Minutes PC 11-20-07City of arme
D10
CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 20, 2007
Minutes
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel Plan Commission met at 6:00 PM November 20,
2007 in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana. The meeting opened with the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Members present: Leo Dierckman, Jay Dorman, Wayne Haney, Kevin Heber, Rick Ripma, Carol
Schleif, Eric Seidensticker, Sally Shapiro, Steve Stromquist, Madeleine Torres, Susan Westermeier,
thereby establishing a quorum.
The Minutes of the October 16, 2007 meeting were approved as submitted.
DOCS Staff Present: Mike Hollibaugh, Director, Angie Conn, Adrienne Keeling. John Molitor,
Legal Counsel was also present.
Legal Counsel Report, John Molitor: An Executive Session has been scheduled at the conclusion of
this evening's Plan Commission meeting. Tom Perkins, Assistant City Attorney, will assist with the
report.
Department Report, Angie Conn: The Agenda was revised approximately 5 days ago to include the
WestClay Economic Development Plan Resolution; that item will be heard first this evening.
Also, Tabled Items are as follows: Public Hearing Item No. 6 -91 Lakeland Subdivision; under Old
Business, Item No. 1 -2I, Chesterton Woods Subdivision and Item 3I, The Legacy (Residential Phase
L) These three items have been tabled to December 18, 2007.
Agenda Items
1G WestClay Economic Development Plan Resolution
By Mike Shaver, Wabash Scientific, Inc.
Mike Shaver, 3799 Steeplechase Drive, Carmel, President of Wabash Scientific, Inc appeared before the
Commission representing the petitioner. Also in attendance: Bruce Donaldson, attorney, Barnes
Thornburg.
Wabash Scientific is requesting that the Plan Commission consider action and approval of the WestClay
Economic Development Plan Resolution at its meeting in December. The Plan Commission's review
and approval is to determine whether or not the proposed development conforms to the Comprehensive
S: /P1anCommis Sion /Minutes /PC /2007nov20
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Plan for the area. The history of the Redevelopment Commission has been that the Redevelopment
Commission does not take action on an Economic Development area until the Plan Commission has
approved it.
One of the reasons the Commission is being asked for action on the Economic Development Resolution
next month is that the numbers that the County Auditor's Office have for the parcels has changed. This is
extremely common, it happens in new developments all of the time, it has happened about 4 times in City
Center —they simply re -group parcels, take old numbers out, something they call deading" them, and
reconfigure the numbers so that they can more efficiently track the property tax issues that are incumbent
upon the Auditor. They are in the process of doing that now.
The original map had duplicate parcel numbers and it became very confusing and very difficult. The parcel
numbering is the only thing still at -large here. A revised legal description has been submitted that reflects
the new parcel numbers as well as a revised map. The Resolution states that should the Plan Commission
decide to approve, the approval would be with the modification regarding the legal description and the
parcel numbers.
Michael Shaver stated that there is nothing being changed in regard to land use, nothing proposed by the
Redevelopment Commission that the Plan Commission has not already acted upon.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: This item can be sent to the Executive Committee of the Plan
Commission at a date to be determined, and returned to full Commission on December 18, 2007.
Leo Dierckman noted that the Plan Commission's scope of review is to ensure that the proposed
Development Plan conforms to the Comprehensive Plan. A public hearing is not required on this
Resolution.
Commission Member Questions /Comments:
Jay Dorman: Why is this area designated as an Economic Development Area?
Mike Shaver responded that the Redevelopment Commission has chosen to designate it as such because it
is the commercial portion of the WestClay Development—the main commercial portion that was rezoned.
Jay Dorman asked why that would necessitate any special treatment for the area.
Mike Shaver said he was not comfortable answering a "why" question that probably should be asked of
the Redevelopment Commission. Mike Shaver was willing to research and get back to the Commission
with the answer.
Carol Schleif. Are we having a public hearing on the 18 of December on this item?
Leo Dierckman: This item does not require a public hearing.
Carol Schleif. This area was supposed to only have neighborhood serving commercial and now there are
repeatedly indications where it is western Clay Township, Boone County—in the text of the document.
For instance, page 4 under Retail Commercial Development proposal—it states that this is specifically
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 2
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
targeted for the support of residential development located in west Clay Township as well as the City of
Carmel and Westfield. That is a long way from neighborhood commercial —that repeats throughout this
document —this is going to create havoc in WestClay. Also page 6, under the Finding of Fact number 1,
almost to the last sentence: `Business activity supported by residential development in western Clay
Township as well as Eagle Township in Boone County." Can you explain what is going on here?
Michael Hollibaugh, Director of DOCS, addressed the Commission. Mike said he too had noticed the
discrepancies in the document. The Department has not been involved in the drafting of the document and
we have approximately one month to work through this and massage it so that it is more consistent with
the language in the Plan and the community's understanding. With that, we can make is so that there is no
confusion—nothing out of context.
