HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 07-20-99CARMEL /CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
JULY 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 July 20, 1999.
Members present were: Marilyn Anderson; Kent Broach; David Cremeans; Leo
Dierckman; Madeline Fitzgerald; Ron Houck; Norma Meighen; Bob Modisett; James T.
O'Neal, Sr.; Pat Rice; Paul Spranger; and Tom Yedlick.
Director Steve Engelking, Michael Hollibaugh, and Terry Jones were present
representing the Department of Community Services.
The minutes of the June 15 meeting were approved as submitted.
Terry Jones reported that the following items under Old Business were TABLED: 1 i., 2i.,
4i., 5i., and 6i. Also, Docket No. 48 -99 SP was omitted from the Agenda and will be
heard this evening.
Tom Yedlick announced that a questionnaire /survey had been prepared by Kelli Hahn,
summer intern at DOGS. Members are asked to complete the questionnaire and return to
the DOCS by July 27
H. Public Hearin:
lh. Commission to consider Docket No. 56 -99 DP /ADLS, Development Plan
and Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage application for REI
Investments. The petitioner seeks approval to construct a 261,577 square foot office
building on a total of 13.534 acres known as Meridian Pointe Office Park. The site is
located at the southwest corner of 106 and Meridian Streets. The site is zoned B-
6 /Business and is located within the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone.
Filed by Axis Architecture plus Interiors.
NOTE: Bob Modisett recused himself from this item due to a conflict of interest and
exited the Chambers.
Julie Hall, vice president of development for REI Investments, appeared before the
Commission representing the petitioner. Also in attendance were Kevin Cooper with
Axis Architecture, and Jim Peck, director of Civil Engineering for the Schneider
Corporation.
The property is bounded by U.S. 31 to the east, 106 Street to the north, Illinois Street to
the west, and abuts the Thomson Consumer Electronics to the south. The petitioner is
s AP1ancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1
proposing to build two, five story buildings totaling 262,000 square feet. In addition, a 3
level parking structure will be constructed between the two buildings, connected by a
surface walkway under roof. A landscaped, pedestrian plaza occurs along the main
entrance. The main entrance into each building consists of a portico- canopy and a one
and one -half story lobby.
The buildings are constructed with pre -cast concrete and brick masonry along with glass
to provide maximum natural light for the interior. There are 551 surface parking spaces
and 629 garage parking spaces for a total of 4.6 spaces per thousand.
In 1991, this project was approved prior to the property being annexed by the City of
Carmel. At that time, a projection of 250,000 square feet of office space was made. The
petitioner referred to a traffic study that was done in 1991 and the traffic projection made
at that time. The petitioner stated that the median cuts curb cuts had been approved in
1991. It is hoped that the office park can be developed as initially designed.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition; no one appeared.
Terry Jones reported that a project had been approved in 1991 at this indicated site as part
of the Thomson project. The proposed project is significantly changed from the original
plan and a new Development Plan was required. The issues with the curb cuts are still in
open discussion with the City Engineer. In 1991, the property was under the jurisdiction
of the County Highway and approval for curb cuts would have come from the County
Commissioners. As yet, the Department has not been able to identify those curb cut
approvals. With respect to U.S. 31, it is required that INDOT be notified as to any
development that takes place within the corridor for potential right -of -way issues as it
relates to U.S.31 improvements.
Julie Hall reported that at the TAC level, the plans were sent to INDOT. The new
ordinance requires that plans be sent to the Commissioner's office; this has now been
done and open communication will continue.
Docket No. 56 -99 DP /ADLS for REI Investments was referred to the Special Study
Committee for review at its meeting currently scheduled for Wednesday, August 11,
1999.
Ron Houck moved for the review of the prior traffic study done in 1991 by a traffic
engineer, and results furnished to the Commission. APPROVED 11 -0.
2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 57 -99 D.P. /ADLS, Development Plan and
Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage application for Max Erma's
Restaurants, Inc. The petitioner seeks approval to construct a 7,744 square foot
restaurant fcility on 1.6 acres. The site is located near the southeast corner of 126 and
Meridian Streets within the Hamilton Crossing East Complex. The site is zoned B -3/
Business and is located within the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone.
