Minutes PC 09-18-07City of arme
D10
CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 18, 2007
Minutes
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel Plan Commission met at 6:00 PM in the Council Chambers
of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Members present: Leo
Dierckman, Jay Dorman, Kevin Heber, Rick Ripma, Carol Schleif, Eric Seidensticker, Sally Shapiro,
Madeleine Torres, thereby establishing a quorum.
Department of Community Services Staff in attendance: Angie Conn, Michael Hollibaugh, Adrienne
Keeling. John Molitor, Legal Counsel was also present.
The minutes of the August 21, 2007 meeting were approved as submitted.
G. Reports, Announcements, Department Concerns
Angie Conn announced that the following items have been tabled for this evening and will be heard
at the October 16, 2007 meeting: Item 4h, Dixie Highway Addition Rezone at 10696 College
Avenue, and Items 5h and 6h, 531 South Guilford Road (Kousa Street Cottages.)
Also, the Rules of Procedure would have to be suspended in order to hear item Items lh and 2h,
146 and Gray Road Rezone and Primary Plat due to a mis- mailing of the Public Notice —some
property owners were left off the original mailing, but that was corrected within the State Statute
time limit of ten (10) days.
Item I IH, US 31 Overlay Hotel/Cultural/Entertainment Uses failed to make the 25 day notice
requirement as per the Rules of Procedure; however this item does meet the ten (10) day State
Statute Public Notice requirement. A suspension of the Rules would be needed to hear this item.
Legal Counsel Report, John Molitor: Regarding the Open Door Law and how it restricts activities
of Commission members —John is working with Counsel for the Parks Board to see if a visit can be
arranged from the new Public Access Counselor later this fall. Perhaps a joint meeting could be held
that would include the Parks Board members and Plan Commission members with the Counselor. It
would be voluntary on behalf of the Commission members, but would be an opportunity for perhaps
a one -half hour seminar. John asked that a hand -out be distributed via email to Commission
members regarding the Open Door Law.
John Molitor requested that a short Executive Session would be scheduled at 5:30 PM prior to the
next full meeting on October 16, 2007 in the DOCS Conference Room. The purpose of the
S :/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /sept 18
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Executive Session would be to up -date members of the Commission on the items that have been
approved for initiation of litigation.
Jay Dorman made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to hear Items 1H and
2H in view of the Public Notice situation, seconded by Madeleine Torres, Approved 8 -0.
H. Public Hearings
1H. Docket No. 07070003 Z: 146th Gray Rezone (146th St Office Complex)
The applicant seeks approval to rezone 11.6 acres from S -1 /Residence to B- 1/Business
for an office development. The site is located at the southeast corner of 146"' St. and
Gray Rd.
Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC.
2H. Docket No. 07070004 PP: 146th St Office Complex
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 5 lots on 11.6 acres. The site is located at the
southeast corner of 146"' St. and Gray Rd. and is zoned S -1 /Residence, pending a B -1/
Business rezone.
Filed by Kelli Lawrence of Hearthview Residential, LLC.
Joe Scimia, Attorney, Baker Daniels, 600 East 96"' Street, Indianapolis appeared before the Commission
representing the applicant. Also present: Jim Thomas, Brian Kramer, Kelli Lawrence, Chris Reed, principals
of Hearthview Residential LL.
The proposal is for a rezone of 11.6 acres located at the southeast corner of 146"' Street and Gray Road. This
particular site is affected by three zoning jurisdictions: Carmel, Noblesville, and Westfield. The petitioner is
requesting a rezone from S -1 /Residence to B- I /Business.
As currently zoned, a low density residential development would be allowed; frontage on 146"' Street, two
access points, two lanes each access, onto 146"' Street and onto Gary Road. This particular site is very low
compared to the grade of the surrounding properties. Mr. Thomas lives in the area and is familiar with the
neighborhood. Hearthview Residential has resisted a gas station on this site because it is inconsistent with the
area.
The parcel has a significant tree line along its eastern border. A high level of architectural design and
construction material is important. The development will provide more of a "village" effect.
The Petitioner has met with Technical Advisory Committee members and adjacent property owners; the
petitioner is very positive about the relationship with the surrounding property owners. The neighbors have
been invited to attend meetings with the petitioner and have open dialogue. The petitioner has already received
some good comments regarding the site plan.
The petitioner has changed the size of the buildings, pulled the buildings up to the street, and relocated some of
the buildings. The petitioner has tendered commitments to ensure follow through for a high level of
development. The petitioner's commitments include the following: Committing to a common architectural
theme and style, the slope of roof, site layout, limitation of retail to the northern half of the property and not
adjacent to the southern property line, limitation of height of the buildings to one story, limiting the buildable
area to 75,000 square feet, commitment to lighting standards and controls, commitment to a uniform height,
and commitment to tree preservation and signage on site.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl 8 2
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Gary Nance, architect, has designed the development that has a Mansard roof, cupola, and one story. The
landscape section shows the elevation between the existing homes and landscape as projected with the
difference in elevations.
A traffic study has been performed and the results were received today. The results of the traffic study have
not yet been reviewed; however, the petitioner will meet or exceed the current level of service.
Public Remonstrance, General/Unfavorable:
Alex Krell, 14417 North Gray Road, directly south of the building in question —said he had not met with the
petitioner but was contacted by telephone and asked to submit questions—MT. Krell did not want to talk with
the petitioner via telephone. Mr. Krell said he had questions, but did not express them.
Organized Remonstrance /Organized /Unfavorable:
Cesare Turrin, 5436 Woodfield Drive, Woodfield HOA President -186 homes with entrances on both 146"'
Street and Gray Road was generally complimentary of the petitioner and the development, but had a number of
concerns.
Concerns: 1) Traffic is a major consideration with the widening of 146th Street. Results of a traffic study
would be vital for consideration. 2) Emergency vehicle access poses some safety challenges with the proposed
design. 3) Drainage is a major concern, especially with the substantial grade difference and the Mitchner
Drain. 4) Deciduous tree barrier that would not function in the all and winter months. 5) The Retention Pond
poses a safety hazard for children in the area, especially an autistic child in residence. 6) Intrusion of
business /commercial into a residential area, thereby threatening the quality of life of the residential neighbors.
7) The developer has tendered a draft of proposed commitments— Woodfield residents are requesting
additional commitments as stated in a written, detailed letter and petition submitted this evening.
Finally, the Comprehensive Plan updated in 2006 did not result in a rezoning of this parcel —this proposal is
looked at as "Spot Zoning" and not in the best interest of the community.
General Public Comments /Unfavorable:
Tim O'Connor, Real Estate Agent with Century 21, Gray Road and 96"' Street. Mr. O'Connor did a
comparative analysis at the request of the Woodfield residents. The current zoning allows low density
residential. Developments named included an Estridge project under construction on 146"' Street with home
values that exceed $700,000 —right ON 146"' Street; a small development near Carey Road—Taylor Trace
has single family residential home values ranging from $325, to $400,000; an older subdivision at 146
Hazeldell— Ashton —home values are between $300,000 to over $400,000. Residential can be done on this
site. This proposal will have a negative impact on the residents, particularly because of home values.