Carol Schleif noted that there is also an indication of New Employment Opportunities" in this area is
there something coming that we don't know about?
Michael Hollibaugh responded that it is probably the employment created by the commercial that occurs in
the WestClay project.
Rick Ripma: If we don't approve this, what are the ramifications?
Michael Hollibaugh said that if this is this Resolution is not approved, it tells the City Council that the
votes that have occurred on WestClay over the years should not or did not happen. Essentially, the Plan
Commission has made recommendations on WestClay over the years, and the Council has adopted
WestClay which is a reality, not a concept—it exists today. This document needs to be massaged so that
it is consistent with policy; then it is not even a question any more —the Plan Commission would vote for
it.
Carol Schleif asked if Commission members should list all of their concerns and send them to the
Department.
Leo Dierckman confirmed that questions and concerns should be sent to the Department, to the attention
of Mike Hollibaugh.
Susan Westermeier: Will there be a revised document coming out before the next meeting, and also,
where has the "E.D." designation occurred previously.
Mike Shaver responded that there are currently 29 Economic Development areas within Carmel. Mike
Shaver also said that changes in the document will be made as requested by the Plan Commission.
Michael Hollibaugh said the Department is happy to make any changes that the Plan Commission
requests.
Susan Westermeier asked that a representative from the Redevelopment Commission be in attendance at
the next meeting to answer questions.
Mike Hollibaugh commented that perhaps comments could be received from everyone and the document
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
could be adjusted —maybe Redevelopment Commission would not have to be in attendance.
John Molitor opined that although the Rules of Procedure do not require this type of matter to be sent to
Committee, it might be advisable to send this item to the Executive Committee for further review on the
same night the other Committees meet, perhaps 5 or 5:30 pm so that this can be worked over in a
Committee setting. If there are questions or explanations, this can be done at the Committee level.
Leo Dierckman asked that he be copied on comments and requests for information, since he will be
attending the Executive Committee.
Bruce Donaldson, Barnes Thornburg, assisting the Redevelopment Commission had the following
comments: "The Redevelopment Statute allows the Redevelopment Commission to go and find areas in
town that it wants to declare for Economic Development or Redevelopment purposes. They are required
under Statute to make Findings of Fact to support that. In the Redevelopment Statute, there is a provision
that basically, they must have a checkpoint with the Plan Commission that says anything that you are
planning on doing from an Economic Development or Redevelopment standpoint must conform to what
the Plan Commission has put into place as the overall plan for this City. That is the context in which this
Resolution, this plan is here before this body. I only say that in that....I don't want this to slip over into
nit- picking every line of the Redevelopment Commission's plan. The job here is to determine that what
they have done and approved does or does not conform with the overall plan of development for the City
at this point in time. Certainly, people can go to the Redevelopment Commission meeting and they will
have a public hearing if this is approved, and make their thoughts known on their issues and the Council
would have to approve this as well."
Carol Schleif said she was curious —there is an inference in the documents that the City infrastructure is
adequate for that area. Maybe some of this stuff needs to come out.
Bruce Donaldson asked that comments and questions be referred to Mike, that the two of them would sit
down and revise the document to what the Commission members want to say.
The Economic Development Plan was referred to the Executive Committee on November 29, 2007 at
approximately 5:00 PM. Prior to the regularly scheduled Committee meetings.
H. Public Hearings
Note: Items 1H and 2 -511 were heard together.
1H. Docket No. 07070059 DP /ADLS: 531 S Guilford Rd Kousa Street Cottages)
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for 33 single family homes on 6 acres.
The site is located at 531 S Guilford Rd. and is zoned 13- 7/13usiness.
Filed by Justin Moffett of Uptown Partners, LLC.
2 -511. Docket No. 07080024 PP: Kousa Street Cottages (531 S Guilford Rd)
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 33 lots on 6 acres. Also, subdivision waivers
requested are:
Docket No. 07080025 SW SCO 8.09.01 sidewalks on both sides of street
Docket No. 07080026 SW SCO 6.03.20 private streets
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 4
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Docket No. 07080027 SW SCO 6.05.01 minimum lot width of 50 -ft at R/W
The site is located at 531 S Guilford Rd. and is zoned B -7 /Business.
Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson Frankenberger for Uptown Partners, LLC.
Note: Eric Seidensticker exited the meeting during this presentation and did not return.
Jim Shinaver, attorney, Nelson Frankenberger appeared before the Commission representing the applicant.
Also present: Justin Moffett, partner in Uptown Partners, and Jim Shields, Civil Engineer with Weihe
Engineers.
Uptown Partners is the contract purchaser of approximately 6 acres of located east of and adjacent to Guilford
Road with a common address of 531 South Guilford Road.
