Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 01-21-03o o �y�< ON H rl I City of Carmel CARMEL /CLAY PLAN COMMISSION JANUARY 21, 2003 MINUTES The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel /Clay Plan Commission met at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers immediately following an Executive Committee at 6:30 PM in the Caucus Rooms. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Members in attendance were: Marilyn Anderson; Stephanie Blackman (late arrival;) Jerry Chomanczuk; Dave Cremeans; Leo Dierckman; Dan Dutcher; Wayne Haney; Ron Houck; Pat Rice; Paul Spranger; and Wayne Wilson, thereby establishing a quorum. Marilyn Anderson introduced the newest member of the Commission, Pam Campbell Willliams, who begins a four -year term as a mayoral appointment. The minutes of the December 2002 meeting were approved as submitted. John Molitor gave a status report on the Leeper Electric property at 131 Street and US 31. There was a jury verdict valuing the property at $675,000 that the City would ultimately be obligated to pay to the landowner. The City, in turn, would become the owner of the approximately 4 -acre parcel. The landowner has filed a motion to correct errors with the Court and the motion has been set for hearing next month but will probably be postponed. It appears that the case is being positioned to go to the Appellate Court. Jon Dobosiewicz reported that item lk. is requested for Tabling by the Department until the February meeting due to lack of submission of informational materials. In addition, an item not placed on the Agenda but notice sent to the public, Docket 186- 02 -PP, Laurel Oaks Primary Plat, and the attached Subdivision Waivers has been Withdrawn by the applicant. Election of Officers: Leo Dierckman nominated Paul Spranger for President, seconded by Jerry Chomanczuk. Ron Houck moved to close the nominations, seconded by Pat Rice. Paul Spranger was elected President of the Commission by Unanimous Consent. S: \Memorandum of Meeting \P1anCommission \2003 \jan Pat Rice nominated Marilyn Anderson for Vice President, seconded by Dave Cremeans. Ron Houck moved to close the nominations, seconded by Dave Cremeans. Marilyn Anderson was elected Vice President of the Commission by Unanimous Consent. Marilyn Anderson nominated Pat Rice to serve as the Plan Commission representative to the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals; seconded by Leo Dierckman. Ron Houck moved to close the nominations, seconded by Jerry Chomanczuk. Pat Rice was elected representative to the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals by Unanimous Consent. Dave Cremeans nominated Dianna Knoll to serve as Plan Commission representative to the Hamilton County Plan Commission; seconded by Leo Dierckman. Ron Houck moved to close the nominations; seconded by Wayne Haney. Dianna Knoll was elected representative to the Hamilton County Plan Commission by Unanimous Consent. Marilyn Anderson nominated Leo Dierckman to serve as Plan Commission Member -at- Large, seconded by Pat Rice. Ron Houck moved to close the nominations; seconded by Pat Rice. Leo Dierckman was elected Plan Commission Member -at -Large by Unanimous Consent. I. Public Hear*ngs li. Docket No. 182 -02 PP; Village of Mount Carmel, Section 10 (Primary Plat) The applicant is proposing a 5 -lot subdivision. The site is located at the southwest corner of 146 Street and Village Drive. The site is zoned S -2 /Residence. The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 182 -02a SW SCO 6.3.4 continuation of platted street Filed by Chuck Wright of the Elliot Wright Group, LLC. Chuck Wright of Elliot Wright Group, LLC appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Approval is being requested for a 6 -lot Subdivision located at the southwest corner of 146 Street and Village Drive, commonly known as the Wilfong" property. The property was owned by Ralph Wilfong, purchased by Keith and Sarah March, then purchased by the Elliott Wright Group as to the southern portion of the parcel. Access into the Subdivision is proposed off of Village Drive North. A Subdivision Waiver is S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 2 being requested so that the petitioner will not be required to connect to an existing stub street within the Village of Mount Carmel, known as Amalfi Drive, on the southwest portion of the property. The traffic generated from the six lots would be much safer accessing from the northern portion and the street, cul -de -sac would be much safer for pedestrian traffic. If Amalfi were connected, people would be coming in through the subdivision where traffic is unaccustomed. At this time, the applicant is requesting Primary Plat approval Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to this petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Jon Dobosiewicz provided Department comments. As indicated in the Report, this was noted for a 5 -lot Subdivision —the plat was then re- worked to provide for 6 lots and the notice is adequate based on the legal description provided. The 6 t lot comes in place of the detention area as well as the parcel adjacent to the west. The applicant has appeared before the Technical Advisory Committee. The applicant has also had continuing dialogue with the City Engineer regarding the design of access and some conclusion has now been reached. Comments from Commission Members: Ron Houck asked if the question had been resolved as to the legality of the Subdivision. Jon Dobosiewicz said the inclusion of lot 6 and modification of the adjacent parcel resolved any question. Ron Houck referred to the petition that stated the homeowners on Amalfi are opposed to any improvements on Amalfi. Mr. Houck said he was surprised that no one had shown up to speak to the issue this evening. At this point, a member of the public appeared in anticipation of making public comments; however, the public hearing was formally closed and comments will be addressed at the Committee level. Marilyn Anderson asked if landscape plans were required as a part of this proposal. Jon Dobosiewicz responded that only plats under the ROSO provisions require landscape plans. Dan Dutcher was unsure of the location of Amalfi and asked if there were any new information regarding the trail /sidewalk on 146 Street. Mr. Wright said they have agreed to extend the sidewalk on the west side of Village Drive North to the existing sidewalk on 146 Street. Docket No. 182 -02 PP, Village of Mount Carmel, Section 10 Primary Plat, was referred to the S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 3 Subdivision Committee for further review on February 4, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. 2i. Docket No. 183 -02 PP; Wexley Chase (Primary Plat) The applicant seeks approval of a Primary Plat for a 40 -lot residential subdivision on 29.974± acres. The site is located on the north side of West 126 Street, 1 /2 mile west of Towne Road. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence Estate. The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers for one street: 183 -02a SW SCO 6.3.6 reduced pavement width 183 -02b SW SCO 6.3.6 reduced right -of -way width 183 -02c SW SCO 6.3.7 exceed maximum cul -de -sac length of 600' 183 -02d SW SCO 6.3.15 reduce street centerline curvature 183 -02e SW SCO 8.9.1 elimination of sidewalk (part) Filed by David Warshauer for GWZ -2 Development, LLC. David Warshauer, attorney, 11 South Meridian Street, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Mark Zuckerman and Glenn Garrison of GWZ, LLC were also in attendance. The applicant is seeking Primary Plat approval for a 40 -lot residential Subdivision to be known as Wexley Chase. Wexley Chase is bounded by 126 Street to the south, 141 Street to the north, Shelbourne Road to the west, Towne Road to the east, and across from the new Carmel /Clay Middle School complex and soccer fieldsa 166 -acre campus that will eventually include College Wood Elementary. The property is also bordered on the east by the J.W.Brindle drain and a portion platted as the Village of WestClay. Hayden Run Subdivision is to the north, and Aberdeen Bend Subdivision extends to 131 Street. To the west is a large residence