Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 05-17-11Of CA2 A A ❑V /NDIANp City of Carmel CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION MAY 17, 2011 City Hall Council Chambers, 2nd Floor One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 6:00 PM Members Present: John Adams, Leo Dierckman, Jay Dorman, Brad Grabow, Judy Hagan, Steve Lawson, Kevin "Woody" Rider, Steve Stromquist, Sue Westermeier, Ephraim Wilfong Members Absent: Nick Kestner DOCS Staff Present: Director Michael Hollibaugh, Angie Conn; Legal Counsel John Molitor Also Present: Ramona Hancock, Plan Commission Secretary Minutes of the April 19, 2011 meeting were approved as submitted Legal Counsel Report, John Molitor: House Bill 1311 was recently signed by the Governor; will be taking effect and will present some opportunities and challenges in the next year. Dept Announcements/Report, Angie Conn: Two tabled items Legacy PUD, Turkey Hill Minit Market auto fueling station, tabled to June 21 and Woodland Terrace CCRC, also continued to June 21 Distributed this evening are letters regarding The Bridges PUD petition, and First and Sixth NW Primary Plat petition. Welcome to John Adams, new Plan Commission member. H. Public Hearings 1. Docket No. 11030008 PP: First and Sixth NW Primary Plat. The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 2 lots on 0.98 acres. Also, a waiver is requested from the Subdivision Control Ordinance: 2. Docket No. 11030009 SW SCO Chptr 6.05.01: lot width at road right of way. The site is located at 610 First Ave NW, and is zoned R- 2/Residence within the Old Town Overlay Character Subarea. Filed by Justin Moffett of The Old Town Design Group. Present for Petitioner: Justin Moffett, Old Town Design Group. Overview: Site located at First Avenue NW and Sixth Street NW First Avenue NW is the eastern border of the property; the Monon Trail is the western border, S:/P1anCommission/M inutes/ P1anCommissionMinutes /PCMinutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may 17 WWW.CARMEL.IN.GOV 317 -571 -2417 approximately two blocks south of Eighth Street NW, a/k/a/ 136 Street and Smokey Row Road Proposal splits the property into two home lots —one is the existing home, the other lot would be vacant at this time The proposed division plan would create an east and west lot rather than a north and south lot If the property were developed following the Zoning Ordinance exactly, there would be two lots approximately 60 feet wide and 357 feet deep Waiver request is appropriate in this circumstance which allows existing landscape to be retained and large, mature trees can be preserved Proposed lots will be %2 acre each; western lot would have a 20 -foot wide access drive from First Ave NW back to the lot Existing garage to be razed and a new one constructed for the older home A 5 -foot landscape buffer will be included between proposed, new drive and property to the north In addition to mailing required public notices, the petitioner contacted Carmel /Clay Historical Society and offered to meet with the Director —the Director was personally in favor of the proposed plan but could not speak for the Society Proposed home would be a custom home with value of $500,000/600,000 and required to go thru Site Design Review process Remonstrance/Favorable: Russell Schwartz, 510 First Avenue NW, supports the proposal and believes the petitioner has been sensitive to the historic nature of the existing house preserved the streetscape Jeff King, 431 First Avenue NW, supports the proposal and believes it will be an enhancement to the neighborhood Remonstrance, General/Unfavorable: Sumera Baker (Khan) owner of property located at 634 First Avenue NW; concern with preservation of trees /shrubs, safety of her children in the yard, closeness of adjacent driveway, and unsightly tank on the property. Ms. Baker requests petitioner provide a 6 -foot fence for security, prevent cars parking in her yard, and preservation of trees. Public Hearing Closed Justin Moffet's response: The evergreens on the south property line were discussed, not the ones on the north .-roperty line that are on Sumera Khan's property two different sets of trees. Sumera Khan owns but does not live 'n the property, it is a rental, and no children have been seen playing in the yard. Previous owner had gravel to the property line and parked an RV in that location. The property was well -known for being overgrown with landscaping. The tanks are hog roasters being stored for a church that existing condition would go away everything currently in the garage will be removed and the garage torn down. A 6 -foot fence along the property line in Old Town Carmel would be out of place. A landscape buffer is being committed to that is above and beyond the requirements of Subdivision Control Department Comments, Angie Conn: Department recommends approving this item subject to installation of a fence Old Town Overlay regulations are for a 4 -foot tall, picket -type fence Department recommends suspending the Rules of Procedure and approving this item after concerns are addressed S:/ P1 anCommission/ Minutes/ PlanCommissionMinutes /PCMinutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may 17 2 WWW.CARMEL. RGOV 317- 571 -2417 Commission Members Comments /Questions: Confirm Fence Guidelines in the Old