An aerial photograph was displayed showing the subject real estate and the immediately adjacent parcels. The
proposed site plan was also displayed. To the west of the subject site is an apartment complex, to the south is
an existing condominium development, to the north and east is an existing, single- family, detached residential
subdivision.
The real estate is zoned B -7 /Business and permits various office and business types of uses that the petitioner
believes would not be as compatible with the surrounding residential uses. However, the B -1 classification
does permit a multi family type of use. To this end, Uptown desires to develop upon the subject site an empty
nester, patio -home type of community targeted to older demographic that desires to scale down their home size
and enjoy a maintenance -free living situation.
The proposed community will contain duplexes and triples, that will feature main -level living with a master
bedroom on the main floor as well as a sun room or patio on the main level. The anticipated base price for
these home is approximately $250,000 $275,000. At this time, it is Uptown's intent to establish an HPR,
Horizontal Property Regime. As a result, the petitioner is not seeking Primary Plat development of this
community. In the beginning stages of this project, a primary plat was considered. However, after a
considerable number of meetings with the Staff, it was determined that an HPR would be more appropriate.
Because the underlying zoning is B -1, this project must come before the Commission from an ADLS /DP
perspective.
The petitioner appeared before the Board of Zoning Appeals on September 24"' and was granted approval of
certain variances explained in the Department Report. Again, it should be noted that the underlying B -7
development standards are geared toward commercial and office uses and are not conducive to residential
developments.
In order to develop the site for the less intense, multi family use, certain variances were granted by the BZA.
As a part of the BZA process, Justin was encouraged to continue working with the staff on the layout and
design for this community. The petitioner believes that the layout and design of this community addresses
most if not all of the Staff s concerns and suggestions.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition; the following appeared:
Remonstrance/Favorable:
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 5
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Ron Coster, 1076 Timber Creek Drive, HOA President. Other HOA Board Members present: Millie Adams
and Sandy Wheatland. The HOA Board is very much in favor of this proposal and looking forward to
working with Scott Brewer, Urban Forester regarding the landscape buffer.
Micah Kinnaman, 438 Oak Drive, appeared before the BZA in September and had spoken against this
project. With the proposed site changes and the fence being built prior to construction, pursuant to
commitments from the petitioner, Mr. Kinnaman is now in favor of the development.
Remonstrance /Unfavorable: None
The Public Hearing was then closed.
Dept Concerns, Angie Conn: The Staff has been working with the petitioner in increasing the buffer along
the eastern property line. The petitioner has also been in contact with the City Engineer and Urban Forester
letters of approval have not yet been provided.
Sally Shapiro asked for clarification on the number of home sites33 or 40.
Jim Shinaver: Clarification, the proposal before the Commission is for 40 units.
Kevin Heber: Would prefer a second "front" to the plan so that the side facing Guilford will look and
function as a front as well. Several treatments can be done to the "rear face" to make it appear as a front
perhaps a front door, maybe a porch.
Justin Moffett: Alternate elevations can be presented at Committee— revisions, columns, front doors, etc.,
and a front door along Guilford.
Rick Ripma: Referencing unit 10 —would like to see additional landscaping to block from Guilford. Also,
the garage doors shown—is this the actual unit itself or just a picture?
Justin Moffett said it is just a picture —the developer intends to use a high quality garage door and will show
more options at Committee.
Rick Ripma said he would like a commitment at the Committee level of the specific type of door to be used.
Jay Dorman had questions regarding the approval at BZA now that the HPR application has been forwarded.
Justin Moffett said that the reason the proposal changed was based on direction from the BZA to continue
working with the Staff. In continuing to follow -up with Staff, the proposal changed from a detached type of
product to an attached product; it was then determined that the petitioner would be better off going for an HPR
product.
Jay Dorman requested that professional opinions be rendered from Scott Brewer and the Engineering
Department; until that time, Jay was not in favor of pursuing with the petition.
Carol Schleif referred to lot 40 and asked if there were turn- around requirements for the driveway.
The petitioner will attend Committee prepared to address the comments heard this evening.
