Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Sub 09-04-07of CA �VNONE y�A C i t y RTOMORROW o /NDIMAN CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE AGENDA TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2007 LOCATION: CAUCUS ROOMS TIME: 6:00 P.M. CARMEL CITY HALL DOORS OPEN AT 5:30 P.M. ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, IN 46032 Representing the Committee Rick Ripma, Chairperson Carol Schleif Sally Shapiro Representing the Department Mike Hollibaugh Adrienne Keeling Angie Conn Lisa Stewart Of Counsel: John Molitor Rick Ripma, Chairman called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Mr. Ripma reviewed the Docket Items for the meeting. The Subdivision Committee will meet to consider the following items: 1. Docket No. 07080005 ADLS Amend: AT &T Signage The applicant seeks approval for 1 new wall sign. The site is located at 900 E 96 St. It is zoned PUD in Parkwood Crossing. Filed by Nancy Long of A -1 Expeditors. Brent Bennett presented for the petitioner. Due to conversion of Cingular to A T T it is necessary to reflect the new name with a new sign. Brent indicated that originally a logo had been intended for the sign, but due to ordinance regulations, the sign will now just have the A T T letters on the sign. Page I of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes Angie Conn indicated that the sign will be seen as black during the day and white at night. The Department recommends approval of this item. Carol Schleif made a motion to approve Docket No. 07080005 ADLS Amend: AT &T Signage Sally Shapiro seconded the motion Approved 3 0 2. Docket No. 07080023 ADLS Amend: Sundown Gardens Signage The applicant seeks approval for 1 new monument sign. The site is located at 13400 Old Meridian St. It is zoned OM/MM. Filed by Todd Erb of Sundown Gardens. Todd Erb presented for Sundown Gardens. This is a landscape and garden business. They are petitioning for a new sign. The current sign is very tall and outdated. They are going to go with a lower monument type sign. Mr. Erb showed on a visual the color scheme used on the new sign. The sign will meet the required 60 degree angle for a two directional sign. Angie Conn, the petitioner has satisfied the Department's concern about the 60 degree angle, so the Department recommends that the Committee send this forward with a favorable recommendation. Carol Schleif made motion to approve Docket No. 07080023 ADLS Amend: Sundown Gardens Signage Sally Shapiro seconded the motion. Approved 3 -0 3. Docket No. 07080034 ADLS Amend: Springmill Medical Office Building Phase II— Signage The applicant seeks approval for 1 new wall sign. The site is located at 200 W. 103r St. It is zoned B -3. Filed by Paul Reis of Bose, McKinney Evans, LLP. Paul Reis of Bose, McKinney Evans presented for the petitioner. He was accompanied by David George of Kite Realty Group, the developer of the current building and the second phase to this building. Mr. Reis indicated that it is his belief everyone has received an information booklet on this site. The site is located at 103r and Pennsylvania which has a very large roundabout. This portion of this building will be owned by a different development entity and will be developed exclusively for the Midwest Eye Institute. They have submitted the site plan showing where the second wing will be added. It matches the existing wing. Building elevations that show the wall signage for the IU Medical Group as well as the Midwest Eye Institute have been included. The specifications for the sign are under Tab 4. This sign is approximately 74.8 sq. ft., 90 sq. ft. is permitted. Angie Conn indicated that the sign does comply with the sign ordinance, so the Department recommends that the Committee approve this item. Page 2 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes Carol Schleif made a motion to approve Docket No. 07080034 ADLS Amend: Springmill Medical Office Building Phase II— Signage Sally Shapiro seconded the motion. Approved 3 -0 4. Docket No. 07050013 PP: Forestal Estates Minor Subdivision TABLED TO OCT. 2 The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 3 lots on 2.33 acres. The applicant also seeks the following subdivision waiver request: Docket No. 07050019 SW SCO Chapter 6.03.19 Access to Collector Roads The site is located at the northeast corner of 141S St. and Ditch Rd. and is zoned S- 1 /Residence. Filed by Stacey Fouts of DeBoy Land Development Services, Inc. 5. Docket No. 07070010 PP: Trillium TABLED TO OCT. 2 The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 57 residential lots on 32.447 acres. The site is located at 2555 W 131S St. and is zoned S -2 /Residence. Filed by Dennis Olmstead of Stoeppelwerth Assoc, Inc. 6. Docket No. 07070024 Z: SW Old Town C -2 Rezoning The applicant seeks approval to rezone 57 parcels from R -2 /Residence, B -1 /Business, B- 2 /Business, B -3 /Business and I -1 /Industrial to C -2 /Old Town. The sites are located in Old Town and along Third Avenue SW. Filed by the Department of Community Services. Mike Hollibaugh presented for the Department. He reviewed information that can be found in the information packets the Committee received. Aerial photographs are also included. Carol Schleif, asked if Mike could give an update on what projects are in the works for Carmel, i.e., in the Ameritech area. Mike Hollibaugh, shared with the Committee some plans for the northern end of the map. On the National City Bank side, bank officials and the CRC have been talking about a project that would be a two -phase project, which would have the existing bank building replaced by new multi -story building which would be similar to the one that exists across the street on the southeast quadrant. A timeline has not been set. To the west, where the VFW is the and Tuesday Morning is under discussion. Mr. Hollibaugh indicated that his understanding is that Hearthview controls in various ways the entire block with the exception of the VFW. Mike shared that Les Olds, Director of the Redevelopment Committee has made contact with the