Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 06-15-99CAP2vIEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION JUNE 15, 1999 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission was called to order by the President at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, One Civic Square, Carmel, Indiana on June 15, 1999. Members present were: Marilyn Anderson; Kent Broach; Dave Cremeans; Leo Dierckman; Madeline Fitzgerald; Ron Houck; Kevin Kirby; Norma Meighen; Bob Modiset; James T. O2q'eal, Sr.; Pat Rice; Rick Sharp; Paul Spranger; Chris White; and Tom Yedlick. Terry Jones, Mike Hollibaugh, and Mark Monroe were present representing the Department of Community Services. The minutes of the May 18* meeting were approved as submitted. Mike HoIlibaugh gave an update on the progress o'f the Old Meridian Task Force. The next meeting is June 29th and it is hopeful that the results can be brought before the full Plan Commission for public hearing in August or September. Dave Cremeans reported that two ordinances referred to the City Council by the Plan Commission had been passed. One ordinance dealt with the amount of retail usage in the U.S. 31 Corridor, and the other was changing the geographic boundaries of PUD's from the eastern boundary of Spring Mill to the White River. H. Public Hearing: lb. Commission to consider Docket No. 39-99 DP/ADLS, Development Plan and Architectural Design, Landscaping, Lighting, and Signage applications for Browning Investments. WITltDRAWN BY PETITIONER 2h. Commission to consider Docket No. 44-99 PP, a primary plat application for SCM Development. The petitioner seeks approval to plat 107 lots on 49 acres known as Brookstone Park of Carmel Subdivision. The site is located on the southeast comer of Ditch Road and 146th Street. The site is zoned S-1,Residence. Filed by Brace Fagan of SCM Development. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Commission representing the petitioner. Bruce Fagan of SCM was also in attendance. The 49 acre parcel at 146'h and Ditch Road is owned by Butler University, and will be developed into a residential community to be known as Brookstone Park. The plat is filed under the Residential Open s:'minutes'~plancomm\pc 1999jun I Space Ordinance and provides for 107 lots, 49% open space and homes by Signature in the $160, to $200,000. price range. All homes will be two stories in style and design. With respect to the natural features of the real estate, the northeast corner is heavily wooded, 5.8 acres in size, and is characterized as a primary conservation area. There is also a wetland, 4.8 acres in size, that will be preserved in its entirety with a 50 foot buffer around the entire perimeter. The primary entrance is from Ditch Road midw~a~ between the north and south property line; there is no point ofingress/egreas from 146 Street. The petitioner has connected at the end to a platted stub street that extends northward from Kingsborough. All lots within the development back up to or have frontage on the open space provided. There are four categories of open space. The natural open space which is the primary conservation areas of young woodlands and wetlands, totalling 12.85 acres or 26%; some secondary conservation areas consisting of hedge rows on the south and east property lines, .6 acres in size. There are 7.3 acres of open space, 15%, consisting of planting strips around the perimeter of the property and in pockets interspersed throughout the development. There is an on-site storm water management system represented by the four lakes which equal 3.24 acres in size. With respect to open space, there is 49% or 24 acres. Another primary feature of the plan is the pedestrian thoroughfare plan consisting of three types of pathways Within the development; sidewalks on both sides of all internal streets; adjacent tO Ditch Road and 146th Street, consistent with the alternative transportation plan, an 8 foot wide asphalt pathway is provided; an internal trail system that connects with the sidewalk system as well as the alternate transportation system. The pathway extends from the north, meanders in a southeasterly direction and down to the very south end of the property. This system of inter-connected trails provides a connection to the open space, both internal and external. Several access points have been provided both for the residents of Brookstone and members of the public. The homes will be built by Signature Homes within a size range of 17,050 to 2400 square feet and priced between $160, to $225,000. Unique to this development is the two story homes. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the proposed development; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mark Monroe reported that the Department is recommending a few minor changes to the plan, specifically the connection of the internal open space to the external spaces via bike path or sidewalks through the eastern-most cul-de-sacs. Also, the Department is recommending that the western-most open space area be widened to accommodate more accessibility by the residents to the rear of the lots on Brookstone Lane. The Department is recommending that the project proceed to Committee. s:~-ninutes\plancomra\pc 1999j un 2 Dave Cremeans commented that the amount of open space being preserved appears to be excessive and asked that Tom Yedlick be provided with the computations prior to the Committee meeting. Ron Houck asked if the petitioner had considered any other configuration of lots for the area being developed and if a different configuration could be explored before Committee. Jim Nelson responded that the petitioner had investigated a number of options but was somewhat constrained by the location areas and sizes of the two primary conservation areas. However, the petitioner was willing to re-visit the configuration. Tom Yedlick agreed with previous comments regarding the open space areas and was concerned with whether or not it met the definition of the open space ordinance. The landscaping along Ditch Road relative to the screening of the tots from the street also needed to be looked at. Also, Tom questioned the ponds or drainage swales and the computation of the open space. Jim Nelson stated that under the Open Space Ordinance, the base density is 1.6; the underlying density under the Comprehensive Plan is 1.3. Rick Sharp asked if roadway improvements, other than accel/decal lanes, were anticipated for Ditch Road. Jim Nelson responded that the petitioner has been involved in a series of conversations with the County Highway Department regarding roadway improvements. Since the County Highway Department is going to be handling 146t~ Street, they have asked that the petitioner make substantial roadway improvements to Ditch Road. The emphasis on all roadway improvements will be Ditch Road and will include widening, resuffacing, drainage ditches, swales, etc. for the entire length of the property line. The petitioner will be prepared to go into detail at committee for the roadway improvements. Docket No. 44-99 PP, Brookstone Park of Carmel, was referred to the Subdivision Committee that will meet on Tuesday, July 6th, in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. NOTE: Item 4h was heard out of sequence due to technical difficulties in the power point display on Item 3h. 3h. Commission to consider Docket No. 45-99 Z, a rezone application for the Buckingham Companies, The petitioner seeks approval for a rezone application for the Buckingham Companies. The petitioner seeks approval for a rezone of 28 acres from F- 1/Residence and R-3/Residence to Planned Unit Development (PUD.) The site is located at the northeast comer of Carmel Drive and Old Meridian Street. Filed by Lynnette Williams of the Buckingham Companies. 