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 6
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Docket No. 07070059 DP /ADLS, 531 S. Guilford Road, Kousa Street Cottages and 07080024 PP, Kousa
Street Cottages were forwarded to the Subdivision Committee for further review on November 29, 2007at
6:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
6 -9H. TABLED to DEC. 18: Docket No. 06090037 PP: Lakeland Subdivision
The appheant seeks primary plat approval for- 5 lots an 10 aer-es. The appheani also seeks
the following
Doeket No. 0707005 �r,.z SCO 8.09 sidew on b sides of street
Doeket No. 07070056 v �s tHb st to adjuee
Doeke N 07071 057 SW SCO 6.03.07 eulde sae leng
The is leea4ed 12650 Clay Center- Read is zoned l dene fled b
T ieh.,el DeBe o f DeBey Land De Se f Browning 1 yes4v..efAs
10H. WITHDRAWN: Docket No. 07090013 Z: DE Wilkinson's Addition, lot 20
The ,Be seeks ..1 to rezon 1 let fro D 3 /De e to B 5/ us i e��
wiffiintheOldTew-nOver-lay Char-aeter- Sub area. The site is leea4eda4 410 lstA-venue
NE Filed by Ti R„le,- of DEC A H o lli ngs T L C
11H. Docket No. 07090014 DP /ADLS: Weston Park, lot 2 -Mike's Carwash
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a car wash. The site is located at
10580 Michigan Rd. and is zoned I -1 /Industrial within the US 421 Overlay.
Filed by Jim Shinaver of Nelson Frankenberger for Mike's Car Wash Inc.
Jim Shinaver, attorney, Nelson Frankenberger appeared before the Commission representing the applicant.
Also in attendance: Jerry and Bill Dauhm and Terry Wells, Mike's Car Wash; Frank Hines, architect; Chris
Wiseman, civil engineer; Miles Fleckner, landscape architect.
The proposed car wash is located south of 106' Street, west of and adjacent to Michigan Road in the Weston
Park Commercial Office complex. The site is zoned I -1 /Industrial, and a car wash is a permitted use in this
zoning classification. To the north is an existing bank building, another existing bank building to the south, to
the immediate west is the new LA Fitness Center recently approved by the Plan Commission, and to the east,
across the street from Michigan Road, there are many retail and commercial types of businesses. This
particular lot is located along the commercial section of the Michigan Road corridor.
After the information packets were submitted, the petitioner continued to make adjustments to the plan; a new
set of brochures for the November 29"' Special Studies Committee will be submitted. The entrance to this
particular facility will be off of 106' Street and will utilize the internal loop road of the commercial complex
or enter from Michigan Road and travel either direction from the interior access point. There is no direct
access to this site off Michigan Road. Once the customers arrive into the site on the western portion, they
would enter the site on the southwest corner of the property and would allow them to begin driving through the
drive -thru lanes and around into the car wash facility. As the cars exit the facility in a westerly direction, they
would then exit the property on the northwestern corner of the site. The access point on the northwestern
corner of the site will be an exit only in order to prevent any conflict between the cars.
The site plan also provides significant buffering along Michigan Road. The petitioner has been in contact with
INDOT and has obtained INDOT approval to encroach into INDOT's right -of -way for the construction of a
three -foot berm along the eastern portion of the site; numerous trees, bushes, shrubs, and plantings will also be
included on the three -foot berm. There are other numerous plantings around the perimeter, internal to the site.
Special consideration is being given to the eastern property line. The actual car wash is on the northern
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 7
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
portion of the site. With this project, Bill and Jerry Dauhm are introducing a new and improved manner for
providing self vacuuming services. Other Mike's Car Wash facilities have vacuum cylinders that are very
noticeable and allow customers to clean their cars. As a part of this project, Bill and Jerry are proposing an
improved way to provide this service. The area in the middle of the site will contain a canopy; there is an
enclosed structure that will actually contain all of the vacuuming equipment. The vacuum hoses will be
designed in such as manner as not to be obvious and will be more pleasing to the eye.
The landscape plan has been adjusted as a result of meeting with Greg Hoyes from Hamilton County
Surveyor's Office and Scott Brewer, Carmel Urban Forester. There is a total of 29 shade trees, 20 ornamental
trees, 188 shrubs, and 151perennial plantings or grass -type plantings for a grand total of 388 types of
landscape plantings around the site. This is probably the most heavily landscaped car wash seen to date, but it
is felt to be extremely appropriate, considering the proximity of Michigan Road and this particular corridor.
Signage: One ground menu sign on the southern portion of the site stating services and prices offered; a
second ground menu sign continuing in the drive -thru lane; and another ground menu sign on the eastern
elevation above the entrance to the buildinga wall sign. The signs will contain individually mounted,
internally illuminated lettering that will appear white both at night and during the day. The ground menu signs
provide information regarding the types of services offered by Mike's Car Wash and the price schedule. The
menu signs are housed in an attractive brick cabinet with a stone base —much like the signs seen at Mike's Car
Wash on Carmel Drive and Range Line Road.
The petitioner is seeking certain variances for this project. Most if not all variances are due to the fact that the
car wash facility is a unique type of use and requires specific consideration in order to construct this type of
facility and the petitioner will be appearing before the BZA to present these variances.
The Petitioner will distribute revised packets for Committee.
