Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence tf.\O22Z lJ 2 1, i nnial'1,4Gtv1 t- Ol e ve f arc/pn Conn, Angelina V From: Kristy Tornga[ktornga @!gha-architects.com) Sent: Tuesday; October04, 2011 5:1,2 PM To:, Conn, Angelina.V Subject: Proposed Olive'G'arden Attachments: c090423 OG -Michigan Rd - Carmel IN-PSP-S4A.pdf; c090423 OG - Michigan Rd - Carmel IN-PSP-S4.pdf • Good-afternoon,Angie, I left you a voicemail and wanted to follow up with an email. I am worki ng'with a proposed Olive Garden restaurant;at North Michigan Road and Retail Parkway. I will be in town on site next week and was hoping I could set up a meeting to meet with the applicable departments involved during any planning reviews and building permit processes. I have attached!a preliminary site plan for.your reference. I am hoping to be in town on Wednesday but it is not set in stone.Please review and let me know if we can set up a meeting. • Thank you, ' I" • Kristv'roriiga; "Z k, Project Coordinator \\k*\N- �\ � GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT ` ! L 14110 Dallas Parkway Suite 300 Dallas,TX 75254 1 Office: (972)239-8884 Direct: '(214)461-9632 Mobile: (469)426-9338 Fax: , '(469)916-5375 email:ktornga@gha-architects.com This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.If you are not the intended:recipient,please notify GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT immediately.!by replying to this message and destroying all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you. 1 Conn, An•ehna V � ...�r From: Lovell Foushee [lovell @trgpsc.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:32 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: Olive Garden - Carmel IN: Site Light Pole Shaft Requirement Thank you! Lovell Foushee—Project Manager 859-276-2006 l.lovell@trgpsc.com From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn@carmel.in.gov] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:21 PM To: 'loveli @trgpsc.com' Subject: RE: Olive Garden - Carmel IN: Site Light Pole Shaft Requirement Yes, Lovell I think that will work! Angie Conn Planning Administrator From: Lovell Foushee Jmailto:lovell@trgpsc.coml Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:18 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: Olive Garden - Carmel IN: Site Light Pole Shaft Requirement Angie: Thanks for the quick response. I realize this may be splitting hairs but they have a 6" square pole that measures 8.5" diagonally. Will this be satisfactory since the code.says 8" diameter but does not specify how the diameter is to be measured? Thanks, Lovell Foushee-Project Manager 859-276-2006 I lovell@trgpsc.com From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn@carmel.in.aov] Sent:.Wednesday, September 19, 2012 3:22 PM To: 'lovell @trgpsc.com' Subject: RE: Olive Garden - Carmel IN: Site Light Pole Shaft Requirement Lovell- - Please try your best to find an alternative parking lot pole light fixture that meets that 8" diameter size, since it is a standard in the ordinance.Any deviation from the 8'= shaft would require a variance approval from the BZA. If you just cannot find an alternative,then we can revisit this issue later, and try to come up with a solution. Please keep me posted. Thanks,so much, Angie Conn I Planning Administrator �` • All M1 y Jb. Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL` September 12,2012 TO: City of Carmel;- Department of Community Services Planning&Zoning Division Attn: Angie Conn,Planning Adininstrator One Civic Square,3rd Floor Carmel, IN 46032 Phone:;317-571-2417 FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206'Michigan Road-C090423.400 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: rf.i. Prints I: Disk Bidding J Review lI Samples I Photocopies Cost Estimating IT! Specifications 1j Shop Drawings Information Reproducibles ri Record n� 'IeS 'Sheet NO t Uescrl tiOfl r a ro �,µ 7 Z�� '" tI ;1:7�T,I; :asp ?":.; eta».mow #,n�� .�+�' d(�'Il'9'�n 9 � .��a,�7Ea`!z av� .& tom,u� .,a <�+)n�^'�`^z4.,� � ,zi,.�. S9�.r�� "�n��.%';�wJU,a,�mns{ 15 Informational,Packets for the PC meeting on 9/18/2012 tI Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents required as part of°the Development Plan. and ADLS Plan review process for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road-TAC Meeting held on June 20,20.12. Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. Thank you so much for all of your assistance with this process! 910 11 7,2 Smc:'ely, _ .. co 4, 011 „..�! ev' pl2 0, 44.7 SECtWE° Ja 'ei� r' SEP 1 ry Pro i�•rty Development . � DOGS A GH• ARCHITECTURE_/DEVELOP MENT 0) Direct:214-461-9631, " Email:,Jreid @gha-architects.com e'� • Real Estate _Development`Se`vi c_e_s Site Development AGchitecture- Construction'Manag. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates • 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 cam. Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 EL • Sepfeniber 6, 20,12 JABS BRAtNARD, MAYOR Ms. Janet Reid Gerdes, Henrichson,and Associates A rchitecture/Development, 14110 Dallas Parkway, Suite' 100 Dallas.Texas 75254 ,RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#3' Dear Mls.Reid:, The:City received'your site development plans and response letter:on August 29;2012. We offer the following comments: 1. Previous Comment 1 cif a letter dated August 6.2012:and.comment 8 of aletter dated June 15,2012 Please Um-firm with the'INDOT-that'the enti•ance,to the south can be used as proposed.You•Will'also•iieed to work with Rd(the property owner to the--South)to obtain access rights. Please keep our o`fficemapprised of,all approvals°and•agreements for.this entrance:_ 2., Previous-Comment 3 of a lettei dated At gust.6,.2012 and ent.12 of a letter dated.Hine 15,2012. .Please provide the MFPGand'MLAG forthe�proposed building. The MFPG>ald the MLAG shall'be a minimum of''2 feet`:above the 100:year flood elevation or the maximum water surface elevationoftheflood routes. The iMFPG and,MLAGshotild be based.on the overflow weir elevation orlthe 100-year pond elevation,whichever'is greater.OR the highest surface water elevation on site(What is the e,highest water.surface elevation on site;with all inlets plugged, before.thestotiiiwater will spillaover)nto the pond?). Please ensure the MFPG,and`MLA.G are correct., This variance-request',has been.,received and will be processed along,with the other twostormwater"variancerequests. lfyou,have questions,please'contact me at 5'71,2441. Sincerely, di) Mt* Gary'R. Du can. Assistant c' y Engineer Department-of Engineering cc: Angelina Conti,Department,of Community Services ;John Duffy, Carmel Utilities 'Paul Pace.Cannel Utilities Paul Arnone,Carmel Utilities Greg Hoyes, Hamilton;Couity Surveyor's Office Greg Ilko,Crossroad Engineers, PC - issvrappst iserdatalz:1stiaied\DIIILL.\PROJREVI2\OLi\' GARL)I:NRE TAIJRANTREV#3 ' DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING ONE Clvic 5QT:ARE, CARiMEL, IN 46032• OFFICF: 317:571.'2441 Fk,< 317.571.2439 EMAiL engineering @carmel.in gov, • Ei� f 'w rk R 0 � Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL, August 28,2012 r 1 TO: City of Ca_rmel,-.Department of Community Services 6. r�Planning&Zoning Division Attn: Angie Conn, Planning Adminstrator One •'Civic:Square,3 rd P Carmel,.IN 46032 "2g t ,� Phone: 317-571-2417 " cu/2 FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: TheOlive Garden—Carmel; IN— 10206''Michigan Road-C090423.460 • Oa " •L6,8 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: R Prints Q Disk 1 Bidding R Review • y", Samples Photocopies. 0 Cost,Estimating' a Specifications D �,�';Shop Drawings ' ';Information Reprod'ucibles n Record • e r',""ie E.. [; 're "6:-, ei 3;Co le$��,asi!ee _NO� o-s QeSC rl tl0 n^"dd • 1 Copy of TAC memb er comments received after the.7/17 Plan Commission meeting— ,o CTRWD,- Ryan Hartman •o Hamilton'Counfy Surveyor's Office—Greg Hoyes o CrossRoad Engineers—'Greg Ilko o City,of Cannel Engineering Gary Duncan o City of Carmel•Stormwater—`John Thomas, Copy of,KHA Response Letter°(toacomments noted above)and supporting documentation 2' Full size sets of the REVISED Civil Plans 1 Electronic(.pdf)copy of the resubmittal documents on CD Hi Angie, Please find enclosed,the'above.referenced documents in response to the.Planning/Zoning comments received regarding the Development Plan and ADLS Plan submittal for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant°to:be located•at:,1.0206'Michigan Road—TAC,Meeting held on July 17, 2012. ,e ntact me _ 'e" haveGany questions or comments. Silt/ , an: ^ Pro: .Development, Real Estate GHA ARCHITECTURE!'DEVELOPMENT Developmentservces - Direct: 214-461.-9631. Site Development , - Architecture. Email:jreid0,,gha-architects.co m Construction'.Manag: • `Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway.•'Suite 100,•Dallas,TX•75254, Phone: (972)239-8884'•Fax: (972)23925054 . Conn, An c e;l.ina`V From: Janet Reid[jreid @.GHA-Architects.com] Sent: • Tuesday, August 28, 2012 3:28 PM. To:' Conn, Angelina V; ryan.hartman@ctrwd.Org; greg.hoyes @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; gilko @crossroadengineers.com; Duncanf Gary R; Thomas, John G Cc: Kourtnie Airheart;'jdegagne @darden.com Subject: Docket No. 12050014 DP/ADLS Olive Garden - Carmel, IN - 2nd TAC Member Response Distribution Dear TAC Member, Please find below a link to the REVISED Development Plan and ADLS,documents (per your comments) and Response Letter for the proposed new Olive Garden Restaurant—for your review*. ftp://ftp.gha-projects.com FTP User.name: aconn FTP Password: ru5EdebR The password is case sensitive,'type it in as it appears in this email. *1 will also be sending you a hard copy set—FedEx overnight. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions or.comments regarding this submittal. Sincerely, Janet Reid Property Development GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT 14110 Dallas Parkway,Suite 300 Dallas,TX 75254 Office: (972)239-8884 Fax: (972)239-5054 Direct: (214)461-9631 Mobile: (214)697-977-1 email: ;ireid@gha-architects.com This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.If you are not the intended recipient;please notify GHA ARCHITECTURE/ DEVELOPMENT immediately by replying to this message and destroying all copies of this message and any attachments.Thank you. • • 1 �Arn A Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Suite 2125 205 W.Wacker Drive Chicago,IL 60606 • August23 2012 �1 # 6� Gary Duncan _ AUG 29FA2 Assistant City Engineer,City of Carmel One,Civic Square Carmel, IN,46032 Cb (317) 571-2441 01.6$ Re: Olive Garden Restaurant-10206 Michigan Rd.,Carmel IN MFPG Waiver Request Dear Mr.Duncan: Per the City of Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards Manual Section 104.02,"Minimum Flood Protection Grade[MFPG) ofall structures fronting.,a pond or open ditch shall be no less than 2 feet above any adjacent 100-year local or regional flood elevations"and"The Lowest Adjacent:Grade for residential,commercial,or industrial buildings outside a FEMA or IDNR designated floodplain shall have two feet of freeboard above the flooding source's 100-year flood elevation under proposed conditions"In addition,it has been noted in review comments°°from the City of Carmel Engineering Department,that the MFPG,must also be two feet greater than surface water elevation onsite:assuming all inlets are plugged. The proposed development has three proposed detention pond areas,each with overflow weir spillways.The maximum overflow weir elevation of the ponds is 892.82(above,all'the 100-year storm elevations for all the ponds). The finished floor elevation of the building is 895.05.This provides 2.23 feet of freeboard. Due to grading constraints of the site,the greatest water elevation onsite is 894.05assuming all inlets are plugged.This provides one foot,of'freeboard to the finished floor elevation of 895.05.Grading constraints prevent,the possibility of lowering this an additional foot.A;grading constraint for the site includes maintaining a minimum four feet of°cover-over an existing sanitary forcemain that runs through the north side of the property.Another grading constraint is providing cover over the proposed storm sewer onsite. Lowering onsite elevations would reduce the cover on storm sewer.Additionally, proposed detention pond elevations and tieelevations to existing grades limit the grading onsite in the parking areas. While site constraints'prevent full compliance of the MFPG,City requirement,we are providing over 2 feet of • freeboard from overflow weir elevations and have a minimum 1 foot of freeboard from onsite surface elevations. Therefore,we respectfully request a waiver of the MFPG requirement. Please contact me if you have any questions or require any.additional information. Sincerely, Kimley-Horn and Associates,,Inc. Justin Muller, P.E. KimleyHorn :a• and Associates, Inc Suite 2125 205 W.Wacker Drive• Chicago,IL 60606 6 • August 23,2012 �� Gary Duncan ' 'fl cet ,a11 Assistant City Engineer,City of Carmel G �y One,ciyic Square w Carmel, IN 46032, O' w (317) 571-2441 � 'Re: Olive Garden Restaurant:-10206 Michigan Rd.,Carmel IN Minimum Cover Waiver Request • Dear Mr. Duncan: Per the City of Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards•Manual Section 501.01,"There should be no less than 2.5 feet of cover:°along any part of the pipe from final pavement elevation or final ground surface elevation to-the top:of the pipe." • Due to site constraints,cover on the.proposed storm sewer in,some areas within the site do not meet this 2.5 foot.of"cover requirement:,'Cover over all storm sewer pipes exceeds 2.5 feet at all pavement locations'(the majority'ofstorm sewer pipe length).The cover drops below the minimum 15 foot requirement as,thestorm.sewer meets the storm sewer structures located t within the proposed'vegetative swale BMPF areas. These structures:are at lowest elevations onsite. In order to provide.City required:BMP for storm'water these structures are required to be • within the vegetative swales.- Another site constraint'is thetCity requires.a 4 foot'maximum ponding depth fordetention,areas. We do meetthis requirement,'and in meeting this requirement the pond inlet structure elevations are set,therefore•we+cannot lower the pipes anymore than`they currently are. In - addition,the existing 1'4"sanitary forcemain onsite whit h the storm sewer must.cross constrains the storm sewer elevations as well. While site cons traintsiprevent"full compliance with Section 501.01,of the Stormwater Technical Standards IVlanual,we are provi'ding'2.5`feetof cover over a majority of`the storm sewer:Therefore,we .. respectfully'requesta waiver of the minimum cover requirement. Sincerely, • Kimley-Horn'and'Associates;Inc. Justin Muller, P.E." f. AKimley-Horn and Associates, Inc, • Suite 2125 205 W.Wacker Drive Chicago,IL 60606 • August 23,2012' ;^ ntV a .; AEG 29 201 2 ' GaryDuncan Assistant City Engineer,City of Carmel WOO ti One Civic Square 4, Carmel, IN 460322 (317) 571-2441 l at 6 9 g Re: Olive Garden Restaurant-10206 Michigan„Rd.,Carmel!IN Detention Sizing Including Adjacent Right-of-Way.Waiver Request Dear Mr. Duncan: Per the City of Carmel Stormwater TechnicalStandards Manual Section 302.06,"Detention basins shall be sized to detain the runoff from the fully developed right-of-way per the City of Carmel 20-year Thoroughfare Plan across all frontages,regardless of existing watershed boundaries or drainage breaks/divides.The acreage of the,full right-of-way width shall be included in the overall acreage of the development in determining the allowable release rate". Due to site constraints,,thesite cannot detain the fully developed Michigan Road right-of-way adjacent to the development. Instead,the proposed.site detention calculation has been designed for the developed Michigan Road right-of-way to'the'centerline of Michigan Road which includes 0.49 acres of impervious;area. Michigan Road right-of-way in its currentcondition is built out a minimum of two-lanes in each direction with additional turn lanes. Michigan Road right-of-way also has its own storm sewer drainage system in which the current:roadway drains. If'Michigan Road`were to add additional lanes,the current roadway storm sewer system would be upgraded/sized to accommodate. Further detention cannot beincluded within the Olive Garden development as the current site,already includes three detention areas all reaching their-maximum elevation of4 feet per,City code. In addition, • pavementareas are not availablefto be used as detention as,we're at the City codes minimum parking count ,requ_irement. While site constraints prevent full compliance Section 302.06 of the Stormwater Technical Standards Manual,we are still providing detention for half of the Michigan Road right-of-way.Therefore,we respectfully request a waiver of the right-of-way detention requirement. Please contact me if you have any further questions,or require any additional information. Sincerely, Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. Justin Muller, P.E. r - r i ' < Ara Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL August 23,2012 TO: , 1 a City of Carmel- Department of Community Services 1 T'- d! * Planning&Zoning Division `44 k Attn: Angie Conn, Planning Adminstrator Ate One Civic Square,3rd Floor 4 , Carmel,IN 46032 ,; �2n ' I Phone:'317-571-2419 r.j oCt9 • FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: The Olive'Garden—Carmel, IN- 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400 O� • e ' 9 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: • Prints f Disk r Bidding J Review ri Samples r Photocopies n Specifications C Shop Drawings fl Information Reproducibles 1 Record. • %CO ies"lt(, pt� � Yff„sheelt (�0��5 ��eSCr1 9. Informational Packets for the PC sub=committee'meeting on 9/4/2012 • .Site'plan • Landscape plan • • Architectural building elevations • Color renderings='2D and 3D 1 Copy of all documents(.pdf./.jpg)on CD,:for reference Hi Angie, - Please find enclosed the above referenced documents required as part of the Development Plan and ADLS Plan review process(Docket 2050014)for the•proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road TAC Meetingxhe1d on June 20,2012. Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. , Jan: ,R.id Pro• y_Development GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct 214-461-963.1 Real Estate Development.Services Email: ireid(&,,gha-architects.com Site Development i - - - ' Architecture ' Construction Menag. i Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates. 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX.•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054. • Y A, Kimley-Horn 144 and Associates, Inc. ma Suite 2125 205 W.Wacker Drive Chicago,IL 60606 August 23, 2012, 1,1q -'4!! Angie Conn Planning Administrator "i City of Carmel Planning:&Zoning Divisions �,$ Dept.of Community Services /� � 44 1;Civic Square;,3rd Floor trki Carmel, IN 46032 (317)571-2426 ea /-t, g OliverGarden Restaurant—10206 Michigan Rd.Carmel IN-Project Review#2 Dear`Mrs.Conn: We are in receipt of your comnientsdated July1'9,2012,.on the plans submitted for the 10206 N. Michigan Road,.Olive Garden Restaurant in Carmel, IN. Following are our responses to those comments: CLAY TOWNSHIP REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT . i Comment 1:, Existing.Sanitry structure should have the prefix MH-#"E"'not El. ,Response 1:.<Existing.sanitary structure labeled ast,MH'"E".SeeSheet C5.1.forrevision. • Comment 2; It may riot be possible to,adjus't,the Air Release Structureito TC El:892.14-the invert of the whole structureis889., This structure will probably not be able,to be:a"djusted from current TC Elevation. ' ' Response 2"The''Olive Garden;site was raised and regraded and rim elevation on theexisting air ,` ;release„structure;does notneed to be a djusted and'therim will remain at S 94.17.,See grading plan on Sheet C4.2 for revision. • • Comment 3:Please provide a cut sheet:of JR Smith 2010:H-B':. • Response 3:The.cutand detail sheet.of the JR;Sinith 20104-1711 structure has been added•to the plans. See sheet C6.2 to.see the.;detaiL • Comment 4: 'Calloutson sheetC5.1 Utility legend still show 4”sanitary:and needs to.be changed to 6" (Ex.,C 1, and J): Response 4:.All,crossing,callouts have been.revised to<calhout 6"Sanitary instead;of 4".See:Sheet for revision. Comment 5: Service Yard°Drain(Calls out 4" and 6" is labeled on blow up view. Kimsey-Horn and Associates, Inc. Response 5:Service Yard Drain now callsout=for a°6"sanitary-pipe connection.See Sheet C5.1 for revision. Comment 6: Dry Detention Basin elevation:888 don't leave much clearance over our 14"Force Main (see asbuilts)., Estimate is 2'-4'...4' is least amount of cover allowable. Please also put note on plans sheet caution when digging active FM depth unknown. Response 6:Site has been regradedand pond design changed to now allow for over 4'of cover on the westside of the.site.See C4.2 and C5.1.for revision. Comment 7`- Please send us'.a copy of`theexecuted sanitary sewer application thatcan be found on our web site at www.ctrwd.org. Response 7:Executed sanitary sewer application is'included withythis submittal HAMILTON COUNTY SURVEYOR'S OFFICE REVIEW Comment 1:We still need an:outlet permit for the indirect discharge into the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain. The application is available atSurvevor's Form Page. Response 1.-Outlet permit is included with this submittal. Comment 2: OurStorniwater Manual(HCSMTSM)allowsfor the;exceeding ofthe release rates based • on a6"'mina-hu'rn orifice,;but only 1 orifice per°site/outlet. Looking at the-site design,I would recommend th-e;orificebe placed on the outfall pipe of ST2,with debris guards on both pond outfalls to minimize chances of debris getting to the orifice. The discharge rates need'to be adjusted accordingly. Response 2:Thestorrn sewer has been changed tube all 12"pipe.We have included a 6"plate restrictor at structure ST2.Imorder to minimize:the release,rate of thesite we,included-a 6"plate restrictor atstructure,ST4 for,the west pond. We also added a 6"plate restrictor at storm structure ST14.See Sheets C4.4 and C4.5 for revisionlalong with the storm water report. Comment 3: Please submit final construction plans and drainage calculations along with the outlet ' permit. Response 3:-Revised plans and storm.:water drainage report are included witlythis submittal. CROSSROADS ENGINEERING REVIEW Comment 1: Per Section 102.2.v.d,,please include the FEMA map reference number in all notes about floodplains,floodway fringes and floodways. Response 1:FEMA map,reference,number.has been added to the plans.See Sheet C4.3 for revision. ' Comment 2 Section 102.02.xi.k,please revise,the Grading Plan,Sheet C4:2,and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3,to show`the emergency flood routing path(s)and'thei'r invert elevations from the detention facility to the receiving system. 2 ' ;A, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Response 2:Emergency flood routing,paths and invert elevations have been added to the plans.See Sheet C4.3 for revision. Comment 3: Per Section 102.02.xi.r., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3,to indicate theslopes of all surface drainage swales. The response letter states that all drainage swale slopes have been,added'to Sheet C4.2,however the slope of the Southwest pond is not included. Response 3:-All ponds and drainage swales now show bottom of pond slopes.See Sheet C4.2 for 'revision. Comment 4:Per Sections 102.02.xi.I and 102.02.xi.s, please revise'theGrading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to include a typical cross section,of the detention pond showing the following information on the cross sections: a. 10-year high water,elevations resulting from the controlled release conditions called for by the City'of Carmel's Stormwater Management Ordinance. b. bottom of pond,top of bank,emergency spillway,and water surface over the emergency spillway elevations. c. Emergency spillway'dimensions Response 4:Pond`and''spillway cross sections are included'with all above listed information in the plan set.See Sheet C4.5 Storm Profiles and Cross Sections for the cross sections. Comment 5: Section 102.2.xi.o., please revise the plans to include,a statement indicating the definition of minimum flood protection grade in accordance with the manual. Response 5:'Minimum flood protection'grade,definition is listed in the.Drainage Summary Table on the Drainage Plan.See Sheet C4.3 for revision. Comment 6: Section 102.02.xiv.,please include,a,separate Structure Data Table containing the minimum information discussedinthe manual or revise the:Storm Sewer Pipe Analysis on the Storm Sewer'Plan,,Sheet C4.4,to include the required information. Response 6:Structure and pipe Data Tables are included in the plan set with applicable information. See Sheet C4.4 for revision. Comment 7: Per Section 302.06.01, please provide information to verify that a minimum of'90%of the original detention capacity of the proposed dry detention basin is restored within 48 hours from the start of the design 100-year storm. It appears that the Northeast Pond does not,conform. Please review and revise as necessary. Response 7:The orifice;,restriction at the northeast pond was revised to now allow for 90%of the original detention capacity,(19,023;CF)to be restored within 48 hours for the 100 year storm.See Appendix L of the Storm Water Management Plan for the revision. Comment 8: PerSection 302.08.1,a minimum of 1%bottom slope in all directions shall be provided in dry detention facilities with perforated subsurface drains. The Southeast pond does not conform to the 3 C°. ' Kimley-Horn • and.Associates, Inc. • minimum 1%bottom slop a and the:West,pond'does not•have a slope listed in the Construction Plans. Please review'and revise accordingly. • • Response 8:Pond andswalerslopesdareall now'a minimum'of1%anditherslopes are shown in the plan set.See'Sheet C4 2 for.revision:' Comment 9 Per'Section;302 08_2,the maximum planned depth of sto rmwater water stored shall not exceed four(4),feet. Also note any waiver requests`should besubmitted directly to the City of Carmel EngineeringiDepartment., Response 9:The'maximum planned'depthof water stored in any of the ponds doe's not exceed 4 feet. See pond cross sections on Sheet C4.5for;revision. • Comment 10;,Pleaseprovide a typical section of the ernergency,spillway in the Construction Plans and calculations-for the prop osed spillway to show'that it complies with all requirements of Section 302.11 of the manual. • Response 10:Cross sections of the emergency for both the west pond and the southeast pond'are included in the plan sheet along withFthespillway weir..calculations:See Sheet C4.5 for revision. • ,Comment 11 ,Per'Sectiory;501.01,there should be<nolessthan 2.50 feetof cover along any part of the pipe the'-final pavementelevatiomor final ground surface elevation to the top(outside) of pipe. It appears that there are multiple:storm:sewer'structures•thatare not in conformance. Please note that • any waiver requests should be submitted directlyto the City ofCarmel'Engineering Department. Response 11:.We will be submitting:a waiver forthis.2.5'coverrequirement.With maintaining only 4' .of-depth in the>ponds and theneedfor BMP drainageswales,the cover overthe pipes,at the structures dropsbelow 25'.;Note that for a majority of the'length.of,pipe;;cover is over 2.5',it is only ' within the swaled,igrassedareas'that the cover drops,below 2.5'..A waiver request is,submitted to the City with this revision. • ( Comment 12: Per Section,501.03,a minimum'drop'of 0.1 feetthrough manholesiand inlet structures shall be:provided. AlsoperSection 501.03;whenchanging pipe sizes within a structure,the pipe crownsshould;align. Please notethatanywaiver requestsshould.be,submitted directly to the City of Carmel Engineering Department. • . Response 12fThe minimum drop of 0.1 feetthrough,manholes and inletsds nowmet atoll storm seWer structures:See r Sheets C4'.4 a,d'C4.5 for revision.. Comment 11.,Please provide:calculations showing thatthedownstream receiving system from the detention pond,(grate and pipe'flovvof ExistingStorm Structure"A")issufficient°to convey thepeak ' detention pond butflow'in addition to the watershed:alreadydr:aining`to the inlet. 'Verify that-there are no downstream restrictions,and'thatthesystem can handle•;the emergencyo,verflow scenario. (This inform ation should:be sarveYed,,as"built information.) • 4 • }" 4 _ Klm►ey-Horn �e and Associates Inc. Response 13:A downstream analysis has been done and,a'summary,calculations and exhibits are included in the storm water management plan. The°proposed condition does not increase the current flowto the existing storm sewer structure at the southeast corner of the site. Comment 14: Per Section 305.02,the minimum diameter of all storm sewers shall be 12 inches. This shall apply to both public,andprivate storm piping, unless the piping is a roof drain,footing drain or sump pump. When'the:minimum 12-in diameter pipe will not limit the rate of release to the required amount,the rate of release for detention storage shall,be controlled by an orifice plate or other device, subject to acceptance of the City of Carmel. Please revise the plans accordingly. Response 14:Theminimumpipe diameter(besides the roof drains)`is now 12".Orifice plates have been added to storm sewer structures to control the release.See SheetC4.5 for revision. CITY OF CARMEL Comment 1: Previous Comment;8 of a letter dated June 15,,2012,. Please confirm with the INDOT that the entrance'to the south can be:used'as proposed. You will also need to work with RCI(the property owner to the south)to obtain access rights. The Department restates this comment. Response 1:We have contacted INDOT and,discussed the proposed project and use of the south drive. , We sent them the site"plan•and they were going.to have conversationswith the City of Carmel and , contact us if i they need any further information and if the proposed use of the drive is allowed. We have also contacted working with RCI to put together access.dgreements.Correspondence and final documents will be forwarded to the City once received. Comment 2: Previous-Comment 11 of a letter dated June 15,2012. Please provide the emergency flood route from any detention facilities to the receiving system. Please also provide the'on-site flood routing from all areas to the detention facility assuming all inlets plugged during-a 100-yr rain event. Please indicate the on-site flood route through the site to the detention facilities. Response 2:Emergency flood routes'and'invert elevations from the emergency spillways to the receiving system are included on the plan set.On-site flood routing for the site if all inlets are plugged i are also provided.See Sheet:C4.3 for revision. Comment 3: Previous Comment 12 of a letter dated June 15,2012. Please provide the MFPG and MLAG'for the proposed building. The MFPG and the MLAG shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation or'the maximum water surface elevation of the flood routes. The MFPG'and MLAG should be based on the overflow weir:elevation or the 100-year pond elevation,whichever is greater, OR the highest surface'water elevatioa on site(What'is'the highest water surface elevation on site,with all inlets plugged, before the stormwater will spill over into the pond?). Please ensure the MFPG and MLAG are correct-. Response 3:The MFPG and.MLAG elevations are listed in the plan sheet. The finished floor elevation is.2.29'above the emergency spillway'elevation and is 2.5'over the100 year flood,elevation. The highest on-site•elevation for overland flow if all the inlets are plugged is 894.05. The finished floor • • 5 • • • ' 'Kimley=Horn_ 'and Associates,Inc. • elevation of'the building is 895.05..This is only`-providing l'of difference betweedthe twos..elevations. A waiver request is included in this submittal for this requirement Comment 4: Previous'Comment 14 of'a letterdated June 15,2012., There appear to be direct discharge points proposed for areas of this property. The<property'should be graded to drain internally to the . site, minimizing any direct discharges. There still appears to bedischarge points proposedfor areas of this property. The propertysh;ould begraded to drain internally to the site, minimizing-any direct discharges. There,still appears to be a;direct,dis charge from the south driveway. lt_is possible'to direct ' this stormwater'back into the site? Response 4:-The Site is drained so that there is no direct'discharge within the,property limits.At the south driveway the high point for'the'Site.is at the property line and all drains'internal'to the site. The rest of the drivewayn,which is'not within the property limits'doesdrain'so'uth'to meet existing'drive grades.See.Sheet C4.2. Comment 5: ,Previous Comment 21.b.of a letter dated June 15,2012. On Sheet CS6:Section 03000: Does this applyto curbing or foundations? If this applies to curbing,,please include a note similar to the note on CS3 stating,"All concrete curbing materials,.production,delivery, placement,curing,jointing, finishing,etc.shall be per City of CarmelCurbing Policy." Response 5:Note stating"All:concrete curbing materials,production,'delivery,placement,curing,. jointing,and finishing`shall be per City of Carmel Curbing Policy"is added to the plans under Section 03000'1.028 on Sheet.CS6.See Sheet CS6 for revision. • Comment 6: Please indicate the requisite drainage and BMP easements perSection 306.02 of the Stormwater Technical Standards Manual. • p g easements are shown on the plan.set:See Sheet-C4.3 for • the;easmen^t.BNIP and water drainage easem_ ( Comment 7: Please label the pond elevations as:Top;of Bank,100-yr,and spillway elevation. Response 7:Pond elevations for Top of'Bank,.100-year elevation and spillway elevations are listed on the plan sheet.;See Sheet C4.3 for revision. Comment 8: Has Clay;Regional Waste District approved the•detention•pond locations along the sanitary ;sewer easements? Response 8:Clay Township Regional Waste District has4eviewed theplan setandthe sanitary sewer easements. Their concern with''the•previous pondelevations:reducing coverover the existing forcemain has:been addressed with regrading thesite.and'maintaining;a4ninimum,of 4'of cover over the pipes.Final.approval and acceptance from Clay'Township'Regional Waste District can be forwarded to<the City upon"request.. CARMEL STORMWATER'POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN REVIEW Comment 1: Please;place.all storm drains and SSDS in bold on C2.2., 6 • • F Kimsey-Horn • and Associates;,Inc:. -Response 1:All storm drains and'SSDs are shown in bold:See Sheet C2 2 for revision: Comment 2: Does'tfis drain to Payne Branch or Crooked Creek?Please check and;revise if necessary. Response 2:Theultimate drainageof`the.siteand,drainageduring°construction°will drain south which is in the:Crooked Creek Watershed.See-Sheet C2.2for:revision and'clarification. Comment 6. Please provide a soil map for the site. Response 6:Soil;type boundary'outlines and'types are listed in,plan°view and,in•the legend on Sheet C2.2.A separate sol,map is also included with\,this submittal:See Sheet C2.2 and the separate soil map included. • Comment 7: 'Iowa regulations°;are cited. Please revise: Response 7 Iowa regulations:t re no longer cited.See',Sheet C2.21or revision. Comment 8a: How will the site be accessed until Retail Parkway is completed?Will'an additional construction entranc •be needed off'of Michigan Road until it'is installed?Please close gap in silt fence on'SE Omer of'thes'ite on C2.2.The."'Do Not Mow or Spray"signIocations are hardto determine;on • C2:3 where it meets thevegetative swale symbol. Please clarify.There are also handicapped signs with the same symbol`nearVegetated Swale 8. Please remove these from C2.3 Response 8a:lf'RetailParkway is not constructed at the:time of the>.OliveGarden construction a construction entrance will need tolbe,placed,off,ofMichiganfoad.A note has been added'toithe plans-(Sheet,C2 2)stating this and;that:the,location:shallbe coordinatedwith:the.City and Engineer to determine the best location: The gap,has been,closed••of thesilt fence;at the southeast corner of the • site(Sheet,C2.2)r The"Do Not Mow or Spray"ssign locations:have been clarified by changing the symbol and increasing•the-size of the symbol:on the plans:The handicap signlocations have been frozen on the sheet(Sheet C2.3). Comment 8d Geotechnical report indicates water was found 3.5'below the proposed building pad. Please include a dewatering control detail in case excavations need to be dewatered.Vegetated Swale SSDs need to beyencased in washed.#8:stone.with"filter fabric on bottom and sides of the'#8s'.A 4"'layer of pea,gravel should be placed ion,top of the#8 stone with the filter fabric extending up'along the sides of this layer astwell. Is the SSD'rise'r detail on C6.2 going°to be used on site?If'not please remove: Filter • Fabricshould'be used,underneath'the rip rap'on thecurb turnouts. Please update detail.. Response 8d:A.dewatering control detail has been,added to.the,planset(Sheet,C2.4).,The vegetated swale detail has been revised'to show pea gravel and layers with propergeotextile'installation. A note about'the?locationrof'the geotextilefabric hasralso been added to the•detailto help clarify . (Sheet;C2.4):TheSSD•risers,°will'be,used for the:SSD drains at both the west and•southeast detention • ponds in order to connect• • the stormsewersystern The detail remains on SheefC6.2. Filter fabric`,to be.installed under riprap'eft the curb turnouts has:been added to the detail (Sheet.C2.4):, • 7 Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. Comment 11:. Please provide a temporary seeding and mulch detail/notes on C2.2,in case there is a gap in time'where,the.site remains undisturbed for more than 14 days. Please provide planting,plan for the vegetated swages on the SWPPP.Erosion control blanket should be used throughout the bottom of the vegetated swalesto stabilize them'unless it conflicts with the planting plan. Response 1.1:Temporaryy seeding notesare listed under section 11.2(Sheet C2.2).lithe site remains undisturbed for more than 14days it states thatthe area shall be temporarily seeded and the seed mix types are listed.The vegetative'swale plantlist has been,added to the SWPPP sheets(Sheet C2.3). Erosion control blanket is shown for all ponds and vegetative swales'through the bottom of the ponds (Sheet C2.2). • Comment 13c: Iowa is listed as the rePorting,authorityfor spills in Section 12.2 of the Spill Prevention Section. Please update with Indiana'Departmentof Environmental Management Spill Response Line and with 911. Response 13c:Iowa references have been removed from the notes and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management Spill Response Line information and contact has been added.See Section 13.12 on Sheet C2.2 for revision. Comment t Please show the location of the Post Construction BMP and Access Easements on C2.3 in accordance with Chapter 700`of the Technical Standards Manual. Response 1:BMP andAccess Easement locations are shown on the plan set.See Sheet C2.3. Comment 2e: Please provide the backfill detailfor the storm water quality unit. Response 2e:eackfill:details,have been added to the "Storm Water Quality Structure"detail.See Sheet C2.4 for revision. Comment 5: Pleaseprovide an 0&M;manual for review. Response 5:,An 0'&M manual is included with this submittal. We trust these,responses adequately address your comments,if you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact Lesley Netzer at 630-487-5555or me at 312.924.7403. Sincerely, Kimley-Horn and Associates;Inc. /� - �u Justin Muller, PE 8 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:47 PM To: 'Janet Reid' Cc: 'Arthur McIntosh'; 'Jack DeGagne' Subject: RE: August 7 Plan Commission Committee Meetings - Dept. Reports I Olive Garden Attachments: PC-2012-julyl7.doc Hi,Janet! O I think Jack and Art•received,plenty of review comments and direction at the 8/7 committee meeting, and they should run with that. (Our Dept. would be willing to review any revisions to the architecture within the next few weeks to let you know if you are on the right track or not.) ® I am not sure when the meeting minutes will be finalized from that 8/7 committee meeting. We might be ablelto get you an audio.recording of that meeting, if you really need it I will see what I can do; maybe I can get a copy of the hand written notes from the secretary. • Attached are the unofficial meeting minutes from the July 17 plan commission meeting. Start on page 5 for the olive garden. • Yes, the olive garden item'was discussed, then continued to the Sept. 4 committee meeting. • Your next step should be to revise the architectural building elevations to address the comments and concerns voiced at the 8/7 committee meeting, voiced by the committee members and by the planning director. If you can get us 9 copies of any revised exterior architectural building elevations by noon on August 24, then we can mail those out to the committee members, along with the Sept. 4 meeting agenda. After that, the final mailing would be August 30, where we mail out the staff reports, so that would be the latest we could mail something out to the committee members, regarding revised architecture. Angie Conn , Planning Administrator From: Janet Reid [mailto:jreidCa GHA-Architects.com] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 5:31 PM To Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: August 7 Plan Commission Committee Meetings-'Dept. Reports/ Olive Garden Hi Angie, Are we going to;receive 2" round comments from the Planning/Zoning review? O Minute's from the 7/17 PC.meeting? ® Comments/ Minutes from the 8/7 PC sub-committee meeting? . ( understand that we have been pushed to the 9/4 sub-committee meeting anci9/18 PC meeting—is that correct? What is our next step? Thanks! • 1 67 8iar, l� � } y Carmel Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Review -' Project Name: Olive Garden *? I4/' Review Date: 8/91202 m Reviewed'Sy:' John Thomas �� q L�cj Construction'SWPPP Satisfactory Unsatisfactory 1) 14 Digit Watershed Hydrologic.Unit-Code £ X 9 2) Name_of All Receiving Waters ;3237211701102 X If the discharge is to a municipal separate storm sewer,identify°the ultimate,receiving:water 3) Estimate of peak discharge for post construction conditions,(10 I '4X l " year) .: 4) Locations.of specific points where stormwater discharge will leave the'site. 5) Locations where•stormwater may be directly discharged into r X4 " .groundwater, such as abandoned'well&or sinkholes r� � 6) Soils map of the;predominant soil types including: X P grit xi a .Soil legend with descriptions of each soil'type OX 'A b`. Brief description of how the,siteVhas accommodated the existing soil ," t rX j limitations le tl . . `AA.t 7).Description of potential pollutant-sources associated with the ;', ' rig X construction activities 4 >� s 8) Temporary and permanent stormwater-quality measures: §` �,._, ;i X a. Location • b Dimensions i% "� X ,r `? G Detailed Specifications d! Construction Details 7P. ' ; r e.y X e` Monitoring and:Maintenance,Guidelines ` �� t X by General construction sequence ; • Each plan should contain multiple stormwater pollution,prevention measures. All measures will not be installed at the sametime, Various measures will be installed at differenutimes,throughout the construction process. Some will be installed prior to land disturbance,and others may not be installed until work at the site progresses to an arearwher e they are necessary, Each proposed measure should be identified in the sequence as to when it is to be installed in relation to the land disturbing activities. • • • • 10);Location Of proposed soil,stockpiles, borrow, and/or disposal a l-f EXr 04 ': +areas< " These;;areas shall be i fclud'ed':as part of the plans whether they occur,on.or off'site. 11) Temporary and Permanent surface stabilization methods X appropriate for each season Provide;applicatiorr rates for soil amendments and;seed'mixtures, as well:as,.the'type and application rate for mulh. 12). :Erosion:Erosion and sediment control specifications for individual X ' building lots 13) Material handling,storage, and spill prevention plan' `'`' ; X at List of expected materials'tfiat may be.present on the site during 'X construction_operahoris _ b: Written description of how these materials will'be'handled.to4minimize 'X the potential of entering the storm sewer.system ca Procedures forthe contractor to take,i'f.any spills'occur-durfng <, ft X ' construction.