Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Subdivision 02-05-13City of Carmel Carmel Plan Commission Subdivision Committee Meeting February 5, 2013 LOCATION: CAUCUS ROOMS, 2nd FLR CARMEL CITY HALL ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, IN 46032 TIME: 6:00 P.M. (DOORS OPEN AT 5:30 P.M.) Committee members in attendance: Ephraim Wilfong, Nick Kestner, Joshua Kirsch, John Adams and Brad Grabow Department Representative: Angie Conn, Lisa Stewart John Molitor Note: the Committee members need to vote for their 2013 Chairperson. The Subdivision Committee met to discuss the following items: Brad Grabow was held up, so Ephraim Wilfong opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. The first order of business was to elect the 2013 Chairperson. Joshua Kirsch nominated Brad Grabow to serve again. The committee members voted 4 -0 to reelect Brad Grabow as Chairperson for 2013. 1. Docket No. 12120013 ADLS Amend: Holiday Inn changeover, from Country Inn & Suites. (within North Augusta Addition, Section i, Lot 5A). The applicant seeks approval for exterior building facade changes and signage changes. The site is located at 9797 N. Michigan Rd. and is zoned B -6/ Business, within the US 421 Overlay Zone. Filed by Jared Kemp of VJA Construction, LLC. Lee Heppenheimer presented for the Petitioner, he was accompanied by Jared Kemp of VJA Construction and Tony Butler, Architect of Studio A Overview: • The property was previously a Country Inn and Suites and will now be a Holiday Inn Express and Suites which is owned by • The property is slated to open under the new ownership April 4, 2013. • The signage will be changed to reflect the brand name change • The front facade of the building will also be changed to reflect the new brand • Some interior cosmetic work, all new painting, new wallpaper and carpet • Totally gutting the rooms • The Petitioner brought stone samples for the Committee to review ONE CIVIC SQUARE Page 1 CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317 -371 -2417 February 5, 2013 Meeting Minutes Carmel Plan Commission Subd. Committee We are here to today to get elevation and sign approval. Have worked a bit with the Plan Commission changing the parapet to a curve to match the brand standard that we have to match with Holiday Inn Express and also working with a sign company who do the signs for Holiday Inn Express and they will match the code for the City of Carmel. Committee questions: • Please clarify the landscape plan that will be going in front of the laundry and kitchen area on the west elevation o The petitioner has met with a landscaper, but will be meeting with the City Forester prior to making any decision with the landscaper and it is conditional on this meeting on how they would proceed. The petitioner wants to match the old landscaping plan as much as possible from the old construction. One investor took away the trees on the Parkway without really discussing it. They will be replaced as well as all of the dead plants and trim up all the other landscaping to make it look nice as well as the City standards and the standards of Holiday Inn Express, who visit 4 times per year and those standards are quite stringent. • So know changes to the existing landscaping plan are requested and you are committing to restore or bring the property back to adhere to standards. o Yes, the petitioner will do whatever the City Forester asks them to do. • Can you describe a little bit — the west elevation, how the bare spot at the laundry/kitchen area will be softened — the west elevation just to the left of the front doors o We will install any landscaping that needs to be done, we have not met with the City Forester as yet. The Petitioner wanted to come to an agreement on the elevation first. They agree it needs landscaping, it has been neglected for about two years o The will also be renovating the fountain area and cleaning it out. • There are 3 or 4 pages that depict that area in different ways, the are a couple of photographs and aerial shot. What is supposed to be here and what will be here. o Dead and missing plants will all be replaced along with re- mulching. There will also be regional plants in planters around the hotel which are IHG standards. o The fountain is a wet area that supports the fountain, it is a decorative feature. • It is the wish of the Committee that the pond area be available to be near. The suggestion is that rain garden would best meet this request. It is the best way to catch the runoff and is not just a mucky pond, so softening the landscape and making it more natural and uses the water. Also discussed were ways that the pond will be kept wet, so that planting that need water will be kept nourished o They will discuss this with the City Forester. • The Committee then asked where bike parking will be located o This has not yet been determined by the Petitioner • The bike parking needs to be in the front of the building and may also be located, in the back for both customer and employees; Michigan Road has a nice bike path that would work for both employees and hotel guests. Guests may want to ride to local restaurants, parks, etc. • The City also likes to link the path system to the businesses, so if that is some type of delineation in the parking lot or a defined path. o The Petitioner stated that currently there are only ramps corning into the infill and the ONE CIVIC SQUARE Page 2 CA1t ?1EL INDIANA 46032 317 - 571 -2417 February 5, 2013 Meeting Minutes Carmel Plan Commission Subd. Committee exfill of the hotel. When they do the repaving the Petitioner agrees to in some way to link the entrance of the hotel to the paths on Michigan Road. • Brad Grabow asked John Molitor, PC Attorney that since this not a "new plan" but rather a change in property management with upgrades to a current building can the Committee still request the Petitioner to follow current requirements. Mr. Molitor replied the Committee can ask the Petitioner to bring the property up to current standards. Angie Conn presented for the Department • The landscape plan has been discussed and the Department appreciates the shape of the driveway entry to the arch elements we would ask that they be made more triangular to carry over the overall theme. The Department is requesting, not requiring. o The Petitioner responded that what they have requested meets the Holiday Inn prototype standards. If a change was made, permission would be needed from IHG and since this is the prototype for the whole brand it is unlikely to be approved. • The second wall sign will need a variance is required due to the fact that the Petitioner has requested a ground sign, so any second sign would require a variance and currently the background is EFIS material and a condition will be that if the variance is not approved that the it would go to brick to match