Sr.; Pat Rice; Rick Sharp; Paul Spranger; and Chris White. Director Steve Engelking, Terry Jones, Michael Hollibaugh and Mark Monroe were present representing the Department of Community Services. John Molitor was also present. The minutes of the meetings of April 20 and April 27 were approved as submitted. John Molitor reported on two pieces of legislation that passed the Indiana General Assembly: One creates a new Indiana Land Resources Council that will be a State Agency operating under the Commissioner of Agriculture (Lt. Governor's Office) and will consist of 10 members. The 10 members will be advising local governments on land use and zoning issues as well as topics of interest to agriculture such as farmland preservation. The other Bill is House Enrolled Act 1606 that makes some minor changes in the Board of Zoning Appeals law and would allow Carmel to create a separate BZA panel for the Township, leaving the existing one for the City. The members of the Township BZA would be appointed by County and Township officials rather than City officials. Mark Monroe reported that items 4h., 4i., 5i., 6i., 7i., and 9i., were all tabled for this evening. Also, the Old Meridian Task Force has scheduled a design workshop for Friday morning, June 4 d 7:00 AM to 10:00 AM in the Caucus Rooms; all Commission members are invited to attend. There will also be a meeting of the U.S. 31 Task Force on Thursday, June 3 rd at 7:00 AM. H. Public Hearing: lh. Commission to consider Docket No. 36 -99 Z., Rezone application for Gibraltar Properties. The petitioner seeks approval to rezone 71 acres from S- 1 /Residnce to R- 4 /Residence. The site is located on the northwest corner of 96 Street and Westfield Blvd. The site is currently zoned S -2 /Residence. Filed by Jim Nelson of Nelson Frankenberger. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance were: Harry Todd, general counsel for Gibraltar s:Aminutes \plancoimn \pc 1999may Properties, Inc., Ed Elliott, director of development; and Steve Fehribach, traffic consultant with A &F Engineering. The request of the petitioner is to rezone the parcel of real estate located north and west of the intersection of 96 Street and Westfield Boulevard, commonly known as the Fuller property, from S -2 to R -4. The proposed plan is for a residential community to be known as The Retreat, containing 360 apartment homes allocated among a series of buildings designed to be like a luxury home. An aerial photograph was displayed showing the location of the real estate in the vicinity of I -465 and the intersection of 96 Street and Westfield Boulevard. The parcel is somewhat triangular in shape, 71 acres in size, and since the construction of I -465, has been easily identifiable by the 8 acre lake that occupies the center section of the real estate. The perimeter boundaries of the real estate are well defined by existing uses: to the north is the Sunrise Golf Course and Vera Hinshaw residence; to the east is Wesfield Boulevard; to the south is I -465; and to the west is the Monon Trail and a large lake located to the east of the Monon Trail. Except for the Vera Hinshaw home and the residences that exist on the east side of Westfield Boulevard, all neighboring uses are non residential in nature. There are three small pockets of wetlands on the property on the western, southern, and eastern edge of the lake. A small, triangular parcel of real estate, 2 and one -half acres in size, south of I -465 and adjacent to the Monon corridor is not part of the Retreat development. This parcel is proposed to be dedicated to the Parks Department as a Trailhead for the Monon corridor. Each building in the Retreat that will house the apartment homes will be a unique design and style, and is intended to simulate a luxury home. There are three elevations showing three distinct building designs: The Estate; The Cobblestone; and The Mansion. Each provides a direct access to a one or two car garage for each apartment home and will be within a rental range of $850./$1,600. per month. The primary entrance is from Westfield Boulevard at a point midway between the north and south property line. The entrance will be divided, with a landscaped median. A service entrance will be located near the north property line that will be utilized for service vehicles as well as an alternate route for emergency vehicles. The Westfield frontage is distinguished by substantial landscaping, setbacks, and a small neighborhood park. The four buildings nearest Westfield Boulevard are set back at least 120 feet from the center line of Westfield Boulevard; within the setback is a substantial corridor of landscaping and in the southeast corner, in a small, three acre pocket, will be a neighborhood park. It is the petitioner's intention to offer the three acre parcel to the Parks Department, fully equipped. The focal point entering from Westfield Boulevard will be the community center or clubhouse. The internal street system moves predominately east to west, encircles the lake, and twice crosses Rehm Creek to provide access to the western edge of the property. Throughout the entire site is a series of pathways which provides access to the s: \minutes \plancomm \pc 1999may 2 