- 14)•Contact'information for the trained individual,responsible for .stormwater pollution prevention for the,project.site ., . a:.Name fr b._Address °Xg z.,z ct'Telephone Number di. Email Address; • ', }(� ' ..' �� et List of-qualifications, X`a� W ', 15) current revision date on°all sheets X4411„ „ • ' a . I Comments y 1i) Please place all storm drains and SSDs in bold on C2.2 2); Does this drain to Payne Branch,or Crooked Creek?' Please check and revise if necessary. C -• 64'Please provide asoil map for'the site. evAt ) Iowa regulations are cited. Please revise. Y• $)a 'How.will the site be accessed until Retail.Parkway is completed? Will an additional construction '71.4 entrance be needed off of Michigan Rd until it is installed? Please close gap in silt fence on SE corner of site on C2.2. The "Do Not Mow or Spray"sign locations are hard to determine on C2.3 rA where it;meets, gi the vegetated swale symbol. Please clarify. There are also handicapped signs p: with the same symbol near Vegetated Swale 8: Please'remove these from C2.3. 0 Geo-technical report,indicates was found 3.5'below proposed'building pad. Please include a dewatering control detail in case excavations need to be de-Watered. Vegetated Swale SSDs 4D1; need to be encased in washed,#8 stone with filter fabric on bottom and sides of the#8s. A 4" layer of'washed pea gravel should be.placed'on top of the#8 stone with the filter fabric extending up along the sides of this layer as well.. Is the SSD riser detail on C6.2 going to be used on site? ,' If not please remove. Filter Fabric should be use d underneath the rip rap on the curb turnouts. t 'k Please_update detail. • �M, t1 1) Please provide a temporary seeding and mulch detail/notes on C2.2 in case there is a gap in time • where.the site remains undisturbed for more than 1'4 days. Please provide planting plan for the vegetated swales on the SW PPP: Erosion control.blanket should be used throughout bottom of the vegetated swales to stabilize them unless it,conflicts with the planting plan.. X13)' rob Iowa is listed as the reporting authority for spills in Section 1;2.2 of the Spill Prevention Section. Please.update with Indiana Department of Environmental Management Spill Response Line and :with 911. 6, . � g�r , .- Carmel Stormwater;Pollution Prevention Plan Review 44 + ;. ° "• Project Name: Olive Garden ;`� r� �G?g Review Date:: 8/9/201,2 p. ?p�? Fd Y=. Reviewed By John Thomas '"ii Post COnStructiOn SINPPP '16 f 99,- Satisfactory Unsatisfactory 1) Description of potential pollutant.sources associated with' r`p ' r proposed land use. t 1 i o ,, �f 2) Post-construction.stormwater quality measures: `i°'# § 1-1 X a. Location 1gr X ` k: Dimensions c: Sizing Calculations ' 74 'nX 2 ,47 d. Detailed Specifications r ° XM e.'Construction Details - ���, � ,; :," 4 X 3),Sequence describing stormwater quality measure implementation ti X 4"V" Description of when the proposed,post construction stormwater quality measures will be installed in relation to the , general construction.,sequence. 4) Stormwater,quaiity measures to,be implemented to prevent or tr v X ;1 - minimize adverse im•acts to stream-and ri•avian habitats. il -" ;t & 5):An operation and maintenance manual for all,post-construction• OW k "` X stormwater qualibimeasures: i i ;;;k i , ; t "a A`brief'description of.what a water quality BMP is and does. r l ,° *'` 1 _ _ rte .. knt�sf�: , b. Contact information-forthe BMP owner Witrairilal i. Name litiNatifrIr ii.Address life I_ iii.Telephone Number. K f i' i iv.E-mail Address Ets„rt; ,,,.:'. ' d. A statement that the BMP owner is responsible°for all maintenance and "v';{ -M,, , d. A right of-entry statementaallowing the City,of."Carmel to,inspect and #, i °; . e.,A,description,of each BMP Xf. W". maintenance„and"sediment/ O�utantgremoval remedial .'Alfit.I I2 ., f. Specific actions to betaken regarding routine maintenance, I. Sediment/pollutant removal procedures should be explained in`both ` `77, „,g;',! narrative and ra hical forms. „ } ii. Guidance on.,routine maintenance, such as mowing,litter removal,, - Afi wood growth removal,etc. 3 , ' iii. A`tabular schedule should be providedlisting all maintenance �'J, i 1, activities and dates for performing these required activities ..s-> ; . iv. Who will actually.be charged with maintaining the BMPs t tg �.` t .z,., ,(mainenance staff, waste diposatcompany etc) � f - s •g. Site Drawings-Showing:. Lr.`Y`7P. . c . i. Locations of'BMPs .. i• C , f?;; _ ii. Locations of'the access,easements to maintain the BMPs ,t 0, z iii. Locations of the points bf discharge for"stormwater treated by the ' `'a i „, BMPs ; _ F : iv. Cross sections of BMP'features I f!, ''• ,`,• I r I h. Requirements regarding the submittal of annual inspection reports to the City of Carmel Engineering Department. The first report is clue one year after construction is completed,with subsequent reports due each year within the same month of the initial report. If there are any deficiencies found during the inspections, these should be addressed. Ifs the inspection report is not received within the month it is due, if there are deficiencies which were not included in the report,or if any deficiencies included in the report are not addressed in a timely manner,the BMP owner faces enforcement action from the City. • ITIMTIV 1-17e..49 • . EL JAMES BRAINARD, MAYOR August 6,2012 7 elt /ti Ms.Janet Reid atC gU0(2 Gerdes Henrichson, and Associates Architecture/Development � 14110 Dallas Parkway, Suite 100trS ' Dallas.Texas 75254 � '' to _. 4,1.' RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#2 •6 , L99". Dear,Ms. Reid: ' The City,received your site development-plans and response letter on July 3,2012. We-offer the following comments: 1. Previous Comment8'of'a letter dated June 15, 2012. Please confirm with the INDOT that the entrance to-the south can,be used as'proposed. You will also need to work with RCI'(the.property owner to the south)to obtain access rights. The Department"restates this comment:. 2. Previous Comment 11 of a letter dated June-1'5,2012. Please provide the emergency flood route from any detention facilities to the;receiving system. Please also provide the on-site flood routingfrom all.areasto the detention facility assuming all inlets plugged during a 100-yr rain event Please indicate the on-site flood route through the site to the detention facilities. 3. Previous Comment 12 of a letter dated June 15,20.12. Please provide the MFPG and MLAG`for°the proposed building. The MFPG and the MLAG shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year flood'elevation or the maximum water surface elevation of the flood routes. The MFPG and MLAG should be based on the overflow weir elevation or the 100-year pond.,elevation,whichever isgreater,OR the highest surface water elevation on site(Whatis the highest water surface elevation on site, with all inlets„plugged,,before.the'stormwater will,spill over into the pond?). Please ensure the MFPG and MLAG are correct. 4.. Previous Comment 14 of a.letter dated June 15,2012. 'There appear to be direct discharge-points proposed for areas of this property. T.,he'property should be graded to drain internally-to the site,minimizing any direct discharges. There still appears to be a direct;discharge;from the south driveway. Is it possible to direct this stormwater back into the-site? 5. Previous,Comment,21.h. of a letter dated June 1-5,2012.. On Sheet CS6: Section 03000: Does this apply to curbing Or foundations? If this applies to-curbing,please"include a note similar to the note on CS3 stating,"All concrete curbing materials, production,-delivery, placement,curing,jointing,finishing,etc.shall be per City of Carmel Curbing Policy." 6. Please indicate;the,requiite,drainage and BMP easements per Section 306.02 of the Stormwater Technical Standards Manual. 7,. Please label the pond elevations as: Top of Bank, 100-yr;-and spillway elevation. 8. Has-Clay-Regional'Waste District approved the detention pond locations along the sanitary sewer easements? t , DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING ” ONE Civic SQUARE, CARMEL, IN'46032 , OFFICE 317.571.2441 FAN 317.571.2439 • EMAIL engineering@carnel:in gov Ms.Janet Reid August 6,''2012 RE Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#2 Page 2 of 2 If you:have questions,please contact me at,57,1-2441. Sincerely, I l•. Du c. .Jr.. '.E. Assistant c''y Eng eer Department of Engineering cc: Angelina Conn,Department of Community Services John Duffy, Cannel Utilities. Paul Pace,Cannel Utilities Paul Arnone,Carmel Utilities Greg Hoyes, Hamilton County Surveyor's Office Greg liko,Crossroad Engineers; PC issvrapps\user data\z\shared\DHILI.\PRO.IREV1210LI VEGARDENRESTAIJRANTR'EV#2 • Janet Reid From: Greg R. Hayes <Greg.Noyes @'hamiltoncounty..in.gov> Sent: _ Friday, August 03, 2012.1:01 PM To: Janet Reid Cc: gduncan @carmel.in.gov;afoley,@carmel.in.gov;jthomas @carmel.in.gov; Greg,�Derek Snyder' (36 7 8.P , Subject: RE: Carmel Drainage Review - Olive Garden 4 ' Ms: Reid �� Fw � I have also reviewed the revised plans submitted and my comments are as follows: .. htY r_ tsar w 1. We still need an outlet permit for the indirect discharge into the.Crooked Creek Regulated D . 94 application is available at Surveyor's Form Page. 2. Our Stormwater Manual (HCSMTSM_) allows for the exceeding of the release rates based on a 6" minimum orifice, but only 1 orifice per.site outlet. Looking at the site design; I would recommend the orifice be placed on the outfall pipe of ST2,with debris;guards.on both pond outfalls to minimize chances of debris getting to the orifice.!The discharge rates,need to be adjusted accordingly. 3. Please submit:final construction plans and drainage calculations along with the outlet permit. If you have any iqUestions, please let me know. Greg I-I,oyes, AC, CFM, CPESC Plan Reviewer Hamilton County Surveyor's Office One Hamilton County Square Suite 188 Noblesville, IN. 46060 Phone: (317) 776-8495 Fax: (317) 776-9628 Greg.Hoyes(c,hamiltor county.in.gov Website: www.hamiltoncounty.in.gov • 1 • • Conn, An•elina V • From: Foley, Amanda J Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 11:28 AM To: Duncan, Gary R;'Conn, Angelina V Subject: Engineering Dept'staff.report Olive Garden Restaurant The Department reviewed and submitted comments,for this project on 6/1.5/12. Revised plans were resubmitted on July 6, and the Department is in the process of reviewing the revised plans. We do not foresee any major concerns regarding the site plan for this project. Grammercy The Department has met with the developer and,reviewed the submitted traffic study, as well as, the access and connectivity through the site. The traffic,study looks accurate, and we have no issues with what has been presented. The proposed connections to the site are acceptable, including the possible right-in/right-out off of Keystone. Abbey Taphouse We have not received adequate information to completely assess the ADLS amendment; however, we provide the following comments. The Department recommends squaring off the intersection of 1st Street NE and 1st Avenue NE, 1) to allow angled parking along 1't Avenue NE in the current public right-of-way, and 2) to create a safer intersection. Squaring off the intersection would allow for a safer crosswalk distance for pedestrians, better site distance for drivers going south on 1st Avenue NE (if there is parking along 1st Avenue NE), and alleviate confusion that the existing intersection in its current state may create: We also recommend changing the parking along 1st Street NE to angled parking. The current plan to direct pedestrians behind the parked cars is not ideal; however, the concrete apron for pedestrian traffic provides a good alternative to redirecting the pedestrians in front of the parked cars. There is a significant increase in impervious surface from the existing conditions, and stormwater detention and stormwater quality treatment need to be taken into consideration. Amanda Foley Staff Engineer City of Carmel 571-2309 (direct) 1 August 2, 2012 2"d Submittal `s - Ms.Janet Reid ' GHA Architecture/Development 14110 Dallas Parkway, Suite 100 I V ' i Dallas,TX 75254 l CR0,55ROA..-— RE: Olive Garden E I L I E E FI S IP C 4 Michigan Road @ Retail Parkway Technical Advisory Committee /qf �+� Engineering Review for Development Drainage Designs Iii '2'9 20/2 Dear Ms. Reid: 4 The stormwater review of the proposed construction plans and drainage calculations for the above ref t: project has been completed. The submittal is in need of additional information in order to be in complt 9i__ S.9 the City of Carmel Stormwater Technical Standard Manual (the manual). Please revise the plans in accordance with the comments below. 1. Per Section 102.02.v.d, please include the FEMA map reference number in all notes about floodplains, floodway fringes, and floodways. 2. Section 102.02.xi.k., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to show the emergency flood routing path(s) and their invert elevations from the detention facility to the receiving system. 3. Per Section 102.02.xi.r., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to indicate the slopes of all surface drainage swales. The response letter states that all drainage swale slopes have been added to Sheet C4.2, however the slope of the Southwest pond is not included. 4. Per Sections 102.02.xi.I and 102.02.xi.s., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to include a typical cross section of the detention pond showing the following information on the cross sections: a. 10-year high water elevations resulting from the controlled release conditions called for by the City of Carmel's Stormwater Management Ordinance b. Bottom of pond, top of bank, emergency spillway, and water surface over the emergency spillway elevations c. Emergency spillway dimensions 5. Section 102.02.xi.o., please revise the plans to include a statement indicating the definition of minimum flood protection grade in accordance with the manual. 6. Section 102.02.xiv., please include a separate Structure Data Table containing the minimum information discussed in the manual or revise the Storm Sewer Pipe Analysis on the Storm Sewer Plan, Sheet C4.4, to include the required information. 7. Per Section 302.06.01, please provide information to verify that a minimum of 90% of the original detention capacity of the proposed dry detention basin is restored within 48 hours from the start of the design 100-year storm. It appears that the Northeast Pond does not conform. Please review and revise as necessary. 8. Per Section 302.08.1, a minimum of 1%bottom slope in all directions shall be provided in dry detention facilities with perforated subsurface drains. The Southeast pond does not conform to the minimum 1% bottom slope and the West pond does not have a slope listed in the Construction Plans. Please review and revise accordingly. Olive Garden GHA Architecture/Development August 2,2012 Page 1 of 2 9. Per Section 302.08.2, the maximum planned depth of stormwater water stored shall not exceed four(4) feet. Also note that any waiver requests should be submitted directly to the City of Carmel Engineering Department. 10. Please provide a typical section of the emergency spillway in the Construction Plans and calculations for the proposed spillway to show that it complies with all requirements of Section 302.11 of the manual. 11. Per Section 501.01, there should be no less than 2.50 feet of cover along any part of the pipe from final pavement elevation or final ground surface elevation to the top(outside)of pipe. It appears that there are multiple storm sewer structures that are not in conformance. Please note that any waiver requests should be submitted directly to the City of Carmel Engineering Department. 12. Per Section 501.03, a minimum drop of 0.1 feet through manholes and inlet structures shall be provided. Also per Section 501.03, when changing pipe sizes within a structure, the pipe crowns should align. Please note that any waiver requests should be submitted directly to the City of Carmel Engineering Department. 13. Please provide calculations showing that the downstream receiving system from the detention pond (grate and pipe flow of Existing Storm Structure "A") is sufficient to convey the peak detention pond outflow in addition to the watershed already draining to the inlet. Verify that there are no downstream restrictions, and that the system can handle the emergency overflow scenario. (This information should be surveyed,as-built information.) 14. Per Section 305.02,the minimum diameter of all storm sewers shall be 12 inches. This shall apply to both public and private storm piping, unless the piping is a roof drain, footing drain or sump pump. When the minimum 12-inch diameter pipe will not limit the rate of release to the required amount, the rate of release for detention storage shall be controlled by an orifice plate or other device, subject to acceptance of the City of Carmel. Please revise the plans accordingly. Please include with your submittal,one(1)copy of the comments indicating the action taken or a written explanation for action not taken. Construction plans and drainage calculations are not to be re-submitted without implementing changes with respect to any and all review comments from the City of Carmel and the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office Please contact me at(317)780-1555 ext. 112 with any questions. Sincerely, CrossRoad Engineers, P.C. / r ! Gregory J. Ilko, P.E. Project Manager copy: Gary Duncan, City of Carmel Assistant Engineer Greg Hoyes, Hamilton County Surveyors Office John Thomas,City of Carmel MS-4 Operator Amanda Foley,City of Carmel File Olive Garden GHA Architecture/Development August 2,2012 Page 2 of 2 l , , Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL July 31,2012 ��, �-4,._ TO: / a Y- City of Carmel-Department of Community Services 1 ItV / ECEIV k Planning&Zoning Division ,' ED Attn: Angie Conn, Planning Adminstrator . 1 AUG - 1 2012 One Civic Square,3rd Floor I Carmel, IN 46032 �y . DCCS n • Phone: 317-571-2417 FROM: Janet Reid .. ; PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: Prints r Disk r Bidding 17 Review ✓ Samples r Photocopies ✓ Specifications r Shop Drawings r Information i Reproducibles r Record Cto ies Sheet No Descri Lion: i i 9 Informational Packets for the PC sub-committee meeting on 8/7/2012 • Site plan • Landscape plan • Architectural building elevations • Color renderings and supplemental design materials • Civil plans—grading/drainage/utilities 1 Copy of all documents(.pdf/.jpg)on CD, for reference Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents required as part of the Development Plan and ADLS Plan review process(Docket 12050014)for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road—TAC Meeting held on June 20,2012. Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. Op ely, A 1■SOIP Ja 5;eid Pro. ty Development Real Estate GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Development Services Direct:214-461-9631 Site Development Architecture Email:jreid(agha-architects.com Construction Manag. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884• Fax: (972)239-5054 0:0,NA • HAM,�roy o� 4/ Clo y •CTRWD• Clay Township Regional Waste District F4,-..° www.ctrwd.orq Phone (317) 844-9200 Fax (317) 844-9203 AEGION&Ip9 v "1;' . / ' .� , 1? July 19, 2012 'clfj - ��` Mrs. Janet Reid `�J(„ t' r GHA Architects �' ',� ! � 14110 Dallas Pkwy Suite 100 ` . I� " ,�; Dallas, TX 75254 ��^,� ,'cty Subject: Olive Garden— 10206 Michigan Rd. Carmel IN • c''g 6 ii-L Dear Mrs. Reid: We have received the revised construction plans for the above mentioned project and have the following comments: 1. Existing Sanitary structure should have the prefix MH #"E" not El 2. It may not be possible to adjust the Air Release Structure to TC El: 892.14 the invert of the whole structure is 889. This structure will probably not be able to be adjusted from current TC Elevation. 3. Please provide a cut sheet of JR Smith 2010-H-B 4. Callouts on sheet C5.1 Utility legend still show 4" sanitary and needs to be changed to 6" (Ex. C, I, and J) 5. Service Yard Drain calls out 4"and 6" is labeled on blow up view. 6. Dry Detention Basin elevation: 888 don't leave much clearance over our 14" Force Main (see asbuilts). Estimate is 2'-4'....4' is least amount of cover allowable. Please also put note on plans sheet caution when digging active FM depth unknown. 7. Please send us a copy of the executed sanitary sewer application that can be found on our web site at www.ctrwd.orq. Specifications and Detail Drawings can be found at www.ctrwd.orq. Please resubmit plans once changes are made. You may contact me at 844-9200 if you have any questions. Sincerely, 6._ -a,((---- ____— Ryan Hartman District Engineer 10701 College Avenue, Suite A., Indianapolis, Indiana 46280-1098 Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL July 11,2012 TO , City of Carmel- Department of Community Services Planning&Zoning Division Attn: Angie Conn, Planning Adminstrator � _ tt -��� , One Civic Square,3'd Floor , t, ra. Carmel, IN 46032 N``' JUL 1 2 2012 . Phone: 317-571-2417 L0•= ,1. FROM: Janet Reid \ �'- tit; PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400 r —_ a iy • 1 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: E Prints [ Disk fl Bidding J Review ✓ Samples r Photocopies r Cost Estimating ✓ Specifications r Shop Drawings r Information ✓ Reproducibles r Record Co ies Sheet No Descri tion 1 t 15 Additional Informational Packets for the PC meeting on 7/17/2012 Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents required as part of the Development Plan • and ADLS Plan review process for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road—TAC Meeting held on June 20,2012. Documents included: • Architectural Elevations(2 sheets) • Signage Sheets(6 sheets) • Updated Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Floor Plan, Photometric Plan(4 sheets) Please contact me, if you have questions or comments.Thank you so much for all of your assista ce with this process. 9e,ely IP° Adeigi Illapdit N.__ Jan• 'eid Pros y Development GH. ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct: 214-461-9631 Real Estate Development Services Email:jreid @,gha-architects.com Site Development Architecture Construction Manop. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 GHA Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL July 11,2012 TO: City of Carmel- Department of Community Services Planning&Zoning Division Attn: Angie Conn, Planning Adminstrator One Civic Square,31-d Floor 2 20121 Carmel, IN 46032 Phone: 317-571-2417 FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: F Prints r Disk f Bidding F' Review r Samples r Photocopies fl Cost Estimating r- Specifications r Shop Drawings ra Information r Reproducibles r Record Co ies Sheet No Descri tion 1 Copy of outstanding Planning/Zoning comments -Angie Conn 1 Comment Response Letter 2 Full size sets of the REVISED Development Plan and ADLS documents 1 Electronic(.pdf)copy of the resubmittal documents on CD 12 Green Cards—Return Receipts for Adjacent Property Owner Notices Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents in response to the outstanding Planning/ Zoning comments received on July 7,2010,regarding the Development Plan and ADLS Plan submittal for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road— TAC Meeting held on June 20,2012. Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. ely, .iiv ¶ • - J,iset Reid P is et erty Development G A ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct:214-461-9631 Real Estate Email:jreid(ilgha-architects.com Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Manag. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 _:,_ ., ...._ , , Er 1 Architecture/Development July 11, 2012 Angie Conn Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning & Zoning Division Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Phone: 317-571-2426 Re: Response to the outstanding P&Z Comments issued 7/6/2012 regarding the DP / ADLS Olive Garden submittal Dear Ms. Conn: We are in receipt of your comments dated July 6, 2012, on the plans submitted for the 10206 N. Michigan Road, Olive Garden Restaurant. Following are our responses to those comments: Staff's outstanding comments for the petitioner: ( ' 1. Please provide the dumpster screening details/elevations/dimensions, and verify that the enclosure height is taller than the dumpsters. Response: The trash enclosure screening details/elevations/dimensions are shown on sheet SP2.1. There might be a conflict with the 15-ft wide gas easement along the south 0 2. property line and placing the required bufferyard plantings in that location. Please work with the City Forester and the utility company to resolve this. Response: The Landscape Architect has been working with Urban Forestry to resolve— see revised L1.1. 3.Please re-review Section 23C.09 of the Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone regulations for the architectural design requirements: www.carmel.in.gov/Modules/ShowDocumentaspx?documentid=1527. Response:Noted. Real Estate Development Services i.`,. 4. Please label the roof pitch on the architectural building elevations. SArchitectuite Development Response: The roof pitch has been labeled on the exterior elevations-see revised re Construction Mgmt. sheets A5.1 &A5.2. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 300•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 July 11,2012 Page 2 11 / The roof material is not permitted. (BZA variance approval is required for the `clay tile' roof.) Response:Noted. 6. Please show/label the gas & electric meters locations on the building elevations. Response: The gas and electric meters have been added to the rear elevation —see revised sheet A5.1. iI'v . Please verify that all parking lot pole light fixtures have flat lenses and/or 90- degree cutoffs. Response:See details provided on revised sheet E1.2. �. Please provide the design details of any building up-lighting or landscaping lighting fixtures, if any. Response:Exterior lighting cut sheets provided. The sign facing south will most likely need variance approval from the BZA to not be facing a public street. Response:Noted. rrBZA variance approval will be required to have 3 wall signs, when only 2 are permitted for this site. Response:Noted. 11. Please reduce the sign square footage down to 40 sq ft, for the sign facing Michigan Rd. Response: OG plans to apply for a Sign Variance through the BZA process. 12. Please submit all signage proposed for the site, even traffic directional signs (which are considered exempt signage if they are under 3 sq ft in size and less than 3-ft tall). Response:Please see complete Sign Package attached. Sincerely, Janet Reid GHA ARCHITECTURE /DEVELOPMENT Property Development Manager Real Estate Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Mgmt. Gerdes• Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 300•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 Conn, Angelina V From: Mindham, Daren Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 1:41 PM To: 'jreid @ G HA-Architects.com" Cc: 'JDeGagne @darden.com'; Conn, Angelina V Subject: FW: Olive Garden (#12050014 DP/ADLS) Attachments: Recommended Tree List.pdf; Treedetail-Carmel.pdf; Shrubdetail-Carmel.pdf; Bufferyard Table.pdf; basket.staking.pdf Janet, The following email represents comments for this project specifically addressing the area of landscaping. I have reviewed the drawings and offer the following comments: URBAN FORESTRY REVIEW COMMENTS 1) This comment does not seem to have been changed on L1.1, as the response suggests. I have attached the Carmel standard details for your use. I have attached our City of Carmel tree planting detail. The submitted details do not recommend basket removal and only states cut wire straps, not remove wires straps. Also, t have not seen a staking detail like this before. I don't believe that this style of staking will work in Indiana clay soil. I don't think it is possible to drive stakes 4-6 feet deep into the soil and easily remove them a year later. Also, the cross members may possibly puncture lawnmower tires. 2) This comment does not seem to have been changed on L1.1, as the response suggests. See 23C.10.03 http://www.carmel.in.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=1527 The chart can be broken down into groups: Greenbelt, Interior Parking Lot, Parking Lot Perimeter, Perimeter Bufferyard. Also, the chart as shown has many incorrect numbers such as: 9 parking spaces—should read 6; Parking lot perimeter numbers are not on the chart on the plan; the greenbelt #'s are wrong, it should be 3 shade and 1 ornamental, and 0 shrubs. This section needs more work and will obviously affect the landscaping counts on the plan as well. Of course you are free to show more landscaping, these numbers are only minimum requirements. If a meeting to clarify this requirement is needed, please let me know. Therefore, I would chart the Greenbelt, 30' with the right number of landscaping; then chart Interior Parking Lot, 42 spaces, the landscaping is adequate for this already; then chart Parking lot perimeter, 6' width planting area along Michigan Rd with the right number of landscaping, the other parking lot perimeters should be adequate knowing what the perimeter bufferyard requires; then lastly chart the 'A' perimeter bufferyard for all sides of the property minus the east perimeter because of the over-ruling 30' greenbelt and 6' parking lot area along Michigan Rd. The Landscape Requirements chart is incomplete, therefore additional landscaping is required. Please note the requirements for the Greenbelt planting along Michigan Rd. Please provide a line for the west parking lot perimeter. Moreover, please reference Ch. 26.04.06 as these are additional regulations on buffering. I have attached the bufferyard chart. Please illustrate how these comments will be addressed by letter or revised plan. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thanks. Conn, Angelina V From: Boone, Rachel M. Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 2:42 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: Olive Garden - Revised Elevations 7-5-12 Attachments: olive.pdf It still seems like a lot of different materials going on. If they're not going to change the architecture of the building, I don't think they should try and put brick on it to make it fit in better. It kind of stands out even worse I think. So maybe stick with the stucco and stone and get variances, but just not so much stone. Meaning have the stone in some of the key areas that have the pitched roof. See the drawings attached. Rachel Rachel/Boone/ Sign Permit Specialist City of Carmel Department of Community Services 317-571-2417 From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 11:30 AM To: Boone, Rachel M.; Donahue-Wold, Alexia K; Hollibaugh, Mike P Subject: Olive Garden - Revised Elevations 7-5-12 Ciao! Attached are the latest architectural building elevations for Olive Garden,to be located in the Michigan Rd. Overlay. Honestly, what do you think?! Please let me know. Angie 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 3:35 PM To: 'Janet Reid' Subject: outstanding Planning Dept review comments Hi,Janet— just staying ahead of the game,and I wanted to get the last outstanding review comments to you, and hopefully you can address them in time, before we release the Dept. reports on Thursday afternoon. You can reply via email or letter correspondence. Thanks! Staff's outstanding comments for the petitioner: 1.. Please provide the dumpster screening details/elevations/dimensions, and verify that the enclosure height is taller than the dumpsters. 2. There might be a conflict with the 15-ft wide gas easement along the south property line and placing the required bufferyard plantings in that location. Please work with the City Forester and the utility company to resolve this. 3. Please re-review Section 23C.09 of the Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone regulations for the architectural design requirements: www.carmel..in.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=1527. 4. Please label the roof pitch on the architectural building elevations. 5. The roof material is not permitted. (BZA variance approval is required for the `clay tile' roof.) 6. Please show/label. the gas & electric meters locations on the building elevations. 7. Please verify that all parking lot pole light fixtures have flat lenses and/or 90-degree cutoffs. 8. Please provide the design details of any building up-lighting or landscaping lighting fixtures, if any. 9. The sign facing south will most likely need variance approval from the BZA to not be facing a public street. 10. BZA variance approval will be required to have 3 wall signs, when only 2 are permitted for this site. 11. Please reduce the sign square footage down to 40 sq ft, for the sign facing Michigan Rd. 12. Please submit all signage proposed for.the site, even traffic directional signs (which are considered exempt signage if they are under 3 sq ft in size and less than 3-ft tall). Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Flr. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317-571-2417 i F: 317-571-2426 I E: aconnCahcarmel.in.gov W: www.carmeldocs.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 1. Janet Reid From: Conn, Angelina V <Aconn @carmel.in.gov> Sent: Friday,July 06, 2012 2:35 PM To: Janet Reid Subject: outstanding Planning Dept review comments Hi,Janet— just staying ahead of the game,and I wanted to get the last outstanding review comments to you, and hopefully you can address them in time, before we release the Dept. reports on Thursday afternoon. You can reply via email or letter correspondence. Thanks! Staffs outstanding comments for the petitioner: 1. Please provide the dumpster screening details/elevations/dimensions, and verify that the enclosure height is taller than the dumpsters. 2. There might be a conflict with the 15-ft wide gas easement along the south property line and placing the required bufferyard plantings in that location. Please work with the City Forester and the utility company to resolve this. 3. Please re-review Section 23C.09 of the Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone regulations for the architectural design requirements: www.carmel.in.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=1527. 4. Please label the roof pitch on the architectural building elevations. 5. The roof material is not permitted. (BZA variance approval is required for the `clay tile' roof.) 6. Please show/label the gas & electric meters locations on the building elevations. 7. Please verify that all parking lot pole light fixtures have flat lenses and/or 90-degree cutoffs. 8. Please provide the design details of any building up-lighting or landscaping lighting fixtures, if any. 9. The sign facing south will most likely need variance approval from the BZA to not be facing a public street. 10. BZA variance approval will be required to have 3 wall signs, when only 2 are permitted for this site. 11. Please reduce the sign square footage down to 40 sq ft, for the sign facing Michigan Rd. 12. Please submit all signage proposed for the site, even traffic directional signs (which are considered exempt signage if they are under 3 sq ft in size and less than 3-ft tall). Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd FIr. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317-571-2417 I F: 317-571-2426 I E: aconn @carmel.in.gov W: www.carrneldocs.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 1 Cjir Architecture/Development (0) TRANSMITTAL � July 5,2012 d e@ a� mot. TO: City of Carmel- Department of Community Services Planning& Zoning Division Attn: Angie Conn,Planning Adminstrator One Civic Square,3rd Floor Carmel, IN 46032 Phone: 317-571-2417 FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400- We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: P. Prints r Disk r Bidding F Review ✓ Samples E Photocopies r Cost Estimating ✓ Specifications r: Shop Drawings r Information ✓ Reproducibles r Record Co ies Sheet No. Descri tion I. 15 Informational Packets for the PC meeting on 7/17/2012 Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents required as part of the Development Plan and ADLS Plan review process for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road—TAC Meeting held on June 20,2012. We will submit the rest of the informational documents-building elevations/renderings/ signage details-next week. Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. Thank you so much for all of your assistance with this process. J:n•tReid 'r i s erty Development GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct:214-461-9631 Email:jreidAgha-architects.com Real Estate Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Manag. Gerdes• Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 Conn, Angelina V From: Arthur McIntosh [AMclntosh @darden.com] Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 2:54 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Cc: Jack DeGagne Subject: FW: OG Carmel IN Revised Rendered Elevations (1 of 2) Attachments: Revised Front Rear Carmel, IN.pdf; OG_parapet sections.pdf; OG_building sections.pdf; ATT00001.txt Ms. Conn: Please see the attached PDF with adjustments made to the elevations per your recent notes. Provided below is a quick listing of what was revised, and what was not. Should you want to have further discussions regarding these items, and anything else, please let us know. Thank you. What Was Revised: 1. LEFT: changed 3 arched niches to match the design of our bricked-in upper round-top window; a larger scale. 2. FRONT: extended the roof line to behind the tower, and extended the brick below. What Could Not Be Revised: 1. ALL: could not add support brackets to the parapet wall. Please see attached "Parapet Section" PDF showing that it is a vertical wall design with nothing to support. 2. LEFT: could not add small square windows, as there is not enough vertical space on the parapet wall to fit them. Creating a smaller window would put them out of scale. I will have to send the Side Elevations in a separate email. Thanks again. Art McIntosh 407.491.0756 mobile 407.245.5767 office From: Rhonda Spring [mailto:rspring@trgpsc.com] Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:19 PM To: Jack DeGagne; Arthur McIntosh; Doug Edwards The Roberts Grp Cc: Mark Naylor Trgpsc Subject: Olive Garden Carmel, IN Revised Rendered Elevations (1 of 2) Please find attached revised rendered elevations for the proposed Carmel, IN restaurant for your review/approval. Let me know if there are any further comments/revisions and I will finalize and send to the city. Thanks, Rhonda Spring i s• Erogla ers Lar=astape Arcfbit cti 239 Southland Drive 1 eifilik,7, f — �� n p�a t4 A= 4 i Iv., 1 g ,4,e, 1 7ljnlsasi k If +.rFro,'rX s� : `1 '154' 7 P.. °a Iar.:wai .x ' 'Sy g ` `F*;lli ^,1: i r.,Hf , g rt� ,•yiaww°.4 +V Darr 4NeF .. ' y.i k... ran� � 1.r;; P hi p�i K!.[N. $R 'i,'. ■ a' ,,,,,ii, 145+ i 1:«Jo �1wa e fR r » w R S 11,1 ammo& Ner7uvi R r IF rall a q RSr"r 1 Rlazzaira'awta�`+i1 .1.-, aw rrc».. "i ,.* 7 I ik ";;•...wy4 Li t -a 11,1,',i. a s 'i«r �'i�[erwraaw'es,i wfaraat`rs 4.. �t�" CIS ».es rr I vea��� b ell,.7 P.. k r � � er�Ktra m §id5+� ;, W4 N kr `� rs�, .w 'r'rl:��- r la r; I 121414ra I . Wv.. r a ^e.%%tre'a�re" i'I' ''1 9• , ITr 1 d 1} "" H alletZlit+ �atri�4: I p rviv j y 1'rar.ue 4 rr-y- + 1. TI 4 w; t t a Pltk a w . l�siai srr s as Lrit""Z� ,1 al �w ff 1 ,tt fr rR j S.C ':t. 'A(g 'Wi:� . [f!1 a �ellaLLrl Parry antra as 1MN.aa { ...4,,k4„: ,.°;'',P' t'-kii: saes sssrssse�' r rte.-. w=it! rap. car 4 . Y % s la,NYC :. i'. 1g 1 a1( _ 1 ) ---,....,-.-,-,,,-, , •:.s.•-•,;;';').T:-.'-',. ,,,,,,-,`Ii•'''',.)',,, :,..nr,,,',',,•;.,;,-3,,,,,,n:,,;-, , '-4',-.:::,;$..,=.,,Y.,i;',4,1,.'.. ..:,(;'" .. ,,. 1 T..-.'','',","-7,-'. : - 'r•'5',,''',.'.','.0:1:' ,.-', ,,-.4,,, ,.. U--) .-..:,..-,!-,:•,:::::"'" * '''''''!.''''''' ''''' ■ )V- .:: AA . * .;i.:f,7,/..•:.;,..lr':':'''',",,,::ic ;:r.,,,..:;;!..,i'';',:..i1.-:47:..*, . .e.;:',.'4:::„....'‘.'..7:'.,'-',•..,-1.,1',,,',:.'.,.,,,:,-.,:-;'w--.),... ,,,,,:q:',•;,..4'..:e.f.iY!..1-i..... ..-.,i;4,i.,.,..„;,:e-.- .-•`: '...' -,‘. _._, r': .;;=::;',Is-1..; . ,,.-• ,. •.' ),),..:,%,,,tisi'..i,:: ,:.,,.,.;.,.:'5.,-..,.,-,',.. .1 ,i.",--,:i.,:,`,1,,'„..•-.. . ,,.,, .., _- ;,..: ,......:.,. „ .. , ' - , . . . . . , . . , , . ,. - — , , ...,. :......,:::- .. 4 .. , ., . ,., A . ';Iii',',,',:•'..,,:' -' " ''''t,` V.t.1',1',.''''1..117.7immerii •.:.. 7,...! , g); kr 1 ;2:;7:11:::r';',:i, 'ry:- It, — — • 0 ,,r) = '7.1'1 -— --7,.,;••...,. ''..'40.'- • giv,„: t ,, e4 4,01111111.1111 ■140,',:: 6, fiTZ: '' .3. i 3.13' ,— •. .. .4 13.3 ., . 't`t=1 .,."•1;1,‘ rlo; -is:-.....:...„-.% a ' i • .? .., iti'4- 7,1 '..., ., *A- ,,-,4.-.4• •-•,. . „,,•... ',;,,,,t ,i.i-44..: .4„ la; ..... ,, ... 47,,,. f:' ''''' ',-' ''-, - .f.„; ..-• !'-''. zu' ii;TA1424c,P,-;1,,,-.,- ,,1;i',:stit - , .-,,,.'`,. ..': --'-';'•.-;:'...' ,I ' .... ,,,,.= '#,A17,,'‘,:i.,;,', :'''''V''''''';:.:411`..;,.,,::r..1:;,'`'.''-44''it.k+:1''.ill"''.,,.:?;'.4.7"4.'7:I 4''''6:4 I'':.1..:*.:::;:'..::'.;12''' ''H.;--,''''"224—f.':.'14:1:;.•:l'''''FI:'-''''''''''.''''''.'''''i:;::''''.'''',::'''''r*,.''...:, 1=7-'1A i . ':',,,v(,?...-thiv.,1,-.,.!.•4::-,.''4.,-:1,-;‘,....__ t.;,,:4,Wie,".°':‘*.' i 0V41.1.1,i ' .‘,.';‘,j::le.f.4•.i.z.,#.,ri,,,....k•--A_ivy:: 1=1=1 .''.',..i-j..;:,l'ii.:,,,!:,..,•..,;,,..;:t,':',t7iftc I* . 72,121..i i ,An'x.,•:.rivit;',-;14n.t,11.<0•011 n e V=1%1% .1„,--'.•'• tr. -.• rw,,g=1 ..-.1, p , „ .,,,„,-• . . .., . , . ,,-„,:, - .,.ii",•;11111.,,'-'44,..q.'.=.7,'.'4:•:,', -.. - . . ... . . ;,..• • Conn, Angelina V From: Janet Reid Ureid @GHA-Architects.com} Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 11:40 AM To: Conn, Angelina V; Mindham, Daren; ryan.hartman @ctrwd.org; greg.hoyes @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; gilko @crossroadengineers.com; Duncan, Gary R; Thomas, John G; Littlejohn, David W Cc: Kourtnie Airheart;jdegagne @darden.com Subject: Docket No. 12050014 DP/ADLS Olive Garden - Carmel, IN - TAO Member Response Distribution Dear TAC Member, Please find below a link to the REVISED Development Plan and ADLS documents (per your comments)and Response Letter for the proposed new Olive Garden Restaurant—for your review*. ftp://ftp.gha-proiects.com FTP Username: aconn FTP Password: ruSEdebR The password is case sensitive,type it in as it appears in this email. • *I have also sent you a hard copy set—FedEx overnight. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions or comments regarding this submittal. Sincerely, Janet Reid Property Development GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT 14110 Dallas Parkway,Suite 300 Dallas,TX 75254 Office: (972)239-8884 Fax: (972)239-5054 Direct: (214)461-9631 Mobile: (214)697-9771 email: jreid @qha-architects.com This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please notify GHA ARCHITECTURE/ DEVELOPMENT immediately by replying to this message and destroying all copies of this message and any attachments.Thank you. • • • 1 4.11n Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2800 Hitchcock Avenue Downers Grove,Illinois 60515 1, :� :fJ June 29, 2012 y,A Angie Conn /� Planning Administrator ' � r;}, City of Carmel Planning&Zoning Division Ja -2 2012 _; .