VFW. Adrienne Keeling continued the presentation. It is her understanding that the VFW's main concern is the "grandfathering" status and would just like to be left alone, they would like to remain where they are. They would like a letter from our Department, which the Department is willing to provide to them that explain that we will not bother Page 3 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes them if they want to remain as they are. The C2 does not affect them. Adrienne indicated she could provide them with a letter. Mike Hollibaugh, regarding the Main and Monon properties, Tom Lazzara is here and he has been speaking with the CRC regarding an idea that would involve multiple story buildings and would be mixed use in nature, which is consistent with C2 zoning. Along Rangeline, the Indiana Design Center building, this is the underground parking which is the City's portion of the project for that and is currently under construction. The fire station and police garage and the old water works, is City owned property and is included in this and Barrett /Stokley who owns AMLI Old Town is interested in expanding their project, so we will include that and some of the surrounding properties. Carol Schleif asked if the AMLI Old Town apartments want to continue. Mike responded he is unsure of the specific project. It is his understanding that they are speaking with Mr. Olds. Les Olds, Executive Director of the Carmel Redevelopment Commission. He stated that the CRC is looking at the possibility of tearing down the three garages behind AMLI and building a 3 story structure with retail on the first floor, apartments on the second and third floor and looking at building an elevated deck within the inside of that enclosure to provide extra parking that will be needed. The developer would also look with favor to expanding south, should the private property to the south, which consists of, one small retail place and a truck repair shop that could be added to the same type of project with retail and more apartments. Sally Shapiro asked if the parking deck would only be for the apartments. Les Olds responded that since they are taking out the garages we are losing cars, so the thought was that by adding a second deck in there all the apartment dwellers could park on the second deck and the first level would be public parking for the Old Town Arts District. We would help support that as long as we got the public parking spaces. The two parcels that Les was speaking about the small retail and the auto repair shop are on the southwest corner of 1 st Street SW and I st Ave and these are not part of this rezone. Any new project would need to come back through the Commission. Rick Ripma asked about a small parcel on 1S Street SW Rick thought this parcel had been taken on out, but it is still showing on the map. Mike Hollibaugh indicated that the Department had been willing to take that out at the last Plan Commission meeting. He indicated it was the hope of the Department that it would facilitate moving the project on that night, so when that did not happen, it was hoped that it could be an opportunity to talk it through, to see whether it made sense to take it out. Mike has spoken with Sue Westermeier, her expressed reason for not supporting moving it on was she felt things were being pulled out without any good reason. Mike indicated the property owner was not pleased with that. We see this area as transitional and on that same street you have the Historical Museum and the properties to Page 4 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes the south are already converting to uses other than single family residential, including Bub's Breakfast. It is not a pristine residential area, not that it is not worth fighting for, but the fact that we are rezoning it to a more dense classification, does not necessarily undermine it either. Rick Ripma questioned why not just rezone the whole area? Mike responded that they are working with one owner on a parcel. He also discussed property behind the Monon and Main development, which also is not included in this rezone. Carol Schleif asked what is being proposed there. Tom Lazzara, One of the Owners and Managing Partner of Main and Monon spoke to the Committee. Tom referred to a visual that the Committee has that reflects the corner of Main and Monon which is to the west of Bazbeaux's and to the south of Bub's, as you look to the left on the visual you are looking down the Monon. On the second sheet of the rendering you will see the first floor space lay out and you will see the Monon and West Main St. designated. On the drawing you will see 2 vacant lots, if you look to the south of space 2 you will see the balance of the lot on the Monon. Mr. Lazzara spoke about the remaining parcels. He indicated that there are 4 parcels, although he only showing 3. He indicated on the visual the parcels that remain. The rendering is strictly a proposal. Tom was quite clear to the Committee that this will be a commericial building. We have been very concerned about parking in Carmel, so we purchased additional parcels directly behind which you can see in your package, we have also purchased a parcel across the street. Tom clarified some confusion over the property west of Bub's. He is the sole owner of that property. That is a completely different project and unrelated to this. Tom discussed spot zoning; Bub's Breakfast was a residence up until it became Bub's Breakfast. There is also a CPA on that street. A recent home was removed and individuals planted flowers behind Bub's Breakfast and there are currently one or two homes on the market in that area at much higher than residential prices. Main and Monon paid considerably higher than residential pricing for the two parcels behind the building. Carol Schleif asked if there will be enough parking. Tom replied that yes they do have enough to meet the requirement, Carol asked why they purchased the other two lots. Tom indicated that he was aware of a problem in Broad Ripple and Zionsville and other places