Filed by Philip A Nicely of Bose McKinney Evans LLP.
s APlancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1 2
Phil Nicely, attorney, 8888 Keystone Crossing, appeared before the Commission
representing the applicant. Christopher Holgate, director of real estate for Max Erma's,
Dave Lash, engineer with Woolpert, and Larry Verble and Cindy Wong with Duke
Weeks.
The proposed restaurant is located within the Hamilton Crossing East complex at the very
southern portion. The property is zoned B -3 and located within the Overlay Zone. A
restaurant is permitted as a Special Use; however, a variance is being requested from the
sign regulations and from the 15,000 square foot requirement for retail within the overlay
zone.
A walkway is being provided between the restaurant and the Hampton Inn Hotel to allow
for pedestrian traffic to the hotel and the retail area; an outdoor seating area for
approximately 40 persons is also being provided for use during the summer. The trash
and dumpster are inside the building and there will be no separate facility for the trash.
Landscaping has been provided around the development; the drainage pond is viewed as
an amenity. The restaurant is an internal development and all traffic will flow through
the development, then out onto either Pennsylvania Street or 126 Street. The restaurant
will be coordinated in design with the shopping center and hotel as well as having a first
class building.
Two signs are proposed; one on U.S. 31 frontage, and one on the front of the building
that faces 126 Street. The sign on the front facade is 44 square feet, the sign on the east
facade is approximately 83 square feet in size. Both signs meet the Ordinance. The signs
are green to match the green awnings. The building is primarily brick, with an
architectural highlight around the top of the building (neon). The restaurant seats 202
persons, including the bar, plus an additional 40 persons in the outside seating area. A
detailed landscape and lighting plan has been submitted.
Christopher Holgate, real estate director with Max Erma's, appeared before the
Commission and gave a brief background of the restaurant Mr. Holgate stated that the
neon around the building was negotiable according to the wishes of the Plan
Commission; however, it does accent the building.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development, or
opposition; no one appeared.
Terry Jones reported that the Department is recommending that this Docket be sent to
Special Study Committee. The development will also be appearing before the Board of
Zoning Appeals for three developmental standards variances.
The public hearing was then closed.
Paul Spranger made some comments regarding the signage and appropriate colors and the
proposed pond.
s APlancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1
Jim O'Neal commented that the landscaping should be "beefed up," that what is proposed
is totally inadequate, and the pond should be cleaned and maintained.
Docket No. 57 -99 DP /ADLS for Max Erma's was forwarded to the Special Study
Committee for review on August 11, 1999.
Old Business:
1 i. Commission to consider Docket No. 24 -99 D.P. /ADLS, Development
Plan and Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage applications for B -K
Partners. TABLED
2i. Commission to consider Docket No. 25 -99 P.P. /S.P., a replat application
for B -K Partners. TABLED
3i. Commission to consider Docket No. 30 -99 D.P. /ADLS, Development
Plan and Architectural Design, Landscapng, Lighting, and Signage applications for the
C &C Realty Company. The petitioner seeks approval to construct a 62,500 square foot
office and warehouse complex on 5 acres. The site is located on the west side of
Michigan Road, 1/8 mile north of 96 Street. The site is zoned I -1 /Industrial and is
located partially within the Michigan Road (U.S. 421) Overlay Zone. (Petitioner may
also be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals for consideration of Development
Standards Variances.)
Filed by Reed Carlson of the C &C Realty Company.
Reed Carlson and Stephanie Curtis appeared before the Commission representing the
applicant. The newest building is the 9840 building, completed just last year. The
current proposal is for an additional 10,000 square feet of retail space just south of the
9840 building. Currently, there is a "U" shaped entrance to the north, and this is being
restructured to one single entrance in order to alleviate traffic congestion. The
landscaping plan will also include additional plantings after the entrance is finished.
The entire perimeter of the storage buildings will include a 3 foot berm, with trees 8 to 10
feet tall.
Jim O'Neal reported for the Special Study Committee chairperson. The petitioner has
appeared before the Committee a number of times and the Committee unanimously
recommended approval.
Terry Jones reported that there were no issues outstanding at this time.
