Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 09-20-94 CARAMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION PLA C OMM SSI AY SEPTEMBER 20, 1994 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 PM by the president with the Pledge of Allegiance in Council Chambers, One Civic Square, Carmel, Indiana. Members present were as follows: David Cremeans; Sue Dillon; Jay Dorman; Ron Houck; Jeff Kennelly; Dick Klar; Alan Klineman; Norma Meighen; Max Moore; Barbara Myers; Salim Najjar; Jeanne Reid; Luci Snyder; and Paul Spranger. A quorum was declared. Members of the Department of Community Development Management Team present were: Dave Cunningham; Terry Jones; Mike Hollibaugh; and Mark Monroe. City Attorney Gordon Byers was also present. Ron Houck moved for approval of the August minutes, seconded by Salim Najjar, unanimously approved. ITEM F. Communications, Bill Expenditures, and Legal Council Report. Sue Dillon distributed T-Shirts, Flowing Well Water, and cups commemorating the opening of the Flowing Well Park on Sunday, September 18. Jay Dorman announced that the following Council members were present: Frank Fleming; Tom Kendall; Chris Painchaud; and Alan Potasnik. ITEMS Fl. and F2. Gordon Byers reported on the proposed Fireworks and Parking Lot Landscaping Ordinances which were rejected by the Council. The Parking Lot Landscaping was returned with comments from councilman Tom Kendall. Gordon stated that the Commission was not precluded from starting over or making changes in the proposed ordinance and sending it back to Council. If nothing is done, the proposed ordinances die within 45 days. Sue Dillon expressed her frustration at spending long hours, two meetings per month, putting together ordinances for the betterment of the Community, and in concert with the Comprehensive Plan, Merriam Report and the Polis Study, only to have them rejected by the City Council. Ron Houck moved to refer the Fireworks and Parking Lot Landscaping Ordinances back to Committee to address the concerns of the Council. Jeanne Reid agreed with Sue Dillon, and suggested that the Plan Commission start at the purpose point and perhaps educate the City Council as to the need for the ordinances. It was felt that perhaps the education process could be a meeting time between the Council and the Plan 1 r Commission before long_hours were spent writing the proposed ordinances; Council members could be a part of the committee writing the ordinances rather than at the end killing them. Salim Najjar seconded Ron Houck's motion to send both ordinances back to Committee for reworking. Alan Klineman asked if the time for action had run out on the ordinances. Gordon Byers agreed and recommended that the Commission make a decision as to whether or not they wish to respond to Council's comments either in the affirmative or negative, or if the Commission wants to refer the proposed ordinances back to Committee for generation of a new ordinance. Salim Najjar withdrew his second, Ron Houck withdrew his motion. Ron Houck moved to take no action on the proposed Fireworks and Parking Lot Landscaping Ordinances, seconded by Max Moore, unanimously approved. Barbara Myers commented that the Commission should seriously consider Jeanne Reid's recommendation to talk with the Council members before the process is started again, and educate them as to why these ordinances are needed. ITEM F3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UP-DATE Salim Najjar reported that he had appeared before the City Council and given them an up-date of the 2020 Vision Process and emphasized the importance of the Council's input on behalf of the Carmel/Clay community. Mr. Najjar stated that his report was received enthusiastically by the Council and praises were given to the Plan Commission on the direction being taken in the QBS selection method and on the visioning process itself which will involve all Carmel/Clay residents. The Council was invited to attend a joint workshop with the Plan Commission, the Department of Community Development Team, and HNTB. Jay Dorman thought that in addition to the Council, perhaps the workshop could be opened to other entities such as the School Board. Jeanne Reid suggested that open invitations be extended to the Board of Zoning Appeals and the Board of Public Works, Gordon Byers commented that if the other entities would be meeting with benefit of agenda, in order to conduct business and make decisions, then, in accordance with the Open Door Law, a formal meeting would have to be scheduled by an affirmative vote. The intent is to simply notice a public meeting to discuss an agenda, and merely inviting the legislative body to attend, no action would be taken. Members of the public and press would be invited to attend, but not necessarily to participate. Mike Hollibaugh addressed the Commission and reiterated that the workshop would definitely 2 , be a public meeting and whoever wanted to attend would be welcome. The