4h. Commission to consider Docket No. 46-99 PV, a plat vacation application for the Buckingham Companies. Petitioner seeks approval to vacate the plat for lot 13 of Franke's Subdivision. The site is located on the East side of Old .Meridian Street. Filed by Lynnette Williams of the Buckingham Companies. s:\minutes\pla, nconum\pc 1999jtm 3 Tim Oaks, attorney with Ice, Miller, Donadio, & Ryan, One American Square, Indianapolis, IN 46282-0002, appeared before the Commission requesting plat vacation for lot 13 of Franke's Subdivision. The request is prompted by the proposed development of 28 acres at the northeast comer &Carmel Drive and Old Meridian Street to a Planned Unit Development. Lot 13 consists of approximately 3 acres. The plat originally anticipated that this lot would be developed residentially. Restrictions and the easements created by the plat would cause severe difficulties in the development of the project. The first difficulty is a 100 foot required setback from the right-of-way of Old Meridian; the second is a utility easement that runs along the southern and eastern boundary of lot 13. There are no utilities located within the easement. The conditions of the area have changed drastically and residential is no longer the highest and best use of the property. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the proposed plat vacation; none appeared and the public hearing was closed. Docket No. 46-99 PV for Buckingham Companies was referred to Special Study Committee that will meet on Tuesday, July 6th at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. Item 3h. Docket No. 45-99 Z., a rezone application for the Buckingham Companies (see above.) Zeff Weiss, attorney, 3400 One American Square, Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant, Buckingham Companies. The Buckingham Companies is Indianapolis based. Brad Chambers, sole owner of Buckingham Companies, Lynette Williams and Mike Speedy, development coordinators of Buckingham were also in attendance. Representatives of Mid-States Engineering were in attendance as well as Jim Klausmeier and Jennifer Pearze ofPflum, Klausmeier & Gehrum. John VanFossen of Looney, Ricks, Kiss, Architects, and Mark Timmons, environmentalist were also present. The 28 acre parcel is proposed for a multi-use development consisting of apartment homes, residential over retail, and commercial along the Old Meridian Street corridor. The property is bounded by The Arbors of Carmel, Twin Lakes Apartments, Carmel Jr. High School and Carmel Elementary, the Carmel Science & Technology Park, and Meijer's Department store. The remainder of Old Meridian Street is residential in character although there are some businesses there: Glass Chimney, Kirk Furniture, etc. In planning the development of the parcel, the historic nature of Carmel and the Old Meridian corridor was considered. The 20/20 Comprehensive Plan was taken into consideration as well as the Old Meridian district master plan. There would be between 56,000 and 80,000 square feet of commercial uses adjacent to the Old Meridian corridor. The first floor of the development would be retail with residential above. The area to the rear would have upscale, apartment homes. s:~xLnutes\ptancomm\pc 1999jun John Vard:ossen, architect with Looney, Ricks, Kiss in Memphis, Tennesseel appeared before the Commission and stated that he lives in a community in Tennessee such as the one being planned. The development is pedestrian friendly; the automobile is present but in balance with pedestrian traffic. There is commercial in the area as well as a school. The mixed use makes it a very pleasant community in which to live. The proposed project is a high density use, 24 units to the acre. Mr. VanFossen displayed several developments that his firm has completed, including Celebration, Florida. The petitioner has attempted to take into consideration all comments made by the Old Meridian Task Force in its draft report, the concerns of the Department, and the proposed architecture of the buildings in relation to the setting. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; no one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed development; the following appeared: Gordon Hopp, science teacher at Carmel Jr. High School, 300 South Guilford Avenue, stated that he has taken classes to Odom Woods for the last 12 years spotting deer, fox, wild turkeys, etc. The current proposal will have a very definite, negative effect on Odom Woods as far as the wild life. It is inevitable that the property will be developed, however, the buildings are right up to the property line. Mr. Hopp asked for at least a 100 foot buffer with a fence that will allow small animals to cross safely. Mr. Hopp was also concerned about motor bikes, kids on bikes, vandalism, trash and debris. Mr. Hopp was hopeful that a committee involving Buckingham Properties, Carmel/Clay School Teachers could be formed to manage this particular facility. Mr. Weiss stated that the petitioner was very sensitive to Odom Woods and a tree forestation plan. Dr. Teagarden has been involved in a long term plan to preserve the woods. Mark Timmons of Louisville, Kentucky, stated that the re-forestation effort will revolve around trying to re-establish as much of the bio-mass with a buffer that any development would take from the Odom Woods perimeter by planting appropriate species adaptable to the area. A great deal of thought has gone into the re-forestation of the area. The public hearing was then closed. Mark Monroe reported issues of density, traffic congestion, architectural detail, tree preservation, etc. It is important to note that if the language does not appear in the PUD ordinance, it will probably not happen during construction. If there is some architectural design feature or landscape or other design feature that the Commission would like to see put into place, it should be so stated in the Ordinance. s:\minutes',plancomm\pc 1999jun 5 Ron Houck asked about parking requirements for both retail and residential components; Mark Monroe responded that these requirements are covered in the PUD ordinance and that ordinance will determine how the project is designed, laid out, and how the uses are distributed. Ma&line Fitzgerald asked how the wetlands were being handled by the developer. The petitioner responded that the wetlands are being placed off-site in a qualified wetlands area based on recommendations by the Corps. There is a minor amount of wetlands, 2.2 acres, some higher quality than others, but they will be replaced as a part of this development. In regard to parking, residential over retail is accommodated by some of the residents, in other words, some of the people living there will also be working there and driving to work is not necessary. In addition, some persons living there will be leaving the premises to work, and this will leave some open parking spaces. A final development plan will be furnished. Dave Cremeans asked about the density of the current proposal, the petitioner responded that the density computes at up to 18 units per acre. Dave Cremeans asked that the petitioner bring to Committee the density of the multi-family projects surrounding the proposed project for purposes of comparison. Ron Houck asked about the current, permitted uses and requested a detail listing. Ron also asked about the language regarding sidewalks and paths to be provided on both sides and asked that this language be further reviewed by Committee as well as the proposed signage. Docket No. 45-99 Z, rezone application for the Buckingham Companies, was referred to Special Study Committee that will meet Tuesday, July 6th in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall at 7:00 PM. NOTE: Items 5h. and 6h. were heard together. 5h. Commission to consider Docket No. 47-99 DP/ADLS, Development Plan and Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping, and Signage applications for Glendale Partners. Petitioner seeks approval to construct 4 retail buildings totaling approximately 50,000 square feet on 8 acres known as the West Carmel Center, Retail A. The site is located on the southeast comer of 106th Street and US 421 (Michigan Road.) The site is zoned B-3/Business and is located within the Michigan Road US 421 Overlay Zone. Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers. 6h. Commission to consider Docket No. 48-99 SP, a Secondary Plat application for Glendale Partners. Petitioner seeks approval to plat one 8 acre lot for the West Carmel Center, Block A. The site is located on the southeast comer of 106th Street and US 421 (Michigan Road.) The site is zoned B-3/Business and is located within the Michigan Road US 421 Overlay Zone. Filed by Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers. (Non-Public Hearing Itern) s:'aninutes\plancomm\pc 1999jtm 6 Kevin McKasson of Glendale Partners appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance were Jamie Poczekay of American Consulting Engineers and April Hensley, Leach, Hensley Architects. The site is part ora larger site at the southeast and southwest corners of 106th and Michigan Road. INDOT will be improving the Michigan Road corridor this year by adding lanes and a bicycle path along Michigan Road. The State has approved plans for widening the road, and the petitioner's plans take into account the future fight-of-way taking. The curb cut farthest to the north will be eliminated; there are two curb cuts on I06~ Street--one at Commeme Drive, the other aligns with the Village Pantry. The site provides for the development of four buildings. A retail building consisting of 28,000 square feet; a 13,000 square foot pharmacy, and unidentified uses such as a restaurant, and perhaps a bank. All drive-through facilities are located at the rear of the buildings as well as the stacking lanes for the drive through, thus meeting the Ordinance. The retail building is designed in the Federalist style. The back of the building is done in brick and shingles; the intention is to make the rear of the building as clean and uncluttered as the front of the building. One part of the code reads ...... "Buildings with continuous facades that are 90 feet or greater in widths shall be designed with offsets, projecting or recessed, not less than 8 feet deep and intervals of not greater than 60 feet. The petitioner is unable to accomplish the 8 foot offset. In addition to the retail building, the petitioner will have three other buildings "at the street." The building materials being used are a red brick, (required in the code) stucco features used in the areas above the brick, and simulated, shake shingles. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed development; no one appeared and the public hearing was closed. Mark Monroe reported that the Department has identified some minor deficiencies with the landscape plan and has some minor issues with architectural requirements. Curb cuts and access points are critical to the success of all projects along Michigan Road--these three items are major issues for discussion at Committee. Ron Houck questioned the lighting fixtures; Kevin McKasson stated that the lighting fixtures are designed to be focused straight down and do not filter over the property line. There is no lighting currently planned along Commerce Drive, however there are some wall packs along the buildings. This will be discussed further at Committee. In response to questions from Bob Modisett, Kevin McKasson reported that as the project develops, Commerce Drive will be extended as far to the south as the property is developed, and eventually to 97th Street. Rick Sharp expressed concern for the area at the comer of 106t~ Street and Michigan Road--provisions should be made for another let turn lane or southbound from westbound 106th to 421. sSminutes\plancomm\pc 1999jun 7 Docket Nos. 47-99 DP/ADLS and 48-99 SP for Glendale Partners were referred to the Special Study Committee that will meet on Tuesday, July 6~ at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. 7h. Commission to consider Docket No. 49-99 PP, a primary plat approval for Pittman Partners. Petitioner seeks approval to plat 104 lots on 57 acres known as the Ashbury Park Subdivision. The site is located West of Springmill Road and is between 131a Street and 136t~ Street. The site is zoned S-l/Residence. Filed by Steve Pittman of Pittman Partners. Steve Pittman, 306 Millridge Drive, Carmel, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant. Also in attendance were: Neal Smith and Bob McKinney of Pittman Partners, Bruce Hagan and Gary Murray of Paul I. Cripe Engineering. Land planning was a joint collaboration with Randal Arendt, previous consultant for the Residential Open Space Ordinance, Burlson Design Group, and Paul I. Cripe. The subject parcel is approximately 57.39 acres and zoned S-1. The property is located west of and adjacent to Spring Farms Subdivision; north of and adjacent to 131st Street; south of and adjacent to 136t~ Street, directly opposite Smokey Row Elementary School; and east of and adjacent to Henley Creek and several single family residences that have individual curb cuts on Six Points Road. The property is best known as the "Harvey" properly or "Harvey Farms" and is owned by Ashbury Park LLP, of which Pittman Partners is the general partner. The petitioner is requesting one variance regarding conservancy lots. The northern portion of the property wraps around the "Morrow" residence which was the original farmhouse on the Harvey property. Spring Farms subdivision is to the east and contains a stub street called "Springs Farms Drive." U.S. 31 can be seen to the east with its accompanying office/retail parks. Roadway improvements will be made to 131~; Street in conjunction with the development of The Village of WestClay along with the extension of Meridian Comers Boulevard (Illinois Street.) This particular plan contemplates 104 home sites on 57.39 acres or 1.81 units per acre. The plan has been divided into three different areas. The surrounding uses have been taken into consideration in the development of Ashbury Park. The landscape plan provides a 50 foot buffer yard adjacent to 136t~ Street, a minimum of five shade trees, five ornamental trees, and 27 shrubs per I00 linear feet. Where two residential areas meet, DOCS has requested a 10 foot buffer yard with a minimum of three shade trees, three ornamental trees, and 15 shrubs per 100 linear feet. The petitioner would like to have the flexibility to change some of the plant material at the request of adjacent neighbors in order to provide a greater, year-round buffer. In addition, the petitioner will be planting two street trees on each lot at the time the home is built; these will be planted either between the curb and sidewalk or between the sidewalk and the house. s:\minutes\planconun\pc 1999jun 8 The site plan is consistent with the ,p~r~o~osed frontage place ordinance. The nearest lot line is approximately 50 feet from lo6 Street road right-of-way. The landscape treatmem along 136th Street will serve to complement the other features and will not thoroughly block the view from 136th Street. The community concept provides for maintenance free lifestyle, maintained by the Homeowners Association. The homes will be brick, one or two story in design. A sidewalk will be installed along the entire length of all interior streets, (I 36th and 13 l~t Streets.) A 40 foot one-half right-of-way will be dedicated as part of the plat along 136th Street, and a 45 foot one-half right-of-way will be dedicated along 131~t Street. The Residential Open Space requires one variance. The Ordinance allows for non- common private ownership in the form of conservancy lots of at least 10 acres, provided the open space is permanently restricted from future development. No more than 75% of the open space may be included within one or more conservancy lots. The plans call for two lots on twelve acres rather than one lot on ten acres. It is anticipated that these home sites and the homes built on these lots will have a retail value approaching one million dollars. The proposed development will have very little traffic impact on the roads because of fewer people per household and little impact on the school system because of older children in the household. The proposed plan provides for large, useable areas of open space as intended under the Residential Open Space Ordinance. The site is served by all utilities, Clay Township Regional Waste, Indiana Gas, Ameritech, PSI, and Indianapolis Water. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; the following appeared: Mark Rattermann, 11257 St. Andrews Lane, Carmel, president of the Crooked Stick Homeowners Association and president of the Original Clay West Information Council, commented that the Residential Open Space Ordinance is obviously flawed as demonstrated by the proposed development. Mr. Rattermann asked that the Commission revisit the Residential Open Space Ordinance because of the obvious higher density proposed in the Ashton Development. Phil Lowery, 418 S chumaker Drive, and John Butterworth, 405 Schumaker Drive, appeared before the Commission as representatives of the residents of Spring Farms. As a whole, the residents of Spring Farms were supportive of controlled growth and many of the concepts that Ashbury Development offers Carmel. However, the residents are strongly opposed to the proposal that would connect the two subdivisions via a road that would be the only southbound traffic alternative. The concern is one of traffic flow and child safety. One remedy would be allowing a street on 131st Street fi.om Ashbury that would allow the vast majority of traffic to floxv through a thoroughfare rather than the community area adjacent to the pool. s:~minutes\plancomm\pc 1999j tm 9 John Butterworth, 405 Schumaker Drive, spoke of the traffic and safety issues in view of 57 children currently in the Spring Farms Subdivision that will be affected. The swimming pool will be located at the entrance where Ashbury Park enters the Spring Farms Subdivision. The greatest concern is the amount of traffic that comes into Spring Farms from Ashbury Park. Steve Pittman is aware of the concerns. A southbound entrance is one remedy. The builder thus far has been very helpful and receptive to discussing a second entrance. The residents of Spring Farms are not opposed to the connectivity. The Spring Farms recommendation is to tie into Spring Farms via a cul- de-sac. Alexa Albrecht, 1604 Old Mill Circle, in Spring Mill Ponds, was not necessarily opposed to the proposed project, however there are two additional projects that impact Springmill Road, 126th Street, 131~t Street, and 136th Street, and roadway improvements are behind. Ms. Albrecht asked the Commission to consider the rate of development of the area as opposed to the rate at which the Thoroughfare Plan is being implemented. Springmill Road has the potential to be closed several times for three month imervals to repair bridges and intersections. Jerry Wagner, 403 Schumaker Drive, Spring Farms, commented that the cluster home portion of Ashbury Park is incompatible with the family nature of Spring Farms. Mr. Wagner also agreed that traffic was a continual problem in view of development VS thoroughfare improvements. Steve Pitman offered the following rebuttal: A number of persons have voiced favorable comments regarding the development, but they are concerned that the Residential Open Space Ordinance is being taken advantage of. The leadership of Spring Farms has been very professional. Mr. Pittman felt that the inter-connectivity of the neighborhoods was a problem, although he was willing to do so under the Ordinance. Mr. Pittman thought it made sense for the first 15 houses to connect the neighborhoods and not cross the primary conservation area and install a cul-de-sac. An emergency access could be created utilizing brick pavers for emergency vehicles. The developer is definitely not willing to create an entrance at 131~ Street. The developer has been sensitive to the neighbors and accommodating as well. Mark Monroe reported that a there have been a number of changes to the proposed plan as it has progressed through the process. As far as the road connection, there may be other alternatives that would meet the Ordinance requirement as well as various goals of the Community. It is worthy of mention that the stub street provided in Spring Farms was to be continued and it has been obvious for a number of years. If the connection does not occur, it would force the developer to request a variance. The Department recommends that this Docket proceed to Subdivision Committee. Leo Dierckman asked that the public hearing remain open on this Docket; all were in agreement. s:~ninute$\plancomm\pc 1999jun 10 Rick Sharp asked how the proposed dedication by the developer relates to the requirements of the Thoroughfare Plan. Mark Monroe responded that the right-of-way dedication is consistent with the current Thoroughfare Plan; 136th Street specifically does not fit in with the proposed Thoroughfare Plan. Kevin Kirby commented that he would like to see a second access to 136th Street rather than cul-de-sac the road; it is possible that some traffic calming devices could be used. Docket No. 49-99 P.P. for Ashbury Park Subdivision, was referred to the Subdivision Committee that will meet on Tuesday, July 6th in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall. Rick Sharp asked about the roadway improvements to 131a and 136th Streets and whether or not any plan was really in existence. Mr. Sharp has repeatedly asked for a concrete plan for roadway improvements, how it will be funded, and when construction will start. Mr. Pittman stated that he was not aware of the exact improvements and had not seen anything in writing. At this point, the Commission took a brief recess. I. .Old Business: Ii. Committee to consider Docket No. 14-99 Z, a rezone application for Duke Realty Investments, The petitioner seeks approval to rezone 55 acres from B- 5/Business and S-2/Residence to B-6/Business. This site is located at the northwest corner of 96th Street and U.S. 31 and extends north of 1-465. Petitioner also seeks approval to rezone I0 acres from B-5/Business to B-8/Business. This site is located at the northeast corner of 96th Street and U.S. 31. The sites are currently zoned B- 5/Business and S-2/Residence and are located partially within the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by Steve Granner of Bose McKinney and Evans. Phil Nicely, attorney with Bose McKinney and Evans, 8888 Keystone Crossing, appeared before the Commission along with Steve Granner. The petitioner is requesting a rezone of the property from B-5 and S-2 to B-6 and B-8/Business. Rich Horn, vice president of Duke Realty, Chris Sager and Bob Falk, also of Duke Development, and Steve Fehribach of A&F Engineering were also in attendance. Phil Nicely briefly went over the location of the subject property. The petitioner's request is basically three-fold: 1) Rezone the southwest quadrant from B-5 and S-2 to B- 6/Busienss 2) Rezone the northwest quadrant to B-6/Business; and 3) Rezone the southeast quadrant to B-8/Business classification. Mr. Nicely reported that since the initial public hearing, three meetings have been held with the Special Study Committee who asked numerous questions and studies the rezone in depth. The Special Study Committee did make a favorable recommendation with one dissenting vote. s:\minute5 p lanco mm\pc 1999jun 11 The proposal for the southwest quadrant is to rezone to B-6 and develop for office buildings, hotel, and two restaurants, as per the site plan. Mr. Nicely stated that the rezone is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. At the insistence of the Special Study Committee, the square footage of the offices has been reduced from the original proposal of 850,000 square feet to 710,000 square feet. The petitioner has filed formal commitments with the Department stating ....... "There will be no more than 710,000 square feet of office space; A maximum of 3 l0 rooms in the hotel; and No more than two restaurants." The petitioner has also committed that: Prior to any development, the development plan for the development and ADLS would have to be approved by the Plan Commission prior to the commencement of construction. In