Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence Page 1 of 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Dorman, Jay Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 10:02 AM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: FW: Holiday Inn FYI...one supporter. Not sure who he is or where he lives? From: Tom Walden [mailto:tw00021 ©sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wed 6/4/2008 4:08 PM To: Dorman, Jay Subject: Holiday Inn It seems to me that a Holiday Inn at 136 Old Meridian would be a perfect location due to the fact that a hospital is located near by.This would make it very convenient for family members to stay in touch with their love ones. I can't think of one good reason for you to reject this project. Tom 6/5/2008 t p '4;7 M� d y a- a ry 1' e A" A 0, fi w /,,t, •'l 4 e J r a d iw -Il I I i i. fi r, J 1 r I d n t ,rtes 11 r ry area,*„ s r7 'Alr/IAr/II I WAIranii J I sT 411 I, !iitob4, ----44r -..q it i t r J1 a f .0. 4 I st ��:,.sW ma a! '.:y,g1d'' ti' w i` i I III 1+' �Ih fir,: r A.w r,{ o� d ^r 1 e fy." 7 r i r .a, e 4 t 1 1 7 "•'N., 1 1 I ik V•i.' I .1 e 7 11 1 y �t 1.7 41 I j N p r y y 1 II I A'r I! f I k:, ;II E J J' _"r., i I I'I 4 1 a 1 j' .,N:. N t' A .3 e a r e al�f -v4 f If 1 /4 1 iii t, 17,..,*... sy f t` ti f ti N 1 r r" y i_ C X11 r v i I N N r A 4 h ,t fit" f t �--ti a 1.. q M,,. mil i 'J Q) C Page 1 of 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 3:01 PM To: Hollibaugh, Mike P Cc: 'John Molitor' Subject: holiday inn at pro med lane court case Hi Mike a resident of Kensington Place called today and offered to help out in any way he can, regarding the court case with holiday inn. Let me know if you want to use him as a witness or expert testimony. His name is Gary 'Dox' Doxtater- Director of Development, Indiana Wildlife Federation. Thanks, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator Dept. of Community Services Planning Zoning 1 Civic Square, 3rd Floor City of Carmel, IN 46032 p. 317- 571 -2417 f. 317- 571 -2426 aconn @carmel.in.gov 3/5/2009 APR -17 -2008 THU 09:30 AM COOTS HENKE WHEELER FAX NO, 3175735385 P, 01 APR -17 -2008 THU 08:33 AM FAX NO P, 0 if2J e 7 730035pp e aka I00o y f} _,I f n RECEI e Township City of Carmel Clay wnsh p 1 I Department of Co Services One Civic Square; Carmel IN 46032 APf coo 0 Planning Zoning ORio3: ph. (317) 571 -2417 Fax (317) 571 -2426 Building &Cade Entomement Ph. (317) 5712444 Fax (317) 571- -2499 ew` D ®CS REQUEST FOR RECORDS PURSUANT TO INDIANA ACCESS TO PUBLIC, r7 x RECORDS ACT (I.C. 5- 144-1, at seq., As Amended). I .,,e i v �"S „_Cs p. hereby request of the Oty of (NAME OPMVAL please prMt) Carmel, Indiana, the right to inspect and/or copy the fotiowing records: c be specific as to what r you am looldng for/requesting, and the correct properly [donation) �1 7 Se.- 4 f. i..__'i fad Iyr /i il� if d fi i '1. -'6) .e tea,, 4!>►ey_, Date of Request: 7 c Signature: ammo TECO C1'1T MAY PROVIDE ME WITH ITS RESPONSE: O By telephone at: O By facsimile transmission at: Cl By mail at: Other: 4 l ..a Zr• r te OFFICE Or�j urti ed Dept S alutee: Date; Time: Sent to Legal Department by: Om Received in Legal Depano tby: Oa: rum Wt 4ollr Nd11FWATtoN TO LEGAL tit; Y N PAU MUM: staff try i 4 -'0 0 i ...4 t C ity of Carmel NMI alum 1=1 1 ••■"'",..Y.= '141:ZraW AX To: 1, A 1 41 From: Fax: 573 -5 3(c pages: Phone: Date: ---/7 Re: CC: 0 Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Reply 0 Please Comment Comments: Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 4603 Phone: 317-571-2417 Fax: 317-571-2426 0 Q/te- l i. c( ,30035 pp a7'0 loo o 9 .p-o S w y o' f City of Carmel Clay Township Department of Community nity Serv i I" l �ep rt Square; Carmel, IN 46032 y, One Civic Sgoar 4ro„ G ;,,11 Planning Zoning Office: ph. (317) 571 -2417 Fax (317) 571 -2426 Building Code Enforcement: Ph. (317) 571 -2444 Fax (317) 571 -2499 REQUEST FOR RECORDS PURSUANT TO INDIANA ACCESS TO PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (LC. 5- 14 -3 -1, et seq., As Amended). hereby request of the City of I, (NAME OPTIONAL please print) Carmel, Indiana, the right to inspect and/or copy s: and the prop the following records: ord formation) (please be specific as to what records you are looking for/requesting, P 4,,, _,..e_..... ....L.( Li /O __.5 f1/////- ....FAO: i// I 4104g., _4 i I .I /1/�/ S mil.- S�"`�"- L 4 n ily� j l�/ Yea Date of Request: Signature: (OPTIONAL) THE CITY MAY PROVIDE ME WITH ITS RESPONSE: By telephone at: By facsimile transmission at: By mail at: Other: OFFICE USE: Received by: Dept: (Print) Signature: Date: Time: On: Sent to Legal Department by: Received in Legal Department by: On: Y N DATE FILLED: stafffl) FILLED WITHOUT NOTIFICATION TO LEGAL DEPT.: Page 1 of 3 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:56 PM To: 'jmolitor @prodigy.net' Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: holiday inn findings of fact Attachments: Holiday Inn Findings.doc Please see attached, and feel free to add /delete. Angie Conn, Planning Administrator Dept. of Community Services Planning Zoning 1 Civic Square, 3rd Floor City of Carmel, IN 46032 p. 317- 571 -2417 f. 317- 571 -2426 aconn@carmel.in.gov From: John Molitor [mailto:jmolitor prodigy.