Town Overlay (Part of the lot is considered a front yard and the fence height could not be greater than 3 %2 --4 feet tall; the fence could not be 6 feet the entire length) Does the driveway stay exactly as shown or shift slightly? (driveway stays on the south side of the Hosta plants —as proposed, existing drive would shift to the north a little but not toward the property line will make that a commitment—petitioner will also commit to a 5 -foot landscape buffer along the driveway the drive will be as much as 20 feet away from Sumera Khan's property /existing house —the drive will clear the light pole) Site Design Review? (Administrative Review to maintain the character of Old Town) Existing Garage —torn down and re- located? (Will be torn down and a new one constructed for the older home —newly constructed home will have a garage structure as part of the home) Pine tree shown on Sumera's property —trunk hidden behind light pole petitioner will trim tree that overhangs but would not remove the tree Fence Dept says if fence is truly in the side or rear yard, it can be six feet tall and is not required front yard can be 3 '/2 -4 feet picket fence style Justin Moffett: The Urban Forester has done a site review; the petitioner also has an arborist for the site the tree preservation plan and landscape plan have been approved by Urban Forester. Note: Petitioner will incorporate preservation measures for Pine tree on adjoining property Motion: Woody Rider to suspend the Rules of Procedure to allow additional public comments from Sumera Khan (Baker) seconded by Ephraim Wilfong; 10 in favor, none opposed, Motion Approved. Sumera Khan (Baker) asked for clarification as to what would be done with the tree that is on the property line. Ms. Khan showed pictures of parked cars along the property line in the yard and rusted tanks. Motion: Woody Rider to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to vote on this item this evening, seconded by Ephraim Wilfong; voted 6 in favor, 4 opposed (Westermeier, Hagan, Grabow, Lawson) Motion Denied Justin Moffett commented that if the tree is not his sole property /ownership, he does not have the right to cut it down. Commission member suggested angling the drive to by -pass and preserve the tree. The site plan has not yet been finalized and making a commitment regarding positioning the drive is not appropriate at this time. The pine tree is a white pine, a good screen tree —not expensive --can either be replaced or branches trimmed. Docket No. 11030008 PP, First and Sixth NW Primary Plat, and No. 11030009 SW were referred to the Subdivision Committee for further review at 6:00 PM on Tuesday, June 7, 2011. Motion: Sue Westermeier to allow Subdivision Committee to cast a final vote on Docket No. 11030008 PP, First and Sixth NW Primary Plat and No. 11030009 SW, seconded by Leo Dierckman, voted 10 -0 Motion Approved. 3. TABLED TO JUNE 21: Docket No. 10110012 DP /ADLS: Legacy PUD -Turkey Hill Minit Market. The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for an automobile fuel station, retail store, carwash and also seeks the following zoning waiver approval: 4. TABLED TO JUNE 21: Docket No. 10110013 ZW: Section 9.02, Legacy PUD ordinance Z- 501 -07, maximum 15 -ft front yard building setback. The site is located at 7729 E. 146 St. (at River Rd.) and is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development. Filed by Charlie Frankenberger of Nelson Frankenberger. S:/ PlanCommission/ Minutes/ PlanCommissionMinutes /PCMinutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may 17 3 WWW.CARMEL.IN.GOV 317 -571 -2417 5. Docket No. 11040003 DP Amend: Walnut Creek Drive Extension Amend. The applicant seeks development plan amendment approval to extend Walnut Creek Dr. south to 98th St. and modify that drive's currently approved design. The site is located at the north- east corner of 98 St. and Michigan Rd., just south of West Carmel Marketplace. The site is zoned B -3 /Business within the Michigan Rd /US 421 Overlay Zone. Filed by Bill Armstrong. Present for Petitioner: Brian Cross, Civil Site Group, 643 Massachusetts Avenue, Indianapolis; Bill Armstrong. Overview: Originally reviewed by Plan Commission October 2010 Have worked to provide other options for access extension of Walnut Creek Drive Walnut Creek Drive is a private drive that runs thru West Carmel Marketplace Petitioner has worked with DOCS Staff as well as legal counsel John Molitor to come to a resolution as to how to make this access connect to 98 Street Access drive is now a part of the City of Carmel with the annexation Proposed new alignment shown to make connection possible Property controlled by Mr. Armstrong is approximately 3.26 acres and includes Block H lot of Carmel Marketplace Proposed for amendment is the alignment Petitioner will dedicate a public, City easement right -of -way to the City for the benefit of the public, health and safety Easement will encompass 36 -foot wide drive thru the alignment and up thru the connection to Walnut Creek Drive on West Carmel Marketplace's development Petitioner has re- designed storm sewer structure and investigated new utility re- locations due to the alignment change Alignment is in the best interest of property owner as well as the City of Carmel Lane striping has been added as well as a