on a 10 -acre parcel buffered by woods. The property consists of approximately 30 acres and is zoned S -1 /Residence. The property is rectangular in shape and about 3 times as long as it is wide. The property has been used primarily for agricultural purposes. There are trees along the western edge, also some along the north, and in the southeast corner. A nice stand of trees has been kept as part of the open space. Currently, there are two barns on the property; one is in bad shape and will be razed, the other is a fairly new pole barn and the owner will re- locate the barn to a new site. GWZ is proposing to develop this property under the Residential Open Space Ordinance with 40 lots for a density of 1.34 units per acre, slightly less than the density in Aberdeen Bend and Hayden Run. The gross amount of open space is 12.14 acres -11.27 acres net after deducting that portion of the pond perimeter that does not qualify under ROSO. The net open space is 37.60 The majority of the open space is located around the perimeter of the site, especially on the west, south, and east. Each of the lots backs up to common area. Wexley Chase will pick up the path from Hayden Run and bring it to Common Area "B" down to 126 Street where a 10 foot wide, multi -use path across the entire length of the site on 126 Street will be constructed. This will connect with the path system being constructed on the school campus. GWZ's Engineers have worked with the Engineers from the School with respect to aligning the S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 4 intersection and the actual construction of improvements within the 126 Street right -of -way as requested by the County Highway Department. All of the open space is directly accessible either from a public street, 126 Street, or one of the internal streets in Wexley Chase. The open space will be visibly open and permanently identifiable as open space for maintenance practices. The open space is undivided by streets or alleys except where necessary for proper traffic circulation at Tuscany Boulevard and Tramm Lane in Aberdeen Bend. The open space will also be free of all buildings and structures and the common area will be maintained as provided by a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions, a draft of which was included in the information booklet. The lots in Wexley Chase are at least 95 feet wide at the building line. The lots are designed for homes with initial prices, including lots, of $280,000 to $350,000. This is a market range for new homes in similarly sized lots in western Clay Township. As a reference point, lots in Long Branch Estates where Pulte is constructing homes at 116 and Shelbourne are priced between $300,000 to $340,000 and those lots are 90 feet wide. In Shelbourne Park, a Drees Home development on 131 Street, the lots are 100 feet wide and the homes are priced from $290,000 to $400,000. An important aspect of this development is that it will serve as the southern terminus of the connector road system that links the various subdivisions in the quadrant between 126 Street and 141 Street and Shelbourne and Towne Roads. As noted in the Department Report, this proposal completes the connector system as contemplated by the Thoroughfare Plan. The westerly stem is called Tramm Lane and includes Wexley Court, a small cul -de -sac. The easterly stem is called Kilkenny Circle and will end short of the Brindle drain area. Rather than a standard cul -de -sac with a bulb of pavement, GWZ has proposed a cul -de -loop that includes approximately 11,000 square feet of green space as its center. The cul -de -loop will serve as a green focal point at the end of the neighborhood and will also allow those lots that face it to front and back up to common area. In order to accomplish this, GWZ has proposed the Subdivision Variances that relate to the area at the end of Kilkenny Circle. The loop creates a travel lane, one -way, around the island. The Ordinance sets standards for travel lanes that are appropriate for through streets for not necessarily a situation such as this that would serve only a few residents. In essence, the waivers relate to the same thing —the substitution of grass for pavement. The first waiver would permit Kilkenny Circle to be 688 feet rather than 600 feet in length. The second waiver requests a reduction in the curvature of Kilkenny Circle around the island from 100 feet to 80 feet. Because this is an island as opposed to a cul -de -sac, there is a center line and the Ordinance provides for center lines of curves of 100 feet. Two of the waivers relate to the width of the right -of -way and pavement around the island. A waiver is requested to reduce the right -of -way width from 50 feet to 40 feet around the island and to reduce the minimum pavement from 26 feet to 20 feet. Finally, a waiver is requested to eliminate the sidewalk on the inside or around the circle in front of those lots. It is unlikely that people would want to walk in a very tight, short circle around the island. The proposed cul -de -loop design has been approved by the Hamilton County Highway Department and the Carmel Fire Department. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 5 The applicant has appeared before the Technical Advisory Committee and has agreed to work with the Carmel /Clay School Corporation and any improvements to 126 Street. GWZ will be widening 126 Street with 3 feet of pavement and 3 feet of shoulder along the entire length. GWZ will also be providing right -of -way and pavement length along the north side of 126 sufficient to create a dedicated left -turn lane from east -bound 126 Street into the Subdivision. At the same time, the School will be providing a dedicated left -turn lane on west -bound 126 Street into the School campus. The landscape plan will be utilizing the mature stand of trees on the property along the north side and the southeast corner. There are also plans to install a substantial amount of trees and variable mounding along 126 Street. Because of the school, the perimeter buffering provided is sufficient for residential to commercial rather than residential to residential. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Department Comments: Jon Dobosiewicz noted a clerical error in the Department Report and paragraph 3 does not apply to this application and should be removed. With the approval of this Subdivision and the expectation that West Park will be connected to the middle school site, there will probably be a pathway connection. This provides a connecting path from 116 Street all of the way to 141 Street, 2 1 /2 miles, half the distance between 96 and 146 Street with six -foot asphalt paths that are outside the right -of -way. This is an accomplishment that deserves recognition. Pat Rice asked about community area and common facility for this project. Dave Warshauer responded that no community area or common facility is planned for this project. The subdivision is not large enough to justify constructing a pool and clubhouse. The open space, the path, and the proximity of the school and soccer field, baseball diamond, etc. will provide a lot of recreational opportunities. The reference to any such facility in the covenants is in error. Marilyn Anderson commented that she was very much in favor of the landscaping and cul -de- loop rather than an asphalt cul -de -sac. Docket No. 183 -02 PP, Wexley Chase Primary Plat was referred to Subdivision Committee for further review February 4, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. 3i. Docket No. 185 -02 DP Amend/ADLS; West Carmel Center, Block D, Lot 3 Applebee's Neighborhood Bar Grill The applicant seeks amended development plan and ADLS approval to construct a restaurant. The site is generally located at the northeast corner of Michigan Road and Commerce Drive. The site is zoned B -3 and is located within the US 421/Michigan Road Overlay Zone. Filed by Troy Terew of Lewis Engineering for Apple Indiana I, LLC. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 6 Troy Terew, 3315 East Main Street, Plainfield of Lewis Enginering appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant. Also in attendance was Vaughn Martin, Nashville, Indiana for Apple Indiana I, LLC. The applicant is seeking approval for the construction of a restaurant facility known as Applebee's Neighborhood Bar Grill in front of the existing Target store at the northeast corner of Michigan Road and Commerce Drive. The ingress /egress is interior to the site, with exit through common entrances on Commerce Drive and the northern entrance of the site. Two variances have been applied for and the petitioner will be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals in February. One variance is for architectural design concerning the length of the wall; the other is for the number of signs on this site (3). Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. There are five signs indicated in the informational packets forwarded to the Plan Commission and clarification was requested as to number and design of the signs. The application for architectural design variance (length of wall) is supported by the Department. The landscaping has been increased significantly from the original submission and meets with the Urban Forester's comments regarding species and location. The Department requests that the Subdivision Committee closely scrutinize the design of the building. The language within the corridor emphasizes that corporate architecture and appearance do not stand out from one building to the next. A single color awning is preferable, perhaps one that might match the light fixtures and other accent colors on the building, and would blend with other characteristics of the corridor. Mr. Martin confirmed that the petitioner is requesting a total of 3 signs —one on the south facia facing 421, the west facia parallel to 421, and a ground sign. Dave Cremeans asked the petitioner to bring samples of the brick to the Committee meeting. Ron Houck referred to an insert from McGraw Edison for parking lot lighting —two fixtures are shown--one totally recessible, one more exposed that would lend more peripheral light spillage. Ron would lean toward the light fixture that is recessed. Ron also asked that the committee pay attention to the architectural detail of the trash enclosure as viewed from Michigan Road. Docket No. 185 -02 DP Amend/ADLS for Applebe's was referred to the Special Study Committee for further review February 4, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. 4i. Docket No. 187 -02 DP Amend/ADLS; Carmel Science Technology Park, Block 12, Lot 5 Linc Systems S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 7 The applicant seeks Development Plan and ADLS Amendment approval to construct a building addition. The site is located at 1402 Chase Court. The site is zoned M- 3/Manufacturing. Filed by Adam Dehart of Keeler Webb Associates for KAT, LLC. Adam DeHart, project manager with Keeler Webb Associates, 486 Gradle Drive, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Ted Azar, President of Linc Systems was also present. The petition was filed by KAT, LLC, the holding company for the property owner. This site is one of six lots developed on Chase Court over the last 8 to 10 years. The property is off Carmel Drive in the Carmel Science Technology Park. All six lots are predominately industrial in nature. This particular piece of property was rezoned to B -6. While it is a business zone, the proposed use and plan filed with the Plan Commission and Town Council for the rezone was for a high density, residential development, similar to the apartments across Guilford. The plan still provides the required bufferyard between the residential use and industrial -type use. At this time, the petitioner is requesting Development Plan Amendment from the original plan filed in 1997. The petitioner is also requesting ADLS Amendment. The petitioner is proposing to reduce the odd -size yard to 60 feet and maintain the landscape buffer as required between the two zones, M- 3/Manufacturing and B -3 /Business. Linc systems is proposing to enclose the industrial -type uses and focus them towards Chase Court as opposed to allowing industrial -type uses being viewed or phased from the residential zone area and Carmel Drive. The end result is an odd shaped building addition that allow Linc Systems to obtain an additional 13,000 square feet for use of their facility, and re- locate the truck docks, (4) that will face Chase Court as opposed to having the truck docks face Carmel Drive. Also included on the truck dock wall, the masonry building materials will be extended the same height as wrapped; there will be an 8 foot wall screen that will be painted of similar building materials as those used in the existing building. There are recommendations for revisions to the construction documents to provide for additional landscaping around the perimeter of the project. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz: The applicant has been cooperative and responsive to the Department's requests regarding the extension of the wall around the dock area. The truck dock is exposed to view from the far northeast corner of the site where there is residential development. With the revised proposal, the truck docks are angled and will be screened from the adjacent use, the Performing Arts Building, and the adjacent parking area. The building materials match the existing proposal and the only other comment would be those of the Commission. The Department is requesting suspension of its Rules of Procedure and acting upon this petition this evening. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 8 Wayne Wilson had questions regarding the creek to the rear of the building and if this proposal would interfere with the creek. Adam DeHart responded that their request for a variance reduces the rear yard from 80+ feet to 60 feet. Within the six foot area is an existing stand of trees and these trees will not be disturbed in any way. The creek runs farther to the west of the property, but there is no intention to construct or do any activity within the 60 -foot area and it will be maintained as existing bufferyard. Ron Houck commented that for the winter months, since these are deciduous trees, the metal part of the building will be highly visible along with noise and truck activity from the loading dock. Ron Houck was in favor of referring this item to committee for further review. Dave Cremeans moved to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to vote on this item this evening, seconded by Pat Rice. The vote was 7 in favor, 4 opposed (Wayne Wilson, Marilyn Anderson, Ron Houck, Jerry Chomanczuk). Motion Denied. Docket No. 187 -02 DP Amend/ADLS, Carmel Science Technology Park, Block 12, Lot 5, Linc Systems was referred to the Special Study Committee for further review February 4, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. 5i. Docket No. 188 -02 DP /ADLS; Dixie Hi -Way Addition, Lot 8 Glenwood LLC The petitioner seeks to convert an existing residence into an office building. The site is located at 10820 North College Avenue. The site is zoned B -1 /Business within the Home Place District Overlay Zone. Filed by Leonard Voight. Leonard Voight appeared before the Commission as the applicant. Mr. Voight is seeking approval to convert an existing residence into an office building located at 10820 North College Avenue. The site plan indicates minimal improvements to the site. The driveway is to be paved and an existing storage barn razed in order to accommodate parking. In addition, the site is in transition to develop within 5 years. The applicant will be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals to develop the property without curbing. Also, the petitioner will be requesting a waiver from landscaping requirements. