Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes SpecStdy 09-16-04 Special1,1`I y G`'`y of Cq,9y C o CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE Minutes THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2004 (Special Meeting) REPRESENTING THE CITY OF CARMEL: Jerry Chromancz Mark Ratterman Wayne Haney Madeline Torres REPRESENTING THE DEPARMENT: Michael Hollibaugh Jon Dobosiewicz REMONSTRATORS: Dolores Ray, 2410 Winfield Drive Francis Ray Jr., 2410 Winfield Drive Dee Fox, 11289 Royal Court Dave Fox, 11389 Royal Court Carl Calcamugjio, Village of WestClay resident Docket Nos. 04060035 OA and 04060036 Z: Village of WestClay Filed by Brandon Burke of The Schneider Corporation REPRESENTING THE PETITIONER: David Warshauer, BARNES THORNBURG Jennifer Pyrz, EDWARDS KELCEY George Sweet, BRENWICK Tom Huston, BRENWICK Keith Lash, BRENWICK Kevin Krulik, BRENWICK The applicant seeks to amend their PUD ordinance. The applicant also seeks to Rezone 30 acres from S -1 /Residence Estate to PUD Planned Unit Development. The site is located at 131st Street and Towne Road. Chomanczuk: Can we first hear from the Department? Dobosiewicz: The Committee Members were sent the written correspondence that spoke at the last Committee Meeting along with a petition circulated from Laurel Lakes. Some information you should have available to you from the last Page 1 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda meeting showing a map of the Traffic Study Intersections and Summary of the Funded Improvements, 20/20 Vision Plan, Township Land -use Map, and Build -out Area Map along with Subdivisions approved in 2001, 2002, and 2003, in color. I would like to show through the Comp Plan the need for neighborhood serving commercial in this part of the Township as it develops. Getting into the Petition, another issue would be what uses are provided within the existing PUD and what uses are provided for in the proposed additional retail area at 131 st Street and Towne Road. Chomanczuk: Petitioner comments? My name is David Warshauer here on behalf of Brenwick; next to me are Tom Huston, Chairman of Brenwick, Keith Lash, Vice President of Operations and George Sweet. It is clear by the comments that some believe the Village of WestClay was a mistake and these changes would only compound the mistake. The project is a benefit to the City of Carmel. The Mayor considers it a showpiece for visitors to Carmel. The Comp Plan of 1991 was replaced in 1996 we are now eight years past the 1996 plan I would respectfully suggest the current plan is even more obsolete than the one replaced in 1991. You can see by the map that Jon Dobosiewicz has prepared that Clay Township is built -out. The Comp Plan projected the population in Carmel Clay Township to reach 85,000 in the year 2015. In July 2003 according to IU's Kelly School of Business, Clay Township had a population of over 75,000, which is an increase of 16.2 more than the 2000 Census. In Mayor Brainard's "State of the City address he estimated the City's population in 2014 would exceed 100,000 people. We think this plays into the additional services neighborhood to commercial. More people more services. Since the 1996 plan the biggest change has been in Annexation. In her letter, Miss Anderson talks of the Village of WestClay as the "straw that broke the Camel's back" in terms that some had these feelings in Clay Township and had attempted to form their own town. As I recall, the irony that one of the centerpieces of that separate town in Clay Township was going to be the Village of WestClay which would provide the commercial tax base for their said town. We believe that the City of Carmel and the residents of the Township are served by the annexation that has occurred that will be complete when you complete your southwest annexation with the exception of the area of Westfield and 96 Street. Greatly different in that almost all of Clay Township will be in the City of Carmel that means several things as we talked about the issue with road improvements and the lack of improvements by the County. The City has come in and taken a number of major steps to improve major intersections and has more plans underway to do more of that. As the City annexes and extends its services into the Township a lot of the issues we believe that were raised in 1996 go by the wayside. The City has placed a Maintenance Garage at 131 st Street and Towne Road. We have Fire Stations and Schools in Western Clay. These things were dots on a map in 1998 they are a physical reality now. In 1998 we argued that the Village of WestClay met the goals of the plan. The plan also provides that development proposals are to be reviewed on a case -by -case basis. So Page 2 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda we are asking you tonight instead of going back and looking at whether or not the decision was correct in 1999 look at what has been done at the Village of WestClay. Has it been developed as Brenwick said it would be developed? There are times when density is appropriate in connection with other things that benefit the community. ROSO limits it to open space, which allows a trade- off of open space for higher density. Every subdivision that I have been involved with has come through for approval since 1998 has come in under the ROSO at a density greater than 1.3 units per acre, 30% higher then what the Comp Plan showed for that area. Heather Knoll at Towne Road and 141S Street is 1.95 units per acre the additional density in that case was warranted by the public interest in benefit of obtaining a collector road. Stanford Park at 131 st Street and Towne Road was rezoned from S -1 to R -2 which has a base density of 3.9 units per acre we also have Trails at Hayden Run at1.6 density, The Lakes at Hayden Run 1.37 and The Ridge at Hayden