Commission particularly wanted to invite the council in order for them to see, in depth, what was planned. Dave Wenzel of HNTB could submit and explain the findings of their study thus far, and share how other communities have conducted similar studies. All groups will have an opportunity for input into the process at some point. It was determined that the 8th of October would be the best date for a workshop; this was put to a consensus vote; 8 in favor, 5 opposed. The workshop will be held the morning of October 8, 1994. ITEM F4. HOWMEDICA REQUEST Dave Cunningham distributed a letter of request regarding a Development Plan Review for HowMedica. The Department has been working with HowMedica to prepare their petition so that it can be heard at the October meeting and the rules suspended and a vote taken. ITEM F5. Terry Jones addressed the Commission regarding a.re-write of the entire fee schedule in general, and filing fees. Terry presented a listing of the current fees and what the current ordinance requires for filing with Plan Commission/BZA. Terry Jones recommended to the Plan Commission that this particular item be referred to the Special Study Committee for review and hopefully for full review at the October Plan Commisison. ITEM G. NONE ITEM H. PUBLIC HEARINGS lh. Docket No. 82-93 O.A., a Zoning Ordinance Amendment replacing the current Sign Ordinance. TABLED AT SPECIAL STUDY COMMITTEE. ITEM I. OLD BUSINESS li. Docket No. 40-94 ADLS for Hook's Drugs. TABLED AT SPECIAL STUDY COMMITTEE. Alan Klineman moved to re-order the Agenda so that Item 3i., Residential Open Space Ordinance, could be heard next, seconded by Ron Houck, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. 3i. Commission to consider Docket No. 66-94 O.A., a Zoning Ordinance Amendment for the Residential. Open Space Ordinance. The purpose of this ordinance is to allow flexibility of design, using innovative and efficient use of land. The ordinance includes the reduction of disturbed land for both utility placement and vehicle access, and emphasizes the protection of natural settings, set-asides of common area and openspace. Filed by the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission. Paul Spranger, Chairman of the Subdivision Committee, introduced the Residential Open Space 3 Ordinance and the background of the proposed Ordinance. Gene Valanzano,Land Use Specialist with Baker & Daniels appeared before the Commission and presented his credentials. Mr. Valanzano gave the highlights and purpose of the proposed ordinance. The proposed ordinance takes density to the underlying zoning of the property. There is provision for density bonus of 10% for creative and innovative, quality products. A key feature deals with compatibility of a development with the surrounding development, i.e. perimeter lots must comply with underlying zoning. There are some exceptions spelled out. Also key to the ordinance is the creation of open space and provisions for perpetual maintenance as a part of the Plat. The amount of open space created by a development would be equal to or greater than the total amount of open space created as a result of the lot size reductions. The approval process for the proposed ordinance is purely discretional by the Plan Commission. Recommendations can be made and improvements and commitments can be required on the development. The basic element of approval is on a two site plan comparison. The design criteria have to do with: topography; existing wooded areas; open space made accessible to the community; tie-in of open space to the Carmel greenway plan; the efficient use of land; innovation and creativity; the minimization of site alteration; diversity in lot layout; variety in building, design; and lot relationship to surrounding properties. The two plan process is currently in use in Indianapolis as well as other communities. Brian Waltz, Project Manager of Fink, Roberts & Petrie, presented some case scenarios and analyzed the comparison between the underlying zoning ordinance and the proposed open space ordinance, and how the same property would develop under the old Cluster Ordinance. The Commission was then given an opportunity to comment, question, and discuss the presentations. Luci Snyder expressed concern that the two plan process would be cost prohibitive. Sue Dillon was concerned that a project could be approved and developed under a first sketch, and subsequently deemed not to be workable by the developer in mid-construction. Mr. Spranger responded that it would be part of the total package and the underlying zoning density would be worked out at the Department level. Approval would be on a sketch plan basis and not a fully engineered project. Ron Houck noted a reference to additional cost saving in private VS public streets, and expressed serious reservations encouraging private streets. In response to Jeff Kennelly's questions, Mr. Valanzano stated that if there is going to be open space, the intent is to have it set aside up front and recorded as a part of the plat in the first section. Subsequent sections can feed off of the first section and use it to finish out a development. Input and comments were invited from the City Council members in attendance. 