regard to portions of the development that are in conflict with provisions in the Overlay Zone, the petitioner agrees to appear before the Board of Zoning Appeals to obtain a variance of developmental standards. The petitioner has also committed that from the existing right-of-way of 96th Street, the setback of any building would be 240 feet. Mr. Nicely believes that this commitment was 220 feet in the original plan, but the petitioner has agreed to 240 feet. The petitioner has also committed that no building or other structure within 46 feet of the center line of 96th Street would exceed 5 stories, and that no structure on the property would exceed eight stories. Additionally, the petitioner has made the following commitments: To construct a berm along 96m Street; five to six foot undulating mounds on which would be planted conifers at an initial height of 8 to 10 feet; the right-of-way for the expansion of 96th Street shall come offthe north side of 96th Street with 90 feet of right-of-way for improvements to be made in 96th Street. In addition, the 90 feet would be available for future improvements, if deemed necessary. There will be no access from the site to Springmill Road; the south and west facades of any parking garage constructed within the development within the site line of any existing neighborhood or within the site line of proposed residential development west of Springmill Road would be developed and aesthetically improved from the standard parking garage. Note: Parking garages are also subject to ADLS approval. The process for the construction of improvements to 96 Street as suggested in the A&F Engineering Report would be commenced contemporaneously with the start of the development of the real estate and diligently pursued to completion. (This is also true of the berm.) The road improvements will be developed parallel with the development of the property. It is the petitioner's belief that he has been attentive to the concerns raised by members of the Special Study Committee. The automobile parking from the center line of 96th Street was initially proposed at 80 feet and is now 103 feet; the setback of the first building as 220 feet and is now at 240 feet; the office development was at 850,000 and is now at 710,000 square feet. In regard to the northwest quadrant, there will be a 90 foot greenbelt/buffer area along Springmill Road--this also exists on the property being developed south ofi-465. The s:h~ninutes\plancomm\pc 1999jun 12 southeast quadrant (the 10 acre tract being rezoned to a B-8 classification) will provide for retail development. The area is designated as an employment area in the Comprehensive Plan. The following changes and commitments were made with respect to the retail component: At the request of the Special Study Committee, I) the petitioner has expanded the list of permitted uses in B-8 that would not be permitted in the proposed development such as billiard parlor, bowling alley, dance hall, indoor theatre, shooting gallery, and similar type uses that are listed as excluded uses for this property. 2) The commitment indicates that, excluding the height of the buildings shown on the frontage of 96th Street, the developer would use as a guideline for submission of any buildings for ADLS approval, the architectural design requirements established in the 421 Overlay Ordinance. 3) A sketch plan developed by Ron Gfiery of the DOT of Indianapolis, expanding the intersection of 96th Street and Meridian to produce a level of service D was submitted, and if implemented, would require right-of-way in excess of what is necessary to accomplish the improvements designated in the suggestions made by A&F Engineering. The Special Study also requested, and the petitioner has agreed, to reserve land on the southeast comer necessary for future dedication. The petitioner has agreed in the design of development that the dedication could be accomplished without the removal of any pavement or buildings with respect to the development. 4) The retail development is limited to 105,000 square feet. 5) If retail development does occur, it will be constructed substantially in accordance with the conceptual plan. 6) The access to the development would be limited to the access at Pennsylvania Street; there will be no fight in--right out access as originally proposed in the middle of the site. 7) The petitioner has agreed to reserve an area along the green belt along Meridian Street where a sign could be constructed that would be a "Welcome" sign to the City of Carmel. Mr. Nicely stated that it is likely that the improvements along 96th Street and Meridian Street wilI be financed through a "TI~." The zoning requested is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to this property. Rick Sharp moved to suspend the rules to allow for double the amount of time for public comment. This motion passed 12 in favor, Jim O%leal opposed. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the proposed development; no one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed development; the following appeared: Tom Bartlett, Department of Metropolitan Development for the City of Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Bartlett commented that while Duke has reduced the density of the project, it is still too dense. The total square footage for the 35 acre parcel results in a development density of over 24,000 square feet--this exceeds the s:'umi nutes~,plancomm\pc 1999j un 13 density of any other suburban office parks in the metropolitan area, including Keystone at the Crossing (office component only--not retail.) Spdngmill Road was compared to College Avenue because a lot of the traffic uses the adjoining roadways. Springmill has no commercial at any of its intersections and is entirely residential in character along its length. College extends into Broadripple and eventually into downtown linking Carmel and Indianapolis. In addition to U.S. 31, College serves the arterial roadway purpose-- Springmill does not. The densities proposed for the southwest and northwest quadrant will have a significant impact on traffic on Springmill Road, despite what the traffic study may suggest. Springmill do not show on the Metropolitan area of the Marion County Thoroughfare Plan because it is a collector roadway, not an arterial; College Avenue and Meridian Street show as an arterial. College Avenue carries about 50% more traffic on average for the area north of Kessler. Considering developments that have prior approval, there is approximately 3 million square feet of office uses at the interchange of 465 and U.S. 31. If Duke is approved, it would be equivalent to locating the four tallest office buildings in downtown Indianapolis to this one interstate interchange. The proposed office use makes sense, however, when you add up the densities, the offices are having to rely on an infrastructure system that is not designed to serve over 3 million square feet. Due to the fact that Springmill Road is classified as a collector road, the State has no plans to widen Springmill Road in Marion County. Commercial developments approved by Cannel in the past in the same general that abut single family, residential properties, are required to make more substantial commitments in terms of buffering and landscaping than has been presented. It is preferable to m-align the entrance to the retail quadrant with a re-aligned entrance to the Kroger Center. At the request of the Special Study Committee, HNTB engineers conducted a review of the petitioner's traffic study and it is apparent that there are several items that were not addressed. A prior commitment was made when Duke was re-zoning and developing the original Parkwood East that suggested no retail uses would be permitted other than those required to support the offices on that site. Finally, there may be an issue with regard to the State of Indiana (INDOT) having already compensated the land owner for this real estate for prior damages caused at the time the last interchange improvements were