Woodfield has home values ranging from $350,000 to over one million dollars. No one expected this parcel to
remain vacant forever, neither did any of the residents expect to back -up to a commercial/retail center on a 10-
acre parcel when they purchased their homes. Even when the Comprehensive Plan was revised in the last few
years, this property still did not go to a commercial use. The development at 106 and Town Road —not
nearly as busy as 146 Street, but still a busy thoroughfare with a stoplight. The home values exceed one
million dollars. The highest value to the land owner must also take into consideration the neighbors and what
it does to their home values. This would be an ideal site for a church from the standpoint of high visibility and
churches typically have a lot of open area /green space. Please do not allow high density, commercial use;
please try to create a balance between the land owner and the neighbors.
Angie Molt, 740 West Auman Drive, suggested that rather than a blanket rezone, the petitioner should
S :/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /sept 18
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
consider a PUD in this instance where uses, setbacks, building materials, etc. can be contained and enforced
from the PUD. It is important that the property owners' rights are upheld and protected.
Ann Zaniger, Noblesville jurisdiction area, requested a buffer /tree zone so that a quiet church service can be
conducted. Since the widening of 146"' Street, the traffic is ridiculous—it was to become a major
thoroughfare—no semi -truck traffic, but that is what we have. At the intersection of 146"' on Gray, there is
now a hill, and it is impossible to see to make a left turn onto Gray Road.
Dave Sicklesteel, 5164 Sue Drive, directly behind the proposed development, said that when he bought his
home 14 years ago, the land behind him was zoned residential. At this time, it is still zoned residential for
someone's reasons and reasoning as well. If he had known that the zoning would be changed to offices or
retail buildings, he would not have purchased his home—behind office buildings and retail —that is where the
dumpsters and other stuff is located. Mr. Sicklesteel said he has had a clear view of the land from an elevated
position and can presently see traffic lights and the lights from the strip mall on the corner. 146"' and Gray
Road is one of the most congested locations in the City. We don't need any of these proposed services. We
don't need additional traffic, don't want the resulting depreciation of our property, and we defmitely don't
want to look at an ugly strip mall and some office buildings.
Barb Dauby, 5151 Sue Drive, Woodfield, has a personal situation that merits considerationa 9 -yr old son
who is autistic. Autistic children are very attracted to water and typically attracted to retention ponds. The
located of the retention pond is very close to her home and poses a serious concern. There are also other
children in the area and if this site is ever developed, a perimeter iron fence should be required as well as
underground drainage. This proposal will have an adverse impact on property values, ruin our quality of life,
and will have a substantial, negative impact on our great neighborhood.
Mrs. Fuegge, across the street from this development on the west side of Gray Road. Mrs. Fuegge's driveway
is halfway up the hill and it is very dangerous —our home has been in this location sine 1984. Mrs. Fuegge
said she has about 500 feet of "junk' since the inception of the Vine Branch within the historic "Haynes
House." If anything is to be zoned for business, it should be her side. There is everything from porta- potties
to trucks to stacks of stones. If I wasn't a farm, I would be screaming! Clean this up--lo something about it!
Mrs. Fuegge said her husband had tendered a check to the Superintendent on Pleasant Street in Noblesville so
he could have another entrance to his property; the check was cashed, no drive was ever installed. If you put a
business across from my property, you had better consider my property too.
Dr. Max Cook, resident at 14520 N Gray Rd, directly across from proposed development. Developers are
looking to make money, they are not looking to share anything with the residents. The proposed curb cut or
entrance to the development is almost directly across from Mrs. Fuegge's driveway. Traffic headlights from
the street impinges the residence and makes it very difficult to sleep —with a strip mall and increased traffic,
the cars will be coming and going all evening long. There has been nothing said about the lighting and whether
or not it will spill over to adjacent properties. Dr. Cox felt the proposal was premature, since nothing has
been fmalized.
Paul Abbenhaus, 5017 East 146"' Street, 6 -7 acres just east of the corner site. Mr. Abbenhaus stated that his
house is approximately 8,000 square feet, his garage is 5,500 square feet, the area has some really nice houses
and the potential for there to be other large lots is there. Mr. Abbenhaus said he was not opposed to the corner
being developed, it will have to be developed at some point, but it should not be at the detriment of the
neighboring property owners. The developer has tried to lessen the impact to the adjacent properties, but some
of the boundaries —the four acres of tree barrier on the east side of the property—those trees all belong to Mr.
Abbenhaus; the trees are deciduous, but there needs to be a better barrier.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 4
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Paul Schneider, 5152 Sue Drive, (Woodfield Subdivision) The traffic is a major concern. Currently on 146
Street, the traffic is a madhouse! Mr. Schneider has 3 teenagers, 2 that drive, and pulling out onto 146"' Street
is very scary. The road carries gravel trucks coming from Noblesville— traffic is a really big issue and a big
problem. Turning left onto 146"' to head west is impossible—it is easier to wind through Woodfield and
Valleybrook Subdivisions and onto Gray road to finally turn left onto 146"', passing 3 or 4 bus stops along the
way with children standing there. With the development and traffic at this corner, the residents will seek
alternative traffic routes and this is defmitely a safety issue.
Steve Dauby, 5151 Sue Drive, agreed with all of the previous comments stated. Please consider that a B -1
zone from an S -1 is a drastic change—alarming. The developer has done a very nice job of presenting and the
neighbors have tried to work with them. At this time, we can't even discuss the proposed development.
Looking at B -1 and the list of what is allowed—it is a serious list of developments. The petitioner has made
commitments, but it doesn't look as if there is any policing department to see that those commitments will be
enforced. If they can't rent the retail space or office space and want to do something else, the residents will
have no say so and damage will have been done. Mr. Dauby cautioned the Commission to not get caught up in
looking at a nice development —this is a drastic change to B -1 from residential S -1.
Rebuttal:
Jim Thomas, Hearthview Residential, 805 City Center Drive, Carmel, a neighbor that is also one of the
developers, did not want to be accused of hiding behind his attorney and not standing and speaking up. As
previously stated, we, the developers, will continue to offer to meet with the neighbors. One or two persons
have implied that this is just about developing the property and making money. When the property is
developed, that person(s) will be interested in making money, however, this firm is not about ignoring the
residents. We have tried to make sure that we are responsible and we started with a reasonable proposal —not
something crazy and then falling back to a "Plan B." Abbey Hohlman with F.C.Tucker Co. categorically said
that this is a terrible site for a Church and fundamentally unmarketable—it is too small for a church parcel and
does not provide the type of ancillary activities. Abbey pointed out a recent development at 131 Street that
was developed as a church and as it was developed, the building area took all of the 11 acres. To the
neighbors, we actually did consider a church, but it is clear-cut—it was not viewed as reasonable.
Regarding the adjacent properties, we have tried to pull back and pull back even further—we are only several
hundred feet from the neighbors. How many developers would love to stand at this podium and say that were
several hundred feet of buffer from the neighbors. We would love to figure out a way in cooperation with
everyone to make that distance even farther. We appreciate the meetings to date; everyone keeps talking about
backing up to a retail center—by our commitments, we don't want the neighbors to back up to a retail center
and that is why we made sure that it does not back up to the homes —that the retail is along the busiest portion
of the site. We do hear the neighbors.