Jim O'Neal moved for the approval of Docket No. 30 -99 D.P. /ADLS. APPROVED 12-
0-.
s:\Plancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1 4
4i. Commission to consider Docket No. 44 -99 P.P., a primary plat
application for SCM Development. The petitioner seeks approval to plat 107 lots on 49
acres known as Brookstone Park of Carmel Subdivision.
TABLED
5i. Commission to consider Docket No. 45 -99 Z, a rezone application for the
Buckingham Companies. TABLED
6i. Commission to consider Docket No. 46 -99 P.V., a Plat Vacation
application for the Buckingham Companies.
TABLED
NOTE: Items 7i. and 8i. were heard together and voted on separately.
7i. Commission to consider Docket No. 47 -99 DP /ADLS, Development Plan
and Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping, and Signage applications for Glendale
Partners. Petitioner seeks approval to construct 4 retail buildings totaling approximately
50,000 square feet on 8 acres known as the West Carmel Center, Retail A. The site is
located on the southeast corner of 106 Street and U.S. 421 (Michigan Road.) The site is
zoned B -3 /Business and is located within the Michigan Road U.S. 421 Overlay Zone.
Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers.
8i. Commission to consider Docket No. 48 -99 SP, a Secondary Plat
application for Glendale Partners. Petitioner seeks approval to plat one lot, 8 acres in
size, in the West Carmel Center, Block A. The site is located on the southeast corner of
106 Street and US 421 (Michigan Road.) The site is zoned B -3 /Business and is located
within the Michigan Road US 421 Overlay Zone.
Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers.
Kevin McKasson, 9864 Summer Lakes Drive, Carmel, with Glendale Partners, and Jamie
Piczekay of American Consulting Engineers appeared before the Commission
representing the applicant. Also in attendance were April Hensley of Leach, Hensely
Architects, and Terry Sullivan of Sullivan Corporation, contractor.
The proposed project was referred to the Special Study Committee. Some modifications
were requested by the Committee, the most important being a change in the site plan to
provide for an additional 12 feet of right -of -way on 106 Street to allow for the
construction of an additional turning lane. The petitioner has also agreed to extend a
median that the State Highway intends to install on Michigan Road, beyond the middle
entrance so that the entrance is a right in- -right out. The median will prevent traffic from
crossing over to make a turn.
The architectural is a Federal style with dormers, completely brick with glass on the
front. The rear of the building is also all brick. All utility lines are concealed in a room
that will also conceal the trash dumpsters, constructed of brick. The outlot buildings are
of the same style. The dumpster and mechanical areas are totally enclosed. The drive-
s APlancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1
thru lanes are designed to be at the rear of the building, with stacking and exiting also at
the rear of the building.
The landscaping requirements have been met; however, the petitioner will be appearing
before the BZA seeking a variance from the front setback regulations. The lighting plan
consists of decorative wall sconce on the building, and box lighting in the parking lot
Dave Cremeans gave the Committee report for Rick Sharp. There were two outstanding
issues; these have been addressed through the extension of the median past the
petitioner's curb cut, and the addition of 12 feet of right -of -way on 106 Street to allow
for a turning lane. The Committee passed this Docket unanimously.
There was discussion regarding signage for this development; Kevin McKasson stated
that there is a specific approval process by Glendal Partners and the City. All signs are
standard, individual letters, internally illuminated, and the petitioner will be returning to
the Commission for each sign approval. The petitioner stated his willingness to meet all
the requirements of the Overlay and Zoning for B -3.
Paul Spranger cautioned the petitioner about the level of illumination for the signage; the
petitioner stated a willingness to commit to allow the Department to use its discretion in
reviewing the brightness of each of the signs.
Jim O'Neal moved for the approval of Docket Nos. 47 -99 DP /ADLS, and 48 -99 SP, for
Glendale Partners. APPROVED 12 -0.
9i. Commission to consider Docket No. 49 -99 P.P., a primary plat approval
for Pittman Partners. Petitioner seeks approval to plat 104 lots on 57 acres known as the
Ashbury Park Subdivision. The site is located west of Springmill Road and is between
131 Street and 136 Street. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence.
Filed by Steve Pittman of Pittman Partners.