made. If this were the case, it is possible that the landowner has already been compensated for the loss of the real estate. Mr. Bartlett urged the Commission to fully explore the truth of the matter before making a final decision. Brad Yarger, president of Yarger Engineering, Indianapolis reviewed the traffic study prepared by A & F Engineering at the request of the Heartland Coalition and offered the following general comments: 1) The interchange in the middle ofthe entke development was omitted from the traffic study. The area studied was too small; the impacts will be much greater. There are significant ~mpacts at 96 and Meridian. These impacts should be studied at 96t~, 91st, 86th, and so on until the impacts dissipate. Mr. Yarger questioned the traffic distribution. Under the existing zoning, to achieve a level of service C, it would take 26 lanes coming into the intersection of96,h and Meridian. The proposed development shows 23 lanes entering the intersection and a level of service ofF. In order for the proposed development to get a level of service C, it would take 31 lanes entering s:~ninutes\plancomm\pc 199~;j un 14 into the intersection. Three of those lanes would come on the east side of Meridian where the Shell station or Kroger is located (40 feet of additional right-of-way.) Mr. Yarger's conclusion was that the current study does not follow the guidelines as set forth by Carmel's transporation impact study guidelines. HNTB comments went into great detail as to what should be done and how it should be done. Mr. Yarger recommended that a full simulation be done after a workable plan is devised so that it can be determined how one intersection relates to the other. Gregory K. Silver, counselor for the Heartland Coalition, a citizen organization consisting of neighborhood groups and associations, individuals, and two major umbrella groups, Clay West Information Council, Inc. and Nora Northside Community Council. It is important to note that two members of the coalition live work, and own business in both Marion County and Hamilton County. The Coalition has come together to help find answers to the many questions. On June l0th, the State of Indiana formally notified the Department Staffthat any decision on this issue would be premature and not in the best interests of tax payers. Mr. Bartlett read into the record the final two paragraphs of Christine Klika's letter to Carmel, copy attached and made a part hereof. Sharon Clark, 11932 Pebblebrook Lane, Carmel, president of the Hamilton County Commissioners, stated that the County Commissioners had approved the following statement: "Hamilton County, the City of Indianapolis, and Carmel, the State of Indiana, have entered into a special study of the 96~ Street corridor, with the results due in September. Hamilton County has undertaken large road projects to facilitate traffic flow. The projects that interact with the completion of U.S. 31 to freeway status are: 146t~ Street upgrade, and the Clay Township intersection improvements. If this rezone is approved without sufficient traffic information, data, analysis, which will enable all entities to continue cooperation and planning, taxpayers and ultimately the traveling public will be negatively impacted. Traffic flow counts, illustrations, dedication of right- of-way for State or County improvements, projections of level of service--all of this needs to be presented before such a rezone is approved. To delay this decision three months to secure this traffic information is reasonable with so much at stake." Alan Klineman, 398 Vantana Court, Indianapolis 46260, appeared before the Commission expressing opposition to the density of the proposed development. The density is not in the best interest of the people in Marion County or Hamilton County to have this type of density as proposed in this instance. Mr. Klineman commented that it is extremely important that whatever happens, particularly at Springmill and College and Meridian Street, that those things are properly done. Mr. Klineman felt that there was enough evidence in the records to show that the studies are incomplete at this time and the matter should be sent back to the Special Study Committee for further review. Also, the exhibits attached to the commitments are not in conformity with the commitments themselves and their validity is questionable. The plot plan of the southwest site shows the original 800,000 odd square feet and not the newly revised 710,00 square feet--still at too high a density for the site. Mr. Klineman urged the Commission to return this Docket s:2ninutes\plancomm\pc 1999jun 15 to Committee to review density and the allowable height, especially for the portion on the southwest quadrant. Incidentally, there are no 300 room hotels in Carmel--the closest one would be the Holiday Inn at the Pyramids (465 and Michigan Road.) Henry Efroymson, 9440 Holiday Drive, Bellmeade Subdivision, on the south side of 96th Street, spoke as a 35 year resident of the area. There comes a point when development destroys the quality of life of a residential neighborhood, aside from the obvious traffic issue. The proposed development will infringe on the privacy of the immediate neighborhoods. To Mr. Efroymson's knowledge, there is no existing development of this density in any residential neighborhood in either Hamilton County or Marion County. Mr. Efroymson urged the Commission to deny the rezone. Maynard Cox, 9540 Broadway, Indianapolis, pointed out that there is no other location of this density where traffic will be limited to 7/10 of a mile (from College to Springmill) with the limitations of the ends of it dumping into a two lane, undeveloped thoroughfare. Previous concerns were expressed as to subdivision impact regarding County roadways in Clay Township; those same concerns should be directed toward this project. All traffic will disperse into the noah/south secondary roads, College, Springmill, and Ditch Road; none of these thoroughfares is designed to dissipate this volume of traffic. The north/ south roadways to the west are residential--no commercial development will probably occur within close proximity to contribute to the further development of 96t~ Street west. To the east, 96th Street at College is a problem traffic area and there is no "quick-fix" answer available presently proposed by the County Highway, either Hamilton or Marion, to relieve this problem. Brandi Anderson, 9232 North Washington Boulevard, and is "totally disgusted" with the existing Parkwood development and speaking as a resident of the immediate, is not pleased with either the existing or proposed development. Janet Cox, 9540 North Broadway, Indianapolis, was concerned with possible cut-through traffic to avoid the 96* and College Avenue intersection. Phil Nicely responded that with respect to the density, the office buildings at Keystone at the Crossing have a density per square foot of approximately 29,000 plus a 560 room hotel. In addition, the Ameri-Suites adds 150 rooms plus 723,000 square feet of retail space at the Crossing. To compare the proposed development with the Keystone Crossing Development is absolutely ludicrous. Duke has lowered the density substantially on the proposed development. Under the current zoning for the B-5 property on the east side and the B-5 property on the west side, south of 465, the City Council this past Monday passed an ordinance allowing more offices and more square footage in the Overlay Zone than the proposed development of 710,000 square feet plus the hotel. Mr. Nicely commented that the existing study was made as to the existing Parkwood complex; a large percentage of the traffic from Parkwood East goes College, (16%). It is anticipated that the traffic from Parkwood West would go to Springmill Road. The bulk s:~finutes\ptancomm\pc 1999jun I6 of the traffic will go to the Interstate via Meridian Street. Also, the landscapebuffer at the existing Parkwood facility is more than adequate and is aesthetically pleasing to the neighbors. Mr. Nicely