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. The petitioner appeared before Plan Commission and City Council last summer requesting a rezone from residential to B -1. The rezone afforded the ability to be consistent with the underlying Home Place Business Overlay. The existing zoning S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 9 at the time would have allowed the conversion of the property to duplexes. The Department will be recommending to the BZA to set time limits on the variances to guarantee the opportunity for redevelopment of the site and not leave them open -ended for an allowance that might leave the property under this particular use for an indefinite period of time. The petitioner has indicated minimal improvements, and the Department concurs. The house is vacant today and has been used as a single family residence. There are two outbuildings on the property, and the petitioner is prepared to remove one of them, pave the parking area, provide additional landscaping, and utilize the existing residence for offices. The Department is recommending favorable consideration of the proposal and will be recommending favorable consideration to the BZA of the Variances. Docket No. 188 -02 DP /ADLS, Dixie Hi -Way Addition, Lot 8, Glenwood LLC was forwarded to Special Study Committee for further review February 4, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms at City Hall. 6i. Docket No. 177 -02 OA, 178 -02 CPA Amendment to the Carmel /Clay Zoning Ordinance Comprehensive Plan Mineral Extraction District The petitioner seeks to add a new zoning district to the Zoning Ordinance. Filed by the Department of Community Services. Michael Hollibaugh, Director of the Department of Community Services, appeared before the Plan Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance was Greg Sovas, Consultant with Spectra Environmental Services. Two documents have been distributed to Commission members, the draft Mining Policies for inclusion in the Carmel /Clay 20/20 Vision Plan, and a draft Ordinance that would create the Mineral Extraction "ME Zone. The draft Comp Plan policies will be inserted into the land use policy chapter of the 20/20 document. The policies should be the primary focus, initially, since the draft should provide the framework for discussion of the "ME" District Ordinance and will serve as a guide for future decision making on this important community issue. The draft "ME" District Ordinance acknowledges mining as a use with a special requirement that unique impacts must be addressed by approval authorities. The process of development of these documents goes back a few years and largely involved petitions and discussions involving the Board of Zoning Appeals. The issues are very technical which caused the Department to conduct a search and Spectra Environmental was brought on board. Greg Sovas and John Molitor were influential in the drafting of the Ordinances and Policies before the Commission this evening. In summarizing, the draft does not regulate existing mining within the City today—it is an Ordinance much like the C-1—it creates a district that does not have a home on our map today. The Ordinance creates an all -new district, zone standards, and provides the necessary regulatory structure for rezoning, whenever it occurs. The high points of the draft: It does remove mining and related activities as a use or special use from all of the zones that currently exist, whether it be residential or business. It does establish a district specific to mining. It does establish S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 10 approval criteria for consideration of a rezone request. It does establish submittal requirements for development plan approval as well as create the development plan approval for mining operations similar to what has been done with the PUD Ordinances, i.e. after the PUD is adopted, it comes back with a development plan and must meet specific criteria. It does establish specific performance standards for reclamationa big issue with the Board of Zoning Appeals —and there is also a transition process. The Department requests that this item be sent to Committee for further study, and that the Commission consider leaving the public hearing open to emphasize the public nature of the process. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed Ordinance; the following appeared: Favorable: Bill McEvoy, 6120 Williams Circle, Carmel, president of Kingswood HOA. There are some concerns: limited setbacks in both the Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; environmental concerns such as water supply, air pollution, noise pollution, tremors; safety; and property values. Kingwood HOA had an informal survey done by a local real estate agent. The survey shows that over the last two years, compared with two other Carmel neighborhoods, the Kingswood property values have appreciated Half of the others, and the average days on the market have tripled, whereas the other two neighborhoods have remained the same. Mr. McEvoy asked that the public hearing remain open and that any negotiation for settlement discussion would include a representative of the Kingswood HOA Board. Larry Kane, 11268 Williams Court, Kingswood, affiliated with a group known as "KAN," (Kingswood Action Network) echoes support for the conceptual approach expressed in the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Kane also shares concerns expressed by Bill McEvoy and felt the proposed revisions to the Comprehensive Plan unduly emphasize the importance of mining in this community. A larger setback should be required to protect residential areas from incompatible uses. Marcus Freihofer, 11136 Bradbury Place, Kingswood, also a member of the "KAN" group, shared the mission statement of the Kingswood Action Network. Four major points: 1) Protect the property values of all Kingswood homeowners. 2) Provide more frequent information regarding neighborhood activities and mining developments. 3) Empower the neighborhood to take a stand against actions that would inversely impact the neighborhood from both a livability standpoint as well as property value. 4) Demand more transparency and accountability from both the City of Carmel and the Kingswood HOA Board. Currently, there is a newly elected board of directors for Kingswood and the members of the "KAN" group are in full support of Mr. McElvoy and other members of the Homeowners Association. Mr. Freihofer implored the Commission to place the best interest of Carmel residential property owners above and before that of any business in Carmel. Unfavorable: Zeff Weiss, attorney, 3400 One American Square, Indianapolis, together with John Zapiere and Dan Hafner on behalf of Martin Marietta, referred to complex issues that need to be addressed. S:AMemorandum of Meeting \P1anCommission \2003 \jan I I Martin Marietta concurs in leaving the public hearing open. This is an important matter and does require further study at Committee. Mr. Weiss suggested that Martin Marietta as well as a number of other businesses has a vested interest in the Carmel community as well as the neighbors and other members of the community. Martin Marietta is looking for balance and fairness within the system. The proposed Ordinance strips out mining as a permitted use in many districts that exist today and puts it into a new district that may or may not make sense. What the proposal does not do is permit mining anywhere after the Ordinance is adopted —there would be nowhere in Carmel that mining would be permitted without seeking a rezone. This seems to be fundamentally unfair, since Martin Marietta and its predecessor have been mining this area for over 50 years, long before these homeowners elected to become our neighbors. There are some complex issues that need to be addressed. Martin Marietta would like the opportunity to meet with the Department and gather input and advice. Additional data will be presented at the Committee level. Public Hearing Remains Open Note: The intent of the Ordinance is to create a regulatory framework before identifying sites. Ron Houck suggested the following points could be addressed at Committee: A clear definition of Mining in the Ordinance in terms of types of activities that are or are not permitted; proximity restrictions to mining operations—it might make sense to define by types of activities that could occur within a certain proximity of a residential area. If all activities under mining as commonly viewed are allowed, then 300 feet seems unreasonably close to an existing residential area. Regarding "Mining Policies," there is a reference under Section i. to only mining companies that are members of the Environmental Stewardship Council and have adopted the guiding principles of the Environmental Stewardship Council should be allowed to mine within the Carmel /Clay community. It all sounds good, but what is the substance of those guiding principles? Some consideration might be given to what membership in the organization means and what the commitment is in terms of membership. Regarding Definitions —under Blasting —there were some criteria established, but noise does not seem to be addressed or seismic measurements. The classification was not clear. Dave Cremeans commented that this is a rezone of all of Clay Township to exclude mining in all districts where it currently exists. Secondly, in regard to the buffering, 300 feet may or may not be the right amount, but if it were buffered properly, it could be effective—we need to look at the type of buffering. Wayne Wilson asked that consideration be given this item on the placement of the Agenda. Docket No. 177 -02 OC, 178 -02 CPA, Amendment to the Carmel /Clay Zoning Ordinance Comprehensive Plan Mineral Extraction District, was referred to the Special Study Committee for further review on February 4, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms at City Hall. Following a short recess, the Commission continued with the business at hand. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 12 Note: Leo Dierckman was not in attendance. Ij. Docket No. 140 -02 DP Amend/ADLS Amend; Motorcycles of Indianapolis The applicant seeks Amended Development Plan and ADLS approval to construct building additions. The site is located at 4146 East 96 Street. The site is zoned B -3 (Business). Filed by Bill Keller of KES Consultants, Inc. for Motorcycles of Indianapolis. Bill Keller of KES Consultants, 740 East 52 Street, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing Dellen Automotive Group that operates Motorcycles of Indianapolis. The applicant appeared before the Special Study Committee in December and again in January to resolve certain issues concerning the site plan and the building additions to the project. The Committee voted 6 -0 to recommend approval with the plan presented, and the owner is in agreement. The owner will also be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. The applicant has indicated that they do not have a copy of the prepared Findings. The Department recommends that this item be considered for approval as amended, and subject to the four recommendation of the Committee. 1) Final landscape approval by the Urban Forester; 2) Application for obtaining a sign permit; 3) Lights under the canopy are to be mounted flush with the surface of the canopy; and 4) No outdoor display permitted. Pat Rice said that even though this item came out of Committee with a 6 -0 favorable recommendation, several concerns have been raised since that time. The owner did not agree to provide an alternative design as requested for the carport-type canopies that have metal poles protruding out of the existing brick columns as support for the proposed canopies. A more compatible design could be accomplished with a little creative thinking. Pat Rice moved to send this item back to Committee in order for the petitioner to provide an alternative design to the canopies. Pat Rice then withdrew her motion and discussion followed. Ron Houck asked for clarification, since the Committee minutes recommend approval, subject to landscape approval, appropriate sign permit, recessed lighting on the canopies. It would seem that since the meeting, there was a change in thinking. Pat Rice was apologetic, but said the Committee had requested an alternative design plan be brought back to the Committee. At presentation, and when the request was made, the owner said "No" to the request. There was some strong discussion at the Committee level, and because of that discussion and because of what the canopies will look like, Ms. Rice would like this item S:AMemorandum of Meeting\PlanCommission \2003\jan 13 returned to Committee. Ron Houck was a little confused—if the vote was 6 -0, what were they thinking when they voted it out of Committee? Were they not concerned with the design? Was the ruling mentality: Vote on this —take it or leave it? After further questions and comments from other Commission members, the primary focus of concern was the canopy, since the landscaping had been dealt with adequately. Ron Houck moved to return this item to the Special Study Committee for alternative design. Jon Dobosiewicz reported this item is scheduled to appear before the BZA January 27 with a request for reduction in the setback. Jon recommended that the Plan Commission approve the "DP" portion of this Docket so the BZA could move forward on the request for setback reduction; the ADLS portion could be returned to Committee for further deliberation on the design of the canopy. Ron Houck then withdrew his motion to return this Docket to Committee. Ron Hock then moved to approve the Development Plan portion of Docket No. 140 -02 Amend., Motorcycles of Indianapolis, and return the ADLS portion to Special Study Committee, specifically for the architectural design of the canopies, on February 4, 2003. The motion was seconded by Pat Rice and Approved 11 -0. j. Docket No. 144 -02 PDP; Clay Terrace (Preliminary Development Plan) The applicant seeks approval of a Preliminary Development Plan. The site is located at the southwest corner of US Highway 31 and East 146 Street. Filed by Jeff Clayton of American Consulting, Inc. for the Lauth Property Group. Paul Reis, attorney, 5013 Buckeye Court, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. The Preliminary Development Plan was presented and discussed at the Subdivision Committee on January 7 At the meeting, there was extensive discussion concerning the proposed north /west egress point on 146 Street and its location relative to John Street and the neighborhood to the west. Following discussion at the Committee, it was acknowledged by all parties present that the petitioner, the City of Carmel, and the Hamilton County Highway Department would finalize the location of this egress point. The parties would also finalize the need for any additional improvements that may need to be made on 146 Street in conjunction with the final Development Plan. The County has jurisdiction of 146 Street, and the City of Carmel is interested because of the proposed Development Plan. The three parties will coordinate exactly where the point is going to be relative to the egress. The second major topic of discussion concerned the drainage plan. It was re- stated, for everyone in attendance, that the drainage plans have been thoroughly reviewed by the City Engineer and the Hamilton County Surveyor to ensure two things. The water coming onto this site, currently S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 14 from the west, the John Street neighborhood, will be dealt with —the water that will be collected in this development will not impact persons in the Walters Plaza area. The stormwater will be collected and put in retention ponds, and directed into the legal drain system. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. Favorable consideration of this petition is recommended. This item was forwarded to the full Commission by the Subdivision Committee with a 5 -0 favorable recommendation, and will return to the Department for final Development Plan approval. In addition, the petitioner will likely file an ADLS petition for a large portion of the property that will be before the Commission in March. Dave Cremeans reported that the Committee had approved this Docket 5 -0 and the two main issues were the location of the egress onto 146 Street and the water /drainage issues. The committee was comfortable thinking these issues would be addressed professionally. Paul Spranger asked if a potential interchange at 146 Street were discussed by the Committee. Dave Cremeans responded that there was a brief mention of the continuation of Rangeline Road, but no mention of an interchange at 146 Street. Paul Reis commented that the Preliminary Development Plan maintains two options that are still being studied by Parsons, Brinckerhoff Transportation Group. The "diamond" type interchange and the "V" interchange. The Preliminary Development Plan maintains reservation of area within the development for either of these options. The traffic study does not anticipate any problem with stacking. Wayne Wilson commented that there is a different impact associated with each person in the area depending on the location of the egress. Wayne Wilson was disappointed that a final decision was not made regarding the egress. Dave Cremeans said they ended the discussion because the Committee could not really decide (they are not professional engineers) the location of the egress. The neighbors were somewhat concerned because the egress point was on the western most part of the property and was the closest to their property line. The other concern was an accel /decel lane because of merging traffic. Locating the egress at the western most edge allows the developer to install an accel lane so that traffic can merge easier. If the egress were located closer to the intersection, it would not be possible to accommodate an accel lane. Ron Houck said he understood the egress point was to be a right in /right out only and it was a secondary point of access. The applicant was working with the County to move the point 100 feet east which would take it farther away from the residential area. Dave Cremeans moved for approval of Docket No. 144 -02 PDP, Clay Terrace, Preliminary Development Plan, seconded by Ron Houck. The motion was approved 10 in favor, one opposed (Wayne Wilson.) Note: Clay Terrace will return to the full Commission in March for ADLS review. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 15 3j. Docket No. 167 -02 PV; Part of Walters Plaza Replat (Plat Vacation) The applicant seeks approval to vacate a portion of the Replat of Part of Walter's Plaza Replat. The site is located on the north and south sides of Walter Street (Tract "A" and "B" of the Plat). Filed by Michael C. Cook of Wooden McLaughlin for Metro Acquisitions, LLC. Mike Cook, attorney, 1600 Capitol Center, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing Metro Acquisitions, a part of the Lauth Property Group. This proposal is a "step child" to the Clay Terrace Development Plan. Walters Plaza is located at the southeast corner of what will be Clay Terrace and what was preliminarily shown on the plan just approved. The petitioner seeks to vacate tracts A B on the eastern edge of the subdivision. These two tracts contain approximately 2.5 acres. Also proposed is the vacation of two easements; one running to the north of Tract B, and one to the south of Tract A, for drainage purposes. These two tracts are located within Walters Plaza and currently designated for commercial development. The lots to the south of Walters Plaza as it enters the subdivision were reserved for multi family development. The two "bubbles" to the north side of the development are reserved for single family purposes. The proposed re- location of Rangeline Road as currently planned would go through Tracts A B. The petitioner is asking for plat vacation approval, since it is in the public's interest and consistent with the PUD approved for Clay Terrace. It is also consistent with the re- location of Rangeline Road. The vacation of Tracts A B does not create a problem for the remainder of the subdivision, since it was designated for commercial purposes some time ago and not a part of the residential portion of the plat. For purposes of clarification, Mr. Cook said they are not asking for the vacation of Walter Street, only for the vacation of a portion of the plat, Tracts A B. Walter Street would require vacation by the City. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. The request is not use related or what is going to happen on the parcel. Rather, "Has the petitioner presented evidence to the effect that the adjoining properties within the plat are not negatively impacted by the rear of the two parcels zoned commercial prior to the preliminary development plan if they were removed from the plat Drainage and easement issues will be addressed through the preliminary development plan approved for Clay Terrace. The vacation of street right -of -way is approved by another body, and the issue before the Commission is to approve the plat vacation so that the property lines as established for the two lots will be removed and the development for the approved preliminary development plan can proceed. Dave Cremeans gave the Committee report. Members of the public were in attendance at the Committee meeting and issues raised have been addressed. The Committee voted 5 -0 to recommend approval. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 16 Dave Cremeans moved for approval of Docket No. 167 -02 PV, Part of Walters Plaza Replat, (Plat Vacation,) seconded by Marilyn Anderson and Approved 11 -0. 4j. Docket No. 152 -02 PP; Cherry Creek Estates (Primary Plat) The applicant seeks approval to plat a 273 -lot residential subdivision on 149.562 acres. The site is located on the east side of Hazel Dell Parkway north and south of Cherry Tree Road. The site is zoned S -1 /Residential Low Intensity. 152 -02a SW SCO 6.3.7 maximum cul -de -sac length of 600' 152 -02b SW SCO 7.5.7 clearing of woodland areas Filed by Dennis Olmstead of Stoeppelwerth Associates, Inc. for Platinum Properties. Jim Nelson, attorney, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Paul Rioux, president of Platinum Properties was also in attendance. The primary plat application was reviewed by the Subdivision Committee on two occasions, December and January, and resulted in several revisions to the Plat. The revisions included: 1) Expansion of the tree preservation areas, especially the area adjacent to Hazel Dell Parkway, expanded to a size of 10 acres; 2) A 20 -foot tree preservation easement was created around the entire perimeter of the property; 3) A buffer consisting of both trees and fencing between Cherry Creek Estates property and the 14 lots adjacent in Delaware Trace; and 4) Substantial landscaping of the new, proposed boulevard both in the median and adjacent to the north and south right -of -way line. In all, over 1500 new trees are being planted as a part of the landscape plan. As amended, the plat has established consensus with the neighboring property owners and has received the final approval of Scott Brewer, Urban Forester, the City Engineer, and the favorable recommendation of the Staff of DOCS as set forth in the Department Report. As of January 7 th this item is being brought to the full Commission upon favorable recommendation of the Subdivision Committee. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. As indicated, the petitioner has responded to the recommendation of the Subdivision Committee to the full Plan Commission. Any motion for approval should be made subject to the petition as amended. (As amended refers to statements and information indicated in a letter dated January 13, 2003 addressed to Jon Dobosiewicz for distribution to the Plan Commission from Paul Rioux, President of Platinum Properties.) The amendment illustrates the findings of the recommendation made by the Subdivision Committee. The Department is recommending plat approval, subject to the amended petition, and that the Subdivision Waivers also be approved, subject to the recommendation of the Committee. Dave Cremeans reported the findings of the Subdivision Committee. There was extensive public input and more was allowed than normal. Public comments were taken into consideration and Mr. Rioux and Mr. Nelson worked well with the public to address those comments. The Committee recommended approval 5 -0. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 17 Stephanie Blackman moved for approval of Docket No. 152 -02 PP, Cherry Creek Estates Primary Plat, (including Both Subdivision Waivers) as amended by statements and information contained in a letter to the Department from Paul Rioux, President of Platinum Properties dated January 13, 2003 for distribution to the Plan Commission. (The information in the letter distributed with the Department Report illustrates the findings of the recommendation made by the Subdivision Committee.) The motion was seconded by Marilyn Anderson and APPROVED 11 -0. 