HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Sub 07-05-11 CA
T q� i Rs
0 f c r: e l
_ii CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
JULY 5, 2011 Meeting
LOCATION: CAUCUS ROOMS, 2 FLR TIME: 6:00 P.M.
CARMEL CITY HALL (DOORS OPEN AT 5:30 P.M.)
ONE CIVIC SQUARE
CARMEL, IN 46032
The Subdivision Committee met to discuss the following item:
Representing the Committee:
Brad Grabow, Chairperson; Judy Hagan; Steve Lawson; Ephraim Wilfong, John Adams
Representing the Department:
Angie Conn, Planner; Lisa Stewart, Recording Secretary
Representing the Petitioner: Jim Shinaver N &F, Jon Dobosiewicz N &F Walt Justus Owner, Chris
White Consultant, Dan Ware InterDesign (Architect) Rick Reynolds EMHT (Engineer), Robert
Markette Attorney with Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan Aronoff LLP Street Overlay. Filed by Charlie
Frankenberger of Nelson Frankenberger, on behalf of Justus Homes.
Of Counsel: John Molitor
1. TABLED TO AUG. 2: Docket No. 11040005 ADLS Amend: Ed Martin Signage.
d Overlay
Zonc. Filed by George Small, AIA, of Design Point Inc.
2 -3. Docket No. 11020013 DP /ADLS: Woodland Terrace CCRC.
The applicant seeks site plan design approval for a continuing care retirement community
(CCRC) on 7 acres. The application also seeks the following zoning waiver request:
Docket No. 11030006 ZW: Ordinance Chapter 23.08.01.D: front building setback.
The site is located at 136 Street (Smokey Row Rd.) and Pro Med Lane, and is zoned B-
6 /Business, within the US 31/ Meridian Street Overlay. Filed by Charlie Frankenberger of Nelson
Frankenberger, on behalf of Justus Homes, Inc.
3. Docket No. 11020013 DP /ADLS: Woodland Terrace CCRC
The applicant seeks site plan design approval for a continuing care retirement community (CCRC) on 7
acres. The applicant also seeks for the following zoning waiver request:
Page 1 of 1
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317- 571 -2417
July 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
Docket No. 11030006 ZW: Ordinance Chapter 23.08.01.D: front building setback.
The site located at 136 Street and Pro Med Lane, and is zoned B -6 /Business, within the US 31 /Meridian
Overview:
Jon Dobosiewicz presented for the petitioner:
Reviewed changes made in the plan for the project
The building set back has been adjusted 10 ft.
Parking lot has been adjusted an additional 58 ft.
Tree preservation, open space area has been increased by 40%
The garage that was closest to Pro -Med Drive has been eliminated
The building closest to the neighbors in Kensington Place was reduced from 4 stories to
3, the parapet was also modified to 1 story
Elevations have been outlined in different colors in Tab 4 to show renderings of the
elevation as seen from the east of the development. This would be what the neighbors
see.
On the southeast wing of the building half of the fourth floor was removed along with the
parapet
Mr. Dobosiewicz reviewed the cross section in Tab 6, and clarified that this area meets
the. Ordinance Requirements. He further indicated that the even though the development
met the Ordinance Requirement, Justus did add an additional 10 ft. set back and the
reduction of one story.
Previously the building was 67.33 ft. from the property line and was 43.33 ft. tall, it is now
84 ft. back from the property line and is 40 ft. high
There will be 24 additional plantings
Tab 10 provides an illustration of the location of the off -site path as currently proposed.
The basement area of the building is centrally located and does not extend out to other
areas.
Tab 12 shows the building perspective from Smokey Row.
An exhibit was distributed showing a shadow line study that was produced by the
architect. This rendering was produced using December 21 when the sun is lowest in the
sky. All of the shaded area falls into the Justus site and not onto the Kensington site.
Staff Comments:
Angie Conn indicated that John and Virginia Kerr has sent out emails to Committee members. They also
requested that the Committee not vote on the Dockett to night due to the information that was discussed
at the Friday, July 1 meeting.
The Department's stance is that we recommend approval. The Petitioner has met the Ordinance
requirements and meets it more now.
