HomeMy WebLinkAboutSignage Revisions 4-28-11JAMES J. NELSON
CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER
JAMES E. SHINAVER
LAWRENCE J. KEMPER
JOHN B. FLATT
FREDRIC LAWRENCE
JAMES A. NICKLOY
CHRISTOPHER A. FERGUSON
Rachel Boone
City of Carmel
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
RE: The Bridges
Docket Nos. 10120008 Z
Dear Rachel:
The Bridges Ltr to R Boone DOCS response 042811
NELSON FRANKENBERGER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3105 EAST 98TH STREET, SUITE 170
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280
PHONE: 317 844 -0106
FACSIMILE: 317- 846 -8782
April 28, 2011
1 of 3
JANE B. MERRILL,
Of Counsel
JON C. DOBOSIEWICZ,
Land Use Professional
Below please see the agreed upon changes to the remaining comments regarding signage that we
discussed on April 25
1. Page 9: Definition of Sign Face: Logos may be a maximum of twenty -five percent of
the maximum sign area. This should be total sign area. Maximum makes me think
maximum square footage allowed, even if the sign itself is not that large. We have
removed the work "maximum" as requested.
2. Page 14: Section 6.5: decorative poles with fabric banners, tables and umbrellas,
advertising panels and ATM enclosures: It should be included in this section that any
signs on the above mentioned items shall be 3 sq. ft. or less to be considered incidental
signage. Section 6.5 has been reduced to a cross reference to Exhibit 6, Part 14 to
avoid duplication as agreed. Notes on standards have been added to Exhibit 6, Part 14
as requested.
3. Page 14: Section 6.5: There is a conflict with terms re "decorative poles with fabric
banners "banners" in section 9.11, and "incidental decorative banners" in section
9.14. The "decorative banners" I am assuming are for advertising purposes versus what
the Sign Ordinance allows (section 9.11) are very different things. Please use the same
language and clarify. Section 6.5 has been reduced to a cross reference to Exhibit 6,
Part 14 to avoid duplication as agreed. "Incidental decorative banners" noted in 9.14
has been changed to "Decorative poles with fabric banners" consistent with the text of
Exhibit 6, Part 14 as requested. In addition a reference to Section 9.13 and 9.14 has
been added to the item as agreed.
4. Page 14: Section 6.5: Advertising panels these are not defined anywhere. Is this what
you mean by murals in Section 9.9? If so, please change advertising panels to murals.
Murals is the correct term. Section 6.5 has been reduced to a cross reference to Exhibit
6, Part 14 to avoid duplication and the noted inconsistency.
5. Page 14: Section 6.5: Please see number 14 below. Please change for consistency.
Section 6.5 has been reduced to a cross reference to Exhibit 6, Part 14 to avoid
duplication and any inconsistency as agreed.
6. Page 21: Section 9 Signage Requirements: Can it be added here that all signage shall
be approved by the Plan Commission as part of a DP /ADLS? This would prevent the
need to include it in every section. "subject to ADLS approval" has been added to the
Section 9 as requested. As discussed it is required already per the ADLS process. This
addition of text is intended to provide consistency and avoid any confusion on the
requirement.
7 Page 22: Section 9.3: Directory signs: "street sign" style can this be included in the
definitions section? Or a drawing provided to be included in the PUD? I know we
discussed what it meant, but I would like a concrete definition and/or illustration for
future reference. A rendering has been added to Exhibit 13 as requested.
8. Page 24: Section 9.5: Commercial Building Signs H.: Does this mean if the building
is located 201' from the centerline signs can still face Spring Mill Rd.? Yes, it may.
No change was requested.
9. Page 25: Section 9.9: Window signs, Portable Signs and Murals: This section is too
broad /open -ended even though they have been limited to 10 murals at 100 sq. ft.
each. Without having buildings in place to see where the murals will go, it is hard to
support the concept. Also, I am completely against the off premise advertising concept.
Clay Terrace is only allowed to have murals that pertain to tenants/businesses within
the complex. There was also a condition applied that the month of June July 4 will
be donated for advertising for Carmel Fest. Has The Bridges offered to do the same? I
think if they can say that murals are allowed in the PUD, that is fine. But we should let
the Plan Commission determine what and on which buildings they are appropriate at
the appropriate time when the buildings are there, with limitations similar to those at
Clay Terrace:
a) Require Plan Commission ADLS Amendment approval
b) Signs pertain only to tenants/businesses located within the property no
off premise advertising
c) Signs are not oriented towards any public streets only visible to the
interior of the property
d) Signs are not illuminated
e) Signs do not interfere with architectural elements of the building
Section 9.9.B.1 has been amended to permit not more than 3 murals of this type as requested.
The Bridges Ltr to R Boone DOCS response 042811
2 of 3
10. Page 26: Section 9.12 C.: Should keep ground signs at 6' tall for consistency
throughout the PUD language. This change has been made as requested.
11. Page 26: Section 9.13: This section should refer back to Section 6.5 if that is in fact
what it is referring to for clarity. As discuss this refers to all signs of less than 3 square
feet in area. A reference is being added to Exhibit 6, Part 14 to Section 9.13as
requested.
12. Page 26: Section 9.14: Incidental decorative banners: Can we have a definition of this
included in the definitions section? I also think this statement about signs are limited to
three square feet in area should be included in section 6.5. Section 6.5 has been
reduced to a cross reference to Exhibit 6, Part 14 to avoid duplication as agreed.
"Incidental decorative banners" noted in 9.14 has been changed to "Decorative poles
with fabric banners" consistent with the text of Exhibit 6, Part 14 as requested. In
addition a reference to Section 9.13 and 9.14 has been added to the item as agreed.
13. Page 29: Section 13.1 Public Art: Public Art is not defined in the PUD nor in the
Zoning Ordinance. I want to make sure this category is not open to interpretation i.e.
the murals are public art and they can go anywhere the DP approves them.
Clarification has been added to Section 13.1 indicating that public art shall not be a
sign as regulated by the Bridges PUD.
14. Exhibit 6 page 9 of 10: Number 12, 15 and 18 have been changed here, but not in the
PUD Section 6.5. Please make the changes consistent. Section 6.5 has been reduced to
a cross reference to Exhibit 6, Part 14 to avoid duplication and any inconsistency as
agreed.
15. Definition of Conceptual Character Imagery: Remove "actually constructed" from the
last sentence of the definition as DOCS is not reviewing buildings as constructed but
rather as illustrated in the ADLS submittal. This change has been made as requested.
16. Text in the architectural requirements is redundant. Specifically Parts 11.B, 12.B and
13.B. This text has been deleted as requested.
The Bridges Ltr to R Boone DOCS response 042811
3 of 3