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:47 AM To: Conn, Angelina V Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P; Hancock, Ramona B Subject: RE: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting west park annex, rezone Good. Please don't circulate any drafts to Carol (or other Commission members); I don't want them to become a public record yet (as in the Martin Marietta case). Also, we don't have formal authority to prepare these findings until the executive committee delegates that power to us. John Original Message From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn @carmel.in.gov] Sent: April 16, 2008 10:12 AM To: jmolitor @prodigy.net Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P; Hancock, Ramona B Subject: RE: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting west park annex, rezone John: Today, I will work on a draft of the written findings of fact regarding the Holiday Inn decision, and run them by you. Angie From: John Molitor [mailto:jmolitor @prodigy.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:08 AM To: Conn, Angelina V; Hancock, Ramona B Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: RE: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting west park annex, rezone In addition to this, I would recommend that the executive committee pass a motion to authorize the staff and counsel to prepare written findings of fact regarding the Holiday Inn decision. John Original Message From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn @carmel.in.gov] Sent: April 15, 2008 8:56 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B Cc: John Molitor; Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: FW: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting. west park annex, rezone Hi Ramona can you please poll the plan commission executive committee members and set up a 3/5/2009 Page 2 of 3 date /time to approve the p -1 /parks rezone for the west park annex? Thanks, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator Dept. of Community Services Planning Zoning 1 Civic Square, 3rd Floor City of Carmel, IN 46032 p. 317- 571 -2417 f. 317- 571 -2426 aconn@carmel.in.gov From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:49 PM To: Boone, Rachel M.; Brainard, James C; Brewer, Scott I; Weddington, Trudy A.; Coy, Sue E; DeVore, Laura B; Donahue -Wold, Alexia K; Glaser, Karen A; Hancock, Ramona B; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Holmes, Christine B; Keeling, Adrienne M; Lillard, Sarah N; Littlejohn, David W; Mindham, Daren; Stewart, Lisa M; Tingley, Connie S Subject: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting 1H. sent to executive committee for a final vote: Docket No. 08030035 Z: West Park Annex, Rezone The applicant seeks to approval to rezone approximately 40 acres from the S- 1/Residence zoning classification to P- 1/Parks and Recreation. The site is located at 3030 W 116 St (just west of West Park) and lies within the West 116 Street Overlay. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission Carmel /Clay Board of Parks Recreation. 2 -4H. sent to May 8 special studies committee meeting: Docket No. 08020021 DP Amend /ADLS Amend: Staybridge Suites The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a 3 -story extended stay hotel. The applicant also seeks the following commitment amendment and zoning waiver approvals: Docket No. 08020022 CA amendment of parcel's previous commitments Docket No. 08020023 ZW Chapter 23E.09.E.1: building must face Pennsylvania St. The site is located at the 10800 block of Pennsylvania St. and is zoned B-6/Business within the West Home Place Commercial Corridor High Intensity area. Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson Frankenberger for Hotel Development Services, LLC. 5H. sent to May 8 subdivision committee meeting: Docket No. 08020028 DP /ADLS: The Legacy Towns Flats The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a retail /residential development of 23 buildings with 288 residential units. The site is located southeast of the 7000 block of E. 146 St. and is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development. Filed by Charlie Frankenberger of Nelson Frankenberger for J.C. Hart Company, Inc. 6H. tabled until city council votes on the rezone: Docket No. 08030003 SW: 146 and Gray Office Complex The applicant requests approval for a subdivision waiver, in addition to its primary plat approval for 8 lots on 11.6 acres: Docket No. 08030003 SW SCO 6.05.01 all lots shall abut a public right of way The site is located at the southeast corner of 146 St. and Gray Rd. and is zoned S- 1/Residence, pending a B-1/Business rezone (with restrictions). Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC. H. Old Business: 1!. 7 -0 sent to council with NO Recommendation: Docket No. 07070003 Z: 146th 3/5/2009 Page 3 of 3 Gray Rezone (146th St Office Complex) The applicant seeks approval to rezone 11.6 acres from S- 1/Residence to B-1/Business (with restrictions) for an office /retail development. The site is at the southeast corner of 146 St. and Gray Rd. Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC. 2I. tabled until city council votes on the rezone: Docket No. 07070004 PP: 146th St Office Complex The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 8 lots on 11.6 acres. The site is at the southeast corner of 146 St. and Gray Rd. and is zoned S- ]/Residence, pending a B -1/ Business rezone. Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC. 3I. final approval 7 -0: Docket No. 08010011 DP /ADLS: Old Meridian Plaza (RA Franke Subdivision, lot #8A) The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a 4 -story office /retail building. The site is located at 12863 Old Meridian St. and is zoned OM/MU- Old Meridian, Mixed Use. Filed by Ersal Ozdemir of Keystone Group, LLC. 4I. 7 -0 sent to council with favorable Recommendation Docket No. 08030002 CPA: Bicycle Routes Loops Systems Plan The applicant seeks to amend the Thoroughfare Plan-section of the Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan, in order to propose and identify a system of Bicycle Routes and Loops on existing facilities. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission. 51. Denied 7 -0: Docket No. 07030035 DP: Pro -Med Lane Holiday Inn The applicant seeks site plan approval for a full- service hotel. The site is at 136th Street and Pro -Med Lane, and is zoned B-6/Business within the US 31/Meridian Street Overlay. Filed by Stacey Fouts of DeBoy Land Development Services, Inc. 61. Denied 7 -0: Docket No. 07070009 ADLS: Holiday Inn at Pro Med Ln The applicant seeks architecture /design approval for a full service hotel. The site is at 136 Street and Pro Med Lane, and is zoned B6, within the US 31/Meridian Street Overlay. Filed by Dave Coots of Coots, Henke Wheeler for Midwest Hospitality Group, Inc. 3/5/2009 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.07030035 DP NAME OF PROJECT: Holiday Inn at Pro Med Lane PETITIONER: Dave Coots; Coots, Henke Wheeler Based upon all the evidence presented by the Petitioner and upon the Department Report of the Department of Community Services, dated, we determine that the Development Plan complies with the Standards set forth in the Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance. We hereby approve the Development Plan as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. X We hereby disapprove of the Development Plan as submitted for the following reasons: 1. The plan commission feels that project did not comply with all of the zoning requirements spelled out in the ordinance, regarding a DP /ADLS approval. 2. The Plan Commission feels that the traffic congestion immediately surrounding this location does not warrant a land use like this. 3. Even though EIFS in not specifically excluded, it is not listed as choice of building material, per the US 31 Overlay, chapter 23B.09.B. 4. The intent of the US 31 Overlay height and yard requirements is the orient new buildings with their longest axis parallel to the adjoining highway of street and to create a sense of enclosure along the streets, with parking located to the rear, and, if necessary to the side of a building, per chapter 23B.08 of the Zoning ordinance. 5. It can be interpreted from the ordinance that there shall not be parking between the US 31 right of way and the front build -to line of the building. 6. When this area was initially rezoned in 1990, under docket no. 40 -90 Z, it was anticipated that the site would consist of facilities ancillary and auxiliary to the medial /health care field. DATED THIS 15 DAY OF April, 2008. Commission Member Page 1 of 2 Conn, Angelina V From: John Molitor [jmolitor @prodigy.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:08 AM To: Conn, Angelina V; Hancock, Ramona B Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: RE: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting west park annex, rezone In addition to this, I would recommend that the executive committee pass a motion to authorize the staff and counsel to prepare written findings of fact regarding the Holiday Inn decision. John Original Message From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn @carmel.in.gov] Sent: April 15, 2008 8:56 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B Cc: John Molitor; Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: FW: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting west park annex, rezone Hi Ramona can you please