Steve Pittman, 306 Mill Ridge Drive, Carmel, appeared before the Commission
representing the applicant. This particular item was referred to the Subdivision
Committee in July. There were a number of neighbors at the public hearing who had
expressed concern regarding traffic through their subdivisions.
The current site development plan is supported by the neighbors. An additional point of
ingress /egress was added at 136 Street and a cul -de -sac was added rather than a through
road. The petitioner is asking for a variance from the Residential Open Space Ordinance
to be allowed two conservancy lots that are less than 10 acres as opposed to one that is 10
acres. The Subdivision Committee unanimously voted to recommend this development
for approval.
Tom Yedlick reported for the Subdivision Committee that the development did receive
approval. The conservancy commitments were discussed and restrictions recited. Those
restrictions provide that no subdivision of the conservancy lots "CL") is permitted; a
s:\P1ancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1
residential building area must be established on the plan submitted for Secondary Plat
approval. The residential building area may not exceed a total of 3.5 acres on CL 101
and 3.5 acres on CL 102. Agricultural uses are permitted in accordance with the
requirements of the S -1 Zoning restrictions in the area outside the residential building
area. Passive recreational use is permitted anywhere on CL 101 and CL 102. One
dwelling and accessory residential facility associates with the dwelling are permitted as
additional improvements, but only within the residential building area. The residential
building area must be established prior to commencement of construction of any dwelling
or accessory residential facility on CL 101 and CL 102. Organic yard, garden and
kitchen waste materials may be piled for temporary storage of composting for use by
owners, provided such piles consist only of natural, unprocessed, vegetative matter
originating only from the property and do not exceed 200 square feet in gross area.
The petitioner is trying to limit the width of one residential driveway to 15 feet from 131
Street. This will take the homeowner to their residence or to the residential building area
where they will have their residence or accessory structure.
Ron Houck was concerned about the uses that could be put on the conservancy lots
adjacent to the development in place. Ron was concerned about an objectionable use
directly abutting a residential development.
Steve Pittman responses that the Ordinance does prohibit some offensive uses. The
conservancy lots are not classified as agricultural use but rather "gentleman's farm. Each
of the conservancy lots is anticipated to sell at around $250,000. The total of the lot and
home is anticipated to sell between $750,000. and $1,000,000.
John Molitor stated that the purpose of the ordinance was to require the mini -farms to be
at least 10 acres in size. The Commission can waive that requirement as much as 35
The petitioner was willing to reconfigure so that each lot would be at least 6.5 acres.
Jim O'Neal moved for the approval of Docket No. 49 -99 PP for Pittman Partners.
Ashbury Park Subdivision, to include the 13 acre minimum requirement of the two
conservancy lots. APPROVED 11 in favor, Madeline Fitzgerald opposed.
New Business:
lj. Commission to consider Docket No. 62 -99 ADLS Amend., an amended
Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping and Signage application for Duke Realty
Limited Partnership. The site is located at 510 East 96 Street within the Parkwood
Crossing Office Park, designated as Building 5. The site is currently zoned B -6 /Business.
The petitioner will be seeking a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Filed by Philip A. Nicely of Bose McKinney Evans LLP.
Phil Nicely, attorney at 8888 Keystone Crossing, appeared before the Commission
representing the petitioner. Approval is being requested for tenant signage on Building 5
of Parkwood Crossing Office Park.
s:\P1ancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1
The proposed sign would be located on the exterior of the building facing I -465. Merrill
Lynch has requested this particular sign in connection with leasing space in Building 5.
The sign is basically black on a white building, a total of 82 square feet in size, including
the logo. The letters are 2 and one -half feet high, the logo is approximately 5 feet high.
A variance may be needed for the logo because it is more than 25% of the sign.
The Department offered no comment on this Docket.
There was discussion concerning the size of the logo, the size of the sign, and the
allowable size of the logo.
Paul Spranger moved for the approval of Docket No. 62 -99 ADLS Amend., for Merrill
Lynch sign for Parkwood Crossing Building 5. APPROVED I 1 in favor, Madeline
Fitzgerald opposed.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was
adjourned at 9:10 PM.
David A. Cremeans, President
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
s:\Plancommission\minutes \pc 1999ju1