Subcommittee Comments
Additional information has been sent to the entire Plan Commission so that they
will have the benefit of the most up -to -date information. Feedback has been
received from members stated, however the Chairman indicated that there were
not comments that the Petitioner had not heard previously.
The Chairman indicated that there is a lot of new information before the
Committee tonight, most of it as a result of the meeting between the Petitioner
and Kensington Place neighbors held on Friday. Typically the Committee
Page 2 of 1
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317 571 -2417
July 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
receives information approximately 10 days in advance of the meeting. He
would like to see this go to the Plan Commission this month.
o Angie also suggested a special meeting next week.
Asked what was lost when the 10 parking spaces were added and 10 ft. of
building space was moved.
The Petitioner responded that some garage space was lost and the building was
actually moved the building 15 ft. on a diagonal on the site in an east /west
direction which moved the building 10 ft. west.
o The Committee appreciates that the Petitioner has taken initiative to meet with
the neighbors and have done things to work toward a solution. Acknowledged
that Justus has given u p land that they will not be able to generate income from
and will pay taxes on.
What constraints to you have when you slide the building on a diagonal are we
faced with Code problems, ordinance problems. The Petitioner responded that
there are no Ordinance problems. This change will not have an adverse impact
Asked why the 4 story parapet is 10.7' 5/8" why is the parapet that high?
Petitioner: It was thought from a proportion perspective that this height looked
better, particularly with the dormers that are being provided.
Committee asked if there is any possibility those parapets could be reduced to
the line of site as depicted in Tab 7, the second picture. It shows the lowest line
of site actually cutting through the 10 ft. parapet, maybe by 2 ft. At a minimum
could the parapet be reduced by that amount if not more?
o Petitioner indicated that at minimum they could be, since they are not
structural. The Petitioner stated that with the dormers it may not look quite right,
but the petitioners will give this request more thought.
Clarification was requested regarding garages and the spaces added at the north
end of the property. Is the number of parking spaces static or is there a net gain?
Petitioner indicated that there are the same numbers of spaces. Brad also asked
the cost of garage rental each month. Petitioner indicates from 50 $150 per
month.
Asked about the service drive when bringing it in for Pro Med drive what are
the constraints? Petitioner indicates that this was discussed with the Carmel
Fire Department and talked about access to the building in terms of firefighting
and they preferred an access off of Smokey Row to get to the building. So this
road was set up and an access road for deliveries and firefighting. The road is a
gentle slope.
Questioned lighting fixtures that would be visible on the east side
Petitioner indicated that lights are placed in the ceilings of the balconies light
will not e cast out in a sideways direction Complete lighting may be found in
the April and June packets under Tab 9
What is the mix of units? We did not lose total number of units, but did lose one
bedroom units, these were converted into studio units, changed the mix, but not
the total. Have the neighbors seen the new plans prior to this evening?
Petitioner: on Friday we reviewed potential revisions, took some renderings
based on ideas we received from the neighbors. They are seeing in detail those
changes that were discussed last Friday.
Is this project still being done in phases? Petitioner waiting to review cost
analysis.
Page 3 of 1
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDLANA 46032 317 571 -2417
July 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
Can changes be made after this approval if done in two phases NO
What changes will be made to the landscaping? Petitioner will have a consulting
arborist on site during construction who will work with the arborist for the City.
Will the building footprint be honored? YES inspectors will be aware that this is
a tight area.
Petitioner indicated they would agree to a DOCS inspection was made prior to
the pouring of the footers that verified the building set back
Would the Petitioner be willing to do one more study regarding the grade level,
and dropping the 0 grade level, just drop it down 3 or 4 feet, that is significant,
or at least give the Committee an understanding of what the technical problems
are doing that. Petitioner We had to set that basement floor higher that the low
point on the site which is the beehive at the property line. If they went lower
more mechanical means would be needed to move water.
Has the Petitioner received a new ROW easement for the path no easement is
needed.