where there have been buildings erected, tenants move in and then they move out because of lack of parking. He hopes to attract a high end restaurant to that corner of Main and Monon. He owns a liquor license and we feel there will be a requirement for valet parking, so we do not plan a structure on those two back lots. We will also propose at some point that we gain access to the back street out the back rather than causing further congestion on Main Street. There might be ample opportunity to open up the back street for an exit area. Page 5 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes Rick Ripma asked if they had tried to buy the lot on the corner. Tom responded that they have been in negotiations off and on with that parcel. Tom indicated that he asked that these parcels be included. He asked the City, and asked to be included in the CRC, that is why he included the additional lot, because he owned it. It made sense, since these were the parcels that Main and Monon owns and eventually it appears that this area will be transitional, considering you already have Bub's Breakfast, the train station, and the CPA. Tom envisions in the long run that the residential will end at the new street which is 3r street, the roundabout street and the west will remain residential. Discussion was held relative to how many parking spots would be needed for the restaurant, etc. Tom responded that he is not at that stage of planning yet. Tom stated that this development is still in development. Les Olds stepped into the conversation to inform the Committee that on the corner across from Bazbeaux's which is referred to as the Hearthview Property, the CRC is planning to build a 300 car parking structure on that corner as an infill surrounded by retail and living units. 200 of those spaces is meant for public parking in the Arts District and across the street at AMLI we are looking at another 100 parking spaces for the public, plus on street parking. We are making a concentrated effort wherever we go to build parking, on street parking and parking structures. Sally Shapiro, asked if this is not spot zoning, what is the zoning of some of the other places are surrounding it. It looks like spot zoning, even if you have a home business The Committee discussed the feasibility of all lots being rezoned. Tom Lazzara— indicated that even if the one lot is unable to be rezoned the other two lots are important to his project. Carol Schleif reviewed the purpose of the Comp Plan and how this should guide us in terms of looking at continuity of neighborhoods. The massing of the buildings in this area, while not gorgeous are consistent with the Plan. While this could stand to be updated, but as far as the buildings along the street and creating a streetscape, to have half the buildings turn into a parking lot. Carol feels that removing these homes is inconsistent with maintaining a viable neighborhood. Carol referred to infill guidelines for Indianapolis; she refers to that a lot of the time. However, they talk about principles of urban planning that are common, where you take buildings and you take them down and put in parking, you have a gap. This is an inconsistency with what is going on in that neighborhood. Carol agrees that something else can be done there, but, she has a problem with this solution. She suggests that another way be found, rather than destroying the neighborhood. Tom believes that the duplex purchased next to his property on the Monon sold for over $400,000 and I would suggest to you that this is not a residence, and that is not residential pricing, so obviously this was purchased to do something with. Carol this is fine if he can get another use for it. She has no concerns with this along the Monon. The massing of that neighborhood has been established and even if we don't like it, it is what it is, and I think tearing down two out of four buildings is she has major problems with that. Page 6 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes Les Olds indicated one of the residents of that little neighborhood come to see him, she was speaking for herself and two other neighbors and their comment was, "how do we get rezoned to C2" as an individual residence. Sally Shapiro indicated that this is important, why was not a door to door done to ask residents if they wanted to be in that, some of the comments was that it seemed so spotty and there was not a good effort made to go to see if we could not do the whole thing. Les stated he told the resident that she needed to gather her neighbors that are interested in C2 and contact Mike Hollibaugh to express interest. The Committee had a lengthy discussion regarding the possibility and strategies for rezoning the entire area surrounding Monon and Main to C2. Monon and Main is a critical area and the CRC is very interested in these properties for development. Discussion revolved around massing, keeping the massing during transition, parking availability, with the addition of underground parking. Also, the Committee asked for clarification on whether neighbors need to be notified on zoning changes. It was important for Committee members to understand why the whole area could not be done at one time. Mike Hollibaugh indicated that it could be done without neighbors agreeing to the rezone, however, the City does not like to do business that way. However developers are reluctant to jump until zoning is clarified. Mr. Olds indicated that discussion has been held with some property owners who would like to keep their homes and he has suggested to them to start looking for infill lots in old Carmel that they could identify as a possible relocation site. There is a possibility that if a commercial developer would like to purchase their land, compensation toward moving the home, buy contributing to the purchase of infill land or the actual moving of the home could be negotiated. Carol Schleif initiated conversation regarding the type of buildings that may be developed. She indicated she was pleased with the Evan Lurie building and the way it steps