Frank Hines, architect addressed the Commission. The Carmel Mike's Car Wash on Range Line Road has
become the proto -type and many of those items have been adapted to the new product. Some of the materials
that the petitioner has elected not to incorporate into the proto -type are: metal panel at the top has been
eliminated, the translucent panel at the entrance and exit to the Car Wash has been eliminated and a
dimensional asphalt shingle tile will be utilized in this location. The window divisions now are divided by
lights; there will be no self -serve wash bays; the vacuum canisters are now a central vacuum design that
provide for easier maintenance and the visual impact is far less. The central vacuum structure will also help
screen the facility from Michigan Road.
The petitioner will submit revised information booklets with current drawings prior to the Committee meeting
on November 29, 2007.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: Letters of approval are pending from Greg Hoyes, County
Surveyor's office, and Scott Brewer, Carmel Urban Forester. The Department is recommending this item be
sent to the September 29 Special Studies Committee.
Commission Comments:
Madeleine Torres —the coins /vending machines are not shown on informational packets; please provide for
Committee review.
Carol Schleif —no mechanical equipment is shown -is it all on top and behind the parapet?
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 8
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Jerry Dauhm responded that all main mechanical equipment is in the building at the end —the hosing and
piping will come down through the roof. In the main carwash building, all pf the equipment is inside the
building—if there are any rooftop heaters, exhaust fans, etc., they are hidden behind the parapet wall.
Sally Shapiro —there are different directions for car parking for the vacuum area—if you were only coming in
to use the vacuum, what would be the traffic flow?
Kevin Heber —Will "Big Bird" and "Winne the Pooh" be prominently displayed?
Susan Westermeier —the "Exit Only" should be clearly markedhow many cars can stack at any one time
without spilling out onto Michigan Road?
Bill Dauhm responded that there will be an entrance sign, clearly marked. Stacking room is for
approximately 30 cars.
Jim Shinaver stated that the petitioner would prefer to discuss the parking and traffic flow further at the
Committee level.
Jay Dorman asked for clarification on the necessity for a bike rack —can respond at Committee
Steve Stromquist said the plan shows three lines of stacking; the safety and angle of the parking area a
concern. Steve requested that all illustrations look the same.
Docket No. 07090014 DP /ADLS, Weston Park, lot 2 Mike's Carwash was referred to the Special Studies
Committee for further review on Thursday, November 29, 2007 at 6:00 PM.
12H. Docket No. 07090015 DP /ADLS: West Carmel Dr. Retail (Meijer Outlot A)
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a multi- tenant retail building.
The site is located at the northeast corner of Carmel Dr. Pennsylvania St. and is zoned
OM/M Old Meridian District/Meijer Zone. Filed by Paul Reis of Bose McKinney
Evans for Thomas English Retail Real Estate, LLC.
Paul Reis, attorney, Bose McKinney Evans, 301 Pennsylvania Parkway, Suite 300 appeared before the
Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Ken Cave, Tom English Real Estate; Sean
Curran, Architect; Brian Cross, Project Engineer.
This site is within the Meijer's zone and is the first redevelopment project in the Old Meridian District, more
particularly the Meijer's site. The petitioner will be requesting some variances connected with this project and
will be consistent with the Old Meridian District.
The development project is bounded by Old Meridian Street, Pennsylvania Street, Carmel Drive. There is also
a Meijer detention area to the south of Carmel Drive. The site is approximately 1.3 acres in size. The
proposed development plan is for a multi- tenant retail building and is consistent with the Old Meridian District
within the Meijer Zone. The building contains 10,600 square feet. One of the requirements for the Old
Meridian District is bringing the building up to the street. The petitioner considered open drives that would be
consistent with the Meijer site. However, by brining the building up to the open drive, and by this site being
adjacent to the public street, it would cause some problems regarding the parking because the building would
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 9
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
be on the open drive, and parking would be between the building and the street. In looking at the overall
development standards for Old Meridian, that situation is not permitted.
The other issue has to do with the contractual agreement with Meijer to sell this property. Meijer was
concerned with the line of vision traveling east on Carmel Drive to be able to see the Meijer store. Therefore,
the building is being situated to the east of the site versus to the west of the site, closer to Pennsylvania Street.
The petitioner is considering retail entrances to the site so that a more aesthetic view can be provided towards
Pennsylvania Street and also to identify those tenants towards the traffic traveling on Pennsylvania. Again,
because of the Old Meridian District, a variance is required to allow retail entrances not immediately adjacent
to an open drive or a public street.
Paul Reis commented that the parking spaces sizes will be a different dimension (larger) than stated in the
informational booklet. Generally, the petitioner will have the cast/west drive in front of the Meijer store to be
utilized as the loading area. The retail entrances would be along the south fagade and the west fagade with a
corner anticipated to be on the east. Connections are shown to the existing sidewalk on Pennsylvania, Carmel
Drive, and a connector to access the pedestrian crosswalk. The handicap parking is to the front of the store.
