HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 Mar 30, 2004
CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 2004
Minutes
The Special Study Committee of the Carmel Plan Commission met at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana on Tuesday, March 30, 2004. This meeting was in lieu of
an April Committee meeting, due to the Carmel School System Spring Break.
Members in attendance: Jerry Chomanczuk; Wayne Haney; Mark Rattermann; Steve Stromquist; Madeleine Torres, thereby establishing a quorum.
Department of Community Services Staff in attendance: Jon Dobosiewicz.
The Special Studies Committee considered the following items:
1. Docket No. 167-03 ADLS (#03110003)
Meridian Technology Park, Corvasc Medical Office Building
The applicant seeks approval to build a medical office building. The site is located at the on the south side of College Ave., 1/8 mile east of Pennsylvania St. The site is zoned B-2.
Filed by Mark Monroe of Drewry Simmons, Pitts & Vornehm for REI Investments, Inc.
OFFICIALLY WITHDRAWN
2. Docket No. 163-03 DP (#030100015)
Carmel Science & Technology Park, Lots 11B & 11C:
Congressional Flex Space- Development Plan
The applicant seeks to construct two buildings. The site is located at southwest 122nd St & Congressional Blvd. The site is zoned M-3/Manufacturing.
Filed by Mila Slepaya of Mid-States Engineering.
Note: Jerry Chomanczuk recused himself from discussion and voting on this item. Mark Rattermann chaired the meeting for this item only.
Todd Mann, JCHart Company, 10401 North Meridian Street, Indianapolis, appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Ken Seebree, Seebree Architects;
Gary Nance, design architect, Nance Design; Gary Murray, Mid-States Engineering; Larry Hemp, landscape architect, Hemp Design; John Hart, JCHart Company; Chris Reid, Hoosier Contracting.
The plan provides for three buildings, each separately platted. The largest building is building #2; buildings 1 and 3 are approximately 12,000 square feet each. The common area maintenance
is shared under an Association Agreement. This particular design is primarily due to the office market in the North Meridian and Carmel area. The buildings are owner-occupied rather
than a speculation-built basis. The largest building (#2) is shared by Hoosier Contracting and the JCHart Company; the other two buildings will be “built to suit.”
The site is virtually the same except that a pass-through has been eliminated and replaced with a green lawn area between all three buildings. The landscape plan remains much the same
except that some landscaping has been added. The largest change is architectural in nature and based on the Committee review in January.
Gary Nance of Nance Design explained the architectural changes. The height of the tower has been lessened and the pitch of the roof line has been lowered. Also, two of the finishes
have been eliminated and those are now stone and EFIS. A more galvanized-looking, standing metal seam is now shown and the color will be matched with the window system. The look has
been “stream-lined” more than on previous elevations.
Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. The items that have not been addressed were regarding the architectural elevation and addressing the south elevation of the building in the southwest
corner, building #3. In addition, the petitioner was to provide the Committee with a reference on the typical rear elevation of the building as well as information on the lighting.
The fixtures are shielded and visors are utilized on the ground-mounted lights. The petitioner should give an overview of the rear elevation of the building and address any concerns
regarding the southeast building, in particular, the south elevation.
In response to questions from Mark Rattermann, the south elevation of building 3 has the stone and EFIS detail. The south elevation of buildings 1 and 2 and the west elevation of building
3 would be more split-face block with the overhead door concept—more industrial space. The concept for the buildings is to have an up-scale office environment in the front and the back
would allow warehouse/storage.
Regarding the landscaping, the south elevation of building 3 has landscaping, mounding and some existing, tall evergreens on the Conseco property that will help shield the view driving
north.
Madeline Torres made formal motion to forward Docket No. 163-03 DP (#030100015) Carmel Science & Technology Park, Lots 11B and 11C, Congressional Flex Space Development Plan to the
full Plan Commission with a positive recommendation, subject to the following. The applicant will provide the Department with revised lighting, renderings, commitment for all white
signage, (no green lighting) and full building elevations on the rear of all three buildings. The motion was seconded by Wayne Haney and Approved 5-0.
Note: The Harley Davidson lighting review was delegated to the Department staff for approval.
3. Docket No. 198-03 ADLS (#03120015): Greyhound Commons, Phase II
The applicant seeks approval build a restaurant building. The site is located at the southwest corner of Greyhound Pass and E. 146th Street. The site is zoned PUD.