back to help with the human scale. Les Olds indicated that in discussions with developers they are talking about stepping back 10 ft., 12 ft. and creating patios for the residential units above. Les informed the Committee that the CRC has been talking with the VFW regarding their building for about a year and half. Some ideas that have been discussed are possibly incorporating them into the Hearthview project and building them a new VFW hall facility on the first floor, if they would then surrender their property to the developer who will then build on top of the VFW building two additional floors of residential and /or parking. This subject then turned the discussion to the height requirements of C2 4 stories or 60 ft. which means if you have mezzanines you can go up that high and still quality. Carol had serious concerns regarding the height of some of these building. She shared a visual with the Committee that she did showing how height would affect privacy and sun rights of individuals living in the area. Carol continued to share with the group he renderings of how buildings would look step backs. She feels this is critical when going from residential Page 7 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes to commercial. Adrienne Keeling brought to the attention of the Committee on a visual two small parcels at the south end of the Indiana Design Center, she indicated those were inadvertently left off of the public notice last month, so they have been advertised for public hearing next month. If this docket number comes back as old business in September, we will have public hearing for the 2nd parcel and will ask to suspend the rules and send them along with the rest. Carol Schleif made a motion to approve Docket No. 07070024 Z: SW Old Town C -2 Rezoning With the conditions that the three lots on Is SW are removed and that the Redevelopment Commission keep an eye on and do sections when projects come in to make sure that privacy issues are not a problem and that sun rights are also taken care of Sally Shapiro seconded the motion Approved 3 -0 7. Docket No. 07050023 OA: Monon Trail Overlay Zone The applicant seeks to adopt Chapter 231-1: Monon Trail Overlay Zone into the Carmel Zoning Ordinance. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services Adrienne Keeling presented for the Department. She informed the Committee that in their packets are four items, two of which are the latest version of the overlay. One has red lines the other does not, so it just depends on your viewing preference which one you want to read. The other is a highlighted Use Table. The highlighted areas show zoning districts that would fall in both the urban and natural areas of the Monon Overlay; and the fourth document are excerpts of a study that we did to help us envision what a widened Monon Trail would look like in the center section between City Center and Old Town. The Trail is very crowded in this area and there has been some consensus that the Trail will have to be widened in some manner or fashion in this area and so we commissioned a study to look at various considerations of how the Trail could look. Since the last committee meeting, I have received just a few comments and I believe everyone was copied on Jay Dorman's response, that he did not have any issues with the version of the Overlay. One of the outstanding issues was the question of uses along the trail and we can talk about that. Adrienne reviewed changes. Purpose Intent and Authority no change Application Procedure Carol Schleif indicated she was curious about the DP part She has listed some things that we keep asking for i.e. cross section drawings, aerials, overlays. We do not receive these items in a consistent manner. Carol requested that we amend Chapter 24. Adrienne indicated that this was possible, however, due to many projects in the works, it will be a number of months. Carol will work on a rough draft and send to Adrienne for review and revision. Adrienne than reviewed Chapter 23 H.01 she indicated that on page 2 generally Page 8 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes the sections highlighted in yellow have been changed, this represents the most recent changes. This area represents the urban section, properties that abut the Monon Greenway from 1 st street NW and properties that abut the Monon Greenway from 146 street to Ist Street NW. Carol Schleif indicated she would like to leave the option open to having 3 sections on the Monon. She suggested subdividing the urban section as outlined above; we are going to need some differentiation between City Center part and northern urban areas. Adrienne stated that the character differences are there today and probably by virtue of the City Center project being so large, that no one will be able to replicate it. However, Carol stressed building heights and set backs should be reflected. Carol reviewed a visual with the Committee, showing the proposed 12 ft. proposed Monon with a 2 ft. shoulder between them. What we have now in the in the overlay is these volumes and as you can see is not very natural, it is a huge volume. What we have now for building height and set back and the feeling of what goes on in here is very different from the naturalistic. Adrienne stated that she did not believe they were changing in the naturalistic section of the heights. Carol indicated that 35 ft. is acceptable in R2 zoning. Adrienne that can be done today, Carol yes but that is why it is important to address this now, because the overlay will supersede what is there. The natural area is not going to be changing very much, except how it is zoned. The zoning allows much more that will be built. Carol shared what could be built with R2 zoning. There are many things listed for the natural area that we would not want built there. Carol feels we should have a 50 ft setback from the right of way because that is what is in keeping with what is there, it will keep vegetation and when you take into consideration 20 or 30 feet of tractor space to get a building in you would be