5j. Docket No. 165 -02 PV; Carmel High School Campus (Plat Vacation) The applicant seeks to vacate a portion Carmelwood Subdivision in order to modify the Carmel High School Campus. The site is zoned R -2 (Residential). Filed by Allen J. Cradler, AIA of Fanning /Howey Associates for Carmel Clay Schools. Charles Tyler of Fanning/Howey Associates, 9205 North River Road, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Roger McMichael, Assistant Superintendent of Business Affairs, Carmel Schools, and Ron Farrand, Carmel Schools Transportation. Request is being made for the vacation of a portion of the Carmelwood Subdivision with the School corporation as purchaser of the property. Resolution is to be made of street and right -of- way issues. Regarding the loss of established trees within the Carmelwood neighborhood, the petitioner has been working with Scott Brewer, Urban Forester, on a tree preservation plan. The plan, as developed, does remove approximately 50 existing trees with a plan to relocate over 60 existing trees and planting over 150 new trees. In addition, there were concerns expressed from some of the neighbors regarding the reduction of green space. One of the analyses completed indicates that with the addition of the 6 properties and even with the expansion of the freshman campus to the northwest, the subsequent, resulting buffer space between building and the nearest property is increased over existing conditions. There were also questions as to screening of residential properties from the school property, specifically the parking lot and drive. The School has been working with the homeowners to develop a plan that combines some new planting materials, some berming, and some new fences in order to address privacy issues between the school and residential property owners. Traffic flow in the vicinity of the high school with the addition of the freshman campus was also looked at. Steve Fehribach, traffic engineer with A F Engineering, has completed an analysis that supports the disconnect of the school property from the north, the Carmelwood neighborhood. The school is retaining an emergency vehicle drive that gives emergency crews two access points into the neighborhood, but no normal, vehicular traffic would be allowed between the school property and the adjacent property owners. All traffic will be directed to a controlled intersection either via stop signs or automatic signal— considered to be an S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan is improvement over existing conditions. As a part of the project, the school will be re- connecting Audubon Drive to Sylvan Lane so that neighborhood connectivity is maintained. Regarding the Taylor property and the Christy House, the School Corporation is in the process of receiving bids on the property for the potential consideration of re- locating the house. Roger McMichael, Assistant Superintendent of Carmel Clay Schools Business Affairs addressed the Commission regarding the School's impact on adjacent property owners. During the course of discussion with the Subdivision Committee, one neighbor in particular feels that the proposed school project will devalue their property. It was not intent of the School Corporation to devalue the property and while the school does not feel that is the case, they cannot guarantee that it isn't the case. The idea was expressed at Committee that the School could appraise the property before the proposed changes are put in place and appraise the property after -the -fact. If there were any devaluation, the school could pay the homeowner the difference. The School's legal counsel did not think this was appropriate and there was discussion between School counsel and Plan Commission counsel regarding the matter. The response from the School's legal counsel was in a two -page letter distributed this evening to Commission members and the Department. It was felt that paying the homeowner a difference in appraised value was not consistent with the State Statute; also, the School corporation might then be in a position of being cited by the State Board of Accounts as not having the authority to make such payment, should that occur. Thirdly, and perhaps most significantly, the question would be whether or not this would set a precedent for not only the School Corporation but the City of Carmel as well as other governmental entities. Finally, there is a process in place through the Courts that is referred to as "inverse condemnation and if this issue were to be raised, it would be in the Courts. For these reasons, it was determined that a before appraisal and after appraisal would not be workable. Jon Dobosiewicz referred to the State Statute that indicates the Plan Commission shall approve the application to vacate a plat, covenants, and public utilities only upon the finding...... that the value of part of the land in the plat not owned by the petitioner will not be diminished by a vacation. The Committee believed that there was some reduction or diminished value to the adjoining property and was willing to entertain a commitment from the petitioner to off -set that diminished value; the commitment was expected to be received this evening. This item is not with regard to use but rather to the plat vacation and whether or not the plat vacation diminishes the value of the adjoining lots within the plat. The use question here is for the Board of Zoning Appeals to decide. It is incumbent upon the Plan Commission to find that the plat vacation does not diminish the value of adjoining or additional lots within the subject plat by the nature of the vacation. Based upon information received from the applicant today, the Department finds it necessary for the petitioner to either submit an alternative to the proposal given to the Subdivision Committee and how they wish to address the perceived reduction in value, and whether or not they would be willing to off -set that reduction. Based upon the language in the letter presented this evening, the Department cannot recommend approval of the plat vacation at this time and this item should be returned to the Committee for further review and discussion. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 19 There were comments from the Committee Chair, Dave Cremeans, and other Commission members as well that the School Corporation should consider purchasing the two homes on Sylvan Lane that are the most affected by the school's proposal. Dave Cremeans stated an unwillingness to vote for the plat vacation at this time in view of the letter received this evening. Wayne Wilson commented that from the time this proposal was first presented and the neighbors' reaction and concerns known, there is a high degree of arrogance on the part of the School and disrespect for this body to present the two -page letter at this hour. This process is still in the beginning stage and the woods haven't even been discussed yet. Perhaps a vote should be called for this evening rather than returning this item to Committee, thereby creating a clear picture for the school of what the Plan Commission is about. Marilyn Anderson reasoned that it was logical compromise to purchase the two homes and if there were a negative, economic impact and the School was willing to make it up, then the negative impact would go away and the Commission could recommend approval. At the very least, this now needs to go back to Committee. In response to questions from the Commission, Jon Dobosiewic said if this item were voted on this evening and denied, the School would have a 12 -month time frame before they could re- apply. There is the potential of legal action by the School against the Plan Commission in a denial; then we would be faced with some type of settlement or going through the legal process. Taking this item back to Committee gives the applicant an opportunity to re- address the situation. Jon suggested that the Committee is the proper place to resolve the issues. Ron Houck had additional comments and thought there may have been a gross misunderstanding on the part of the applicant in terms of direction given at the Committee level. It is disappointing that the direction was not followed by the applicant and they are perfectly able to judge the sentiment and comments made this evening and how the vote might go. The applicant could then accept the outcome and deal with the system to redress the issues or we could go back to Committee with the idea that the original direction would be followed. Dave Cremeans moved to return Docket No. 165 -02 PV, Carmel High School Campus (Plat Vacation) to the Subdivision Committee and the applicant is to review comments made by Committee members at the time recommendation was made for approval. The motion was seconded by Ron Houck and Approved 11 -0. This item will return to Committee on February 4, 2003. Wayne Haney exited the meeting at this point and did not return. 