Minutes PC 10-16-07CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
OCTOBER 16, 2007
Minutes
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel Plan Commission met at 6:15 PM in the Council Chambers
of City Hall, Carmel Indiana on October 16, 2007. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Members Present: Leo Dierckman, Wayne Haney, Kevin Heber, Rick Ripma, Carol Schleif, Eric
Seidensticker, Sally Shapiro, Steve Stromquist, Susan Westermeier, thereby constituting a quorum.
DOCS Staff in attendance: Angie Conn, Adrienne Keeling, Mike Hollibaugh, Director.
The Minutes from the September 18, 2007 were approved as submitted.
Department Announcements, Angie Conn: Docket No. 07070037 Z, Dixie Highway Addition, lot 5 pt,
was published as a different docket number, but all of the other information was correct in the public
notice. We should perhaps poll the remonstrators to see if anyone has been inconvenienced by that slight
error.
Items 2I through 3I, Chesterton Woods, have been tabled for this evening. Item 2H has been tabled (531
South Guilford Road;) Items 3H through 6H, Kousa Street Cottages has been tabled; Items 7H through
I OH, Lakeland Subdivision has been Tabled; Item 4I, The Legacy has also been Tabled.
Additionally, there was a slight error in the Department Report regarding Item 20H, Ordinance
Amendment for US 31 Overlay this item did indeed meet the 25 -day notice requirement.
Also, the Department is requesting that the Plan Commission move the December 04, 2007 Committee
meetings to Thursday, November 29 due to Hanukkah Holiday.
Legal Counsel, John Molitor recommended that if no one objected to hearing item 1H due to defective
notice, the Commission should suspend its Rules of Procedure to allow this item to be heard this evening.
President Leo Dierckman called for remonstrators present to speak up if they had an issue with the
Commission suspending its Rules of Procedure in order to hear Docket No. 0707037 Z, Dixie Highway
Addition, lot 5 pt; No one appeared.
Susan Westermeier made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to hear Docket No.
0707037 Z, seconded by Rick Ripma, Approved 9 -0.
Susan Westermeier made formal motion to move the previously scheduled December 4, 2007 Committee
meetings to Thursday, November 29, 2007 due to the religious holiday, seconded by Rick Ripma,
Approved 9 -0.
John Molitor, Legal Counsel reported that previously there was discussion regarding the possibility of an
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16
Executive Session to report on the status of litigation that Staff was authorized to initiate. At this time, there
are on -going negotiations with the parties involved and the neighbors, and these negotiations should not be
disturbed; resolution looks somewhat promising without legal action. Therefore, no Executive Session will be
requested this month.
Also, there is a report forthcoming from the Subdivision Committee that met just prior to this evening's Plan
Commission meeting. The Commission may want to entertain the report from the Subdivision Committee and
perhaps add an Agenda item (under Old Business) as a result of the Committee report. (Docket No. 07080028
OA, Carmel Drive -Range Line Road Overlay Sunset Amendment provisions.)
Sally Shapiro made formal motion to add Docket No. 07080028 OA to the Agenda this evening as the first
item under Old Business, seconded by Rick Ripma, Approved 9 -0.
1H. 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, 255 East Carmel Drive, Carmel appeared before the
Commission representing the applicant. Also in attendance: John Levinson, 12216 Redgold Run, Carmel,
principal of "Bobby John LLC."
The applicant seeks to rezone a parcel from R -3 /Residence to B -1 /Business. The property is within the Home
Place Business District Overlay and is across the street from the John W Hensel Government Center. The
home on the subject parcel is currently unoccupied and is in a string of houses north from 106"' Street that
have already been converted to business uses, some into duplexes. The Home Place Business District Overlay
does accord certain other procedural matters that must be followed before there is an established use or change
in the topography, exterior parking, things of that nature.
At this time, the applicant is requesting a positive recommendation from the Plan Commission so that the
Rezone application can be forwarded on to the City Council and heard by them.
Dave Coots apologized for the publication of the incorrect Docket Number. The legal notice was sent to the
surrounding property owners with a cover letter; Dave Coots was hopeful that no property owners were
inconvenienced due to the notice.
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 property does lie within the Home Place
District Overlay and the City Comprehensive Plan does promote business land uses in this area. Also, the
Department reports some potential land uses such as a medical office, retail, service, art gallery, etc. The
Department would like to know more about what the petitioner would like to put on this site. Again, if the
rezone is approved, it will come back before the Commission as a DP /ADLS application. The Department is
recommending approval of this item, and if comfortable with the petition, the Commission may choose to
suspend its Rules of Procedure and vote on this item this evening.
Rick Ripma noted that incorrect notices are becoming a habit and this needs to be looked at more carefully.
Rick was also concerned that it is not known what can go on the property.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 2
Angie Conn responded that the Ordinance does limit the uses because it is within the Home Place Business
District. The Schedule of Uses in the Zoning Ordinance can be gone over. The petitioner has not said what
will go in this location.