double yellow line not a residential street, but it is 36 feet wide typical lane widths are 12 -13 feet and lots of room to maneuver Typical lane signage is also being added As agreed by DOCS and legal counsel, the Extension Amendment is best course of action for petitioner City of Carmel to perpetuate extension of Walnut Creek Drive to 98 Street and also meet the Michigan Road Overlay Ordinance requirement for connectivity Favorable Remonstrance: one Unfavorable Remonstrance: Greg Ewing, Land Planner with Bingham McHale, 10 West Market Street, Suite 2700, Indianapolis, representing West Carmel Marketplace, LLC, owner of West Carmel Marketplace Shopping Center and owner of existing Walnut Creek Drive as a private street West Carmel Marketplace recognizes that it may make good planning sense to extend Walnut Creek Drive West Carmel Marketplace also recognizes that any development plans for property south of the current terminus of Walnut Creek Drive may need to consider its extension as an element of that development Independent of this petition but clearly related, to date there has not been fruitful discussions S:/PlanCommission/M inutes/P IanCommissionMinutes/PCM inutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may 17 4 WWW.CARMEL.IN.GOV 317 -571 -2417 between West Carmel Marketplace LLC and Bill Armstrong To date, there is no cross access agreement in place between these two private property owners Any commercial landowner with a private drive would have a variety of issues which need to be resolved before another adjoining landowner is allowed to connect to that private drive Issues include: liability, restrictions from tenants, drainage, etc Regardless of the outcome of this petition, West Carmel Marketplace wants to be on record that the cross access agreement between these two private property owners needs to be in place before the extension of Walnut Creek Drive, a private drive, is physically constructed Lou Visco of Casto, parent entity for West Carmel Marketplace, LLC Columbus, Ohio asked Mr. Ewing to relay to the Commission Casto's continued willingness to engage in discussions with Bill Armstrong toward a cross access agreement Record shows that no cross access agreement exists at this time, and it is believed that it should be in place before the connection is completed Public Hearing Closed Rebuttal, Brian Cross: As indicated by the remonstrator, Walnut Creek Drive is part of the West Carmel Marketplace development Documentation from the recorded plat of West Carmel Marketplace shows that the intent of the previously approved development plan of West Carmel Marketplace was the continuation of the private drive for the perpetuity, thru to 98 Street that as the Development Plan approval in 2003 Another item to consider is that as previously stated, Mr. Armstrong owns Block H contained within the plat of West Carmel Marketplace; as property owner, Mr. Armstrong has ability and is already under certain restrictions within the plat of West Carmel Marketplace for access, not only access for utilities drainage, but also with restrictions on use as it pertains to retail development that could include tenancy, for instance, if there was an existing tenant in West Carmel Marketplace, a competing tenant could not construct a facility on this lot Mr. Armstrong purchased this particular piece of property from Duke in an effort to mitigate these possible issues with West Carmel Marketplace Because Mr. Armstrong is a property owner within West Carmel Marketplace, he has divisible access to that road This current proposal is the best solution Rebuttal, Bill Armstrong: Bill Armstrong, 10654 Sunset Point Lane, Fishers, stated that in the past, discussions have occurred with Casto concerning the access that would align perfectly with Walnut Creek Drive. Last conversation concerning the matter was with Linda Schwenger, Exec. V -P with Casto, who informed Bill Armstrong that they would have some requirements that would be demanded prior to any connection. In a 12/08/2010 email, Mr. Armstrong said he would look forward to receiving those requirements and demands; nothing further has been heard from her It is incorrect to say that we have not had efforts in the past to devise some way to connect to the road The current proposal is the most reasonable, alternate solution to connect By all agreements in place, with the easement to the City of Carmel, we have the right to S:/PlanCommission/ Minutes/ PlanCommissionMinutes /PCMinutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may 17 W W W.CARMEL.IN.GOV 317 -571 -2417 construct the roadway easement into Block H Dept Comments, Angie Conn: This petition is similar to the one heard a few months ago Dept recommends suspending the Rules of Procedure and voting for approval, subject to engineering Dept approval of final construction documents Motion: Woody Rider "To suspend the Rules of Procedure," seconded by Steve Stromquist, Motion Unanimously approved. Motion: Leo Dierckman "To approve Docket No. 11040003 DP Amend, Walnut Creek Drive Extension Amend," seconded by Sue Westermeier, voted 10 in favor, none opposed, Motion Approved I. Old Business 1. Docket No. 10100006 DP /ADLS: AutoZone Park Northwestern, Lot 1. The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a new 7,370 sq. ft. store on 1.59 