Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 05-15-12City of Carmel CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION MAY 15, 2012 City Hall Council Chambers, 2nd Floor 1 Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 6:00 PM Members present: John Adams, Jay Dorman, Brad Grabow, Nick Kestner, Joshua Kirsh, Steve Lawson, Alan Potasnik, Kevin "Woody" Rider, Steve Stromquist, Sue Westermeier, Ephraim Wilfong DOCS Staff Present: Director Michael Hollibaugh, Planning Administrator Angie Conn; Legal Counsel John Molitor Also Present: Ramona Hancock, Plan Commission Secretary The minutes of the April 17, 2012 meeting were approved with minor correction. Legal Counsel Report, John Molitor: Probably will be an up -date soon on the pending litigation. Department Announcements, Angie Conn: Public Notice for The Overlook at Legacy (Legacy PUD) and The Meadows at Legacy (Legacy PUD), was three days late being published in the newspaper. The Commission must vote to suspend its Rules of Procedure to hear these items this evening. H. Public Hearings 1. Docket No. 12040016 Z: The Lakes at Towne Road III PUD Rezone. 2. WITHDRAWN: 3. The applicant seeks approval to rezone 9.6 acres to PUD/Planned Unit Development for single family residential uses on 12 lots. The site is located at 13336 Towne Rd. It is currently zoned S- 1/Residence. Filed by Jim Shields of Weihe Engineers, for Indiana Land Development Corp. Present for Petitioner: Leo Dierckman, Indiana Land Development Corp.; Jim Shields, Weihe Engineers Overview: Site is located at 13336 Towne Road Lake has been re- located to accommodate the neighbors Preserving trees to the greatest extent possible Re- locating the lake also provides a buffer for the neighbors along the west side Lot lines are matched with the lot lines to the north Lakes at Towne Road has a density of 1.34; acres moving toward The Lakes at Hayden Run, the density computes to 1.37 acres; to the south of the site is open space 30 acres of undeveloped land zoned S -1 1 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 Entrance will be off Towne Road Development will have 6 lots on Alexandra Road and 6 directly across the street total of 12 lots The development will connect to a stub street that goes to The Lakes; that will alleviate traffic The lake will manage the drainage issues on the site Total density on the site is 1.25 acres Open space on the site computes to 44% and exceeds the Open Space Requirement Homes to be constructed will be equal to or greater than size, quality, and price of existing homes to the north Petitioner request suspension of the Rules of Procedure and a vote this evening Public Remonstrance/Favorable: Marilyn Anderson, Shelborne Court, representing CWIC -2 willing to accept the PUD for several reasons: Lakes at Towne Road III is actually an extension of an existing subdivision, and the density is slightly less; the lot sizes will match or exceed the lot sizes of the abutting neighbors; the developer is setting aside a significant amount of open space (44 that will not be developed; the impact from the PUD will be minimal, even with the density increase, because it is under 10 acres; abutting neighbors have communicated an overall acceptance with the proposal. Overall, CWIC -2 is satisfied. Tyrone Thomas, 2559 Milano Drive, President, Lakes at Towne Road HOA. The HOA is in favor of the proposal, however they do have a concern with the stub road to the undeveloped 30 acres. The neighbors would prefer a walking path and not a road, due to increased traffic and safety issues. Public Hearing Closed Rebuttal, Leo Dierckman: The stub road is simply a requirement of the City. In the event the project to the south develops, it might be possible to change the PUD to eliminate the stub road -if development of the 30 acres occurs before the petitioner starts construction. Dept Report, Angie Conn: Proposed development is low in density Dept is in support of PUD being voted on this eve Dept requests suspension of the Rules of Procedure in order to vote Dept recommends favorable consideration to the City Council Commission Members Comments: Kudos to the petitioner for working with the residents Good to minimize the density rather than maximizing Mailboxes street signage how will those be addressed? Any other option for the stub? Dept Response: Only other option for the stub is if the petitioner would plat the road right -of -way but not actually build the street; ultimately the City Ordinance does require the connection Motion: Woody Rider to suspend the Rules of Procedure, seconded by Joshua Kirsh, approved 11 -0 Note: Petitioner commits to match mailbox design with those to the north, Lakes at Towne Road, as well as the street signage; commitment will be included in the PUD prior to going to City Council. Street lighting will be pursuant to zoning requirements. Motion: Woody Rider to forward Document No. 12040016 Z, The Lakes at Towne Road III PUD Rezone to the 2 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 City Council with a positive recommendation; seconded by