The south fagade and the west fagade of the building were shown. The building elevations were shown —the
exact location of the mechanical equipment has not yet been determined, since it does depend on the size of the
units; however, there is a 2 -foot, six inch parapet unit that will hide the mechanical equipment from view.
The elevations were shown with the locations of the signs for various tenants. A sign criteria plan has been
put together and included in the informational booklets. The petitioner is striving for a uniform look to the
building. In discussions with the Department Staff, it was suggested that the cast/west main drive that crosses
the lot would have some straight forward, white letters to identify the tenant—no logos, no colors —that would
identify the tenants on the north side of the building. That would require a variance and is part of the overall
sign criteria for the project.
The landscape plan was recently delivered to Scott Brewer at the City. Some revisions have been made —the
islands have been re- designed and some of the smaller ones have been eliminated to make larger islands to
support the plants. The landscaping is generally consistent with the Old Meridian District to shield the parking
from the sides and rear of the building. Some of the plantings are per the Meijer landscape design for their
store and not a part of this proposal. This proposal basically deals with the parking within the subject site. It
is hoped that the landscape plan can be fmalized prior to the Committee meeting on the 29"' of November.
The sign criteria will be discussed in detail at Committee, but the intent is to have a consistent look for the
building for the tenants so that each tenant would know what they could have when they look at the building.
Lighting—included in the informational booklets. There are 90 degree cut -offs for the parking lot lights and
accent lights on the building. There is up- lighting underneath the overhang, and those lights are focused and
will hit the top of the overhang, but there will be no light migration out from that. The lights are aimed
towards the building, not towards the top. The photo metric plan is included to show what the light levels are
around it.
Regarding the Engineering concerns, there are no thoroughfare issues —the petitioner is looking at some water
quality issues with stormwater, and that should be worked out. The size of the parking spaces will be revised.
Paul Reis said he had delivered full size drawings of the light specifications to the Department. Again, the
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 10
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
mechanical locations have not been set, however the parapet wall should be sufficient to screen the equipment
from view.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of, or in opposition to the petition; no one appeared and
the public hearing was closed.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: Additional items to be added to the outstanding comments and concerns:
1) The question about the signage, the raceways, and how that would interact with being mounted on the glass
fagade. The Department recommends that the petitioner provide photographic examples at the Committee
meeting on November 29. 2) Why was the building moved approximately 43 feet west from the initial site
plan. At this time, the Department is recommending this item be sent to the Special Studies Committee
meeting on November 29
Steve Stromquist asked how tall the Meijer building is and the height of the proposed building. Also, Meijer
sells everything —what will this building offer that Meijer does not have?
Paul Reis responded that the proposed building is 26 feet, the Meijer building is perhaps 25 feet. The
proposed building will have service tenants that offer services that Meijer does not. There have also been
discussions regarding a potential restaurant —uses that Meijer does not have.
Susan Westermeier asked if Meijer would be selling off more land—is this the beginning'? And does the
location of the proposed building visually block their sign?
Paul Reis said he knew of no other plans. This particular outlot was being marketed simply because Meijer
was not utilizing the land. This building has been approved by Meijer and there is a clear sight line of vision
to their store.
Paul Reis explained that the proposed building was moved because the petitioner was afraid people would
walk from the convenience store to the proposed building, so parking was placed in between. This can be
discussed further at Committee.
Rick Ripma noted that the exit was very close to the actual exit from Meijer'sis that an issue—it seems as if
it could be a problem.
Angie Conn said she had briefly spoken with Engineering regarding traffic flow and they do not see much of
an issue with the exit—it could also be discussed at the committee level.
Carol Schleif asked about the height of the mechanical equipment —what would fit under a 2 foot, six -inch
parapet? Maybe in the parking lot you would not see it because of the overhang, but it would be visible from
Meridian.
Sean Curran, Architect responded that the height of the parapet is 2 feet, six inches at the edge of the building.
Because the roof has internal roof drains, everything slopes towards the center and there is an additional one
foot of height at the center of the building—typically where the rooftop equipment is located. Also, because of
the overhang of the building, it decreases your sight line to anything that will be back there. Sight -line
drawings can be provided to help illustrate that.
Carol Schleif asked that the drawings be provided showing the view from Meridian because it is a much lower
angle and a farther distance.
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 11
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Steve Stromquist reiterated that the parking issue will be looked at in depth at the Special Studies Committee
meeting —the reason is —the convenience store /gas station has been built since the Meijer store was approved,
and with the current proposed structure, we need to be certain it fits within the Ordinance.
Docket No. 07090015 DP /ADLS, West Carmel Drive Retail (Meijer Outlot A) was referred to the Special
Studies Committee for further review on November 29, 2007 at 6:00 PM.