neighborhood park and access from the park to the west property line and around the entire perimeter of the lake. Adjacent to the south property line is a 150 foot "no build area." Mr. Nelson commented that under the Comprehensive Plan, the site is designated as a special study area. The area was the subject of further study in July, 1997 by HNTB; following that study, a report was issued and adopted, the primary focus of which was both land use and transportation issues. The report discussed four scenarios as a possibility for use: regional office; neighborhood commercial; multi family at 12 units per acre; and single family at 3 units per acre. The current proposal is for multi family with a density of slightly over 5 units per acre. The plan is believed to be consistent with the Special Study in providing residential use and a traffic impact most similar to that suggested for single family at 3 units per acre. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; the following appeared: Vera Hinshaw, Westfield Boulevard, spoke in favor of the plan and thought it to be totally workable. The only criticism is the road from the parking lot to the trail for public access; Ms. Hinshaw thought the road should be deleted to discourage outside access. George Haerle, 502 Braeside North, Indianapolis, land use chairman of the Nora Community Council, spoke of having worked very closely with the Grass Roots Coalition and being very pleased with the proposal at the "Gateway to Carmel." The development will be compatible with what the Nora Community Council is trying to do south of 96 Street in Marion County, and the developer has been very sensitive in his treatment. Mr. Haerle commented that they were also please with the park area. Jack Edwards, 10475 Cornell, Home Place, spoke in favor of the proposed development. Mr. Edwards commented that the developer had worked with the community and has come up with a plan that fits the land and the people around it. Mr. Edwards recommended approval of the proposed development. Mark Varnau, 10202 Westfield Boulevard, spoke as an officer of Grass Roots Coalition and was complimentary of Gibraltar and their proposed plan. Mr. Varnau commented that the density was still thought to be too high, but the area residents were in favor of the proposal. John Kassabaum, 2503 Pleasant Way, West Drive, was complimentary of the proposal and stated that it meets everyone's needs and desires. Mr. Kassabaum felt that it was inappropriate for the parcel to remain S -2 because of the close proximity of the inter- state. Ms. Jones, Waldon Pond, commented that the current proposal is the only one that she approves of. The developer has done his homework, and a lot of persons are in favor of the proposal. s: \minutes \plancomm \pc 1999may 3 Tom Hamblin, 9801 Westfield Boulevard, commented that the current proposal is a good project, although he was concerned about the level of zoning moving down four levels to a level that could permit a trailer park. Mr. Hamblin stated that the proposed covenants are not adequate and asked the Plan Commission for more stringent covenants. Mr. Hamblin commented that he was also in favor of constructing the proposed development by way of variance rather than rezone. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposal; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Dave Cremeans was complimentary of the project and the developer. Mark Monroe reported that there are some remaining technical issues outstanding including the wetlands on site, site related drainage issue, and the 96 Street extension. The project relates to the Comprehensive Plan in that it fits into a medium intensity, residential area and meets four of the five criteria necessary. These types of residential areas are not recommended adjacent to a stable residential, i.e. those neighborhoods east of Westfield and north of 96 Street. The view of the project is positive as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan and the study done two years ago. In response to questions from Madeline Fitzgerald, Ed Elliott, 4526 216 Street, Noblesville, stated that the Rehm Creek does not carry water all year round. The plans are to leave Rehm Creek as environmentally sound as possible. There may be two, one lane bridges across the Creek, leaving the balance in its natural state. The natural drainage created will go to the existing pond and continue out to and underneath I -465. Ron Houck asked if there were any commitment from the Park Department in regard to the site being offered. Mr. Nelson reported that the petitioner has had on -going discussion with the Parks Department and they are very interested in the two acre tract south of I -465 because of its proximity to the Monon. In regard to the park area to the north, the Parks Department had sent a letter indicating that they did not have proper funding to include playground equipment, landscaping, picnic equipment, etc.; the developer is providing those improvements. The Monon Trail Head will be used for an estimated 100 -150 parking spaces; however, the planning process has not yet begun for the design of this area. Mr. Nelson stated that the letter is not an acceptance of the