We have had civil engineers working on the drainage. The traffic study does show that we maintain the
existing level of service and do not make it worse. We appreciate the chance to work with the neighbors and
hopefully will do so at Committee. It is our goal to continue to listen and work cooperatively with the
neighborhood.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department will recommend that this item be forwarded to the
Special Studies Committee on October 2" From a technical standpoint, the City Forester does have issues
with the landscape plan and needs more conceptual plans that show plantings. The City Engineering Dept is
still reviewing the plans —there are several issues outstanding. The Hamilton County Highway Dept. has
jurisdiction over 146 Street and they are reviewing the curb cut onto 146 Street —not yet approved. The
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 5
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Department is recommending this item would be referred to the Special Studies Committee for further review
on October 2, 2007.
Commission Comments and Discussion:
Carol Schleif: Are the woodlands considered mature or is this young woodlands? It looks like more than half
the trees are being cut. Carol encouraged the petitioner to move the buildings around and to try permeable
pavers. The drainage should be worked so that detention ponds are not highly visible —they are not
particularly attractive and they might be dangerous in this instance. Has a PUD been pursued?
Angie Conn responded that the Department has not yet received a woodlands analysis; a PUD has not been
explored.
Rick Ripma: The front page of the submittal shows a nature preservation area along with drainage
improvements that can be done. The retention pond is being shown, but it doesn't specifically call out the
drainage improvements, specifically the drainage pond won't be built where the trees are, and you tear down
all the trees. This leaves it very open and this is uncomfortable. Also, we need to see the traffic study. It is
difficult to understand how this development will not affect traffic. The area has some traffic issues and we
really need to look at the traffic.
Kevin Heber: Could not really see the "Village Effect" as mentioned. It would be good to see more renderings
as to what the development would like as you approach from the sides. One rendering of the architecture was
not really helpful because it was a long, rectangular building and most of them are square.
What will the overall development look like —especially the building on the comer it looks like a fast food
restaurant with perhaps a drive -thru. Personally, I would not want to see that and probably most people would
not want to see that at this corner. Please show some suggested uses as a final product. This just looks like
typical suburban sprawl.
Eric Seidensticker: It has been indicated that this area is a low -lying section of land. The level of the grade
will probably have to be raised to build or at least a significant amount of blacktop and the drainage runoffs.
The capacity of the Mitchner Drain is unknown, but there are certain areas in Carmel that are at capacity now
and the people in those areas already have drainage issues and adding to that —I would be critical o£ The
anchor point of this project on the northwest corner is to be a bank —banks make money through activity and
drive -thru. Again, for this development to have no effect on the traffic is highly unlikely. The area is bounded
basically on three sides by residential if we ignore the northern side —the 11 acres seems suspiciously like
"spot zoning."
Rick Ripma: Rick said he is really uncomfortable with being able to make a left turn onto 146"' Street and
would like to see this exit moved if this development is approved. Regarding emergency equipment access,
this is no doubt checked by the Department, correct?
Angie Conn: The Fire Dept. is a member of the Technical Advisory Committee and they are still reviewing
this project.
Sally Shapiro agreed with Rick Ripma's comments and asked that the Committee look at the traffic flow for
this project. The whole drive -thru area for the northwest corner is in the wrong position on this lot.
Leo Dierckman commented that there has been a lot of development on the north side of 146"' Street that
Carmel has no control over—it would be fair to say that our friends to the north do not have the same concerns
because of the distance this property is from their city center, etc. It will be interesting to see how this
particular property develops, although the preference would be more residential in nature. There are a lot of
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl 8 6
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
complexities to this site —the grade is low and that will create the need to be somewhat flexible when it comes
to a residential use. This parcel would serve the community best as something more residential in nature
maybe a PUD would be best, but the general concept of this property being changed to B -1 is
uncomfortable —there would be a lot more control with a PUD. This is a significant piece of property in a
significant location and it is important that we do a really good job from a planning standpoint. Hopefully
there will be flexibility from the developer for some residential use.
Docket No. 07070003 Z, 146' Gray Rezone, (146' Street Office Complex) and Docket No. 07070004
PP, 146 Street Office Complex were forwarded to the Special Studies Committee for further review on
October 2, 2007 at 6:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
3H. Docket No. 07070038 PP: Patel Estates
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 2 lots on 5.04 acres.
The site is located at 13300 Six Points Rd. and is zoned S -1 /Residence.
Filed by Mukkaish Patail.
Nilah Patail and brother Mukkaish Patail appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. Vincent
J. Barr, Surveyor was in attendance as well as Robert Marr, current property owner of the site at 13300 Six
Points Road.
The current proposal is for two homes on 5 acres. The intent is to subdivide the property-2 %2 acres per
home site, with one common driveway. The petitioner will keep the existing trees and current landscape. The
houses should appraise between $700,000 and $800,000 each and would be compatible with the homes in the
surrounding neighborhood.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition, no one appeared. Members of the public
were invited to speak in opposition to the petition; the following appeared:
Karen Kluba, 13531 Six Points Road, was not sure whether her comments would be favorable or
unfavorable, but had some questions. Ms. Kluba was concerned that the existing trees might be cleared to
make way for drives into the property. Also, traveling south on Six Points Road is beautiful and trees should
not be removed and the road should not be widened —that would necessitate removing trees. Six Points is a
narrow road and it naturally slows traffic. There are a lot of children in the area as well.
Nilah Patal responded that they would be keeping existing setbacks as well as all of the trees. Currently there
is a driveway in the middle of the property and that drive will be maintained for access. Again, no trees will be
removed unless they are in the way, and if that is the case, the Patails would re- plant. The trees along the road
will remain.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: There are no outstanding issues with this item. The petitioner has
submitted building elevations for the two homes and those were sent out with the Dept Report. The Plan
Commission could suspend the Rules and vote this evening, if so inclined, or the Commission can forward this
to October 2nd Subdivision Committee.
Kevin Heber asked what year the existing barn was constructed.
Robert Marr, 13300 Six Points Road, said that there are actually two structures on the property in terms of
barns. One was constructed in 1972, the other is a large metal building resembling a pole barn, and that will
be removed.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 7
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Jay Dorman made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure, conditioned upon comments from the
staff being a part of the ultimate proposal, seconded by Sally Shapiro, Approved 8 -0
Jay Dorman made formal motion to approve Docket No. 07070038 PP, Patail Estates, conditioned upon any
concerns from the Department/City Forester being resolved as well as Engineering approval with final
construction plans and architectural guidelines submitted with the packets are consistent with the Rules and
Regulations of Carmel Building Codes and the requirements of the Department of Community Services, and
that the development also conform to the draft architectural guidelines. The motion was seconded by Sally
Shapiro, APPROVED 8 -0.
4H. 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.
TABLED TO OCTOBER 16, 2007
5H. Docket No. 07070059 DP /ADLS: 531 S Guilford Rd Kousa Street Cottages)
The appheant seeks site plan and design appr-eval for- 33 single family homes on 6 aer-es.
Th site is lee .4 531 CGuilf R a nd i zen ed B 7 /Busine��
Filed by Justin MeffeA of Uptown Paf tner-s, LLC.