Run 1.41. So density is something that has been modified over the years beyond what was contemplated in the Comp Plan. Given the added number of houses in the area is a reason to create the peripheral retail area. We believed initially that we needed to be selective in our retail choices and have found the contrary that residents like walking to those retail areas. The Village Center however is not ideally suited for a number of neighborhood retail uses. The Comp Plan requires location of retail to be on major arterials regardless of common belief the 20 -Year Thoroughfare Plan shows that 131 st Street and Towne Road are to become major streets. By the County's Standard Towne Road was going to be a four -lane road with a design speed of 55 mph to connect traffic quickly from 96 Street to US 32. Carmel `s plan is to make it a parkway. The same with 131S Street it is to connect traffic from Michigan Road into Carmel. It is our understanding that IDOT has concluded that the interchange for US 31 should be at 131S Street. This will be a major traffic carrier. At 131S Street and Towne Road you have these two major roads coming together. We think at that point it becomes a logical place to put neighborhood retail services. There is benefit for closer retail. We believe that if someone is going to develop a retail center in western Clay Township Brenwick is a logical choice for the quality of what it has done, for willingness to design outside the box, and the willingness to meet and satisfy requirements. Brenwick had come before for approval of a service station and the request for one at 131 st Street and Towne Road the existing Ordinance page 17, Section 5, 1 -D permits within the Village Center one Automobile Service Station including the sale of gasoline. Current language is being deleted because we are requesting approval to move, that which is already permitted in the Village of WestClay to a spot that makes more sense in light of the population that exists in that area. Section 1.71 of the Comp Plan says that the neighborhood serving office and retail should be located in residential community areas. This is an incredibly basic point to what we are talking about here. We have a specific concept it is in the Comp Plan for neighborhoods serving uses in residential areas they should be in density and scale with surrounding land uses. The schematic plan shows retail at the corner of 131S Street Towne Road and has located the commercial uses close to that intersection. There is a buffer in place, which meets Carmel's requirements. The other buffers to the north are constant with Carmel's requirements. We have met the Ordinance requirements for Carmel. We have tried to provide a Development Plan, which becomes part of the Ordinance that shows individual buildings not a strip center. We have proposed architectural guidelines that would make this area similar in design to the 1920's Art Deco style. 1.7.2 reads, Page 3 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda "Neighborhood serving commercial areas should have access with primary and secondary parkways based in part by comparable retail facilities We are proposing retail at a neighborhood scale and character. I would like to introduce Jennifer Pyrz, Traffic Engineer for Edwards Kelcey has provided us with a summary that I would like to go through. Question: Why was the intersection of Shelborne and 116 Street omitted? The Departments of Engineering and Community Service provided us with 23 Intersections to count and analyze and that intersection was not on the list. Question: Why "F" level of service "F meaning worst. Our report recommends stop controls or roundabouts at the "F" level intersections. Brenwick's commitment of almost 2.4 million dollars if this is approved will go to improve those intersections that are not scheduled to be improved or have not already been improved. Question: The study was based on current traffic studies during all peak times morning lam 9am and evening 4pm 6pm at all the intersections in May of 2004. We provided this complete traffic report to M. McBride in City Engineering in June 2004. We also provided him with traffic volume studies directionally by approach. There was a study done by NF Engineering in 2002 indicated the intersection of 131st Street and Towne Road rating is "F Signals are required to increase the rating to "B Our Traffic Study suggests dual lane roundabout or turn lanes. Brenwick is willing to work with the City to construct a roundabout. Question: Were cars counted that left the areas of Village of WestClay to get to the peripheral retail areas and the answer is yes. No reductions were taken for internal trips at the proposed 131st Street and Towne Road development. Question: On trip generation for goods and services the Institute of Transportation Engineers has a Trip Generation Manual that gives us those numbers taken from actual sites of all vehicles This is not Edwards Kelcey's option. Question: Specifically for a trip generation for a Bank or Gas Station or Fast Food Restaurant. Edwards Kelcey has provided a break down from each of those proposed uses. M. McBride in City Engineering has addressed all these questions. Huston: Looking at the letter from D. Creamens where he makes the statement that a Gas Service Station has been denied on every repeated request by the petitioner. You also have the e- mail from Ms Anderson that says, "When this PUD was last revised the Plan Commission was adamant there would be no Gas Station in the Village Center. Although Mr. Sweet fought for this the Plan Commission Members serving during the time of the initial PUD where so certain that the Gas Station was not to be built there that additional language stating this was added to the PUD. I would like to pass to you the original copy of the proposed