trashing a lot of space. That is what is there in a natural area, but to do this drawing made it clear why Village Green and a couple of other things started happening. All they did was change the building set back and they are right up on the Monon, so there was a lot of flak over that. That is the same situation below 1 11 Carol reviewed typical houses and seeing what the actual set backs were there. She indicated that the Committee needs to think about the set backs in the natural area. Carol went through, the northern urban area, beginning at the Civic Center Carol showed a drawing of what is proposed at the Civic Center area. It is monumental, they are big buildings, so how they are spaced will determine how human scale they will be. When the space between buildings gets taller than it is wide it begins to feel uncomfortable and you are getting there with this. She proposed that if you are not going to have any stepping back, then you need to be a 150 ft. in order to keep human scale and that is a priority. Adrienne asked if this meant between buildings Carol answered 100 ft. between buildings with the Monon in between and that is if you go straight up to maintain human scale. Carol indicated that 150 ft. is very wide and that is a point of discussion in itself. However, realizing that that is a wide space, she started looking how it would look if we step the building back, what does that do for us. Some of this will depend on how tall the building is because, you can step back once or twice, she indicated on her visual what this would do. Also, if you have a restaurant on Page 9 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes the Monon you have to step back about 25 ft. because you need room for tables and circulation and the other thing that does is start to differ your you get variety in your building frontage. That is using the 66 ft. wide proposed section, that would indicate that we should step some of those buildings back at the first or second floor level. Adrienne Keeling stated the right of way itself would be 66 ft and it is in many places along the trail. We are also proposing an additional 12 ft. on either side, so that would be 90 ft. from facade to facade so if we are proposing no more than 42 feet in height it would be only roughly be half the distance. Carol retorted that she took this out of what the Department is proposing and I have to tell you unless there is a step this is too tall and is not going to feel like the Monon, this is just too tall. The four stories straight up, nobody is going to sit and read a book under a tree next to that building. The Civic Center is very monumental, and hopefully the buildings are spaced accordingly and the drawings appear to be gorgeous, but on the Monon, it is a special spot and we need elbow room, so I just did these drawings based on what is proposed and it tells me that these buildings need to set back, whether it is at the first or second floor. Mike Hollibaugh discussed whether to generalize like that; it doesn't have to be one story, two stories all the way along the Monon. Carol stated that this is about human scale and when you get into a space that is more vertical than horizontal, it is more of human scale issues that can you build it. Carol This is centuries old Mike stated there are century old places that are two story buildings that are some of the most loved places on the planet Carol responded they are in very urban places Mike both American and European cities have this. Carol responded this is in keeping with the urban level we have here, downtown Indianapolis it is a different animal, but the Monon is very special. When you get into a vertical space it is not what the Monon is. I know its European, but that is not why the overlay came to be. Adrienne reemphasized my only point is just be taking these dimensions its not more vertical than it is horizontal, if you have 45 ft, 66 ft. plus 12 ft. between building. Carol stated, I asked you to do a section and you did not do it, so I did them. Those these are not the dimensions do not meet the overlay I had to go in do this on a computer and match the overlay. If you go back over the pages it does not match. Adrienne pointed out to Carol that we are only dealing with the right of way Carol right of way, setbacks, those I used those numbers and she feels they do not match. Mike asked what is human scale again Carol in this case it tends to be wider than it is tall and its more and it has to do with basic sighting of a building and I now that is not what you guys learn in school but the success of a building and how you feel inside a building and outside a building is critical to the success of the building, and in this case it is critical to the success of the Monon. Mike responded that understands what Carol is saying, he indicated he has a bit of a design background as well, so I think you are generalizing much like an ordinance tends to generalize and I do think that there are accommodations made for set backs, it is not at the second floor level, I believe it is at the 3r floor level where set back is initiated in the set back. Mike disagrees about what exactly what isn't human scale. Carol Page 10 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes indicated on the visual how when you step back it opens up the space that is exactly what you need, it gets your buildings close together but allows you not to make people feel overwhelmed by the height of it. I hate to see us make mistakes and realizing it later when we don't have to. Carol went on to discuss the area from 126 street to Main street. She indicated that the Monon does some funky things all the way up the range is 24 ft. to over 100 ft., a 102 at one spot. The majority of is plus or minus 100 ft. one spot is down to 80, however that spot will be part of C2, so we will have some latitude to do something about that. Carol reviewed other areas that will be in the C2. She indicated another section that is 24 ft, which is like the natural section and it is right next to C 1 which is