TABLED TO OCTOBER 16
6H. Docket No. 07080024 PP: Kousa Street Cottages (531 S Guilford Rd)
The appheant seeks pr-imafy plat approval for- 33 lots on 6 aer-es. Also, subdivision waivers r-equeste
are:
Dorms t N 07080025 5'W SCO 8 sidewalks o n b sides of street
Docket N 07080026 SW SCO 6.03.20 =private st-reet�
Doeket N 27 SW ern 6.05.0 minimum lot ft a t "I
The site N YVCict 7 at 531 C Guilf D.1 ,,.1 is zen o.l R 7/Bus—
Filed by Ti Chin ye of K .P. F,- an -gee- for T T,.t,. P f t„o,•s T T
TABLED TO OCTOBER 16
7H. Docket No. 07070040 PP: Chesterton Woods Subdivision
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 14 lots on 9 acres. The applicant also
seeks the following subdivision waiver approvals:
Docket No. 07070041 SW SCO Chapter 6.05.01 minimum lot width of 50 -ft
Docket No. 07070042 SW SCO Chapter 6.03.15 street curvature radius
Docket No. 07070043 SW SCO Chapter 7.05.07 percent of woodland clearing
The site is located at 2405 E 99 Street, near Haverstick Rd. and is zoned S- 2 /Residence-
Roso.
Filed by Matt Skelton of Baker Daniels LLP for 56"' Development, LLC.
Matt Skelton, attorney with Baker Daniels, 600 East 96"' Street, Indianapolis appeared before the
Commission representing 56"' Development, LLC. Also present: Mark Humphrey, 56"' Development; Tom
Williams, See Group, Engineer.
*Note: The Waiver for minimum lot width of 50 feet is no longer needed and is considered withdrawn.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 8
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Matt Skelton presented the preliminary plat for Chesterton Woodsa 14 -lot, custom -home Subdivision
located on 99 Street between Keystone Avenue and Westfield Boulevard. The petitioner has agreed to the
City's architectural design guidelines, included in the commitments. The average price of the homes within the
proposed development are expected to exceed $600,000.
The petitioner has met with Scott Brewer, Urban Forester, and has also been working with Jud Scott in order
to create ways to maximize the tree preservation area. The petitioner is still refining the plans and will have
them available prior to the October 2nd Committee meeting.
The petitioner hosted a neighborhood meeting on August 29 and several neighbors are her this evening. One
of the primary concerns voiced was the location of the detention pond and safety of the children in the area.
The detention pond will be a dry retention/collection basin that will discharge water at a controlled rate only
during storm surges. Another concern was drainage, drainage, and drainage and that seems to be a recurring
problem in this area. The drainage solution is this area is probably a wider focus than this development.
Arramore will take care of part of the drainage, this project will take care of part of the drainage, and there are
some other issues as well. However, the way the stormwater drainage system has been designed, it would
dovetail into any larger regional solution and easily diverted into whatever system is ultimately designed.
The third concern pertained to the walking paths. There are three street stubs into the south property line of
the project Woodbriar, Chambray and Chesterton. The neighbors were very supportive of the idea of NOT
connecting streets, but were supportive of connecting pedestrian paths to the streets. The method by which
the pedestrian paths are connected was an issue and in response to that, the petitioner is bringing the pedestrian
pathways in, off of the property lines, and this will create a vegetative buffer screen as requested by the
neighbors. The petitioner is planning to re -group with the neighbors prior to the October 2nd Committee
meeting to provide that input to the Committee.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition; the following appeared:
Patrick Thomas, 9884 Chambray Drive, adjacent to the proposed development, stated that he and his wife
would support the development as planned if the petitioner follows through on the drainage problem. Three
fourths of Chambray drains to the north and ends up in their front yard and street. If the drainage problem can
be resolved, Mr. Thomas and wife are supportive of the development.
Public Remonstrance, Organized /Unfavorable:
Joy Sullivan, (CNA) Chesterton Neighborhood Association Board, likes the single family
development and the price points, but drainage is a BIG problem in this area, and there are serious
concerns with the drainage pond. Ms. Sullivan said she would like to meet with the developer
regarding the dry detention pond, since she is a little confused about the design. Ms. Sullivan also
stated concern with the walking path; it was her understanding that the City is urging the petitioner
to pave the path and the residents would prefer to see the path material as mulch or stone—anything
but paving—in order to preserve the tree. The tree preservation is another concern; there are mature
trees currently on site and the residents would like those preserved. Ms. Sullivan suggested that the
petitioner and the City work together with the Subdivision to resolve the drainage and to preserve as
many trees as possible.
General/Unfavorable:
Michelle Fry, 9892 Haverstick. Tree preservation is a number one issue —would like the percentage
of woodland clearing kept at 15 Also concern regarding the drainage and retention pond because
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 9
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
of the number of children in the area—it is a safety issue. Also concern regarding the asphalt
pathway —would like a different material.
Richard Davis, 2402 East 99 St, north of proposed development. Stated concerns: passing lane
north of the development will be in his front yard and there is a steep elevation change. Mr. Davis
would like some sort of commitment regarding proper grade and an acknowledgement that the utility
lines (poles) and sewer lines would be relocated.
Paul Knight, 10111 Hillsdale. Drainage is a major concern; also traffic through the neighborhood.
Dorothy Green, 9845 Woodbriar Lane. Drainage is a major concern—has ducks residing in her
front yard.
Patrick Sullivan, 2325East 99 Street. Drainage is a major concern as well as property setbacks.
Henry Winckler, 411 Jenny Lane, President of Central Carmel Preservation Assoc. "When
development bumps against trees, trees lose —when trees lose, we all lose." We need the trees; they
are our lungs, they control water flow, drainage, erosion. There is a wonderful development on 116
west of Range Line RoadRosemeade —there are some large homes that were built in and among
the trees —the trees were a priority in that development. Anything we can do to preserve trees
among the single family homes will be appreciated by everyone in Carmel.
Matt Skelton referred to the tree preservation areas and noted that the developer will keep every tree
that they can. Matt Skelton offered to spend some time after the meeting describing a "dry pond" to
the residents.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: There are still some pending issues with the landscape plan,
tree preservation plan, woodland analysis; drainage is still being reviewed by the County and City
Engineers; there will be further discussion regarding the interior path materials. The Department is
recommending this item would be forwarded to the Subdivision Committee for review at 6:00 PM
October 2n in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
Commission Members:
Kevin Heber: The petitioner agreed to the draft architectural guidelines, but in the home elevations,
the interior side -load garages are not ideal and there should be alternatives. Kevin suggested that the
petitioner design the drive so that it looks like you can't just drive through the front door. If the
driveway were made one -lane into the garage and maybe one and one -half lanes, made a turn
maybe different materials to distinguish a walk—it might be a safer approach.
Rick Ripma suggested that the petitioner bring pictures of the trees as seen from the street some
pictures of the area. Rick said he agreed with changing the materials in the walking paths. Kevin
Heber had previously suggested a materials —Rick would be in favor of that and asked for
suggestions from the Dept.
Sally Shapiro suggested that the aerial be shaded so that the density of the trees could be seen.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 10
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Carol Schleif wondered what percent of woodland area is being cleared. Carol asked if there was
any way to put the path on top of the easement so that fewer trees would be destroyed.