referred to a previous commitment by the petitioner that no retail would exist east of Meridian Street, and the petitioner is still in compliance with that commitment. Also, the landowner did receive compensation for the property that was taken by the State, and this fact is totally irrelevant to the issues before the Commission. According to Phil Nicely, an independent traffic consultant has reviewed the study that was done and found it to be satisfactory. Steve Febxibach referred to a previous community wide needs study that was done by A&F Engineering in 1992 through 1997. From that study, Ag: F was able to expound with the proposed development. The area at 1-465 and US 31 was lef~ out of the A&F Engineering report and it will currently be studied by INDOT. At present, to get onto the interstate is basically a right turn movement and fairly easy to make. Secondly, the area is too small--A&F then determined which intersections were critical. The distribution sensitive to congestion computed to be 16%. College is utilized more than Springmill Road. Computing at 20°,6, it was determined that the intersection of Springmill and 96th will work at level of service B with the planned improvements; however, this will need to be looked at in the future. It is A&F Engineering's belief that their recommendations will fit--96th and Meridian Streets will have delays based on their recommendations, but INDOT will address those delays as well as Marion County and A&F. The issues have been looked at. Phil Nicely stated that the necessary roadway improvements will be made, including a stop light at 96th and Spfingmill Road. The commitments are consistent and specifically provide for a maximum square footage of 710,000 square feet and the exhibit relates to the fact that it would be developed substantially in accordance with the conceptual plan. Immediately south of the hotel site is a McDonald's restaurant and apartments. There is a height limitation of 100 feet within the B-6 zoning classification. The public hearing was lef~ open on Docket No. 14-99-Z. Mark Monroe reminded the Commission that the proposed plan does meet the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Duke has provided the Department with a list of commitments and the Department feels that they are adequate and similar to other developments that have occurred along 96th Street and other areas along U.S. 31. However, a lot of new information was received just today that was presented this evening but not thoroughly studied by the Commission such as new public input, 30 pages of zoning commitments, and new traffic information. The Department's recommendation on the project still stands, but would agree that more time be allowed for the Plan Commission to study additional material. Mike Hollibaugh gave a brief report from the 96~ Street Task Force which is the joint study between Hamilton County, Marion County, and the City of Carmel. A traffic s:hninutes'~plancomm\pc 1999jun 17 model is being created and more information is needed at this time before a full report and recommendation can be made. Rick Sharp gave the report of the Special Study Committee. There was an item outstanding: One condition of the Committee's approval was that the recommendations of HNTB's analysis be implemented, in other words, before Duke appears before City Council, Duke will be required to submit a base-level assessment and the incremental analysis of what improvements are required based solely upon their impact on the site and analysis of what the cost would be. The theory was that the Commission would give the City Council the tools needed in order to make a decision not only on the rezone but perhaps a fair sharing of the financial burden of the incremental cost of improvements on Duke's part. The Committee also asked that an outlet onto Springmill Road be incorporated into the plan, per HNTB's analysis, subject to Plan Commission approval. Rick Sharp recommended that additional time be given to the Commission to adequately analyze the new materials presented. The Committee's recommendation was for approval with the conditions stated, 5 in favor, 1 opposed. Pat Rice commented that the 96th Street Task Force was scheduled to preview a preliminary, 20 year traffic forecast prepared by John Myers of Parsons, Brinckerhoff. According to John Myers, the finalized report should be ready in one month. The Duke proposal has made a significant impact on the forecast and the preliminary figures are astounding. Pat Rice moved to TABLE Docket No. 14-99 Z until such time as adequate review and reports are submitted to the full Plan Commission. Point of Order: Rick Sharp stated that a motion to TABLE cannot have any limitations. However, it is possible to Postpone to a time certain. Pat Rice then moved to POSTPONE Docket No. 14-99 Z until the full Commission meeting in August to allow for new materials to be adequately reviewed and for materials to be received from the State, seconded by Rick Sharp. POSTPONED TO AUGUST 8 in favor, 5 opposed. Rick Sharp asked the President to authorize the Department to look at the Rules of the Procedure, Ordinance, whatever needs to be changed to allow the Plan Commission to hire a traffic engineer, give the traffic engineer the scope of the work to be done, and require the petitioner to fund the work. The Rules need to be changed. Mark Monroe suggested that the Executive Committee discuss this item at the next meeting. NOTE: Chris White recused himself from items 2i., 5i., and 6i. 2i. Committee to consider Docket No. 17-99 PP, a Primary Plat application for the Hazel Dell Summit Company. The petitioner seeks approval to plat 166 lots on 88 acres known as the Hazel Dell Summit Subdivision. The petitioner also seeks approval of a variance of Section 8.9 of the Carmel/Clay Subdivision Regulations to eliminate the sSminutes\plancomm\pc t999jun 18 required perimeter sidewalk along Cherry Tree Road. The site is located on the north side of East 131~t Street, between Cherry Tree Road and Hazel Dell Road. The site is zoned S- 1/Residence. Filed by Jim Nelson of Nelson and Frankenberger Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. A letter was received from the attorneys representing the Trails &Avian Glen and distributed to the Commission members. An agreement has been reached among the parties, and the residents of Avian Glen have formally withdrawn their opposkion to both the primary and secondary plats. The Subdivision Committee unanimously agreed to favorably recommend approval of the development conditioned upon the petitioner's agreement to make certain changes to the plan. The following changes address the concerns of the committee as well as the neighbors. 1) Saphire Drive will no longer be extended to Cherry Tree Avenue and inter-connect between the Trails at Avian Glen and Hazel Dell Summit. The pedestrian connection between Emerald Drive and Cherry Tree will remain. 2) One lot was eliminated and the width of the lots was increased from 65 feet to 75 feet. 3) The petitioner has provided for a pedestrian bridge to allow for pedestrian access between the area south of the creek and north of the creek. 