$ , Dept.of Community Services ;3 1 Civic Square,3rd Floor Carmel, IN 46032 ' ' (317)571-2426 - Re: Docket No. 12050014 DP/ADLS: Olive Garden Restaurant Dear Mrs. Conn: We are in receipt of your comments dated May 29, 2012,on the plans submitted for the 10206 N. Michigan Road, Olive Garden Restaurant. Following are our responses to those comments: PLANNING&ZONING DEPARTMENT Comment 6: Prepare an estimated construction cost to comply with the Thoroughfare Plan & Alternative Transportation Plan;contact the Engineering Dept.for more details,at 571-2441. Response 6:The Thoroughfare Plan improvements have been discussed with the City and the Olive Garden development is to provide$75,000 for the improvements. Comment 10: Not sure that the building can encroach into the 5-ft wide electric easement. You might need to shift the building south a bit. Response 10:The existing 5 foot wide electric easement is being dissolved. Comment 11:There might be a conflict with the 15-ft wide gas easement along the south property line and placing the required bufferyard plantings in that location. Please work with the City Forester and utility company on this. Response 11:Plantings are placed at south property line in order to meet bufferyard planting requirements.Plantings are kept out of the existing easement as much as possible while still trying to meet the quantity of plantings. Comment 12: On Sheet C3.1,you show the private drive to the south of your site to be called Northwestern Drive, but we do not think that it has a name at all. Response 12:"Northwestern Drive"has been changed to"Private Drive"on all sheets. Comment 17: Please show/label on the site plan the percent of green space vs.the percent of impervious surfaces(asphalt, roofs,etc.) AKimley-Horn ® and Associates, Inc. Response 17:The percent of pervious and impervious area has been added to sheet C3.1 in the Site Data Table. Comment 19: Please verify with the City Engineering Dept.that no type of traffic analysis is required. Response 19: We will verify with the City Engineering Dept. that no traffic analysis is required. Comment 20: Please provide the bike rack details, per ZO Chapter 27.06 of the ordinance. And, please locate the bike rack closer to the main door entry. Response 20:The bike rack detail from ZO Chapter 27.06 has been added to sheet C6.1. Comment 26:The landscape plan shows a future 2,700 sq.ft.future building but the site plan does not. Which is correct? Response 26:The future 2,700 square foot building has been removed from the landscape plan, sheet L2.1. A future building has been incorporated into the design of the storm water management system and impervious area calculations,but is not being shown on proposed site plans for the development. Comment 27: On the construction plans, please provide the pavement specs and sidewalk/path specs. Response 27:The pavement and sidewalk section drawings have been removed from the detail sheet,C6.1 and added to the paving plan,sheet C4.1. CLAY TOWNSHIP REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT Comment 1: Existing Sanitary structure should have the prefix MH#"E". Response 1:All existing sanitary structures have been given the prefix MH#"E". This change is .reflected on all sheets that label the existing sanitary structures. Comment 2: Please send us a copy of the executed sanitary sewer application that can be found on our web site at www.ctrwd.org. Response 2:The sanitary sewer application will be submitted. Comment 3: Updated Interceptor Detail needs to be inserted into the plan sheet. Response 3:An updated detail for an "Exterior Interceptor/Separator Detail"has been added to sheet C5.1. Comment 4:Cleanout Types shall be called out(ex.Type II,Type Ill)and detail inserted into plans. Response 4:Details for Cleanouts Type 1,11,and 111 have been added to sheet C6.2. The notes on Sheet C5.1 have been updated to specify the type of cleanout at all locations. 2 • AKimley-Horn ® and Associates, Inc. Comment 5: Sanitary Sewer Bedding and Backfill Detail needs to be inserted into the plans. Response 5:The "Sanitary Sewer Bedding and Backfill Detail"has been added to sheet C6.2. Comment 6: Saddle Tee Detail needs to be inserted into the plans. Response 6:The"Saddle Tee Detail"has been added to sheet C6.2. Comment 7: Service Lateral Detail needs to be inserted into the plans Response 7:The"Service Lateral Detail"has been added to sheet C6.2. Comment 8: 6"SDR 26 PVC Lateral shall be cored through benchwall Invert:874.57. Response 8:Sheet C5.1 has been updated to show the proposed lateral invert to be 874.57. Comment 9:All laterals exterior of building must be 6"in size. Response 9:All laterals on sheet C5.1 have been revised to be 6"in diameter. Comment 10: Lateral slope seems excessive and can dive down towards connection to minimize lateral depth overall. Response 10:All lateral slopes and inverts,and relevant utility crossings have been recalculated. The lateral slopes are kept at 1.0%when possible. The revisions are reflected on sheet C5.1. A 45°Bend—Restrained Joint,as shown in the"Deep Lateral Connection to Sanitary Sewer Manhole Detail"on sheet C6.2,is to be inserted in the location specified on sheet C5.1 for the connection. Comment 11: Force Main flow arrows are backwards. Response 11:The Force Main flow arrows have been reversed and the change is reflected on all sheets showing the existing.Force Main. LANDSCAPING Comment 1: Pear trees of any variety are not permitted for Carmel landscape plans. Medor Juniper and Taylor Juniper do not grow in Indiana;from what I have read.Also, I do not recommend maples as they are overplanted within the City and tend to have undesirable characteristics for commercial developments. Please choose substitute trees; I have attached a pre-approved Recommended Tree list. I would like to recommend the Japanese Zelkova and a variety of the hybrid elms for the areas around vehicular traffic. Response 1:The plans have been revised such that there are no pear trees proposed. A note has been added to the plan indicating that Juniperus chinensis'Hetzii Columnaris'can be substituted for both Medora and Taylor Juniper if necessary due to availability. All maple trees proposed have been removed from the plan and a recommended substitute has been included. 3 . Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 2: I have attached our City of Carmel tree planting detail.The submitted details do not recommend basket removal and only states cut wire straps, not remove wires straps.Also, I have not seen a staking detail like this before. I don't believe that this style of staking will work in Indiana clay soil. I don't think it is possible to drive stakes 4-6 feet deep into the soil and easily remove them a year later.Also,the cross members may possibly puncture lawnmower tires. Response 2:The plans now incorporate the City of Carmel's tree planting detail. Comment 3: The Landscape Requirements chart is incomplete,therefore additional landscaping is required. Please note the requirements for the Greenbelt planting along Michigan Rd.Please provide a line for the west parking lot perimeter. Moreover, please reference Ch. 26.04.06 as these are additional regulations on buffering. I have attached the bufferyard chart. Response 3:The landscape requirements have been clarified. The proposed landscaping now incorporates the Greenbelt planting requirements along Michigan Rd. and the Bufferyard'A' requirements along the North,South and West perimeters. CITY OF CARMEL DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING Comment 1: Please add the following note to the drawings: "IF IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO RELOCATE EXISTING UTILITIES,THE EXPENSE OF SUCH RELOCATION SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER. ALL UTILITY POLES SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN ONE FOOT OF THE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY." Response 1:The note above has been added to Sheets C1.3,C2.1,and C5.1. Comment 2: Please add note stating"NO EARTH DISTURBING ACTIVITY MAY COMMENCE WITHOUT AN APPROVED STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT"to construction set. Response 2:The note above has been added to Sheets C1.3 and C2.1. Comment 3: Please omit Sheet L1.1, Landscape Plan;Sheet L2.1, Irrigation Plan:Sheet L2.2, Irrigation Details:and Sheet LS1, Landscape Specifications from construction sets to be submitted for review by this department. Please also omit these from the Title Sheet,C1.0. The Department of Engineering does not have approval authority over landscape plans. Response 3:Sheets L1.1,L2.1, L2.2,LS1 have been omitted from the construction set to be reviewed by the City of Carmel Department of Engineering. Sheet C1.0 has been updated to reflect the omissions. Comment 4: Will this development be platted? Response 4:This development is not going to be platted. 4 AKimley-Horn 4411® and Associates, Inc. Comment 5: Provide all existing easements for entire tract to pertinent sheets with correct calls for each. Response 5:Existing easements are shown and called out on the survey included in the set. Reference Sheet C1.2. Comment 6: Please ensure the entrance off Retail Parkway aligns with the entrance to West Carmel Commons' property to the north. The entrances do not appear to be aligned;there is a slight offset. Response 6:We received the latest entrance locations from the engineer for West Carmel Commons. The updated entrance is now represented in our plan set. The entrances now align. See Sheet C3.1. Comment 7: Please remove text"Retail Parkway Extension by City"from all plan sheets and replace with "Future Retail Parkway". Response 7:The text, "Retail Parkway Extension by City"has been changed to "Future Retail Parkway"on all sheets. Comment 8: Please confirm with the INDOT that the entrance to the south can be used as proposed. You will also need to work with RCI(the property owner to the south)to obtain access rights. Response 8:We will contact INDOT to confirm entrance to the south can be used as proposed. Access rights will also be obtained from the property owner to the south. Comment 9: Please provide an ingress/egress/access easement that benefits the public across the property, to run between the property entrances. Response 9:An ingress/egress access easement has been added to the Site Plan Sheet C3.1. Comment 10: Please provide all proposed drainage/BMP easements for the plan set. Response 10:Proposed BMP easements have been added to Sheet C4.3. Comment 11: Please provide the emergency flood route from any detention facilities to the receiving system. Please also provide the on-site flood routing from all areas to the detention facility assuming all inlets plugged during a 100-yr rain event. Response 11:Emergency flood routes are now shown on Sheet C4.3. 5 AKim ley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 12: Please provide the MFPG and MLAG for the proposed building. The MFPG and the MLAG shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation or the maximum water surface elevation of the flood routes. Response 12:The MFPG and MLAG for the proposed building have been added to a drainage summary table on Sheet C4.3. Comment 13: Please label the slopes of all swales. Response 13:The slopes of all drainage swales have been added to Sheet C4.2. Comment 14: There appear to be direct discharge points proposed for areas of this property. The property should be graded to drain internally to the site, minimizing any direct discharges. Response 14:Site grading adjusted to have no direct discharges off site.See Sheet C4.2. Comment 15: On Sheet C4.1 a.City standard curb:The maximum spacing for control joints shall be 10 feet on tangents and 5 feet on radii. The maximum spacing for expansion joints shall be 50 feet. b.What is the curb detail on this sheet? All curb shall be to City standards. Response 15: The second paving note on Sheet C4.1 has been updated to City of Carmel standards. The curb detail on Sheet C4.1 is an Olive Garden standard for walk-off curb, which allows patrons to step on a concrete strip rather than landscaped areas when exiting their vehicles. Comment 16: On Sheet C4.3: a.Are the lines shown from the building intended to be flood routing? Please see comment 11 of this. b. Please provide the requisite storm water/drainage information required by Section 100 of the Storm Water Technical Standards Manual on the plan sheets. c. Please include a drainage summary on this sheet including: i. The allowable rates based on the flat release rates. ii. The proposed release rates. iii. The amount of detention required. iv. The amount Response 16:all above information has been added to Sheet C4.3. Comment 17: On Sheet C4.4, Note 2: Please add "and c6.2"to this note. Response 17:Sheet C4.4,Note 2 has been updated to reference Sheet C6.2. Comment 18: On Sheet C6.1,the City would prefer the curb turn out detail to include a transition to 0 curb instead of a vertical cut. Response 18:The Curb Cut detail on Sheet C6.1 has been revised to include a transition to 0 rather than a vertical curb cut. Comment 19: Please include the City's curbing policy in the plan set. 6 AKimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Response 19:The City of Carmel Curbing Policy has been added as Sheet C6.4. Comment 20: On Sheet CS3,please include the following note, "All concrete curbing materials, production, delivery,placement, curing,jointing,finishing,etc.shall be per City of Carmel Curbing Policy." Response 20:The above note has been added to Sheet CS3 in Section 02528,Part 1.03. Comment 21: On Sheet Cs6: a.Section 02847: Does this apply? b. Section 03000: Does this apply to curbing or foundations? Response 21:Section 02847 does not apply to this project. The note is a standard construction specification included with all of our construction sets.Section 03000 applies to curbing and pavement. Comment 22: Irrigation in City right-of-way requires a variance and Consent to Encroach, approved by the Board of Public Works. Response 22:There is no intent on irrigating the proposed right of way. The irrigation heads are pointing inwards toward the property.No variance will be required. Comment 23: Please ensure that spray patterns from the irrigation system does not spray on City sidewalks. Response 23:Irrigation spray patterns are not to be sprayed on any City sidewalks.See Sheet L2.1. Comment 24: Please add note as required in Storm Water Technical Standards Manual Section 102"Permit Requirement and Procedures, "Article 102.02 vii pertaining to construction and approval of storm sewer systems to all storm sewer plan and profile sheets. Response 24:The note has been added to Sheet C4.5. Comment 25:All swales on site must have sub-surface pipe installed. Pipe to conform to requirements of Storm Water Technical Standards Manual and shall be double wall, HI-Q pipe. Response 25:All swales on site will have 6"sub-surface drains installed. The detail for a typical swale has been updated on Sheet C6.3 to be City of Carmel Standard Drawing 10-27. Comment 26: Sheet C1.0—Title Sheet. Please remove the titles for the Landscape Plan, Irrigation Plan, Irrigation Details,and Landscape Specifications from the Sheet Index. Response 26:The titles for the Landscape Plan,Irrigation Plan,Irrigation Details,and Landscape Specifications have been removed from the Title Sheet,C1.0. The landscape plans will be submitted to the appropriate departments separately. HAMILTON COUNTY SURVEYOR'S OFFICE 7 -. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 1: The proposed project falls in the incorporated area and MS4 jurisdiction of the City of Carmel. Response 1:Comment noted. Comment 2: The proposed project does not fall in a Carmel Wellhead Protection Zone. Response 2:Comment noted. Comment 3: The proposed project does fall in the Park Northwestern and the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain Watershed. The Crooked Creek Regulated Drain Watershed has a restricted allowable release rate of 0.1 cfs per acre up to the 10 year 24 hours storm event and 0.27 cfs per acre above the 10 year to the 100 year 24 hours storm event. Response 3:Site has now been designed to detain for these release rates. The City of Carmel does have a minimum orifice size of 6"and this is the size of the outfall pipes that will be constructed. Comment 4: Please submit an outlet permit for the indirect discharge into the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain. The application is available at Surveyor's Form Page. Response 4:An outlet permit will be submitted to the County. Comment 5: Drainage calculations were not submitted for this project so a drainage review and approval of the site outlet permit cannot be conducted until the calculations are submitted. These calculations must also include analysis of the downstream drainage system to prove the capacity exist for the discharge from this site. Response 5:A drainage report will be submitted for the County to review. Comment 6: Since this proposed site crosses a watershed boundary and is being redirected into a single watershed,the allowable release rate per the Hamilton County Stormwater Technical Standards Manual,Section 302.02 will be a maximum of 0.58 cfs to the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain. Response 6:Site has now been designed for the release rates of 0.37 cfs for the 10 year storm and 1.00 cfs for the 100 year storm based on the requirements of 0.1 cfs per acre(10 year)and 0.27 cfs per acre(100 year). Comment 7: Please refer to the Hamilton County Stormwater Management Technical Standards Manual that can be found at: http://www.hamiltoncounty.in.goviegovidocunnents/1321628191 98613.pdf Response 7:Comment noted. Comment 8: Additional comments will be made upon review of the drainage calculations for this proposed project. Response 8:Comment noted. 8 Kimley-Horn 44111 and Associates, Inc. CROSSROADS ENGINEERS ENGINEERING REVIEW Comment 1: Per Section 102.02.i.,please revise the Civil Cover Sheet,Sheet C1.1, to include a location map. Response 1:A location map has been added to sheet C1.1. Comment 2: Per Section 102.02.iv., please submit a reduced plat or project site map containing the required information on a sheet or sheets no larger than 11" by 17". Response 2:An 11"x 17"project site map is being included in the submittal. Comment 3: Per Section 102.02.v.a.,please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey,Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan,Sheet C2.1,to include the names and land uses of the adjoining properties. Also, please indicate on the plans the existing right-of-ways. Please review and revise as necessary. Response 3:The names and land uses of the adjoining properties has been added to Sheet C2.1. The R.O.W.for U.S.421 has been noted as having variable width. Comment 4:Per Section 102.02.v.a.a.,please review the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey,Sheet C1.2,and/or Demolition Plan,Sheet C2.1,to include all topography of land surrounding the site to a distance of at least 200 feet. Response 4:The topography surrounding the site at a distance of 200 feet has been added to Sheet C2.1. Comment 5: Per Section 102.02.v.d., please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey,Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan,Sheet C2.1 to include all 100-year floodplains,floodway fringes,and floodways,established or identified in accordance with the City of Carmel Flood Hazard Area Ordinance. Please note if none exists. Response 5:A note has been added to Sheet C1.2 stating that the site is outside of the 100 year and 500 year floodplain. Comment 6: Per Section 102.2.v.f., please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey,Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan,Sheet C2.1,to include the casting elevation, invert elevations,and pipe materials of the existing 14 inch force main running through the property. Response 6:Casting and invert elevations for the existing force main that was available through Clay Township asbuilt plans.See Sheet C2.1. Comment 7:Please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey,Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan, Sheet C2.1,to include the property boundary information and section corner information. Response 7:The boundary bearings have been added to Sheet C2.1. 9 • AKimIey-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 8: It appears that the manhole casting for the existing 14 inch sanitary force main and 10 inch gravity sanitary sewer will need to be adjusted to grade during construction. Please revise the Utility Plan,Sheet C5.1,to include the proposed casting elevations and related details/notes. Response 8:The proposed rim elevation adjustments have been added to Sheet C5.1 for the 14" sanitary force main and 10"gravity sewer rims. Comment 9: Per Section 102.02.vii., please revise the plans to include Storm Sewer Plan and Profile sheets. Response 9:Storm sewer profiles and pond cross sections have been added as Sheet C4.5. Comment 10: Please revise the Site/Dimension Control Plan,Sheet C3.1,to include the proposed alignment of the Retail Parkway Extension to ensure that the proposed right-of-way is accurate. Response 10:The Retail Parkway alignment represented in the plans is a preliminary estimation of the alignment of the roadway. Engineering plans have not been developed and/or made available for us to reference.See Sheet C3.1 for the estimated Retail Parkway alignment. Comment 11: Per Section 102.02.xi.b., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to show the location of all site improvements including lot delineation,lot identification,and proposed structures. Response 11:The boundary bearings have been added to Sheet C4.2 and Sheet C4.3. Comment 12: Per Section 102.02.xi.x., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3, to include show the location of all 100-year floodplains,floodways established in accordance with the City of Carmel Flood Hazard Area Ordinance. Please note if none exists. Response 12:A note has been added to Sheet C4.2 and Sheet C4.3 stating that the site is outside of the 100 year and 500 year floodplain. Comment 13: Per Section 102.02.xi.d, please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to show delineation of all proposed land disturbing activities. Specifically,the area scheduled for demolition within the Retail Parkway Extension and the future 2,700 square feet retail building in the northeast corner of the development should be delineated the final grades/drainage patterns should be shown. Response 13:The limits of disturbance has been added to Sheet C4.2. Spot grades for the future 2,700 square feet retail building have also been added to Sheet C4.2 Comment 14: Per Section 102.02.xi.g., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to include the 100-year overflow paths/ponding areas shown as hatched areas and the required easements through the development. Response 14:100 year flow paths have been added to Sheet C4.3 along with the required BMP easments. 10 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 15: Per Section 102.02.xi.h., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to include a statement indicating whether the proposed storm drainage system will be public or private. Response 15:A statement has been added to Sheet C4.3 stating the storm sewer system will be private. Comment 16: Section 102.02.xi.k, please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to show the emergency flood routing path(s)and their invert elevations from the detention facility to the receiving system. Response 16:The emergency flow paths have been added to Sheet C4.2. Comment 17: Per Sections 102.02.xi.I and 102.02.xi.s., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to include a typical cross section of the detention pond carried to a point above the 100-year high water elevation showing the following information: a. Elevation of the existing land and proposed changes. b. 10-year and 100-year high water elevations resulting from the controlled release conditions called for by the City of Carmel's Stormwater Management Ordinance. c. Relationship to adjacent structures,streets,and other facilities. d. Bottom of pond,top of bank,emergency spillway,and water surface over the emergency spillway elevations. e. Emergency spillway dimensions f. Detention facility side slopes Response 17:Pond cross sections with the above mentioned information have been added to Sheet C4.5. Comment 18: Per Section 102.02.xi.m, please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to include a drainage summary,which summarizes the basic conditions of the drainage design, including site acreage,off-site/upstream acreage,allowable release rates, post-developed 10-year and 100-year flows leaving the site,volume of detention required,volume of detention provided,and any release rate. The drainage summary should also include both the required orifice size to restrict the release rate per ordinance and the minimum 6-inch orifice information. Response 18:A drainage table has been added to Sheet 4.2 which includes site acreage,off- site/upstream acreage,allowable release rates,post-developed 10-year and 100-year flows leaving the site,volume of detention require,volume of detention provided,and release rates. Comment 19: Section 102.02.xi.o., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to include elevations at each corner of the property to verify that no direct discharge will take place.Also, please include the flood protection grade for the property and a • statement indicating the definition of minimum flood protection grade in accordance with the manual. Response 19:Spot grades have been added to all corners of the property on Sheet C4.2. The spot grades verify that no direct discharge will take place. 11 AKimiey-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 20: Section 102.02.xi.r., please revise the Grading Plan,Sheet C4.2,and/or Drainage Plan,Sheet C4.3,to indicate the slopes of all surface drainage swales. Response 20:All drainage swale slopes have been added to Sheet C4.2. Comment 21: Section 102.02.xiv.,please include a separate structure Data Table containing the minimum information discussed in the manual or revise the Storm Sewer Pipe Analysis on the Storm sewer Plan,Sheet C4.4, to include the following information;structure number references, pipe material, type of structure, detail reference to type of structure,and any notes related to the structure. Response 21:All applicable storm information is provided on Sheets C4.5 in the storm plan and profiles and Sheet C4.4 the storm sewer plan. Comment 22: Per Section 102.03.i.a.i, please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include a pre-development watershed map which shall include all pertinent information described in the referenced Section. Response 22:A pre-development watershed map including all information referenced in Section 102.03.i.a.i in the City of Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards Manual is being included with the submittal. Comment 23: Please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the 2-year and 10- year pre-developed runoff in addition to the 100-year runoff already provided. Please note that the fully developed right-of-ways(per the City of Carmel Thoroughfare Plan)for Michigan Road and the Retail Parkway extension should be included in the pre-developed runoff calculations. Response 23:This information is now included in the Storm Water Management Plan. The Michigan Road ROW has been included in the pre-developed runoff calculations. Per conversations with the City of Carmel,the Retail Parkway extension ROW will be captured by the West Carmel Commons development(north of the Olive Garden property)and does not need to be incorporated into the Olive Garden detention system. Comment 24: Per Section 102.03.i.b.i, please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include a post-development watershed map showing that all off-site acreage draining through the site is accommodated, including the fully developed right-of-ways(per the City of Carmel Thoroughfare Plan)for Michigan Road and the Retail Parkway extension. Please ensure that the future 2,700 square foot retail building discussed in the Storm Water Management Plan is shown on the post-developed watershed map. Response 24:Post development watershed map showing Michigan Road ROW is included.Per conversations with the City of Carmel, the Retail Parkway extension ROW will be captured by the West Carmel Commons development(north of the Olive Garden property)and does not need to be incorporated into the Olive Garden detention system. Comment 25: The post-development 100-year,5 minute storm runoff does not appear to be correct. Please review and revise as necessary. Response 25:The 100-year 5 minute storm has been revised. 12 •�. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 26: Per Section 102.03..i.c., please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the following information for both 100-year storm and 10-year storm: a. Provide Stage/Storage Discharge calculations b. Critical storm discharge routed through the pond outlet structure c. Critical pond elevations,including top of bank and spillway elevations. Response 26:The Storm Water Management Plan revised to include the above referenced information. Comment 27: Per Section 102.03.i.d., please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the following information: a.Storm Basin Watershed Map, including the storm structure designation that each basin is draining. b. Unit discharge allowable release rate for the post-developed 10-year and 100- year events. c.Time of Concentration calculations for all storm sewer pipes. Response 27:The Storm Water Management Plan revised to include the above referenced information. Comment 28: Per Section 102.03.ii., please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the following information in tabular form: a. Pre-developed acreage for each outlet b. Unit discharge allowable release rate used c.The resulting allowable release rate for the post-developed 10-year and 100- year events. d. Pre-developed 2-year flow rates e. Pre-developed and post-developed release rates for 10-year and 100-year events f.Completed Table 102-I worksheet from the manual Response 28:The Storm Water Management Plan revised to include the above referenced information. Comment 29:Per Section 302.03 of the manual,the allowable release rate for this site shall be 0.1 cfs per acre of development for 0-10 year return interval storms. In addition,as this development is located within an area with a release rate restriction (Crooked Creek Shed)by the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office,the allowable release rate for 11-100 year return interval storms shall be 0.274 cfs per acre of development. Please review and revise accordingly. Response 29:Site has now been designed for the release rates of 0.37 cfs for the 10 year storm and 1.00 cfs for the 100 year storm based on the requirements of 0.1 cfs per acre(10 year)and 0.27 cfs per acre(100 year).See revised calculations in the Storm Water Management Plan. Comment 30: Also per Section 302.03, as this site to consist of a pre-developed area with more than(1)outlet,the release rates should be computed and restricted based on the pre-developed discharge to each outlet point. Please review and revise accordingly. 13 ■••• mey orn and Kil As-Hsociates, Inc. Response 30:The site is now being routed to have one release point to the south. The post development release rate for the development is less than what the current drainage plans have draining to that outlet.See pre-development drainage map for details in the Storm Water Management Plan. Comment 31: Per Section 302.06.01, please provide information to verify that a minimum of 90%of the original detention capacity of the proposed dry detention basin is restored within 48 hours from the start of the design 100-year storm. Response 31:This information has been added to the Storm Water Management Plan. Comment 32:It appears that the 10-year and 100-year high water elevation in the detention pond are both within 20 feet of the overhead electric line along Northwestern Drive. Per Section 302.06.03, please revise accordingly. Response 32:Ponds have been shifted north to be at least 20 feet away from the overhead electric line on Private Drive. Comment 33: Per Section 302.03.06,any pipe or opening shall include a Debris Guard in accordance with the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office Standard Detail D-12. Please review and revise the plans accordingly. Response 33:Hamilton County Surveyor's Office Standard Detail D-12 has been added to sheet C6.3. Comment 34: It appears that the outlet control structure has been designed in accordance with Section 302.06.07,as the orifice size required to limit the release rate from the proposed pond is less than the minimum 6-inch diameter size. However, please revise the drainage report to provide full modeling calculations,and resulting critical elevations and flow rates,for both the ordinance and minimum 6-inch orifice scenarios. The required drainage summary(see comment #21) Response 34:Site has now been designed for the release rates of 0.37 cfs for the 10 year storm and 1.00 cfs for the 100 year storm based on the requirements of 0.1 cfs per acre(10 year)and 0.27 cfs per acre(100 year).See revised calculations in the Storm Water Management Plan. The site will still have 6"minimum orifices but has been designed to detain for the above mentioned allowable release rates. Comment 35: Per Section 302.06.10,a minimum fifteen(15)feet horizontally from the top of bank of the proposed detention facility shall be dedicated as a permanent stormwater easement. Please review and revise accordingly. Response 35:Detention and BMP easements have been added to the plans.See Sheet C4.3. Comment 36: Per Section 302.06.12,detention basins are to be designed to detain the runoff from the fully developed right-of-way per the City of Carmel 20-Year Thoroughfare Plan across all frontages, regardless of existing watershed boundaries or drainage.breaks/divides. Response 36:Detention basins have been designed to accommodate the Michigan Road right of way. Per conversations with the City of Carmel, the Retail Parkway extension ROW will be 14 AEAKimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. captured by the West Carmel Commons development(north of the Olive Garden property)and does not need to be incorporated into the Olive Garden detention system. Comment 37: Per Section 302.08.1,a minimum of 1%bottom slope in all directions shall be provided in dry detention facilities with perforated subsurface drains. A positive/gravity outlet is also required for the underdrain in the dry detention facility. Please review and revise accordingly. Response 37:A 1%slope has been provided for the detention basins and subsurface drains provided as well.See Sheet C4.2 and C4.4. Comment 38:Per Section 302.08.2,the maximum planned depth of stormwater water stored shall not exceed four(4)feet. Please review and revised accordingly. Response 38:In order to provide maximum cover on storm pipes and provide the necessary detention,maximum pond elevations for 100 year storm are 4.7'for the west pond and 4.1'for the southeast pond. Comment 39:Please provide a typical section of the emergency spillway and calculations for the proposed spillway to show that it complies with all requirements of Section 302.11 of the manual. Response 39:Typical sections for the proposed spillways are included in the Storm Water Management Plan. Comment 40:Please review the stormwater easement requirements of Section 306 and revised the plans to provide the necessary easements. Response 40:Detention and BMP easements are now shown on Sheet C4.3. Comment 41:Per Section 104.02,the minimum finish floor elevations shall be at least 6 inches above the minimum MLAG elevations and 15 inches above adjacent roadway elevations. Please review and revise accordingly. Response 41:MFPG and MLAG elevations have been provided on Sheet C4.3. Comment 42:Per Section 501.01,there should be no less than 2.50 feet of cover along any part of the pipe from final pavement elevation or final ground surface elevation to the top(outside) of pipe. It appears that there are multiple storm sewer structures that are not in conformance. Please review and revise accordingly. Also note that any waiver requests should be submitted directly to the City of Carmel Engineering Department. Response 42:In order to minimize pond depth and maintain minimum pipe slopes, the cover on some pipes at some locations is less than 2.5.' Comment 43: Per Section 501.03,a minimum drop of 0.1 feet through manholes and inlet structures shall be provided. Also per Section 501.03,when changing pipe sizes within a structure,the pipe crowns should align. Please review and revise accordingly. 15 4•JA AKimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Response 43:In order to cross the proposed 14"forcemain it was necessary to eliminate the 0.1'drop for those 2 manholes. The pipes have been revised to so when pipes change sizes the crowns are aligned. Comment 44: Please provide calculations showing that the downstream receiving system from the detention pond (grates and pipe flow of Existing Storm Structure"A")is sufficient to convey the peak detention pond outflow in addition to the watershed already draining to the inlet. Verify that there are no downstream restrictions, and that the system can handle the emergency overflow scenario. (This information should be surveyed,as-built information.) Response 44:Calculations for the downstream receiving system have been provided in the pre- development watershed map. The post development release to the structure is less than the pre-development condition. Reference the Storm Water Management Plan for details. SWPPP REVIEW COMMENTS Comment 1: Please place the SWPPP for both Construction and Post-Construction in the City of Carmel's SWPPP format(See Attached). Item#5 of the Post-Construction SWPPP format details the requirements of the separate Operation and Maintenance manual for review. Response 1:The SWPPP for Construction and the SWPPP Post Construction have been revised to fit the City of Carmel's SWPPP format. Comment 2: Please submit an Operation and Maintenance manual for review. Response 2:An Operation and Maintenance manual will be submitted for review. Comment 3: Please specify the CFS that needs to be treated by each Water Quality Unit. Please check to make sure these are sized to meet the approved treatment rates on the Indianapolis Approved Water Quality unit list(attached). Response 3:The CFS to be treated by both Water Quality units is 0.63 cfs. Per the Approved Water Quality Unit list,the Stormceptor STC 900 can accommodate up to 0.83 cfs. Comment 4: Please show the location of all storm pipes,subsurface drains, and roof drains on the Post-Construction SWPPP C2.3. Response 4:The locations of all storm pipes,subsurface drains,and roof drains are shown on the SWPPP Post Construction. Comment 5: Please show the general method of stabilization (specify seed and cover)for all pervious areas of the site. All swales, pond slopes,and general slopes greater than 6:1 should be stabilized with erosion control blanket at a minimum. Please reflect on plans. Response 5:The general method of stabilization has been added to part 11 of the SWPPP. Erosion Control Blanket has been added to the plans in all areas with slopes greater than 6:1.A detail has been added to Sheet C2.4. Comment 6: All subsurface drains required for the function of Post-Construction BMPs shall be double-walled perforated pipe at a minimum. Please specify. 16 AKimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Response 6:The Vegetative Swale detail on Sheet 2.4 has been updated to call out a 6" perforated underdrain double wall,HI-Q pipe. Comment 7: The vegetative swale cross section shows a 4"ponding depth. Will the inlet pipes for the vegetative swale be raised to create this ponding or will they be flush with grade? Response 7:The inlet pipes for the vegetative swales will be flush with the grade. The detail on Sheet C2.4 has been updated. Comment 8: Could the vegetative swales and dry detention to be constructed as rain gardens or bio-retention areas to treat WQv with detention instead of flow through? If so,could the water quality unit treating the roof drainage be eliminated and the roof drains be rerouted to the dry detention? Response 8: Water quality systems have been redesigned.See Sheets C2.3 for details. Comment 9: Please overlay the SWPPP for Construction—C2.2 with any existing features that need to be protected at the initial stage of construction. Response 9:The existing inlets on site are now shown on Sheet C2.2 with inlet protection. Comment 10: Please provide a curb turnout detail that shows the type of scour protection for the swales. Response 10:The Curb Cut detail on Sheet C4.2 has been updated to show scour protection for the swales. Comment 11: Socked pipes are not ideal for our local soil conditions. Subsurface drains in swales should meet our local standard(attached). Geotextile can be placed around the subsurface bedding stone to provide a soil barrier. If the vegetative swales are converted to a bio-retention area,then the subsurface drain is typically bedded in a trench of#8 bedding(to provide a barrier),and then the amended soil is placed on top of the pea gravel. Response 11:Socks have been eliminated from the subsurface drain detail and replaced with geotextile. Comment 12: Can "Do Not Mow or Spray"signage be used to protect the native vegetation in the vegetative swales? If so,please provide a detail and show the locations of the signage on the Post-Construction SWPPP. Response 12: "Do Not Mow or Spray"signs have been added to sheet C2.3 at all vegetative swales. A detail can be located on Sheet C6.1. Comment 13: Please show the silt fence turning into the site where it terminates at construction entrances on C2.2. Response 13:Silt fence revised to turn into the site at the construction entrance.See Sheet C2.2. 17 AKimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Comment 14:Perimeter silt fence is shown crossing into tree protection areas on C2.2. Please make sure these do not conflict and run the silt fence along the outside of the protection fencing. Response 14:The silt fence has been moved to the outside of the tree protection. Comment 15: Please provide a cross-section of the detention pond with the vegetative swale running through it. Response 15:Cross sections for the three proposed ponds provided on Sheet C4.5. Alternative Transportation Review and Comments Comment 1: The City of Carmel's Parking Ordinance requires bicycle parking to be within fifty (50)feet of the main entrance. Please review the City of Carmel's Parking Ordinance in order to determine the appropriate locations and construction details for the required bicycle parking. Response 1:The bike rack location has been updated to be within 50'of the main entrance. We trust these responses adequately address your comments, if you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact Lesley Netzer at 630-487-5555 or me at 312.924.7403. Sincerely, Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. x'74 Justin Muller, PE 18 Conn, Angelina V From: Rhonda Spring [rspring @trgpsc.com] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 10:56 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Cc: 'Mark Naylor'; Doug Edwards; AMclntosh @darden.com Subject: Olive Garden Carmel Rendered Elevations (1 of 2) Attachments: Revised Front Rear Carmel, IN.pdf Angie, Please find attached revised rendered elevations of the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant in Carmel, IN per your request. There will be two emails forthcoming. Thanks, Rhonda Spring p -7-, e_ .rgi-IviTe-rds:-.4_ra-a-r it ite is- €nvieera-Lacriata pc A r I Iiocui 239 Southland Drive Suite-C Lexington,KY 40503 Ph.(859)276-2006 Fax:(859)276-2901 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Rhonda Spring [rspring @trgpsc.com] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 10:56 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Cc: 'Mark Naylor'; Doug Edwards; AMclntosh @darden.com Subject: Olive Garden Carmel, IN Rendered Elevations (2 of 2) Attachments: Revised Left Right Carmel, IN.pdf Rhonda Spring • 4coke: ts_- o:ufi Ots• Englaeers•Lair.esrapa Ardthect; • 239 Southland Drive Suite-C • Lexington,KY 40503 Ph.(859)276-2006 Fax:(859)276-2901 1 I Y Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL June 29,2012 TO: 8 9 !Z, City of Carmel-Department of Community Services ` �� Planning& Zoning Division Attn: Angie Conn,Planning Adminstrator 3 One Civic Square,3rd Floor ? 411L -2 Carmel, IN 46032 1b12 ' r= Phone:317-571-2417 CS cu FROM: Janet Reid /id PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: P.: Prints r Disk r Bidding P Review l Samples r Photocopies r Cost Estimating r Specifications r Shop Drawings 1 Information Reproducibles I— Record o ies " Sheet No Descri tion 1 Copy of TAC member responses issued— • Planning/Zoning -Angie Conn • Urban Forestry-Daren Mindham • Carmel Clay Communications Department-Bill Akers • CTRWD-Ryan Hartman • Hamilton County Surveyor's Office—Greg 1loyes • CrossRoad Engineers—Greg Ilko • City of Carmel Engineering—Gary Duncan • City of Carmel Stormwater—John Thomas • Alternative Transportation—David Littlejohn 2 Full size sets of the REVISED Development Plan and ADLS documents 1 Electronic(pdf)copy of the resubmittal documents on CD t ► `5 AsrATint&Lee 4:. Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents in response to the Planning/Zoning comments received regarding the Development Plan and ADLS Plan submittal for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road—TAC Meeting held on June 20, 2012. Real Estate Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Mang. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 Architecture/Development June 29,2012 Page 2 Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. • y, Jan ski is Pro• • Development GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct: 214-461-9631 Email:jreidnn,gha-architects.com Real Estate Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Manag. G:\Darden\Property Development Projects\Olive Garden\SIR-20111C090423-Carmel,IN\Permitting\PC- I Development Plan\Comments rcvd\Planning-Zoning-Angie Conn\Response\T-OG_CarmellN_DP-PBrZ- An g i eC o n n_Res p o n se_06-29-2012.d oc Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75240 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 Conn, Angelina V From: Janet Reid [jreid @GHA-Architects.com] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:17 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: Olive Garden/Carmel, IN - P&Z Response due 6/29 Hi Angie, Per your comments received on 5/29—I am working on the P&Z response/resubmittal due tomorrow. Our Civil Engineer is scrambling to respond to all of the engineering comments that we have received—mainly concerning stormwater design. I will be sending to you overnight tonight all of the items regarding the Public Notice and copies of the comments/ correspondence received, but I am not sure that we will have all of the plans completed in time to send them hard copy to you by tomorrow. We plan to send you the electronic .pdf files tomorrow—will you accept the hard copies on Monday? We will also be issuing the responses to all of the commenting parties tomorrow via email/following with hard copies on Monday. Will that keep us on track for the July 17 PC meeting date? Feel free to call me, if it is easier. Thank you! Janet 214-461-9631 From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn @carmel.in.gov] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:05 PM To: Jack DeGagne • Cc: Janet Reid Subject: RE: Olive Garden/Carmel, IN - Building Elevations hi, Jack - yes, i am out of the office today. it does look a little better and is moving in the right direction, but now our concern is that there is too much stucco/EIFS! (whereas, before, there was too much stone.) There needs to be a balance and a good mix of building materials. And considering that the maximum percentage of EIFS the overlay requires is 10%, you should try to get as close to that as possible. any way to add in more brick? and, you will need BZA variance approval for the roof material, but that is with a different voting body,just so you are aware. i will follow up with you more tomorrow, after i get back to the office, and get some feedback from staff. thanks, angie 1 i -2 G-1 Hancock, Ramona B "� 1/ �= Subject: FW: Docket#12050014 DP/ADLS: Olive Garden Restaurant - To: Plan Commissioners We are concerned about a trend that seems to be developing with new businesses wanting to benefit from the success established within the Michigan Road Overlay Zone while at the same time, they ask for relief from fully meeting those standards. These are "standards,"not "guidelines." Certainly you can use your judgment, but the standards are meaningful only to the extent they are upheld. We ask you to carefully consider the necessity of any deviation from holding the newcomers to the standards met by those who came before them. Please also remember that there are people whose sole experience of Carmel is through this gateway area. The standards set and met do matter to this area's continuing success. This item on the agenda as "New Business"raises additional serious concerns we have about the"preliminary feedback"process, particularly since it is the second time that this process is being used in the Michigan Road Overlay Zone (PetSuites was first). While we understand the desire of the petitioner to get a green light to move forward and that Commissioners may feel it is beneficial to steer petitioners in a desired direction, this process results in significant problems: 1. Once Commissioners have listened to the development team and provided their feedback, the petitioner leaves believing they know what they need to do to gain Plan Commission approval. An expectation for approval is impossible to dispel once Commissioners state what they desire and the petitioner meets those expectations. 2. If the petitioner makes changes so that the development plan specifically complies with the issues raised at this "preliminary feedback"meeting, even the most thoughtful and careful Commissioner will be predisposed to granting approval to this response to their feedback. A "no" vote faces a higher hurdle than it would without the "preliminary feedback"meeting. 3. All of this occurs as if the input from the area residents is a formality, without the same value and validity as the petitioner's information, and the questions and issues raised by Commissioners and staff. The perhaps unintended message to residents is that their information is not all that useful or helpful. Residents are left believing that it is all too likely to take "new"and "serious"information to offset the "preliminary" decision that has already taken place. Even if inadvertent, the bar is set higher for their input to gain influence in the final Commission decision. While we can theorize that part of the intent of the "preliminary feedback"process is to save residents as well as Commissioners and staff from wasting time and effort dealing with a seriously flawed development proposal, we believe this process itself has serious flaws that should preclude it being used. We are especially concerned that "preliminary feedback"meetings subvert the intention of State law requiring public hearings for development proposals. Please provide us with the statutory foundation that permits any such "preliminary feedback"meetings, whether at Committee meetings or full Plan Commission meetings. Even if a"preliminary feedback"process is statutorily permissible, we believe the serious problems automatically entailed in this type of process should preclude its use. We ask that development proposals go through the required vetting process without the expectations set by "preliminary feedback" meetings. Marilyn Anderson, President MaryEllen Bormett, Vice-President Dee Fox, Secretary 1 • (<6 GH A PECEIVED -0 `- JUN 2 9 2012 Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL June 28,2012 00 w cb TO: �� ®4 6 L City of Carmel- Department of Community Services Planning& Zoning Division Attn: Angie Conn,Planning Adminstrator One Civic Square,3rd Floor Carmel, IN 46032 Phone:317-571-2417 FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: Prints f Disk r Bidding P7 Review ✓ Samples E Photocopies [ Cost Estimating fl Specifications r Shop Drawings r Information ✓ Reproducibles r Record C;o ies Sheet No. Descri tion, 1 Copy of TAC member correspondence received— • Planning/Zoning -Angie Conn • Urban Forestry-Daren Mindham • Carmel Clay Communications Department-Bill Akers • CTRWD- Ryan Hartman • Hamilton County Surveyor's Office—Greg Hoyes • CrossRoad Engineers—Greg Ilko • City of Carmel Engineering—Gary Duncan • City of Carmel Stormwater—John Thomas • Alternative Transportation—David Littlejohn 1 Check in the amount of$2,302.49 for Docket#12050014 DP/ADLS 1 Notarized Affidavit of Public Hearing 1 Copy of Notice of Public Hearing—sent certified mail to the adjacent property owners 1 Notarized Sign Placement affidavit/photos Hi Angie, • Please find enclosed the above referenced documents in response to the Planning/Zoning comments received regarding the Development Plan and ADLS Plan submittal for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road—TAC Meeting held on June 20,2012. Real Estate Items to follow on Monday: Development Services Site Development • Full Size sets of the Development Plan and ADLS documents REVISED PER Architecture Construction Manag. COMMENTS—(24 x 36 maximum sheet size) Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 . _ ,,, , , GH' A Architecture/Development June 28,2012 Page 2 • Electronic(.pdt)copy of revised documents—on a CD • Copy of the Response Letters to the above noted comments/correspondence Please co tact me, if, i• e questions or comments. inter i Janet ' :id Prop- Development GHA . 'CHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct:214-461-9631 Email:jreid(agha-architects.com Real Estate Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Manag. G:\Darden\Property Development Projects\Olive Garden\SIR-2011\C090423-Carmel,IN\Permitting\PC- Development Plan\Comments rcvd\Planning-Zoning-Angie Conn\Response\T-OG_CarmellN_DP-P8:Z- AngieCon n_Response_06-28-2012.doc Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75240 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 Janet Reid `' From: Thomas,John G <jthomas @carmel.in.gov> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 12:28 PM JUN t ` .; 2012 To: Janet Reid Cc: Foley, Amanda J; Barnes, David R; Redden, Nick; Duncan, GaryR0 I Subject: Olive Garden SWPPP Review Comments Attachments: City of Carmel SWPPP Requirements.pdf;Indianapolis Approved BMP List°pdf; Typical Swale Detail.pdf -- " Good afternoon Janet, I have the following comments on the Olive Garden submittal received by our office on 5-23-12; 1. Please place the SWPPP for both Construction and Post-Construction in the City of Carmel's SWPPP format (See Attached). Item#5 of the Post-Construction SWPPP format details the requirements of the separate Operation and Maintenance Manual. 2. Please submit an Operation and Maintenance manual for review. 3. Please specify the CFS that needs to be treated by each Water Quality Unit. Please check to make sure these are sized to meet the approved treatment rates on the Indianapolis Approved Water Quality unit list(attached). 4. Please show the location of all storm pipes, subsurface drains, and roof drains on the Post-Construction SWPPP C2.3. 5. Please show the general method of stabilization (specify seed and cover)for all pervious areas of the site. All swales, pond slopes, and general slopes greater than 6:1 should be stabilized with erosion control blanket at a minimum. Please reflect on plans. 6. All subsurface drains required for the function of Post-Construction BMPs shall be double-walled perforated pipe at a minimum. Please specify. 7. The vegetated swale cross section shows a 4" ponding depth. Will the inlet pipes for the vegetated swale be raised to create this ponding or will they be flush with grade? 8. Could the vegetated swales and dry detention be constructed as rain gardens or bio-retention areas to treat the WQv with detention instead of flow through? If so, could the water quality unit treating the roof drainage be eliminated and the roof drains be rerouted to the dry detention? 9. Please overlay the SWPPP for Construction -C2.2 with any existing features that need to be protected at the initial stage of construction. It appears there are a few inlets that will need to be protected. 10. Please provide a curb turnout detail that shows the type of scour protection for the swales. 11. Socked pipes are not ideal for our local soil conditions. Subsurface drains in swales should meet our local standard (attached). Geotextile can be placed around the subsurface bedding stone to provide a soil barrier. If the vegetated swales are converted to a bio-retention area, then the subsurface drain is typically bedded in a trench of#8 stone with geotextile on the bottom and sides of the trench. 4" of pea gravel is placed on top of the #8 bedding (to provide a barrier), and then the amended soil is placed on top of the pea gravel. 12. Can "Do Not Mow or Spray" signage be used to protect the native vegetation in the vegetated swales? If so, please provide a detail and show the locations of the signage on the Post-Construction SWPPP. 13. Please show the silt fence turning into the site where it terminates at construction entrances on C2.2. 14. Perimeter silt fence is shown crossing into tree protection areas on C2.2 Please make sure these do not conflict and run the silt fence along the outside of the protection fencing. 15. Please provide a cross-section of the detention pond with the vegetated swale running through it. Please let me know if you have any questions and have a good day. Sincerely, John Thomas, CPESC, CMS4S Stormwater Administrator City of Carmel Engineering Department (p) 317-571-2314 (f) 317-571-2439 1 Hancock, Ramona B From: CW IC2 [cwic2 @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 11:02 AM To: Hancock, Ramona B Subject: Docket#12050014 DP/ADLS: Olive Garden Restaurant To: Plan Commissioners We are concerned about a trend that seems to be developing with new businesses wanting to benefit from the success established within the Michigan Road Overlay Zone while at the same time, they ask for relief from fully meeting those standards. These are "standards,"not "guidelines." Certainly you can use your judgment, but the standards are meaningful only to the extent they are upheld. We ask you to carefully consider the necessity of any deviation from holding the newcomers to the standards met by those who came before them. Please also remember that there are people whose sole experience of Carmel is through this gateway area. The standards set and met do matter to this area's continuing success. This item on the agenda as "New Business"raises additional serious concerns we have about the "preliminary feedback"process, particularly since it is the second time that this process is being used in the Michigan Road Overlay Zone (PetSuites was first). While we understand the desire of the petitioner to get a green light to move forward and that Commissioners may feel it is beneficial to steer petitioners in a desired direction, this process results in significant problems: 1. Once Commissioners have listened to the development team and provided their feedback, the petitioner leaves believing they know what they need to do to gain Plan Commission approval. An expectation for approval is impossible to dispel once Commissioners state what they desire and the petitioner meets those expectations. 2. If the petitioner makes changes so that the development plan specifically complies with the issues raised at this "preliminary feedback"meeting, even the most thoughtful and careful Commissioner will be predisposed to granting approval to this response to their feedback. A "no" vote faces a higher hurdle than it would without the "preliminary feedback" meeting. 3. All of this occurs as if the input from the area residents is a formality, without the same value and validity as the petitioner's information, and the questions and issues raised by Commissioners and staff. The perhaps unintended message to residents is that their information is not all that useful or helpful. Residents are left believing that it is all too likely to take "new" and "serious" information to offset the "preliminary" decision that has already taken place. Even if inadvertent, the bar is set higher for their input to gain influence in the final Commission decision. While we can theorize that part of the intent of the "preliminary feedback"process is to save residents as well as Commissioners and staff from wasting time and effort dealing with a seriously flawed development proposal, we believe this process itself has serious flaws that should preclude it being used. We are especially concerned that"preliminary feedback"meetings subvert the intention of State law requiring public hearings for development proposals. Please provide us with the statutory foundation that permits any such "preliminary feedback"meetings, whether at Committee meetings or full Plan Commission meetings. Even if a"preliminary feedback"process is statutorily permissible, we believe the serious problems automatically entailed in this type of process should preclude its use. We ask that development proposals go through the required vetting process without the expectations set by"preliminary feedback" meetings. 1 Hancock, Ramona B Subject: FW: Docket#12050014 DP/ADLS: Olive Garden Restaurant To: Plan Commissioners We are concerned about a trend that seems to be developing with new businesses wanting to benefit from the success established within the Michigan Road Overlay Zone while at the same time, they ask for relief from fully meeting those standards. These are "standards,"not "guidelines." Certainly you can use your judgment, but the standards are meaningful only to the extent they are upheld. We ask you to carefully consider the necessity of any deviation from holding the newcomers to the standards met by those who came before them. Please also remember that there are people whose sole experience of Carmel is through this gateway area. The standards set and met do matter to this area's continuing success. This item on the agenda as "New Business"raises additional serious concerns we have about the "preliminary feedback"process, particularly since it is the second time that this process is being used in the Michigan Road Overlay Zone (PetSuites was first). While we understand the desire of the petitioner to get a green light to move forward and that Commissioners may feel it is beneficial to steer petitioners in a desired direction, this process results in significant problems: 1. Once Commissioners have listened to the development team and provided their feedback, the petitioner leaves believing they know what they need to do to gain Plan Commission approval. An expectation for approval is impossible to dispel once Commissioners state what they desire and the petitioner meets those expectations. 2. If the petitioner makes changes so that the development plan specifically complies with the issues raised at this "preliminary feedback"meeting, even the most thoughtful and careful Commissioner will be predisposed to granting approval to this response to their feedback. A "no" vote faces a higher hurdle than it would without the "preliminary feedback" meeting. 3. All of this occurs as if the input from the area residents is a formality, without the same value and validity as the petitioner's information, and the questions and issues raised by Commissioners and staff. The perhaps unintended message to residents is that their information is not all that useful or helpful. Residents are left believing that it is all too likely to take "new" and "serious" information to offset the "preliminary" decision that has already taken place. Even if inadvertent, the bar is set higher for their input to gain influence in the final Commission decision. While we can theorize that part of the intent of the "preliminary feedback"process is to save residents as well as Commissioners and staff from wasting time and effort dealing with a seriously flawed development proposal, we believe this process itself has serious flaws that should preclude it being used. We are especially concerned that"preliminary feedback"meetings subvert the intention of State law requiring public hearings for development proposals. Please provide us with the statutory foundation that permits any such"preliminary feedback"meetings, whether at Committee meetings or full Plan Commission meetings. Even if a "preliminary feedback"process is statutorily permissible, we believe the serious problems automatically entailed in this type of process should preclude its use. We ask that development proposals go through the required vetting process without the expectations set by "preliminary feedback" meetings. Marilyn Anderson, President MaryEllen Bormett, Vice-President Dee Fox, Secretary \VC Y204.9(5 ooNcr sfffA • 1 o arnl e, m�02�;Fi'fGe t' r �NDIANa-%/ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES- ,• JUN/ !yam► June 19,2012 Ms.Janet Reid GHA Architecture/Development --� 14110 Dallas Parkway,ste 300 Dallas,TX 75254 RE:Olive Garden Restaurant Dear Ms.Reid: The following letter represents comments for this project specifically addressing the area of alternative transportation. I have reviewed the project submitted for the June 20, 2012 Technical Advisory Committee meeting, and offer the following comments: Alternative Transportation Review and Comments 1) The City of Carmel's Parking Ordinance requires bicycle parking to be within fifty(50)feet of the main entrance. Please review the City of Carmel's Parking Ordinance in order to determine the appropriate locations and construction details for the required bicycle parking. We request that all responses to our comments be provided in writing. Failure to provide written responses may result in delay of the review process. It is critical that this office be made aware of all modification made on the plans being re-submitted,particularly if any such changes are considered"new"or fall outside of our previous reviews. Please provide revised plans indicating all revisions. Please notify us of any changes and specifically state any changes, including changes resulting from Plan Commission,Special Studies or other committee meetings. The Department of Community Services reserves the right to provide additional comments based on subsequent reviews. If you have questions,please contact me at 571-2417. Sincerely, David Littlejohn Alternative Transportation Coordinator Department of Community Services cc: Angie Conn,Department of Community Services Engineering Department Review Project File Page 1 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARmEL,INDIANA 46032 317/571-2417 CITY " ; � ' EL June 15,2012 JAMES BRAINARD, MAYOR Ms.Janet Reid Gerdes, Henrichson,and Associates Architecture/Development 14110 Dallas Parkway, Suite 100 Dallas,Texas 75254 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Dear Ms.Reid: The City received your site development plans on May 21,2012. The project is scheduled for review at the June 20,2012 Technical Advisory Committee meeting. We offer the following comments: CONSTRUCTION DRAWING REVIEW COMMENTS 1. Please add the following note to the drawings: "IF IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO RELOCATE EXISTING UTILITIES,THE EXPENSE OF SUCH RELOCATION SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER. ALL UTILITY POLES SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN ONE FOOT OF THE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF- WAY." 2. Please add note stating"NO EARTH DISTURBING ACTIVITY MAY COMMENCE WITHOUT AN APPROVED STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT"to construction set. 3. Please omit Sheet L1.1,Landscape Plan;Sheet L2.1, Irrigation Plan; Sheet L2.2, Irrigation Details;and Sheet LS1,Landscape Specifications from construction sets to be submitted for review by this department. Please also omit these from the Title Sheet, C1.0. The Department of Engineering does not have approval authority over landscape plans. 4. Will this development be platted? 5. Provide all existing easements for entire tract to pertinent sheets with correct calls for each. 6. Please ensure the entrance off Retail Parkway aligns with the entrance to West Carmel Commons' property to the north.The entrances do not appear to be aligned;there is a slight offset. 7. Please remove text"Retail Parkway Extension by City"from all plan sheets and replace with"Future Retail Parkway". 8. Please confirm with the INDOT that the entrance to the south can be used as proposed. You will also need to work with RCl(the property owner to the south)to obtain access rights. 9. Please provide a ingress/egress/access easement that benefits the public across the property,to run between the property entrances. 10. Please provide all proposed drainage/BMP easements for the project on the plan set. 11. Please provide the emergency flood route from any detention facilities to the receiving system. Please also provide the on-site flood routing from all areas to the detention facility assuming all inlets plugged during a 100-yr rain event. DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING ONE CIVIC SQUARE, CARMEL, IN 46032 OFFICE 317.571.2441 FAx 317.571.2439 EMAIL engineeringCcarmel.in.gov • Ms.Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 2 of 6 12. Please provide the MFPG and MLAG for the proposed building. The MFPG and the MLAG shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation or the maximum water surface elevation of the flood routes. 13. Please label the slopes of all swales. 14. There appear to be direct discharge points proposed for areas of this property. The property should be graded to drain internally to the site, minimizing any direct discharges. 15. On Sheet C4.1: a. City standard curb: The maximum spacing for control joints shall be 10 feet on tangents and 5 feet on radii. The maximum spacing for expansion joints shall be 50 feet. b. What is the curb detail on this sheet? All curb shall be to City standards. 16. On Sheet C4.3: a. Are the lines shown from the building intended to be flood routing? Please see Comment 11 of this letter. b. Please provide the requisite storm water/drainage information required by Section 100 of the Storm Water Technical Standards Manual on the plan sheets. c. Please include a drainage summary on this sheet including: i. The allowable rates based on the flat release rates. ii. The proposed release rates. iii. The amount of detention required. iv. The amount of detention provided. 17. On Sheet C4.4,Note 2: Please add"and C6.2"to this note. 18. On Sheet C6.1,the City would prefer the curb turn out detail to include a transition to 0 curb instead of a vertical cut. 19. Please include the City's curbing policy in the plan set. 20. On Sheet CS3,please include the following note,"All concrete curbing materials, production,delivery,placement, curing,jointing,finishing,etc. shall be per City of Cannel Curbing Policy." 21. On Sheet CS6: a. Section 02847: Does this apply? b. Section 03000: Does this apply to curbing or foundations? 22. Irrigation in City right-of-way requires a variance and Consent to Encroach,approved by the Board of Public Works. 23. Please ensure that spray patterns from the irrigation system does not spray on City sidewalks. 24. Please add note as required in Storm Water Technical Standards Manual Section 102 "Permit Requirement and Procedures,"Article 102.02 vii pertaining to construction and approval of storm sewer systems to all storm sewer plan and profile sheets. 25. All swales on site must have sub-surface pipe installed. Pipe to conform to requirements of Storm Water Technical Standards Manual and shall be double wall, Hl-Q pipe. 26. Sheet C1.0—Title Sheet. Please remove the titles for the Landscape Plan, Irrigation Plan, Irrigation Details,and Landscape Specifications from the Sheet Index GENERAL INFORMATION • These comments represent the Department of Engineering's first review of the site development plans for this project. o We request that all responses to our comments be provided in writing and be accompanied by a drawing reflecting the requested revisions. Failure to provide written responses may result in the delay of the review process. Ms.Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 3 of 6 • It is critical that this office be made aware of all modifications made on the plans being re-submitted,particularly if any such changes are considered"new"or fall outside of our previous reviews. Please provide revised plans including all revisions. Please notify us of any changes and specifically state any changes,including changes resulting from Plan Commission, BZA or other committee meetings. • We have engaged Crossroad Engineers,PC to review all drainage plans and drainage calculations submitted to this office for review. If you have not already done so, please provide a set of drainage plans and calculations to their office for review. We will share Crossroad's comments as they are received. • Final drawings will not be approved for construction until: o All Engineering Department and Utility Department and Hamilton County Surveyor issues have been resolved. o All bonds and performance guarantees are posted. o All Board of Public Works and Safety approvals and any other governing agency approvals(if required)are obtained. o All off-site easements necessary to install utilities to serve the development are secured. o SWPPP is approved. o All fees are paid. • The Department reserves the right to provide additional comments based upon subsequent reviews. • An approved Storm Water Management Permit is required prior to commencing any earth disturbing activity. Please contact Mr.John Thomas regarding storm water quality requirements. • An approved right-of-way permit is required prior to commencing any work in the public right-of-way and for construction equipment access from the City's right-of-way. • If it will be necessary to relocate existing utilities,the costs for such relocation shall be borne solely by the developer: Any utility poles requiring relocation shall be relocated to within one foot of the outside edge of the proposed right-of-way. • The Department requires that the construction drawings be developed in accordance with the City of Carmel digital submission standards and that all required submittals for primary plat,secondary plat,and construction drawings be made. The digital files must be submitted to the Department of Engineering prior to the approval of the construction plans. Please contact the City GIS Department for the requirements. • Thoroughfare Plan Compliance: Section 2.09 of Chapter 2,Article 1 of Chapter 10 of the Cannel City Code requires that all projects and Improvements or authorizations under the jurisdiction of the zoning ordinance that adjoin, include,are served by or affect existing streets bearing.a designation:on the Thoroughfare Plan shall conform to the requirements of the Thoroughfare Plan in regards to(1)the dedication of public Rights- of-way;(2)design and construction of the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage of the project;(3)Setback;and(4)any other affected development standards. Section 2.09 further states that the petitioner may elect to provide a monetary commitment equal to the value to otherwise design and construct the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan'across'the roadway frontage.The value of the commitment shall be equal to the difference in the value to otherwise design and constructthe improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage,minus the cost to design and construct those improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage that will be installed by the petitioner. The values established above shall be approved by the department of Engineering. Section 2.09 further states that conformance with the Thoroughfare Plan,as outlined Ms. Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 4 of 6 above shall be in addition to any improvements deemed necessary by:(1)Chapter 5, Sections 5.03.05 and 5.05.02(3); (2)Statements per Chapter 24, Section 24.02(B)(5)(e); and(3)Other applicable standards. • Jurisdictions: o The project site is located within current City of Carmel Corporate Limits. o Perimeter Street and Right-of-Way—City of Carmel(Northwestern Drive). o Perimeter Street and Right-of-Way—Indiana Department of Transportation(U.S. 421/Michigan Road). o Water—City of Cannel Utilities o Sanitary Sewers—City of Carmel Utilities o Storm Sewers/Drainage—City of Cannel. o Legal Drains—Hamilton County Surveyor's Office. o Drawings submitted for approval: • The design engineer must certify all drawings submitted for final approval. • This office will require 9 sets of drawings for approval after all issues have been resolved. The drawings will be stamped as approved and signed by the City Engineer and by Carmel Utilities. The Owner will receive 3 sets,one of which must be maintained on the construction site at all times. If this project is subject to review and approval by the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office,a total of 11 sets will be required for final approval. • Carmel Utilities will provide separate reviews of this project for water issues. Please assure that copies of all drawings are sent to: Paul Pace Paul Arnone Cannel Utilities Distribution Carmel Utilities Collection 3450 West 13151 Street 901 North Range Line Road Westfield, IN 46074 Carmel,IN 46032 • Carmel Utilities subscribes to"Holey Moley"who should be contacted directly for all water main locations. • The following items will be sent electronically upon request regarding this correspondence and project: o Project Approval Checklist o Performance/Maintenance Guarantees o Utility Jurisdictions/Right of Way Permits o Availability(acreage)Fees BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY • A schedule for Board of Public Works and Safety meeting dates and agenda deadlines will be sent electronically for your use upon request. Please use the Engineering Department deadlines for submissions to the Board. • Any submission to the Board requires prior approval by the Carmel Clay Plan Commission and/or the Board of Zoning Appeals(if applicable)and completion of review by the Technical Advisory Committee. All written requests to be placed on the Board's agenda must include the appropriate Docket Number and the date(or dates)of approval by the Plan Commission and/or the Board of Zoning Appeals(if applicable). • Water Availability and Sanitary Sewer approval from the Board will be required. This is an EDU approval based upon the proposed use of the site. Reference Items#33 to#35 below for additional details/explanations. Please note that if an entryway or other irrigation system is planned for this development, additional Water Availability Approval from the Board will be required and additional Water Connection Fees will be Ms. Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 5 of 6 assessed based upon the size and usage of the system as determined by the Director of Carmel Utilities. • Commercial Curb Cut Approval. Please provide 8'/2 x 11 exhibits with the request for approval. Provide all pertinent information including lane widths,overall width, radii, lane markings,location of opposing drives or streets,relationship to the location of previous curb cut,etc. • Temporary Construction Entrance Approval. It appears the planned construction entrance is located at the site of a permanent curb cut planned on Retail Parkway. Therefore,a separate approval from the Board will not be required. a The installation of any permanent,privately owned and/or maintained improvement (signs.decorative street signs,walls,streetlights,etc.)within dedicated right of way or dedicated easements requires the execution of a Consent to Encroach Agreement between the Owner and the City of Carmel.Such agreements are executed by the Board of Public Works and Safety. The City Engineer may approve irrigation system agreements. • Secondary Plat approval if applicable. All performance guarantees must be posted prior to submission of secondary plats for Board of Public Works and Safety approval. • Dedication of right-of-way if not platted. This is based upon the City of Carmel 20-Year Thoroughfare Plan requirements. Dedication documents are available upon request. Please be advised that all Right-of-Way Dedications must be accompanied by a Sales Disclosure Agreement completed by the owner for the property being dedicated to the City. The dedication document cannot be recorded without a completed Sales Disclosure. The form is available upon request. • Any open pavement cuts of City right-of-way will require Carmel Board of Public Works and Safety approval. BONDING REQUIREMENTS • Please contact Mr.Dave Barnes to review performance guarantee requirements. Please contact Mr.John Duffy to review water and sanitary sewer bonding requirements. • The amount of the Performance Guarantee is based upon a certified Engineer's Estimate for 100%of the cost of labor and materials to construct the individual improvements,to be provided by the design engineer. Please provide detailed Engineer's Estimates for each improvement including quantities,unit costs,pipe sizes,and materials, etc. • Upon completion and release of individual Performance Guarantees,a three-year Maintenance Guarantee will be required(see Street Sign comments above). The Maintenance Guarantee amount is based upon 15%of the Performance amount for Streets and Curbs and 10%of the Performance amount for all other improvements. • Performance Guarantees may be Performance or Subdivision Bonds or Irrevocable Letters of Credit. • Please reference the available enclosures for more detailed explanation of our procedures. RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT AND BONDING • Any work in the dedicated right-of-way will require an approved Right-of-Way Permit and a License& Permit Bond. • The bond amount is determined by our Right-of-Way Manager. However, if the work is included in the scope of work of a required and posted Performance Guarantee,the Performance Guarantee may be used to satisfy the bond requirements of the Right-of- Way Permit. Ms.Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 6 of 6 • Please contact our Right-of-Way Manager,Fred Glaser,to arrange right-of-way permitting and bonding. AVAILABILITY AND CONNECTION FEES • We defer to Carmel Utilities regarding this issue. • If an entryway or overall site irrigation system is planned for this development, additional Water Connection Fees will be assessed based upon the size and usage of the system and upon the recommendations of the Director of Carmel Utilities. • These fees are required to be paid prior to final approval of construction plans by Engineering and prior to issuance of building permits by Building Codes Services. Please confirm these fees and calculations with Carmel Utilities. If you have questions,please contact me at 571-2441. Sincerely, 4 . ' R. I n.•1,J ., P.E. Assistant' ity Engineer Department of Engineering cc: Angelina Conn,Department of Community Services John Duffy,Carmel Utilities Paul Pace,Carmel Utilities Paul Amone,Carmel Utilities Greg Noyes,Hamilton County Surveyor's Office Greg Ilko,Crossroad Engineers,PC issvrapps\user data\z:lshared\DHILL\PRO.IREV I2\OLIVEGARDENRESI AURANTREV111 r . , Lrff y 1____. - - ._...... ---N .40,04m.. .04401„. i ,, .,41 .r_,;,),:,1 . i a . 3 14 CITY a 0' -AEI,juv 2 3 2012 i' Do June 15, 2012 JAMES BRAINARD, MAYOR \ _ _ 0. Ms.Janet Reid Gerdes, Henrichson,and Associates Architecture/Development 14110 Dallas Parkway, Suite 100 Dallas,Texas 75254 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Dear Ms. Reid: The City received your site development plans on May 21, 2012. The project is scheduled for review at the June 20,2012 Technical Advisory Committee meeting. We offer the following comments: CONSTRUCTION DRAWING REVIEW COMMENTS 1. Please add the following note to the drawings: "IF IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO RELOCATE EXISTING UTILITIES,THE EXPENSE OF SUCH RELOCATION SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER. ALL UTILITY POLES SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN ONE FOOT OF THE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF- WAY." 2. Please add note stating"NO EARTH DISTURBING ACTIVITY MAY COMMENCE WITHOUT AN APPROVED STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT"to construction set. 3. Please omit Sheet L1.1, Landscape Plan;Sheet L2.1, Irrigation Plan; Sheet L2.2, Irrigation Details:and Sheet LS1, Landscape Specifications from construction sets to be submitted for review by this department. Please also omit these from the Title Sheet, C1.0. The Department of Engineering does not have approval authority over landscape plans. 4. Will this development be platted? 5. Provide all existing easements for entire tract to pertinent sheets with correct calls for each. 6. Please ensure the entrance off Retail Parkway aligns with the entrance to West Carmel Commons' property to the north. The entrances do not appear to be aligned;there is a slight offset. 7. Please remove text"Retail Parkway Extension by City"from all plan sheets and replace with"Future Retail Parkway". 8. Please confirm with the INDOT that the entrance to the south can be used as proposed. You will also need to work with RCl(the property owner to the south)to obtain access rights. 9. Please provide a ingress/egress/access easement that benefits the public across the property,to run between the property entrances. 10. Please provide all proposed drainage/BMP easements for the project on the plan set. I I. Please provide the emergency flood route from any detention facilities to the receiving system. Please also provide the on-site flood routing from all areas to the detention facility assuming all inlets plugged during a 100-yr rain event. DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING ONE CIVIC SQUARE, CARMEL, IN 46032 OFFICE 317.571.2441 FAX 317.571.2439 EMAIL engineering @carrnel.in.gov Ms.Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 2 of 6 12. Please provide.the MFPG and MLAG for the proposed building. The MFPG and the MLAG shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation or the maximum water surface elevation of the flood routes. 13. Please label the slopes of all swales. 14. There appear to be direct discharge points proposed for areas of this property. The property should be graded to drain internally to the site, minimizing any direct discharges. 15. On Sheet C4.1: a. City standard curb: The maximum spacing for control joints shall be 10 feet on tangents and 5 feet on radii. The maximum spacing for expansion joints shall be 50 feet. b. What is the curb detail on this sheet? All curb shall be to City standards. 16. On Sheet C4.3: a. Are the lines shown from the building intended to be flood routing? Please see Comment 11 of this letter. b. Please provide the requisite storm water/drainage information required by Section 100 of the Storm Water Technical Standards Manual on the plan sheets. c. Please include a drainage summary on this sheet including: i. The allowable rates based on the flat release rates. ii. The proposed release rates. iii. The amount of detention required. iv. The amount of detention provided. 17. On Sheet C4.4,Note 2: Please add"and C6.2"to this note. 18. On Sheet C6.1,the City would prefer the curb turn out detail to include a transition to 0 curb instead of a vertical cut. 19. Please include the City's curbing policy in the plan set. 20. On Sheet CS3,please include the following note,"All concrete curbing materials, production,delivery,placement,curing,jointing,finishing,etc. shall be per City of Carmel Curbing Policy." 21. On Sheet CS6: a. Section 02847: Does this apply? b. Section 03000: Does this apply to curbing or foundations? 22. Irrigation in City right-of-way requires a variance and Consent to Encroach,approved by the Board of Public Works. 23. Please ensure that spray patterns from the irrigation system does not spray on City sidewalks. 24. Please add note as required in Storm Water Technical Standards Manual Section 102 "Permit Requirement and Procedures,"Article 102.02 vii pertaining to construction and approval of storm sewer systems to all storm sewer plan and profile sheets. 25. All swales on site must have sub-surface pipe installed. Pipe to conform to requirements of Storm Water Technical Standards Manual and shall be double wall, Hi-Q pipe. 26. Sheet Cl.0—Title Sheet. Please remove the titles for the Landscape Plan, Irrigation Plan, Irrigation Details,and Landscape Specifications from the Sheet Index GENERAL INFORMATION • These comments represent the Department of Engineering's first review of the site development plans for this project. • We request that all responses to our comments be provided in writing and be accompanied by a drawing reflecting the requested revisions. Failure to provide written responses may result in the delay of the review process. Ms. Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 3 of 6 • It is critical that this office be made aware of all modifications made on the plans being re-submitted, particularly if any such changes are considered"new"or fall outside of our previous reviews. Please provide revised plans including all revisions. Please notify us of any changes and specifically state any changes, including changes resulting from Plan Commission,BZA or other committee meetings. • We have engaged Crossroad Engineers,PC to review all drainage plans and drainage calculations submitted to this office for review. If you have not already done so, please provide a set of drainage plans and calculations to their office for review. We will share Crossroad's comments as they are received. • Final drawings will not be approved for construction until: o All Engineering Department and Utility Department and Hamilton County Surveyor issues have been resolved. o All bonds and performance guarantees are posted. o All Board of Public Works and Safety approvals and any other governing agency approvals(if required)are obtained. o All off-site easements necessary to install utilities to serve the development are secured. o SWPPP is approved. o All fees are paid. • The Department reserves the right to provide additional comments based upon subsequent reviews. • An approved Storm Water Management Permit is required prior to commencing any earth disturbing activity. Please contact Mr.John Thomas regarding storm water quality requirements. • An approved right-of-way permit is required prior to commencing any work in the public right-of-way and for construction equipment access from the City's right-of-way. • If it will be necessary to relocate existing utilities,the costs for such relocation shall be borne solely by the developer. Any utility poles requiring relocation shall be relocated to within one foot of the outside edge of the proposed right-of-way. • The Department requires that the construction drawings be developed in accordance with the City of Carmel digital submission standards and that all required submittals for primary plat, secondary plat, and construction drawings be made. The digital files must be submitted to the Department of Engineering prior to the approval of the construction plans. Please contact the City GIS Department for the requirements. • Thoroughfare Plan Compliance: Section 2.09 of Chapter 2, Article 1 of Chapter 10 of the Carmel City Code requires that all projects and Improvements or authorizations under the jurisdiction of the zoning ordinance that adjoin, include, are served by or affect existing streets bearing a designation on the Thoroughfare Plan shall conform to the requirements of the Thoroughfare Plan in regards to(I)the dedication of public Rights- of-way; (2)design and constriction of the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage of the project;(3) Setback;and (4)ally other affected development standards. Section 2.09 further states that the petitioner may elect to provide a monetary commitment equal to the value to otherwise design and construct the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage. The value of the commitment shall be equal to the difference in the value to otherwise design and construct the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage, minus the cost to design and construct those improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage that will be installed by the petitioner. The values established above shall be approved by the department of Engineering. Section 2.09 further states that conformance with the Thoroughfare Plan as outlined Ms.Janet Reid June 15, 2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 4 of 6 above shall be in addition to any improvements deemed necessary by: (1)Chapter 5, Sections 5.03.05 and 5.05.02(3);(2)Statements per Chapter 24, Section 24.02(B)(5)(e); and (3)Other applicable standards. • Jurisdictions: o The project site is located within current City of Carmel Corporate Limits. o Perimeter Street and Right-of-Way—City of Cannel (Northwestern Drive). o Perimeter Street and Right-of-Way—Indiana Department of Transportation (U.S. 421/Michigan Road). o Water—City of Cannel Utilities o Sanitary Sewers—City of Cannel Utilities o Storm Sewers/Drainage—City of Carmel. o Legal Drains—Hamilton County Surveyor's Office. o Drawings submitted for approval: • The design engineer must certify all drawings submitted for final approval. • This office will require 9 sets of drawings for approval after all issues have been resolved. The drawings will be stamped as approved and signed by the City Engineer and by Carmel Utilities. The Owner will receive 3 sets, one of which must be maintained on the construction site at all times. If this project is subject to review and approval by the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office,a total of 11 sets will be required for final approval. • Carmel Utilities will provide separate reviews of this project for water issues. Please assure that copies of all drawings are sent to: Paul Pace Paul Arnone Carmel Utilities Distribution Cannel Utilities Collection 3450 West 13151 Street 901 North Range Line Road Westfield, IN 46074 Cannel, IN 46032 • Carmel Utilities subscribes to"Holey Moley"who should be contacted directly for all water main locations. • The following items will be sent electronically upon request regarding this correspondence and project: o Project Approval Checklist o Performance/Maintenance Guarantees o Utility Jurisdictions/Right of Way Permits o Availability(acreage) Fees BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY • A schedule for Board of Public Works and Safety meeting dates and agenda deadlines will be sent electronically for your use upon request. Please use the Engineering Department deadlines for submissions to the Board. • Any submission to the Board requires prior approval by the Carmel Clay Plan Commission and/or the Board of Zoning Appeals(if applicable)and completion of review by the Technical Advisory Committee. All written requests to be placed on the Board's agenda must include the appropriate Docket Number and the date(or dates)of approval by the Plan Commission and/or the Board of Zoning Appeals(if applicable). • Water Availability and Sanitary Sewer approval from the Board will be required. This is an EDU approval based upon the proposed use of the site. Reference Items#33 to#35 below for additional details/explanations. Please note that if an entryway or other irrigation system is planned for this development, additional Water Availability Approval from the Board will be required and additional Water Connection Fees will be Ms. Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 5 of 6 assessed based upon the size and usage of the system as determined by the Director of Cannel Utilities. • Commercial Curb Cut Approval. Please provide 8'/2 x 11 exhibits with the request for approval. Provide all pertinent information including lane widths,overall width, radii, lane markings, location of opposing drives or streets,relationship to the location of previous curb cut,etc. • Temporary Construction Entrance Approval. It appears the planned construction entrance is located at the site of a permanent curb cut planned on Retail Parkway. Therefore,a separate approval from the Board will not be required. • The installation of any permanent,privately owned and/or maintained improvement (signs, decorative street signs,walls,streetlights,etc.)within dedicated right of way or dedicated easements requires the execution of a Consent to Encroach Agreement between the Owner and the City of Carmel. Such agreements are executed by the Board of Public Works and Safety. The City Engineer may approve irrigation system agreements. • Secondary Plat approval if applicable. All performance guarantees must be posted prior to submission of secondary plats for Board of Public Works and Safety approval. • Dedication of right-of-way if not platted. This is based upon the City of Carmel 20-Year Thoroughfare Plan requirements. Dedication documents are available upon request. Please be advised that all Right-of-Way Dedications must be accompanied by a Sales Disclosure Agreement completed by the owner for the property being dedicated to the City. The dedication document cannot be recorded without a completed Sales Disclosure. The form is available upon request. • Any open pavement cuts of City right-of-way will require Cannel Board of Public Works and Safety approval. BONDING REQUIREMENTS • Please contact Mr.Dave Barnes to review performance guarantee requirements. Please contact Mr.John Duffy to review water and sanitary sewer bonding requirements. • The amount of the Performance Guarantee is based upon a certified Engineer's Estimate for 100%of the cost of labor and materials to construct the individual improvements,to be provided by the design engineer. Please provide detailed Engineer's Estimates for each improvement including quantities, unit costs, pipe sizes,and materials, etc. • Upon completion and release of individual Performance Guarantees,a three-year Maintenance Guarantee will be required (see Street Sign comments above). The Maintenance Guarantee amount is based upon 15%of the Performance amount for Streets and Curbs and 10%of the Performance amount for all other improvements. • Performance Guarantees may be Performance or Subdivision Bonds or Irrevocable Letters of Credit. • Please reference the available enclosures for more detailed explanation of our procedures. RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT AND BONDING • Any work in the dedicated right-of-way will require an approved Right-of-Way Permit and a License& Permit Bond. • The bond amount is determined by our Right-of-Way Manager. However, if the work is included in the scope of work of a required and posted Performance Guarantee,the Performance Guarantee may be used to satisfy the bond requirements of the Right-of- Way Permit. Ms.Janet Reid June 15,2012 RE: Olive Garden Restaurant-Project Review#1 Page 6 of 6 • Please contact our Right-of-Way Manager, Fred Glaser,to arrange right-of-way permitting and bonding. AVAILABILITY AND CONNECTION FEES • We defer to Carmel Utilities regarding this issue. • If an entryway or overall site irrigation system is planned for this development, additional Water Connection Fees will be assessed based upon the size and usage of the system and upon the recommendations of the Director of Carmel Utilities. • These fees are required to be paid prior to final approval of construction plans by Engineering and prior to issuance of building permits by Building Codes Services. Please confirm these fees and calculations with Carmel Utilities. If you have questions, please contact me at 571-2441. Sincerely, /4., ♦. • R. D n..n,J .,P.E. Assistant ity Engineer Department of Engineering cc: Angelina Conn, Department of Community Services John Duffy,Carmel Utilities Paul Pace,Carmel Utilities Paul Arnone,Carmel Utilities Greg Hoyes, Hamilton County Surveyor's Office Greg Ilko,Crossroad Engineers,PC issvrapps\user data\zashared\DHILL\PROJREV 12\OLIVEGARDE•NRESTAURANrREV# aCP wk, June 15, 2012 1'' Submittal Ms. Janet Reid GFIA Architecture/Development pEC ' } 14110 Dallas Parkway, Suite 100 I Dallas,TX 75254 JUN 2012 I � OCCS , CROSSROAD RE: Olive Garden fir', ENGINEERS,PC Michigan Road c Retail Parkway Technical Advisory Committee Engineering Review for Development Drainage Designs Dear Ms. Reid: The stormwater review of the proposed construction plans and drainage calculations for the above referenced project has been completed. The submittal is in need of additional information in order to be in compliance with the City of Carmel Stormwater Technical Standard Manual (the manual). Please revise the plans in accordance with the comments below. 1. Per Section IO2.02.i., please revise the Civil Cover Sheet, Sheet C1.1, to include a location map. 2. Per Section 102.02.iv., please submit a reduced plat or project site map containing the required information on a sheet or sheets no larger than 11"by 17". 3. Per Section 102.02.v.a., please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey, Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan, Sheet C2.1, to include the names and land uses of the adjoining properties. Also, please indicate on the plans the existing right-of-ways. Please review and revise as necessary. 4. Per Section 102.02.v.a.a., please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey, Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan, Sheet C2.I, to include all topography of land surrounding the site to a distance of at least 200 feet. 5. Per Section 102.02.v.d., please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey, Sheet C 1.2, and/or Demolition Plan, Sheet C2.1, to include all 100-year iloodplains, floodway fringes, and floodways, established or identified in accordance with the City of Carmel Flood Hazard Area Ordinance. Please note if none exists. 6. Per Section 102.02.v.f., please revise the ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey, Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan, Sheet C2.1, to include the casting elevation, invert elevations, and pipe materials of' the existing 14 inch force main running through the property. 7. Please revise the ALTAIACSM Land Title Survey, Sheet C1.2, and/or Demolition Plan, Sheet C2.I, to include the property boundary information and section corner information. 8. It appears that the manhole casting for the existing 14 inch sanitary force main and 10 inch gravity sanitary sewer will need to be adjusted to grade during construction. Please revise the Utility Plan, Sheet C5.1, to include the proposed casting elevations and related details/notes. 9. Per Section IO2.02.vii., please revise the plans to include Storm Sewer Plan and Profile sheets. 10. Please revise the Site/Dimension Control Plan, Sheet C3.I, to include the proposed alignment of the Retail Parkway Extension to ensure that the proposed right-of-way is accurate. 11. Per Section 102.02.xi.b., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to show the location of all site improvements including lot delineation, lot identification, and proposed structures. 12. Per Section 102.02.xi.c., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to include show the location of all 100-year floodplains, floodway fringes, and floodways established in accordance with the City of Carmel Flood Hazard Area Ordinance. Please note if none exists. Olive Garden GHA Architecture/Development June 15,2012 Page 1 of 4 13. Per Section 102.02.xi.d., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to show delineation of all proposed land disturbing activities. Specifically, the area scheduled for demolition within the Retail Parkway Extension and the future 2,700 square feet retail building in the northeast corner of the development should be delineated and final grades/drainage patterns should be shown. 14. Per Section 102.02.xi.g., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to include the 100-year overflow paths/ponding areas shown as hatched areas and the required easements through the development. 15. Per Section 102.02.xi.h., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to include a statement indicating whether the proposed storm drainage system will be public or private. 16. Section 102.02.xi.k., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to show the emergency flood routing path(s) and their invert elevations from the detention facility to the receiving system. 17. Per Sections 102.02.xi.1 and IO2.02.xi.s., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to include a typical cross section of the detention pond carried to a point above the 100-year high water elevation showing the following information: a. Elevation of the existing land and proposed changes b. 10-year and 100-year high water elevations resulting from the controlled release conditions called for by the City of Carmel's Stormwater Management Ordinance c. Relationship to adjacent structures, streets, and other facilities d. Bottom of pond, top of bank, emergency spillway, and water surface over the emergency spillway elevations e. Emergency spillway dimensions f. Detention facility side slopes 18. Per Section 102.02.xi.m, please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to include a drainage summary, which summarizes the basic conditions of the drainage design, including site acreage, off-site/upstream acreage, allowable release rates, post-developed 10-year and 100-year flows leaving the site, volume of detention required, volume of detention provided,and any release rate. The drainage summary should also include both the required orifice size to restrict the release rate per ordinance and the minimum 6-inch orifice information. 19. Section IO2.02.xi.o., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to include elevations at each corner of the property to verity that no direct discharge will take place. Also, please include the flood protection grade for the property and a statement indicating the definition of minimum flood protection grade in accordance with the manual. 20. Section 102.02.xi.r., please revise the Grading Plan, Sheet C4.2, and/or Drainage Plan, Sheet C4.3, to indicate the slopes of all surface drainage swales. 21. Section IO2.02.xiv., please include a separate Structure Data Table containing the minimum information discussed in the manual or revise the Storm Sewer Pipe Analysis on the Storm Sewer Plan, Sheet C4.4, to include the following information; structure number references, pipe material, type of structure, detail reference to type of structure, and any notes related to the structure. 22. Per Section 102.03.i.a.i, please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include a pre-development watershed map which shall include all pertinent information described in the referenced Section. 23. Please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the 2-year and 10-year pre-developed runoff in addition to the 100-year runoff already provided. Please note that the fully-developed right-of-ways (per the City of Carmel Thoroughfare Plan) for Michigan Road and the Retail Parkway extension should be included in the pre-developed runoff calculations. 24. Per Section 102.03.i.b.i, please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include a post-development watershed map showing that all off-site acreage draining through the site is accommodated, including the fully developed right-of-ways (per the City of Carmel Thoroughfare Plan) for Michigan Road and the Retail Parkway extension. Please ensure that the future 2,700 square foot retail building discussed in the Storm Water Management Plan is shown on the post-developed watershed map. Olive Garden GHA Architecture/Development June 15,2012 Page 2 of 4 • 25. The post-development 100-year, 5 minute storm runoff does not appear to be correct. Please review and revise as necessary. 26. Per Section IO2.03.i.c., please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the following information for both the 100-year storm and 10-year storm: a. Provide State/Storage Discharge Calculations b. Critical storm discharge routed through the pond/outlet structure c. Critical pond elevations, including top of bank and spillway elevations. 27. Per Section IO2.03.i.d., please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the following information: a. Storm Basin Watershed Map, including the storm structure designation that each basin is draining b. Inlet grate capacity design in accordance with Section 305.05 of the manual c. Time of Concentration calculations for all storm sewer pipes 28. Per Section IO2.03.ii., please revise the Storm Water Management Plan to include the following information in tabular form: a. Pre-developed acreage for each outlet b. Unit discharge allowable release rate used c. The resulting allowable release rate for the post-developed 10-year and 100-year events d. Pre-developed 2-year flow rates e. Pre-developed and post-developed release rates for 10-year and 100-year events f. Completed Table 102-I worksheet from the manual 29. Per Section 302.03 of the manual, the allowable release rate for this site shall be 0.1 cfs per acre of development for 0-10 year return interval storms. In addition, as this development is located within an area with a release rate restriction (Crooked Creek Shed) by the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office, the allowable release rate for 11-100 year return interval storms shall be 0.27 cfs per acre of development. Please review and revise accordingly. 30. Also per Section 302.03, as this site to consist of a pre-developed area with more than one(I)outlet, the release rates should be computed and restricted based on the pre-developed discharge to each outlet point. Please review and revise accordingly. 31. Per Section 302.06.01, please provide information to verify that a minimum of 90% of the original detention capacity of the proposed dry detention basin is restored within 48 hours from the start of the design 100-year storm. 32. It appears that the 10-year and 100-year high water elevation in the detention pond are both within 20 feet of the overhead electric line along Northwestern Drive. Per Section 302.06.03, please revise accordingly. 33. Per Section 302.06.06, any pipe or opening shall include a Debris Guard in accordance with the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office Standard Detail D-12. Please review and revise the plans accordingly. 34. It appears that the outlet control structure has been designed in accordance with Section 302.06.07, as the orifice size required to limit the release rate from the proposed pond is less than the minimum 6-inch diameter size. However, please revise the drainage report to provide full modeling calculations, and resulting critical elevations and flow rates, for both the ordinance and minimum 6-inch orifice scenarios. The required drainage summary (see comment #21) within the plans shall also include the specified information for both scenarios. 35. Per Section 302.06.10, a minimum fifteen (15) feet horizontally from the top of bank of the proposed detention facility shall be dedicated as a permanent stormwater easement. Please review and revise accordingly. 36. Per Section 302.06.12, detention basins are to be designed to detain the runoff from the fully developed right-of-way per the City of Cannel 20-Year Thoroughfare Plan across all frontages, regardless of . existing watershed boundaries or drainage breaks/divides. Olive Garden GHA Architecture/Development June 15,2012 Page 3 of 4 37. Per Section 302.08.1,a minimum of 1% bottom slope in all directions shall be provided in dry detention facilities with perforated subsurface drains. A positive/gravity outlet is also required for the underdrain in the dry detention facility. Please review and revise accordingly. 38. Per Section 302.08.2, the maximum planned depth of stormwater water stored shall not exceed four(4) feet. Please review and revised accordingly. 39. Please provide a typical section of the emergency spillway and calculations for the proposed spillway to show that it complies with all requirements of Section 302.11 of the manual. 40. Please review the stormwater easement requirements of Section 306 and revise the plans to provide the necessary easements. 41. Per Section 104.02, the minimum finish floor elevations shall be at least 6 inches above the minimum MLAG elevations and 15 inches above adjacent roadway elevations. Please review and revise accordingly. 42. Per Section 501.01,there should be no less than 2.50 feet of cover along any part of the pipe from final pavement elevation or final ground surface elevation to the top(outside)of pipe. It appears that there are multiple storm sewer structures that are not in conformance. Please review and revise accordingly. Also note that any waiver requests should be submitted directly to the City of Cannel Engineering Department. 43. Per Section 501.03, a minimum drop of 0.1 feet through manholes and inlet structures shall be provided. Also per Section 501.03, when changing pipe sizes within a structure, the pipe crowns should align. Please review and revise accordingly. 44. Please provide calculations showing that the downstream receiving system from the detention pond (grate and pipe flow of Existing Storm Structure "A") is sufficient to convey the peak detention pond outflow in addition to the watershed already draining to the inlet. Verify that there are no downstream restrictions, and that the system can handle the emergency overflow scenario. (This information should be surveyed, as-built information.) Please include with your submittal,one(1) copy of the comments indicating the action taken or a written explanation for action not taken. Construction plans and drainage calculations are not to be re-submitted without implementing changes with respect to any and all review comments from the City of Carmel and the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office. Please contact me at(317) 780-1555 ext. 112 with any questions. Sincerely, CrossRoad gineers, P.0 'Of / Gregory J. o, P.E. Project Manager copy: Gary Duncan, City of Carmel Assistant Engineer Greg Hoyes, Hamilton County Surveyors Office John Thomas, City of Carmel MS-4 Operator Amanda Foley, City of Cannel File Olive Garden GHA Architecture/Development June 15,2012 Page 4 of 4 Ugy Ey®R'S (4,44,jC i t"\-- ' ! lV'1+ r I.I t .1� ;_ 011� I r ', i` ' { I '" 1 I t'/ 11 � F� p t III ,? 1 ..�-_ �� � - y\_ r _ ' „..i • Xenton C. `Ward, C(F.MM -- - "' Suite rSa Surveyor of J-kunilton County One,7iamilton County Square (Phone(317)776-5495 Noblesville, Indiana 46060-2230 (Fa.r (317)776-9625 June 14, 2012 GHA Architecture/Development ATTN: Janet Reid 14110 Dallas Parkway Suite 100 Dallas, TX 75254 VIA E-MAIL: jreid a,gha-architects.com RE: Olive Garden - Carmel Dear Ms. Reid: We have reviewed the construction plans submitted to the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office on May 23, 2012, for this project and have the following comments: 1. The proposed project falls in the incorporated area and MS4 jurisdiction of the City of Carmel. 2. The proposed project does not fall in a Carmel Wellhead Protection Zone. 3. The proposed project does fall in the Park Northwestern and the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain Watershed. The Crooked Creek Regulated Drain Watershed has a restricted allowable release rate of 0.1 cfs per acre up to the 10 year 24 hours storm event and 0.27 cfs per acre above the 10 year to the 100 year 24 hours storm event. 4. Please submit an outlet permit for the indirect discharge into the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain. The application is available at Surveyor's Form Page. 5. Drainage calculations were not submitted for this project, so a drainage review and approval of the site outlet permit cannot be conducted until the calculations are submitted. These calculations must also include analysis of the downstream drainage system to prove that capacity exist for the discharge from this site. 6. Since this proposed site crosses a watershed boundary and it being redirected into a single watershed, the allowable release rate per the Hamilton County Stormwater Technical Standards Manual, Section 302.02 will be a maximum of 0.58 cfs to the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain. 7. Please refer to the Hamilton County Stormwater Management Technical Standards Manual that can be found at: http://www.hamiltoncounty.in.gov/egov/documents/1321628191 98613.pdf 8. Additional comments will be made upon review of the drainage calculations for this proposed project. Should you have any questions, I can be reached at 317-776-8495. Sincerely, 4 , rh104#14 Greg Hoyes, AC, CFM, CPESC Plan Reviewer CC: Angie Conn—Cannel DOCS John Thomas—Cannel Engineering Dave Barnes—Cannel Engineering Greg Ilko—Crossroad Engineers /p' i 7,-___-_74 - '-,,, "=„ ._ *CQcry i-; JUN 2 9 2012 i -U EYOR S OFF/ ..s,5k1, 1) ,;1irc,-',..(1:::: ,,,..,, , -----q)c-:-_}— i' II IL, ".:___,/ ( A Q.)/ f , i - a�t'i„ a� ;.k ',' I _'P , "_"Ear ��- .�:=1k 11 l JUid ( cI) `) , ,,--- 4 t -. - Xenton C. 'Ward, UFLM Suite 18J Surveyor of J-(amilton County One.7 familton County Square 'None(317) 7764495 Aoblesuille, Indiana 46060 2230 'Fax (317)776-9623 June 14,2012 GHA Architecture/Development ATTN: Janet Reid 14110 Dallas Parkway Suite 100 Dallas, TX 75254 VIA E-MAIL:jreid(c�gha-architects.com RE: Olive Garden - Carmel Dear Ms. Reid: We have reviewed the construction plans submitted to the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office on May 23, 2012, for this project and have the following comments: 1. The proposed project falls in the incorporated area and MS4 jurisdiction of the City of Carmel. 2. The proposed project does not fall in a Carmel Wellhead Protection Zone. 3. The proposed project does fall in the Park Northwestern and the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain Watershed. The Crooked Creek Regulated Drain Watershed has a restricted allowable release rate of 0.1 cfs per acre up to the 10 year 24 hours storm event and 0.27 cfs per acre above the 10 year to the 100 year 24 hours storm event. 4. Please submit an outlet permit for the indirect discharge into the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain. The application is available at Surveyor's Form Page. 5. Drainage calculations were not submitted for this project, so a drainage review and approval of the site outlet permit cannot be conducted until the calculations are submitted. These calculations must also include analysis of the downstream drainage system to prove that capacity exist for the discharge from this site. 6. Since this proposed site crosses a watershed boundary and it being redirected into a single watershed, the allowable release rate per the Hamilton County Stormwater Technical Standards Manual, Section 302.02 will be a maximum of 0.58 cfs to the Crooked Creek Regulated Drain. 7. Please refer to the Hamilton County Stormwater Management Technical Standards Manual that can be found at: http://www.hamiltoncounty.in.gov/egovidocuments/1321628191 98613.pdf 8. Additional comments will be made upon review of the drainage calculations for this proposed project. Should you have any questions, I can be reached at 317-776-8495. Sincerely, rAluv4 Greg Noyes, AC, CFM, CPESC Plan Reviewer CC: Angie Conn—Carmel DOCS John Thomas—Carmel Engineering Dave Barnes—Carmel Engineering Greg Ilko—Crossroad Engineers iHA Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL June 12,2012 TO: City of Carmel Development Services Department Attn: Angie Conn, Planner 1 Civic Center Square Carmel, IN 46032 Phone: 317-571-2417 FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN— 10206 Michigan Road-C090423.400 We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: p. Prints r Disk I Bidding P Review IT Samples IT Photocopies r Cost Estimating IT Specifications r Shop Drawings r Information Reproducibles r Record Co ies, Sheet No Descri,tion 15 Sets of the Preliminary PC Architectural Review packets Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents for distribution/review at the Planning Commission meeting on Tuesday,June 19-for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located at 10206 Michigan Road—TAC Meeting scheduled on June 20,2012 p Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. ®, y I s - i •ly, Alp G•=.' 4. ffi\ 01) S, rep ;oo Reid 6'd Ja Pr s ty Development et 1 GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct: 214-461-963 1 Email:jreid@gha-architects.com Real Estate Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Manag. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:32 PM To: 'Janet Reid' Subject: RE: olive garden & plan commission pre-review of architecture - Carmel, IN Hi,Janet, I hate to say this, but I really do not see any changes to the architecture to try to attempt to meet the Michigan Rd. Overlay Zone architectural requirements... Here are the architectural design requirements of the US 421 overlay zone, below. The yellow highlighted areas should still be addressed, since the revised building elevations do not seem to have changed very much. I thought Arthur McIntosh said he could add a base/foundation,or at least a 3-4' high water table, but I do not see that. He also said he could add a few"bricked in arched windows" to the rear and left elevations, but I do not see that either... can you please help? (I do see a few upper level windows added to the right elevation, though, which might be good if it is not opaque/black glass; perhaps it could be a frosted glass?) 23C.09 Architectural Design Requirements. In reviewing the architectural design of building(s) proposed to be built in the Overlay Zone, factors to be considered by the Commission shall include but are not limited to the following: A. Design Theme: Buildings shall be designed with an overall Corridor Architectural TGheme consistent with. or complementary to the Federal. Georgian,Italianate or-4Gr eek;4Reuival 'Periods New are mot required to,<be imitative, hutr.must incorpoi atethe'salient features of.these architecturalestyles. Pre-existing buildings on adjoining tracts shall not be a factor in the design of new buildings unless they are consistent with the architectural objectives of the Overlay Zone. B. Building Proportion: Buildings within the Overlay Zone should geiier ally avaid?long monotoi ous w inter•rupted''`walls;orirooffplanes. The design and placement of building facades, doors, windows, and architectural design details shall be through use of Regulating Lines. C. Building Height. The height of new principal buildings shall be at least one and one-half (11) stories, or be designed to appear so from the front and sides. Retail and office buildings are encouraged to be two (2) stories in height, with office or residential uses on the second floor. The minimum height for all buildings shall be twenty(20) feet, either at the roofline or at the top of the parapet wall. The maximum height shall be thirty feet (30'); however, an additional eight feet (8') shall be permitted to accommodate mechanical penthouses or other inner roof structures. Building heights for proposed buildings that are adjacent to residential uses shall be no more than one and one-half(11/2) stories or 20' on the facade(s) nearest the residential use, but may increase in height by one additional story for a facade step back with a depth of 25', or first structural bay, whichever is larger. D. Building Facades Faiyadea'yshall have a defirieclT base<or.fou'idatt`oti;.a rniiidl6:or moth laced vuall and'd,:top formed by a pitched roof or articulated cornice, in each instance appropriate to the building style. Buildings with continuous facades that are ninety (90) feet or greater in width, shall be designed with offsets (projecting or recessed) not less than eight (8) feet deep, and at intervals of not greater than sixty(60) feet. Facades constructed of more than one material shall only change materials along a horizontal line, or along a vertical line of an architectural element (not a diagonal line). The material that appears to be heavier shall always be placed beneath the lighter material. All facades of buildings shall be of the same materials and similarly detailed. Design elements of the elevations shall be organized such that openings line up horizontally and vertically with other openings. Openings in a facade shall be arranged in a balanced, relatively 1 uniform fashion. Openings of varying sized are often centered vertically along the center line of the openings above or below. E. Roofs Roofs shall be simply and symmetrically pitched and only in the configuration of gables and hips, w th pitcl es iarigmgafrom 4:x22 to. 1r4 d1. Shed roofs are permitted only when the ridge is attached to an exterior wall of a building, and shall conform to pitch between 14:12 and 4:12. Flat roofs are permitted when consistent with the historic style of architecture, if edged by a railing or parapet, and if rooftop mechanical equipment is either camouflaged on all sides or visually integrated into the overall design of the building. In no case shall rooftop mechanical equipment be visible from adjoining streets,residential zones or uses. Modulation of the roof and/or roof line will be required in order to eliminate box-shaped buildings. Parapets must be fully integrated into the architectural design of the building and provide seamless design transitions, including exterior materials, between the main building mass, mechanical penthouses and other roof structures. Should they be used,partial parapets shall have a return that extends inward to at least the first structural bay,or twenty-five (25) feet,whichever is greater. Pitched roofs shall Abe clad in wTood slid gleS sl'atew compos Lion asphaltAshingle'or standingd°seain irietalpaiels. Asphalt shingles shall be colored to resemble gray slate; standing-seam panels may be either gray, black,dark blue, dark green or barn red. Dormers shall be designed with the correct details,proportion and style consistent with the overall building composition, and roofed with symmetrical gable, hip or barrel roofs. Belvederes, cupolas, and pergolas are permitted if appropriate to the style,well proportioned,and fully detailed. All vents,attic ventilators,turbines,flues and others roof penetrations must be painted to match the color of the roof or flat black, except those made of metal which may be left natural. Gutters and downspouts shall be appropriate to or visually integrated with the architectural style of the structure. F. Entrances. Building entrances shall be defined and articulated by architectural elements such as lintels, pediments, pilasters, columns, and other design elements appropriate to the architectural style and details of the building as a whole. The location, orientation, proportion and style of doors must faithfully reflect the chosen style of the building. Building facades for industrial and warehouse uses shall be designed with a main entrance and at least two (2) window openings associated with this doorway. G. Windows. All window design shall be compatible with the style, materials, color, details and proportion of the building. The number of panes, the way it opens,the trim around it and whether it is embellished with shutters must be consistent with the architectural style of the structure. H. Awnings. Fixed or retractable awnings are permitted if they complement a building's architectural style, material, colors, and details; do not conceal architectural features (such as cornices, columns, pilasters, or decorative details); do not impair facade composition; and are designed as an integral part of the facade. Metal or aluminum awnings are prohibited. Storefronts. Storefronts shall be integrally designed with overall facade character. Ground floor retail, service and restaurant uses should generally have large pane display windows, however, they shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the total ground level (first floor) facade area. Buildings with multiple storefronts shall be of unified design,through the use of common materials, architectural details,signage and lighting consistent with the overall building style. J Drive-thru windows. Drive-thru windows shall be designed as a related, integrated architectural element and part of the overall design composition of the building. 2 K. Suitability of building materials. Unless otherwise approved by the Commission, building materials shall be consistent with and/or complementary to those which replicate Federal, Georgian, Italianate and Greek Revival Periods of American architecture,as follows: 1. Exposed foundation shall be constructed of one or more of the following: a. Red brick; b. Stone (limestone,granite,fieldstone,etc.); c. Split-face block or architectural pre-cast concrete, if surface looks like brick or stone. 2. Facade walls shall be constructed of any combination of red brick or stone. The following materials may also be applied as trim details, but shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the overall non-window facade area: a. Red brick or stone of a contrasting color; b. Smooth cut cedar shingles; c. Wood clapboard siding; d. Wood beaded siding; e. Stucco with smooth finish,or EIFS. Angie Conn Planning Administrator From: Janet Reid [mailto:jreid @GHA-Architects.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:35 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: olive garden & plan commission pre-review of architecture - Carmel, IN Okay— I'm sending the pkts out tonight—you should receive them by 10am tomorrow. Thank you for your quick responses!! Oh—btw, we are preparing to issue the Public Notices next week—can you recommend a sign company to place the sign on the property? Janet From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn@carmel.in.aov] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:33 AM To: Janet Reid Subject: RE: olive garden &plan commission pre-review of architecture - Carmel, IN Sure! Angie Conn Planning Administrator From: Janet Reid j mailto:ireid@GHA-Architects.coml Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:32 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: olive garden & plan commission pre-review of architecture - Carmel, IN 3 Conn, An•elina V From: Foley, Amanda J Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 3:44 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Cc: Duncan, Gary R Subject: RE: June 19 Plan Commission meeting agenda Olive Garden: We have reviewed the plans in preparation for the June TAC meeting and are issuing comments. Therefore, we have not had extensive dialogue with the petitioner yet. Based on the existing construction plans that have been submitted, we do not foresee any major issues with this project moving forward. Thanks! Amanda Foley Staff Engineer City of Carmel Department of Engineering (317) 571-2309 direct From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 11:47 AM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: June 19 Plan Commission meeting agenda Greetings, Plan Commissioners - 1) Attached in 2 file formats is the agenda for the Tuesday,June 19 Plan Commission meeting. Paper copies of this and info packets will be mailed to you today. 2) Within a few days,the scanned info packets can be viewed online at: http://cocdocs.ci.carmel.in.us/weblink/0/fol/19877/Rowl.aspx; just refer to the agendas to find the docket no.for each petition. (The first two numbers of a docket no. represent the year,such as in docket no. 12030008, the year is 2012.) Have a great weekend! Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Flr. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317-571-2417 I F: 317-571-2426 I E: aconn @carmel.in.gov W: www.carmeldocs.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Hunter, Shirley A [Shirley.Hunter @duke-energy.com] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 10:39 AM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: June 20 Technical Advisory Committee meeting agenda Angie, I will not be attending this TAC meeting. I have no objection to the rezone for Item 12050013 Z. The Olive Garden is IPL service territory. I will work directly with Old Town Design on the new subdivision. Thanks, Shirley Hunter Sr. Distribution Eng Specialist Duke Energy 16475 Southpark Dr Westfield,IN 46074 317.896.6711 From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn@carmel.in.gov] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 9:34 AM To: Akers, William P; Blanchard, Jim E; 'Brooke Gajownik'; 'David Lucas'; Duffy, John M; Duncan, Gary R; Ellison, Christopher M; 'Greg Ilko'; Hohlt, William G; Huffman, David; 'Jason Kirkman'; 'Jason LeMaster'; 'Joel Thurman'; Krueskamp, Theresa A; Redden, Nick; 'Ron Farrand'; 'Ryan Hartman'; Hunter, Shirley A; Westermeier, Mark; McNamee, Gary S; 'Yackle, Troy '; 'jlclark @vectren.com'; Thomas, John G; 'Greg.Hoyes @hamiltoncounty.in.gov'; 'dan.davenport@aes.com'; 'doland.w.wise @usps.gov'; Mindham, Daren; Littlejohn, David W; 'KREBS, STEVEN J (ATTINB)'; 'Larry Beard'; Green, Timothy J; 'Duane Whiting' Cc: Boone, Rachel M.; Carter, Ronald E; Mishler, Nicholas F; 'Chuck Shupperd'; Donahue-Wold, Alexia K; Hancock, Ramona B; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Knott, Bruce; 'Richard Heck'; 'Marilyn Anderson'; 'Mark Zukerman'; McBride, Mike T; Pace, Paul V; 'Judy Hagan'; Tingley, Connie S; Maki, Sue; Keeling, Adrienne M; Stewart, Lisa M; 'mw9285 @aol.com'; Haney, Douglas C; 'Jeffrey Cohen'; Barnes, David R; Worthley, Matthew D; 'amy.schnick @hamiltoncounty.in.gov'; Wenger, Garry; 'Ron Morris'; Whitman, Mike; 'Jennifer Marlett'; 'Rlchreis @aol.com'; Hoover, Aaron; 'Jeremy Boyer'; 'Wiseman, Alan'; Kempa, Lisa L; 'MWhite @buckeye.com'; Martin, Candy; 'McFeely, Dan';-Mishler, Nicholas F; Barlow, James C; 'kcummings @citizensenergygroup.com'; 'jhavard @citizensenergygroup.com'; 'Jon Dobosiewicz'; 'justinmoffett @aol.com'; 'Janet Reid'; 'Jack DeGagne'; 'Pohlman, Jesse M.'; 'joseph.scimia @FaegreBD.com'; 'roberta.driver @faegreBD.com' Subject: June 20 Technical Advisory Committee meeting agenda Hello, TAC members: The Wednesday, June 20, Carmel Technical Advisory Committee meeting agenda is attached in 2 file formats. Please let me know if you did not receive plans for a certain item, or if you have any questions/concerns. Have a great weekend! Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Fir. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317-571-2417 I F: 317-571-2426 I E: aconnOcarmel.in.gov_ W: www.carmeldocs.com 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 11:16 AM To: 'Janet Reid' Subject: olive garden &plan commission pre-review of architecture Hi Janet— I think we talked about possibly giving the plan commission a look at the proposed architecture for this building, to get their preliminary feedback about the architecture. Did you want to go ahead and have us do that? (We would just present it to the commission and gather feedback to send back to you and Darden; you would not have to attend that June 19 meeting.) The next meeting of the plan commission is June 19,so we would need the architectural design building elevations (15 copies)for us to mail to them by noon on June 14. Please let me know if you would like to do that. Thanks, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Flr. Carmel, IN 46032. 