I. Old Business
1 -2I. TABLED to Dec. 18: Docket No. 07070040 PP: Chesterton Woods Subdivision
The applieafA seeks pfimafy plat appfeval fef 14 lots on 9 aefes and also seeks the follow
Doeket No. 070700 SW SCO Chapter 6.03. street eurvature radius
The site is leeated a4 2�E -0-0 ct nea 14 stiev Rd a nd i zon c 2/R d enee
nll icvSO. Filed by Mutt Skelton of Bak Daniels L n �5v h Development r r C
3I. TABLED to DEC. 18: Docket No. 07070058 PP: The Legacy (Residential Phase 1)
The appheani seeks pfimafy pla4 appfeval fef 126 lots an 93.34 aefes. The site is leea4ed
i of E 1 th a PUD/Pi.. U
��tl�- 6g89 -ble� c �zen° D ev e lepm en 4
Fil by Fleming of Steeppehvefth Assee. fef Plafi,,,,w, Pfopeft�LLG
4I. Docket No. 07070037 Z: Dixie Highway Addition, lot 5 pt
The applicant seeks approval to rezone 0.41 acres from R -3 /Residence to B- 1/Business
within the Home Place Business District. The site is located at 10696 N College Ave.
Filed by E. Davis Coots of Coots, Henke Wheeler, and P.C.
Dave Coots, attorney, Coots, Henke Wheeler appeared before the Commission representing the applicant.
This item was referred to the Special Studies Committee November 1S at which time the Committee voted 5 -0
to approve the Rezone, conditioned upon the petitioner acquiring information from County Highway and
County Surveyor regarding the County's Thoroughfare Plan for College Avenue and road right -of -way width-
due to the fact that this property is within an area that has not been annexed into the City. The requested
information has been supplied based on information received from the David Lucas, Hamilton County
Highway Engineer.
Secondly, an email has been sent to the Department that the County Surveyor's office had more issues with the
drainage as to this matter on a rezone. If and when a development plan or ADLS application applies to this
property, drainage issues—if any —would be addressed at that time.
With those two responses to the Committee's request, the petitioner is asking that the full Commission forward
this item to the City Council with a positive recommendation.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department has no further issues or concerns and the Department is
recommending a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the City Council.
Special Studies Report, Steve Stromquist: The Committee concluded that this proposal is NOT spot zoning.
The type of occupant was discussed —there are several different possibilities and the petitioner committed to
limiting the land use to general office, retail, and professional office and retail, not including medical office.
The Committee voted 5 -0 to forward this item with a positive recommendation.
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 12
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Steve Stromquist made formal motion to forward Docket No. 07070037 Z, Dixie Highway Addition, lot 5 pt
to the City Council with a positive recommendation, seconded by Madeleine Torres, Approved 10 -0.
5I. (Docket No. 07090002 OA) Ordinance Z- 511 -07:
(As amended and approved by City Council)
US 31 421 Overlay Architectural Design Amendment
Petition to Amend the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 23B: US Highway 31 Corridor Overlay
Zone and Chapter 23C: US Highway 421– Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone, in order
to amend the Architectural Design Requirements.
Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services.
Adrienne Keeling, Department of Community Services appeared before the Commission representing the
applicant. This item has already been reviewed and certified this item to the City Council. At last evening's
Council meeting, and as a result of discussion at Council's Land Use and Annexation Committee, some minor
modifications were requested to one section of this Ordinance, Z- 511 -07.
Amendments made by the Council are found on page 3 of the Ordinance and also included in the Department
Reports. The Plan Commission is required to review the Amendments and either approve or return the
document to Council with additional recommendations. If this item is approved this evening, the Ordinance
will go into effect immediately.
Jay Dorman questioned building heights against residential uses--lo we need to put a cap on that?
Adrienne Keeling explained that in the Amendment that was approved last evening at Council, the wording has
been changed; further, there is already a maximum height requirement of 30 feet—an additional 8 feet shall be
permitted to accommodate roof structures, mechanical penthouses, etc.
Carol Schleif made formal motion to approve Ordinance Z- 511 -07, seconded by Stromquist, Approved 10 -0.
6I. Docket No. 07050023 OA: Monon Trail Overlay Zone
The applicant seeks to adopt Chapter 23H: Monon Trail Overlay Zone into the Carmel
Zoning Ordinance. Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services.
Adrienne Keeling, Department of Community Services appeared before the Commission representing the
applicant. Included in a separate mailing following a Special Subdivision Committee meeting, Commission
members would have received two sets of a new draft —one redline, one not.
The Subdivision Committee made some changes and exceptions to the draft. Basically, an Overlay is being
proposed for the entire length of the Monon Trail. Within the Overlay, there are two distinct sections —the
urban and the natural section. Within those sections, between Carmel Drive and Main Street is generally the
Urban Section; anything extending north of that —most of Old Town or south of City Center Drive is generally
the natural section. There are varying and distinct setbacks and building heights, and landscaping development
standards that are separate and distinct for both of the areas.