Filed by Paul Reis of Drewry Simmons Pitts & Vornehm for Kite Greyhound, LLC.
Mark Monroe, attorney with Drewry Simmons Pitts & Vornehm, 8888 Keystone Crossing appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Greg Poets and Eric
Strickland, Kite Companies; Kyle Lantz, Abuelleo’s Restaurant; John Wheeler, Wheeler Architects; Paul Reis of Drewry Simmons, et al.
The site is located at the southeast corner of 146th and Keystone Avenue on an 8.5-acre tract just south of the Lowe’s Home Improvement store. The Abuello’s Restaurant is an 8,200 square-foot
facility located on the northwest corner of the site adjacent to a pond. The building design has changed since the February 17th meeting.
The building will be constructed of brick, reddish in color, with EFIS, stone and glass. The signage will be white and the size will be in compliance with the Sign Ordinance. There
is also a sign on the western elevation of the building, again, made of white letters, internally illuminated, and in compliance with the Sign Ordinance.
A landscape plan for the entire site includes a 60 foot buffer along Keystone Avenue—a 30-foot buffer is required by Ordinance. The landscape plan also includes buffering along the
Keystone Avenue ramp as well as parking lot landscaping and foundation plantings around the restaurant. Three other building pads are shown—these will likely be restaurants and separate
ADLS applications will be filed with the Department.
A lighting plan has been filed and is in compliance with the PUD Ordinance for the site. The light fixtures are shoebox-style, typical in commercial parking lots, and cut sheets have
been provided for the decorative lighting that will be a part of the Abuello’s Restaurant design. The first decorative lighting will be used to highlight the signage in the front of
the building—other canister type lighting is arranged around the building for architectural accent.
The major change since the February 17th meeting is the architectural design. The building is 4-sided with brick, EFIS columns, and stone caps. Any rooftop mechanical equipment has
been screened from sight with a screening wall in a color to complement the color of the EFIS as well as incorporate the cornice along the entire length of the restaurant.
The color of the sign has been changed from red to white and it is now in compliance with the PUD Ordinance for the site. The size of the signs has been reduced and is now in compliance
with the Ordinance.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. The issues with regard to signage have been resolved. The architectural design elements have been addressed to the Department’s satisfaction.
The applicant has broken up the east elevation that was previously a solid brick wall. The PUD requires a minimum building height of 30 feet—the petitioner has filed for a variance
based upon comments from the Committee and Plan Commission regarding building design. It is likely the Department will support the variance request.
Jerry Chomanczuk questioned the number of handicap parking spaces. The applicant said he would make sure they comply with the Code. If changes are needed, they will be made.
Jerry Chomanczuk also asked about the sidewalk installation that goes along the greenery and the retention pond—it seems to start from nowhere and goes nowhere. What kind of foot traffic
is expected and what is the rationale?
Mark Monroe responded that a lot of foot traffic is unlikely. Currently, there exists a sidewalk starting at 146th Street and the proposed sidewalk would connect with the different
restaurant locations. Someone could walk across 146th Street on the bike path and then down to the restaurants utilizing the sidewalk.
Madeleine Torres asked about the statue—Mark Monroe said the statue is located in a recessed area and is a Mexican celebrity, name unknown.
Mark Rattermann moved to recommend approval of Docket No. 198-03 ADLS, Greyhound Commons, Phase II, to the full Plan Commission, seconded by Wayne Haney and Approved 5-0.
4. Docket No. 04010002 DP/ADLS - Mike's Express Carwash
The applicant seeks to construct a new carwash facility. The site is located at 1250 S Range Line Road. The site is zoned I-1/Industrial.
Filed by Charlie Frankenberger of Nelson & Frankenberger.
Jim Shinaver, attorney with Nelson & Frankenberger appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Bill Daum, Mike’s Carwash; Frank Heinz, Paul I. Cripe,
Engineers.
Mike’s Carwash is the contract purchaser for the Carmel Carwash site on Range Line Road. If approved, the existing buildings will be demolished and in their place construct a new,
automated carwash facility and a new self-service facility.