very grand and monumental and at some point I think when those final two properties bike shop and north of there when they finally join the good group, that might be the time to make the Monon more consistent top to bottom from the City Center all the way up to the bank. Carol what we need is a 100 ft. ride section you can see how open that is and not intimidating in any way. If you start to go 3 4 stories you will again start to be a vertical space, though 100 ft. is a lot better than the 66ft that is proposed. How to get an open natural human scale building and sidewalk is not rocket science, so is there any chance to get 100 ft from Main on down to City Center. Carol would like to have this could we have sort of like a thorough fare plan approach, when things are redeveloped that is what the easements will try to be, like roads. Rick Ripma are we not at 90 feet now Adrienne from building facade to building facade we are at 90 ft. Mike stated that although this sounds grand it is good to remember that this is a pedestrian way, not a boulevard, not for automobiles, it is very pedestrian, the wider it gets and then buildings can get taller to balance the space, but Mike believes 90 ft. is very reasonable. The esplanade plan which lays out conceptual cross sections, it was well thought through. The urban section is 66 ft. Adrienne reviewed what the Department would be asking through the Thoroughfare Plan process to get a consistent 66 ft. from top bottom 96 street to 146 street where it's not having no less than 66 ft. 33 ft. half upon your development for all of it the natural section is 12 ft. asphalt path and 2 ft. crushed stone on either side. That was an attempt to regulate that in the zoning ordinance, we have taken that out and we will put those details in the road design, even though it is really a trail, we like to keep those in the thorough fare plan since those are typically public property, not private property. So what we are proposing then is there is no design or trail cross section in the ordinance itself, and that the 33ft half would be the right of way and. Carol stated this is 90 ft. but much tighter in the natural area than anything that is there. Adrienne, except in Old Town north of main they are all 50 ft. going up 200 ft. There is 50 ft. from the right of way that is people's back yards and side yards. That is what exists there now, so to bring it to 30 ft. is half, which is a substantial change. Adrienne this is more than would be allowed now, only 20 ft. would be allowed today. Further discussion began with Carol stating that is what the zoning says but this is an opportunity to make the natural part stay like it is which is natural. If you are 30 feet from the right of way that area can all get trampled when you do Page 11 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes construction; back hoes and all that stuff just trash the area, that is why you have to put up snow fences all the time and 20 or 30 feet, those guys will drive over anything, so I really think 50 ft. and maintaining what is there is critical to keeping the natural section going there. Carol referred back to Village Green, they are right up to the Monon and when that gets built it we will wonder why they are so close. We need to work on this some more. These sections are the heart of what is going to keep the natural section natural and it is so critical, it is one of the very first things you do when you are designing a building. Judy Hagan, Parks Department asked for clarification on where the 30 ft. in the natural area came from Adrienne indicated it was just an extra set back above and beyond what would be required today. Judy so how was 30 ft. arrived at is there anything magic about 30 ft. Judy indicated her goal is to not have the same issues that occurred on 136 street and it is unclear until Cobblestone gets done, whether we have successfully protected what we wanted to do there, because that is just 15 ft. Their sidewalk is within the 15 ft., which is why Judy requested non access easement to make sure they have to stay out of the trees like they promised. The goal is to protect the natural vegetation that is there, is 30 ft. enough or do we need 40 ft. Adrienne looked at the aerials after one of our CCAT meetings, one of the requests was to see where does this right of way line where does the 33 ft. half fall into the tree line and the second part of that is how much further than that does it need to be protected for the typical tree line. This may have been where the 33 ft. came from. Carol you have to remembers that the tractors and these guys don't care, they don't care, they go a straight line from one spot to another and if there is a tree or something in the way, it is toast. You have to have extra room, and I think when Village Green and Cobblestone go up, it will be more obvious then. Adrienne we will have construction enforcement, just making sure that these fences and boundary markers are in place from the beginning. Carol but if you don't have enough room, fences won't matter. Judy we don't want to make it necessarily that the natural cover keeps expanding in someone's yard. What you are getting is a visual barrier, people on the trail don't feel that their backyards are on view for everybody, but also for folks using the greenway aren't seeing laundry. John Molitor indicated it was important to know where the 30 ft. came from. Adrienne stated that she will review the process and let the Committee know and will get the drawing from the aerial and will verify the dimensions. Carol discussed the infill guidelines for Indy, she feels we could tweak and adopt for Carmel. Sally asked if there was any concern that the urban section only goes to 1S street NW, shouldn't that be a little bit further north? Adrienne indicated that this was discussed early on with Judy and others that we felt that it was ok to stop there because currently north of there is residential. If it changes we can amend. Carol if you widen the building set back to 50 ft, be big enough, so if we