Sharon Oldman representing Kensington Place (KP);
This was presented as a CCRC, is this a CCRC? It was presented as being 3
levels of care, IL, SNL, NH. Mr. Justus has indicated that a resident would stay
here until they needed to go to a nursing home. KP has questioned this
repeatedly. Why would residents have to leave to go to a nursing home. If this
is not a nursing home, then this does not fit on the City Of Carmel Schedule of
Uses. If this is only a retirement community then it is only an apartment and is
only low- income these are so small. The rent cannot be equivalent to what is
in the City Of Carmel. This project does not look like a CCRC, this is an
apartment building with 185 units crammed on 7 acres, it is 4 stories a walk
out basement which is a story.
Neighbors are not to be deprived of light and air. KP residents feel this project
will deprive them of light and air.
Ms. Oldman was in contact with Debbie Beers, of the Indiana State Department
of Health and discussed CCRC's. Ms. Beers indicated if there was to be a
Registered Nurse onsite, this has to be a licensed facility, otherwise the RN
cannot provide wound care or give injections
Asked that Justus Company review the 11 reasons why Holiday Inn project was
denied. Almost half of those reasons still apply to this project. Issues still
remain regarding trees being removed.
Questions regarding drainage have been raised. Mr. Doxtater has spoken with
someone from the City who indicates that the drainage plan is in progress.
Drainage is a major issue for KP; they see where the water flows into the
retention pond located in KP.
Several Ordinances are being questioned, along the 31 Overlay there is not to be
any parking in front of the building, it is to be in the rear, or if necessary to the
side. Every depiction shows parking right by Smokey Row Rd. and when
previously discussed, KP residents were told the front of the building is along
Smokey Row Rd Parking is in the wrong place against the Ordinance, and it is
not being addressed.
Page 4 of 1
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317 571 -2417
July 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
The Meridian Corridor Overlay also states that the longest line of the building
must be parallel to the road. This is not parallel to Meridian. Why are there
Ordinances if they are not going to be followed?
How tall is the building going to be. From the Sullivan's dining room straight
out to where the walkout basement is going to be at the same level of their first
floor. Also the parapet should be counted.
The ordinance does not say building line, it indicates the building and is very
clear. That is why issues that are being agreed to by Staff and Justus are based
on interpretation are completely contrary to what the Ordinance says.
Committee Response:
Brad Grabow stated that it is not unusual for engineering studies to follow Plan
Commission decisions. There are paid staff on the City's payroll whose
professional job and responsibility it is to address issues of engineering and
drainage and tree preservation and this body delegates its trust to those
professionals and as an indication of that trust it is also a very common that the
work by those individuals is completed after the work of the Plan Commission.
There are instances where the preference and/or requirement to see that work
prior to PC decision, but the common practice is we do development plan
review, then they do the engineering around that approved development plan.
Per the Ordinance height is defined based on feet, not stories and we do not have
except in limited circumstances and in the Comprehensive Plan itself, which is
only a guideline, height restrictions are expressed not in terms stories or
including or not including walkout basements, but in terms of height from the
ground of the principal floor up to the roof top and excluding by definition the
parapet. That does not always sit well with everyone on the Plan Commission,
but that it is the way the measurement if defined.
Petitioner Response:
Atty. Shinaver responded to the question in regard to the 3 levels of care. On
May 4t1 we did have quite a discussion regarding the 3 levels of care and at no
time was anything swept under the rug. There were questions regarding the
skilled nursing component at the June 21' meeting under exhibit 12 we
provided additional information regarding. Per DOCS staff, CCRC is a
permitted use on this real estate and we meet the definition of this use. If in the
future there was a concern with complying with Carmel's definition that would
be an issue that the staff would enforce. However, the way we propose the
facility to operate we meet that definition. Atty. Shinaver introduced Bob
Marquette, Esq. whose area of expertise is health care. Atty. Marquette
distributed a memo he had prepared answering concerns of the neighbors.
Bob Marquette
o Addressed whether or not the project meets Carmel's definition of a CCRC. The
remonstrators feel that the facility needs to be a skilled nursing facility to quality
for a CCRC. This is not a case. It is only required to provide 3 levels of care.
Justus does intend to provide 3 levels of care, independent living (not an
apartment complex), not defined by any governing body or regulatory group.