0: 317-571-2417 I F: 317-571-2426 I E: aconn@icarmel.in.gov W: www.carmeldocs.com Please consider the,environment before printing this e-mail 1 1742,4„ (6 -LAS yo Janet Reid `X,„,A:17',411,, NNW jig . ter, From: Conn, Angelina V <Aconn @carmel.in.gov> 17 JUN 14 ; Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:45 AM ` 9 2012 To Janet Reid its Cc: 'Jack DeGagne'; Kourtnie Airheart Subject: Review Comments for Docket No. 12050014 DP/ADLS: Olive Garden•6staurant,4c' Good afternoon,Janet- Please reply to each of the review comments for the ADLS application via email or letter correspondence by June 29. Additional review comments might be voiced at the June 20 TAC meeting.Thank you. Preliminary Planning/Zoning Dept.review comments: 1. Please provide digital copies of any revised plans and applications. 2. Please provide copies of your correspondence with the TAC members and their correspondence with you. 3. Provide the filled out and notarized affidavit of notice of public hearing page of the application. 4. Provide the filled out Notice of Public Hearing page of the application. 5. Provide the filled out and notarized Public Notice Sign Placement affidavit page of the application. 6. Prepare an estimated construction cost to comply with the Thoroughfare Plan&Alternative Transportation Plan; contact the Engineering Dept. for more details, at 571-2441. 7. Feel free to bring color/material samples of the building to the Plan Commission meeting. 8. Please provide the dumpster screening details. 9. Please verify that the dumpster enclosure height is tall enough to screen any dumpsters from view. 10. Not sure that the building can encroach into the 5-ft wide electric easement.You might need to shift the building south a bit. 11. There might be a conflict with the 15-ft wide gas easement along the south property line and placing the required bufferyard plantings in that location. Please work with the City Forester and the utility company on this. 12. On Sheet C3.1,you show the private drive to the south of your site to be called Northwestern Drive,but we do not think that it has a name at all. 13. Some slight areas of concern on the building are:the roof material, style of architecture,blank walls,and the use of only stone,instead of having a defined foundation,middle,and top. Some changes should be made to the design. Please re-review Section 23C.09 of the Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone regulations for the architectural design requirements: http://www.carmel.in.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=1527 .Also,please refer to the US 421/Michigan Rd. Overlay Visual Guide for guidance on architecture: http://www.carmel.in.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=315 14. Please label the roof pitch on the architectural building elevations. 15. The roof material is not permitted. 16. The building facades need to have a defined foundation/base,middle, and top. 17. Please show/label on the site plan the percent of green space vs.the percent of impervious surfaces (asphalt, roofs, etc.) 18. Please show/label the gas&electric meters locations on the building elevations. 1 19. Please verify with the City Engineering Dept.that no type of traffic analysis is required. 20. Please provide the bike rack details,per ZO Chapter 27.06 of the ordinance.And, please locate the bike rack closer to the main door entry. 21. Please verify that all parking lot pole light fixtures have flat lenses and/or 90-degree cutoffs so that the light is downcast. 22. Pleas show the foot-candle measurements all the way to the property lines on the photometric plan. 23. Please provide the wall sconce design details/cut sheets. 24. Please provide the design details of any building up-lighting or landscaping lighting fixtures. 25. Daren Mindham with the City Forestry Dept,will review the Tree Preservation Plan and Landscape Plan. 26. The landscape plan shows a future 2,700 sq.ft.future building,but the site plan does not.Which is correct? 27. On the construction plans, please provide the pavement specs and the sidewalk/path specs. 28. Please clarify if 2 or 3 wall signs are proposed.The different building elevations show different things. 29. The sign facing south will most likely need variance approval from the BZA to not be facing a public street. 30. BZA variance approval will be required to have 3 signs when only 2 are permitted on this site. 31. Please reduce the sign square footage down to 40 sq ft, for the sign facing Michigan Rd. 32. Please submit all signage proposed for the site,even traffic directional signs (which are considered exempt signage if they are under 3 sq ft in size and less than 3-ft tall). Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Flr. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317-571-2417 I F: 317-571-2426 I E: aconn @carmel.in.gov W: www.carmeldocs.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 2 � � • _ UNF Janet Reid /3,-1-* I From Mindham, Daren <dmindharn @carmel∎in gov 2,v1 Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:27 AM s ; 33111A 2 r� To Janet Reid # DOOS Cc: 'JDeGagne @darden.com' _ ;' Subject: Olive Garden (#12050014 DP/ADLS) :� " ,�J Attachments: Recommended Tree List.pdf; Treedetail-Carmel.pdflrubdetail-Carmel.pdf; Bufferyard Table.pdf; basket.staking.pdf Janet, The following email represents comments for this project specifically addressing the area of landscaping. I have reviewed the drawings and offer the following comments: URBAN FORESTRY REVIEW COMMENTS 1) Pear trees of any variety are not permitted for Carmel landscape plans. Medor Juniper and Taylor Juniper do not grow in Indiana; from what I have read. Also, I do not recommend maples as they are overplanted within the City and tend to have undesirable characteristics for commercial developments. Please choose substitute trees; I have attached a pre-approved Recommended Tree list. I would like to recommend the Japanese Zelkova and a variety of the hybrid elms for the areas around vehicular traffic. 2) I have attached our City of Carmel tree planting detail. The submitted details do not recommend basket removal and only states cut wire straps, not remove wires straps. Also, I have not seen a staking detail like this before. I don't believe that this style of staking will work in Indiana clay soil. I don't think it is possible to drive stakes 4-6 feet deep into the soil and easily remove them a year later. Also, the cross members may possibly puncture lawnmower tires. 3) The Landscape Requirements chart is incomplete,therefore additional landscaping is required. Please note the requirements for the Greenbelt planting along Michigan Rd. Please provide a line for the west parking lot perimeter. Moreover, please reference Ch. 26.04.06 as these are additional regulations on buffering. I have attached the bufferyard chart. Please illustrate how these comments will be addressed by letter or revised plan. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thanks. Sincerely, Daren Mindham Urban Forester City of Carmel Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, Indiana 46032 Office:317-571-2283 1 ./-,-..,,__ .,, ,-..7. A - - . aN T ,(:: ::0-' _1,.. , _, \'\ ,141k • HARt2� `�p ! 1 ��F tio o o 4 l JUN 2 9 20]2 j, . •CTRWD• Clay Township Re,gton l astei District R _. a U:"'i V. .d��i 0 www.ctrwd.org Phone (31'�7)' 8�\9200 -Fax;(317) 844-9203 gEGIoNA1-' May 29, 2012 Mrs. Janet Reid GHA Architects 14110 Dallas Pkwy Suite 100 Dallas, TX 75254 Subject: Olive Garden–10222 Michigan Rd. Carmel IN Dear Mrs. Reid: We have received the construction plans for the above mentioned project and have the following comments: 1. Existing Sanitary structure should have the prefix MH#"E" . 2. Please send us a copy of the executed sanitary sewer application that can be found on our web site at www.ctrwd.org. 3. Updated Interceptor Detail needs to be inserted into the plan sheet. 4. Cleanout Types shall be called out(ex. Type II,Type III) and detail inserted into plans. 5. Sanitary Sewer Bedding and Backfill Detail needs to be inserted into the plans. 6. Saddle Tee Detail needs to be inserted into the plans. 7. Service Lateral Detail needs to be inserted into the plans. 8. 6" SDR 26 PVC Lateral shall be cored through benchwall Invert:874.57 9. All laterals exterior of building must be 6" in size. 10. Lateral slope seems excessive and can dive down towards connection to minimize lateral depth overall. 11. Force Main flow arrows are backwards. Specifications and Detail Drawings can be found at www.ctrwd.orq. Please resubmit plans once changes are made. You may contact me at 844-9200 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Ryan Hartman District Engineer 10701 College Avenue, Suite A., Indianapolis, Indiana 46280-1098 Conn, Angelina V From: Akers, William P [WAkers @carmel.in.gov] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2012 7:26 PM To: Janet Reid Subject: Re: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Ok....the whole project incorporates 2 parcels?. That is what I thought....the address is what I advised to make it fit along the other buildings in the area. Bill r-CfW\ I 22 2—o(r Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless • Original message From: Janet Reid <jreid @GHA-Architects.com> To: "Akers, William P" <WAkers @carmel.in.gov> Sent: Fri, May 25, 2012 17:35:33 GMT+00:00 Subject: Re: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution There are 2 parcels. Did you get a copy of the application? Janet Sent from my HTC InspireTM 4G on AT&T Reply message From: "Akers, William P" <WAkers @carmel.in.gov> To: "Janet Reid" <jreid @ GHA-Architects.com> Subject: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN - TAC Member Distribution Date: Fri, May 25, 2012 12:31 pm Is the parcel number 1713070000011.001 ? From: Janet Reid [mailto:jreidPGHA-Architects.corn] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 1:26 PM To: Akers, William P Subject: Re: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Works for me. Do you make the final decision? Janet Sent from my HTC InspireTM 4G on AT&T Reply message From: "Akers,William P" <WAkers @carmel.in.gov> To: "Janet Reid" <jreid@GHA-Architects.com> i Subject: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN - TAC Member Distribution Date: Fri, May 25, 2012. 12:24 pm Hello Janet, I was looking over the site plans for this project and noticed that the address you have listed for it is wrong.The address listed of 10222 N Michigan Rd will not work. I know that is what the county has listed on their information but that will have to be changed. The building across the street on the NE corner of N Michigan Rd and Retail Parkway is 10215 which means that the Olive garden would have to be lower then 10215.There are also 4 parcels north of the Olive Garden parcel that have addresses that are lower then 10222 and if buildings were to be built there in the future then they would be out of range. Hopefully by that time, since nothing is there but open land, it can be changed. My biggest concern is the building on the NE corner. I would like to assign an address of 10206 N Michigan Rd to the future Olive Garden restaurant. Thanks Bill From: Janet Reid [mailto:jreidCa�GHA-Architects.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:15 AM To: Akers, William P Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Do you still want a hard copy? From: Akers, William P [mailto:WAkers@carmel.in.gov] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:14 AM To: Janet Reid Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN - TAC Member Distribution 2 Janet Reid From Akers, William P <WAkers @carmel.in.gov> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 12:24 PM F . To Janet Reid '+ � JUN 29 2012 � II Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member`Distri• •+ ,t Hello Janet, I was looking over the site plans for this project and noticed that the address you have listed for it is wrong.The address listed of 10222 N Michigan Rd will not work. I know that is what the county has listed on their information but that will have to be changed. The building across the street on the NE corner of N Michigan Rd and Retail Parkway is 10215 which means that the Olive garden would have to be lower then 10215.There are also 4 parcels north of the Olive Garden parcel that have addresses that are lower then 10222 and if buildings were to be built there in the future then they would be out of range. Hopefully by that time, since nothing is there but open land, it can be changed. My biggest concern is the building on the NE corner. I would like to assign an address of 10206 N Michigan Rd to the future Olive Garden restaurant. Thanks Bill From: Janet Reid [mailto:jreid @GHA-Architects.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:15 AM To: Akers, William P Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Do you still want a hard copy? From: Akers, William P [mailto:WAkers @carmel.in.gov] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:14 AM To: Janet Reid Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution That is exactly what I need.Thank You From: Janet Reid jmailto:jreid @GHA-Architects.coml Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:13 AM To: Akers, William P Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Is this what you need? From: Akers, William P jmailto:WAkers(acarmel.in.iovl Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:10 AM To: Janet Reid Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution 11 x 17 is just fine...I do not need the survey. 1 Thank You Bill From: Janet Reid [mailto:jreid @GHA-Architects.coml Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:09 AM To: Akers, William P Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Do you want a full size copy or is 11 x 17 large enough? I can send the survey,too... From: Akers, William P [mailto:WAkers @carmel.in.govl Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:01 AM To: Janet Reid Subject: RE: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Actually, I would like to have a hard copy of just the site plan for this project so I can assign an address to the building. Thank You Bill From: Janet Reid f mailto:jreid @GHA-Architects.comj Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:35 PM To: Conn, Angelina V; Donahue-Wold, Alexia K; Mindham, Daren; Littlejohn, David W; Akers, William P; Huffman, David; Thomas, John G; greg.hoyes @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; gilko @crossroadengeineers.com; Duncan, Gary R; Redden, Nick; david.lucas@hamiltoncounty.in.gov; Hohlt, William G; Blanchard, Jim E; Duffy, John M; Green, Timothy J; Ellison, Christopher M; Krueskamp, Theresa A; Forward for Westermeier, Mark; iason.lemaster @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; brooke.gajownik @hamiltoncountv.in.gov; jason.kirkman @mybrighthouse.com; shirlev.hunter @duke-energy.com; gary.mcnamee @duke-energv.com; jlclark @vectren.com; dan.davenport @aes.com; dwhiting @citizensenergvgroup.com; rfarrand_@ccs.k12.in.us; ryan.hartman @ctrwd.orq; trov.yackle @sug.com; doland.w.wise @usps.gov; sk4986 @att.com Cc: Kourtnie Airheart; jdegagne @darden.com Subject: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Dear TAC Member, Please find below a link to the Development Plan and ADLS applications/submittal documents for a new Olive Garden Restaurant—for your review*. ftp://ftp.gha-proiects.com FTP Username:aconn FTP Password: ru5EdebR The password is case sensitive,type it in as it appears in this email. *If you require a hard copy set of the submittal documents—please indicate so,via email response to this email. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions or comments regarding this submittal. Sincerely, 2 • Janet Reid Property Development GHA ARCHITECTURE I DEVELOPMENT 14110 Dallas Parkway,Suite 300 Dallas,TX 75254 Office: (972)239-8884 Fax: (972)239-5054 Direct: (214)461-9631 Mobile: (214)697-9771 email: jreidaoha-architects.com This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please notify GHA ARCHITECTURE/ DEVELOPMENT immediately by replying to this message and destroying all copies of this message and any attachments.Thank you. 3 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 3:33 PM To: 'Janet Reid' Cc: Donahue-Wold, Alexia K Subject: Olive Garden & Michigan Rd. architectural design requirements Hi, Janet— Staff is beginning to review the applications and already has concerns with the roof material, style of architecture, blank walls, and the use of only stone, instead of having a defined foundation, middle, and top. Some changes should be made to the design. Please re-review section 23C.09 of the Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone regulations for the architectural design requirements: http://www.carmel.in.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documented=1527, as well as this Michigan Rd. overlay visual guide: http://www.carmel.in.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=315. I can give you a call next week and can talk it through, if needed. Sincerely, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Flr. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317-571-2417 I F: 317-571-2426 I E: aconn @carmel.in.gov W: www.carmeldocs.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 1 FTP directory/OG_CarmelIN_DP%20and%20ADLS%20Submittal%20pkg%20-%205-1... Page 1 of 1 FTP directory /OG_CarmellN_DP%20and%20ADLS% 20Submlttal%2Opkg%20-%205®18 2012/Complete%20Civil% 20Set%20547®12/ at ftp.ghamprojects.com To view this 1-F"I'P site in Windows Explorer, click Page, and then click Open FTP Site in Windows Explorer. Up to higher level directory 05/17/2012 02:15PM 230,391 101-01.1 Covr.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :16PM 740, 581 102-01.2 Srvy.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 1,306, 948 103-01.3 GenN3.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 629,491 104-02.1 Demo.pdf 05/17/2012 02:47PM 1, 186, 551 105-02.2 SWPPP.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :16PM 474,529 106-C2.3 SWPPP Post.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 1, 056, 165 107-02.4 SWPPP Dtls.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 703, 084 108-03.1 DimC.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :16PM 500, 011 109-04.1 Pavi.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 452,514 110-04.2 Grad.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 403, 174 111-04.3 DMap.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 531, 879 112-04.4 Strm.pdf 05/17/2012 02:16PM 684,335 113-05.1 Util.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :16PM 551, 030 115-06.1 Dtls.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :16PM 2, 130, 962 116-06.2 Dtls.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :17PM 4,358, 507 117-06.3 Dtls.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :17PM 6, 753, 671 118-08.1 Borl.pdf 05/17/2012 02:17PM 3, 169,502 119-08.2 Bor2.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :18PM 1, 791, 155 121-CS1 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :18PM 1, 519, 118 122-082 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :18PM 1, 550, 842 123-083 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :18PM 1, 665, 573 124-084 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 02 :18PM 1, 563, 720 125-085 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 02:18PM 1,301,278 126-086 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 02:18PM 424, 871 127-087 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 03:10PM 1, 302,645 150-L1.1 Land.pdf 05/17/2012 03 :10PM 543, 719 151-L2.1 Irr.pdf 05/17/2012 03 :10PM 375,472 152-L2.2 IrDt.pdf 05/17/2012 03 :10PM 1, 702, 649 154-LS1 Spec.pdf 05/17/2012 02:18PM 285, 745 Aerial Exhibit.pdf ftp://ftp.gha-pro_jects.com/OG_CarrnellN_DP%20and%20ADLS%20Submittal%20pkg%2... 5/18/2012 Conn, Angelina V From: Janet Reid (jreid @GHA-Architects.com] Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:35 PM To: Conn, Angelina V; Donahue-Wold, Alexia K; Mindham, Daren; Littlejohn, David W; Akers, William P; Huffman, David; Thomas,John G; greg.hoyes @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; gilko @crossroadengeineers.com; Duncan, Gary R; Redden, Nick; david.lucas @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; Hohit,William G; Blanchard, Jim E; Duffy, John M; Green, Timothy J; Ellison, Christopher M; Krueskamp, Theresa A; Forward for Westermeier, Mark;jason.lemaster @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; brooke.gajownik @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; jason.kirkman @mybrighthouse.com; shirley.hunter @duke-energy.com; gary.mcnamee @duke-energy.com;jlclark@vectren.com; dan.davenport @aes.com; dwhiting @citizensenergygroup.com; rfarrand @ccs.k12.in.us; ryan.hartman @ctrwd.org; troy.yackle @sug.com; doland.w.wise @usps.gov; sk4986 @att.com Cc: Kourtnie Airheart; jdegagne @darden.com Subject: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN -TAC Member Distribution Dear TAC Member, Please find below a link to the Development Plan and ADLS applications/submittal documents for a new Olive Garden Restaurant—for your review*. ftp://ftp.gha-proiects.com FTP Username: aconn FTP Password: ru5EdebR The password is case sensitive,type it in as it appears in this email. *If you require a hard copy set of the submittal documents—please indicate so,via email response to this email. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions or comments regarding this submittal. Sincerely, Janet Reid Property Development GHA ARCHITECTURE!DEVELOPMENT 14110 Dallas Parkway,Suite 300 Dallas,TX 75254 Office: (972)239-8884 Fax: (972)239-5054 Direct: (214)461-9631 Mobile: (214)697-9771 email: jreid@oha-architects.com This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please notify GHA ARCHITECTURE/ DEVELOPMENT immediately by replying to this message and destroying all copies of this message and any attachments.Thank you. 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Janet Reid [jreid@GHA-Architects.com] Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:35 PM To: Conn, Angelina V; Donahue-Wold, Alexia K; Mindham, Daren; Littlejohn, David W; Akers, William P; Huffman, David; Thomas,John G; greg.hoyes @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; gilko @crossroadengeineers.com; Duncan, Gary R; Redden, Nick; david.lucas @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; Hohlt, William G; Blanchard, Jim E; Duffy, John M; Green, Timothy J; Ellison, Christopher M; Krueskamp, Theresa A; Forward for Westermeier, Mark;jason.lemaster @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; brooke.gajownik @hamiltoncounty.in.gov; jason.kirkman @mybrighthouse.com; shirley.hunter @duke-energy.com; gary.mcnamee @duke-energy.com; jlclark @vectren.com; dan.davenport @aes.com; dwhiting @citizensenergygroup.com; rfarrand @ccs.k12.in.us; ryan.hartman @ctrwd.org; troy.yackle @sug.com; doland.w.wise @usps.gov; sk4986 @att.com Cc: Kourtnie Airheart; jdegagne @darden.com Subject: Proposed Olive Garden - Carmel, IN - TAC Member Distribution Dear TAC Member, Please find below a link to the Development Plan and ADLS applications/submittal documents for a new Olive Garden Restaurant—for your review*. ftp://ftp.gha-proiects.com FTP Username: aconn FTP Password: ru5EdebR The password is case sensitive,type it in as it appears in this email. *If you require a hard copy set of the submittal documents—please indicate so,via email response to this email. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions or comments regarding this submittal. Sincerely, Janet Reid Property Development GHA ARCHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT 14110 Dallas Parkway,Suite 300 Dallas,TX 75254 Office: (972)239-8884 Fax: (972)239-5054 Direct: (214)461-9631 Mobile: (214)697-9771 email: jreid @oha-architects.com This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please notify GHA ARCHITECTURE/ DEVELOPMENT immediately by replying to this message and destroying all copies of this message and any attachments.Thank you. 1 G,, ..,,, A Architecture/Development TRANSMITTAL May 17,2012 TO: City of Carmel r • ;` Attn: Angie Conn, Planner �' ..-.A. � 1 Civic Center Square t- t Carmel, IN 46032 -, ,NR) Phone: 317-571-2417 ��� rK�. FROM: Janet Reid PROJECT: The Olive Garden—Carmel, IN—Michigan Road @ Retail Parkway-CO90423 400 • We are sending you as requested the following: For Your: P Prints fl Disk r Bidding F7 Review Samples r Photocopies r Cost Estimating ✓ Specifications r Shop Drawings r Information ✓ Reproducibles r Record Co ies Sheet No Descristion l 2 Sets of the Development Plan and ADLS Package(per checklists)—24 x 36 max sheet size 1 Electronic copy of all submittal docs—on a CD Note—the above noted packages have also be distributed to the TAC members Hi Angie, Please find enclosed the above referenced documents for the Development Plan and ADLS Plan Reviews for the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant to be located near 10222 Michigan Avenue. I will be your primary point of contact for this submittal. Please contact me, if you have questions or comments. — el y_ v v 0///////////i_.'''.7-*-.'- —- - VOW 1111 Ja 'eii Prss , Development GH•-., 'CHITECTURE/DEVELOPMENT Direct: 214-461-9631 Email: ireid@gha-architects.com Real Estate Development Services Site Development Architecture Construction Manag. Gerdes•Henrichson&Associates 14110 Dallas Parkway•Suite 100•,Dallas,TX•75254 Phone: (972)239-8884•Fax: (972)239-5054 Conn, Angelina V From: Ashlee Boyd [aboyd @thompsonthrift.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 9:08 AM To: McBride, Mike T; Duncan, Gary R; Conn, Angelina V; Hollibaugh, Mike P Cc: Don Potter; Jack DeGagne (JDeGagne @darden.com); Marc Braun (mbraun @darden.com); Adam Fischer Subject: Retail Pkwy Extension DRAFT REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT - West Carmel Commons Attachments: Retail Parkway Reimbursement Agreement clean v1 12-0515.docx Please find attached a draft agreement that we have prepared to memorialize the parties understanding as it relates to the design, construction and reimbursement allocations for the extension of Retail Pkwy. We look forward to receiving your feedback/thoughts on the agreement to determine if the format meets the city's approval. As mentioned, we used a very similar document on a recent project and it seemed to work well. We are working on the Exhibits and will send those in a separate email. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need additional information at this point to complete your review of the agreement. Thanks From: Ashlee Boyd Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 5:11 PM To: 'MMcbride @carmel.in.gov'; Duncan, Gary R (aduncan@carmel.in.gov); Conn, Angelina V (Aconn©carmel.in.gov); Hollibaugh, Mike P (MHollibaugh@carmel.in.gov) Cc: Don Potter; Jack DeGagne (JDeGagne@darden.com); Marc Braun (mbraun@darden.com); Adam Fischer Subject: RE: N. Michigan Road-Retail Pkwy Extension Follow Up All, Would it be possible to schedule another meeting at the city offices to sync up on the project and determine next steps? Below is a quick update on our progress: - Outback Steakhouse received Plan Commission approval with a few conditions that they are prepared to satisfy. - Our project financing is in place to close and commence construction as soon as we can get City engineering to sign off on our plat. - We have finalized our plan with Darden which has been distributed to the City. - We continue to work with RCI on the drainage easement and are close to having that in place. - It is our understanding that the City and RCI met to discuss the Retail Pkwy Extension and that RCI is in general agreement with its location. - We have provided a letter to Gary Duncan acknowledging Darden's agreement on the proposed location of Retail Pkwy as requested. - Before Darden is prepared to proceed with its development plans,they need an agreement in place memorializing the terms for the design and construction of Retail Pkwy and the reimbursement obligations of the parties. In the spirit of moving this along, we have drafted an agreement based upon a very similar situation on a project we recently developed in northern Indiana. I will be emailing that agreement to the City for review and comment. Should I send this to Mike Howard as well? 1 - Once an agreement is in place, Darden is prepared to proceed with site plan approvals. We are truly needing to reach a resolution on this as quickly as possible due to the timing of our land contracts and our collective need to keep this moving along as quickly as possible. Please let us know a few dates/times that would work for everyone. Thanks! From: Ashlee Boyd Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 10:38 AM To: 'MMcbride @carmel.in.gov'; Duncan, Gary R (gduncanCacarmel.in.gov); Conn, Angelina V (Aconncarmel.in.gov); Hollibaugh, Mike P (MHollibaugh@carmel.in.gov) Cc: Don Potter; Jack DeGagne (JDeGagne@darden.com); Marc Braun (mbraundarden.com); Adam Fischer Subject: N. Michigan Road-Retail Pkwy Extension Follow Up All, We wanted to thank everyone for taking the time to meet last week to discuss our collective efforts for the extension of Retail Parkway and to establish a game plan for moving it forward. As a follow up, we are continuing to work with Darden to finalize a site plan that we can submit back to Gary for his review and approval. Also, Don and I are working to arrange a meeting with RCI to discuss the extension of the road across their property to determine if they would be agreeable to dedicating the ROW. We will report the results of that meeting to Gary and then work to determine the next steps for that portion of the road. As currently planned, our Lot 3 contemplates a worst case scenario for the building set back but it would be our desire to maximize the buildable area of the Lot which in turn would maximize the tax increment generated from the development of that parcel. Once you have a better understanding on the funding structure, we would like to better understand how that arrangement will be documented, the total anticipated cost of the project, our proposed contribution amount and the proposed timing of when we would contribute our portion of the costs. Thanks again for your time, we look forward to getting this pulled together and working closely with everyone to get the road completed at the earliest possible date. Please let us know if there is any information or input you need from us as you work with through the details Best regards, Ashlee Boyd 1 Senior Vice President Thompson Thrift 2750 East 146t''Street,Suite 300 Carmel,Indiana 46033 317.557.1035 Cell 317.848.4755 Reception 317.580.0987 Fax 2 GMRI Draft#2 05/10/12 • AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into this day of , 2012, among the City of Carmel, Indiana, (hereinafter referred to as "City"), whose address is One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032, Thompson Thrift Development, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "TTD"), whose address is 901 Wabash Avenue, Suite 300, Terre Haute, IN 47807 and GMRI, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "GMRI"), whose address is 1000 Darden Center Drive, Orlando FL 32837. RECITALS 1. TTD is under contract to purchase a parcel of real estate that is located north of the northwest corner of Retail Parkway and Michigan Road, in the City of Carmel, the legal description of which is .attached hereto as Exhibit A and further identified on the attached site plan Exhibit B (the "TTD Parcel"). GMRI is under contract to purchase two (2) contiguous parcels of real estate, the northern most of which is located at the southwest corner of Retail Parkway and Michigan Road, in the City of Carmel, the legal description of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 and further identified on the attached site plan Exhibit B (collectively, the "GMRI Parcel"). Collectively both the TTD Parcel and the GMRI Parcel shall be referred to as the "Parcels". 2. TTD proposes to develop and install all on site infrastructure to the TTD Parcel and adjacent property consisting of approximately 8.64 acres which will be platted into three (3) lots that will accommodate approximately 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of commercial space ("TTD Project"). Phase I of the TTD Project will consist of approximately 2 acres and a 5,500 square foot building. GMRI proposes to develop and install all on site infrastructure to the GMRI Parcel consisting of approximately 3.5 acres in the aggregate and which will be platted as one (1) or two (2) retail lots that will accommodate approximately 12,000 square feet of commercial space, but upon which GMRI intends to construct an approximate 8,000 square foot building ("GMRI Project"). The TTD Project and the GMRI Project are collectively hereinafter referred to as the "Projects" and are shown on Exhibit R. 3. City has a master development plan to encourage infill development in areas that are underutilized and deteriorating. 4. The proposed Projects are an infill development in an area that is underutilized and deteriorating. 5. In order to encourage infill development, the City chooses to participate in site development in this area and other infill areas which may include committing Tax Incremental Financing ("TIF") revenues to pay the costs of engineering, reconstructing msword\agree\coeredd-a eree\gdb\jw and/or modifying existing public infrastructures and roadways to make such sites viable commercial development sites to encourage redevelopment. 6. The Projects are within the West Cannel TIF Allocation Area ("West Carmel TIF"). 7. The estimated annual increase in real estate taxes from the Projects upon completion will be One Hundred Seventeen Thousand ($117,000), and the estimated number of new • jobs created for the community from the development of the Projects is 80-100. In consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this Agreement, the parties now agree as follows: PROJECT COMMITMENTS 1. The City will provide 100% of the funding to engineer, bid, and construct each of the following public improvements (the "City Projects"): a. The extension of Retail Parkway as generally shown on Exhibit B including all drives, curbs, gutter, sidewalks, landscaping and any other necessary improvements required for the completion of the roadway to City standards. b. Upgrade, realign and/or modify the existing traffic signal as needed to accommodate the new roadway. c. Construct any public utility extensions and/reconfigurations that may be necessitated to accommodate the new roadway. The City Projects are currently estimated to cost $ ("Estimated Costs"). 2. TTD and GMRI agree to reimburse the City $75,000 each for the costs incurred by the City to complete the City Projects. TTD shall make its payment to the City on the later of (a) the date TTD receives its permit to develop Lot 2 of the TTD Project and (b) the City's completion of construction of the Retail Parkway extension. GMRI shall make its payment to the City on the later of (x) GMRI's acquisition of fee simple title to the GMRI Parcel and (b) the City's completion of construction of the Retail Parkway extension. The reimbursement obligation of TTD and GMRI are separate and personal to such parties and neither party will be responsible for the reimbursement obligation of the other in whole or part. The foregoing notwithstanding, if in the course of its development of the GMRI Project it is agreed by City and GMRI that GMRI will perform any portion of the work within the scope of work for the City Projects, (including, by way of example, construction of drives, curbs, gutters, landscaping or utilities), the reimbursement obligation of GMRI hereunder will be offset by the amount of costs incurred by GMRI to perform such work. 3. TTD and GMRI agree to donate or cause to be donated to the City easements, right-of- ways or such other form of right or interest ("Right-of-way") in such portions of the TTD Parcel and GMRI, respectively; required for the construction of Retail Parkway as 2 is generally shown on Exhibit B. The granting of the Right-of-way will be accomplished by conveyance or other documents mutually acceptable to the parties. 4. Right-of-way acquisition, and all state or local permits must be obtained by the City before the City awards the bids to construct each of the respective City Projects. CITY'S COMMITMENTS 1. City agrees to complete the design of the City Projects within sixty (60) days following the execution of this Agreement by all parties hereto. 2. City agrees to commence construction of the City Projects upon the earlier of(a) the date selected by City or (b) within sixty (60) days following the earlier of (i) TTD's acquisition of the TTD Parcel and receipt of municipal approval of its development plans for the TTD Project, and (ii) GMRI's acquisition of the GMRI Parcel and receipt of municipal approval of its development plans for the GMRI Project. 3. Following commencement of construction, City agrees to pursue the completion of Retail Parkway with diligence and shall cooperate with TTD and GMRI as is reasonably necessary to ensure unobstructed access to both Projects remains open during the • completion of the City Projects. The City will complete construction of the City Projects within twelve (12) weeks of the commencement date of such construction. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 1. City Projects, including all infrastructure, shall be constructed in accordance with detailed engineering plans and bid package documents approved in advance of construction by the City Engineer and the City Board of Public Works and Safety. 2. City, TTD and GMRI agree to execute all deeds of easements, rights-of-way or other documents that are reasonably necessary, desirable or appropriate to further the Projects and to provide for the future maintenance of the City's infrastructure improvements. 3. All easements and rights-of-way obtained shall be recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton County, State of Indiana. CONTINGENCIES All obligations of TTD and. GMRI under this Agreement are expressly conditioned upon each respective party securing all necessary and acceptable zoning, approvals, easements, land ownership, and/or other requirements for each party to commence and complete the Projects. MISCELLANEOUS • 3 1. If it becomes necessary for any party to this Agreement to institute litigation in order to enforce or construe the terms and provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in such litigation from the non-prevailing party. 2. No remedy conferred upon any party in this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy provided or permitted by law, but each remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedy given under the terms of this Agreement or existing at law or in equity. Every power or remedy provided in this Agreement may be exercised concurrently or independently and as often as deemed appropriate. 3. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between all of the parties respecting the matters set forth, and all prior discussions and negotiations are merged herein. 4. This Agreement may only be amended in writing, signed by all the parties. 5. This Agreement may not be assigned by any party without the prior written consent of all other parties. 6. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Indiana. The venue for any action brought by either party relating to or arising out of this Agreement shall be in Hamilton County, State of Indiana. If any provision is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, such provision will be deemed stricken herefrom, and the remainder of the contract shall continue in full force and effect. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the first date written above. CITY OF CARMEL, INDIANA By: Jim Brainard, Mayor Date: THOMPSON THRIFT DEVELOPMENT, INC. By: Printed: Title: Date: GMRI, INC., a Florida corporation By: Printed: Title: Date: 5 • EXHIBIT A-1 GMRI PARCEL Parcel 1: A part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 17 North, Range 3 East in Hamilton County, Indiana, more particularly described as follows: From a stone at the southwest corner of the aforesaid southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 7, run on an assumed bearing of east along the south line thereof a measured distance of 872.26 feet to the west right-of-way line of U. S. Highway 421, otherwise known as the Michigan Road, as the same is now established; thence North 20 degrees 06 minutes West along said westwardly right-of-way line a distance of 231.17 feet to the place of beginning of the within described tract; Thence continue North 20 degrees 06 minutes West along the aforesaid.West right-of-way line 175.00 feet to the northeast corner of a tract of land presently owned by James Cunningham, as the same is now established by use; thence South 81 degrees 26 minutes West along the said North line of the Cunningham property 376.08 feet; thence South 1 degree 40 minutes East 135.02 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes East 241.15 feet; thence North 83 degrees 54 minutes East 180.02 feet to the place of beginning, containing 1.4820 acres, more or less. Excepting therefrom: A part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 17 North, Range 3 East, of the Second Principal Meridian, Hamilton County, Indiana, and being all that part of the owner's land lying within the right of way lines depicted on the attached Right of Way parcel Plat of Parcel 19, also described as follows: Commencing from a stone at the southwest corner of the aforesaid Southeast quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 7,run on an assumed bearing of east along the south line thereof a measured distance of 872.26 feet to the west right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 421, otherwise known as the Michigan Road, as the same is now established; thence North 20 degrees 06 minutes west along said westwardly right-of-way line a distance of 231.17 feet to the place of beginning of the within described tract (the foregoing portion of this description beginning with the words "from a stone" is quoted from Deed Record 362, page 394), said place of beginning being the southeast corner of the owners land; thence South 83 degrees 29 minutes 05 seconds West 4.419 meters (14.50 feet) along the southern line of the owner's land; thence North 15 degrees 03 minutes 25 seconds West 25.370 meters (83.23 feet) to point "530" as shown on said Right of Way parcel Plat; thence Northwesterly 27.380 meters (89.83 feet) along an arc to the right and having a radius of 69639.938 meters (228477.49 feet) and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of North 20 degrees 44 minutes 33 seconds West and a length of 27.380 meters (89.83 feet) to the northern line of the owner's land; thence North 81 degrees 10 minutes 01 seconds East 1.799 meters(5.90 feet) along said northern line to said western boundary of U.S.R. 421; thence along said. 7 boundary Southeasterly 53.340 meters(175.00 feet) along an arc to the left and having a radius of 69638.178 meters (228471.71 feet) and subtended by a long chord having bearing of South 20 degrees 45 minutes 12 seconds East and a length of 53.340 meters (175.00 feet) to the Place Of Beginning. Parcel 2: Lot 1, Block 4, in Mayflower Park Secondary Final Plat for Lot 1 & Lot 2 of Block 4, a subdivision in Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof, recorded September 12, 2000, as Instrument 2000-45585, in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton County, Indiana. Excepting therefrom: That part of the above-described real estate which lies within the following description: A part of the Southwest Quarter and a part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 17 North, Range 3 East, of the Second Principal Meridian, Hamilton County,Indiana, and being all that part of the grantor's land lying within the right of way lines of Parcel 14A as depicted on the attached Right of Way Parcel Plat, also described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of said Northwest Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 35 minutes 05 seconds East 112.339 meters (368.56 feet) (367.43 feet by hnstrueent 9709725450) along the South line of said quarter-quarter section to the eastern line of a tract conveyed by Mayflower Office Building, LLC to Resort Condominiums International, LLC as recorded by Instrument 9809839558 in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton County, Indiana; thence continuing North 89 degrees 35 minutes 05 seconds East 169.871 meters (557.32 feet) (556.92 feet by Instrument 9709725450) along said south line to the centerline of U.S.R. 421 (incorrectly called out as westerly right of way by .Instrument 9709725450); thence South 89 degrees 35 minutes 05 seconds West 16.262 meters (53.35 feet) along said south line to the southwestern boundary of U.S.R. 421 and the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; thence South 20 degrees 50 minutes 34 seconds East 22.758 meters (74.67 feet) along said boundary to the north line of said Resort Condominiums International LLC tract; thence South 89 degrees 35 minutes 05 seconds West 5.079 meters (16.66 feet) along said north line; thence Northwesterly 87.777 meter(287.98 feet) along an arc to the right and having a radius of 69642.131 meters (228484.68 feet) and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of North 20 degrees 48 minutes 52 seconds West and a length of 87.777 meters (287.98 feet) to point "529" as shown on said Right of Way Parcel Plat; thence North 15 degrees 03 minutes 41 seconds West 4.787 meters (15.71 feet) to the north line of said grantor's land; thence North 83 degrees 29 minutes 05 seconds East 4.419 meters (14.50 feet) along said north line to the southwestern boundary of U.S.R. 421; thence along said boundary Southeasterly 70.461 meters (231.17 feet) along an arc to the left and having a radius of 69637.371 meters (228469.07 feet) and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of South 20 degrees 48 minutes 16 seconds East and a length of 70.461 meters (231.17 feet) to the Point Of Beginning. 