Initially, curb-cut locations were proposed on Range Line Road and Carmel Drive. After the Committee meeting on March 2nd, the applicant met with Jon Dobosiewicz, Mike McBride and
Dick Hill in the Dept. of Engineering offices. As a result, there was a slight re-design in the curb cut for Carmel Drive as well as Range Line Road. Essentially, on the Carmel Drive
curb cut, there is provision for access in with one lane, the median area will still exist—landscaped and with the ground sign—and two lanes out, one for left turn, one for right. As
far as Range Line Road curb cut is concerned, there will be a median area containing the ground sign, two lanes in and two turn lanes exiting onto Range Line Road. A letter was submitted
from Mike McBride in the Carmel Department of Engineering to Todd Bauer of Paul Cripe, Engineers, confirming the acceptance of revisions regarding the before-described curb cuts.
Also discussed at the Committee level were building elevations and some questions regarding design elements for the ground signs. Frank Heinz of Paul I. Cripe said he had met twice
with the planning staff and the building elevations had been revised based on those comments. There was also discussion regarding the Monon Trail bridge over Carmel Drive. Some of
the articulation and detailing of the pedestrian overpass were incorporated into the building design of the carwash. Les Olds was brought in on the design detail and the building has
been brought into alignment with the character of the corridor.
Jim Shinaver said the ground signs were revised to complement the building. Other types of signage that may appear on the building are for safety and direction and 3 square feet or
smaller in size. The base for the “Enter” sign will be similar to the ground sign and the menu signs. A reflector-type shield was implemented on the 18-foot pole lights not only on
the perimeter of the site but also internal to the site.
Mark Rattermann commented that the flags on the poles have been addressed and this is currently a classy design. That said, the decals are a tremendous bother—decals seem so foreign
to go to the extent of a classy building and then put decals in the windows. The self-service building looks as if it was forgotten. Mr. Rattermann would prefer the coin machines to
face the interior of the site rather than Carmel Drive.
Jerry Chomanczuk commented that the petitioner has addressed the concerns of the committee as far as signage, pictures, decals, etc. One additional item of concern is the 11-foot high
monument sign that will be awe-imposing on Range Line Road. The applicant will be going before the BZA for height approval for the monument sign on Range Line Road as well as the menu
boards on site.
In response to Committee suggestions, the petitioner committed to the following: 1) No decal treatment on the windows and/or stuffed animals/characters. 2) A single color design on
the light fixtures, thereby eliminating the yellow band. 3) Addition of globe light fixtures between the self-service bays on the Carmel Drive elevations. 4) Both the coin-operated dispensing
equipment on the south side of the building and the change maker on the south side of the building will be retained. 5) On the north side of the building facing Range Line Road, the
coin-op dispensing machine would be removed, but the one Change Maker would be retained for persons in the self-service area.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to forward Docket No. 04010002 DP/ADLS, Mike’s Express Carwash, to the Plan Commission on April 20, 2004 with a favorable recommendation, subject to
commitments as aforesaid and agreed by the petitioner, seconded by Madeleine Torres and Approved 5-0.
5. Docket No. 04010024 Z: Steckley Rezone (Guilford Reserve PUD)
The applicant seeks to Rezone approximately 5 acres from B-6/Business to PUD/Planned Unit Development. The site is located at 1011 S. Guilford Road.
Filed by David Klain of Crawford Development, LLC.
Charlie Frankenberger, attorney, Nelson & Frankenberger appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Robert Barbeto; Adam DeHart; Robert Johnson, neighbor
to the north of the proposed development.
The applicant is requesting approval to construct 48 up-scale brownstone-style townehomes on the 5-acre parcel located on the east side of Guilford, north of 116th Street and south
of Carmel Drive, directly east of the Lenox Trace Condominiums. Other uses in the immediate vicinity include two, detached, single family residences immediately to the north, PSI Energy
to the south, and a mix of commercial and light industrial development to the north and east.
The existing B-6 zoning permits an independent living, retirement facility containing up to 72 one or two bedroom apartments along with accessory uses, including a dining room, library,
community room, health and wellness area, country store and other uses. The proposed towne homes will provide greater buffering and transition, especially considering the nearby residential
areas.