4 Luci Snyder stated that the proposed ordinance was very subjective and she cautioned the Commission that they may be creating an ordinance that will not be very well liked in a few years, especially when the membership of the Commission changes. Alan Klineman commented that the intent was not to suppress development, but merely to direct it, and that the proposed ordinance allows for flexibility. Councilman Tom Kendall, 11818 Gray Road, District 4, agreed with Luci Snyder's comments. The private VS public streets was more a safety factor for Mr. Kendall, i.e. the width to accommodate emergency vehicles. Mr. Kendall requested that the Commission give the matter serious consideration from safety and maintenance standpoints. Chris Painchaud, 1529 Rolling Springs Drive, Councilor at Large, agreed with Luci Snyder regarding the subjectiveness of the proposed ordinance and also agreed with the issues of ambiguity. Paul Spranger addressed the issue of subjectivity; that is was nominal; the issue of gross density is actually computed by formula (sketch plan A VS sketch plan B). The private street issue could be looked at again for reasons stated. David Cunningham of the Department addressed the private street issue thusly: currently, private streets are not allowed in developments per the Subdivision Regulations and private Streets would require a Subdivision Regulation Variance approved by the Plan Commission. The current proposal would require a variance through the Plan Commission, and it would limited to ten lots. As in all projects, review from the safety factor would be required by Technical Advisory Committee which consists of various governmental agencies and includes the School,Police,Fire, and DOCD. Jeff Kennelly felt that it would have been good to keep the old Cluster Ordinance in place and make amendments or revisions. Mr. Kennelly felt that the proposed ordinance would hurt the creativity of developers in the community by not providing some avenue to assist them in making a financial return. Councilman Kendall addressed the issue of affordable homes and defined them as being quality homes in a nice area at a reasonable price; the market needed to be looked at as well as the people the City represents. Even though the public hearing portion had been closed on this Docket, comments were allowed from members of the public. Judy Hagan, 10906 Spring Mill Road, Carmel, noted that in the entire discussion, open space had not really been discussed. Ms. Hagan felt that most developments to date had been an attempt to maximize at underlying zoning. Ms. Hagan expressed disappointment that the proposed ordinance only encourages open space, not mandates it. Ms. Hagan asked that the Commission 5 i "hold off" on the proposed ordinance until a new Comprehensive Plan had been put into place. Patrick Bennett of the Builders Association of Greater Indianapolis requested affirmation regarding the sketch plan, that it is hand drawn and does not require computer generation; and the square footage is requested to be by scale. The public comments were then closed. Sue Dillon moved to send the proposed Open Space Ordinance back to committee for consideration of comments made, seconded by Ron Houck, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. The meeting was turned over to Vice President Max Moore, and a five minute recess was then taken. 2i. Commission to consider Docket No. 65-94 P.P., a Primary Plat (cluster) application for a subdivision named Weston Communities. The primary plat is being filed under the cluster option and consists of 371 lots on 181.05 acres of land located on the north side of 106th Street and approximately one-quarter mile east of Michigan Road. Site is zoned S-1. Filed by Estridge Development Co. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, Carmel, appeared before the Commission and reported that at the Committee level, final approval letters were submitted which addressed all Technical Advisory Committee concerns from John South, County Dept. of Soils & Water Conservation; Steve Cash, County Surveyor's Office; and Jose Kreutz of the Hamilton County Highway Department. Paul Spranger, Subdivision Committee Chairman, reported that the Committee had recommended approval of this Docket with one dissenting vote. Alan Klineman had raised the question of whether or not this particular Docket could be developed under the Cluster, i.e. if the chronology of filing would deem it "grandfathered" and therefore allowed to be developed under the repealed Cluster Ordinance. Gordon Byers' opinion was that the petitioner was in compliance with the existing standard at the time of filing, and any changes made were made as a result of recommendations either from the Technical Advisory people or DOCD, and those changes were in excess of what would have been required. Barbara Myers moved for the approval of Docket No. 65-94 P. P., a Primary Nat (cluster) application, seconded by Salim Najjar. The vote was 9 in favor, David Cremeans and Dick Klar opposed, MOTION PASSED. 