Kevin Heber asked about the Department's opinion regarding the minimum building separation in the urban
section-30 feet?
Adrienne Keeling noted that this had not been discussed until the last meeting. The Department would have
preferred to omit it; Carol Schleif indicated that there might be some building code issues that require the
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 13
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
separation.
Carol Schleif explained that the international building code now requires 30 -foot building separations or do
some major hoop jumping to protect windows, i.e. roll -down metal shutters, sprinkle the buildinga lot of
things if you are less than 30 feet—it used to be 20 feet. One thing in the City Code is that multi family and
similar buildings need to be spaces equal to the height of the building. We went from 42 to 60 feet, and we cut
that in half.
John Molitor, Legal Counsel commented that the Ordinance does contain the 35% possibility of waivers to be
granted by this body in cases of superior design. Even the 30 -foot rule could be waived essentially down to 19
one -half feet by this body upon proof by a petitioner that it is a superior design element.
Carol Schleif made formal motion to forward Docket No. 07050023 OA, Monon Trail Overlay Zone to the
City Council with a favorable recommendation, seconded by Sally Shapiro, Approved 10 -0.
John Molitor recommend that the Executive Session scheduled at the conclusion of the Commission meeting be
cancelled, since Tom Perkins, Assistant City Attorney could not be present as planned.
Leo Dierckman made formal motion to cancel the Executive Session, seconded by Rick Ripma, Approved 10-
At this time, the Legal Counsel Report was expanded as follows:
Previously the Executive Committee approved three items for litigation. Regarding the Brookshire Village
Home Renovation situation, the Legal Department of the City has determined that it will not be necessary to
initiate litigation to resolve this issue.
Mike Hollibaugh explained that the HOA had reached a monetary settlement with the builder. Additionally,
the builder is in the process of obtaining approval from the Subdivision itself to modify a setback that they had
violated. Once this is done, there needs to be 75% of the votes of the Subdivision to approve the setback.
When that is accomplished, the Department can sign -off on the Secondary Plat.
The Department has not totally signed off on the monetary agreement because the design of the elevations of
one of the buildings was not acceptable. Recommendations were made and the builder has agreed to those
recommendations in an email.
The second item involved a group home for autistic children located in a residential subdivision. Again, the
Plan Commission authorized the Legal Dept. to initiate litigation on behalf of the Plan Commission to enforce
the Subdivision covenants and restrictions in respect to a commercial use which is in violation to those
covenants and restrictions —not in violation of the Ordinance because the Ordinance is now pre empted by
State Statute. This issue is still pending within the City Legal Dept. There are two issues--one is the amount
of staff time available to address this, and the second is a budget issue. This mater will not be pursued until
after the first of January, 2008.
The third item deals with Westwood Estates, a Justus Builders project that was approved by the Commission
on the condition of a 10 foot landscape buffer outside the 20 foot rear yard on the south edge of the
subdivision. (The decks are built within the setback area) The Crooks, neighbor to the south, made
complaints to the Department, it was investigated, and it was determined that there was not room to install the
landscaping; if the landscaping were installed, it would be within a drainage easement for one -half of the
County. A ticket was issued on behalf of the City to enforce the violation of the zoning ordinance because the
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20 14
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
landscape buffer could not be installed as per the Ordinance and the approval of the Plan Commission. This
matter is still pending in the City Court. There has been on -going discussion and they may be close to a
resolution. This could be approved by DOCS as a Secondary Plat Amendment. Mr. Crook may also want an
additional letter indicating that the landscape buffer would not be subtracted from his acreage with respect to
any future development of his property.
Mike Hollibaugh noted that some sort of written resolution would be offered from the City Legal Department
to "close this out" officially.
Unrelated Comments:
Carol Schleif asked if there would be a map /survey done that would identify buildings in the Old Town area
that would be considered "contributing" to the Old Town historic character, or eligible for the State Register
for Historic Landmarks. There are not many of National quality, but it would be helpful to know what there
is. Carol proposed looking into that as new projects come in.
Michael Hollibaugh responded that initially, Historic Landmarks was involved and made a determination that
none of the structures, in their opinion, was historic but felt that the grid and general character were the closest
thing to our Old Town that would be historic —the old town farm, village, community. When the Old Town
Overlay was done, a property -by- property survey was done and that documentation is still available. The
Department still uses the historic landmarks interim report which does point to some of the stronger -built
homes in Old Town and throughout the City. We do have some tools and the Staff would be willing to sit
down and discuss with Carol Schleif.
There was no further business to come before the Commission and the meeting adjourned at 8:15 PM.
Leo Dierckman, President
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
S: /P1anCommission /Minutes /PC /2007nov20
15
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417