poll the plan commission executive committee members and set up a date /time to approve the p -1 /parks rezone for the west park annex? Thanks, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator Dept. of Community Services Planning Zoning 1 Civic Square, 3rd Floor City of Carmel, IN 46032 p. 317- 571 -2417 f. 317- 571 -2426 aconn@carmelin.gov From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:49 PM To: Boone, Rachel M.; Brainard, James C; Brewer, Scott I; Weddington, Trudy A.; Coy, Sue E; DeVore, Laura B; Donahue -Wold, Alexia K; Glaser, Karen A; Hancock, Ramona B; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Holmes, Christine B; Keeling, Adrienne M; Li!lard, Sarah N; Littlejohn, David W; Mindham, Daren; Stewart, Lisa M; Tingley, Connie S Subject: votes from Tuesday night's plan commission meeting 1H. sent to executive committee for a final vote: Docket No. 08030035 Z: West Park Annex, Rezone The applicant seeks to approval to rezone approximately 40 acres from the S- 1/Residence zoning classification to P- 1/Parks and Recreation. The site is located at 3030 W 116 St (just west of West Park) and lies within the West 116 Street Overlay. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission Carmel /Clay Board of Parks Recreation. 2 -4H. sent to May 8 special studies committee meeting: Docket No. 08020021 DP Amend /ADLS Amend: Staybridge Suites The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a 3 -story extended stay hotel. The applicant also seeks the following commitment amendment and zoning waiver approvals: Docket No. 08020022 CA amendment of parcel's previous commitments Docket No 08020023 ZW Chapter 23E.09.E.1: building must face Pennsylvania St. The site is located at the 10800 block of Pennsylvania St. and is zoned B- 6/Business within the West Home Place Commercial Corridor High Intensity area. Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson Frankenberger for Hotel Development Services, LLC. 3/5/2009 Page 2 of 2 51I. sent to May 8 subdivision committee meeting: Docket No. 08020028 DP /ADLS: The Legacy Towns Flats The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a retail /residential development of 23 buildings with 288 residential units. The site is located southeast of the 7000 block of E. 146 St. and is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development. Filed by Charlie Frankenberger of Nelson Frankenberger for J.C. Hart Company, Inc. 6H. tabled until city council votes on the rezone: Docket No. 08030003 SW: 146 and Gray Office Complex The applicant requests approval for a subdivision waiver, in addition to its primary plat approval for 8 lots on 11.6 acres: Docket No. 08030003 SW SCO 6.05.01 all lots shall abut a public right of way The site is located at the southeast corner of 146 St. and Gray Rd. and is zoned S- 1/Residence, pending a B- 1/Business rezone (with restrictions). Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC. H. Old Business: 1!. 7 -0 sent to council with NO Recommendation: Docket No. 07070003 Z: 146th Gray Rezone (146th St Office Complex) The applicant seeks approval to rezone 11.6 acres from S- 1/Residence to B- 1/Business (with restrictions) for an office /retail development. The site is at the southeast corner of 146 St. and Gray Rd. Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC. 2I. tabled until city council votes on the rezone: Docket No. 07070004 PP: 146th St Office Complex The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 8 lots on 11.6 acres. The site is at the southeast corner of 146 St. and Gray Rd. and is zoned S- 1/Residence, pending a B -1/ Business rezone. Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC. 3I. final approval 7 -0: Docket No. 08010011 DP /ADLS: Old Meridian Plaza (RA Franke Subdivision, lot #8A) The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a 4- story office /retail building. The site is located at 12863 Old Meridian St. and is zoned OM/MU- Old Meridian, Mixed Use. Filed by Ersal Ozdemir of Keystone Group, LLC. 4I. 7 -0 sent to council with favorable Recommendation Docket No. 08030002 CPA: Bicycle Routes Loops Systems Plan The applicant seeks to amend the Thoroughfare Plan section of the Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan, in order to propose and identify a system of Bicycle Routes and Loops on existing facilities. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission. 