4i. Commission to consider Docket No. 68-94 ADLS for Methodist Medical Plaza North. . The petitioner is seeking approval of an overall sign package for the development and individual buildings. The petitioner will also be appearing before the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals 6 on September 26, 1994 for variances on this package. The site is located at approximately 101st Street between Meridian Street and College Avenue and is zoned B-5, B-6, B-7 and is located within the US 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by Land Rush Development Services. Doug Floyd, Attorney at Law, Noblesville, appeared before the Commission and stated that most all signs have been reduced by approximately 50%; four signs have been eliminated; otherwise the identification/direction package of signs remains the same. Jeff Kennelly, Chairman of the Special Study Committee, reported that the Committee had recommended approval of this Docket. Jeff Kennelly moved for approval of Docket No. 68-94 ADLS, seconded by Ron Houck. Luci Snyder commented that the Wyndham and Unisys signs are still too small and that the lettering should be much larger. Alan Klineman agreed with Ms. Snyder. Doug Floyd stated that he would undertake to correct the lettering before the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. Alan Klineman commented that he still is upset with the Type A signs, even though it has been down-sized. Salim Najjar moved for approval of Docket No. 68-94 ADLS, Methodist Medical Plaza North, seconded by Paul Spranger, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. J. NEW BUSINESS 1j. Commission to consider Docket No. 76-94 ADLS for Conseco. The petitioner is seeking approval to make additions to and reface the existing 11799 North College Avenue building (old Sam's Club.) The site is zoned B-2. Filed by James Nelson for Conseco. Jim Nelson, 3663 Brumley Way, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the petitioner. Also present was Tom Jolley of CSO Architects. The petitioner is proposing to renovate the exterior facade of the building (the west elevation); conversion of interior space to office use, the addition of landscaping; five perimeter pole mounted lighting fixtures; the painting of the building; and the creation of windows along the north and south facia of the building. Upon changing of the zoning of this parcel to B-2, a commitment was made that any change in existing facilities would require the approval of the Plan Commission. The building is one story in height, 104,000 square feet, and constructed of concrete masonry. No changes are proposed 7 J for the rear of the building except for the provision of a new transformer and some landscaping new the southwest corner of the building. There will be no signage provided except for the common street address identified on the front facia of the building. The parking remains the same except for the addition of twelve spaces in order to accommodate handicap parking. The lighting will consist of five additional poles which will contain fixtures identical to those existing; the light bulbs will vary in wattage from 250 to 400 watts per bulb, depending on what fixture requires the greater intensity of light. All concerns have been addressed by the Technical Advisory Committee. Jeff Kennelly moved for the suspension of the rules in order to vote on this Docket this evening, seconded by Dick Klar, Unanimously Approved. Dick Klar moved for the approval of Docket No. 71-94 ADLS, seconded by Paul Spranger; UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. 2j. Commission to consider Docket No. 72-94 ADLS for Blue and Co. The petitioner is seeking approval of a sign package at the 11460 North Meridian Building. The site is zoned B-6 and located within the US 31 Overlay Zone. Filed by William Wendling for Blue and Co. Bill Wendling, Attorney at Law, 650 East Carmel Drive, Carmel, appeared before the Commisison and presented the petitioner's request for a wall sign on the front facia of the building and the addition of the words "Blue and Co." to an existing ground sign. Paul Spranger asked about the level of illumination of the proposed sign; Mr. Wendling responded that the illumination would be in conformance with the present signage along the US 31 corridor. Ron Houck moved to suspend the rules and vote, seconded by Dick Klar, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Dick Klar moved for the approval of Docket No. 72-94, seconded by Ron Houck, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Salim Najjar moved for adjournment at 10:30 PM. Max Moore, Vice President Ramona Hancock, Secretary 8