Matt Skelton said he would respond to that at the October 2n meeting. Scott Brewer is comfortable
with the tree preservation plan, given the changes that are being made. However, there is no exhibit
available this evening. Matt Skelton promised that the tree preservation plan would be available in
advance of the Committee meeting. The Engineering Dept has already signed off on putting the path
on top of the easement.
Docket No. 07070040 PP, Chesterton Woods Subdivision was referred to the Subdivision
Committee for further review October 2, 2007 at 6:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
8H. Docket No. 07070058 PP: The Legacy (Residential Phase 1)
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 126 lots on 83.34 acres. The site is located
at the 6600 block of E. 146"' St. and is zoned PUD /Planned Unit Development.
Filed by Ed Fleming of Stoeppelwerth Assoc. for Platinum Properties, LLC.
Steve Pittman, Pittman Partners, and East Carmel LLC appeared before the Plan Commission
representing the petitioner. Also in attendance: Nick Churchill, Pittman Partners, and Tim Walter,
Platinum Properties.
The primary plat application for the western-most 80 acres of The Legacy —East Carmel— consists
of 126 home sites; the density computes to approximately 1.56 units per acre. The open space
constitutes approximately 20% of the development —the overall open space in the entire project is
40 the first section is 24
The typical lot size in the custom area is 100 feet wide by 150 feet deep. At the time The Legacy
met with all of the surrounding property owners to the south and Haverstick, and the larger metes
and bounds property owners to the west off Cherry Tree Road, it was decided that the largest lots in
The Legacy would be adjacent to those properties.
There will be an entry access off of 146 Street and off the extension of Cherry Tree Blvd that will
extend from Hazel Dell to River Road. There is also a stub street to undeveloped property to the
west. Regarding the trails, there is a six -foot asphalt path; it does not go through a wooded area.
The minimum lot width at the building line is actually 100 feet —the petitioner agreed to 90 feet; the
minim lot parcel size is 12,000 square feet; minimum lot frontage to the street is 40 feet. The
petitioner has met all of the setback requirements. Permitted building materials include masonry
wood, and cementious board.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of or opposition to the petition; no one
appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: There was a Letter of Remonstrance from Barry and
Karen Smalstig received September 14, 2007. Stated concerns: 1) Traffic on Cherry Tree Road
west of the development—traffic cutting through the Cherry Tree Grove development to Cherry
Tree Road to access 146 Street intersection with Cherry Tree. 2) Maintenance of the existing tree
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 11
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
line separating the proposed Legacy section from the homes along the east side of Cherry Tree
Road—maintained as a tree preservation area? Only a 10 -foot buffer yard is shown on the plat —the
mature trees should be maintained.
The City Forester is still reviewing the landscape plan; he will also need a tree preservation plan. The
Engineering Dept. is still in the review process but they are comfortable with forwarding this item to
Committee for further review. One outstanding issue is the approval of the curb cut onto 146
Streetat this time the status is unknown and that is through the County Highway Dept. At this
time, DOCS is recommending this item for forwarding to Subdivision Committee on October 2,
2007.
Commission Comments /Questions:
Jay Dorman: Is there a new curb cut requested on 146 Street or is it a curb and median cut?
Steve Pittman referred to the Exhibit— currently there is a curb cut and median cut shown; the
petitioner is asking that this particular curb cut would be eliminated. A meeting has been scheduled
with the Hamilton County Highway Dept and this has not yet been addressed. It would be ideal if
there were a median cut, but it is not subject to this plan. Whatever is decided, the petitioner will
abide.
Carol Schleif Has Engineering commented on the "hammerhead" sac design? They are shown at
the ends of some of the streets. Actually the Fire Dept brought it up and they are discouraging this
type of turn around.
Steve Pittman responded that the plans were submitted to the Engineering Dept pursuant to the
requirements prior to Technical Advisory Committee. No comments were received. What is being
shown is a hammerhead cul -de -sac, and two frontage streetswe are not backing homes up to the
roads and residential driveway cuts onto the major road. We are following all of those guidelines we
talked about in the PUD.
Kevin Heber asked if there was adequate space on the east side to provide a suitable buffer for the
one -way street. Also, between Lots 71 and 72, will the path continue? It is not shown. Since there
are no trees in this location, we would definitely want the path to be asphalt.
Steve Pittman responded in the affirmative. The one way street is south to north and there is a two
way bicycle promenade. There will also be a common area and a preservation or set -back area that
will create an appropriate buffer. The intent is for the path to continue through the middle.
Docket No. 07070058 PP, The Legacy (Residential Phase I) was forwarded to the Subdivision
Committee for further review at 6:00 PM October 2, 2007 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
9H. Docket No. 07070060 DP /ADLS: Old Meridian Shoppes at Providence, Phase 2
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for 1 mixed -use building on 2.5 acres.
The site is located at the northeast corner of Old Meridian St. and Carmel Dr and is
zoned OM -V /Old Meridian Village.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 12
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Filed by Buckingham Co.
Jim Shinaver, attorney, Nelson Frankenberger appeared before the Plan Commission representing
the applicant. Also in attendance: David Leazenby, Buckingham Co.; Civil Engineer Rich Kelly,
EMH &T Engineering; Bill Renard, Architect, Demerly Architects.
The site is located near the northeast intersection of Carmel Drive and Old Meridian Street. The
Meijer Store is across the street to the west; to the north of the site is Providence Phase I and
includes the two buildings previously approved by the Plan Commission and currently under
construction.
The parcel under consideration is to the south, 2.5 acres, zoned OM -V /Old Meridian Village. This
particular proposal is basically an extension of the previously approved first phase to the north.
Buckingham Companies is seeking ADLS /DP approval of the building and the site for what would
encompass the Phase II aspect of this project.
Similar to the buildings that were approved in the Phase I portion of the project, the proposed
buildings for Phase II will be a mixed -use building with retail and business shops on the first floor
and residential units on the upper two floors.
The buildings are pulled closer to the adjacent roadway with parking to the rear. The design of the
site, the design of the building, the architecture and building materials have been designed so that
they are similar and compatible to what is already being constructed in Phase I.
The ground floor contains approximately 15,200 square feet of retail space available; the second and
third floors contain the aggregate total of 32 residential units-16 units per floor—apartment loft
style. Access to the residential element is located to the rear of the buildings, directly to the
stairwells or elevator that service the building. Access to the retail units are to the front, adjacent to
Old Meridian Street.
The residential units will have high -end amenities featuring stained concrete floor, up- graded counter
tops and appliances, nine to ten -foot ceilings, expansive windows, and balcony access for all units.
The mechanical units will be screened; the trash enclosure is screened on all four sides -three sides
with brick and doors to the front of the enclosure.
The proposed building will be LEED compatible and LEED certified. It is Buckingham's goal to
make this building the first fully LEED certified building in Carmel. The landscape plan, lighting plan
and signage are consistent and compatible with what is occurring to the north.
The use the petitioner is seeking is permitted by the underlying zoning classification. As indicated by
the Staff Report, the Urban Forester has tentatively approved the landscape plan and there are no
outstanding issues regarding the landscaping. The Department of Engineering has no significant
outstanding issues and the Department's concerns have also been addressed.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 13
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Regarding the status of the Hamilton County Surveyor approval of the drainage—as part of the TAC
review process, the Surveyor did send Rich Kelly a letter /reminder that Buckingham would need to
seek an Indirect Outlet Permit as part of the final construction plan phase of the project, and
Buckingham will certainly do that. Based on that letter, it is the petitioner's understanding that the
Surveyor has no outstanding issues.