want to make it more urban it would not be a right of way issue. Mike on the east side you have road right of way that is a redevelopment there will back anyway. Adrienne only change in the Plan Commission approval process was to clarify that DP and ADLS would only be mandatory in the urban section, but then, in the Page 12 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes natural section zoning M3 is the only class that would require an ADLS. Adrienne indicated that she did not believe the Commission wanted to get into residential development plan after the initial subdivision plat. Discussion was held on whether the City wants to impose and ADLS requirement on residential subdivision. Adrienne gave background overlays Adrienne reviewed the Use Table visual. Carol asked about a couple of the permitted uses, i.e., mobile home court. Mike responded that these are usually taken care by the cost of the land. Most developers want to make the most for their money. Property values will dictate what will be built I this area. Adrienne indicated that on page 3 of the visual you will see the uses that are prohibited. Carol will prepare a list of uses she feels are not appropriate and email it to Mike for distribution. Carol asked that something be put in there for outdoor restaurants bump your building back 25 ft so that there is enough room for tables and circulation? This would be only for outdoor seating where the glass pulls away very transparent this would be acceptable Carol began discussion of the IBC code on commercial buildings. If buildings are closer than 30 feet you can't have windows, you need to have shutters; you need to sprinkle your buildings along with other things to do. These are fire safety issues. Building separation is always 30ft. This would affect property between City Center and Old Town. Judy asked where there could be a conflict between the IBC code and zoning requirements. On page 3 on the bottom, this was called Trail Specifications and we are not calling it Greenway Access Point only change is outlined on page 4 —looking for a non access agreement. The term "Director" is used thorough out Judy indicated that the access points have to be build to Park Board Standards so which director is the decider. Adrienne indicated that the Access Points would be build to Park Board standards, but the actual interval, where they make sense in a project or how close, or how spread out they are would be more of the Plan Commission/DOCS realm. Judy indicated that this is what they are trying to get away from, with everybody making decisions without the larger context, so that may be one you want to think about. We want to make sure there is a consistent decision maker, so what don't have everybody putting their little gates in. Adrienne will look into this. Building orientation simple language one thought, since last meeting and the last draft came was to possibly put a maximum building footprint along the trail, so we are not getting really large Adrienne suggested 15,000 this would be the same size as Walgreens. This would bring down the scale of buildings. Adrienne would like to re -title this from Building Orientation to Building Orientation and Footprint and then adding the maximum footprint A B indicating that a portion of the building must face the Monon and that 15,000 sq. ft. would be the maximum footprint. This would be carried into the natural area, but without restrictions on having a building face the Monon. The facade set back is set at 12 ft. Carol proposed 20 ft. C2 should be limited to 42 ft. At the AMLI building at Main and Monon it is just over 40 ft. and 3 stories. Carol feels this is an awful building. This is just a point of reference 42 ft. is ample on the greenway John Molitor suggested that the department take anther look at the building height Page 13 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes and see if 42 ft. is too tall —Carol thinks it should be 2 stories This docket item will be continued to the October 2n meeting. 8. Docket No. 07020020 OA: US 31 421 Overlay Architectural Design Amendment The applicant seeks to Amend the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 23B: US Highway 31 Corridor Overlay Zone and Chapter 23C: US Highway 421— Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone, in order to amend the Architectural Design Requirements. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services. Adrienne Keeling presented for the Department. The latest ordinance is dated August 24, 2005. Similar to the last docket anything in this version that is highlighted in yellow represent changes made since the last Committee meeting. Adrienne began with page 1, no additional changes. Carol questioned about exhibits, the items that will go in Chapter 24, yet we talk about site plans renderings and so forth as requirements, do these things come out These would be special to the overlay. Anything listed in this chapter would be special to the overlay, and then anything in Chapter 24 would be general requirements for everything. Carol asked about fencing Carol showed a visual of a fence at Clay Terrace, she noted that it is sagging;. Can we change fence requirements to be 26 ft. a unit of the metal fencing instead of 6 feet? Discussion was held relative to any requirements for the replacement and /or maintenance of cedar fences. All fences shall be properly maintained and repaired as necessary. Carol stated that if folks thought they needed to replace their fence every 10 years, they may go for a more maintenance free type of fence. Rick Ripma stated that if the intention of the fence is block view, a metal fence would not be serviceable. Carol indicated you would have to have landscaping with it, are there any metal fences that you can't see through. John Molitor indicated that this would require a person to be hired to enforce the fence maintenance. It was determined this would not be feasible solution. Discussion went on to discuss SR 421. Sally Shapiro brought up it is required along 421 between the out lot and