acres. The site is located at 10560 N. Michigan Rd. and is zoned I- 1/Industrial within the Michigan Rd/US 421 Overlay Zone. Filed by Jeff Kauerz for AutoZone Stores, Inc. Present for Petitioner: Nathan White, Innovative Engineering. Overview: Petitioner requests approval for site plan and design New store is 7,370 square feet on 1.59 acres Site is at 10560 Michigan Rd within US 421 Overlay Zone Store is typical AutoZone —auto parts accessories Store complies with Overlay Zone Connection drive agreement is being worked out with adjacent land owner Drive to LA Fitness will be made thru to Northwestern Drive Submittal being made to Hamilton County Drainage Board for approval Dept Comments, Angie Conn: Dept recommends approval at this time Subdivision Committee Report, Brad Grabow: Petitioner has worked cooperatively with Committee Dept Petitioner has bent over backwards to bring a project that could be viewed favorably Architectural relief element on right side wall which is a 8 -foot bump -out Bump -out adds no extra square footage to the interior of the store but petitioner is going to the expense to provide a more attractive exterior to the store and comply with Carmel development standards Stub road exists in front of LA Fitness behind Mike's Car Wash and Nat'l Bank of Indpls and dead ends just short of Northwestern Drive the corner of this property Petitioner, at his expense, will connect the road thru to Northwestern Drive for continuous access to 106'' Street, subject to negotiations with owner of LA Fitness property Motion: Brad Grabow "To approve Docket No. 10100006 DP /ADLS, AutoZone Park Northwestern, Lot 1," seconded by Woody Rider, voted 10 -0, Motion Approved. S:/PlanCommission/M inutes/ PlanCommissionMinutes /PCMinutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may17 6 W W W.CARMEURGOV 317 -571 -2417 Comprehensive Plan, and the inherently transitional character of The Bridges There were two meetings regarding traffic; the Dept of Engineering's comments at this stage of the zoning have been fully satisfied The petitioner must return to the Plan Commission for DP /ADLS approval of all actual, future development In all instances, the petitioner must return to the Plan Commission prior to receiving any building permits for DP /ADLS approval Topic of traffic has been fully vetted exhausted Under City C -3 Plan, this parcel is no longer designated as residential; however all areas west of Spring Mill retain their estate /residential characterization C -3 Plan identifies this parcel as a transitional site and places the parcel within the US 31 corridor and identifies as a main focus of US 31, the promoting of high quality employment, development, and restaurants and service uses needed to offer residents workers options for shopping and dining Committee also reviewed transition: The Bridges embraces all forms of transition observed by the Comprehensive Plan; roads, setbacks, use transitions, stair stepping down of building heights, and landscape buffers. Examples given of restrictions in PUD and revised concept plan; uses eliminated as permitted uses; restriction of uses in commercial amenity use block During Committee process, numerous comments were poured over and resolved; the cumulative economic impact of all revisions taken together represents a very substantial, economic investment Examples given of restrictions in PUD and revised concept plan Following uses eliminated as permitted uses: indoor theatre, dry- cleaning establishment with on- site plant, and private helicopter land service facility Following uses can occur only within the commercial amenity use block and within 300 feet of Illinois Street: automobile service station, car wash, ve,erinary hospital with indoor kennel, restaurant and drive -thru food sales and hotel Office development capped at 200,000 square feet prior to the extension of Illinois Street south to 111 th Street If located within the office /residential use block, hospitals and hotels are permitted only within 600 feet of Illinois Street and in excess of 300 feet of 111 Street Fire Stations have been prohibited; the cap on apartments has been reduced from 350 to 300 Definition of conceptual character imagery has been re•1 iced to state clearly that conceptual character imagery, attached to and a part of the PUD Ordinance, are intended o establish a benchmark for architecture and design of buildings; requirements reviewed for concealing antennae; landscape buffer for landscaping Requirements that antennae be concealed or camouflaged have been added Landscape buffer requirements have been added south of the commercial amenity use block as well as a requirement of an undulating mound with 8 -foot evergreens planted 15 feet on center with respect to the buffer adjacent to 111 th Street and Spring Mill Road in the vicinity of the existing neighborhoods discretion to cluster the evergreens in this area has been eliminated Conclusion: The Bridges is a tremendous, mixed -use community and community asset with community wide benefits Petitioner requests forwarding to City Council with a favorable recommendation S: /P1anCommission/ Minutes /P1anCommissionM inutes/PCM inutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may 17 8 W W W.CARMEL.IN.GOV 317 571 -2417 Department Comments, Angie Conn: Important