The Staff Report also recommends a Suspension of the Rules to render a final vote this evening
without Committee review. The petitioner supports a Suspension of the Rules of Procedure and
believes that this project should be a known quantity —there are two existing buildings to the north
and this proposal extends that same concept in Phase II.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of, or opposition to the petition; no one
appeared and the public hearing was closed.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: As stated by the Petitioner, the Department Report does state
that the Commission can vote to suspend the Rules of Procedure and vote on this item tonight. If
that is the case, the Department would like any approval conditioned upon the petitioner continuing
to work with the Engineering Dept regarding final approval of the construction plans.
Commissioner Comments:
Carol Schleif Carol said she has been trying to find specifications for residential day lighting
requirements and wanted to know where to find those specs.
Bill Renard, Demerly Architects, was unsure where the specifications were found, but said he was
willing to share the information when it is located.
Jay Dorman: Regarding the trash —there are wide doors on the enclosure for trash removal—do the
residents use the same enclosure?
David Leazenby responded that the residence facility is managed by the existing Providence at Old
Meridian -330 apartment units—as a part of Phase I. There is a trash compactor included in the
Phase I development. When the other two buildings were constructed, those residents utilize the
trash compactor in Phase I. If a resident gets to the dumpster before they come to the compactor,
they will probably use the dumpster.
Rick Ripma referred to a previous design for a trash dumpster that was fully enclosed and had a door
similar to an overhead garage door.
Carol Schleif made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure, seconded by Sally Shapiro,
approved 8 -0.
Carol Schleif made formal motion to approve Docket No. 07070060 DEP /ADLS, Old Meridian Shoppes
at Providence Phase 2, conditioned upon 1) Petitioner continuing to work with Carmel Engineer regarding
final construction plan approval to comply with the City 2) Urban Forester approval regarding landscape
plan 3) Hamilton County Surveyor's approval. The motion was seconded by Sally Shapiro, APPROVED 8-
0.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 14
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
10H. Docket No. 07080028 OA: Carmel Dr -Range Line Road Overlay Sunset Amendment
The applicant seeks to Amend the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 23F: Carmel Drive -Range
Line Road Overlay Zone in order to extend the sunset clause.
Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services.
Mike Hollibaugh, Director, DOCS. The Department is requesting an extension of the Range Line Road
Overlay Sunset Amendment to December 31, 2008. Originally the Range Line Road Overlay was adopted
in 2005 and established so that new development and re- development occurred in a manner that was
complementary to that which was occurring in Old Town and City Center and in a fashion consistent with
the location of the development in the center of Carmel.
As part of the original Ordinance, there was a Sunset Clause that was approved as well. When originally
adopted, the Ordinance was fairly controversial and the Sunset Clause would allow the Commission and
Council the opportunity to monitor the impacts. The Overlay was also adopted with the promise that there
would be additional study for a plan for the development of the central area. The Department is hoping that
there will not be a need to return to the Commission, since funds were approved in the 2008 budget for the
additional study.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of, or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and
the public hearing was closed.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: If the Commission so chooses, they can suspend their Rules of
Procedure and vote on this item this evening or the Commission can forward this item to the Subdivision
Committee October 2, 2007.
In response to Madeleine Torres' questions regarding the additional time needed and the reason for that,
Mike Hollibaugh said the studies take time and the Commission's Agenda has been full; there is also a
Comprehensive Plan Up -date to complete and the Range Line Road Overlay will come on the heels of that.
Carol Schleif made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure, seconded by Rick Ripma. The vote
was 7 in favor, 1 opposed (Seidenticker), motion failed.
Docket No. 07080028 OA, Carmel Drive -Range Line Road Overlay Sunset Amendment was forwarded
to the Special Studies Committee for further review on October 2 d
Docket No. 07080028 OA was REDIRECTED to Subdivision Committee for further review at 6:00
PM on October 2, 2007 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
11H. Docket No. 07090002 OA: US 31 Overlay Hotel/Cultural/Entertainment uses
The applicant seeks to Amend the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 23B: US Highway 31
Corridor Overlay Zone in order to limit hotel and other cultural/entertainment land uses.
Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services
*Note: This item requires a suspension of the Rules of Procedure in order to be heard this evening. The
Public Notice did not meet the requirements of the Rules of Procedure, however the State Statute 10 -day
notice requirement was met.
After discussion by the Commission, it was determined that this item would not be heard this evening and
S :/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /sept 18
15
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
will be Tabled until the next Plan Commission meeting on October 16, 2007.
12H. Docket No. 07080030 Z: SW Old Town C -2 Rezoning, additional parcels
The applicant seeks approval to rezone 2 parcels from B- I/Business to C -2 /Old Town.
The sites are located at 230 South Range Line Road and along First Avenue SW.
Filed by the Carmel Department of Community Services.
Adrienne Keeling, DOGS, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. This
particular proposal is in conjunction and in addition to the proposal heard last month regarding
Docket No. 07070024 Z. Southwest OLD Town C -2 Rezoning.
Along with the previous proposal, there were two parcels that are a part of the Indiana Design
Center site that were not noticed for hearing and were omitted in the hearing. We are bringing those
items forward this evening with the hope that they can be added to the proposal to Docket 07070024
Z so that they can move to the Council together, with whatever the recommendation may be.
The site is along Range Line Road; however there is one parcel that was formerly part of O'Malia's
Fireplace Shop, 230 South Range Line Road, and a parcel behind that on First Avenue SW that has
not been previously addressed—it is the first lot north of 231 First Avenue SW.
Adrienne suggested that the Commission continue with the Public Hearing, discuss the larger
proposal under Old Business, and determine whether or not you want to suspend the rules of
procedure for this item so they can be heard together.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: As stated by Adrienne, the Commission has the option to
suspend the rules of procedure and vote on this item this evening so that it runs possibly parallel to
the process with the next item or send it to the October 2n Subdivision Committee meeting.
Department Recommendation: Either Suspend Rules and vote so that this Docket could run parallel
with and be incorporated into the Old Business Item 07070024 Z, SW (southwest) Old Town C -2
Rezoning, or send this item to Special Studies Committee.
Carol Schleif made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to vote on Docket No.
07080030 Z this evening, seconded by Eric Seidensticker, Approved 8 -0
Carol Schleif made formal motion to recommend approval of Docket No. 07080030 Z, SW Old
Town C -2 Rezoning, additional parcels, and forward to City Council so that it will parallel with
and be incorporated into Docket No. 07070024 Z, Southwest Old Town C -2 Rezoning, seconded by
Madeleine Torres, Approved 8 -0.
I. Old Business
11. Docket No. 07070024 Z: SW Old Town C -2 Rezoning
The applicant seeks approval to rezone 57 parcels from R -2 /Residence, B-1/Business, B-
2/Business, B-3/Business and I -1 /Industrial to C -2 /Old Town. The sites are located in Old
Town and along Third Avenue SW.