During public hearing, there was no remonstrance from Lenox Trace owners. At a neighborhood meeting, those attending expressed support. The only comments at public hearing were from
Mr. Johnson, the neighbor to the north. Mr. Johnson had three concerns: 1) One of the buildings should be moved farther south. 2) A privacy fence installation was requested. 3) Concern
regarding use of fertilizer and pesticides on the 5 acres might percolate and seep into Mr. Johnson’s well, 17 feet in depth. In order to address those concerns, the owner met with
Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson requested that building No. 4 be moved farther south to increase the setback. Building No. 4 has now been moved farther south and is now setback the same distance as building
No. 3. This issue has now been resolved.
Mr. Johnson’s request for connection to City water arises from his concern regarding a possible contamination of his well. Mr. Frankenberger did not think contamination would occur
for a number of reasons, including the fact that the water naturally drains to the south, the same direction as Carmel Creek. If the well were susceptible to contamination, it would
have been contaminated by users to the north. In any event, Mr. Johnson is concerned and requested that he be hooked up to City water and split the cost. The cost of a water line is
approximately $7,500 total. Mr. Johnson has indicated that one-half of the cost is more than he wanted to spend. In an effort to bring resolution, the following agreement was made.
Mr. Johnson was given names of some persons at IDEM to confirm to his satisfaction that his well will not be contaminated. If Mr. Johnson talks to those people and he is not satisfied,
it was agreed that once the petitioner acquires the land and commences development, the petitioner will pay the availability fee, hook-up fee, cost of running the line, and cost of restoring
the land, and that Mr. Johnson would contribute an amount not to exceed $1,000. It would be Mr. Johnson’s option to either keep the well open or close it at his expense.
The fence is still an issue. Originally it was discussed that the fence would be installed on Mr. Johnson’s property to avoid tree loss. Mr. Johnson subsequently requested that the
fence not be placed on his property but on the property line. The concern is that placing the fence on the property line will result in tree loss, an estimated 14 trees. Another alternative
exists. The petitioner can explore the possibility of an intermittent fence between the buildings west of the creek. This would benefit Mr. Johnson in blocking headlights from shining
into his home and may provide a more appealing view.
During the public hearing, comments were also received from Commission members pertaining to the visual monotony of the backs and sides of the buildings, particularly in those areas
where the back of a building faces the back of the building and they are separated by paving. It was generally acknowledged that the site is optimized and difficult to rearrange to
avoid that. It was suggested that the petitioner provide some architectural enhancements on the backs and sides of the buildings. The petitioner submitted revised elevations. The
side elevation and the rear elevation have been enhanced with different brick variations and colors.
With the exception of the fence, Mr. Johnson’s issues have been resolved. The fence issue will be resolved with Committee input. Also, the side and rear elevations have been architecturally
enhanced to minimize any visual monotony.
Mr. Johnson, 929 South Guilford Road, appeared before the Committee and requested that any vote be delayed until the fence issue is resolved. Mr. Johnson favors a security-type fence,
almost the full length of the property.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. The Department does not support creating walls or solid fences/heavy buffer. This item will not return to Committee but will be forwarded to
the City Council after the full Commission vote. From a zoning and land use perspective, this property is identified on the Comprehensive Plan as full intensity, regional employment.
The higher intensity use is seen as appropriate.
Mark Rattermann said he was very concerned about the parking. The are 48 units and 37 spaces for visitors. The driveways are not wide enough to allow parking behind the units. Usually,
the owners park in the visitor spaces because the garages are full of stored/seasonal items. Then, visitors park in the grass because there is no room.
Adam DeHart responded that he had visited similar projects and looked at the parking situation. These units are actually 2 to 4 feet longer than the similar products. The existing
projects do not accommodate an SUV—the garages are not long enough. These proposed units were actually designed 2 to 4 feet longer than the similar products. Initially, parking was
designed at 1 ½ extra spaces—twice as much parking—and asphalt everywhere. The Department requested a reduction in the asphalt to provide more greenspace and more open space. The figure
ended up being ¾ parking space per unit per guest, in addition to the two spaces provided in the garage.
Jon Dobosiewicz stated that the site could accommodate perhaps 10-12 additional parking spaces, but greenspace would be sacrificed. The site exceeds the required amount of parking.
After further discussion and comments from Mark Rattermann and the Department, the petitioner agreed to redesign the landscaping and land-bank greenspace for future parking.
Jerry Chomanczuk referred to the unresolved fence issue. The developer and Mr. Johnson are to work out the fence issue. The greater good is to retain the tree line and mature trees.
Charlie Frankenberger suggested the fence could go in between the trees.