Points touched on by Charlie Frankenberger Over -all, DOCS feels this development is a net positive improvement for the City of Carmel Dept recommends forwarding to City Council with a favorable recommendation Special Studies Committee Summary, Steve Stromquist: 4 Committee Meetings held on this Development First Meeting, traffic, which was an issue and continues to be a big issue The Bridges went through a careful, lengthy, and thorough review process, unlike any previous development Committee members disappointed in multiple access off Spring Mill Road Current full access had been talked about as right in -right out due to Engineering request Email comments concerns submitted by entire Commission to Special Studies Committee Petitioner did an excellent job of identifying and addressing points submitted by Commission members Petitioner agreed to modify the PUD to allow 300 apartment units Extensive buffering was discussed a wall of evergreens will be used for buffer at 111 Street and Spring Mill Road No neon signage permitted anywhere in the exterior of The Bridges, no up- lighting, no cove lighting, absolutely no neon signage tenant signage on inside of building would allow neon Public Service facilities allowed include a police sub station or any other city expansion with the exception of a fire department Buffering of apartments at 111 th Street and Spring Mill Road will require petitioner to work with Dept Recommendation Vote of Special Studies to Plan Commission was 3 in favor, none opposed Commission Members Comments: All due thanks for time and effort from all parties, including public; would like to have had a commitment from Mike McBride, Dept of Engineering on extension of Illinois Street to 100 Street sooner than 2016; traffic is still an issue; size of retail development is an issue, but depends on quality of development; concern with C -3 Plan as far as linking/accessing residents by biking walking to daily goods, but this can be worked out In general, a lengthy process with a lot of input; developer has made concessions adjustments in response to input; if done right, will be great for the area Not sure a fire station can be excluded; Comprehensive Plan and a variety of studies reflect the expectations of residents and developers along the Spring Mill Road residential corridor. Expectation remains that Illinois Street is the western boundary of the commercial uses of the US 31 corridor and point of transition from Spring Mill residential to corridor commercial; all development along the Illinois alignment has had to comply with this expectation, including the Clarian Hospital PUD with has residential immediately north of this project. A special study area was established on this site because a number of interests intersect on this site —that special study has not yet been undertaken. This proposal is not consistent with existing plans or expectations; no doubt any development would make an economic contribution to the community in the short term, but is this the highest and best use on this site for the future? The question is, "Is this the appropriate way to transition from the very important, commercial corridor to the equally important residential development along Spring Mill Road? Definition S:/PlanCommission/ Minutes/ P1anCommissionMinutes /PCMinutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may] 7 9 WWW.CARMEL. RGOV 317 -571 -2417 of a PUD reviewed current PUD development is deficient in comprehensive development and detail standards —it is open -ended and too broadly drawn. Parking lots studded with buildings are no longer the highest and best use of land; large parking lots generate and attract traffic rather than mitigate —swaths of asphalt are not open space; big boxes are not amenity nodes. There is no commitment to owner occupied residential in the PUD. Traffic issues are not resolved; Illinois Street construction does not have a time line yet; simultaneous development of all four corners of Spring Mill Road requires a very comprehensive look at traffic management. A roundabout with retail and institutional uses on four corners sounds like a roundabout that is going to fail. Roundabouts should not be over loaded for future failure and pave the way for larger, impersonal intersections. There is no shortage of appropriately zoned land or corridor amenity space inventory; nothing precluding any of the corridor office buildings from providing the retail or restaurants requested in their buildings already if the demand exists. Making use of the number of existing vacant locations would strengthen the corridor properties. These points were made in a draft of 2009 strategic plan task force document. As a Plan Commission, a number of variances have been granted for height reduction in the corridor; current PUD proposal would place taller buildings off the corridor. Carmel standards and expectations are the creation of a walkable and human scale community. This community does not have to accept every development that comes along in order to be financially sound. Our responsibility is to think as long term as possible for the future economic health of both commercial and residential. As noted in staff comments, the project concept plan is not quite consistent with the Dept or community goals for a more human- scaled, walkable, and