8 Conn, Angelina V From: Mindham, Daren Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 4:01 PM To: 'Adam Fischer' Cc: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: West Carmel Commons - Zoning Overlay- Parking Landscaping Attachments: Bufferyard Table.pdf Yes, see chart for 15' landscape buffer-basically a 'D' side. As for the parking lot, in this case I believe a peninsula would be required to provide enough green space for internal parking lot landscaping(3 trees and 15 shrubs), however, if the one peninsula was moved toward the end cap, then you might have space to put landscaping in this bit larger peninsula. Daren Mindham Urban Forester City of Carmel Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, Indiana 46032 • Office:317-571-2283 From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 3:40 PM To: 'Adam Fischer' Cc: Mindham, Daren Subject: RE: West Carmel Commons - Zoning Overlay - Parking Landscaping Adam—I think you need to have the building set back 15-ft from the road right of way line of future Retail Pkwy, per section 26.04,the table for buffer yard determination.... Not 10-ft. -Angie From: Adam Fischer [mailto:afischerathompsonthrift.com] Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 3:32 PM To: Mindham, Daren; Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: West Carmel Commons - Zoning Overlay - Parking Landscaping Specifically for Lot 3 at the back end of the project on the attached, since we don't really have an interior parking lot like the front two lots, would we need to have the little peninsula that is shown just 5 parking spaces up from Retail Parkway if we could put the requires plantings elsewhere? There really isn't a "within the parking area"for this lot with this potential use and layout and all trees and bushes will be surrounding the paved areas. From: Mindham, Daren [mailto:dmindhamc carmel.in.gov] Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 3:18 PM To: Conn, Angelina V; Adam Fischer • Subject: RE: West Carmel Commons - Zoning.Overlay - Parking Landscaping Adam, Angie is right,the trees need to be within the parking area, not adjacent or surrounding. However, I would rather the design not be one tree per little island but rather one or more larger islands or peninsulas with multiple trees. 1. Hydrologic Soil Group—Hamilton County,Indiana Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group—Summary by Map Unit—Hamilton County,Indiana(1N057) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOl Percent of AOI Br 1 Brookston silty clay loam I B/D 0.3 7.0% CrA Crosby silt loam,0 to 3 percent CID 3.4 93.0% slopes Totals for Area of Interest 3.7 100.0% Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate(low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep,moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate(high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/9/2012 atm Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 Conn, Angelina V From: Ashlee Boyd [aboyd @thompsonthrift.com] Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 10:38 AM To: McBride, Mike T; Duncan,Gary R; Conn,Angelina V; Hollibaugh, Mike P Cc: Don Potter;Jack DeGagne (JDeGagne @darden.com); Marc Braun (mbraun @darden.com); Adam Fischer Subject: N. Michigan Road-Retail Pkwy Extension Follow Up All, We wanted to thank everyone for taking the time to meet last week to discuss our collective efforts for the extension of Retail Parkway and to establish a game plan for moving it forward. As a follow up, we are continuing to work with Darden to finalize a site plan that we can submit back to Gary for his review and approval. Also, Don and I are working to arrange a meeting with RCI to discuss the extension of the road across their property to determine if they would be agreeable to dedicating the ROW. We will report the results of that meeting to Gary and then work to determine the next steps for that portion of the road. As currently planned, our Lot 3 contemplates a worst case scenario for the building set back but it would be our desire to maximize the buildable area of the Lot which in turn would maximize the tax increment generated from the development of that parcel. Once you have a better understanding on the funding structure, we would like to better understand how that arrangement will be documented, the total anticipated cost of the project, our proposed contribution amount and the proposed timing of when we would contribute our portion of the costs. Thanks again for your time, we look forward to getting this pulled together and working closely with everyone to get the road completed at the earliest possible date. Please let us know if there is any information or input you need from us as you work with through the details Best regards, Ashlee Boyd I Senior Vice President Thompson Thrift 2750 East 146`h Street,Suite 300 Carmel,Indiana 46033 317.557.1035 Cell 317.848.4755 Reception 317.580.0987 Fax aboyd @thompsonthrift.com www.thompsonthrift.com Ps4N Wain 1 on )°`b ■ ■ ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ ■ • • • .. , N • O • O 0 to 1i % ' ' .,.a ♦♦$ Is elD'-'0 0 1111•11111 ON=MEM MUM MOM MOM OM"*1MM MIMI Shelborne Rd , NE 4 . , .. . , s milliWillaguil,_ , _ . �_ .� , .., .ii i r - a;- �aa r •v _ foci ��I.. --z��`a+t�1 ',4,< IMII k< Ali 03111101W-1.,1114 ii ' ?t± 3.,, � a; tik. .."'",..1,'.1 • . * 1-1-) opprokbin to P 0-1 Au ipd4r1p0ril1k-#4 ws_0, 11.0 viii�',-.,cam ,yiiiii� ka).c _ �. i s ■1'.4'4` ...' - - :l' '�, //1 ham+ '.' '� `. 39. M""1 11, , '. J I� TIMY -a 1 III a . cr *g-, " .A.> .,4 i 11R4 ' It el" 111111 � ♦� '`1aaar, �- P4 ei r� \A) 41-tliiii1/11111 M w iii M=t �, � cv Q a •'• -1 04 j ,,., 4.vn-R `- tft I N''‘•'' 46 j; .7 - X• R lir F y . ! ,. . 0 'Was*e,„ •� a 'l, — cu r_. . . L , 1, , .4„ I O > % • i1I ., `. fi 7 Z ZZ-i r. .O t;.. ..„\-•v 4 , , ...+ .p * • , )1•10' i., ..,''` '� ,..,. wi g. .. . .... ,, . ifro 7,,, ..".... '...1, 11 iv 7 jl �i ' ' A '4 " tl� ie � yt e s"` i w . w - y r , • "i, '7* l' ,.; %.� .., 4. \\lick a 7 f .4.6..17.c.',''..:::Tr '' ' ' '' -'' '' ?',..i.7." V. . V i ' , 44.,. ''', ■,',",A 0', ,t.-43! ' '',r---.-.,.'-:.1 , In ..., , . ..,-.. ; '"N, '• „, LI.i -.-! 4.'-- . .•,..., . ' .•,,..;.; -.....„„, 4 ,r. t ,_, — • • ''''r,'"'"•:.',.. 'i r'q''.'. --• • -,I.. )i . If I • • is - i "%■,,i,„ ' IL . t ogle.' — , _ Jo -4, ......_... .... . . ... .;........L._.... .,..,. ! . , I irmr----...• • -,c . / ...,- . ..., I 4; A . • , z , !O 1 •. . , :. =xi 4 4 7j0) "C I * ' it 14.. ...,. i ' la 01 ; '..' ' .., . .- > LT..: i 4'" .I.i. ,.. $ „ti, , •'-•,L. , ,. to.04(f w t.•. 0; , 4 _ •• - ' , IL,•4,01..41,4, ,.., :1 1 ,y.,,,2,.. .4 ., _ ) = = 3 17 9 . . .0 g .,..., F - , .-- ' . r.„ . ., . ., N . ........_—_,—: :‘,-, -• . , - ,49.../........*"....7 t • . . 1 /01' - • ' "'Ilt • v .. . 0.4!' ,i ., ' • ,,,,,. , • . ' - _..-.........!.....• . ' %. - 40 \ .44.44..-.,-''''''.., •.Ty,' . .. O1 ..ig• . . :71 °, -.a a w A-. ■,. -.'.- , —••••-„ , 4 ........,...- L. ..r';' -, ' A . . "... ' $:-.) a—,• "a m 0 .,..._ , -. ; . , tr, , 113 rl .. '.I .:,- ''' '. i .... . = tO ' ,,,-.-:. 0 " , 6' t ' , - '- ' •I 11•ttk.r, .-...:4' '-...,■!q;. (" l'ut . , = • " 1'.. 7:::'.,,-,,,•:40, - .....---....:- • - 7,-,,:, 2 . todo' ....-. , , _ -,,,,„, _ . ..,, ..., . . ,,.1" 4..‘1Pabir":1-' ..,"•'• ...---.' . IR, ., •N - ••. .,...'":_--- i; Alk.11 . '■ ' lettAlia*"'' , . . 4 04 . ., ... c,1 - _•,--- . . ,. . . .._., . ..,.. . ... • 1,,, ,(.• 4 . ., „. i *•' ..- .... —Or,..,, •. • o 4 k 4' A' .. . it • _ .—,••- ,••• . , „ „..- -• :i. •..1 ' ` ,, (.. ..) ••”' „.•,, . .„. A!' , , ,..1„ • .0 I 4 a...• ; I . A • 101 %.•''' •nisi fit s. s. .3 ,-s. la , -*" .s ... .,,..k ,' \ 0 ' . 4 ■4 ..... ' ,pr . .4 ..A It' ‘00A 0. •:,. .." .., 4 - 1 0. 1... b.) 7,..0 - '. ., , • , ro,■ , a . . a,, .„. ., .• .. .. ,.......,..„,, at. .,, .00 _ ,. ,. ,...10, ‘ , ...? ' ( 4; 'Ie. ';'' .' a".•4.. ,:;;. ' .. t. ' . ... E. bn ,, VII''' IV ' ' , . • ,t,e."'",,,A,,:s.., -N.--; -. . . I 5 . , %, ..,- . , „ . i mii.•..m vii i m 0 0 1 .••••• im 11.,Ni,,,,,., , ,. * . t.,0.,;„.„, , wir.,.1.7„ ,.m.41„...,r ...c.r.,11,11„.....„,17,114„ , , y ,, 1-- 4 1 \\11 1 1 . 1 1 1 Aii i 1 ■ t t 1 1 m W 1 11 C 111 C ill 1 1 m It "Il 11 1 1 r- -111 ■11 n 1� ♦� 11 tt 1 (12 1 t 1 1 1 ♦ ♦ m I 1 m I Ili ( ■ C7 1 T XI 1 1 t C O I 11 11 11 rt C 09 II I It n - \47;47,-- (.1)();. 1 O D ril 111 N � !'o . V O fl t O 5.m 1� 1 ��c , cn t rn I t 1 �o 11 it �� C i I c3 d ,�'-:; 1 iT1 1 o t'; Z r 1 ,;w ur ?G 1 _Q N ,' Z 11 r Z d 111 O o �� 1 N wo ♦ a .1ii 1 1 rr" �pc 11 1 1 1 1 �n� 1, ,4�C\rH..' `N CO 1 , 1 ..----- „ ..,.._,,,- ...' 1 .F /.d. (----- „...„,1, , , ... . ________________, ,, , ,_. , i n 1 _ , A-10- 0 tote v „- = vvw IF ;0,4 g »` a { n 7 fl° u` 'i R i'krt ,6 ti O _ N / /' / ,/*. / / I ' . .7-- -- , ..• - .. .-.' ..• IN* II :. v\,(/ •- :,1.,' .4111■•7 *. ' % / /, / 1 .,. _ .i. ',' M 0 1/ / / ,/ k •••'i / 1 -1 1 C . 0 Fri M y ,/ //' 1 7a --- . ' M z r- 't .. z , i m ,... 0 u) 0 -0 y / / t > _ - - c 0 \ / , 1 o - --- ci --6> > / , 1 0 -- 2 -1 . \,- / 1 M ...- -. 1 W ,. g" ...; ' . '71 ' " - • , — ‘,k,,` ''-kr4 1. ..." :ve',-,,,,.., 1' I _ 1 cn...-- . _,.,.. 0 .41 44. 0 / b. u -,i' :,-. .....t....1 .i..... do 0., (.7) -- ( -1 , .„..- ' .?. ',,i.-: !J.,4`.',-', ...4,,. •<4 01111111:* 4341111: ,,,, 0 ,- . "' '7'447'7. -.'',,'i'.°°.''''' 1 • - - --..- -• • . . '..' . 4' ' ; - ■ek5 :*k! 2 7,/,,,;,',.;;e.,;'':','.,,',:, t ,..- „A.7 40 '',,,' i:'';■.[-.' %I _i /...''''... .•.'''.. ,,,'■',.1, . :,,,.,.' .1'',,.. 7 ' ' .1"/ t 0 MI % .'" ,....' .,'. > G it % '' '''. ''''-'' 410011.1. 0 - 8 ,,.„‘,..,...,07,5_,•,2: .:04,., ..,.:.1-ry ......, , \........... .....„ .... - ..- m ., •- „- „./ , 4 ■■.78 41 I i 0 > CO , ,,, t 1.7' ../ / .../• \ 1....1 X 1-7.. .... _ -; - .''' : . .,le /0/ // ) • 1,4 i i , ‘ . :. ..,..,00....." '.. II ‘ . ., ' „ ",-.,... ..';:i>1 T,,c ' / - , VF. rn 1 • / \ 1111,_,.0.110\01.00. ItC0 - 1 ` ‘ / / /• 1 i ° ' t _ .v.101 V / // ' Atn 10, \ • *1' . -; * ' • / 0 .-..‘ \s„. ° ixl ‘‘ ' • ' 'Act ' r- -2 .,... - -.. i / , 0 G) v / l / / „/ ) , k --I -te.--.-- rt‘iii ,4' / A . /‘ k / % k • , , , :,. • vi,:s . \ / ( , v 1 ,/Aiii , , •,-,, - %.1...3 Y / 3..k* \t/ . I ,111,J1," , Am / \< ., . V tit', '\ • co Lvkyt , ,,„, • m E %.1•01 'ilk .3. V/ / /- • .,,-ort‘- ,A,,jov-- , .r . , , a,\-• . ' •-''.t M-4 % vi -00A-t) ' / / ‘ G., ,.,.-:... 1• ' t Z N`S.,v1 1 / A i I / ,) '• -1 _< A.'N •:.:1 , , „..- I / -..`" - Y ,- - . ,..,.. " -, •'-''''''. I :..„... :._ , - . _ ,- • ._. .... 111111.r' . , • ., . _ ••, . ., .. .. . --' , ' il=gp. ii . , .,,,,,...-410- 1. ,n • 1 ,. . . FF:EIX :7 ., Oar , ..,„. ,,, .t " E E. 6 hi..: 'E . ''. '' '''','- € g i'FS,:=S' x . .01 t ig ._v F:, > tti 0 16,12 -.■ r4.<.. ,,, c 2 g g . . _ 4 0. ''....:A .• ...., . . , .. AO 2 P gi ...* b ~ o co ` D S r C a z�Z f,;\ o D 1 I 0 cv (_D '' ' O” CJ'/ P w N 'G7 3 'r}� •)" e YA O G' o D• co �\ ; ` \ ,n cia esaEomr- �T,vacn-v \ zm mR> g .Jo t0 N lD O* \ ✓� 8 Q U', w Z7 ..00 V N. c 263.41' ) _L4 75.94' c+ L'''''''' o CA e to � -D r---n ✓".� � c r''+ �,•' c.n m N DETENTION AREA a -I-' r,, °U lP v O 0 r••7'l7 "- rZ1 Z NNr+ N x r.- o o n w AAA I I I ( I I Ia o D z o m I cr+Z� � o � (i, _.r.1 _ E.'..)] ,-........ ..4,....4 r. PT. i „, ,., c,,,,, r.,,, ....,....., .....i. .,. .. .,, ,..0 .. ■) _, rrl C") rrl O D[ p -' °� � .gam N I �;(II CA u A ) - of ---) BIKE RACK e h o � I..--1 g \ 'a; g. — .. o i 'l��M�j��w �" tits N'\114) ` s i r/" -- . ii 9 !, ..•••• E.,,,,,.....„:„..........,.....,- . ., CO -SO(9. a N rn Z .r , ``J /J Cr) 0 o q7 = \ Na CD M M D \ I— Z \ Z 0 \ \-\\'s\ v v vv , 1 � I ,r: 1 ; \ \ F j \ \ I r m r' 1 x /-----•- s s v m a y y m o v v v v m� v E Y.i x'_ D S3 33 rg poo pA pa moo 2 a = x n / I \\\--/ �y /'-� \\\\ ° s g y G m C C m 2 c. y -O O 'O my A Q EA y L g = Z 6 y IR O IBS IA 141 A 14 O Ni Cl O Z �, 1 ' /bg6\ / /\ l.-.. \ \\ 2 p P Z A C yyy7[[[>���!A g �/E�, p° <p", O O O O y co La Q /./ /"� :\\i� \'\\ c) \\\\ n >>rn �,«>' P3 m ' 2 2 b > 9 �2 Z g y 2 \ i' , `\. e L\ \\\ ` \ \\\ n n r2n ° ^, m ^' r51 D 5 N tit Z - ./ N---- a' \ . ' ' :*---••••• \ ,., \ \ --. z `"'— -I1 7 m :9r _!I / \ • ;• ;\•\‘C.\:.;!,.4'24-.\-.., \ \ \ •4'' \ ! ,�'�\,. �': ' \ \\ •=2'• " 11 ."....:% ' ' \7\'\ i ) _.4!k ..114/4n \\\ t•-a 77 N:\ \sz, , \ . ' , i„/,. fir, Q f• :-F-‘,.‘ ,\,. •".‘,\\ 4gNi9 \\\ JI �� ` —< -`g 2 N L' :'Z N; . .: *<• A:,,V.e.- : :\4ks \;\\ ) A0.1! F- / \;. \ m 1 , /IA 0\ -:-.....\,. .f:,:-7:-■,..:_:-, ::,,_.1 ' .:r. ' \ \ r./."----\■, 1,/V 5 • ls6}� \ ti `•• b\e \ /\ € ! I I ire - ���•-•N,” 1-..i • \\ f___-,o,a - p 9, di / �!� „,, � 6P S �� 7 Fri ._----.. N •2.•2,..w oo'� � j N ,, r° _-, EN PER FAT f a /'� '"'- --� £ __s e`r a R 7� e L L_ p x 1 gt��1��00.41 ,.".Qez4-.`_✓_N00'2620 w 2 • 1 .W F.._3.9L.9LR15 o^ ° : a a °° '§ 5 P I6•6SL UO 57 t ' S 1 a 3 3°2 P- B; 4 G q42 /t 1`�,1 I , /g$ -A,AXg \I'A1I'/ 1/\,� 1 i 1 •-~_� Lca 1, I aua -a m // / /.. / lH. 1 , J x'31 :i i 1{ i:!iJ[I: -1J a t /� /f 1 • g.,1 °I –�� tx,. 'ova°= stiS2 3 z P 1, l /11p.' I 1 ( ch.) ∎i- _, x " �', R-w8 •,—S$^ X_ C) /' / t I 1`�. 1 ✓✓/ to/�i !: ., a•-`a eUg“e.,8 P I `�/ 1 ` ,} I fTl / '/ / �Ip ii ' (-1 1` I ��'ogY'1 iii-5�'oa (/ P2e 3s� ac3 y O z (^) 1/ // /—=� _=f �' \ ;-- "l`;5 � t3 �� Iq '¢= �g3 ��on z IN I \ J // ■ a m ° sue . / I ^S 4L 1 m R m.,R o /// i/ f �O, %. ¢ �/ 'mss '€,S' \ ''t y'1 $ .-II :a l.. ..'..1..g$ o Vv (/ 'i_1--/_,,,, ` `c, "_\. \ -- \` tss1\ -y {// co / i q 11 1;1111 1 P c j A— — — lit; \\' \ I \ \ r_ _.-\ / n o'”S 3 t 4 v $� 114/, � Ik \ � (I Ai ■ I ' I i i \ , ,I x _ _ } I 11aR )sl��s.', �� \\O0 9 \ �� =' = m woo X C �o� Z �� \V F \ s� \ ‘� -mo CD (0 '-'4-9" ( ) C� =ZZ m z 1 r. �. I c _ O \ \i, \ __�"-' \ vA m r-n -0 f g�4 _ � C ;Eh N✓ m " { moo z F t �t �' �� n r\\` "� \ , �tbg ss Coo++m D D s e il (-� N fTl \ I, \.6., co y. \ ;�F��., _ m r0 G7 \\6.1. \ 1 t 1 V Y- .1 / 1 oic's ''' ' 1 ,M1% ,, .Z7 In Tl K I-9 0 D Z 7 v Sri \ > - �' / tTl p.Z7 Z x m, 0 Z rn O �] ., J'� �l:'��• J - r jibe /.M ,„,.�'j" �.'�°z n o v CD te.n OI s i' i Ye? S '� A---- C` �f�R%' cr°�7r- o o ° r• O D1 � 1_ ----- M M tncni -4 Z In 'CI Z• 11 '; P' _ � i i®% Qdo1 �d`�\���W� ��/ f«�(g/ a N D�CD m rn -1 m -----c____-,0 Z > l M % C T gP 17 N Z , .i• ..,' o �j N m ITI II II II II II II II II II C C - -T : - \. �� /f4' o o � DNJr'D OuN \: ,R` / '�,� `/��� o -S SOS�"Nn "� n I . to' "" THOMPSON THRIFT DEV., INC. DEVELOPMENT PLAN / • ROGER WA12D ^ '\ ®®�,® ENGII�TEERIl�TG J -. •. -- PRIMARY PLAT INCORPORATED i WEST CARMEL COMMONS O _ �,= N .1-zit,> �_ �.�,_ CIVIL ENGINEERS-LANG PLANNERS-DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS O O m N -�•,, O o.G a:4= REVISIONS' DRAWN BY:RCW 7474 NOEL ROAD s ®-� N sr 10220 N. MICHIGAN ROAD Z=ca;21/1x KR KF ,• &MR110/°0.`��co ".---.:: INDIANAPOLIS,INDIANA 46278 .,��.•• J.- �.: (317)251-1736(FAX)261-1923 vw.iw.Rngirieering.com CARMEL, INDIANA . Conn, Angelina V From: Hollibaugh, Mike P Sent: Thursday, February 23, 20129:04 AM To: Conn, Angelina V; Donahue-Wold, Alexia K Subject: FW: Summary of action items from call - Olive Garden - 10222 Michigan Rd Phone call between Darden, City and Hamilton County. Our only item is to help them move project along, which we would do any way© From: Allea Newbold [mailto:Allea.Newbold(aTPCtax.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 5:26 PM To: Hollibaugh, Mike P; McBride, Mike T; Duncan, Gary R; howardma(aaol.com Cc: Jack DeGagne; Marc Braun Subject: Summary of action items from call Mike, Mike, Mike and Gary- Thank you very much for your support for the potential Olive Garden. I have summarized the key points from the call. Please let us know if we have misrepresented anything. • The City will engage an engineer to design the road and North/South curb cuts and reach out to Darden/Thompson Thrift in the next week or 2 to coordinate site plans • The City will provide an updated site plan once the road has been designed • A total contribution of$150,000 to be split between both Developers (Thompson Thrift/Darden) for"Developer Investment in Infrastructure". This amount will be proportionally reduced if the road costs are less than $600,000. If the road costs are more than$600,000 the City/County TIE will cover the difference • We have a strong preference for the City to support/encourage a split of the costs, rather than Thompson Thrift/Darden "arm wrestle" • If Darden incurs costs for public infrastructure work (for example path/sidewalk),those costs will be credited toward their portion of the contribution. • The land for the right a way will need to be dedicated for the road development • The road project will get prioritized with a goal of completing in the fall 2012 • In order to expedite Darden's title to the property,the City will help with expediting permitting and site plan approval. Mike Hollibaugh to work with Jack DeGagne. Thank you again for your help and support to bring Olive Garden to Carmel. Best regards, Allea Allea Newbold Managing Director True Partners Consulting LLC 400 North Ashley Drive Suite 1600 Tampa, FL 33602 P 813.434.4022* F 813.434.4072• C 813.830.2564 Al lea.Newbold@TPCtax.com http://www.TPCtax.com 1 ✓ CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDDI ANCE CARMEL CITY CODE CHAPTER 10: ZONING&SUBDIVISIONS ARTICLE 1: ZONING CODE CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 23C:US HIGHWAY 421—MICHIGAN ROAD CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE 23C.00 U.S.Highway 421 -Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone. 23C.01 District Boundaries. 23C.02 Commission Approval. 23C.03 Permitted Uses. 23C.04 Special Uses. 23C.05 Excluded Uses. 23C.06 Accessory Buildings and Uses. 23C.07 Minimum Tract Size. 23C.08 Height and Area Requirements. 23C.09 Architectural Design Requirements. 23C.10 Landscaping Requirements. 230.11 Parking Requirements. 23C.12 Lighting Requirements. 23C.13 Access to Individual Tracts. 23C.14 Other Requirements. 23C.00 U.S. Highway 421 -Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone.' 23C.00.01 Purpose, Intent and Authority. It is the purpose of the U.S. Highway 421 -Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone(referred to in this Chapter 23C as the"Overlay Zone") to promote and protect the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare by providing for consistent and coordinated treatment of the properties bordering U.S. Highway 421 (also known as Michigan Road) in Clay Township, Hamilton County, Indiana. The Commission and Council, in establishing this zone, are relying on IC 36-7-4-600 et seq. and IC 36-7-4-1400 et seq. It is recognized that U.S. Highway 421 is an important corridor to Cannel and to Clay Township. Therefore, it is the further purpose of the Overlay Zone to promote coordinated, quality development per the Land Use recommendations set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; to establish basic standards for structures, Iandscaping, and other improvements on the properties within the Overlay Zone which promote high quality, innovative site design and at the same time encourage efficient land usage; to establish development standards which will encourage capital investments for the development of those properties along and abutting U.S. Highway 421; and to promote the steady flow of traffic. This Ordinance further seeks to foster development that will provide this district with a special sense of place that will increase property values, protect real estate investment, spur commercial activity, and attract new businesses. More specifically, the creation of this special sense of place shall be encouraged by means of a coordinated set of design principles for buildings, site planning, landscaping and signage. These principles are intended to guide individual development activities so that they will work together visually in support of the common architectural theme described below. 23C.00.02 Plan Commission Approval. A. Development Plan. The Commission shall review the Development Plan(DP)of any proposed use of any Lot or parcel of ground within the U.S. Highway 421 Overlay Zone prior to the issuance of an Section 230.00 amended per Ordinance No.Z-453-04,§do-dp. Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-1 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07; Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vl • CITY OF C:ARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE Improvement Location Permit by the Department. See Section 24.02:Development Plan. B. Architectural Design, Exterior Lighting, Landscaping and Signage. To insure the compatibility of the proposed use with adjoining areas, the Commission shall review the Architectural Design, Exterior Lighting, Landscaping and Signage (ADLS) application of any proposed use of any Lot or parcel of ground within the U.S. Highway 421 Overlay Zone prior to the issuance of an Improvement Location Permit by the Department. See Section 24.03:Architectural Design, Exterior Lighting, Landscaping and Signage. 23C.00.99 Application Procedure. A. Development Plan. See Section 24.99M):Development Plan. B. Architectural Design, Exterior Lighting. Landscaping and Signage (ADLS). See Section 24.99(B): Architectural Design, Exterior Lighting, Landscaping and Signage(ADLS). 23C.01 District Boundaries. The boundaries of the Overlay Zone are hereby established as shown on the Zoning Map. The boundaries extend four hundred (400) feet on either side of the U.S. Highway 421 right-of-way, include the North Augusta subdivision in its entirety, including both that real estate described as Block "A" and the cemetery on the plat of Section 1 recorded September 2, 1947. The portion of the Overlay Zone east of Michigan Road does not extend north of the parcel numbered 17-13-06-00-00-034 and any lot subdivided therefrom after September 1, 1997. 23C.02 Commission Approval.2 A. Development Plan. The Commission must approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the Development Plan (DP) for any tract of land in the Overlay Zone. The Commission shall hold a public hearing before it decides whether to approve or disapprove a DP.. The Commission,in reviewing DP applications, shall examine factors concerning the site, Site Plan and the surrounding area,which include but are not limited to the following items: 1. Topography; 2. Zoning on site; 3. Surrounding zoning and existing land use; 4. Streets,curbs and gutters,bicycle paths,and sidewalks; 5. Access to public streets; 6. Driveway and curb cut locations in relation to other sites; 7. General vehicular and pedestrian traffic; 8. Parking facilities and internal site circulation; 9. Special and general easements for public or private use; 10. On-site and off-site surface and subsurface storm and water drainage,including drainage calculations; 11. On-site and off-site utilities; 12. The means and impact of sanitary sewage disposal and water supply techniques; 13. Dedication of streets and rights-of-way; 14. Provision for adequate and acceptable setbacks, screening, and compatibility.with existing, platted residential uses; 15. Storage area; 2 Section 23C.02 amended per Ordinance No.Z-453-04,§dq;Z-547-10. Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-2 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 201 1 vl • CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDNANCE 16. Protective restrictions and/or covenants; 17. Effects any proposed project may have on the entire Overlay Zone;and, 18. Consistency with the policies for the Overlay Zone which are set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. B. Existing Features & Site Analysis Plan. Every applicant shall submit an Existing Features and Site Analysis Plan showing all hedgerows, woodlands, individual trees greater than six (6) inches in diameter (dbh), structures, drainage patterns and structures (including tile fields),wetlands, floodplains, and all buildings. This plan shall show topography at two-foot(2')contour intervals and shall be prepared at a scale of not less than one inch equals one hundred feet(1"= 100'). C. ADLS Requirement. Commission review and approval of the architectural design, landscaping, parking, signage,lighting and access to the property(ADLS)shall be necessary prior to: 1. the establishment of any use of land; 2. the issuance of any Improvement Location Permit; 3. the erection,reconstruction or external architectural alteration of any building in the Overlay Zone;or, 4. the changing of any site improvements. D. Exception. Existing residential structures and residential lots platted prior to April 21, 1980, when used for residential purposes,are exempt from the requirements contained within this Section. E. Partial Boundaries &Conflicts. If a Parent Tract is located both inside and outside of the U.S. Highway 421 - Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone, a DP and ADLS in compliance with the US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Overlay Zone shall be submitted to the Commission for the entire Parent Tract. Wherever there exists a conflict between the requirements of the underlying zoning and those of the US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Overlay Zone,the requirements for the US Highway 421—Michigan Road Overlay Zone shall prevail. 23C.03 Permitted Uses.' A. All uses which are permitted in a given site's underlying primary zoning districts, except those uses expressly excluded in Appendix A:Schedule of Uses,are permitted in the Overlay Zone. B. Retail uses are permitted; however, it shall not comprise more than seventy-five percent (75%) of a project's gross floor area on parcels in the B-3/Business District located north of 106th Street. C. Residential uses are permitted;however, it shall not comprise more than fifty percent(50%) of a project's gross floor area on parcels where residential is not permitted in the underlying zoning district. 23C.04 Uses.4 All Special Uses which are permitted(upon obtaining a Special Use approval from the Board)in the underlying primary zoning district(s), except the uses expressly excluded in Appendix A: Schedule of Uses, are permitted in the Overlay Zone. 23C.05 Excluded Uses.' See Appendix A:Schedule of Uses. 23C.06 Accessory Buildings and Uses. All accessory buildings and uses which are permitted in the underlying primary zoning district(s) shall be permitted, except that any detached accessory building in any DP shall be architecturally compatible with the principal building(s) with which it is associated. Section 23(7.03 amended per Ordinance No.Z-415-03,§by;Z-490-06,§a. Section 23(7.04 amended per Ordinance No.Z-415-03,§bz. • 5 Section 23C.05 amended per Ordinance No.Z-415-03,§ca. Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-3 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06:Z-511-07; Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vl CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE 23C.07 Minimum Tract Size. The minimum area covered by a DP within the Overlay Zone must be 130,680 square feet (3 acres). For tracts located only partially within the Overlay Zone,a DP shall be submitted to the Commission for the entire tract to be developed. If a parcel of land or subdivision lot was recorded prior to September 7, 1988 (the"Effective Date"), and said parcel or lot does not contain the minimum area required by this Paragraph, said parcel or lot("Undersized Lot")may be used for any use permitted in the Overlay Zone provided that: A. At the time of recordation of the Undersized Lot or on the Effective Date, the Undersized Lot met the requirements for minimum lot size then in effect for a lot in the underlying primary zoning district(s); B. The owner of the Undersized Lot must include, up to the minimum tract size, any adjoining vacant land (not separated by a street or public way) owned, or owned by an affiliate, on or before the Effective Date or at the time of application which, if combined with the Undersized Lot, would create a tract which conforms, or more closely conforms,to the minimum tract size requirements of this Paragraph;and C. All other development requirements applicable to the Overlay Zone can be met. This Paragraph does not preclude the sale or other transfer of any parcel of land within a tract after the approval of a DP for the entire tract. However, the development of the parcel must still conform to the DP for the entire tract as approved or amended by the Commission,and all other applicable requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance. 23C.08 Height and Area.Requirements.6 23C.08.01 Building Height: A. Minimum: See Section 23C.09(C). O B. Maximum: As specified in primary underlying zoning district. Lc9- — 23C.08.02 Front Yard for Parcels with Frontage on U.S.421 Right-of-way: pe rl A. Minimum: Thirty (30) feet, measured from the U.S. Highway 421 right-of-way. This measurement shall include the mandatory thirty-foot(30')Greenbelt. B. Maximum: One hundred twenty(120) feet, measured from the U.S. Highway 421 right-of-way. This measurement shall include the mandatory thirty-foot(30')Greenbelt. 23C.08.03 Minimum Side and Rear Yards: A. Next to existing residence(s) or undeveloped residential zone: Fifty(50) feet or two (2) times building height,whichever is greater. B. Next to business zone or development: Fifteen(15)feet. • • C. Next to manufacturing zone or development: twenty(20)feet. 23C.08.04 Minimum Gross Floor Area: Each lot or parcel shall contain at least one principal building with a minimum of two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet of gross floor area, excluding the floor area of any basement or any accessory buildings. Accessory buildings need not meet the minimum floor area requirement. 23C.08.05 Maximum Gross Floor Area: All free-standing commercial buildings located north of 106th Street shall have a maximum of eighty-five thousand(85,000)square feet of gross floor area,excluding the floor area of any basement or any accessory buildings. 6 Section 230.08 amended per Ordinance No.Z-490-06,§b-c. Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-4 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vl • • CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE ' t 23('.09 Architectural Desien Requirements.' In reviewing the architectural design of building(s)proposed to be built in the Overlay Zone,factors to be considered by the Commission shall include but are not limited to the following: A. Design Theme: Buildings shall be designed with an overall Corridor Architectural Theme consistent with or complementary to the Federal, Georgian,Italianate, or Greek Revival Periods. New buildings are not reciu_red -vior. to be imitative, but must incorporate the salient features of these architectural styles:.Pre-existing buildings on adjoining tracts s a not e a factor m t e es gn of new buildings unless they are consistent with the architectural objectives of the Overlay Zone. B. Building Proportion: Buildings within the Overlay Zone should generally avoid long, monotonous, uninterrupted walls or roof planes. The design and placement of building façades, doors, windows, and architectural design details shall be through use of Regulating Lines. C. Building Height. The height of new principal buildings shall be at least one and one-half(1'/z) stories, or be designed to appear so from the front and sides. Retail and office buildings are encouraged to be two(2)stories in height, with office or residential uses on the second floor. The minimum height for all buildings shall be twenty(20)feet,either at the roofline or at the top of the parapet wall. The maximum height shall be thirty feet (30');however, an additional eight feet(8')shall be permitted to accommodate mechanical penthouses or other inner roof structures. Building heights for proposed buildings that are adjacent to residential uses shall be no more than one and one- half(1Y2) stories or 20'on the facade(s)nearest the residential use,but may increase in height by one additional story for a façade step back with a depth of 25',or first structural bay,whichever is larger. D. : F. ade Façades shall have a defined base or foundation, a middle or modulated wall, and a top formed by a pitched roof or articulated cornice, in each instance appropriate to the buildings e. Buildings with continuous façades that are ninety(90)feet or greater in width,shall be designed with offsets(projecting or recessed)not less than eight(8)feet deep,and at intervals of not greater than sixty(60)feet. Facades constructed of more than one material shall only change materials along a horizontal line, or along a vertical line of an architectural element (not a diagonal line). The material that appears to be heavier shall always be placed beneath the lighter material. All façades of buildings shall be of the same materials and similarly detailed. Design elements of the elevations shall be organized such that openings line up horizontally and vertically with other openings. Openings in a façade shall be arranged in a balanced,relatively uniform fashion. Openings of varying sized are often centered vertically along the center line of the openings above or below. �° E. Roofs. Roofs shall be simply and symmetrically pitched and only in the configuration of gables and hips,with 1' // pitches ranging from 4:12 to 14:12. Shed roofs are permitted only when the ridge is attached to an exterior wall of a building,and shall conform to pitch between 14:12 and 4:12. Flat roofs are permitted when consistent with the historic style of architecture, if edged by a railing or parapet,and if rooftop mechanical equipment is either camouflaged on all sides or visually integrated into the overall design of the building. In no case shall rooftop mechanical equipment be visible from adjoining streets,residential zones or uses. Modulation of the roof and/or roof line will be required in order to eliminate box-shaped buildings. Parapets must be fully integrated into the architectural design of the building and provide seamless design transitions, including exterior materials,between the main building mass, mechanical penthouses and other roof structures. Should they be used,partial parapets shall have a return that extends inward to at least the first structural bay,or twenty-five(25)feet,whichever is greater. 6 -- Pitched roofs shall be clad in wood shingles, slate, composition asphalt shingle or standing-seam metal panels. Asphalt shingles shall be colored to resemble gray slate; standing-seam panels may ,a emitter gray, black, dark blue,dark green or barn red. Section 23C.09 amended per Ordinance No.Z-511-07. Chapter 23C:US Highway 421—Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-5 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vl 4 CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE Dormers shall be designed with the correct details, proportion and style consistent with the overall building composition, and roofed with symmetrical gable, hip or barrel roofs. Belvederes, cupolas, and pergolas are permitted if appropriate to the style,well proportioned,and fully detailed. All vents,attic ventilators,turbines,flues and others roof penetrations must be painted to match the color of the roof or flat black, except those made of metal which may be left natural. Gutters and downspouts shall be appropriate to or visually integrated with the architectural style of the structure. F. Entrances: Building entrances shall be -defined and articulated by architectural elements such as lintels, pediments,pilasters,columns,and other design elements appropriate to the architectural style and details of the building as a whole. The location, orientation,proportion and style of doors must faithfully reflect the chosen style of the building. Building facades for industrial and warehouse uses shall be designed with a main entrance and at least two(2) window openings associated with this doorway. G. Windows. All window design shall be compatible with the style,materials, color,details and proportion of the building. The number of panes,the way it opens,the trim around it and whether it is embellished with shutters must be consistent with the architectural style of the structure. H. Awnings. Fixed or retractable awnings are permitted if they complement a building's architectural style, material, colors, and details; do not conceal architectural features (such as cornices, columns, pilasters, or decorative details);do not impair facade composition;and are designed as an integral part of the facade. Metal or aluminum awnings are prohibited. Storefronts. Storefronts shall be integrally designed with overall facade character. Ground floor retail,service and restaurant uses should generally have large pane display windows,however,they shall not exceed seventy- five percent(75%)of the total ground level(first floor)facade area. Buildings with multiple storefronts shall be of unified design, through the use of common materials, architectural details, signage and lighting consistent with the overall building style. J. Drive-thru windows. Drive-thru windows shall be designed as a related, integrated architectural element and part of the overall design composition of the building. K. Suitability of building materials. Unless otherwise a proved by the Commission, building materials shall be consistent with and/or complementary to t ose w ich replicate Federal, Georgian,Italianate and Greek Revival Periods of American architecture,as follows: 1. Exposed oundation hall be constructed of one or more of the following: a. Red brick; b. Stone(limestone,granite,fieldstone,etc.); c. Split-face block or architectural pre-cast concrete,if surface looks like brick or stone. 2. Facade walls shall be constructed of any combination o red brick or • The following materials may a so be applied as trim details, •ut shall not exceed ten percent(10%)of the overall non-window facade area: a. Red brick or stone of a contrasting color; b. Smooth cut cedar shingles; c. Wood clapboard siding; d. Wood beaded siding; e. Stucco with smooth finish,or EIFS. 3. Warehouse facilities,including self-storage and mini-warehouse uses, shall have a high-quality façade treatment on all sides consistent with the following: a. Red brick facades trimmed with split-faced aggregate block(of a color and texture resembling Indiana limestone),provided that it also includes accents (such as windowsills, lintels above windows and doorways,building corners,parapet coping,etc.). r —_ Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 -Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-6 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vl CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE b. Split-face aggregate block(of a color and texture resembling Indiana limestone) provided that it also incorporates red brick accents. c. Pre-cast concrete wall panels of a color and texture resembling either red brick or Indiana limestone,provided the building design also incorporates architecturally appropriate details of contrasting color and material,as noted previously in Subparagraphs K(1)and K(2). d. Stone or synthetic stone, provided the building design also incorporates architecturally appropriate details of contrasting color and material, as noted previously in Subparagraphs K(1)and K(2). L. Design in relation to topography of the site; M. Design of proposed landscaping in relation to structures;and N. Overall aesthetics of the proposed building,including color. 23C.10 Landscaping Requirements. 23C.10.01 Landscaping Plan. The applicant shall submit a Landscaping Plan to the Commission as part of the ADLS application. This plan shall be drawn to scale, including dimensions and distances; shall delineate all existing and proposed structures, private parking areas,walks,ramps for the handicapped, terraces, driveways, signs, lighting standards, steps, storm water facilities and other similar structures; and shall delineate the location, size and description of all landscape material and the method to be used for the watering or irrigation of all planting areas. Landscape treatment for plazas, roads,paths, service and private parking areas and storm water areas shall be designed as an integral and coordinated part of the Landscaping Plan for the entire site. The Landscaping Plan shall require the approval of the Commission. 23C.10.02 Areas to be Landscaped: 1. Greenbelt. The thirty (30) foot Greenbelt shall be composed of grass and landscape areas. The incorporation of walkways and bikeways into the design is encouraged; however, no parking lots, through roads,buildings,accessory structures,etc. shall be established within this area. 2. Foundation Plantings. Foundation plantings shall be included along all sides of any building. The minimum width of the planting area shall be five (5) feet, except that when adjoining a parking area located in the front yard adjoining U.S. 421,the minimum width shall be ten(10)feet. 3. Peripheral Plantings. Minimum side and rear yard landscaping shall occur per the Commission's Bufferyard Guidelines. 4. Parking Lots. Per standards specified below in Section 230.10.03. 5. Screening Areas. All air conditioning units, HVAC systems, exhaust pipes or stacks,overhead doors, outside storage areas, and satellite dishes shall be integrated into the overall building design or screened from the U.S. Highway 421 right-of-way and adjoining residential zones or uses using walls, fencing,parapets,penthouse screens,landscaping,camouflage,or other approved method. 23C.10.03 Landscaping Standards 1. The interior dimensions, specifications and design of any planting area or planting median shall be sufficient to protect the landscaping materials planted therein and to provide for proper growth. The following minimum interior widths for planting areas shall be used: a. Canopy Trees: Nine(9)feet; b. Ornamental Trees: Seven(7)feet; c. Shrubs(only): Five(5)feet. Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-7 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vi CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE 2. All plant material proposed to be used in accordance with any Landscaping Plan shall meet the following specifications: a. Shade trees: a minimum trunk diameter of two and one-half(21/4) inches at six (6) inches above grade,a minimum height of eight(8) feet, and a branching height of not less than one- third(1/3)or more than one-half(`/)of tree height. b. Ornamental trees: a minimum trunk diameter of one and one-half(11/4)inches at six(6)inches above grade, a minimum height of six (6) feet, and a branching height of not less than one- third(1/3)or more than one-half(%z)of tree height. c. Evergreen trees: a minimum height of eight (8) feet, and a width of not less than three-fifths (3/5)of the height. d. Deciduous shrubs: a minimum height of eighteen (18) inches, no less than six (6) main branches upon planting,and a mature height no greater than thirty-six(36)inches. e. Evergreen shrubs: a minimum height and spread of eighteen (18) inches, maximum mature height of thirty-six(36)inches. 