Filed by the Department of Community Services.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl 8 16
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Adrienne Keeling, Department of Community Services appeared before the Commission representing
the applicant. Also in attendance: Les Olds, Director, Carmel Redevelopment Commission.
This particular item was introduced and had public hearing at the August 21, 2007 Plan Commission
meeting and moved to the Subdivision Committee earlier this month. The result of Committee
review was that the Committee moved this item forward with a positive recommendation, however,
as was discussed at public hearing, there were three parcels that were removed from the proposal;
those parcels are located at 220 First Street SW, 230 First Street SW, and 311 First Street SW.
The Committee conditioned their recommendation for approval on removing two parcels on the
north side of First Street SW and a third parcel on the south side of First Street SW. The
recommendation for approval was further conditioned upon the discussion of privacy and sunright
issues by the Carmel Redevelopment Commission at such time that any of these parcels were to
come before them for approval.
Also discussed at public hearing and Committee were concerns regarding the VFW parcel. Les Olds
has been in discussion with someone from the VFW, and their concerns are generally that with the
rezoning, it would change the use of their land. This proposal does not affect the VFW and the
VFW would like to remain there. The Department will put that in writing —that the VFW can
remain in their current location as long as they wish.
Another aspect that was discussed as a part of this proposal was the somewhat limited nature. The
Committee felt that the Department and the City should think about coming forward with a more
comprehensive proposal for the area between First Street SW and Second Street SW and not just a
few parcels here and there.
At this time, the Department is seeking recommendation to the City Council.
Rick Ripma reported for the Committee. There were a few properties who wanted out; everything
else the Committee felt comfortable with. We did want to see the area more comprehensive and if
we are going to do it, just do it in the whole area that needs it rather than split it up as it is before us.
The properties taken out were sitting in the middle of residential areas, all by themselves, and they
will probably come back to be added in. The Committee did not feel comfortable with just one,
surrounded by homes. The Committee voted a positive 3 -0 recommendation.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department is recommending that this item would be
forwarded to the City Council with a positive recommendation.
In response to questions from Eric Seidensticker, Rick Ripma further explained that the proposal
does not change the fact that Industrial can stay in this location if the area is redeveloped. The
proposal adds additional options and encourages more or a mixed -use with apartments or homes
along with retail space. We are not asking industrial to go away, we are rezoning so that if they do
decide to sell, it gives some additional options. Almost every property owner in the Industrial area
asked for the rezone if it was not already owned by the City —they obviously want it done and feel
that it adds more value to their property. The Committee was comfortable with this proposal—it is
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl 8 17
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
better for the land owners, better for the area, and better for the City.
Carol Schleif asked if there were plans for a round about at Third Avenue and Industrial Drive.
Les Olds, Exec. Director, Carmel Redevelopment Commission stated that several developers have
come forward with some sketches, thoughts, and ideas, including a possible round about in some of
the configurations. However, they would be of significant size to allow truck traffic to traverse the
area. The round about at Main Street and Fourth is a special case and it is a little tight. Whatever is
developed along Third Avenue will have to be developed to allow semi- trailer truck traffic.
Carol Schleif noted that the Committee had also talked about section drawings with regard to sun
rights and privacy. Carol then distributed drawings to the Commission of "how to do it" and how it
works—schematic drawings at how you look at sun rights and privacy. The worst case scenario is
the angle of the sun at Noon in the winter time. Anything below the sun line is in shadows and the
buildings would be in shade most of the time. There have been 100 years of sun rights, legislation,
and zoning to encourage people not to do thatwe have allowed that to happen in commercial tall
buildings when they were first built. In commercial settings, that is one thing, but in a residential
setting that is special and a lot of people don't get out much, so this could have public health
implications. The red lines illustrate that if a six -foot tall person is at the top floor of the building,
they can see three houses down and this is a privacy issue. Carol gave another illustration with the
Amli building on Main Street —the sun is not shading the residences, the view is over the tops of
houses, not into bedroom windows. Carol then commented that a 33 -foot setback works because it
allows the sun to not shade people 24 hours a day and you are not looking into someone's bedroom
window. You can do the building height with a 33 -foot setback —you can do lots of other things.
Carol Schleif made formal motion to forward Docket No. 07070024 Z, SouthWest Old Town C -2
Rezoning to City Council with a positive recommendation, conditioned upon 3 parcels on First
Avenue SW would be removed from the list of affected parcels to be rezoned, and that the CRC
include sections for privacy and sun rights for each project /site as it comes before them, seconded by
Madeleine Torres, Approved 7 -1 (Seidensticker.) (Carol Schleif agreed to appear at City Council
and present the privacy and sun rights illustration when this item is scheduled for first reading.)
*Note: The motion also includes Docket No. 07080030 Z, SouthWest Old Town C -2 Rezoning,
additional parcels, as previously stated and formal motion made in Item 12H, Public Hearings.
2I. Docket No. 07020020 OA: US 31 421 Overlay Architectural Design Amendment
The applicant seeks 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, City of Carmel appeared before the
Commission representing the applicant. The proposed Amendment is to the Highway 31 Corridor
Overlay Zone and the US 421 Corridor Overlay Zone. This petition received public hearing in June
and has been at the Committee level for review.
The Amendment for the US 31 Overlay essentially removes references to the golden section, and
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 18
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
addresses building footprints and roofs within the US 31 Overlay in an effort to eliminate box -shape
buildings. The proposal would add perimeter fence language to clarify if a perimeter fence is to be
used, the specifications for the fence are listed on page 3, 23B 1604, and for Highway 421, Michigan
Road Overlay, again, references to the golden section are being deleted. As of the latest Committee
meeting, a maximum building height requirement was added as well as roof language to better
incorporate parapets and penthouses to eliminate box -shape buildings. The Amendment also clarifies
the building materials section to include language that facade walls must be constructed of red brick
or stone and further clarified what trim materials may be used as well as the perimeter fence section
on page 6 of the Amendment. This was discussed at length at the previous two committee meetings
and forwarded to the Commission with a favorable recommendation with the inclusion of language
regarding building height.
On behalf of the Subdivision Committee, Rick Ripma concurred with Adrienne's comments. The
changes made were beneficial and the Committee voted a 3 -0 positive recommendation.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department is recommending that the Commission
forward this item to City Council with a positive recommendation.
Jay Dorman made formal motion to forward Docket No. 07020020 OA, US 31 421 Overlay
Architectural Design Amendment to City Council with a positive recommendation for approval,
seconded by Rick Ripma, Approved 8 -0.
3I. Docket No. 07070005 DP /ADLS: Old Meridian Professional Village
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for 7 buildings on 6.25 acres.
The site is located at 12346 Old Meridian St. and is zoned OM/O Old Meridian
District, Office.
Filed by Paul Reis of Bose McKinney Evans for ALTA Business Communities
Paul Reis, attorney, Bose McKinney Evans appeared before the Commission representing the
applicant. Also present: Darren Reno, landscape architect.
This development is located at the corner of Old Meridian and Pennsylvania Street and runs north
towards Carmel Drive. The parcel of land directly to the north is the Meijer retention pond. As
stated in the petition, the parcel is 6.25 acres in size; the development plan is for professional offices
that are consistent with a supportive of the Comprehensive Plan.