Joshua Kirsh, approved 11 -0 4. Docket No. 12030017 PP: The Overlook at Legacy (Legacy PUD). The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 31 lots on 25.23 acres. The site is located at the southeast corner of Community Dr. and future Cherry Creek Blvd. It is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development. Filed by Tim Walter of Platinum Properties, LLC. Motion: Woody Rider to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to hear items 4, 5, and 6 this evening, seconded by John Adams, approved 9 in favor, two opposed (Potasnik, Stromquist) Present for Petitioner: Jon Dobosiewicz, Land Use Professional with Nelson and Frankenberger, on behalf of Platinum Properties. Also in attendance: Paul Rioux and Tim Walter, Platinum Properties, Brett Huff, Stoeppelwerth Associates, Project Engiineer; and Charlie Frankenberger, Nelson and Frankenberger. Overview: Legacy is a mixed -use, Planned Unit Development enacted by City Council in 2007 Developments surrounding the Legacy: o To the north, an apartment community, Lockhaven Subdivision o To the east, White River Fishers, residential development o To the south, Prairie Trace Elementary School along River Road Haverstick Subdivision o To the west is existing Cherry Creek Estates Cherry Tree Grove Subdivisions Overlook at Legacy site comprises 25 acres in the neighborhood residential use block The Legacy is dissected by two primary roadways: north/south Community Drive, connecting 146 Street to River Road, and Cherry Creek Blvd, east/west, which connects the existing portion of Cherry Creek Blvd over to River Road Overlook at Legacy is bound on south east by River Road; along the north by the future extension of Cherry Creek Blvd, and on the west by the extension of Community Drive Overlook at Legacy will be developed by constructing a 31 -lot, single family subdivision Two approvals are required by developing the Overlook at Legacy: o Plat approval by the Plan Commission o Secondary Plat Construction Plan approval administered by the Dept of Community Services Site Access via two planned cuts at Community Drive and the future extension of Cherry Creek Blvd House fronts will face Cherry Creek Blvd Community Drive along a frontage place that runs the extent of the lot frontages off -set from the primary roadways. Driveways will connect to the frontage road and not have individual access points Legacy will be developed in two phases; first phase consists of 13 lots fronting Community Drive, and large common area Landscaping is in full compliance with the PUD approved by the Urban Forester Several sidewalks paths will be provided for connectivity to River Road Community Drive, Cherry Creek Blvd, and the Legacy common areas Site lighting proposed signage is in compliance with the Legacy standards and consistent throughout the residential areas of the Legacy Staff has recommended approve; in light of no issues, the petitioner requests Primary Plat approval this evening Remonstrance /General Public/Unfavorable: Andrea Osborne, 14111 Plantation Wood Lane, Haverstick Subdivision, requested information regarding prices of the homes Nancy Thomas, Arcadian Circle, Cherry Creek Estates, asked if this is the same approval for the same 3 Cannel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 land that was initially approved in 2007 Ida Mae Hanson, 13955 Settlers Ridge Trail. Will anything be done to up -grade River Road which is already in poor condition? Response, Jon Dobosiewicz: Cherry Creek Blvd will be extended in phases; at the same time Overlook Drive is being constructed, after Community Drive section is connected to 146 Street to the north to River Road. The subject this evening is 25 acres of the 500 acre PUD. The uses are permitted under the development approval that conforms to the zoning approved in 2007. The CCRC retirement community was approved, but never moved forward for construction. It is anticipated that the homes constructed will range in price from $375,000 to $450,000 Director Michael Hollibaugh responded to the question regarding River Road As part of the Council's approval of the PUD, there was also TIF money included that will result in River Road being improved. It is uncertain where this is in the timing and scheme of things. It will be a seamless improvement from 146 Street to where the boulevard ends today. Clarification: What is being asked for this evening does not necessarily trigger improvements to River Road; it will be geared to the masses. Public Hearing Closed. Dept Report, Angie Conn: Dept Staff has reviewed the Primary Plat against the development regulations for the PUD Ordinance and feels that it does comply with the Ordinance as well as development design standards Dept recommends suspending the Rules of Procedure and approving this item Commission Members' Comments /Question s: Concern with developing and then building infrastructure Request path along River Road be constructed Request path be constructed on one side of Community Drive instead of sidewalk on both sides Request path be constructed NOW rather