Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence: Reply - Ltr to AConn 120312NELSON & FRANKENBERGER JAMES J. NELSON CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHINAVER LAWRENCE J. KEMPER JOHN B. FLATT FREDRIC LAWRENCE Angie Conn City of Carmel One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3105 EAST 98TH STREET, SUITE 170 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280 PHONE: 317- 844 -0106 FACSIMILE: 317- 846 -8782 December 3, 2012 JANE B. MERRILL, Of Counsel JON C. DOBOSIEWICZ, Land Use Professional Re: Bridges PUD, Commercial Amenity Use Block, Phase 1 - Docket Nos. 12100019 -21 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: A material sample board will be available at the meeting. 2. Please provide digital copies of any revised plans, in addition to paper copies. Reply: A CD including the updated plans is included with this transmittal. 3. Please provide copies of your correspondence with the TAC members and their correspondence with you. Reply: See the correspondence attached. 4. Remember to include the Development Plan application's Findings of Fact sheet in your final information packets. Reply: The Findings will be included with the information packets as requested 5. 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 December 14, 2012 under a separate transmittal. 6. Provide the filled out Notice of Public Hearing page of the application. Page 1 of 7 Reply: A proof of publication submittal addressing this item will be submitted on December 14, 2012 under a scparatc transmittal. 7. 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 December 14, 2012 under a separate transmittal. 8. 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 December 14, 2012 under a separate transmittal. 9. Please label the road rights of way on the site plan. Reply: The road right -of -way widths have been provided on the site plan. 10. Please provide the bridge design details. Reply: Design details for the bridges design features are included in this transmittal. 11. On the CVS (east elevation) & multi tenant building (south elevation), please finish the returns, for the cornices /parapet walls. Reply: The returns have been finished on both buildings. See updated elevations. 12. CVS drive thru canopy: please make it less wide /thick. Right now, it looks out of scale. Reply: We have reviewed the width and thickness of the canopy and believe that the current dimensions are appropriate to the mass and scale of the building. 13. CVS west elevation: will the lighting be security wall packs or wall sconces? Reply: Wall sconces. 14. Please provide 3D views of the CVS building elevations. Reply: 3D views have been included in this transmittal. 15. With the West elevation of CVS facing a busy street (Spring Mill Rd), please add more detailing to that facade. One could consider this a primary facade that needs more detailing , since it faces a highly travelled public street. See the PUD Exhibit 6, page 3, sections D & E. Reply: Additional detailing has been considered. 16. Please show that the rooftop mechanical equipment is adequately screened from view, for the CVS building. Reply: Please sec thc attached wircframc drawing illustrating thc location and height of rooftop equipment. The rooftop mechanical equipment is screened. Page 2 of 7 17. CVS elevations & Multi tenant building elevations — please label what will be vision glass and what will be spandrel. Reply: The revised plans show where the vision glass will be located and where window graphics arc located. No spandrel glass is located on the retail building. 18. The parking space at the northwest corner of the site conflicts with the road right of way. You may have to remove it or shift it. Reply: The parking layout docs not conflict with the proposed right -of -way. A portion of the existing right -of -way is in the process of being vacated. 19. Please show /label any easements on the site plan. Reply: All casements have been labeled on the site plan. 20. Please label the parcel coverage percentage on the site plan. Reply: The parcel coverage percentage has been provided on the site plan. 21. Please verify with the City Engineering Dept. that a traffic impact analysis, nor a traffic study, is required. Reply: A traffic impact analysis was completed with the PUD and per our conversation with the City Engineer, no additional traffic impact analysis will be required. 22. Prepare an estimated construction cost to comply with the Thoroughfare Plan & Alternative Transportation Plan; contact the Engineering Dept. for more details, at 571 -2441. Reply: Section 1 of the Condition to enactment of PUD Z- 550 -11 address compliance with the Thoroughfare Plan and Alternative Transportation Plan. A construction cost estimate has been provided for work within the right -of -way. 23. Please verify that the decorative wall scone lighting on the CVS building is the same as the ones used on the multi- tenant commercial building. Reply: The decorative wall sconce lighting will be the same on both buildings. 