dedication of parkland. The triangular parcel to the south is not part of the development plan -it will remain as is; if it is not a public park for the residents, it will be a neighborhood park for the residents. Bob Modisett, member of the Parks Department and Plan Commission, stated that the Parks Department is certainly interested in the triangular portion for a Trail Head for the Monon. The northern park area that is a part of the development plan lacks public access, parking, restrooms, etc. The Parks Department does not want to be involved in maintaining small, subdivision parks. s:Aminutes \plancotmn \pc 1999may 4 Mr. Nelson stated that if the Parks Department does not accept the parkland, it is the developer's intention that the three acre area become a neighborhood park, accessible not only to the residents of The Retreat but also the general public as well as the pathway. There would be no curb cut from Westfield Boulevard directly to the park area. Ron Houck asked that Mr. Nelson speak to the traffic impact the proposed development would have on the possible extension of 96 Street. Mr. Nelson stated that as of this date, the extension of 96 Street westward to connect with 96 Street in Marion County is yet to be determined. A study is currently underway that may include the 96 Street extension. The petitioner's only point of access is from Westfield Boulevard. If, at some future time, the County requests right -of -way for the extension of 96 Street through eminent domain, it can be accommodated through the 150 foot "no build area." Rick Sharp asked the petitioner to further define the commitments as far as specifics in landscaping, elevations, architectural, etc. prior to the Committee meeting. Also, further definition was requested in regard to the care, maintenance, and equipment in the public/ neighborhood park site. Mr. Nelson responded that at this stage in the rezone, it is possible that changes will be required or suggested. Mr. Nelson confirmed the petitioner's willingness to furnish clearly defined commitments in regard to the park site. Docket No. 36 -99 Z, Rezone application for Gibraltar Properties, was referred to the Special Study Committee on June 1, 1999 at 7:00 PM. The Committee will meet in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. 2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 37 -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 210,000 square foot office building on 7.18 acres known as Parkwood Crossing Building 6. The site is located at the northwest corner of 96 Street and College. The site is zoned B -6 /Business. Filed by Steve Granner of Bose McKinney Evans. Phil Nicely, attorney, 8888 Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing Duke Realty Limited Partnership, owner of Parkwood Crossing. The request before the Commission is for Development Plan and ADLS approval for the construction of a 210,000 square foot, six story office building. Also in attendance were: Blair Carlissimo and Chris Sager of Duke Realty; Steve Granner of Bose McKinney Evans, and Allan Tucker of CSO Architects. All buildings are completed within the development, with the exception of Building 6 and the proposed building in the northwest corner. One of the commitments made at the time of rezone was to give the Plan Commission review approval and ADLS approval for each building as it was constructed. s:Aminutes \plancotmn \pc 1999may The proposed Building 6 is 210,000 square feet, six stories, 85 feet in height. The height is in accordance with the B -6 zoning and also in accordance with the covenants and commitments that were made in connection with the rezone of the property. The overall drainage of the development was approved at the time the Preliminary Plan was approved. The property does have both water and sanitary sewer, and meets all the requirements of the B -6 zoning classification as well as all commitments made. A sign package was previously approved for the development; nothing is proposed for this particular building and any tenant requesting signage would have to appear before the Commission. The lighting is the same as for the other Parkwood buildings, basically a shoebox, down lighting in the parking areas. The height of the fixtures will be no more than 30 feet. Ground mounted lighting will reflect on the buildings. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; the following appeared: Patti Horrigan, 9126 North Delaware, Marion County, appeared before the Commission as an officer of the College Commons Neighborhood Association. Generally, the neighborhood is in favor of the proposal. However, there are some concerns. One concern of the neighborhood is the interior lighting of the buildings cleaning crews leave lights on all night and they shine into neighboring homes creating a disturbance. Ms. Horrigan asked if reflecting glass could be used that would eliminate or at least cut down on the interior lighting. Also, the preservation of the trees on College Avenue is a concern. Maynard Cox, 9540 Broadway, Marion County, was concerned about the level of illumination all night on the south side of the buildings, but generally was in favor of the building. The lighting is disturbing to the neighboring homes. Also, the height of the building is a concern -the other buildings in the development are 5 stories. Mr. Cox asked whether or not the total square footage is being exceeded over the initial approval. Janet Cox, 9540 North Broadway, Marion County, was also concerned about the level of illumination of the interior lights being left on all night. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed development. No one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Nicely responded that there is nothing that can be done to the windows to eliminate the lights. The cleaning crews will be told to extinguish the lights as they finish. The last building to be built will contain 86,000 square feet and will bring the maximum square footage to 1,050,000 square feet, the total allowable for the development. The existing trees on the left and right of the site plan will be preserved. There are a substantial number of trees that will actually be planted. Also, six stories are permitted under both B -6 zoning and the original commitments. s:Aminutes \plancoimn \pc 1999may Mr. Nicely relayed a telephone conversation from Mrs. Carol Marlin, that she had reviewed the site plan and elevation. Mrs. Marlin was pleased that there was some structured parking along College and the surface parking was modified to save some existing trees on the north ring road. Mrs. Marlin reportedly had no problem with the height of the building because of the setback from 96 and College. Mark Monroe reported no remaining TAC issues and the Department is recommending approval. Ron Houck questioned the total square footage. Phil Nicely responded that the total square footage in the commitments is rentable square footage, 1,050,000. Leo Dierckman asked if more assurance could be given to the neighbors regarding the lights in view of their concerns. Phil Nicely stated that he would commit to giving instructions to Ms. Davis and the cleaning crews to turn out the lights at night, although at times tenants come in over the weekend and leave lights on. Mr. Nicely was willing to commit to implement some type of plan to ensure that the lights would be extinguished at night. Leo Dierckman moved for the suspension of the rules in order to vote on Docket No. 37- 99, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Rick Sharp moved to approve Docket No. 37 -99 DP Amend /ADLS, Parkwood Crossing Building 6, conditioned upon commitment from the petitioner that an energy management program will be implemented to ensure that the lights will be extinguished at night in all buildings. APPROVED 14 -0. 3h. Commission to consider Docket No. 38 -99 DP /ADLS, Development Plan and Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage applications for Browning Investments. The petitioner seeks approval to construct a 32,000 square foot office building on 3.778 acres known as The Carmel Office Building. The site is located on the southeast corner of Carmel Drive and Hancock Street. The site is zoned M -3/ Manufacturing. Filed by Jamie Browning of Browning Investments. Joe Scimia, attorney, 300 North Meridian Street, Indianapolis appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant. Also in attendance were Jamie Browning of Browning Investments, Greg Snelling of MSE Engineering Corp., Drew White and Chris Short, architects, Jeff Bowling, landscape architect, and Sandra Perry, law clerk. Final approval is being sought for a Development Plan and ADLS approval for an office building to be located at the corner of Carmel Drive and Hancock Street. Samples of the building materials were displayed. There will be two types of brick; the primary brick color and a lighter color (beige or taupe); the accent tones will be dark; the exterior will be dryvit. s:Aminutes \plancotmn \pc 1999may The site plan provides for 119 parking spaces, 107 are required. There are two access points: one from Hancock Street, and a shared access with the project to the east. Mr. Scimia reported that extensive landscaping has been provided around the perimeter of the development as well as foundation plantings. The southern portion of the project contains the retention pond. There have been some minor changes in the elevations. The number of columns on the building have been reduced from 8 to 5. The number of storefront windows has been increased from 5 to 6. The major, front portion of the building has been changed to reduce the number of columns from 12 to 7; the number of windows has been reduced from 11 to 6. The development has two signs proposed: a monument sign located at the northeast corner of the property and at the access on Hancock Street, internally illuminated, fiberglass signs, 60 square feet including the base. Other than those trees along Carmel Drive, very few trees are being preserved; however there will be a total of 72 trees on the site, 127 shrubs, and numerous perennials and ground cover to landscape the site. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the proposed development; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mark Monroe reported that there are no outstanding issues and the Department is recommending approval. In response to sign color questions from Pat Rice, the petitioner reported that the sign color will match the color of the roof which will be toned down from the terra cotta or rust color as shown. The EIFS or dryvit is the horizontal band directly beneath the roof, light color; the main body of the building is the lighter, buff colored brick, with a dark color brick band at the bottom of the building. The windows are clear glass, not tinted. In response to questions from Marilyn Anderson, Joe Scimia reported that a complete landscape plan is on file with the Department. Rick Sharp moved for the suspension of the rules. APPROVED 14 -0. Norma Meighen moved for the approval of Docket No. 38 -99 DP /ADLS, Browning Investments, subject to the color of signage matching the color of the roof. APPROVED 14 -0. I. Old Business: Ii. Commission to consider Docket No. 12 -99 ADLS Amend., an amended Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage application for Barnes Investments. Petitioner seeks approval to allow multi colored tenant signage for the s: \minutes \plancomm \pc 1999may Marsh Plaza. The site is located at the northeast corner o Carmel Drive and AAA Way. The site is zoned B -8 /Business. Filed by Bob Jolley of Signman. Brad Barnes appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Approval is being requested for amended sign specifications for the old Marsh Plaza. The current sign specifications are for white, individual letters only. The proposed color palate is white, burgundy, blue, and tan. Rick Sharp reported that the Special Study Committee had voted unanimously to recommend approval to the Plan Commission conditioned upon the following: By December 31, 1999, all box signage will be removed and replaced exclusively with channel letters; the petitioner will also work with Kinko's to modify their sign, specifically in regard to the red coloring. Ron Houck moved for the approval of Docket No. 12 -99 ADLS Amend., for Barnes Investments, subject to the conditions recommended by the Special Study Committee. APPROVED 14 -0. 2i. 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 VanSoelen of Estridge Development. Steve VanSoelen, vice president of Estridge Development, and Dave Sexton of Schneider Engineering appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. The plan was initially presented to the Commission in April. The Subdivision Committee then reviewed the proposal. The property is located north of 116 Street on Hoover Road, south of Claridge Farms, and consists of 25.8 acres. The plat was filed under the new Residential Open Space Ordinance and computes to 1.24 units per acre. Clay Creek traverses the property; there are some significant stands of trees on the southern border, eastern border, and along the Creek area. The homes will be custom built by Estridge and priced comparably with the adjoining neighborhoods, $300, to $500,000. The development will be constructed in two sections. The Subdivision Committee looked at the open space in Block F to the north that is traversed by gas pipelines and is a primary conservation area. A common area was created adjacent and contiguous to Block F across the front of the property that will be landscaped; there will also be an entry area for the community. The Creek area is also a primary conservation area. There was discussion at committee to connect Block F, via asphalt paths, along the eastern side of lot 6, 7, north side of lot 14, enter Block C s: \minutes \plancomm \pc 1999may common area, continue to the bottom of Block A common area, to the side of the property. The second focus of discussion was the petitioner's request for a variance to eliminate the stub street or secondary entrance. The petitioner has agreed to convert the cul -de -sac at lot 6 to a stub street so that when the parcel to the northeast is developed, there will be a secondary access for cars and emergency vehicles. The request for the variance is no longer required with the addition of the stub street. Ron Houck gave the committee report. The petitioner has agreed to work with the Department and Panhandle Eastern Pipeline to construct a path through Block F, also modify the right -of -way on the cul -de -sac next to lot 6 to permit a stub street to the northeast parcel. The petitioner did commit to a tree preservation plan on the perimeter. The Committee voted 5 -2 to eliminate the second entrance; the plat was recommended for approval 7 -0. Mark Monroe reported that the changes are acceptable to the Department; however, the requested variance for the elimination of the stub street can be withdrawn. Kevin Kirby commented that the proposed development would be a much better layout if it incorporated the Cox property; Mr. Van Soelen responded that Ms. Cox had been contacted, but no terms could be agreed upon regarding sale of her property. Ron Houck moved for approval of Docket No. 19 -99 PP, High Grove Subdivision. APPROVED 13 in favor, Rick Sharp opposed. 3i. 