than some future date What was the plan for this area before? Are there plans for construction traffic? (Response, Jon Dobosiewicz: There is no commitment regarding construction traffic that is attached to the PUD) What are the plans for addressing private versus public streets? (Response, Jon Dobosiewicz. That is in regard to the frontage drive that exists outside Cherry Creek Blvd Community Drive. As initially filed and planned, it was a private street to be maintained by the individual HOA and complied with the requirements in the PUD as a private street the Engineering Dept's preference is that this would be in the public right -of -way and termed a "Frontage Place." One of the standards is that it requires maximum distance of 600 feet. Though private and maintained by The Legacy, the Engineering Department's preference is that it would be a public street. The private street conforms with the requirements of the PUD; if the Engineering Dept requires that the street be public, the developer is willing and glad to see that done either way. If Plan Commission approves the plat, it will be consenting to the excess of 600 feet in length of the Frontage Place in the public right -of -way. If not, it will be maintained as private by the HOA and comply with the standards of the PUD. It is an issue brought up by Engineering.) Right in/right out access onto Cherry Creek? (Yes) Will trees be installed between the Frontage Road and Community Drive Cherry Creek Blvd? (Yes) Why is the Staff recommending suspension of the Rules of Procedure when there is remonstrance rather than forwarding this item to Committee for review? 4 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 How many acres of useable parkland does this space have? Construction sequence? (completion of Community Drive then addition of the first 13 -14 homes that run north/south; followed by completion of the east/west extension and install the other homes 2 phases? (Yes, the homes that face the extension of Cherry Creek Blvd would not be constructed until the extension was completed and connected to River Road construction of the homes will be market driven Would the landscaping in the central area be completed in first phase or second? (First Phase) Same types of homes as in The Meadows at Legacy? (Homes will be different and construct4ed by a different builder) Outstanding Engineering Concerns to be addressed Administratively by Engineering? (Yes) Dept Response, Angie Conn: This is looked at as a preliminary plat and it meets design development requirements of the PUD Most of the Engineering Dept comments apply to the secondary plat construction documents —all administrative review approval If Plan Commission wishes, it can be sent to Committee Motion: Woody Rider to suspend the Rules of Procedure, seconded by John Adams. The vote was 6 in favor, 5 opposed (Potasnik, Dorman, Stromquist, Westermeier, Kestner) MOTION DENIED Motion, Jay Dorman to grant the Committee final voting authority on Docket No. 12030017 PP, The Overlook at Legacy (Legacy PUD seconded by Woody Rider, APPROVED 11 -0 Docket No. 12030017 PP, The Overlook at Legacy (Legacy PUD) will be heard at Subdivision Committee on June 5, 2012 at 6:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms at Carmel City Hall. 5. Docket No. 12030019 PP: The Meadows at Legacy (Legacy PUD). The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 148 lots on 59.89 acres. The petitioner also seeks the following zoning waiver request: 6. Docket No. 12040003 ZW PUD Z- 501 -07, Exhibit 8 Architectural Standards /garage setback from front facade of dwelling. The site is located at the southwest corner of Community Dr. and future Cherry Creek Blvd. It is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development. Filed by Tim Walter of Platinum Properties, LLC. Note: Items 5 and 6 were heard together. Present for Petitioner: Jon Dobosiewicz, Land Use Professional with Nelson Frankenberger; Charlie Frankenberger, Nelson Frankenberger Also present: Alan Goldsticker, Ryland Homes; Paul Rioux Tim Walter, Platinum Properties; Brett Huff, Project Engineer with Stoeppelwerth Assoc. Overview: The Meadows at Legacy (Legacy PUD) consists of 60 acres west of Community Drive Situated on the east side of Community Drive and south side of Cherry Creek Boulevard extension Meadows is adjacent to the south by Prairie Trace School sections to the west by the Haverstick neighborhood Proposal is for construction of 148 -lot, single family, residential subdivision Approvals required for this development: o Primary Plat Zoning Waiver o Secondary Plat Construction Approval by DOCS Engineering respectively Access to site off Community Drive future extensions of Cherry Creek Blvd 5 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 First Section comprises 32 lots adjacent to Community Drive Site landscaping plan is in full compliance has been approved by the Urban Forester Sidewalks pathways provide connectivity to River Road, Community Drive Cherry Creek Blvd Pathways sidewalks proposed are in conformance with the requirements