amended in 2002 notice on page D -6 original language reads, "one Automobile Service Station including the sale of gasoline and other automotive petroleum products and such other retail consumer goods as permitted sales in a general store but excluding auto repair This was adopted by the City Council in 1999. In the approved Development Plan in 1999 showed a rendering of a Gas Station. We are authorized Page 4 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda today to put that in the Village Center. The email from Mr. Neal referencing the senior housing and the menials associated with Nursing Homes as socially undesirable nor did we need a three story High School type building. I would like to point out that the only restriction on the west side today is a height restriction of 40 feet. Forty feet can easily accommodate three stories. Ms Anderson's four -page email, she states on page 13 of the Building Requirements, "all building facades shall be of the same materials and similar in detail except where inappropriate to the historic style or sharing a party wall drops all facades becomes the front and side, no just no. On the right side of this documents is shows this has been deleted (interrupted)... Chomanczuk: I believe we get the inconsistencies please restrict your comments to facts. Dee Fox: We are submitting to you a petition signed by 48 households in the Huntington Chase Subdivision opposed to this Rezone. Carl Calcamugjio: Moved here a year ago and I like Brenwick's VOWC and neighborhood type developments. Wondering why they have changed their minds on this style. We would like to see VOWC keep the Gas Station in the Village. Traffic Study did not include destinations on directionals. Would like this petition Tabled until a complete set of drawings is made and allow the Community to vote. Warshauer: In every new development there are people opposing the project and think better of it after it is developed. We have had this petition in front of you since June 2004 with a mail distribution of 3,500 postcards inviting you to the Community Meetings explaining this project with only one hundred or so showing up. We sent hundreds of Legal Notices. To be accused of hiding facts and the probability of "paying people off' frankly make us all very angry. Chomanczuk: I believe our continued meetings like this reinforces that we are trying to do this in good faith with the population and communities in mind. Ellen Watson: I live at 136 and Towne Road and have lived out here for 29 years on what was zoned Agriculture. I now live on a five -acre estate property. They are clearly estates we cannot sell them as farms. We believe we are being force into a direction that suits big business. We see ourselves in ten fifteen years having to sell to a Developer like Simon Malls. I would like to see the Gas Station stay in the Village. I do not believe a commercial development will be good for my estate property. Ray Thoman: 13124 Towne Road and I own 10 acres of the 30 acres in question. I sent a written letter to the Committee and would like to say in 1969 we purchased this property. We like the lifestyle and what the Building and Zoning Commission have done through the years. We have had people moving into our area from that time forward and It would be unfair of us to say to those people you are not allowed to make your life the way you see fit but let us Page 5 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda have ours. You cannot stop progress and the fact that people want to live in communities in the country is progress. You cannot stop progress and you will have a strip mall out here if you do not allow Brenwick to continue to develop with esthetically pleasing architecture. Chomanczuk: I will now close the Public portion of this meeting and open it to the Committee. Ratterman: I do like the changes. Mr. Warshauer why does State Government require and what is the goal of Comp Plans? Warshauer: The theory is you cannot regulate land use. They are only planning documents not ordinances themselves. They reflect a certain view at a certain point in time. They do require updating and re- examination. They are setup to provide perimeters for good planning. Ratterman: State of Indiana requires zoning and the Planned Unit Development (PUD) replaces the ordinance with your own that you have written in order to do new and improved things, would that be accurate? Warshauer: No, it must go through the same controls as any ordinance. The PUD becomes the law of the community it serves and must be amended the same as any ordinance. Ratterman: I wanted everyone here to understand the PUD Ordinance and by its design it should reflect compatibility and flexibility as goals of a plan. Can you give me some history on the original ordinance? In the original ordinance this was or was not approved? Warshauer: In the original ordinance the Plan Commission recommended against approval. Changes came at City Council level. Huston: The original ordinance was adopted by the Commission with a negative recommendation to the Council and affirmed in 2001. We went back to the Plan Commission for amendment of the Development Standards in the Ordinance and the Plan Commission approved those changes. 