24. What are the maximum number of tenants possible in the multi- tenant commercial building? Reply: The estimated number is between 2 and 6 tenants. 25. What is the anticipated mix of tenants, regarding restaurant vs. retail uses? Reply: This is yet to be determined. See the PUD for a list of permitted uses. 26. 5 -ft wide building base landscape planting area widths are required by the PUD, section 7.5. Please work with the City Forester, Daren Mindham, on meeting this requirement, whether it be at the building base or mitigating plantings elsewhere on -site. Page 3 of 7 Reply: More shrubs than required by the PUD have been added between the parking & Illinois Street to help mitigate the lack of plantings along the east side of the retail building. I plan on meeting with Daren to make sure this is sufficient to meet the requirements and will revise if required. 27. Will there be street lighting on the very south entry shown on the overall DP? Reply: No street lighting is proposed at the most southern cntry. 28. Will there be street lights installed along 116"' St., Illinois St., and Springmill Rd. as part of this Development Plan? (See PUD Section 8.1.) Reply: No street lights are proposed along 1 1 6th Street, Illinois Street or Springmill Road as a part of this Development Plan. 29. There is a maximum 25 -ft tall parking area lights, per the PUD. Right now you show a 25 -ft pole plus a base..... Please revise your light fixture types. Reply: The maximum height is 25'. Please see the revised photometric plans. 30. Please submit the photometric plan the foot - candles all the way to the road right of way, especially along the west property line. Reply: See an updated Photometric Plan attached. 31 Please show a pedestrian connection to Illinois St. from the commercial building. See PUD Section 11.3 and Exhibit 2. In addition, please mark the pavement with striping for a cross walk for easy access to the building. Reply: A pedestrian connection to Illinois Street from the commercial building has been provided with appropriate pavement markings. 32. Please provide a paper copy of the overall pedestrian plan, per PUD Section 11.8. (We have the digital copy.) Reply: Please see a paper copy of the pedestrian plan attached. 33. Please amend the development plan, to show a traffic circle at the southern interior street intersection, as shown on the Concept Plan. Reply: With revisions to the final site plan interior site traffic flow will be adequate without a traffic circle at this location. 34. Per PUD Section 11.2, sidewalks and paths and walkways shall be provided on both sides of all interior streets and shall allow for pedestrian mobility within the Bridges District. (With the approval of the City Engineer and Alternative Transportation Coordinator areas along specific streets may provide sidewalks on only one side of the street.) Please add the second walk. Reply: The sidewalk has been provided on the cast side of the north /south interior drive. Page 4 of 7 35. Multi- tenant building: please add a sidewalk along the west side of the building, or along the east side of the entry drive. Reply: As noted above, a sidewalk has been provided along the cast side of the interior drive. 36. Please show the bicycle parking location and the bicycle rack details for the Commercial Building. Reply: The location of thc bicycle parking for thc commercial building has been provided on thc site plan and the bicycle rack details have been provided on the site details sheet. 37. Per PUD sections 13.10 and 7.7, please show how the mechanical equipment is screened from view, including gas, electric, and water meters. Reply: Screening details have been added on the elevations of each building and on the site plan. 38. Multi- tenant building: please provide design detail on the metal canopy or trellis. Reply: See building detail sheets included with the building elevations. 39. Multi- tenant building: Most likely outdoor dining areas will be added by tenants. Pleas show that there is enough room for outdoor dining areas and that patrons of the site also have adequate clearance to pass by these areas. Reply: See building floor plan and seating details. 40. Multi- tenant building: please provide more details about the lineal light fixtures. Reply: See building detail sheets included with the building elevations. 41. Please provide more design details and spec sheets about the GFRP fins. Reply: See building elevations and detail sheets. 42. Additional signage comments & general comments are below, with PDFs attached (which might have some repetitiveness): A. CVS /Pharmacy: 1. All signs comply with the sign ordinance and the PUD language except possibly one sign:. a. Please confirm the height of the drive thru pharmacy directional sign #9 and 10. Reply: Maximum of 3'. b. It appears to be possibly over the maximum of 3' tall. Reply: Maximum of 3'. 2. Is there not going to be drive thru lane signage on the drive thru canopy? (Please verify). Reply: A sign a maximum of 3 square feet has been added. 