of the PUD Site lighting and Site Signage is in full conformance with the PUD Zoning waiver pertains to garages which face the street found in Exhibit A to The Legacy PUD Architectural designs fully comply with other architectural standards included in The Legacy Ordinance Based upon prior recommendation for The Overlook, the petitioner is requesting final action at the Committee level on June 5, 2012 Public Remonstrance: Nancy Thomas, 14207 Arcadian Circle, requested clarification of the zoning waiver Jon Dobosiewucz explained the zoning waiver requested, and that it pertains to homes that face the street. Exhibit A of the PUD provides for homes to be recessed at least three (3) feet back from the primary front facade. The proposed homes have garages that are recessed less than three (3) feet an vary in relation to the front facade, depending on their architectural style. Andrea Osborne, 14111 Plantation Wood Lane, asked about a pathway, since there are so many runners and cyclists in the area; also, would there be some assurance that the construction traffic will not be disruptive and dangerous to Prairie Trace School children? There is concern regarding the wildlife in the woods behind Ms. Osborne's property —will there be a significant barrier? How far will the homes on the back lots be from the woods and will the HOA be responsible for damage to homes caused by falling trees? Public Hearing Closed Response, Jon Dobosiewicz: As proposed, the asphalt along River Road would be constructed between Cherry Creek Blvd and Community Drive at the time River Road is improved, not at the phase of development this is under. The plan calls for pathway connections within the common area that extends from the segment at Community Drive to the corner of the development and will serve the same purpose as the path along River Rd. There will be significant improvements to River Road requiring the removal of a path that would be constructed at this time, only to be torn out at a future date with improvements to River Rd. When Community Drive is extended from its current termination, it will have sidewalks connected on either side and the public will be able to walk to 146 Street by traveling the connections on Community Drive. The developer will connect the sidewalk to the front of the school. There is an existing, black, chain -link fence that runs along the perimeter with the school regarding displacement of wildlife, there is no specific provision being proposed that would address that the wildlife will take its place in the open areas, closer to White River and within the woods. There is no specific answer to the falling trees question, but the inclination is that the HOA would not be responsible. The homes meet the required setbacks, and those homes adjacent to the woods are larger than the remainder. These homes fall within the suburban residential block of the PUD which requires those homes and lots to be larger within the development to be consistent with the homes approved to the north in the Ridge area. At the time of the rezone, there was a change that occurred to the PUD whereby it was indicated to the residents of Haverstick that those lots adjacent or abutting would be larger lots conforming with the standards in the PUD for the suburban residential rather than the smaller lots. 6 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 If there is infrastructure planned at the rear of the lots that would potentially impact specimen or larger growth trees, preservation measures will be observed. Normally, a site inspection is done by the Urban Forester prior to construction and tree protection locations are determined. A 15 -foot tree preservation area is provided along the rear of the lots adjacent to the woods. Typically nothing is removed from the area unless it is deemed a hazard by the Urban Forester. There was a question regarding the path and the sidewalk location and width this will be reviewed further at Conunittee There were also questions regarding the construction sequence. Tim Walter, Platinum Properties, stated that Section III would not be built until the segment of Cherry Creek Blvd over to the open section is constructed. It is difficult to know whether or not construction would occur at the same time as The Overlook because it is market- driven. The first phase would be from the roundabout at Cherry Creek Blvd, south to River Road; second phase would be the lots in Section I for The Meadows as well as Section I of The Overlook. Depending upon market, we would then move to Section II of The Meadows before moving on to Section III. Note: Private roads should be built to public /City standards and specifications, in the event the City would ever take over a private street. Petitioner states that constructing roads to City standards is required in the PUD. Motion: Woody Rider to forward Docket No. 12030019 PP, The Meadows at Legacy (Legacy PUD) to the Subdivision Committee for review with authority for final disposition, seconded by John Adams, approved 11 -0 7. Docket No. 12040015 OA: BZA Hearing Officer Ordinance Amendment. The applicant seeks an ordinance amendment to change Zoning Ordinance Chapter 30: Board of Zoning Appeals in order to modify the qualifications of BZA Hearing Officers. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission. Present for Petitioner: Adrienne Keeling, Dept of Community Services. Overview: Executive Committee of Plan Commission has already discussed this modification Amendment now being formally brought before the Commission for approval Proposed Amendment allows for flexibility to have additional, experienced members that are already familiar with the BZA rules and procedures In the case of an appeal, an independent hearing officer would free-up all five current members of the Board of Zoning Appeals to make a ruling in case a hearing officer item is elevated to the full Board State Statute requires that the Plan Commission appoint those hearing officers, and that would still be the case The Dept would be open to the Suspension of Rules of Procedure for a vote this evening and then forwarding to the City Council No Public Remonstrance Public Hearing Closed Member's comments: Proposal makes sense ALL Members in agreement 7 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 Motion: Woody Rider, "To suspend the Rules of Procedure and vote on Docket No. 12040014 OA, BZA Hearing Officer Ordinance Amendment this evening, seconded by Steve Stromquist, Approved 11 -0 Motion: Woody Rider, To forward Docket No. 12040015 OA, BZA Hearing Officer Ordinance Amendment, to the City Council with a favorable recommendation, seconded by Steve Stromquist, Approved I. Old Business 1. Docket No. 12010005 OA: Patch Ordinance IX. The applicant seeks to amend Subdivision Control Ordinance Chapter 3: General Provisions and Chapter 7: Open Space Standards for Major Subdivisions. The applicant also seeks to amend Zoning Ordinance Chapter 2: Compliance with the Regulations, Chapter 3: Definitions, Chapter 5: S- 1 /Residence District, Chapter 6: S -2 /Residence District, Chapter 7: R -1 /Residence District, Chapter 8: R -2 /Residence District, Chapter 9.• R -3 /Residence District, Chapter 10: R -4 /Residence District, Chapter 20A: I -1 /Industrial District, Chapter 20G: Old Meridian District, Chapter 21: Special Uses Special Exceptions, Chapter 23B: US Highway 31 Corridor Overlay Zone, Chapter 23C: US Highway 421 Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone, Chapter 23F: Carmel Drive Range Line Road Overlay Zone, Chapter 24: Development Plan and Architectural Design, Exterior Lighting, Landscaping Signage Regulations, Chapter 25: Additional Use Regulations, Chapter 26: Additional Height, Yard, Lot Area and Buffering Regulations, Chapter 31: General Provisions and Appendix A: Schedule of Uses. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission. Present for Petitioner: Adrienne Keeling, Dept of Community Service. Overview: Too many Amendments to go through individually Larger Amendments High lighted Language changes to reflect city code Density Standards are being moved from the Waiver realm to either a Board of Zoning Appeals variance or a rezone under the Plan Commission and on to City Council for any varying densities Continuing Care Retirement Communities "CCRC definition will remain without change, but the definition for Nursing, Retirement, and Convalescent Facilities is being amended to make it more clear that the nursing, retirement, convalescent facility is more a congregate living arrangement in larger buildings whereas the CCRC could include the Cottages or individual buildings. The term "CCRC" has also been added to the appendix —the term previously did not exist Appendix A is being Color -coded and some adjustments made to make it even more clear and user friendly Overlay Zones: Rely on the primary zoning district for uses to determine if something is allowed, but if the use is excluded, it is listed in the shaded overlay category with an `B" The Dept is asking for a favorable recommendation to the City Council Brad Grabow, chair of the Subdivision Committee, noted concerns with the CCRC existing language that provides for a project that looks and feels like apartments to move forward. If we move forward with this definition, we are failing to address a problem that has arisen in the past. Not satisfied with the definition of "CCRC," but that is the only concern. Commission Members' Comments: Impression was that the City's definition was changed to align with State Statute definition Response, Adrienne Keeling: The proposal went to Committee, but there was concern because the Indiana Code 8 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 Section included a lot of language that did not relate to zoning at all. If the Code changed, the City would be stuck with the State Code changes without regard to Zoning Ordinances The current definition of CCRC does not provide enough distinction between a nursing facility, a CCRC, and an apartment Committee liked part of the definition in the Indiana Code "A health care facility that provides independent living services and health