In a very narrow sense of the word it is an apartment, but that does not mean it is
Page 5 of 1
ONE CIVIC SQUARE C ARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317 571 -2417
July 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
not a continuing care facility. The difference between Woodland and an
apartment complex, are for instance, community social functions,
transportation. As the individuals who live in the community age, they have
access to other services and supports. You do not have to be licensed to provide
assisted living services. You can become a Medicaid provider which has a
registration requirement and that just means you are accepting Medicaid waiver
dollars. As the folk's age they can receive more services at this development and
do not have move into another facility i.e., nursing home, most do not want to go
into a facility. Then as their needs progress they can go into the skilled nursing.
When you call the State Department of Health and depending on who you speak
with you can get different answers. You can provide skilled nursing outside of a
facility; you do not have to be licensed. Woodland can provide all of these
services without being a nursing facility. Fewer nursing homes are being built,
people who need these services do not want to go into a facility. They want to
obtain services through home health, house call doctors, etc. do they can stay at
home. The object here is that this is the person's home, and they are able to
receive services without leaving home.
There will be Registered Nurses in the facility and they will hold the appropriate
licensure. Tab 11, is the floor plan of the basement, showing a therapy room,
nursing wellness area.
Committee Comments:
Mr. Adam's concern is not with the ordinance, it is with differentiating between
the different types of care provided. We do have a responsibility to do
something that could jeopardize the health of our people. How do you manage
care with the type of structure you have. Would like a better understanding how
to manage health and mental issues with just assisted living. Will visit another
Justus facility
Petitioner Comments:
In regard to light and air the shadows will be contained within their own site
development.
Set back is 84 ft to closest property line and building height of approximately 61
ft., and along property edge is 40 ft.. Additional information submitted to day
should cover concerns from neighbors.
All drainage plans have been included in the all brochures submitted to the Plan
Commission.
Reviewed previously outlined changes.
Meeting all ordinance requirements
Longest side of the building no frontage on US 31, frontage on Smokey Row
and Pro Med we meeting all the standards of the ordinance.
Page 6 of 1
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317- 571 -2417
July 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
Walt Justus comments:
Is not asking to be treated as an exception to the rule, have always tried to follow
the ordinance. We need to maximize the site. Very comfortable with what we
have presented for the site.
This is not our first go round with neighbors. We worked together and put a plan
together that was amendable
We are being made the exception, mud slinging, smoke screen, we are not
newcomers to this market we are developers of fine quality masonry buildings
senior living communities' as well residential housing. I have chosen what I feel
is the best team possible to develop this property.
We are defending, defending and coming up with changes upon changes, upon
changes
When does it end
Would not have started this project if it did not meet the ordinance
Brad Grabow comments:
I feel there is a lot yet for the Committee to digest within this new information.
We did not receive this information in enough time to review in a timely manner
Not appropriate to render a decision on that kind of timing
Two commitments all proposed improvements including the courtyard area be
constructed as part of phase I and even expand as to say if there ends up being a
roof top component to the green space that it could be a substitute or fulfill this
condition, second, the Department would certify to its satisfaction the proper site
location of the footers before they are poured.
Two conditions would be BZA approval of all appropriate or necessary
variances and if Brad needs to go to the BZA to testify on behalf of the variances
he will do that. The variances are critical to other subjective enhancements; the
other condition the City Engineering approval of the drainage plan.
Ephraim Wilfong comments:
Accept what staff has already approved
Disappointed that this had to come back again and not in favor in extending this
beyond tonight and should have a favorable recommendation.
John Adams comments
Need more time to study
Wants a special meeting —next week
Petitioner:
Not much more that can be changed will revise what can be revised but will
need time to make sure PC gets packets
John Adams moved that we continue this discussion this process a week from tonight, Tuesday, July 12.
Tabling this motion to 5 -0 approved to table until next week.
Special meeting will be held, Tuesday, July 12 at 6:00 p.m.
Page 7 of l
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARAMEL, INDIANA 46032 317 -571 -2417
July 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
Meeting adjourned: 8:10 pm
1
l V 4r
Br Gra ow, Ch rperson isa Stewart, Recording Secretary
Page 8 of 1
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317- 571 -2417