Mark Rattermann commented he would rather see trees and shrubs as opposed to a tall, solid wall fence the length of the property. There is no easy answer. There is also the question,
“Who would maintain the fence?”
Jerry Chomanczuk suggested a hedge wall, but requested some compromise and resolution between the neighbor and the developer before the full Commission meeting.
Mark Rattermann moved to recommend approval to the Commission of Docket No. 04010024 Z, Steckley Rezone (Guilford Reserve PUD) subject to the fence issue being resolved and a redesign
of the greenspace to land-bank for future parking; seconded by Madeleine Torres and Approved 5-0.
6. Docket No. 04020008 ADLS: Main & Guilford Plaza - ADLS
The applicant seeks approval for a retail building with parking. The site is located 811 W Main Street. The site is zoned OM/MF- Old Meridian/Multifamily (pending rezoning).
Filed by Joe Calderon of Ice Miller for Main & Guilford Plaza, LLC.
Note: Wayne Haney exited the meeting at this time and did not return.
Joe Calderon, attorney, Ice Miller, offices at One American Square, Indianapolis appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Joe Peale and David Caine,
principals of the Main & Guilford Plaza, LLC; Darryl Phillips, consulting engineer, In-Sight Engineering.
The site at 811 West Main Street is currently an abandoned service station and has been a “blight” for the last few years. The current proposal is a neo-classic, traditional design
that would be an excellent connection/transition between downtown and Old Meridian Street. All of the bays are oriented to the rear, hidden from public view.
Mr. Calderon referred to a letter of remonstrance received from Marilyn Allison and Roxa Gregory, residents of Wilson Village that objected to this proposal on the grounds that it was
an auto body type of business; that is not the case. The proposed development is very light auto repair and service, oil changes, etc., no auto-body work whatsoever. There is no need
for fuel or underground storage tanks at this location. The petitioner has received a closure report from the Department of Environmental Management that shows a satisfactory closure
report issue in 1995 to the previous owner. There were three tanks on the property—all were closed and monitored. In conjunction with the use of the property by Joe Peale, there will
be no underground storage tank and no fueling islands, etc. There will be an above-ground storage tank for used oil, etc., all of which is regulated and hauled away on a regular basis.
The petitioner will be appearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals for Use approval and other development standard type of issues. The current proposal is for a brick veneer building,
bronze metal roof, custom cast stone and stucco at the cornice level. The signage plan does not feature any monument signs on the ground. The building will be placed at the edge of
the right-of-way. At some time, Main Street may turn into a boulevard setting, in which case the sequence would be building to sidewalk to street. Currently, it is building to sidewalk,
a lawn area with some landscaping and then the street with the appropriate amount of right-of-way dedicated for future use.
Darryl Phillips will be meeting with the Department of Engineering regarding the final grade of the building. The petitioner has been working with Cornerstone Properties to the west
regarding an off-site easement for storm water. Once the easement for storm water issue is resolved, final grading of the building can be done.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. Jon reported no outstanding issues on the proposed development. Jon referred to the letter of remonstrance from Marilyn Allison and Roxa Gregory
and an opportunity was given for these persons to speak their concerns. No one gave any public comment at this time.
Jerry Chomanczuk said his concerns have been addressed.
Mr. Calderon stated that Joe’s Auto Service is the anchor tenant and the developer. The development will all be constructed at the same time. No tenants are identified.
Jerry Chomanczuk asked how easy it would be to retro-fit the building into another use at some future date. Mr. Calderon responded that it is designed with that in mind.
Madeleine Torres made formal motion for approval of Docket No. 04020008 ADLS, Main & Guilford Plaza, - ADLS, seconded by Mark Rattermann and Approved 4-0.
Following a short recess, the meeting continued with the business at hand.
7. Docket No. 040100025 DP/ADLS: 630 - North Range Line Office Building
The applicant seeks approval for an office building with parking. The site is located 630 N Range Line Rd. The site is zoned B-5/Business within the Old Town Overlay, Historic Range
Line Sub-area.
Filed by Dave Barnes of Weihe Engineers.
Nick Kestner, 2123 West 106th Street, Carmel appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Mr. Kestner gave a brief history of how this project came about. This particular
property was Housing Authority and part of the agreement was that it had to be office, and had to meet certain architectural standards. The architectural standards were reviewed by
Les Olds and those recommendations have been followed.