facility services in a campus setting with common areas. This seemed to differentiate between a nursing facility and apartments. The Patch Ordinance could be sent to Council minus the CCRC section, and return it to Committee rather than forwarding in bits and pieces. Another option is to fix it now, then send it on to Council. Adrienne Keeling proposed the definition of a CCRC as a place where 3 or more levels of continued care are provided to senior citizens, including but not limited to independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing/memory care and to add "in a campus setting with open space:.." The Commission approved forwarding Docket No. 12010005 OA, Patch Ordinance IX, to the City Council with a positive recommendation, seconded by Woody Rider, subject to Brad Grabow the Dept working with John Molitor to insert the proper language definition for a CCRC before forwarding to the City Council. 2. Docket No. 11120028 ADLS: West Carmel Commons, Lot 1- Outback Steakhouse. The applicant seeks architectural design site plan approval for a restaurant on 1.7 acres. The site is located at 10220 N. Michigan Rd. It is zoned B-2/Business within the US 421/Michigan Rd. Corridor Overlay Zone. Filed by Joe Calderon of Bose McKinney Evans, LLP on behalf of OSI Restaurant Partners, LLC. Present for Petitioner: Joe Calderon, Bose McKinney Evans. Overview: Revised Site Plans Elevations submitted Outback parcel had two major items of concern Access to Michigan Rd access to other parcels to the west Site is now re- designed with no direct access to Michigan Rd Temporary Entry will use existing curb cut where Retail Parkway will be cut and come across t Lot 2 Once Retail Parkway is extended, the main drive will be connected and eventually flow to the north The layout of the site has been revised so that there are no severe jogs to access other properties The site is now much cleaner and provides much better connectivity, including future access to the north south once Retail Parkway is constructed Discussion at Committee revolved around making sure pedestrians could access from the parking lot to the front of the bldg safely Petitioner was asked to incorporate speed bumps or different material for safety purposes The Urban Forester prefers trees 2 Y2 caliper Bike Parking has been added Architectural Design on the building has been agreed upon and finalized The monument sign complies with the Ordinance and matches the building materials Brad Grabow, Committee Report: Tower Element Design addressed at Committee Architectural Standards are consistent with Michigan Road 421 Overlay Revised Road -plan now creates safer pedestrian crossing with addition of "crossing humps," installed 9 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 at the time of road expansion to the north the question is "what would trigger that Building Orientation is not toward Michigan Road; however, the landscape plan greatly softens the exposure the Michigan Road side of the building is very heavily screened by trees shrubbery and is acceptable to Committee Larger caliper trees would create a more immediate impact, but larger trees have a very low survival rate Concerns of the Committee have been addressed Dept Comments, Angie Conn: Dept Recommends approval at this time Commission Members' Comments: Suggestion for pedestrian hump: Compute cost and ask petitioner to deposit equal amount in escrow for future road improvements it would then be City's responsibility at time of connection NOTE: In order to avoid any future conflict, Joe Calderon said the petitioner is willing to install the pedestrian access humps now Any fence envisioned around patio area to contain children from the street? (Petitioner must return for ADLS Amendment for outdoor seating area conceptual at this time Motion: Nick Kestner, to approve Docket No. 11120028 ADLS, West Carmel Commons, Lot 1 Outback Steakhouse conditioned upon the addition of two pedestrian crossing humps acceptable to the Dept of Community Services and/or Carmel Engineering; said pedestrian humps to be installed now, seconded by Steve Stromquist, Approved 11 0 3. Docket No. 12030010 DP Amend/ADLS: The Centre, Part A: Bank Retail/Drive -Thru Building. The applicant seeks site plan and design approvals for a partial redevelopment of the site. The applicant also seeks the following zoning waiver request: 4. Docket No. 12030012 ZW ZO Chptrs 23F.15 23F.02.04: Required of parking spaces. The site is located at 1342 -1430 S. Range Line Road. It is zoned B-3/Business, within the Carmel Dr. Rangeline Rd. Overlay Zone. Filed by Paul Reis of Krieg Devault, for Kite Realty Co. Present for Petitioner: Paul Reis, Krieg Devault, 12800 North Meridian Street, Carmel. Also in attendance: Ashley Bedell. Project Manager, Kite Realty; Dan Brueggert, Project Architect. Overview: Three out buildings at this centre Bldg at corner of 116 Range Line is an important bldg, highly visible With Dept approval, petitioner split the ADLS approval for the corner bldg away from the design approval for Range Line Road. Retail, and the