4) The existing mounding and landscaping south of the creek will be augmented and a landscaping plan has been submitted to the Department. The plan includes the addition of 23 Austrian Pines, 8 feet in height. In addition, within the area north of the creek where no landscaping exists today, the petitioner is proposing mounding and 23 Austrian Pine Trees. Ihe primary change has been to the landscaping along 131s Street which now allows for the installation of brick pillars and wrought iron fencing from the west to the east property line; the spacing on the brick pillars will be every 75 feet. Behind the pillars and fencing will be planted 4 to 6 foot high sculptured mounding with both deciduous and coniferous trees. With respect to the coniferous trees, Austrian Pines are being referred to; with respect to the deciduous trees, trees of 3 inches in caliper are being referred to. Along 13 1st Street, the petitioner's plan provides for 135 trees within an area 2,060 feet in length or one tree (Austrian Pine) every 15 feet. Tom Yedlick, Subdivision Chairman confirmed Mr. Nelson's report. Jim O2qeal asked about the elimination of sidewalks on Cherry Tree. Mr. Nelson responded that the petitioner is requesting a variance for the elimination of sidewalks on one portion of Cherry Tree only. Bob Modisett asked about the final resolution of the park area and the maintenance. It was Mr. Nelson's understanding that the Parks Board agreed to consider the acceptance of the dedication of the park upon the Plan Commission's approval of the primary plat. The petitioner would first provide the Parks Board $20,000. cash to fund improvements to the Park; also the Park area would be maintained by the petitioner for two years. s:~minutes\plancomm\pc 1999jtm 19 Mark Monroe stated that the Department is recommending approval of the variance for the sidewalks conditioned upon the bike path being installed on Chen~ Tree. Norma Meighen moved for the approval of Docket No. 1%99 PP, a Primary Plat application for Hazel Dell Summit Company. APPROVED 12 in favor none opposed. Mark Monroe stated that the Department is recommending approval of the variance for the sidewalks conditioned upon the bike path being installed on Cherry Tree. Jim Nelson formally requested that as a part of their request for the variance, the petitioner would accept the condition that the variance be approved subject to the pathway along Cherry Tree Avenue being installed. Ron Houck moved for the approval of the variance granting the elimination ora sidewalk and the installation of a bike path along Cherry Tree. APPROVED 12-0. 3i. Commission to consider Docket No. 31-99 Z, a rezone application for Glenwood, LLC. the Petitioner seeks approval to rezone less than one acre from R-3/R. esidence to B-I/Business. The site is located at 10820 North College Avenue· The site is currently zoned R-3/Residence. Filed by Leonard Voigt of Glenwood, LLC. The petitioner was not in attendance. · Dave Cremeans reported that the Committee had voted a negative recommendation on this particular petition. Ron Houck then moved for approval of Docket No. 31-99 Z, Glenwood, LLC. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY DENIJED. Rick Sharp moved for an unfavorable recommendation to be sent to the City Council. APPROVED 13-0. 4i. Commission to consider Docket No. 36-99 Z, Rezone application for Gibraltar Properties. The petitioner seeks approval to rezone 71 acres from S-2/Residence to R-4/ Residence. The site is located on the northwest comer of 96th Street and Westfleld Blvd. The site is currently zoned S-2/Residence. Filed by Jim Nelson of Nelson & Frankenberger. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Gibraltar Properties was referred to the Special Study Committee. The petitioner has expanded its commitments to assure the Committee that the project described by picture and drawing would actually occur. The Committee voted a favorable recommendation. sSminutes\plancomm\pc 1999jun 20 Rick Sharp, Chairman of the Special Study Committee, confirmed the vote and reported that the petitioner offered to dedicate their one-half right-of-way along the southern border of the neighborhood park. It was also hoped that the "no build" zone could serve as a means of meeting the County's needs, however, this situation is still to be resolved between the petitioner and the County. Jim Nelson stated that the petitioner has shown on their exhibit the area along the south edge of the park that is anticipated to be a 45 foot half right-of-way. Jim Nelson also stated that the owner had received a uniform land or easement acquisition offer from the City in an amount acceptable to them. Ron Houck moved for the approval of Docket No. 36-99 Z, Rezone application for Gibraltar Properties. APPROVED 13-0. 5i. Committee to consider Docket No. 43-99 SP, a secondary plat application for Davis Homes. Petitioner seeks approval to construct 74 lots on 32 acres within the subdivision known as Emerald Crest at Hazel Dell Summit, Section 1. The site is located on the northeast corner of 131st Street and Cherry Tree Road. The site is zoned S- l/Residence. Filed by Li-Ching Wu of Davis Homes. During the time that the primary plat was under review by the Subdivision Committee, the petitioner filed the secondary plat for the first two sections, hoping that the full Commission could act on the Secondary Plat. Mark Monroe reported that there are no remaining TAC issues, except for a minor labeling issue on the two secondary plats. The new Open Space Ordinance does require all open spaces to be designated as conservation easements. Rick Sharp moved for the approval of Docket No. 43-99 SP, conditioned upon the appropriate labeling of open space as conservation easements. APPROVED 12-0. 6i. Committee to consider Docket No. 53-99 SP, a secondary plat application for Oak View Associates. Petitioner seeks approval to construct 51 lots on 38 acres within the subdivision known as Delaware Commons at Hazel Dell Summit. The site is located on the west side of Hazel Dell Road, north of 131s~ Street. The site is zoned S- l/Residence. Filed by Richard Henderson of Schneider Engineering. Jim Nelson appeared before the Commission on behalf of Hazel Dell Summit, seeking secondary plat approval. The petitioner has appeared before the Subdivision. Mark Monroe reported that the Department is again recommending approval conditioned upon the labeling of open space as conservation easements. s:~ninutesxplancomm\pc 1999jun 21 Rick Sharp moved for the approval of Docket No. 53-99 SP, Oak View Associates, Delaware Commons at Hazel Dell Summit, conditioned upon the appropriate labeling of conservation easements within the open space. APPROVED 12-0. J. New Business: lj. Commission to consider Docket No. 54-99 ADLS Amend., an amended Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping, and Signage application for the Blockbuster Awning. The site is located on the northeast comer of 116t~ Street and AAA Way. The site is zoned B~8/Business. Filed by George Fishell. George Fishell, Madison Heights, Michigan, appeared before the Commission representing Blockbuster Video. Mr. Fishell stated that they had agreed to remove the current awning (blockbuster blue) and replace with the haw blue consistent with the Merchants Square colors. Mr. Fishell asked that they be granted 30 days to effect the change. Mark Monroe reported that the Department's recommendation concurs with Mr. Fishell's proposal. The current awnings are to be removed within one to two weeks and within 30 days replaced with the naw blue. Rick Sharp moved approval for the petitioner to remove the current awnings and replace with awnings of appropriate material and color within 30 days. APPROVED 11 in favor, Tom Yedlick opposed. 2j. Commission to consider Docket No. 55-99 ADLS Amend., an amended Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping and Signage application for Baker Hill. The site is located north of the norhtwest comer ofU. S. 31 and 126th Street. The site is currently zoned B-2/Business and is located within the U.S. 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by Jim Leahy of Midwest Sign Company. Jim Leahy, Indianapolis, of Midwest Sign Company appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. The petitioner is requesting approval of the sign as submitted in conformance with the applicable ordinance. Mark Monroe reported that the sign, as proposed, faces west rather than U.S. Ron Houck moved for the approval of Docket No. 55-99 ADLS Amend., for Baker Hill. APPROVED 12-0. s:h-ninutes\plancomm\pc 1999jun 22 Kevin Kirby asked that the Executive Committee look at considering two meetings within one month's period when the Agenda is long and looks as if it would continue past 10:00 PM. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:17 AM. David A. Cremeans, President Ramona Hancock, Secretary s:kminutes\plancomm\pc 1999jun 23