Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence Reply - Ltr to AConn 110512JAMES J. NELSON CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHINAVER LAWRENCE J. KEMPER JOHN B. FLATT FREDRIC LAWRENCE JAMES A. NICKLOY Angie Conn City of Carmel One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 NELSON & FRANKENBERGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3105 EAST 98TH STREET, SUITE 170 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280 PHONE: 317- 844 -0106 FACSIMILE: 317- 846 -8782 November 6, 2012 Re: 9800 North Michigan Road — Docket # 12030014 DP Duncan Donuts and C -Store — Docket # 12030015 ADLS JANE B. MERRILL, Of Counsel JON C. DOBOSIEWICZ, Land Use Professional Dear Angie: Please see below our response to staff comments received via e -mail on October 22, 2012. Planning /Zoning Dept. review comments: 1. Feel free to bring color /material samples of the building to the Plan Commission meeting. Reply: Architect will provide physical samples of exterior materials at Plan Commission Meeting. 2. Please provide paper copies of the revised applications. Reply: See attached paper and digital copies of the applications. 3. Please provide digital copies of any revised plans. Reply: See attached paper and digital copies of the applications. 4. Please provide copies of your correspondence with the TAC members and their correspondence with you. Reply: See attached. 5. Remember to include the Development Plan application's Findings of Fact sheet in your final information packets. Reply: A proof of publication submittal addressing this item will be submitted on November 16 under a separate transmittal. 6. Provide the filled out and notarized affidavit of notice of public hearing page of the application. Reply: A proof of publication submittal addressing this item will be submitted on November 16 under a separate transmittal. 7. Provide the filled out Notice of Public Hearing page of the application. Reply: A proof of publication submittal addressing this item will be submitted on November 16 under a separate transmittal. 8. Provide the filled out and notarized Public Notice Sign Placement affidavit page of the application. Reply: A proof of publication submittal addressing this item will be submitted on November 16 under a separate transmittal. 9. Provide a copy of the Official List of Adjacent Property Owners from Hamilton County Auditor's Office. Reply: A proof of publication submittal addressing this item will be submitted on November 16 under a separate transmittal. 10. Show /label a cross access easement across the site, so that when the site connects to the adjacent sites there will not be an issue with vehicular traffic accessing the site from the north and from the south. See Zoning Ordinance Chapters 23C.13 and 23C.11.D, too. Reply: A cross access easement has been added to the Detailed Development Plans. Please see revised sheet C2.0. 11. Please submit to -scale architectural building elevations on 24 "x36" or similar sized paper. Reply: Elevations on 24" x 36" sheets are attached. 12. On each building, please provide the percent of EIFS of all non - window facade areas, per ZO Chapter 23C.09.K.2. (It must be less than or equal to 10 %, otherwise a BZA variance will be required.) Reply: EIFS areas have been reduced based on TAC comments. EIFS is now shown only in high parapet signage areas per TAC comments. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 13. Please lower the parapet to reduce the total percent of EIFS OR use more brick between the heights of 4 -ft and 14 -ft, possibly, for a 10 -ft wide band of brick at least. The ratios look 'oft'. Reply: EIFS areas have been reduced. See attached /revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A- 5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 14. Both the C -Store south elevation and Commercial retail building west elevation have long and monotonous walls, which are not permitted by ZO Chapter 23C.09.B. Reply: These elevations have been revised which now have 2' -0" projections in plan and varying roof parapet heights. EIFS has been reduced. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 15. What is the bollards color? Reply: All bollards will be painted black. 16. Gas canopy location might need BZA variance approval. See ZO Chapter 25.01.02 and ZO Chapter 25.19.c - Setbacks of accessory buildings & uses. Reply: Carmel DOCS staff has determined that a variance is not required from this standard. 17. Cornices - please finish the detailing /reveals on the sides /ends. Reply: Detailing on cornices and reveals have been continued on all sides of parapet. See attached /revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 18. You will need a BZA variance from ZO Chapter 23C.09.D: 8 -ft deep bumpouts /recessions, facades and detailing, etc. The Dept. recommends that you at least show 4 -ft deep projections and recessions. Reply: The building plans and elevations have been revised. On the Dunkin Donuts /C -Store building, there are 4' -0" projections in plan on the north, east, and west facades. The south facade has 2' -0" projections. On the Retail Building, the east facade has 4' -0" projections. The west facade has 2' -0" projections. See attached building plans A -1, A -2. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 19. Modulating roof /roofline on all visible elevations is required. Reply: Modulating roof line is now shown on all facades. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 20. Building must appear to be 1.5 stories tall. Reply: The highest parapets on both buildings at the main entrance projections is 24' -0 ". Other secondary parapet heights equal 22' -6" and baseline parapet is 19' -0 ". See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 21. BZA variance is required for the parking spaces located along the front of the site, where it is not setback 36 -ft to accommodate the 30 -ft wide greenbelt, plus the 6 -ft wide parking perimeter buffer, per ZO Chapter 23C.10.03.5.a. Also, per ZO chapter 23C.11.F: Parking within frontyard setbacks shall be discouraged and limited to a maximum of two (2) rows of parking, subject to minimum Greenbelt width, minimum bufferyard requirements and maximum building setback standards. Reply: The site has been adjusted to provide the full 36' greenbelt adjacent to the parking along Michigan Road. Please see the revised Detailed Development Plans. 22. Is there not more detailing or a changeup of materials that can be done to break up the upper EIFS portion of the building? Reply: The EIFS areas have been reduced and the facade design has been revised. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 23. Maybe remove the awnings from the windows, or at least place them lower than they are shown. Right now, it looks awkward. Reply: Awnings have been removed with the exception of the east elevation of the Dunkin Donuts and the Drive Thru awning on the south elevation. Limestone headers have been shown over windows in lieu of awnings in all other window locations. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 24. The grids in the windows and the door entries: please make them the same pattern or proportionate. Reply: Window mullions have been revised. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 25. Please paint the backs of the taller parapets a brick color. Reply: Based on the new facade elevation, no tall parapet backs are exposed in elevation view. All back sides of parapets will be painted a similar color as the brick should they be seen from an angle. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. 26. Please provide more detail on the metal canopies. Also, can you make them deeper, to provide more of an overhang? Reply: The glass at the entrances is set back from the facade projection 2' -0 ". The metal canopy suspends 6' -0" out from the entrance door /window line. The basis of design for this canopy system is Mapes Architectural Canopies: Super Lumideck Hanger Rod Flat Soffit. A product sheet is attached. Also see attached building plans A -1, A -2. 27. Please submit to -scale floor plans or typical store layouts for the Dunkin Donuts and C- store. Reply: Building plans of white box tenant spaces for both buildings are attached. See attached building plans A -1, A -2. 28. Please label the mechanical equipment locations (rooftop or ground level) on the site plan and building elevations and provide details on how they are screened from view or camouflaged. This includes electric and gas meters; see ZO Chapter 23C.10.02.5. Reply: All roof mounted air handling units are screened by the high main entrance parapets. Ground level meters /utilities are located in recessed areas around the building perimeter and screened by wood gates painted to match complimentary building material colors. See attached roof plan showing mechanical unit layout on sheet A -9. See mechanical unit locations on elevations A -10, A -11, A -12, A -13, A -14, and A -15. 29. Please consider using additional LEED or 'green' site and building practices, such as a white membrane roof, solar panels, native plants, rain gardens, etc. List is attached. Reply: These elements have been considered. 30. Please verify with the City Engineering Dept. that no type of traffic analysis is required. Reply: A &F Engineering has been commissioned to perform a full traffic impact study (TIS). Based on meetings and correspondence with INDOT, they have dictated the scope and requirements for the TIS. The traffic counts have been completed and once the conclusions and report are compiled, they will be submitted to INDOT for approval. 31. Please provide correspondence from INDOT about the 2 curb cuts and their approvals of that. Reply: We have had multiple meetings with INDOT regarding the proposed driveways for the project. INDOT has given us the scope and requirements for a full traffic study (TIS) which is currently underway. INDOT will not issue a final approval for the driveways until they have had a chance to analyze the completed TIS. However, based on the preliminary correspondence, INDOT would be willing to approve the two driveways as long as they are supported by data from the TIS and will cause a minimal impact to traffic patterns in the area. 32. Please show /label the bicycle parking areas and provide the bike rack details, per ZO Chapter 27.06 of the ordinance. Reply: Bicycle parking areas were labeled on the previously submitted plans. A detail of the proposed bicycle rack has been added to revised sheet C2.0. 33. Please verify that all parking lot pole light fixtures have flat lenses and /or 90- degree cutoffs so that the light is downcast. Reply: We have verified with the site lighting vender, TechLite, that all proposed fixtures on- site are indeed flat lenses with 90- degree cutoffs. 