new bank Concern regarding the site plan was expressed with the signalized entrance at Range Line Road currently un- striped, and no separate lane for right turn There is space for three (3) access lanes at the Range Line Road entrance (left turn, straight/ right turn, and one incoming) Dumpster for the bank will be located at the west side of the building, approximately mid -way The bank drive -thru canopy will be maroon to match the brick color and not make it stand out so much Plans by the City include greatly increasing the streetscape along Range Line Road the proposed design will accommodate those changes The petitioner has been granted a Variance to allow the existing sidewalk to remain until such time as the Streetscape project begins The petitioner has agreed to either enter into an agreement with the City that will spell out who will 10 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 construct the path along Range Line Road if an agreement is not reached, there will be a contribution to the City to cover the costs and the City would install the path in connection with the Streetscape The path will also continue to the west and will connect to Central Park The Zoning Waiver Request is for a reduced number of parking spaces Dept Report, Angie Conn: Dept concerns have been addressed The petitioner has pointed out the commitment regarding the Variance Approval should be contingent upon the commitment associated with the Variance The Dept recommends approval conditioned upon the commitment associated with the Variance Special Studies Chair Report, Steve Stromqusist: Dumpster enclosed or free standing? (Will be enclosed landscaped)) Striping will be at center entrance for traffic flow Stacking issue resolved for drive -thru at north end of project Committee voted unanimous recommendation for approval Commission Members' Comments: Still a concern with access at traffic light narrow width Would encourage petitioner to find a creative way to alleviate traffic (Petitioner states that at time Streetscape is done, they will look at possibility of widening drive) Would like some discretion to remain with Staff regarding the Dumpsters and truck access from service road, not only for bank but for all the shops Motion: Woody Rider "To approve Docket No. 12030010 DP Amend/ADLS, The Centre, Part A, Bank Retail/Drive -Thru Building and Docket No. 12030012 ZW, ZO Chptrs 23F.15 23F.02 -04: Required number of parking spaces, conditioned upon commitments associated with the Variance regarding the Streetscape and construction of the path, as well as giving DOCS Staff discretion on location of the dumpster, seconded by John Adams, approved 11 -0 J. New Business 1. Docket No. 12040018 ADLS Amend: Monon Main, Blocks 5 7. The applicant seeks approval modify a portion of the site plan and modify a few of the architectural building elevations. The site is located northwest of the intersection of Main St. 3 Avenue NW. It is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development. Filed by Francois Mercho for Big Monon Main, LLC, owners. Present for Petitioner: Brian Cross, Civil Site Group, 643 Massachusetts Avenue, Indianapolis. Also in attendance: Francois Mercho and Hassan Mercho Overview: Development approved in 2004 as Monon and Main Development has undergone some economic impacts over the years Approved PUD site plan displayed in color format Monon Main is a condominium development with individual, fee simple ownership of lots New Development Plan modifies the PUD plan north bldg slides south in an effort to create more, continuous open space /courtyard area for the community Another major change to the site plan is removing the court area of buildings with interior access garages from the center area to a more traditional, linear building of eight (8) units 11 Carmel Plan Commission Meeting May 15, 2012 A primary focal point of the change is driven by the development and community, as well as the neighborhood, to have more green space. Also, the street view from the roundabout at Main Street is much improved These are the amendments proposed to this PUD and ADLS Dept Comments, Angie Conn: Monon Main PUD Ordinance could have been approved administratively Proposed Changes were more than the Dept Director was comfortable with and requested full Commission review Dept is in support of proposed changes Architectural change addresses the site view from Main Street Dept recommends approval this evening Committee review not necessary Question: Was there a plan to continue the road farther north through redevelopment? Angie Conn responded that there was some discussion about future, potential connection to the north, but all of those roads are private and the Thoroughfare Plan does not show anything; it was weighed as an option to the proposal. Motion: Steve Stromquist to approve Docket No. 12040018 ADLS Amend, Monon Main, Blocks 5 -7 seconded by Woody Rider, Approved 11 -0. 2. TABLED TO JUNE l Docket No. 12020024 ADLS: Meridian and Main, Parcel 1, Building 1. K. Adjournment at 8:25 PM 1 2 ,441 4 1/N ay Dorman, President 12