The petitioner met with the Special Studies Committee on September 04, 2007 to review the
development plan and ADLS application. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the project, however, they did request that the petitioner do some additional streetscape
illustrations.
As stated in the Dept Report, the Engineering plans are still under review. The petitioner is
comfortable with the condition that they will work with the Engineering Dept to gain final approval.
(The project could not be built without Engineering approval anyway) If, however, the plans are
substantially changed, the petitioner would return to the Commission or Committee for approval.
The concerns of the County Surveyor's Office regarding trees near the Fertig Drain have been
satisfied and a copy of Greg Hoyes' email has been forwarded to Angie Conn.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 19
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
The petitioner has not yet received the style of the street pole lights —light lamp designs for Old
Meridian Street —the City may not have selected them as yet. The petitioner will conform to
whatever style of lighting the City chooses. The ground sign location was included in the
information booklets distributed in August.
Finally, the petitioner filed a revised landscape plan with Scott Brewer and submitted revised planting
details —there was a concern with soil volumes and planting areas with respect to the parking lot
landscape islands. The species have all been approved by Scott. Simply, there is a disagreement
between Scott and the registered landscape architect regarding the size of the islands. There are no
standards in the Zoning Ordinance concerning the size of the parking lot islands. In picking the
plantings and species, Darren Reno looked specifically at the recommendations Scott sent out. The
petitioner fits the recommendations for the size area where this size of tree can be planted. The
current request for 400 square feet is an unknown. With all due respect to Scott, the petitioner is
requesting that the Commission approve the landscape plan as submitted, since it does meet the
Ordinance and the recommendations submitted to the petitioner by Scott Brewer. The Ordinance
does not require the approval of the City Forester to approve an ADLS application.
At this time, the petitioner is requesting approval of the application for Development Plan and ADLS
for Old Meridian Professional Village.
Department Comments, Angie Conn. At the September 4 th Committee meeting, the Committee
voted to approve, subject to landscape approval. That could be interpreted to mean approval as long
as the petitioner satisfied all of the Ordinance requirements. The City Forester's concern is that the
parking islands may be too small to support mature trees —one way to solve that is with expanded
soil volume technology and several types have been recommended. This issue was left up to the
Commission to vote on —the landscape plan does meet the Ordinance.
There was considerable discussion regarding: engineered soils, cost of engineered soils, cutting costs
up front and replacing dead trees later as anticipated by the current plan in place, the size of the
planting islands, re- locating the planting islands. It was determined that the perimeter plantings are
fine.
John Molitor commented that he did not disagree on anything that had been said. The Old Meridian
Ordinance says that it is the responsibility of the owners and their agents to ensure proper
maintenance to all trees, shrubs, and other landscaping approved, including replacing dead plantings
with identical varieties or suitable substitute. The petitioner takes the risk that if the plantings do not
work out, they must replace with identical or suitable substitutes. The Commission can also impose
conditions on the approval of an ADLS, if the conditions are reasonably necessary to satisfy the
development requirements as specified in the Zoning Ordinance. If the Commission feels the trees
will not survive unless they meet Scott's recommendations, the Commission can put that condition
on the approval.
Mike Hollibaugh addressed the Commission and stated the City's position. The environment of the
interior of the parking lot is a harsher environment and we need to do what we can to provide the
trees with whatever possible for better odds of survival. In the case of 400 square feet, Scott is not
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl 8 20
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
making up that figure—it is based on research by certified arborists and scientists, it is based on
actual data. What is being asked here is not to increase the width of the islands— obviously the site
is very tight—it is how the sub -base for the parking area is prepared /engineered in the areas adjacent
to the planting islands. Essentially, the engineered soils could be provided in a linear fashion that is
consistent with the areasa narrow strip —and that is probably what Scott is asking, that the
additional porous pavement does allow the trees to have additional rooting area and also allow for
better movement of moisture under the pavement. Research has shown that it does not undermine
the long term viability of the pavement —that is why it is called "Engineered soils."
Leo Dierckman felt that the Commission/City needed to do a better job of documenting their
requirements —there have been previous debates on this topic and there should be an easy patch.
Sally Shapiro made formal motion to approve Docket No. 07070005 DP /ADLS, Old Meridian
Professional Village, seconded by Madeleine Torres, APPROVED 6 in favor, two opposed
(Ripma, Schleif
41. Docket No. 07070007 DP Amend /ADLS: Weston Pointe Outlot 3
The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a multi- tenant retail building.
The site is located at 11145 N Michigan Rd. and is zoned B-2/Business within the US
421 Overlay.
Filed by Jim Peck and Darci Pellom of Civil Designs, LLP.
David Gilman appeared before the Commission representing Williams Realty, developer of this
project located on US 421 at 11145 North Michigan Road. This is an in -line center with an office
building to the bank, a bank outlot on the front —there are three outlots on the front; Outlot 3 is
located in the farther northwest corner of the site.
This multi- tenant retail building will have approximately 6 tenants, just shy of 8000 square feet. The
landscape plan, site plan and building materials were reviewed at Special Studies Committee; the
development was recommended for approval on September 4, 2007. The Staff report indicates that
there a few issues outstanding —the County Highway report and the County Surveyor. The
petitioner has received the Surveyor's approval letter and an email was received from the Highway
Dept stating no issues. The approval letter and email have been forwarded to the Dept.
It is important to note that the sidewalk does connect to the sidewalk along 421. The bike racks will
be installed as per the plan and the landscape plan has been tentatively approved by the City Urban
Forester.
At this time, the petitioner is requesting final approval.
Department Report, Angie Conn: Since the petitioner stated that the County Surveyor and County
Highway Dept have given tentative approval, there are currently no outstanding issues and the
Department recommends that the Commission approve this item.
Sally Shapiro questioned the lighting across the front of the building —west, north and south
elevations.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /septl8 21
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
David Gilman responded that the lighting is accent lighting and dimly lit.
Sally Shapiro had issues with the white lighting—it is very stark —the light fixture itself stands out
against the red brick. Some of the larger buildings in the area have a downlight and do not actually
light up the entire building, only the path (columns.) The white lights really detract from the
building; perhaps another color would be better.
David Gilman said that it is not possible to walk behind the columns, they are a 3 -foot relief and only
stick out —there is no canopy. The petitioner received a variance to go from an 8 -foot relief to a 3-
foot relief on this building because it is only 117 feet in length. The brick will match the existing—it
is not red -red, it is more a brownish red and less contrast with the bright, white light. The lights are
decorative and only for accent.
Sally Shapiro said she was not interested in the wattage, she was interested in the fixture—it is
troublesome.
Carol Schleif pointed out that the fixture could be matched to aluminum windows, other light
fixtures in the area, etc. The fixtures could blend.
David Gilman offered an alternative proposal for the lighting —David was willing to submit to Staff
and get Carol's and Sally's input-3 or 4 options could be presented and if everyone agrees, we
could go with whatever is decided.
Sally Shapiro made formal motion to approve Docket No. 07070007 DP Amend /ADLS, Weston
Pointe Outlot 3, subject to further review and approval of the exterior lighting by the Department,
seconded by Rick Ripma, APPROVED 8 -0.
There was no further business to come before the Commission and the meeting adjourned at 9:36
PM.
Leo Dierckman, President
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
S :/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC- 2007 /sept 18
22
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417