34. Please provide the wall sconce design details/ cut sheets. Reply: Wall sconces are shown on revised building elevations. See attached /revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. The basis of design wall sconce fixture is "Avatar Metro OW1316 ". A cut sheet for this fixture is attached. We intend to have a bronze finish to compliment the other building material colors. 35. Per ZO Chapter 23C.12.B, please amend the parking lot pole lights to be a maximum height of 24 feet. Reply: The site lighting plan has been revised to show a maximum height of 24' A.F.G. (above finished grade). Please see revised sheet SL1.0. 36. Would like a commitment to have no or very little outdoor sales and displays associated with the gas station /convenience store to limit the propane gas exchanges, mulch stacks, washer fluid displays, etc. per ZO Chapter 23C.14.01, storage areas must be completely screened from view. Reply: An outdoor display /sales area has been shown on the west facade of the Dunkin Donuts /C -store building toward the north end. This area is enclosed with a masonry screen wall and wood gates that are painted to compliment building material colors. 37. The Dept. would like the plan modified to shift one or both of the buildings closer to Michigan Rd. Can you rotate the commercial retail building 90- degrees and slide it closer to Michigan Rd, to be sited closer to the north property line? Reply: The site plan works best from a logistical and functionality standpoint as it is laid out currently. The traffic circulation through and around the site is ideal as it is now. Rotating the commercial building 90- degrees and moving it closer to Michigan Road could impede access into the site from the northern curb cut. The location of the northern curb cut is being dictated by INDOT to line up with 98th Street on the East side of Michigan Road. Also, rotating and moving the commercial building would cause the back of the building to be visible from Michigan Road which is not desirable. In addition, tenants ideally will need to face Michigan Road directly for the best visibility. 38. Daren Mindham with the City Forestry Dept, will review the Tree Preservation Plan and Landscape Plan. Reply: We received two minor comments from the Urban Forester and have addressed those with this revision. 39. BZA variance will be required for the drive thru stacking location, per ZO Chapter 23C.11.G. Reply: A variance application has been filed with Carmel DOCS. 40. Signage review & additional review comments: Dunkin Donuts /BP and commercial retail buildings: a) We don't think the EIFS is placed in the best possible location. It should be utilized above the entry doors to aid in installation and visibility of the signage. Right now, the signage blends into the building and does not stand out against the brick. Reply: The building elevations have been revised. EIFS has been removed from the lower parapet areas and is now shown above entrances at signage areas as suggested by TAC comments. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. b) Where the EIFS is located, it would be best to continue the brick all the way up the facade to the cornice element, or even use a different color brick to make it stand out from the feature entrances /protrusions of the tenants' areas. Reply: The building elevations have been revised. EIFS has been removed from the lower parapet areas and is now shown above entrances at signage areas as suggested by TAC comments. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. c) On the commercial retail building, I don't think using the CMU block all the way up the entry feature is an appropriate material. This should be kept at the base. Then perhaps a different color brick could be used to call attention to that particular part of the building, to that tenant's entry feature. Reply: The retail building no longer has the burnished, high finish, smooth faced block on the entry features continuing up to the cornice. The building elevations have been revised. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. d) We would also like to see some more architectural elements built into the sign band area of each building. It would be good to see some brick detailing around the EIFS, to call out a specific sign band area or placement for the sign - to frame each sign, in a way. Reply: The building elevations have been revised. See attached /revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. e) For the both buildings, the recessed brick detail is very distracting. Perhaps this feature would be better on the other facade elevations where the EIFS top half is proposed, but not the main ones. Reply: There is no longer recessed brick detailing. The building elevations have been revised. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. f) Would also like to see more detailing to define the two spaces (Dunkin and BP). Perhaps some edge molding at the corners of the building and a matching one in- between the spaces would help add some detail and separation. Reply: The entrances for the Dunkin Donuts and C -Store have been separated into 2 separate high parapet projections. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. g) If EIFS is required above the entry doors to the tenant spaces, perhaps have less scoring on them to make it stand out less and /or paint it to match the surrounding materials so it does not stand out as much. Right now the buildings look very busy with so many different elevations and materials. Reply: The reveals have been reduced above the entrance canopies. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. h) Staff would like to see the same window awning colors for all sides of the Dunkin Donuts /BP building. Reply: Awnings have been removed with the exception of the east facade of the Dunkin Donuts and at the south elevation above the drive thru. All other awnings have been removed. The logo on each of the canopies = 3 s.f. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. Dunkin Donuts /BP building Signage: a) Each tenant is allowed 40 square feet per sign chart B. Reply: All signs are less than 40 s.f. b) We will consider the main signage /ROW to be facing north, so there is consistency between the signage for the two tenants. Reply: Understood. c) Dunkin Donuts signage and awning detail facing south will need BZA variance approval. We will not support these variances for additional signage and signage not facing a right -of -way. Reply: The proposed sign has been removed. d) Dunkin Donuts signage facing east will also require a BZA variance for number of signs and going over the total square footage allowed. These variances might be supported by Staff. Reply: Variance applications have been submitted. e) Dunkin Donuts signage facing all directions will be subject to the 25% logo rule for their coffee cup logo. Please submit additional size information for the logos. Reply: The Dunkin Donuts sign contains a logo that is 32% of the overall sign size. The Indy Go C -Store logo is 10% of the overall sign dimensions. See attached /revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. f) BP will require a BZA variance for a 100% logo sign. Reply: The BP sign has been removed. Indy Go C -Store signage has been shown in lieu of the BP logo sign. g) Need to see more detail on the drive thru menu board, menu canopy, etc. The size is limited to 6 feet tall and 16 square feet in size. Staff would like a masonry base on this sign. Reply: The menu board elevation and sizes are shown on sheet A -17. Commercial retail building: a) Please submit information on the signage requirements for tenants, including but not limited to: Size, Color, Lighting style, Installation method, Signage on awnings permitted? Reply: Signage is noted on revised building elevations as individual letters, 40 s.f. maximum. All signage and logos are noted to meet required signage ordinance. See attached /revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. b) If they would prefer it just meet the Sign Ordinance requirements, that is okay, too, but we just need to know. Reply: Signage is noted on revised building elevations as individual letters, 40 s.f. maximum. All signage and logos are noted to meet required signage ordinance. See attached/revised building elevations: A -3, A -4, A -5, A -6, A -7, A -8. Gas Station island & canopy areas: a) Signage is not allowed on the roof of the gas station canopy. This will require a BZA variance that the Dept. will not support. Reply: Signage has been removed from the gas station canopy. See attached/revised elevations on sheet A -16. b) The design of the canopy as all EIFS material is not preferred. Perhaps the color needs to change? Or have less breaks or scoring in the material? It looks very choppy. We have seen more ornate and detailed canopies recently and this one needs a bit more substance. Reply: The gas sta.t:ion canopy design has been revised to be a metal fascia /coping system, See revised elevations on sheet A -16. c) The gas canopy seem a little top - heavy. Is there a way to widen the columns or to reduce the thickness of the canopy, to remedy this? Reply: Mc size of the columns has been inci cased to become; ore proportionate to the depth or the canopy. See revised elevations on sheet A -16. d) Need to see signage details for the gas station bumps and pump markers. All signage for pumps and markers needs to be 3 square feet or less to be considered exempt. Otherwise, BZA variances will be required. Reply: All gas station pump markers are less than 3 s.f. These elevations have been added to sheet A -17. Ground signs: a) The height for the Dunkin Donuts /BP ground sign is ok. We need more detail on the size, though. Reply: Dimensions have been added to this sign elevation to give more detail. See revised sheet A. -17. b) The ground sign which is for the tenant panels is limited to 20 sq. ft. and 5 -ft tall. Please provide more detail on the size. Reply: This sign elevation has been revised. See sheet A -17. The tenant signage sign with four panels will also require the name of the shopping center. development to be at the top of the sign Reply: Center development name has been added to the top of this sign elevation. See sheet A -17. d) If possible, Staff would like to see a more pronounced base for each sign, to balance out the top cornice of the sign. Right now it seems a bit "top heavy ". reply: The sign elevations have been revised. See sheet A -17. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, NELSON & FRANKENBERGER, P.C. Enclosures • Jon C. Dobosiewicz Land Use Professional