6j. Docket No. 157 -02 DP Amend /ADLS; Hamilton Crossing Building #6 The applicant seeks amended development plan and ADLS approval to construct an office building. The site is generally located on the south side of 131st Street between U.S. Highway 31 and Meridian Corners Blvd. Filed by Blair D. Carmosino of Duke Realty Corporation. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 20 Blair Carmosino of Duke Realty Corporation appeared before the Plan Commission representing the applicant. Steve Granner of Bose, McKinney Evans was also in attendance. This particular project came out of Special Study Committee with a 5 -1 favorable recommendation. A lot of time was spent looking at details on the site, particularly the parking garage and the lighting. The applicant is still engaged in conversations with the neighbors to ensure that the lighting concerns are addressed. Modifications have been made to the fixtures, fitting some with shields and bending them appropriate to hide light forces. As a result of discussion at Committee, the petitioner is submitting commitments this evening, four of which are direct results from dealing with the neighbors and light issues. One commitment deals with landscaping as requested by the Department for phasing, and the last three commitments deal with right -of -way issues discussed at Plan Commission regarding 131 Street, the potential round about, and Meridian Corners. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. The Department has received a copy of the commitment and it is believed to adequately address the concerns of the Committee. However, Item E of the commitment should be stricken regarding arbitration by the Director of the Department; thereby allowing enforcement either by the City Council, Plan Commission, or the Department of Community Services. Otherwise, the Department is recommending favorable action subject to the recording of the commitments provided. Paul Spranger reported that commitments for right -of -way were requested by the Committee to allow the City and the State an opportunity to make necessary roadway improvements. The rights -of -way will be granted when requested. The location of the interchange could be either 131 Street or 126 Street, and the applicant would like to reserve the option to develop the ground they own. Of particular concern was the lighting and the impact on the neighbors. The lighting concern was addressed by directing the lighting fixtures so the lighting elements were not visible. Pat Rice commented that there was discussion about the possibility of the parking garage being partly below grade level. The other point of discussion was providing screening around the parking garage. The petitioner adequately addressed both items. There was open dialogue between Ron Houck and Blair Carmosino regarding past history with lights being left on not in parking garages but in the office buildings and interfering with the neighbors on the south side of 96 Street. Mr. Carmosino could not totally commit to extinguish lights because of cleaning crews and tenants that may work late hours and leave lights on. Best efforts are being made to keep the situation at a minimum so as not to be intrusive to the residents on the south side of 96 Street. Parkwood has established a communication line directly with those residents before the lighting becomes a problem. Ron Houck moved to approve Docket No. 157 -02 DP Amend /ADLS, Hamilton Crossing Building #6, subject to the recording of commitments provided by the petitioner concerning development and use of the real estate discussed. The motion was seconded by Jerry Chomanczuk and Approved 10 -0. S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 21 7 J_ Docket No. 166 -02 Z; Pennsylvania and 122 Street Northeast Corner The applicant seeks to rezone 28.378 acres zoned R -1 (Residential) and M -3 (Manufacturing) to B -6 (Business). The site is located at the northeast corner of 122 Street and Pennsylvania Road. Filed by Blair D. Carmosino of Duke Realty Corporation. Note: Jerry Chomanczuk Recused himself on this item and was not present during discussion or vote. Blair Carmosino of Duke Realty Corp., 600 East 96 Street, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance was Steve Granner, Bose McKinney Evans. The site currently has two zone classifications, R -1 Residential and M -3 Manufacturing. The applicant is seeking B -6 zoning and has submitted conceptual plans only at this point. Currently, there is no specific user and no tenants are lined up. The Committee voted 5 -0 to approve this proposal, and the only open item is whether or not the Development Plan was a part of the approval from the Committee. Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. From the beginning, the Department made a recommendation regarding two issues. One is the dedication of right -of -way pursuant to the Thoroughfare Plan; the second is the Department's request to the Plan Commission to require the petitioner to submit a commitment with regard to Development Plan approval. Currently, the Department is considering adding D/P approval to the B -6 zone; however, at present it only requires Development Plan approval within Overlay Zones and not outside those areas. The M- 3 Zone requires Development Plan approval and the Department would not like the Plan Commission to lose that additional review process. The Department's recommendation is that the Plan Commission forward the recommendation for approval with condition that the petitioner submit a commitment committing to Development Plan Approval. Paul Spranger reported on behalf of the Committee. The vote was 5 -0 for approval, subject to the recommendations of the department regarding right -of -way. Blair Carmosino responded that the petitioner is subject to ADLS review on this property. The D/P issues will be dealt with in a plat vacation and right -of -way is not an issue. The D/P essentially has a 45 -day lead -time in going through the approval process, which is why the zoning is being requested now rather than later. The Department's intent is not to exact right -of -way through the D/P process, but it does provide the Plan Commission some additional discretion with regard to building placement and parking lot issues. This item will be forwarded to the Council —they can adopt it without the S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 22 Development Plan, but the real issue behind the D/P is that it gives the Plan Commission the leverage of review of the site and characteristics as it relates to parking and building placement. Marilyn Anderson commented that it was better to err on the side of caution, and perhaps the Plan Commission should reserve the right to review the Development Plan. Blair Carmosino agreed to submit to Development Plan Approval. Ron Houck moved for the approval of Docket No. 166 -02 Z, Pennsylvania and 122 °a Street, Northeast Corner, as amended by the Petitioner to provide for Development Plan Approval. The motion was seconded by Dave Cremeans and APPROVED 9 in favor, none opposed, 1 Recused (Jerry Chomanczuk.) lk. Docket No. 163 -02 ADLS Tom Wood Volkswagen Signage Petitioner seeks Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping Signage approval to establish signage for a automobile dealership. The site is located at 3300 East 96th Street. The site is zoned B -3 (Business). Filed by Kevin Phillips of Freeman Sign Company. TABLED There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 PM. Paul Spranger, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary S:AMemorandum of MeetingTIanCommission \2003\jan 23