5I. Denied 7 -0: Docket No. 07030035 DP: Pro -Med Lane Holiday Inn The applicant seeks site plan approval for a full service hotel. The site is at 136th Street and Pro Med Lane, and is zoned B- 6/Business within the US 31/Meridian Street Overlay. Filed by Stacey Fouts of DeBoy Land Development Services, Inc. 6I. Denied 7 -0: Docket No. 07070009 ADLS: Holiday Inn at Pro Med Ln The applicant seeks architecture /design approval for a full- service hotel. The site is at 136 Street and Pro Med Lane, and is zoned B6, within the US 31 /Meridian Street Overlay. Filed by Dave Coots of Coots, Henke Wheeler for Midwest Hospitality Group, Inc. 3/5/2009 IN THE CARMEL PLAN CO 4 kio gicGtiv s dliY 3 02 0 08 IN RE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, EXTERIOR LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING, AND A SIGNAGE APPROVAL t..3 of Docket Nos. 07030035 DP and 07070009 ADLS MIDWEST HOSPITALITY GROUP, Applicant OL 6300 April 15, 2008 DECISION Upon application and after a public hearing pursuant to the Advisory Planning Law of the State of Indiana and the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, the Commission hereby denies, by a 9 -0 vote, the application for DP /ADLS approval filed by the Applicant. Members voting to deny: Leo Dierckman, Jay Dorman, Kevin Rider, Rick Ripma, Carol Schleif, Steve Stromquist, Sue Westermeier Member voting to approve: None. Members absent and not voting: Dan Dutcher, Wayne Haney, Kevin Heber, Madeleine Tones. FINDINGS In accordance with the Carmel Zoning Ordinance (the "Ordinance the Commission hereby determines that the Applicant's Development Plan and ADLS Proposal (the "Proposal should be disapproved pursuant to the following provisions of the Ordinance: SCA- Fr) §23B.02.A.2.a: The Proposal is not compatible with existing site features including topography and wooded areas, in that the Proposal necessitates excessive utilization of retaining walls and calls for the destruction of virtually all of a mature woodland. §23B.02.A.2.c: The Proposal is not compatible with the surrounding land uses, which uses have been developed without modifying the topography and woodlands so drastically. §23B.02.A.2.h: The Proposal does not provide for adequate vehicle and bicycle parking facilities and internal site circulation, in that the proposed bicycle path is only five feet wide, and the parking facilities would accommodate only 155 vehicles when the Ordinance requires 169 to be accommodated. §23B.02.A.2:n: The Proposal is not compatible with existing platted residential uses, in that the building setbacks with accompanying landscape plans are not sufficient to safeguard the privacy and quiet enjoyment of the neighboring residents. §23B.08: The Proposal does not orient the new building with its longest axis parallel to the adjoining street as required to create a sense of enclosure along the street, nor does the Proposal locate all parking to the rear or the side of the building as necessary to accomplish this purpose. §23B.09.B: The Proposal does not use only permitted materials for the building exteriors, in that an uncertain percentage of EIFS (Exterior Insulation Finishing System) is utilized as an exterior finish. §23B.09.E(2): The Applicant's presentation of the Proposal did not include all required architectural exhibits, in that no perspective color renderings showing the proposed building from locations along U.S. 31 were provided to the Commission, and the building elevations that 2 were provided did not show how the parking structure would be ventilated nor how openings to the parking structure would fit in with the rest of the building. §23B.10.02.C(1): The Proposal does not show a planting area equal to an area measuring 25 feet in depth by the width of the front of the building plus 20 feet out on both sides along the building facade that faces U.S. 31, nor does it include as an alternative an innovative and original design for the planting area as encouraged by §23B.10.C(5). §23B.10.04: The Proposal does not make a reasonable effort to protect and incorporate the existing stands of trees into the overall site design, in that fewer than 70% of all trees that are nine -inch DBH or larger and located within the perimeter buffering were preserved. §23B.16: The Proposal does not include a roof on the accessory structure for refuse storage. §24.02.B.3.a: The Applicant's presentation of the Proposal did not include a traffic study that provided a meaningful comparative analysis of present volumes on streets bordering the development, in that the traffic data that were provided were flawed due to the times of day studied (ignoring traffic generated by Carmel High School students at school start/close times) or dates of study (data having been compiled during Carmel High School vacation periods). Filed in the Office of the Carmel Plan Commission this 30 day of May, 2008. Leo Dierckman President ATTEST: R,mona Hancock Secretary 3 Page 1 of 2 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:42 PM To: 'Michael L. DeBoy' Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P; 'John Molitor; 'Dave Coots' Subject: FW: Holiday Inn Here is the email that Carol was referring to. To be honest, I am not sure ever sent it to the petitioners, but perhaps Carol emailed the petitioner directly, since she had phone conversations with Dave Coots. Regardless, Staff did a thorough review of the project