those two elements or some type of EFIS scoring so that it is not just a blank area. o We can put in some relief to break up the monotony. • The Department does recommend approval with the BZA approval for the sign as well as working with the City Forester on landscaping. John Adams made a motion to approve Docket No. 12120013 ADLS Amend: Holiday Inn changeover, from Country Inn & Suites with the following conditions including: • If BZA does not grant approval for the additional wall sign the Petitioner will work with DOCS staff to minimize the visual distraction of the empty space that will be created. • Petitioner continue to work with City Forester to implement missing landscape and to come into compliance with 1997 Landscape Plan. • Petitioner provide bicycle parking at front and rear entrances in conformity with City Code and also include some type of passage marking from the entrance to the existing path. Joshua Kirsh seconded the motion. Approved: 5 -0 2. Docket No. 12100017 Z: Hadley Grove PUD Rezone (with Primary Plat). The applicant seeks approval to rezone 30 acres to PUD /Planned Unit Development, for 38 homes, and also seeks primary plat approval. The site is located at 2424 W. 131st St. (the NWC of Towne Rd. & 131st St.) and is zoned S -1/ Residence. Filed by Bryan Stumpf of 11th Street Development, LLC for M/I Homes of Indiana LP. Brian Stumpf presented. • Committee members have received an updated PUD plan. Petitioner sent "red line" copy so that ONE CIVIC SQUARE Page 3 CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317-571-2417 February 5, 2013 Meeting Minutes Carmel Plan Commission Subd. Committee they could see the changes that have been incorporated since the last meeting. • A walking path has been added between lots 32 and 33 to Towne Rd. • Updated the landscape plan, and the City Forester has approved the landscape plan. • A new exhibit at the end which addresses some of the concerns about the location and type of fence that is used. Exhibit will explain that the Petitioner is looking at two main fence types. They understand that what the fence looks like up against a pond or common area that it is a Type A fence and where there is more flexibility there would be a Type B fence. Type A is a 4' wrought iron ornamental fence and Type B can be either Type A or a 6 ft. privacy fence. This is just a concept. The exhibit is to limit the types of fence not to show exact location. This is to show how fences will be restricted /regulated. • It is the Petitioner's preference there not be any fences, the area has been developed so that all of the homes open up to open space • Easements will be complied with Angie Conn presented for the Department • The Petitioner has addressed all of the Departments concerns from last month including questions regarding driveway location. Angie has asked the Assistant City Engineer about the driveway location, that since it is such a low traffic area they would be in support of it. Everything is addressed. • The only outstanding concern is the Right of Way along Main Street. Angie has received an email from the City Engineer this evening that they would support a Dedication of Right of Way that would mirror what the VOWC did on the south side of Main Street, so she feels that the concern can be worked out in time for the February 19th Plan Commission Meeting • The Department recommends a favorable recommendation to the Plan Commission. Committee questions /concerns: • Nick Kestner would like to see the Petitioner install the fence on the lots along Towne Road. This would ensure that the fence will be uniform, i.e. conform to one style, one material and one height. • The Petitioner was asked if their ordinance stipulated that they would all be alike in the Community. o The homeowners have a option of either to continue with Type A if they choose Type A, the fence must be the same size and the same materials. o For Type B fences the homeowners have options • The Committee requested that the PUD Ordinance will changed to include that if `Lots 31, 32 and 33 decide to install fences that they be the same style, color and material. Consistency is important. Toughen up language on fences and include examples o The Petitioner does not feel that fences will be installed on those lots due to the landscape being dense in that area and then the drainage easement on the side of the berm does not give a great of depth to install a fence. • The Petitioner was asked for further information regarding the monument sign that was scheduled to be moved — will this create a line of site issue? Will there be trees in the way so that citizens will not be able to see the sign until they are almost upon it? o You would not see the sign very quickly due to the wooded area, but drivers should not have to "slam" on brakes. It will be the first right after Towne Road. ONE CIVIC SQUARE: Page 4 CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317 - 571 -2417 February 5, 2013 Meeting Minutes Carmel Plan Commission Subd. Committee • It was asked why the Petitioner chose to go with the PUD process rather than use the underlying zoning. Why not variances to the S1 zoning? o It was decided that the conversation would be held after the meeting. • Regarding the location of the pedestrian connectivity to Towne Road, lots 32 and 33 are described as • Regarding the driveways at lots 12 and 13 there appears to be an opportunity at the stub drive to have an especially large side yard on both of those homes, the logic that dictated the location was first and foremost putting the driveways on the far side of the home from where traffic is, but the thought occurred whether those driveways when someone comes in from Lost Creek Lane and either has a very sharp U -Turn to make to get into their own driveway or the lost opportunity for a side load garage. Would the Petitioner consider re- considering the driveways on those lots. o The Petitioner responded that Lost Creek Lane is not a high volume road, our thought in placing it here is that it allows us to have more space between the homes, since these are corner lots, so there are 2 front yard set backs. Since this is a larger setback it provides more space between the homes. • Regarding the fence type at lot 33, could have two different styles of fence. Should use the same type and color fence. The only exception is along Towne Road, the fence would need to be the same type and color — this will be made more specific 3. Joshua Kirsh moved to approve Docket No. 12100017 Z: Hadley Grove PUD Rezone (with Primary Plat). With the conditions that the fencing along Towne Road for Lots 31, 32 and 33 will be adhered to as discussed in this meeting. Ephraim Wilfong seconded the motion Approved: 5 -0 Brad Grabow Chairperson ONE CIVIC SQUARE Li a Stewart Recording Secretary Page 5 CARbtEI INDIANA 46032 317 -571 -2417