mixed use design; the contribution of the proposal does not overcome its shortcomings. A bike -path or pedestrian walkway should be worked out between the developer and the city. If this is approved, rather than waiting until completion, the paths should be constructed up front. ....Experience the same traffic issues as residents in the area also live in an area of west Carmel where first hand experience is the lack of amenities in this area....drives to 86 Ditch for a drugstore or grocery— crossing Meridian is not an option with a 4- minute stoplight at 116 and Meridian. Proposed project offers an amenity and convenience to residents of Carmel who live near this area. Bike pedestrian access internal to this project is well thought -out and extensive ...problem not the fault of this petition is that it is not connected to anything outside the project. If/when this project becomes reality, the hope is the City will up -date its transportation plan to include pedestrian bike access that extends beyond this project to those who live nearby so we can take advantage of it and not be isolated from it. Glad to see although disappointed —that encouragement for reduced parking requirement due to mixed use nature of project could not be taken further. This will be the first project in the City of Carmel that truly combines a location where one can work, live, shop, and eat without ever leaving the area by car. The same number of parking spaces would not be needed as the zoning ordinance currently calls for. The use of asphalt could be reduced and more greenspace incorporated. The Ordinance as drafted leaves a lot open ended, and can empathize with the remonstrators with the lack of precision that many may find fault with in this petition. From the developer's standpoint, flexibility is a necessity. The economy, types of tenants that might be attracted to this development, and a host of other reasons, including financial, require the flexibility to make this project viable. The reality is, the precision that most of us want so we can get comfortable with the facts and certainty are not available to the degree that we might like at this point, but the process of architectural design, lighting, and standards review that the Commission will follow as the project rises from the ground will ensure that the standards of the zoning ordinance are adhered to as the project is built and that is where the real test will be in making this a successful project. S:/ PlanCommission/ Minutes/ PlanCommissionMinutes MCMinutes2011 /PC -2011 -may] 7 10 W W W.CARMEL.IN.GOV 317 -571 -2417 This project will be a good transition between Illinois and Spring Mill, especially with buffering and the reduced height along Spring Mill and 111 Street corner. Restaurant uses will be great for all the office workers in the area, and they will appreciate not having to cross US 31 or drive farther to eat. One, over looked fact is that US 31 is currently being up- graded to an interstate and at some point in the near future, the residents west of US 31 will have a very frustrating time and may always go to 86 th Ditch because it will be impossible to go east. These services would be a great amenity. A doctor that lives at 116 Hoover Road was very happy to hear that these uses will be available in the near future and he will have less distance to drive to provide for his family. Fruitful discussions have occurred with the developer and the area residents; things were agreed on, things were not agreed on. In every decision the Plan Commission makes, some form of the population will be made unhappy. If The Bridges is approved at Council, it will be the engine that drives the construction of Illinois Street. Once Illinois Street is built, it will create opportunities for other things to happen in the corridor. We worked to get the buildings lower along Illinois Street, closer to the residential neighborhood; a single story nation -wide is known as good planning/transitioning —it is what you do. This development has a lot of potential. The challenges are size, scale and scope; the developer is asking for flexibility to move buildings within different blocks, but the City has not finalized the alignment of Illinois Street. There is a variance process for the size of buildings; there is building mass that is a concern. Traffic has been mentioned multiple times. There was nothing seen in the PUD regarding hours of operation for delivery of products as was done when Kroger wanted to construct a store on 421 /Michigan Road, and limiting hours of service trucks such as trash pick -up at strange hours. Owner occupied is certainly preferable to a true apartment rental. Comments to the public: Whatever vote is taken this evening, this item will be forwarded to the City Council for public hearing and will then be reviewed by a Committee before final vote by Council. Motion: Leo Dierckman to forward Docket No. 10120008 Z, The Bridges PUD to the City Council with a favorable recommendation," seconded by Brad Grabow. The vote was 8 in favor, 2 opposed (Dorman and Hagan) Motion Approved. J. New Business None K. Adjourned a 7.40 PM r ro MV Hancock, Secretary S:/PlanCommission/ Minutes/ PlanCommissionMinutes /PCMinutes2011 /PC- 2011 -may 17 W W W.CARM EL.IN.GOV WAP 1 Jay Dorman, President 317 571 -2417