the road itself that there should be two rows of trees, has that been forgotten? Two rows of trees Adrienne indicated that there is a 30 ft. green belt buffer requirement in that overlay and then on top of that if there are parking lots involved there is parking lot perimeter landscaping required, but there is not anything in there that would require that the planting be in two rows. It may be that was how it ended up. Sally the northern end near Weston Pointe it is pretty sparse on trees up there and they are still doing their out lots. John Molitor reviewed the ordinance it does not require two rows of trees, it may appear that way due to the number of plantings that are required. Carol discussed how when Kohl's and Home Depot came in it was not possible to screen enough to help the people out who had to look at that, so she is proposing the step back. How can we get a very large building with a flat facade to help conceal— i.e., larger trees, fence, if it is stepped don't know what to do. We do have a footprint of 85,000 sq. ft. Adrienne asked from what tolerance for visible from the residence. Is it visible from an upstairs window, is it visible from the street, from the property line. Carol stated upstairs is fair game, but if it is visible from a living room. Page 14 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes Building heights for proposed buildings that are visible from the first floor residential neighbors shall be no more that 1 '/2 stories or 18 ft. high on the elevation nearest the residential neighborhood, but may step up one additional story every 25 ft. It should also say if the site lines, if the back of the building is visible from the residential area. Adrienne, is a step in the building going to do anything? Sally we require cornices, brickwork you require detailing on all sides. Maybe we need a story is generally is usually 10 ft. Adrienne you are not opposed to the height of the building, it is just the design. A one story screen would work also, if we could get mature enough plantings, so that all you see is the top half. Adrienne Carol will come up with a draft for Adrienne from what you drafted originally, I thought your problem was with building height and if you are just trying to variation of the facade in particular in the back portion. On the elevation facing the residential neighborhood. Discussion was held regarding the how high the buildings should be allowed to go. Also, neighboring areas, i.e., Pearson Ford were discussed and what their zoning is we should have a maximum height what is the medical building 3 stories Adrienne will check plans and get height we would not to prohibit this type of building, need to put in a transition between commercial and residential. Building height max should be match medical building. Adrienne please keep in mind that plan commission packets go out on Friday it is a challenge. If the committee if we send this on with the Department Report. Building heights for the proposed buildings that are visible from a residential neighborhoods shall be no more than 1 story high on the elevation nearest to the residential area, but may step up an additional story for every 20 ft. inward. Carol under "K" suitability of building materials. Mike wants to hold off on the white LEED controls, Carol asked if LEED will be coming out in its own package. Adrienne indicated that the Department is working on overall policies right now, City wide that no only deal with private construction, but with City policies. We are trying to get those in order and from there, and then choosing things that will apply to the zoning ordinance in general. We don't know yet if it is going to be it may be a Green Chapter or amendments to include items we want. Carol we are calling out red brick what is the difference between calling for red brick and asking for a white roof? Adrienne will make sure to carry over the fence requirements to this also. Green space? This would be with LEED policies. Regarding hotels we have looked into and we can take care of in the Chap. 31. In the US 31 Overlay that calls out retail uses, and in the past we have applied that to mean restaurants, any kind of retail. However, it could be argued that our use table having restaurants and other uses not under the retail category. Restaurants fall under the cultural and entertainment uses. We have not had the problem before. John M. is there a problem with hotel. Hotels are a separate use category full service hotels are not excluded from the overlay. If we want to change Chap. 31, which has already been advertised for hearing, the Department would not be comfortable we can do that Plan commission must see it. Anything that affects the zoning ordinance must go through the Plan commission. It needs to be dealt with it at the Plan Commission level. Carol Schleif made a motion to approve Docket 07020020 OA US 31 and US 421 Architectural Design Amendments. With the following conditions: Under US 31 Perimeter fence columns will be changed to 26 ft on center. Page 15 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417 September 4, 2007 Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Minutes Under US 421 changes include fence requirements the same as US 31; under building height will include maximum 3 story building height for the overlay; wording to the effect of Building heights for the proposed buildings that are visible from a residential neighborhoods shall be no more than 1 story high on the elevation nearest to the residential area, but may step up an additional story for every 20 ft. inward or first structural bay which ever is greater. Sally Shapiro seconded the motion. Approved 3 -0 9. TABLED TO OCT. 2: Docket No. 07010008 Z: 116 Guilford Rezone 11 ri Residenee. The site isYeeated at1441 S. Guilf6fd D.1 Filed by t he Cafmel Dep Sally Shapiro motioned to adjourn the meeting Carol Schleif seconded the motion. Meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. File: SUB- 2007- 0904.doc Page 16 of 16 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417