HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 11-20-12 CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT REPORT
November 20, 2012
3. Docket No. 12030014 DP: 9800 N. Michigan Rd.
4. Docket No. 12030016 ADLS: Dunkin Donuts, C-Store & Gas Canopy.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for two multi-tenant buildings & fuel canopy on 3.56
acres. The site is located at 9800 N. Michigan Rd. and is zoned I-1/Industrial, within the US
421/Michigan Rd. Overlay Zone. Filed by Brad Walker of H & H Restaurant Management.
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for two multi-tenant buildings, as well as a fuel/gas canopy.
The rear of the site will be used for tree preservation areas and for storm water detention areas. Please view the
petitioner's info packet for further detail.
The petitioner proposes to add a 25-ft wide cross access easement and future driveway connections to connect
to the parcels to the north and the south, labeled as "if needed". However, the Dept. would like the petitioner to
build the site and pave those driveway connections up to the property lines today, instead of waiting for a future
time to connect. The Overlay Zone also calls for this type of connectivity.
BZA Variances: The Board of Zoning Appeals will review the variance requests on November 26, for:
a) The location of car stacking for drive-thru lanes
b) Total number of signs for Dunkin Donuts,
c) Total signage square footage for Dunkin Donuts,
d) Dunkin Donuts logo, Identification sign> 25% logo area, 32%requested,
e) Not meeting the 8 feet deep building facade offsets/projections, 4 feet requested, and
f) Both buildings not meeting the 120 feet maximum building setback
g) Note: additional signage variances might be needed.
Outstanding Review Comments for the Petitioner:
1. Remember to include the Development Plan application's Findings of Fact sheet in your final info packets.
2. Provide the filled out and notarized affidavit of notice of public hearing page of the application.
3. Provide the filled out Notice of Public Hearing page of the application.
4. Provide the filled out and notarized Public Notice Sign Placement affidavit page of the application.
5. Provide a copy of the Official List of Adjacent Property Owners from Hamilton County Auditor's Office.
6. Please submit to-scale architectural building elevations on 24"x36"or similar sized paper.
7. On each building, please provide the percent of EIFS of all non-window facade areas, per ZO Chapter
23C.09.K.2. (It must be less than or equal to 10%, otherwise a BZA variance will be required.)
8. Please submit a copy of the Traffic Impact Study.
9. Please provide correspondence from INDOT about the 2 curb cuts and their approvals of that.
10. How does a patron access the outdoor sales area?
11. The Dept. would like the buildings sited closer to the street. That would allow for greater visibility of the
signage and the tenants. (Right now there is a variance request to exceed the maximum building setback.)
12. Please reduce the amount of CMU block on the trash dumpster enclosure to two to three rows high, with the
rest being brick and with a metal coping cap to remain.
13. Is EIFS proposed right above the metal canopy/entrances to the tenant spaces, where the hanger rod is
attached for the canopy? If so, less scoring might help it look less cluttered. At the very least, please remove
the additional accent lines around the bracket attachments.
14. Gas Station Island & canopy: The Dept. is not in favor of the green gas canopy. Please change it back to a
tan/cream color as previously submitted.
- 3 -
15. Engineering Dept. comments: Comments were issued on 10/25 by the Engineering Dept., with stormwater
quality comments following on 11/9. Additional plans were received on 11/7. The Engineering Dept. is
still reviewing the most recent submittal. Comments effecting the site plan include:
a) A water resources study is required for the west half of the project due to depressional areas and
hydric soils (indicators of wetlands)before any development will be allowed in this area.
b) The proposed outlet from the parking lot to the pond is adjacent to the pond outlet structure, causing
"short-circuiting" of the pond, minimizing the treatment capacity of the pond.
c) A shut-off valve will be required downstream of the water quality unit,prior to the discharge into
the pond, in the event of a gasoline spill.
d) The two proposed entrances to the site off of Michigan Road need to be approved by INDOT. The
Engineering Dept. understands that the developer is currently performing a traffic impact study,
which is required by INDOT for the two access points onto Michigan Rd.
16. With the new Sign Ordinance being approved.this same evening, the Dept. requests that the Petitioner
follows the new signage regulations. The following comments, below, reflect what the updated sign
ordinance would require:
17. The Dept. would like to see more architectural elements built into sign band area of each building. The
Dept. encourages "framing" out the sign band area through scoring in the EMS area (instead of leaving it
plain) or just making symmetrical scores in the EIFS. At the very least, the center scoring line over each
tenant space should be removed to create a significant rectangle (sign area) for a sign to be placed. This way,
the EIFS scoring/lines do not go right through the middle of a sign. Based off the scale on the building
elevations submitted, tins would put each possible wall sign size at 3.85' high (70%)by 15.3' wide (85%),
for a 58.9 sq. ft. wall sign.
18. If possible,please shade in or cross-hatch a boxed.area on the elevations, to show future tenants where their
wall sign is allowed to go.
19. Going by the new Sign Ordinance standards, a BZA variance will be required for the height of the Dunkin.
Donuts logo. I.t is shown at 4'3" and this puts it at 77% of the height. The maximum height allowed would
be 3.85' or 70%.
20. Commercial retail building: Please submit information on the signage requirements for tenants, including
but.not limited to: Lighting style (internally illuminated or back.lit), Letter style (individual letters is
preferred) and Installation method (installed on a raceway or flush-mounted).
21. The Dunkin Donuts awning signage facing south is okay, and.does not need.BZA.variance approval. The
rest of the awning signs and the directional signs which are all less than 3 sq. ft. are also ok for Dunkin.
Donuts.
22. The drive thru menu board i.s too tall. It needs to be reduced to 6-ft or will require a BZA variance.
23. Gas Station island & canopy: Need to see signage details for the gas pumps, too. All signage for pumps and
markers needs to be 3 square feet or less to be considered exempt. Otherwise, BZA variances will be
required.
24. Ground signs:
a) The height for the Dunkin.Donuts/BP ground sign is okay. However, the new Sign Ordinance standards
allow for more square footage, up to 60 sq. ft. Would the Petitioner like to change the size or design
of the proposed ground sign?
b) Thank you for adding the name of the shopping center development to be at the top of the Directory
sign. However, the Department would like to see more distinction/enhancement between that name
and the panels below. This can be done, perhaps with a slightly different background color, or with a
darker line/trim. cap around that portion...
c) Please provide information on how the tenant panels on the Directory sign will be regulated. Will they
all have the same panel/background color? Will they all have same text color?
d) For the design of the directory sign, ground sign, and menu board sign, the Department would like to see
a different material than using the same CMLI block and color material at the l'4" height level of the
- 4 -
.
sjg,u8. The Dept would like to see limestone, cast limestone, or another mater al to match and/or
complement the top cap/cornice detail/feature on top of the sign.
e) The electronic price display for the gas sign will require a BZA variance. Th.e Department will not
support a pricing display with visible LED bulbs. The Department had planned to allow electronic
moving signs that still look like handchangeable numbers; however this seems to have been erroneously
omitted from the sign ordinance update. A variance will be supported for this type of changeable copy.
The Petitioner could also wait until a"patch" ordinance amendment can go through Council, for
approval.
Recommendation:
The Dept. of Community Services (DOCS) recommends that the Commission sends this item to the Dec. 4,
2013 Special Studies Committee meeting for further review and discussion.
5 -