The only objection from neighbors was the brick band around the building. The petitioner agreed to eliminate the brick band but would keep the brick on the posts on the front porch.
Department Report, Jon Dobosiewicz. Jon reported no outstanding concerns. The only issue is the building elevation.
Nick Kestner said that a 1X12 treatment could be added under the first floor windows where there is no brick; Les Olds had made that recommendation.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to forward Docket No. 040100025 DP/ADLS, 630 North Range Line Road Office Building to the full Commission with a positive recommendation, subject
to the 1X12 board treatment under the windows, the elimination of the brick band, and inclusion of brick on the front porch posts, seconded by Madeleine Torres and Approved 4-0.
Jon Dobosiewicz recommended that the petitioner bring in a final rendering for the full Commission meeting.
8. Docket No. 040100026 DP/ADLS: Century 21- Alexander
The applicant seeks approval for an office building with parking. The site is located 1141 Michigan Road. The site is zoned S-1/Residence (pending business rezone approval).
Filed by David Warshauer of Barnes & Thornburg for Mr. & Mrs. Alexander.
Tom Engle, attorney with Barnes & Thornburg, 11 South Meridian, Indianapolis appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Jerry Alexander was also present.
This particular property was previously before the Plan Commission as a Rezone petition and is now at the City Council level. The existing residence on this site will be converted
to a real estate brokerage office and used by Mr. Alexander. The exterior of the residence will remain much as it is today.
Mr. Engle distributed revised sketches of the signage, 24 square feet in size; the actual sign panel is 4X6. The base and cap of the sign are white, the sign is gold, brown and white,
the Century 21 colors. The sign will be internally illuminated rather than by spotlight, and turned off two hours within closing of the office each day.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. The only suggestion is that the yellow frame surrounding the sign should be opaque; otherwise, the letters would not be readable in the evening.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to forward Docket No. 040100026 DP/ADLS, Century 21 Alexander to the full Commission with a positive recommendation, seconded by Steve Stromquist
and approved 4-0.
9. Docket No. 0403008 ADLS Amend: Tranquility Touch
The applicant seeks approval for a wall sign. The site is located at 14 S Range Line Rd. The site is zoned B-2/Business within the Old Town Overlay, Main Street Sub area.
Filed by Timothy Williams of Tranquility Touch, Inc.
Tim Williams of Tranquility Touch appeared before the Committee seeking approval for a wall sign located at 14 South Range Line Road. There is an existing box sign and the petitioner
would like to replace the lettering with “Tranquility Touch” and the phone number. The box sign is illuminated and on a permanent awning.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. The Department is not in favor of can-mounted, internally illuminated signage.
It was noted by the Committee that the existing sign was established without a permit.
Jerry Chomanczuk suggested that the petitioner work with the Department to develop an alternative and also work with the landlord for options.
Jon Dobosiewicz suggested that a sign of this design could be approved on a single board that would be indirectly lit—the petitioner could work with the building owner in coming up
with some form of illumination, other than internal. The petitioner could then return to the Department with a proposal.
Mark Rattermann moved to Table Docket No. 0403008 ADLS Amend, Tranquility Touch until the June meeting to allow the petitioner time to work through the process. Any enforcement action
on the existing sign will be delayed while working through the process; the motion was seconded by Madeleine Torres and Approved 4-0.
10. Docket No. 0403015 ADLS Amend: West Carmel Center, Blk D, Lot 3- Applebee's
The applicant seeks approval for two wall signs. The site is located at 10325 N Michigan Road. The site is zoned B-3/Business within the US 421/Michigan Rd Overlay Zone.
Filed by Phil Barnard of Sign Craft Industries.
Vaughn Martin and Phil Barnard appeared before the Committee on behalf of the applicant. Applebee’s is requesting permission for an additional sign indicating “Carside To Go.”
Jerry Chomanczuk asked if there were to be a take out window as well, or will the signage just indicate the doorway.
Mr. Martin responded that the signage would merely indicate that carside to go is available and patrons would enter the front door of the restaurant.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz said that when Applebee’s was approved, the property was permitted one sign. The BZA granted approval for three signs—two building identification
signs and a ground identification sign. This particular site has been afforded more than enough opportunity for additional signage. If Applebee’s wants an additional sign on the building,
the Department recommends making it a condition that one of the existing signs be removed. The Department does not support this request.
