HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 08-02-11 CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
AUGUST 2, 2011
r '3 "i:,4 `+t s"4 r'Lf�C� 2{F?' ',�''�k i�
1 Docket LSAmendEd�Ma ge
Tbe lice t` seeks" a rovaltfo a riew w all si a e bu 1 din entry element. The site is located at 9896 N.
F pp pp g g rY
Michigan Rd and is zoned I -1 /Industrial within the Michigan Rd Overlay Zone. Filed by George Small, AIA, of
Design Point Inc.
The Petitioner seeks approval for a new exterior building entry element and new signage. The existing Ed Martin name
and Buick and GMC logos (wall signs) will be removed. The signs will be replaced with the words Ed Martin, Buick, and
GMC. The new Ed Martin sign will be placed to the left of the entrance and Buick/GMC will go on the new entry
element. The brick and tan (limestone cornice features of the building will not be changed.
The Petitioner has scaled back the entry element from previous submittals. The "eyebrow" is now smaller, and fits within
the confines of the building facade. It is still in the black and silver color palate. It also is taller now to cover the keystone
element that was visible behind the entry feature previously. The Petitioner also proposes to add either a tan or black
stripe across the building to tie into the new silver and black entry feature.
Here are some talking points or design ideas to consider about the entry element and stripe:
1. Can the stripe not obscure the edge detailing (end stone) of the building? Meaning, begin right after the
detailing, so there is still a small visible line of brick as separation before the tan color stripe?
2. Can the top of the entry element not be curved to match the straight lines of the building?
3. Can the black edges of the entry element be tan colored to match the building?
4. Is it a possibility to not have the stripe across the building at all?
5. What if the stripe did not go across the entire building, but was just a background for the Ed Martin sign?
Meaning center it and frame it on the Left side of the entry?
If the Petitioner can be prepared to discuss these options and ideas at the 8/2 committee meeting, and possibly even
have renderings to show the ideas, (to show how they do or do not work) that would be much appreciated.
For reference, here is the text from the Zoning Ordinance US 421 Overlay Zone regulations:
"F. Entrances. Building entrances shall be defined and articulated by architectural elements such as lintels,
pediments, pilasters, columns, and other design elements appropriate to the architectural style and details of
the building as a whole. The location, orientation, proportion and style of doors must faithfully reflect the chosen
style of the building."
While the entry element is clearly not of the same architectural style as the existing building, the Department believes the
cropping of the eyebrow feature makes a big difference. The entry element is now more confined and seems appropriate
to the scale of the building. The Department believes the Committee should discuss the pros and cons of all options
available and work with the Petitioner to help blend the two architectural styles into something suitable for all parties
involved.
Please view the petitioner's revised informational packet for further detail.
Recommendation:
After all comments /concerns are addressed, the Dept of Community Services (DOCS) recommends positive consideration
of Docket No. 11040005 ADLS Amend.
1