when it was filed. Angie From: Ron Carol Schleif [mailto:schleif @indy.rr.com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 3:19 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: Holiday Inn Angie, Thank you for diligently following up on all our comments Could you forward this to the commission? Everyone, I assume someone asked the petitioner to request my input on this project. When Dave Coots called, I mentioned to him that I felt that until the site issues (parking trees) were resolved, that it was a waste of time to address the architectural issues in this project. He forwarded that to Mike DeBoy, who sent me a updated few plans, and here are my thoughts: In general, this project is too large for this site given its topography and existing trees. Here's why I feel this way: All the listed concerns in the department report. Site Plan: Question: What kind of permeable pavers are they using? Request: Please show the slope of the driveway to the underground parking. There is a large drop here and will be tricky when icy. Building Setback Concern: In order to get the necessary parking the building has been moved 20 feet to the east. As I read the report, they agreed to 40 feet from the property line. (This was probably done to get an additional row of parking) Solution: Move the building back to where it was approved 40'. Location Character of Parking. Concern: There is too much paving in this project. Solution: The parking area could be redesigned to be more efficient (eg. the west corner) Concern: Parking requirement is too much for this site resulting in a steep driveway, many retaining walls and clear- cutting of most of the existing trees. Solution: Parking should be designed around large existing trees. If not, the square footage of the building should be reduced to allow for more room and a more logical parking lot layout. Concern: Underground parking drawings don't show structural columns (24" diameter) that can decrease the parking count significantly. Solution: Finish this drawing so that we have an accurate parking count. Concern: Parking aisle could be Tess. Solution: We have used 20' parking aisles for decades (with 90 degree 3/5/2009 Page 2 of 2 parking spaces). If we could save some trees, this might be worth a waver..... Site Landscaping Screening_ Concern: Insufficient screening with neighbor to the east. The retaining wall is there because they are too close to the property line. Solution: Move the building back to 40 feet from the property line. Concern: The use of Honeylocust to screen the neighbor to the east is insufficient, and will be negligible in the winter time. Solution: Use evergreen trees, at least 1 story tall (12 -18 ft tall). Concern: Only have deciduous plantings on entire site that will be bare in the winter. Solution: Use a varied of evergreen, deciduous and multi -stem or ornamental plantings. 30% evergreen, 30% deciduous with variety in the remainder works well, and would allow for winter greenery. Tree Preservation Plan: Concern: Scott Brewer mentioned that all the buffer area trees are required to be preserved. According to the latest drawings dated "2- 15 -07" (please correct date), only a few trees will remain on the site. Most of the ones shown on the tree preservation plan (drawing TP1) will die due to construction of retaining walls on top of their roots, or due to the installation of the sewer line in the SE corner of the lot. Only 1 medium sized tree on the west corner, and 6 small trees in the northeast corner of the site will live, IF they are protected with sufficient fencing during construction. Solution: I would like see more concern for the existing trees and site topography in this petition. The number of retaining walls speaks mountains! Architectural Issues: Concern: Without going into lots of detail, this building a "box with two projections on it This is why we spent so much time amending the US 31 and 421 overlays. Solution: 1. It needs to have variable square footages on upper floors so that the building mass will vary. 2. The roofline needs to vary regularly in a frequency that is proportionate to the length of the building. 3. The plan and elevations need changes in volumes that could be achieved through bump -outs or additional wings. Concern: Though already mentioned in the dept. report, this is a special concern. If the mechanicals are going onto the roof, they may show according to the elevations. Are they near the elevator shafts? Solution: If not, this is another reason to modulate the roofline be less box -like. General concerns: This site is being clear cut for a use that was supposed/ approved to be a medical building (and requires less parking than this use). Bottom line: My sense is that there the petitioner may not be willing to what is needed for this project. Therefore, this project should probably be on a larger site. See you all tomorrow! Carol 3/5/2009