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. This 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. Phil Nicely, attorney, 8888 Keystone Crossing, appeared before the Commission with persons from Skinner and Broadbent Company. The petitioner is requesting a rezone to B -3 /Business to provide for the development of a self storage facility, contingent upon a Special Use Approval from the Board of Zoning Appeals. The Special Study Committee reviewed the proposed development and voted unanimously to recommend approval to the Plan Commission. Mr. Nicely commented about property values in the area if the proposed facility were developed. Based on information given regarding the storage facility at 96 and Keystone, the property values of the adjoining office buildings were not deemed to be affected by the storage facilities. The petitioner met with the City Engineer and agreed to change the configuration and move the buildings back 10 feet in order to allow for future s:Aminutes \plancomtn \pc 1999may 10 development of a loop road. The proposed facility does not tax the infrastructure in any way and will be an asset to the area. The petitioner has filed commitments stating that the facility will be developed consistent to the plan filed with the Department; the petitioner also agrees that the only security lighting will be in the parking lot; the balance of the lighting will be wall- mounted inside the development. The petitioner also made commitments in regard to the minimum setback for Building 3 and the dedication of certain right -of -way in the event the loop road did occur. Rick Sharp stated that the Commission was to receive a commitment from the petitioner controlling light spillage to one -tenth of one foot candle at the property lines. Mr. Nicely concurred. Paul Spranger commented that the area is certainly an opportunity for re- development. If an entrance drive were established farther back from Keystone Way, the development could be very attractive. However, Mr. Spranger suggested that Skinner and Broadbent work with Marsh and see what higher and greater use might be for the site -also in terms of economic benefit for all parties, including the land owner. Marilyn Anderson asked that more variety be considered for shrubs. Also, Ms. Anderson asked for clarification of the rezone classification to B -3. Mr. Nicely stated that under B -3 with a Special Use attached to it, the zoning encompasses almost every use conceivable. B -1 zoning was a possibility, but permits a lot of additional uses that are not necessarily desirable. The B -3 classification with the Special Use allows control of the development. The petitioner is requesting a rezone to B -3 ONLY if the Special Use is granted. In response to Bob Modisett's question as to the feasibility of installing an automatic signal at Carmel Drive and Keystone Way, Mark Monroe stated that the City had looked at a number of different alternatives in this area. The problem is the proximity to the intersection of Keystone, a State Highway, and the preference would be not to have another stoplight there. The City has also looked at another alternative that is a left turn lane into Keystone Way for eastbound traffic on Carmel Drive, and only right in- -right out turns for southbound traffic on Keystone Way. The alternative of the loop road could eventually allow greater access to Carmel Drive than Keystone Way. The loop road would bring the traffic to AAA Way where there is an existing traffic signal. The petitioner is offering 25 feet of right -of -way as a part of the rezone -the minimum requirement- -and does not allow for sidewalks or drainage improvements. The overall up -grade plan includes brickpavers at major intersections, new sidewalks, street lights and landscaping. The improvement at Keystone Way would provide a better left turn lane for eastbound traffic but would limit southbound traffic from Keystone Way. Carmel Drive at Keystone is a significant entrance to the City. s:Aminutes \plancoimn \pc 1999may I I Leo Dierckman commented that since this area is considered one of the primary entrances into the City, the Plan Commission needs to think about a storage facility within a stone's throw of a major investment that the City is making to upgrade the intersection. Mr. Dierckman did not see any problem with the design of the storage facility -only the proposed location. Pat Rice commented that she also had mixed reactions to the facility at the proposed location. Ms. Rice stated agreement with statements made by Paul Spranger and Leo Dierckman, and was in favor of holding to the present zoning. Rick Sharp commented that the loop road does not appear on the Thoroughfare Plan, although it has been discussed for the past few months, it is still in the discussion stage. The reality of the plan before the Commission is the right of a land owner to realize the value of their land. There are two issues to be considered: planning and political. The planning issue is clear -cut; as presented, the proposed plan is a very good use, probably the highest and best use for the site. However, if the City is going to construct a loop road at this location, the proposed plan is not the highest and best use. From a planning perspective, the tools provided to work with today say that this a creative use of the site and will have a positive impact. Paul Spranger reiterated that there is an opportunity at this location, and he again encouraged Skinner and Broadbent