3. Greenbelt. The primary landscaping materials used in the Greenbelt shall be shade trees, ornamental trees,shrubs,ground covers,grass,etc. a. A minimum of three (3) shade trees and one (1) ornamental tree shall be provided per 100 . linear feet of Greenbelt. b. Shade trees planted within the Greenbelt parallel to the U.S. Highway 421 right-of-way shall be spaced neither less than fifteen(15)feet apart nor more than forty(40)feet apart. 4. Foundation Plantings. The primary landscaping materials used adjacent to buildings shall be shrubs, ground covers,and ornamental grasses. 5. Parking Lots. a. Interior Landscaping. A minimum of one (1) shade tree and five (5) shrubs shall be planted within each parking lot for every nine(9) spaces provided, or not less than eighteen(18)trees per acre of parking. However, for buildings with parking areas located in a front yard, with frontage directly on U.S. 421, a minimum of one (1) shade tree and five (5) shrubs shall be planted within each parking lot for every six(6)spaces provided,or not less than twenty-four(24)trees per acre of parking. b. Parking Lot Perimeter Planting. Where parking areas are located in the front yard, with frontage directly on U.S. 421, a six (6) foot wide perimeter planting area shall be provided along the front and sides of those areas. 1) The required planting unit for this area shall include: two (2) shade trees, three (3) ornamental trees,and thirty(30)shrubs per 100 linear feet. 2) The perimeter planting area shall be provided in addition to the Greenbelt area. c. Front and Side Parking. Parking areas within front and side yards shall be completely screened from view. Such screening shall be subject to Commission approval. 230.10.04 Landscaping Installation and Maintenance Installation. All landscaping approved as part of the Landscaping and/or Development Plan shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy by the Department. If it is not possible to install the required landscaping because of weather conditions, the property owner shall post a bond prior to the issuance of the Final Certificate of Occupancy for an amount equal to the total cost of the required landscaping. 2. Maintenance. It shall be the responsibility of the owners and their agents to insure proper maintenance of all trees, shrubs and other landscaping approved as part of the Landscaping and Development Plans Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-8 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vi • CITY OF CARMEL ZONNG ORDINANCE in accordance with the standards set by this Ordinance. This is to include, but is not limited to, replacing dead plantings with identical varieties or a suitable substitute, irrigation and mulching of planting areas,and keeping the area free of refuse,debris,rank vegetation and weeds. 3. Changes after Approval. No landscaping which has been approved by the Commission may later be substantially altered, eliminated or sacrificed without first obtaining further Commission approval. However, minor material alterations in landscaping may be approved by the Director in order to conform to specific site conditions. 4. Inspection. The Director may visit any tract within the Overlay Zone to inspect the landscaping and check it against the approved plan on file. 23C.1.1 Parking Requirements. A. Spaces required:see Chapter 27:Additional Parking&Loading Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. B. Space dimensions:9'0"x 20'0"or 10'0"x 18'0",including 2'0"for bumper overhang where appropriate. C. Landscaping standards: see Section 23C.10.03. D. Parking lots shall be designed to provide coordinated access to parking areas on adjoining tracts or parcels within the Overlay Zone,preferably via a frontage road network. Sites utilizing front-loaded parking areas shall provide for continuous access across the rear of the site to adjoining tracts or parcels. As part of the ADLS submittal,the petitioner shall provide a Site Circulation Plan that illustrates to the Commission how coordinated access will occur relative to the overall U.S.Highway 421 Corridor. E. All parking lots and drives shall be paved with asphalt or concrete.Brick pavers or other decorative pavements may be used as accents in parking lot design. Poured-in-place concrete curbs shall be used. F. Parking within front yard 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. G. Stacking for drive-thin lanes shall be confined to the rear of the tract or parcel with outlet from such lines also being to the rear of the building. Lines for drive-thru facilities shall not be permitted along the front and sides of structures within the Overlay Zone, nor permitted to spill onto adjoining properties. The minimum number of vehicles required for drive-thni lanes shall be as follows: USE TYPE MIN NO. SPACES MEASURED FROM Bank teller lane 5 Teller or Window Automated Teller Machine 3 Teller Restaurant Drive-thru 10 Pick-up Window Car Wash 5 Entrance Gas Pump island 3 End of pump island Other To be determined by the Director 23C.12 Lighting Requirements. A. Lighting Plan. A Lighting Plan for the proposed development shall be filed as part of the ADLS application. B. Design. All lighting standards, including those on buildings, security lights and architectural lights within the development area shall be of uniform design and materials. Parking lot and streetlights shall also be of uniform height not to exceed twenty-four(24)feet. Poles for such lights shall have a minimum diameter of six(6)inches for poles up to twelve(12) feet in height and a minimum of eight(8) inches diameter for poles between twelve (12) and twenty-four(24) feet in height. Luminaries for such lights shall be in proportion to the pole diameter and height. All lights within gas station canopies and adjacent to residential areas shall be of a"down lighting" Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-9 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 v1 CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE type with the light element completely shielded on all sides and top. The Commission may approve decorative lighting should it be more appropriate to the overall site design. C. Intensity_ Lighting shall not cause illumination beyond any residential lot line or road right-of-way line in excess of 0.1 footcandle of light.Lighting shall not cause illumination beyond any non-residential tract or parcel line or road right-of-way line in excess of 0.3 footcandle of light. 23C.13 Access to Individual Tracts. The purpose of this Section is to make the closing of all curb cuts along U.S. Highway 421 possible by establishing a common access road to the rear parking lots of all tracts within the Overlay Zone. Frontage roads and common entrances shared by several businesses and developments shall be encouraged and may be required at the discretion of the Commission. hi those cases where tracts can be accessed via connection to an arterial,collector,or adjoining parking lot, curb cuts shall not be established on U.S. Highway 421. The Commission shall encourage maximum distances between curb cuts to U.S. Highway 421 in cooperation with the Indiana Department of Transportation. Bicycle and pedestrian circulation to and through the site shall be coordinated with vehicular access,Greenbelt design,and parking. 23C.14 Other Requirements.' 23C.14.01 Outside Storage. Outside storage areas shall be allowed as shown on the DP and shall be architecturally compatible with the principal building(s) with which they are associated. Storage areas shall be completely screened from view and subject to Commission approval. Trash collection areas shall be enclosed and screened. 23C.14.02 Loading Berths. Loading berths and trash collection areas shall be permitted per the needs of the business establishments and shall be identified on the DP. Loading berths and overhead doors shall face to the rear of all buildings. Should a loading berth be located adjacent to or visible from a public right-of-way, or established on the side of a building through any circumstance,it shall be screened per Commission approval. 23C.14.03 Emergency Access. All emergency access areas and facilities shall be shown on the Site Plan and reviewed by the Carmel Fire Chief. 23C.14.04 Signs. A Sign Plan for the proposed development shall be submitted to the Commission for its approval as part of the ADLS application. Signs for each proposed use shall be uniform in character as to color and architectural design as approved by the Commission. Should an ADLS-approved Sign Plan be replaced with a new design, the amended Sign Plan must go before the Commission for ADLS review and approval. Individual signs which conform to both the Sign Ordinance and to the approved Sign Plan shall not require further ADLS approval,however,such signs shall require a sign permit. 23C.14.05 Conforming Uses. A DP shall be submitted to the Commission for its approval when a legal non-conforming use is changed to a conforming use and when either: 1. Any new building is to be constructed;or 2. Any existing building or site development(including addition of parking lot)is expanded by more than thirty percent(30%). 23C.14.06 Non-Conforming Uses. A DP shall be submitted to the Commission for its approval when a legal non-conforming use is altered as follows: 1. A building has been more than sixty percent(60%)destroyed. 2. Any expansion of a building or site development (including addition of parking lot). Normal maintenance and repair is exempt from the DP approval requirement. 3. If property or building is vacated for more than one(1)year. s Section 23C.14 amended per Ordinance No.Z-511-07. Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-10 as amended per Z-325;Z-326:Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vi CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDNANCE 23C.14.07 Perimeter Fences. Perimeter Fences shall be permitted for privacy, buffering and screening purposes and shall be identified on the DP. When used, perimeter fences shall be constructed of wood and masonry materials,be solid as viewed from any angle and shall be at least eight feet(8')in height. Primarily cedar fences are permitted; however, twenty-four inch(24") wide red brick or stone columns shall be incorporated into the fence design at least every twenty-six feet(26'). Alternatively,metal fencing with landscaping is permitted such that 100% landscaping screen is achieved within three (3) years. All fences shall be properly maintained and repaired,as necessary. • Chapter 23C:US Highway 421—Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-11 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;Z-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vl CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 23C: U.S.HIGHWAY 421 CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE AMENDMENT LOG Ordinance No. Docket No. Council Approval Effective Date Sections Affected Z-325 Z-326 July 20, 1998 Z-415-03 39-02 OA November 17,2003 November 18,2003 23C.03;23C.04; 23C.05 Autumn 2003 vl Z-453-04 150-02 OA August 16,2004 August 16,2004 23C.00;23C.02; 23C.15 Summer 2004 vi Z-490-06 0602005 OA May 15,2006 May 15,2006 23C.03;23C.08 Spring 2006 vl Z-511-07 07020020 OA November 19,2007 November 20,2007 23C.09;23C.14 Autumn 2007 vi Z-547-10 10040014 OA December 20,2010 December 20,2010 23C.02 Winter 2011 vl Chapter 23C:US Highway 421 —Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone 23C-12 as amended per Z-325;Z-326;Z-415-03;2-453-04;Z-490-06;Z-511-07;Z-547-10 Winter 2011 vl 0 Z \ CC — J IU N M\00,:„so , .r III 1 _ . I z 1 1 �. Q CD• IA , '"��ae813s ONia1inal,5s LLI \ r . .v., 1 -'I a0 a_, �' 1 �¢o 11 1 jY �j= W i D<0 1 / �jiI Z �,,��t� 1 v i •j , j z¢ j / lii ..]j gp W� O c ) 1 i Ali, ig o CL \......4,„.....,„\i U0 00 r (:-.3 ., N gp-d tiAw t� Z&o Oi i O 1 / I o0 1 i i t I $1 O I I O / °O N I i i. 1 ` I I x x 11 z 0 1 I 1 1 o O 11 1 Q O i 0 \ I O I U w OI ! O CC U-1 U ¢ O ~ • t I I I rn p cn Cr) -. 1 '• r•7 i 1` j 1y e O O i �° I ^ CD � Q ,, �I 1 _ _ w 0- ( ) z �% 1 /,----� -1 -\\ I a. a cn w (-3- z 1 , ///- -∎\\ co W • I (--) CD,' ' 1 //// - -I--I -\\\\ - ; N CD N � 85mCEY 11 I 1_ $ IIII I I IIII I N r� ��'� +I▪ n ¢ ° W _ O A:OmxNa ¢ Cr) O ¢ 1 i SL 14£9Z 3 p M H N A n r7 O5 CD , `0+∎• con. . ¢ ¢ .- a cr' \ d��CiiLL CD Z z 1 i -1 0_ Y Z N V \ 1 C C' w Ujamo_& O /,. ; a U-1 i' I o CD N Ni d CO ? O I 0 I co 1 = P. Z V e,6_, - , Y J c v /+ � i4 ,. J It '-11 .� , ,r, ;'% .�+► — sx woo U 0 Ilk \ S. ,. 0. 4, foreill,\1444 "- . gyp * _ "~ 4 �"` { d' 4 t ,e"... ,4 4F, \�•0 .x .. z aij • �► 0 9. 4* s { �1r CD .. �r w WW OP ', k• t -, ' N ' e+qp" 8 .g7 o C z =Li °-:ilw:m.:1' ' ‘ 41i '; ,-N : : (_ � CO i r � N,i ...t ‘....# MOM MOM Eon 1 d m SO . ••• . = ===-H..... I , M r r7 I N.0 . z w f . U \ -‹ cj 1= L At r•id NZ = 4 +1 Y . C7 CL±(n W !Th71 ZZ f ,x _ W U O Z . - N d,N Cr) Y ,{ a d 2,T p d ^ = d co m0 N C.n O ¢ '' fl -! x N Q �' i C� W"" 't^ 7 m t O cc) CC Z Z — ,a ... ma' LL,O 0 CC i i Zama cn O \, ',", # O W a' 0 r G V Z '',!.-"I'!" ' S = IS r e z � U r -a Ca; '5 ..,i, `� t 'S . ., a ` ceo. o`- r :.� a u ��� • ar , . . .:. R • —mil _ fr ,0 1..x'19• ......1' II ■t m �I r.w. . Au*, r w., 1..m"....." r, ' la Vat 1 ,'•'-:,'a n�. 0 I .tc T...� �' a rWa W � in c. . r rt., ,l A■ j. '_, ‘ l•Y' it F1 Lg: a . . s #1111 , •i QM'µ i::` :1 * W 4 : : %,:,!„...1 , , . ..,, ,,,,, ..., _._,, v„,,,, _ :,, lc ....c..,...t......x.„.Vil......,... ‘Q....1,1,Mit `,. :a _ .,s►17 ate 2,., 4 97 ......... I,9 i6,g Iv ,17441 2,....vg 4-t I.r,•■ .2 ;- t...& c.g' i c'-F -iEF •--,-,, 6 a ••,' ---- - ' ..!. p.:-...1..,..,...6, . i • •,,,,,+:,--4 •'7. E =—•=„7 '•Z.V.:: i '%MM.*,, , . • ...... :) •azraa.: a % .,:r , ,.- vAti - ' ,P... -‘.• A 4.1 '• ....."F;, -4.5: ! ' ., $. ::::41111•••=1 71=1 =1 •Cir-*WWI. ,si..- ...' :ril.larE ,, ..........1 : ,..; at ,,'. '.. i M . .......:. 'I •-i-dri—ewp •: , ...4i p.I., 1 111114,1 z r.,.. , :1 ,,i 2•:- 'T ,`,./ .,.... ‘11 -,' , , .. .. ".":-: , 0 ,,-.• .. 1 4 ' '7, i. . p-■, .. I ,.,... 'ow . ' < 1:t: , * • 7, -t' ■'' < C .... t... re 4r.-=-, * ..i.. > Cr) c a - • LI-1 '-,,. ' 4•J '-'''`,1 .•. . - ,.-- ....... Jill , • ----- NW .. ,___H :: ; 4 1, • .1 2:5.1:1 I.a , Z , • -I : . .. 0 . • ):::: ' • % :- •;.., . II li o• : , i:: " :','\ t''.•, .:,..' 0.64 ■ ,",„, t. F...1 / 11 etk:' ' :-. ■ '7 t i . • 1---.3 Y Al:, •4,,.. . N • ° %, - i•.. . • 1 - •,..-._, Air - ,„•,.,••• , . • • • . , ,, „,..: ..,,.,. ,,,,,., ,. . • .:. = s, , . r 1 5 . , 7 '7, 4 ... 1 CL to g • ' -I •. t 141 Z 6: , I 1 ..J z ia 4 1- .2 . U. agnVi3 CtIll • 900Z'6 15►6nv S8d '8161d 'Sid '09d SiE!JaWw sioioD . I NV21(1V1S-18 NV! 1V11 D161 2C4 XVI K41 tt4•1! :' : : :;•• • 1 d ••0141 ••••••Y „wale uap.irao atmo,woo w uwafuag %9Z PO t313q PO S21000 'g 9eL#Ups pa rl- S to SMOONIM1W12114OOM INI\kJ-901, SI113211000MC7NIV 5-9901, &JO lesileN anoio A2J0 lax4'N: o.J uvoi¢se Awopueu pau !its wan)W,:DPO P3141111-'P!i8 uNl.2 x .2/17Z sau:$isu,no pa p6u.pi UI aDEg4ADO M PLDFPFIA ue!IPLIalcIV,atnEoPeulD0 5213)4N no>I0 I213-En !IO>P!aH E£I#M)2133N3 A 3 NODS-201, . , 4..,,,,,,,. ,, doilask,s\,. ..,;kiki t 1 . N. \ ``i Din nods I#,d�184D 19„ ,.- j , ';-- ,S„fit-allla1!1W 3111LOON-01,1, is ,, -k , '0'4141/4, 1 771 '4---471_4 • im _ • • 0 o . — __ �._,._._ .,_._.._. O ,- ,�t, \ W 00 eR ' -. 5 M CO O O Q d N 1 co O O Cn un a) ; ce O 0 F- 1 W 0.E ,O N 0 C[ N C G OO� NN ! M :61L)11'1 .--P M C d o ��N P- 00 Cr, HI _Q o O Z tee L N O ini O ai j .� a m O F l CM d N 0 O _ •O-Ig O N 00u -I-I O 0- o® y C N U L d i s- s Dc CC Q o7 c " °I ua 4, tiyE L-. N I L e Aa o a3 a) °o o, o a M � CZ 0 N ;p' - CO I-1 ,51 2 >- 0 0 I O p LA o U � ! No - C d i C i a ! a C w ° n C = C 1 CI ,~� a q x741 Ct _ E E Ct a 0 = 0 a) a w Z of a+. p a L. i C O I tk W } w w sue.. W O O U C h y H {L W ti I O i i N 0 U m C A H o o O.. N m to � co b II t c to +.' a Oo I.._..,, . __ U 1a) 0 L.7. ._g a.. X O C .IDO,I N 2 U 5 9 a I OR 'Pr%Milli I1■m1 fit,15321 I I�_I 4 l i M1 E I In:'', _ _ y I I ■ 1. �i i 1 I ■ti' MI 1�� x ■■ �q y� II 1 i l *II W [y 5 N il6 N W ,p i ii T m I H 1 Il E�1 i O NN(III INNNq 1 ,I■�� ' al a ■mil > Q 1 1 NW Gq u •=1i w Z r ■01 J A. ',I iia Q ? SUNNI G 2 glag CD ap� I 1 I WI V � x l 0 li mill I INENNNN _ �L c O a UI gtg N c A 0 C o) 11 O O o® Illtri NgNNINiNfNNNNN Z �I 0 .ifill CD w — a b EMI ',` ■W {y ° '711 11111 ■M1 Z y N O„ Mil in1 d as d • ri ix t, �„ It 20i�c tin' i„a � m°a m 01 1111 A {.�" ski �I " acr -O' a p- 4 V F I r_ A 6te, it o p Q / ,- N �c a 1 �0� N g yaN 0 11 S ■ ■ ?36e Cli t y vw.` N \1715 S all I �3* ''"''u Vii. "`yy ,e�0`' I r—� Og { tan u= M CM,..M.- \ `, ,._. H \ Ca erg - �\ _;tlS t , 2 tta i'j \ f ---- `?�' 1 N 'yi 4}43'� Y is S�,RV\GE f ,/ i a ,,„ -- ., a I t�, — --- t o I I o a t R 4 I I f � -- I , ONIABVd pp; „__11 '----I C I F. I I f 16 I � ,r: r. I 111 \,..:L_i_ I b 4Y g • 1 y • a Y,, �+fir r1404,ma I TV k\ \ i 44,>igk, z it , Vp{ r ,- aw ' g a szs lie rn +. ES ▪ 5 r. � W ik,. m m px� X$, 4 .� r+` ,+' w4a�' S f 'id`r r, Y .r- ho- kx "' v d 'y .0°.-,, Y itioit ' ''''''4''..--- ..„-„2-::::::--:::,-"---------T-,„"..' - ' '4,„ -.\tit';,4:,'„; -:i '.....- , � :Sa ,.-.. as ti ♦ _e. � 1j$�, o• " ` La • 4 ,-;~:,-,t; 1 d 4 'S e. L w )‘ * <° a O a` '•!,.:, '4 ''',., HI: J. », '- ,isL,•..,-..,..- . ..+' -, .,ti,,,,,. —..,;, ',, ,t _ 0 .� N _ + x '^ T >a■�° rt . I" t l', 2 u s U Q mwM� ' E3 req, •: ,. N o 0_ 3 r N N z4 � s• m= 8 15 ▪ g p � am3m_ k '8 m 8 F M. jJ 3,, � a.q F. $ r = n. n1."'"0, E ■r + l w. s ► ... t � ',,; P q' V) LL h F ), F • r Z0 /At -16 v-k r Conn, An•elina V From: • Conn, Angelina V Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 3:42 PM To: 'kvanburen @gdiconstruction.com' z_ 2:1j L-/Z 1 eVe,1' Cc: Duncan, Gary R; 'Lucas, David E' .wr L, Subject: RE: sunbelt site at 10222 n Michigan rd l?} �r��vI k IZ/'P Good afternoon— I will try to address your voicemail questions from today: �v•rcGL Clr k1'1 p re l' G 9'� Per the city thoroughfare plan, The proposed road right of way width for the Retail Pkwy extension, west of US 421, would b4411rallUThe dashed line on the thoroughfare plan shows the approximate location of the street, so it could shift nort or south slightly. You might have to contact the Carmel city engineering dept at 571-2441 or the Hamilton county highway dept at 773-7770 to get more detailed info about this, and how much land will be needed. The Hamilton County thoroughfare plan shows this extension of retail pkwy to be a collector road, with a road right of way of 100-ft in width. Since the area will be annexed into Cannel July of • this year, I am not sure which road width applies today. You also asked about setbacks. Since a street is proposed along the north property line, the site would then have 2 front yards. The minimum front yard setback would be 30-ft and the maximum would be 120-ft from Michigan rd. The US 421 overlay standards would trump the underlying I-1 zoning, as far as setbacks and design standards. -Angie Conn, Planning Administrator ' aN1 „ From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 4:27 PM To: 'kvanburen @gdiconstruction.com' Subject: sunbelt site at 10222 n Michigan rd Ken- The Sunbelt site at 10222 n Michigan rd is zoned I-1/industrial and lies within the Michigan Rd/US 421 overlay zone. Usually the overlay standards would trump the underlying zoning standards. • Attached are links to the zoning regulations for those zones: I-1: http://www.ci.carmel.in.us/services/DOCS/DOCSZOchptrs/ZO%20Ch%2020A%201- 1%20lndustrial%20(Summer%202004%20v1).pdf US 421: http://www.ci.carmel.in.us/services/DOCS/DOCSZOchptrs/ZO%20Ch%2023C%20US%20421%20M ichigan%20Road%20( Autumn%202007%20v 1).pdf The plan commission calendar and flowchart/timeline are online at: http://www.ci.carmel.in.us/services/DOCS/DOCSPC2004.htm The Comprehensive Plan and its maps, such as the thoroughfare plan and land classification plan maps, are online at: http://www.ci.carmel.in.us/services/DOCS/DOCSCompPlan.htm . as you pointed out, a proposed street connection is shown along this site's north property line, and most likely road right of way would have to be dedicated to the city, as part of the overall development plan approval from the plan commission.. 1 • And here is a weblink to the plan commission info packet for sunbelt's sign approval in 2007. Note the last pages show the right of way on the property survey. click this link: htt0://cocdocs.ci.carmel.in.us/Weblink/DocView.aspx?id=235455&dbid=0 Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions after reading through all of this information! Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning &Zoning Dept • 1 Civic Square, 3rd FIr Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317-571-2417 • F: 317-571-2426 E: aconn @carmel.in.00v • W: Website Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail • 2 • Page 1 of 2 Conn, Angelina V From: Ben Deichmann [BDeichmann @rw-engineering.com] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:11 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Cc: Victor Reyes Subject: RE: West Carmel Marketplace-Thomas English dtiq \ Angie, \ Thanks for getting back with me. I would like to meet at a.m. on Thursday if that is o.k.? I will plan on seeing you then. Contact me if there is a conflict. Thank you, Ben Deichmann Ph: (317)251-1738 ext. 205 Fx: (317)251-1923 bdeichmann(a�rw-engineering.com From: Conn, Angelina V [mailto:Aconn @carmel.in.gov] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:07 PM To: Ben Deichmann Subject: RE: West Carmel Marketplace -Thomas English Ben — I can meet with you this Thursday, anytime between 9 am and 430 pm, and then not again until March 10. Or, another option would be to set up a meeting with another planner in our office, Christine Barton Holmes. Just let me know! Thanks, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator Dept. of Community Services - Planning &Zoning 1 Civic Square,3rd Floor City of Carmel, IN 46032 p. 317-571-2417 f. 317-571-2426 aconn @carmel.in.gov From: Ben Deichmann [mailto:BDeichmann @rw-engineering.com] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 3:44 PM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: West Carmel Marketplace - thomas english Angie, We are looking into a development for a client and have a few questions related to zoning. I would like to setup a meeting with you to discuss and see what input you can provide. I have attached a conceptual site plan and would ask for you to review it before our meeting. Please contact me to setup a meeting time. Thank you, Ben Deichmann Roger Ward Engineering, Inc. 5420 N. College Avenue, Suite 202 Indianapolis, IN 46220 Ph: (317)251-1738 ext.205 Fx: (317)251-1923 bdeichmann @.rw-en.gineering.com_ 2/18/2008 • V 0 xt,S-Al" . _-1 — O 2 00 I - I U ti -- I aZ� Z CZ US �_ i I I / L 1k SI° ice/ - ,g I C� a M.ti 45 I ‘Iiii Op 111t is 1 I 4'•., 11, 1 . 1 --- iI , ' 1 '111111111 I � \ ..II6 r --� ; , llili_IIIIliIIILIl1JllJlllllll.if y- 1 � 1 - �. - 1�I--- A \ I c22Ya4 ---- 1, � w- . c Y l}, _ • 1, ; ��fL AA♦♦ 11 1 l '''" 1 7 (4), It 1 ;. 1 ' '.1sOL_ L. 0 --;. --:_r----_____r__ ) 1 ,0 /-\ 6 \ \ r• 777 ��� w , V-i .h II $Pr _ 1 lC2= `\ \ \ . - \ • g9 . . : 0 CY i t \ I S \ \ );„ • A9`J`$T -77 C. \ `\) - ` o \. H IN 7 /.. _ - . 1 =-iiir, . . 1 ,. �>� y �' I " g 1 ■1 \ \ \ \ \ . .,) ./ e b I ■1 I \ ` \ 1 if 'ry'` 9 O A !I I fn S■ry \`\ \ \ tI e ��1.l l p ZA. „ ,, iiriii,■i . . '' "f `\ \\ \\\\\ n T,firmi.- . \ \\ . \` \\ \\\\\ i \ \ rl�l \ \ `..I m k t-®14 \\ iIll \ b\ \\ \.\\\ \\ \ i 11=i \ y \ \ € \ �. m b \ \ .'�i—';�! \ \ :n G 000 I ` \ y1.,ii \ \•I \ \tie'' N \ \ IZ \ .li' _ \ \ \ G7 1./l \ !iii";:�j!'rill, \ \ \ \ :.•�. Y :Ij4:11nr�l- !5n . \\ \ "4' ;z m I v • I III nrL q �, IGl.lr y Y C7 • \ ■ I rji i1� !tlir■i!!°y,911Lylly o ¢'2/b\iy\ -4.A \,r\ ° 1 ti n `\ litig.4i-gpsareAgEgoren_ ISi,n�,t1wIN11 105.0��-”ii■n5,i'=_m911 i \ \\ \ ,�,1 1 1I'9r 'i:'�!I IYlllfr' Ir''■YGI511q■ \ \ '-; 0,'-. " f.._7 ., \\ ..VVW='k �'r■'°SI '�4 1ry11 '151 \ \\ .. \ �Hr�R rya LiF 11r� �I,lylt 91i y1 r W J ry 4 \ .1 fir■-111l5uryl1 �A*kite'S. •\ \ £ 1 _ A , ��8,` `�''�SI X 511191 \\ \ my /� \ \ \ \\�t\ / I \ o \ \\ - 1- / I�•1?�/ •• _ e Ill_._•■_■ -�7 Sou cealk clam \ ' \\\ / / JIB' ' \ 4 Vi / / L / ��� E/ / / / / / i �� 4. / z /</ /1/ `� 1 �i�, V %1 / '/ A'' � : V ,!'( i y b \\ // j/;i / / I t ` a ' I Ta ! 1 ;; •1110... .109.i 0 ,..":A /N\/\4/ 1 \ rikIM / I `A A Riga l — — i I/ / _ _ I � -,�,� 1 Al e� te! 1,rr -17 1 f I i 1 ���C lie at, . oil + II _if I; A - .1,A I -1-c. .1-;( 1 i i '.__________—_— * lig :: - \ .41,001111111 , ologe- ill 1 p . _ . y ' w �' PREPARED FM PRI�JEL'1'LOCATED IN. m flir‘) Yc I r THOMAS ENGLISH RETAIL RE PART I.I;r 'I UART R cp ar z 1a . a n it 'I JELl70N/-TOIIRJ I'�MIQIIrYrw:.Y- •$T Z � � � 3 n '< CA�z CLAY'MEP, "tUNTY t J m �D e Cn w �� CARPEL.!-.11' 1 "t7 S' m %NeP• i Z ee �''','s,�enu'�a-/ lkte Remrrla aatl nnaaa-dam: r^ o n 2 o .!a i t/f/EOOi rI W I2WI!Ifl�'held check m (j ■ t+7 N '£ . o Z /f 3 'J3� a D Y d a 6 i i * F ^o o _ z r II a i p D se S \ • FA - \ \ -•4 \ \\\ \ �I \ S i z u) \ 1 g C7 O \ • e z [7 '0 I � - \ \ .dF / \g o` / a? y 1 o . a yfi w�4, x. \ � \p C i , 4�` a_ .I v N" -1 4 ; \ i 311 LmIs@310i o; P7 v ` q,ER,� m 3 ( OI BOA ` I \r�ry \\\ b.9 \`\\\\ 1 - Win. �s z -\. \ \ mggA 2 I I ,' i 4 9� M®� ® o 7 � $ tr- e3 a o,o" (s;;;, \\K5. RSmge _ 5P m 5 ai _ � Rfa p A _ l sg Az a µ�� % Eris m {A� [�i� \ Y ` wig \\ \ n[n n \ k + 4 T v m. a[� m O h i 0 1 :i2`m m°, aa� - "r$ gAe/ /.. ii P: E J - .naazs'z sdisb'(M)r---,m—xoozsze'w aa.00' - . _lEnsi LINE LOT n 5 ° 15'gEAINACE EASEMENT PER PIAi `—' \.. I' Na0'2520'w 272 AVM il• — naozs'2o w 2s}2o'(M) 5'00.2620 E 213.50' I NORTH 2631"(al N u \ OW E NOATHEALY OA NCRiN 2)28'(a) 'U Ogg/ NOOV5O vzso'(0) / �� \ 1 a 'a' 1�`. \ '-_e7 / ',2)33°i,, 2 - gg"gip \ t ! 7 *4,, !/ 7 1 1 jT 1' . , of!! M.$ g el ! l W3a .n,i RlI .$M -1 ' a,", // /i/ ',':;R \ °� 1'; -3.° - daze - F.,70-1,A0:.4-7.3.:-5i--.7: 11,,.,:_-.._3 a $w.. E2- L%z / /,q/ m� ys 1-r al-s- - ai '2.N4 4SRa" .14. T.tri ,/ / ' \ 2,°'E. 0,g,5° 1 \l',]!. a j frig- jl.a ' /' 2�( a 1 mNti se " a l 9. 11IllI a '4; !i a 4t0.44 /e/ o I ao r§2a aq* a= n'S eia�" 9 - 4lael II - s4 /_/ _ Am m °- �6 I.,,,_ R3 � i��R'@ 7a = n „:1„,[. R 2�y /�) `� 1O14Z13Y28M4 �, N-=4 III if,.c x$ f 'a -12-6- § a� 2 !'"� 1 a n n\ stl3az oseOSa y 1 e �' C 31--,,4-A ,. 3 °a, R -.e 5 /e-;.! 1 g R it 8 n_ 1- £ ° �]o ild3N1110�rvl o ^fal,atl ,.d a % R a 6 g Y _- ,' -s / ' t999t M.OZ.OS.a"x - r 3d gaMj ash, : 4 n'Iiii - :In z 3 f . ho m a °�mb 3 VRo ss le!: - it- i 011, - - s s,� a Via- " I ;4:11: 3 1:111,'„' s = € v l - �1°- 8. 'c°M c'�^, =age S'X o $ ,, q s A= '3 I 2 141.99 3, 905 �$e µ�M� -2. a'oionao w 4 i3 §iium1 = -0 $ I n w3Hli0N ¢¢ �`�.__ R`t$= � S � p_vv ,» 'O 1� n W a6 M.QZ.05.a0N 1x14999 lrv).9589. A m� y $T 40F Pan AmC.=g 3 fi; ` $q c.E - _I t- drttl3A00330 LVt E �- �� i=a6 2 Y 3 's _N ,z d t 3 ar3ev0 a33u. o t -4 a all ° t4°4�1 .,'q3� s� o040�'- _N a 62.1.i x :5:_=,,,,g, & ;1„1,--1 ; 3 ° I EF a'° (a na9waox ry1991 mpio.sar'I q m y; te3luaox lni Y a $ '$ a $ " a - 9e :yf� °I99c1r is % '! - %If § j ---,,AE $ II ! a o "s i "3" Na x- a a oaso 4 A e t- ! i m W :'4 n I 9-5, o$ S w.. P %,„-z ij aRiRb �'� a , x I'. A on z M 33,E-.a 2.- - t ?3sv' x a $ ° s n �en.0 a3R Eta a-o0 1E t X63 FW34.t 1 = �'a ' ���� �• s mR= as a e a. R e31 iNa.r '2 a*' ig 3 3 3al g2 f 1^•k� g' Y 4. M � - : __ / , 34� �N53'a ':��� HMO a$ 3 J r Y R . /Nm x23. i4=!,,€'` 11411 i39ug2C R 3 C"� { / e!i S x 3 as1 s � ' 3P3 !N ai3E i cos _ ,--,.m, �,1 /. //. Q o °a ,s "1- = o ee *� ,2. 0.g'/, as o 3 3.N . wo %RR3 2,_ p Ao Avg22eg �/ i 0.3a-�3P ss% 5 rr.1 :f a�q !- aP t � _ w- ,t-h/ -0,0°-.. ,/%- 4 a - s A e Y a' _o •,r - .n Nrw`r''00 90,1 �/- a _2.2 8 T 4i A ;7 4. A I $ §-0--- /61°71)- "�°004 / :o`n\i1� g 0,1 5om a�va° it ai- s e E13 '. .,o. P€A -/ VA' g0982 OdORtlMNUL / 3 g3 -°N ill P.m "- _ W: °°. i` �5.`A rvMld 8 0' ���/ ;Q1°9-°!!74-i 'i ' £ e RN ism SB °� i s;'p° �v!`z=Q 3" $ F424:amN Al� �£- e'svti?n�wcu`� j2yg2Z, IZ /'� ¢3e}'2s'��`- °'3 33a -. kga 60oM� >>pd/ 101P`w��oz1 ,g6 �_ N WnW''1131''21if r,xs 0111 a a€ eoN� - �. ssiff i� e nay -pxo ?s %� Sa / / gIn._W c'N"- _ a.._$ e^ao @& /'' // -// 3 1;$/asd Wsq N° i4N g $E a �°a��9.��s §�aa �aR� �e��s� � 8�. _ PREPARED FOR: PROJECT LOCATED IN: ffi o O z +� THOMAS ENGLISH RETAIL RE PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER v9+ ° N ,c°. rp' s a II 2325 POINTE PARKWAY SUITE 150 SECTION 7-TOWNSHIP 17 NORTH-RANGE 3 EAST y H '' Ate. 7 "`• ,f CARMEL,INDIANA 48032 CLAY TOWNSHIP,HAMILTON COUNTY \ 4 Y y AD G ',? a q CARMEL,INDIANA 48032 n m g x m RQaF m R --,- r 2 i C g 1 A 1. Revision# Date Remarks and revision descriptions: = 3 n = y I s':"1 °t' 1 1/4Dale Minor revisions per Geld check m $ n CY p 2 1/10/2007 Minor revisions pet Geld check k added monamentation set K' $ m 2 iV - E... .1 ,, -3 - C7 S 'M N 2 1 d"' 0 O [ .., 3 d 3 8 - x Ai -+, O zv .- I) a :`. � � � � it •'+yy._.`- _ - _ / t 1117q--,:,--2/ s' V ` Rs„ ` 0 I'z aaxg• , '1. 14 =a R 4 Ra a!a_„,a i- a -g A Aw2i. a3 a R r:3=.:.'R �R2%4° € 2ga k3a z AnpR-o°^PS u2a'$.BS / II W.. • .d sa sa V-2 ayes-. k '� x B k °a Rai g., g E' .w \'f- Ow • �= g RQo $ 'a �aR oR 3 °aRaEa ° $ � gym : �v NF"� -A � 9oG a a1 R B - s '^ ka €' y as;: el"; ag .10 � R et't- s Q 15-:11 Tz ; M 4, ` \ asEaMS, -y4j v czo 7 .'. z ss daRQ B ° a sB" t � ek"5Kn� a< �z L aR$- 3a vas m°,51�. R°°2-°og4 z° ' °a m a 6i2 �kaa � n ` \ Q � sad x cep %x s :1 �4a» 4-le-pat s Rfs a 14 R 8 ��q ray .324,-1- 'g �6 �4" • as _, Ra56 ' , °, N °°aAl 1 v0 1 P7x 3� S 'zs° RS- oz a 1 -1 AR1• Ba,a as z'U-` Aa %on as 'aMa§i▪ % 4,1 v`�I.-;tn a 33 z z g a t ® s $ a a• - RX =R ;a =a3 - . -- $RR_ R a a § .wt.-' _..:,E<,.+ 1 1- -. \ 6°3 °a $-R v£ i-§-2422';-4a a 4 , pS 3E 4, e 3 3 �. 3 € g �' a =a-- ary§6 n ;a 4 y9 '1``gao• R 9° \ cG _ zi a Sea ;'- 'gy p to ^y 11,- 44 1', v \ $ E a$ - R"sR3'10 so 3a° R a-s6-4.t13 a!%3_ \\\ 3 O © �®® o aga.€ 'a° sa aJ na °a � .a = \ ��y\ T'I `, z a 01 vos a � � 3 an 4,a" �g R ya S I, \ -4 a'p°. m r' I o R a.�a hi. ;. _a .a a,_ q a B� dRaa- \ •2 ; '' • �. m 01 -.. ay3E a °R a7, - a.!:ata $a 9 q s .- 3a3� ag�v= \ �. a�a°, .,ty� �\ € a=s4, s' a wig e ° 3^g sa a °g \ '' S a,i za :04;1;° =a s 8R gaQ ��� � , 1 I - x4 g "- :^Wa "ao„se 3 $° RR s el_ aaaR o-R° ( �1 ,,\ ax S :• V.,1,-,q as' ". oa "..-.g, °$ �- €ag�� .gaa � ��, / ® A _\ Bi®B�® ° ' Q° im a e1 _- a as -1 "� aB- - aaR a= _ b v �", / ,,CV v s � a a _ _° " z iu yea 1 \V m / \\ ��`\ 0 1 f r i. ail wag gao R3 R° gsy0 M.°'v - \ a- x s �' z _R °aM1a - ^'8 a' 3 - amp as a"x. F € s. as/a ,, . a °zR :,=ti; gam' �x := pry B. .3,1.,;,1-aN !g$3a? € 9P agmo P ,R. °,,s - r ago- ;m_$ 4� ` ax3a� 5. gR2Raaju me � � i G _ �r' � .. "^g ggx '' 't,-1. -3.-.' R"., .. Ile I 4,y _il 3 :�q _ Rya- 1 "`M AA W ° - u ^a R R.ff e a a'n ra o '±''.8 /N 1 egg+A " B R' -mob o S x� m I _ X a° _ B"a �saa cN .. N "��" - xs a a°s _RS I i II--- NN 33qq ( \ \.�-. ___.. ,LS > Y g ° 3 A!.. a;„-:„..,,, ,.,z $ ! _...-\IS'Uan xAG�E Ea M£ PEa(IAUN6kiX 561.5'16)-N0026'20"w a]4 N0' cHnN Llnrc 1INCE g. 2v 1—‘..s.' _ -Y a- �- �y� S00'26 20'E'219.50 } q§,,,_:,,,,,,,, � eU �4 a3� aga � � �dv�lor" g2>�w R '"$ R^ E !' , tg g S € / sue, `l/� V m!j1 �A - n .. gm - "°a9q 3as3 a $� /' ,00��" �//\ / !gill W E N® A% _ A if 1 :•-, 3 '� m� S g_.z gag tig° ! `y Via\ �1-I o '' a ^K' � i" '� � a R � I �� 0Z !/ l A R - ..919 Z— t- ,',.,!;1:-� k E a !]B 2 d !,14 I -E w / _I 3 FK N Ssya. K3 c's 3va a , /-,/ 1 ,ae q °;aZ _ _ ' _� i ! ;t4 Qn x.. gV 2 J €Aa 32 S R g g!! K _ x8 dal 1 a'y 3 p2p�2 s ffi \ - ez 333a 9 Z q $ .� Rao "a\p� r_ 1 - 11'J3 `- !'' A I {�'�' 3 o x ° l ! J y 1 Az,$ BaB o - �_v, m MNEZ 33N]i I994pp s 3 9 a o m w 1 a m o 61' 2= ° 1 Iii 2 ''E I h l,,P � _ m mom x-3 3 °f ° a a a. s4, $'3 a a ( I \,! p _ '� :�'® v== .da =9S 3 s_� R I ` -IL a]3a crc '1'' VI yd w ""m z p2 d xa° o Y 3 "'`^i MNd ad 332 tq> 3 a E Y k 3. o 5'' _ I R ;7N ii 3tlM y]lpd N3'� - dtl9 0 RH gm R d o s I 8 0�? --i � Sm r1' aR R8 B 8 I I \\- ,, _ F I tl3Nlla3]Wa ilrid - F . ',, - AM mE`g9 y/� M a, 3 ° • 5 =3+ MN,011 888 �, d a_ os 0 o ai4, f1B #r3it A3 SF 4, . a. 2y d a ti!.;-, 9a Ott. .`a` ois• a y R@ 8R 6 'al ® 1 t 4,a : .,t i g € a°2 a`� d t- L1 S`r. - °g �° g e 5 a- '..5'. 1!.0 3 4 a_ W e 9 59 -1 t p11 _ m 4, -',:R SRR .qg R IF', qZ -' 'rC ®v m1. y'ca 4,4 a a R L C l t o i• i R:� ,S_'a z '0,1 ogg a awl-al :4„:.: 3NMNO11ttl3nytli�aa5 S C ,, m s i' , g=4, 4 a%� 6 nRo 7=' �` P.1'.. 2, Sa qq �'„➢'I ` S `R* - £F 3B '^g° �'a=�'93 z, ¢ € IF ice € U t t =.vim „1,2,--,v a• ? oa4 Ma6.,,-y :;i s g I 2 BgR3 .p= o 2332 e, �rtL � 1 psuuer.e z ° vv v eo;.] rz:�,, a �8 .g ^. A g MN.O'9 oN31'J.1 I� ,i, �d dl �t� / T .� ° t 3N coo. i,+ 1�Y ,d�.......9 s Qa Via f';'' R sa 5 "� a '] .-°'• > �o R M F& a` R �a g } I 10 - /ice y �, m. z S' a x -..R rNii �+� It sE „,, ',..,,04.•......• -a R t a.4, if ;a �® o\euo �e wn SM. . * �J�� $4Na 4,s J "a � 3] ', wlt:i" oaN Mn�._. 'rrgmlaH :0i, ° as CO , 3'3o'>d a q g�a 3 n4, o9 F: s a d i I or*.""" 1,:'ndw MIN re�Q�wn io -2,1i1 Or -O a°3 'A^3 n4, x _' si'> x q / / ...3 PREPARED FOR: PROJECT LOCATED IN: 0 9 T m o 7.rn s THOMAS ENGLISH RETAIL RE PARE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER r ° 0 a x � g 2325 POINTS PARKWAY SUITE 150 SECTION 7-T000SHIP I9 NORTH-RANGE 3 BAST "3 `S $or,M CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 CLAY TOWNSHIP,HAMILTON COUNTY \ %;� x y (a N F Z CARREL,INDIANA 48032 pu Revision/ Date Remarks and revision descriptions: �CC1 3 a = z six 3 ,.y I t ` 1 1///2007 Noise reasions per field check '4' o n CV_ „x.. --3 �I 2 0012807 Minor revisions per field check k added monumeniatian set K' \ Z d' 3i�^0 n D w m co s o O o € _ 2 3 3 i :L7 NI oi !i a ° D a p / III • DULY ENTERED FOR TAXATION C— Subject to final acceptance for transfer to day of ,20 oz 22pppp ap gg FiledOfnr5Rcorti in �Lu� btyh2„fa�Auditor of Hamilton County HAMILTDN Ct]t1+f7Y, INDTANA ,Q Parcel# MARY L CLARK f 01-10-2002 K 03:45 pa. • WARRANTY DEED Project: S7R135-29;00 BEST POSSIBLE IMAGE Code: 3428 Parcel: 110 • • ALL PAGES • THIS INDENTURE WITNESSED',That C & E Rental, Inc. NKA EC Holdings, Inc. of Hamilton County, in the State of Indiana Convey and Warrant to the STATE OF Ninety Four Thousand Two Hundred INDIANA for and in consideration of Eighty and no/100--- Dollars,the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,the following described Real Estate in Hamilton County in the State of Indiana,to wit: A part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7,Township 17 North,Range 3 East,of the Second Principal Meridian,Hamilton County,Indiana,and being all that part of the owner's land lying within the right of way lines depicted on the attached Right of Way Parcel Plat of Parcel 110,also described as follows:Commencing from a stone at the southwest corner of the aforesaid southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 7,run on an assumed bearing of east along the south line thereof a measured distance of 872.26 feet to the west right-of-way line of U.S.Highway 421, otherwise known as the Michigan Road,as the same is now established;thence north 20°06'west along said westwardly right-of-way line a distance of 231.17 feet(the foregoing portion of this description beginning with the words"from a stone” is quoted from Deed Record 362,page 394),to the southeast corner of the 0.031 acre tract of land conveyed to the State of Indiana by Instrument No.200000006074,as recorded in the Office of the Recorder of said County;thence along the eastern line of said 0.031 acre tract Northwesterly 53.340 meters(175.00 feet)along an arc to the right and having a radius of 69638.178 meters(228471.71 feet)and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of North 20 degrees 45 minutes 12 seconds West and a length of 53.340 meters(175.00 feet)to the northeast corner of said tract;thence South 81 degrees 10 minutes 01 second West 1.799 meters(5.90 feet)along the northern line of said tract to the northeast corner of the owner's land and the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description:thence along the eastern line of the owner's land Southeasterly 14.376 meters(47.17 feet)along an arc to the left and having a radius of 69639.938 meters(228477.49 feet)and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of South 20 degrees 44 minutes 14 seconds East and a length of 14.376 meters(47.17 feet) to point"5001"as shown on said Right-of-Way Parcel Plat;thence North 65 degrees 43 minutes 59 seconds West 7.072 Interests in land acquired for State Highway by the Indiana Department ofTranspartatton KELLY I!il.' (Tl P r.AN '.:,`J EY AI L: ..d Grantee mailing address; 100 North Senate Avenue This Instrument Prepared By Indianapolis.1N 64204-2219 _ Attorney at Law LC.8-23-7.3I TRANSACTION EXEMPT FROM SALES DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS UNDER • 01!31!01 nth !C6-f.l•5,5 • • Project: STP-135-2(008) Code.' 3428 Parcel: 110 Page: 2 meters(23.20 feet)to point"5002"designated on said Right-of-Way Parcel Plat;thence South 83 degrees 53 minutes 28 Seconds West 23.770 meters(77.99 feet)to point"5003"designated on said Right-of-Way Parcel Plat; thence North 20 degrees 43 minutes 37 seconds West 9.275 meters(30.43 feet)to the northern line of the owner's land;thence North 81 degrees 10 minutes 01 second East 28.614 meters(93.88 feet)along said northern line to the point of beginning and containing 0.0289 hectares(0.071 acres),more or less.All bearings in this description which are not quoted from previous instruments are based on the bearing system for Indiana Department of Transportation Project STP-135-2(008). Also,an easement in and to the following described real estate,to wit:a part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7,Township 17 North,Range 3 Bast,of the Second Principal Meridian,Hamilton County,Indiana,and being all that part of the owner's land lying within the temporary right of way lines of Parcel 110A as depicted on the attached Right of Way Parcel Plat,also described as follows Commencing from a stone at the southwest corner of the aforesaid southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 7,run on an assumed bearing of east along the south line thereof a measured distance of 872.26 feet to the west right-of-way line of U.S.Highway 421,otherwise'mown as the Michigan Road,as the same is now established;thence north 20°06'west along said westwardly right-of-way line a distance of 231.17 feet(the foregoing portion of this description beginning with the words"from a stone"is quoted from Deed Record 362,page 394),to the southeast corner of the 0.031 acre tract of land conveyed to the State of Indiana by Instrument No.200000006074, as recorded in the Office of the Recorder of said County;thence along the eastern line of said 0.031 acre tract Northwesterly 53.340 meters(175.00 feet)along an arc to the right and having a radius of 69637.370 meters(228469.06 feet)and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of North 20 degrees 45 minutes 12 seconds West and a length of 53.340 meters(175.00 feet) to the northeast corner of said tract;thence South 81 degrees 10 minutes 01 second West 1.799 meters(5.90 feet)along the northern line of said tract to the northeast corner of the owner's land;thence along the eastern line of the owner's land Southeasterly 14.376 meters(47.17 feet)along an arc to the left and having a radius of 69639.130 meters(228474.84 feet) and subtended by a long chord having a bearing of South 20 degrees 44 minutes 14 seconds East and a length of 14.376 meters(47.17 feet)to point"5001"as shown on said Right-of-Way Parcel Plat and the POINT OF BEGINNING of this description:thence South 69 degrees 15 minutes 25 seconds West 28.000 meters(91.86 feet)to point"5008"designated on said Right-of-Way Parcel Plat;thence North 20 degrees 44 minutes 19 seconds West 11.007 meters(36.11 feet)to point "5003"designated on said Right-of-Way Parcel Plat;thence North 83 degrees 53 minutes 28 seconds East 23.770 meters (77.99 feet)to point"5002"designated on said Right-of-Way Parcel Plat;thence South 65 degrees 43 minutes 59 seconds East 7.072 meters(23.20 feet)to the point of beginning and containing 0.0197 hectares(0.049 acres),more or less,for the purpose of constructing a driveway for service to the owner's private property,which easement will revert to the owner upon the completion of the above-designated project. All bearings in this description which are not quoted from previous instruments are based on the bearing system for Indiana Department of Transportation Project STP-135-2(008). The undersigned persons executing this deed represent and certify on behalf of the Grantor, 01/31/01 dh that he/she is a duly elected officer of the Grantor and has been fully empowered by proper resolution,or the by-laws of the Grantor,to execute and deliver this deed;that the Grantor is a corporation in good standing in the State of its origin and,where required,in the State where the subject real estate is situate;that the Grantor has full corporate capacity to convey the real estate described; and that all necessary corporate action for the making of this conveyance has been duly taken. • Project: STP-135-2(008) Code: 3428 Parcel: 110 Page: 3 Land and improvements S21,3 50.00 ,Damages$72.930.00 :Total consideration$ 94,280.00 The grantor shall clear and convey free of all leases,licenses,or other interests both legal and equitable,and all encumbrances of any kind or character,in and under said land as conveyed. It is understood between the parties hereto,and their successors in title,and made a covenant herein which shall run with the land, that all lands hereinbefore described (excepting any parcels specifically designated as easements or as temporary rights of way)are conveyed in fee simple and not merely for right of way purposes,and that no reversionary rights whatsoever are intended to remain in the grantor(s). president IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the said EC Holdings, Inc. Edgar L. Coverdale, has hereunto set its hand=and seal_• this 1 5th day o$`1 ovemb e r ,20 01 EC Holdings, Inc. (Seal) (Seal) by ee irr r G Tr-t./-e.eC --e,-- (Seal) (Seal) Edgar L. Coverdale. presiden(8eal) (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) _(Seal) (Seal) • STATE OF INDIANA. Hamilton County,ss: Before me,the undersigned,a Notary Pu Iiic int�td or said unty and State, this 15thday oJN� � ''••ajl Ol C1Q .•.••... personally appeared the within name(Fdgr e• C'B� i•d §�' Grantor=in the f •t'on imce president ! .a,;' acknowledged the same to be it a'oluntary act and deed,for the es and purposes herein mei .f Q I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my official seal. • . November 23, 2001 Y �;,yp; r My Commission expires • -:--- ' 1�., " 491' County of Residence Hamilton Beverly C X ''!w•°' '.,Name STATE OF INDIANA, County.ss: Before me,the.undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said County and State,this day•of ,20_. personally appeared the within named Grantor in the above conveyance,and acknowledged the same to be voluntary act and deed,for the uses and purposes herein mentioned. I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my official seal. My Commission expires Notary Public County of Residence Printed Name 01/31/01 tlh • • . . e • PAR:EL NO: 110 OWNER: C & E RENTAL, INC. CODE: 3426 PROJECT NO. STP-135-2(006) DES. NO.: 9015600 ' ROAD NO. U.S. 421 DEED RECORD 36Z PAGE 394, DATEDI2-12-66 DRAWN 8Y:J.A. WATSON 02-02-01 COUNTY: HAMILTON SELL OFF: CHECKED BY:C.E. JORDAN 02-02-01 SECTION: 7 INSTRUMENT N0.200000006074 RECORDED DATE 02-07-00 SCALE: 1 2000 TOWNSHIP: 17N HATCHED AREA IS THE RANGE: 3E � APPROXIMATE TAKING 0 4 40 0 60 som 262.5 ft. Note: Centerline stationing is in meters - This plat was prepared using information obtained from county records and does not represent o survey of the owner's property. P T 3 O P a ' oa t >*o >3 P.I. a . • !* - $°Parcel 11, SOLD OfF U � �; O. Parcel 110A `/�© Z� iN Temp. R/W t. f, � -a,�l a S 241.15• Alliiki c! . >-,2-- ‘35' .-4:Fi 'L\;\:_ r ______.„. —� _ T ,__,0 ao , ,, 40' 1 _ so'c \ N %�''j '{ _1' 1 { �; 3O' t F6 g f 'mil ,iv Sd J ; \` I ' m \'1 i 43 1 6-- ..... mt.oso 1 N „A (-&", v.,...-- ...--"inb. L.,/ %(---- 1 1 1 . e 4 i i.\\---- m 47L l i i///.6 { �///� 1�5a ��{y il ILI %4 3� 4 / \ \ \naaaudmnznKms ____, r \ \ \ e t. N� \ 'G°�,3'46,0 \ ,5 d5• •• ar \\,.. \\\ \ \\ \\ I\\ \ C \ \ � \ L \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\ Hof\ '\ -a \ Q \\\\ \ 1 e{Cx�j \ \ \\\ \ \\ \ I u'3 \\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ • \ \\ I a 0 �\ \\\\\ \\ I si 0 . `.\, \ \ INFORMATION BOOKLET CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION PETITIONER: THOMAS ENGLISH RETAIL REAL ESTATE, LLC A PROPERTY OWNERS: GAIL AND LEE TERRY 0 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 10212— 10218 North Michigan Road /°� DOGS DOCKET NO. 07030001Z *� PLAN COMMISSION HEARING DATE: APRIL 17, 2007 ./1/1 INFORMATION SUBMITTAL DATE: APRIL 6, 2007 \I 1/\-11 CVS) Attorney for Petitioner: Joseph D. Calderon Bose McKinney & Evans LLP 301 Pennsylvania Parkway, Suite 300 Indianapolis, IN 46280 (317) 684-5331 860287 I.DOC