Mark Rattermann stated that he also was strongly opposed to the additional signage.
Mr. Martin responded that the west elevation is the only other elevation on the building that has signage and it simply says, “Applebee’s.” The south elevation says, “Applebee’s Neighborhood
Grill and Bar.” Mr. Martin proposed eliminating the “neighborhood grill and bar” and adding the “Carside To Go” on the south elevation. The Department said that would be considered
two signs and the Department is not in favor.
The Commiottee determined that most restaurants would gladly package a meal to go. Applebee’s does not have a drive-thru window, and traffic is not encouraged to double-park and run
into the restaurant and get food to go. It is simply an indication that Applebee’s is now packaging food to do.
Mr. Martin commented that if this signage were not approved, Applebee’s would still have carry-out available and would like to set aside a parking stall near the front of the building
for the carside pickup.
Jon Dobosiewicz recommended a dedicated parking stall with a small sign indicating “To Go” parking—no permit would be required.
Mark Rattermann moved for approval of Docket No. 0403015 ADLS Amend, West Carmel Center, Blk D, Lot 3, Applebee’s, seconded by Madeleine Torres. The vote was zero in favor, 4 opposed,
MOTION DENIED.
11. Docket No. 0403016 ADLS Amend: Ballantrae Subdivision
The applicant seeks approval for yard lights and an entrance wall to the subdivision. The site is located south west of 146th Street and Spring Mill Road. The site is zoned S-1.
Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson & Frankenberger for Ballantrae Development, LLC.
Jim Shinaver, attorney with Nelson & Frankenberger appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Jim Anderson, managing member of Ballantrae Development LLD was also in
attendance.
Ballantrae Subdivision is a 4.87-acre parcel of real estate that will house nine home sites. The applicant seeks approval for yard lights and an entrance wall to the subdivision.
An 8-foot high, brick entry wall is proposed adjacent to 146th Street. Providing a well-constructed brick wall will visually screen 146th Street and will reduce some of the traffic
noise into the neighborhood.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. The Department is recommending approval. Any time there is a subdivision with entry way features or lighting that was not presented at the time
of primary plat approval, the development will return to this Committee for review and approval. The 10-foot asphalt path is within the right-of-way; the proposed wall will be beyond
the path.
Mark Rattermann admitted he was no engineer, but an 8-foot tall brick wall seemed too tall and structurally, unstable. One of the problems with a straight wall is that there is lateral
pressure to buckle and fall.
The Department recommends approval of the brick wall, maximum of 8 feet, or a minimum of 6 feet.
Jerry Chomanczuk asked if the petitioner were willing to modify the request to 6 feet rather than 8 feet.
After further discussion, the petitioner agreed to modify his request for a brick wall, no more than 7 feet above the roadbed.
Mark Rattermann moved for approval of Docket No. 0403016 ADLS Amend, Ballantrae Subdivision, conditioned upon the brick entry wall being no higher than the 7 foot crown of the adjacent
right-of-way, seconded by Madeleine Torres and APPROVED 4-0.
12. Docket No. 0403017 ADLS Amend: Bauer Commercial Park - SBC
The applicant seeks approval for a wall and ground sign. The site is located at 4160 E 96th Street.
The site is zoned B-3/Business. Filed by Ron Moenter of Moenter Signs.
Ron Moenter, Moenter Signs, 5033 South 250 E, Shelbyville appeared before the Committee representing SBC telephone company. The applicant is requesting two signs at 4160 East 96th
Street--one illuminated to replace the existing “Ameritech” sign; the other sign is nothing more than a 12X28 placque.
The sign is internally illuminated, aluminum with routed face, acrylic plastic on the back of the aluminum that allows the light to shine through; it has standard, “SBC” blue on the
sign. The side of the sign has screws that remove to get to a full hinge for service. Two solid panels with tapered, flat-head screws are proposed to cover the end of the sign.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosieiwcz. The sign request complies with the size and height limitations of the Ordinance. There is no particular design character the Department is looking
for in the way of signage at this location. At night, the sign will read as a single surface, the “SBC” logo will be illuminated on the sign backdrop.
In response to Committee questions, Mr. Moenter said the facility is loaded with switching equipment. This site was a heavily maintenance garage, but it is not used as much as when
it was Indiana Bell. It is not open to the general public.