to pursue the opportunity. Ron Houck commented that the current proposal is no different than any other rezone that has come before the Commission -it is not an issue of property owner's rights to the extent that the Commission must look at the bigger issue of planning. A lot of attention has been focused on the construction of the loop road, but this is not the only alternative. This could be considered a redevelopment potential. The proposal is a matter of appropriateness. Mr. Nicely stated that one of the uses permitted under the current B -8 zoning is a cold storage locker. The proposed use is not very far from an actual permitted use. Rick Sharp moved for the approval of Docket No. 23 -99 Z, rezone application for the Skinner and Broadbent Company. Mark Monroe reported that the rezone commitments from the petitioner were received this afternoon and a quick review reveals some issues in content; the language is a little vague. Rick Sharp amended his motion for approval of Docket No. 23 -99 Z subject to review and approval of the commitments by the Department. Mr. Molitor clarified the Plan Commission's charge to make recommendation to the City Council. As stated, the motion includes the responsibility of the Department to negotiate cleanup of the language of commitments before the recommendation is forwarded to the s:Aminutes \plancoimn \pc 1999may 12 City Council. In any event, Council has the final decision on the rezone and also the wording of the commitments. The vote on Rick Sharp's motion for approval was 6 in favor, Leo Dierckman, Ron Houck, Norma Meighen, Jim O'Neal, and Pat Rice opposed; Kent Broach recused due to a conflict of interest; Marilyn Anderson and Paul Spranger, No Vote. NO DECISION. Rick Sharp then moved to forward Docket No. 23 -99 Z, Skinner and Broadbent Cmpany, to the City Council with No Recommendation. APPROVED 13 -1. 8i. Commission to consider Docket No. 35 -99 ADLS Amend., an amended Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage application for Glenborough Properties. Petitioner seeks approval to allow one tenant sign with a different color and style for the Meridian Park Place Complex. The site is located at the southwest corner of U.S. 31 and 126 Street. The site is zoned B -3 /Business and is located within the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by Matt Urbanski of Glenborough Properties. Matt Urbanski of Glenborough Properties appeared before the Commission requesting approval of Electronic Data Systems' sign, E.D.S. The Committee recommended utilizing individual channel lock letters in gold tones, back -lit. Rick Sharp reported that the Committee did indeed recommend approval utilizing the channel letters in gold tones as stated. Rick Sharp moved for the approval of Docket No. 35 -99 ADLS Amend, with colors and channel letters as stated. Mark Monroe reported that the Department is not recommending approval of the sign. There are other tenants and another building within this office complex that are still bound by the existing sign criteria for the complex which is individually, internally illuminated letters, creme face, green returns. If approved, there would be one sign as proposed that strays from the criteria and all other signs would have to comply with criteria from ten years ago. There will be inconsistencies in signage within the complex. There was discussion among Commission members; Rick Sharp commented that the issue brought up by the Department is worthy of exploration; but nothing objectionable was seen in the E.D.S. sign. Duane Hostetler, account executive with E.D.S., stated that the signage meets the corporate objectives; the raised letters will not be discernable at night because of the lighting during the day, the visibility from the highway of the gold reflection will have the same look. Docket No. 35 -99 ADLS Amend, Glenborough Properties, was APPROVED 12 -0. s:Aminutes \plancoimn \pc 1999may 13 Paul Spranger brought up the issue of intersection design by the County that incorporates a turning radius of WB20, the largest trucks. There was discussion at Special Study Committee that the Plan Commission adopt the WB 15, the minimum INDOT turning radius for large trucks, school buses, fire trucks, etc. This reduction in turning radius will keep the intersections more in residential character. This will also help discourage the residential streets from becoming truck routes. Paul Spranger asked that a formal letter be sent to the County Commissioners requesting a reduction in the specifications of turning radius for trucks, effective in all residential areas of the township. There was further discussion by the Plan Commission. The consensus of opinion was that the designing of the roads should be left up to the professionals. It was decided that the Plan Commission president would contact the County Commissioner Sharon Clark by telephone rather than formal letter conveying concerns; and requesting consideration of a more narrow turning radius at residential intersections to discourage truck traffic. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 PM. David A. Cremeans, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary s:Aminutes \plancoimn \pc 1999may 14