2002 we went back to the Plan Commission with further changes and text amendments with Council approval. Ratterman: Have you ever received a negative vote? Huston: Never. Ratterman: Is that with the gas station? Huston: The Gas Station was added in 1999. What we changed in 2002 was the language allowing us to provide a car wash, and enclosed auto service. Ratterman: Mr. Warshauer you said and I quote, "some of the uses proposed are not suited for the Village retail uses What were you saying? Warshauer: Not suited meaning architecturally does not work as well in the Village Center as would somewhere else. Chomanczuk Can you give an example? Huston: I believe suitability is inappropriate. The present ordinance provided you could not have a drive -thru so Starbucks with a drive -thru is unacceptable. Ratterman: Mr. Warshauer what currently exists and what is proposed for the southeast and southwest corners of this intersection? Warshauer: Southeast corner there is a pond and on the southwest corner is proposed with the amenities center, tennis courts, and pool. Southeast corner is platted. Page 6 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda Ratterman: Mr. Warshauer you said earlier that you would commit to something not to occur... (interruption), Warshauer: There was a concern expressed by the residents of Hayden Run that the area we show west of the retail buildings that we show as residential would some day driven by slumping residential sales would come back through with retail. Ratterman: What is the difference in that commitment and what you are here for tonight? Huston: I would refer you to Section 4, of our ordinance we have the right to come back as we deem appropriate to modify our Development Plan. This agreement was setup and agreed too by the City of Carmel, the public and Brenwick laid out in Section 4. The difference is if you have Deed Restrictions or Restrictive Covenants that run with the land then that is a contract in perpetuity it cannot be changed. We are saying that if approved we will make it a contract in perpetuity a recordable instrument where it will be setup as residential or open space. Open discussion on Traffic Improvements: Traffic Study: Brenwick to make 1.3 Million Dollar Improvements several improvements still outstanding. Commitments tied to development of the Village under tab 6, of the Commitments. On page 2, Scheduling we show various timeframes. The Commitments also have the supplemental zoning commitments as well. Brenwick will do the work or reimburse the governmental entity. Brenwick has always worked with the City to meet the requirements and improvements and do not foresee any changes in that relationship. Ratterman: Would like to have continuous updated schedules on completion of each improvement. Open discussion on Traffic Study. Pyrz: See Traffic "update" Study by Edwards Kelcey their determination is figures are accurate. Chomanczuk: I am going to stop the discussion. We have gone over the arbitrary two -hour limit we set for ourselves. We can continue to move forward. We need to set a date for the next Special Studies meeting... (interruption). Ratterman: I just have one more question, I want to see hard numbers. If you took out the commercial or single family in the 30 acres what would be the density? Warshauer: We can compute that for next time. Without the senior housing component the maximum density would be 2.3 units per acre. Ratterman: Traffic counts are very important to me. Chomanczuk: Current ordinance has a complex formula where it introduces 10 or 20 percent factor commercial, retail, and office based on a per unit addition. I would like to know who is monitoring that, what is the current status, and what are the current numbers. It seems to me that if the Village Center is well under its allowance then Page 7 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda why is our focus going elsewhere? We can continue this discussion at the next Special Studies meeting. Are there any more questions from the Department? Dobosiewicz: Yes one, I am passing out to you a Connectivity Exhibit that was submitted for a subdivision along 141S and 146 Streets. This encompasses all the subdivisions west of Towne Road and north of 126 Street that have been approved in the last four years with the exception of an eight -lot subdivision. The overall developed density of these approved subdivisions is between 1.5 and 1.6 units per acre. The density at Huntington Chase is 1.3 units per acre Laurel Lakes is 1.22 units per acre. The unique thing you will find in this Exhibit is the philosophy of the Residential Open Space Ordinance. Carmel adopted planning and zoning in 1959 and shortly thereafter the Township entered into an Enjoinder Agreement. Since that time there has never been an exclusively Agricultural Zone within the community nor zoning class larger than one unit per acre on subdivisions not serviced by sewer and water. Chomanczuk: Thank you for your clarification. I would like to set a time for the next meeting. How about Thursday, October 7, 2004 at 7:00 p.m? I would like Mike Hollibaugh to answer this question as quick as possible. Mike, what is the 20/20 Plan that the Developer is relying upon for commercial, retail in the area and with the tremendous amount of growth in the area of Carmel and Hamilton County the validity and reliability of the 20/20 Plan ten years later, do many of these same issues provide a good guideline for us to fall back on? Hollibaugh: We believe the City, the Plan Commission, and Council have kept the promise of the Comprehensive Plan. The 20/20 Plan allows for extraordinary uses or interesting features like the Village of WestClay. We believe that the Plan that exists today has been implemented with the zoning and density. Chomanczuk: Thank you our next meeting is October 7, at 7:00p.m. Meeting adjourned 10:45 p.m. Page 8 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 16, 2004 Carmel /Clay Plan Commission Special Studies Committee Agenda Docket No. 04050053 DP /ADLS: North Meridian Medical Pavilion Filed by Tom Eagley REPRESENTING THE PETITIONER: The applicant seeks approval for a medical/office building. The site is located northwest of Old Meridian Street and Meridian Street (US 31). The site is zoned B -3 and B -6 /Business, within the US 31 Overlay Zone. TABLED. Page 9 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417