Mark Rattermann moved for approval of Docket No. 0403017 ADLS Amend, Bauer Commercial Park, SBC, seconded by Madeleine Torres and APPROVED 4-0.
13. Docket No. 04030026 ADLS Amend: Clay Terrace, Bldg E-2 -ADLS Amendment
The applicant seeks approval for a retail building. The site is located at 14250 Clay Terrace Boulevard. The site is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development.
Filed by Frederick Simmons of Simmons & Simmons Associates.
Note: Mark Rattermann was recused from discussion and voting on this item.
Fred Simmons, architect, Simmons & Associates appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Joe Downs of Lauth Property Group was also in attendance.
The petitioner seeks to amend a previously approved component of Clay Terrace, Building E-2, located at the southwest quadrant of the entire project. An informational packet was submitted
to the Committee explaining the reasoning for the amendment as well as the revised elevations.
There are basically five architectural styles with 10 or 12 color palettes, all consistent with the original concept. Building E-2 is compatible with the various styles that were previously
approved.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. The modification in design may be negligible, but the Department felt it was appropriate to bring this item before the Committee for review.
The Department is recommending approval at this time.
Jerry Chomanczuk noted that the building footprint is being reduced by 3100 square feet—is more parking being added?
Mr. Simmons responded that the reduction in square footage would allow for more greenspace at the rear of the building.
Madeleine Torres made formal motion to approve Docket No. 04030026 ADLS Amend, Clay Terrace, Building E-2, ADLS Amendment, seconded by Steve Stromquist and APPROVED 3 in favor, none
opposed, Mark Rattermann recused.
14. Docket No. 04030027 ADLS Amend: Clay Terrace, Dick's Sporting Goods
The applicant seeks approval for an amended sign package. The site is located at 14250 Clay Terrace Boulevard. The site is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development.
Filed by Paul Reis of Drewry Simmons Pitts & Vornehm.
Note: Mark Rattermann was recused from discussion and voting on this item.
Paul Reis, attorney with Drewry Simmons, Pitts & Vornehm, 8888 Keystone Crossing, Indianapolis, appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Joe Downs, Lauth Property
Group was also in attendance.
Previously, Dick’s Sporting Goods building elevation was approved. At the time of presentation of the building elevation, the Sign package was not approved. At this time, the applicant
is seeking approval of the signs being proposed for the Dick’s Sporting Goods building.
The signs are on the east façade, the south and the north facades. All of the sign are within the parameters of the PUD and the Sign Ordinance for this particular building. The proposed
signage design has been reviewed by the Department and the applicant has made some modifications.
Department Comments, Jon Dobosiewicz. As indicated by the petitioner, everything on this building design was previously reviewed—this segment was left blank and the petitioner is returning
for approval of “filling in the blanks.” On the north and south elevations, modifications were made to place the sign above the doorway as opposed to an elevated area. From a design
standpoint, it seemed more appropriate to identify the entryway for patrons from the parking lot as opposed to elevating farther up, thereby being more sensitive to the two elevations—residential
to the west, and commercial on the north and south.
Paul Reis stated that October 14th is the Grand Opening for the entire development and Dick’s Sporting Goods will be a coordinated opening.
Madeleine Torres moved for approval of Docket No. 04030027 ADLS Amend, Clay Terrace, Dick’s Sporting Goods, seconded by Steve Stromquist and APPROVED 3 in favor, none opposed, Mark Rattermann
recused.
Jon Dobosiewicz stated that there is an issue regarding a fence that has gone through the ADLS approval process—there is now an amended design that is very closed, but the Committee
should review the fence.
Clarification: The only new fence is the fence being proposed by Walter’s Rolling Acres. The cedar fence divides the parking lot from a wooded area, residential area, then the 8-foot
wall.
Madeleine Torres moved for approval of the fence detail for Clay Terrace as presented this evening, seconded by Steve Stromquist and APPROVED 3 in favor, none opposed, Mark Rattermann
recused.
Note: Per Jon Dobisiewicz, the fence detail will be filed with the original ADLS for Clay Terrace, Docket No. 19-03 ADLS.
There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 PM.
________________________________
Jerry Chomanczuk, Chairperson
_____________________________________
Ramona Hancock, Secretary