3. The proposed wall signs locations: a. Please shift these to fit in better with the overall building design, perhaps slightly more centered above the 3 blocks of windows areas. And/or, perhaps right over the main door entrance to the store. Then, if the EIFS material could also stop at the edge of the block of Page 5 of 7 windows and be replaced with brick, it would look much more symmetrical and balanced. Reply: The wall signs have been adjusted to address this recommendation. b. Wall sign color: please make the letters a solid oil rubbed bronze color and be halo lit or back lit, to better complement the prairie style architecture. Reply: The wall signs color allows for the individual expression of the user as permitted under Exhibit 6, Part 3.1.3 of the Bridges PUD. 4. The brick pattern at the top will be very nice. B. Multi- tenant Retail Building: 1. On the west elevation, please continue the brick columns up to the raised EIFS molding. On all elevations, please extend the brick materials on the columns all the way up, but use one brick color and no `strip' pattern. See attached markup. Reply: Sec detailed response from architect attached. 2. The architectural details at the top of the building are very nice! However, there is too much EIFS on the building. The south, east and west where no signs are proposed should have more brick or stone material. Some suggestions for continuing to use brick on the south, east, and west elevation: a. South: i. Continue the brick all the way up the columns (bump outs) to make them a feature. ii. Bring the brick all the way up in the reveals /recessed areas in a simpler, solid pattern. iii. Or perhaps use the block scoring lines at the top as a pattern for brick detailing in the reveals. b. East and West: i. Make faux columns out of the corners and continue the horizontal brick pattern up the faux column to match the south elevation. ii. Bring the brick all the way up to the raised EFIS molding in a simple plain/solid pattern (similar to described for the south elevation) for the "middle" area in- between the two faux columns. iii. Or, again, use the block scoring lines at the top as a pattern for brick detailing. Reply: See detailed response from architect attached. 3. Where the tenant signs are proposed to be located, the Dept. would prefer no vertical or horizontal scoring on the EIFS. This interrupts the flow and appearance of the sign. Reply: See detailed response from architect attached. 4. The Dept. would instead like to see the EIFS scored in a way that would define and/or "frame" a sign area for each tenant. The Dept. would like to call attention to the signs, and not limit or detract from them with too many scoring lines. a. For example, the tower feature sign area should be solid and have no vertical lines in it. b. The end -cap tenant on the west elevation, at a minimum, the bottom two vertical lines should be removed, so the sign can be centered vertically and horizontally in the area under the "block" scoring feature i. To go along with this, on the north elevation for the end -cap and tenant next door, if the vertical scoring at the top could be carried around from the west elevation to the north, it would add nice continuity and then keep all the signs on the north elevation at the same height. Page 6 of 7 ii. Or, change the design altogether to create a rectangular frame for the tenant sign to be placed on/in. c. For the north elevation, if each tenant's sign band area could be centered above their door and framed out, that would be great. d. Please removing the double line scoring through the middle. Perhaps, change it to just have one line above and below where the sign would go, to create the frame that we are looking for. Reply: Reply: See detailed response from architect attached. 5. In regards to the Signage Narrative: a. If the tenant sign band areas can be defined by EIFS scoring statement, described above, it may be best to refer to the newly- adopted Carmel sign ordinance standards for sign size. This will allow a percentage of the height (70 %) and width (85 %) to be used to calculate a signage square footage that better fits the tenant space. Reply: Signage is regulated per the standards included in the Bridges PUD. b. Return color — typically this is called out to be black or dark bronze, to make it stand out from the color of the building facade. The Dept. would not recommend matching the facade or sign face color. The sign loses dimensionality. c. Calling out the width and height is great, but again, the Dept. would point back to the newly- adopted Carmel sign ordinance standards, which are 70% height and 85% width. (The 24" height may end up being 70 %, when the scoring /framing tenant sign band areas are redesigned.) Reply: Signage is regulated per the standards included in the Bridges PUD. C. Overall Development Plan: 1. Will there be any center ID ground signs for the overall Bridges Development as part of this petition? Reply: No, not at this time. 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 Page 7 of 7