Dave Coots noted that within Schedule A of the Uses permitted within the Home Place Overlay District, there
are certain uses that are excluded: a correctional institution, a power generating plant, a commercial sewage
plant, garbage disposal plant —the larger, more industrial uses are excluded. The petitioner would be willing
to make a commitment to general office, professional office, or general retail uses. The site is not of
considerable size, but there are parcels north and south of this site that are going to become commercial use as
well. The petitioner would have an interest in seeing that the entire strip is confined to general office, medical
office, and/or retail.
Rick Ripma asked if retail is a permitted use in this area; the Department responded in the affirmative.
Dave Coots said he would prepare a commitment to confine the use to general office, professional office, and
retail use.
Eric Seidensticker asked about the intent of the petitioner at the present time; does the petitioner intend to hold
onto the property until property values increase? What is the intent of the petitioner?
John Levinson, 12216 Redgold Run, Carmel stated that the property was a foreclosure. The intent is to make
repairs, fix it up, (we put a new roof on it) and market it for whatever uses are allowable. There is no master
plan to bring in multiple parcels —this is being done as a single parcel, and an investment.
Docket No. 07070037 Z: Dixie Highway Addition, lot 5 pt was referred to Special Studies Committee on
November 1, 2007 at 6:00 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall for further review.
NOTE: The Petitioner is to bring an up -dated site plan to the Committee meeting.
2H. TABLED TO NOV. 20: Docket No. 07070059 DP /ADLS: 531 S Guilford Rd
Kousa Street Cottages)
The appheant seeks site plan and design appfeval for- 33 single family homes on 6 aer-es.
Th site i 1.. a t 521 S Guilf Rd a nd zon ed B 7/R„ sines
Filed by Justin MeMtt of Uptown Paftner-s, LLC—.
3 -6H. TABLED TO NOV. 20: Docket No. 07080024 PP: Kousa Street Cottages
(531 S Guilford Rd)
The appheant seeks pfimafy plat appr-eval for- 33 lots on 6 aer-es. Also, stibdi-vi i
reque
Dorms t No. 07080025 SW SCO 8 s id ewa lk s on b sides of street
Doeket No. 07080026 SW SCO 6.03 private street�
Doeket No. 070800 SW SCO 6.05.01 minimum lot :a ft at RAI'
Th site i 1., a t 531 S Guilford Rd a nd zon ed B 743us;„oss
Filed b Ti Chin ye of Nelso F,- e for T T,.t,. P f t„o, LTC.
7 -10H. TABLED TO NOV. 20: Docket No. 06090037 PP: Lakeland Subdivision
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16
11H. Docket No. 07080029 PP: Westhaven, lots 1 -2
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 2 lots on 5 acres. The site is located at
approximately 2020 W 136th St. and is zoned S -1 /Residence.
Filed by Nick Churchill of Pittman Partners.
Nick Churchill, 1040 Reserve Way, Carmel appeared before the Commission representing Pittman Partners.
Neal Smith, Pittman Partners was also in attendance.
The applicant is seeking primary plat approval for two lots on five acres between Towne and Ditch Roads,
north of 136"' Street, west of the recently approved Westmont development. The applicant has worked closely
with the neighbors in developing a plan for this site.
The lots have been angled slightly, thereby allowing a little more than side entries and circular drives; it also
takes into account the Papays —the neighbor to the west. We didn't want the homes in their back yard and
they did not want to be in our back yard either. The western-most lot allows for a house siding that is almost
directly parallel with theirs. There is a mutual respect for each other's privacy.
A 20 -foot tree preservation easement has also been included along the northern portion of the site that will
encompass all trees that are worth saving. In addition, the petitioner will incorporate and install a 10 -foot
multi -use path.
At this time, the petitioner is requesting a favorable vote on the petition.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition; the following appeared:
Public Remonstrance /Favorable:
Tony Papay, 2030 West 136"' Street, Carmel stated that he is pleased with what is shown. Pittman Partners
has met with the Papays and the proposed plan exceeds their expectations. The Papays are in favor of the
proposal and hopeful that the plan would be approved.
Department Report, Angie Conn: The Department suggests that the petitioner also commit to the draft
residential architectural guidelines. The petitioner has also been in contact with the Urban Forester regarding
the landscape plan. If comfortable and the Commission votes to approve this item this evening, the
Department would request a condition that the petitioner provide a conceptual landscape plan.
Steve Stromquist asked if this development would be a gated community.
Nick Churchill responded that it would not be gated directly off the public right -of -way. However, the
individual lot owners would be allowed to gate from the common entrance, thereby allowing a space for turn-
around traffic—it exceeds the 60 feet typically required for a private road for stacking to occur.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 4
Carol Schleif asked if Scott Brewer had had an opportunity to review and approve the landscape plan.
Angie Conn reported that if this item is approved, Scott Brewer would like a condition imposed that he would
receive a conceptual landscape plan (meaning what could be there) and the landscaping would be addressed
further at the secondary plat stage.
Nick Churchill displayed the conceptual landscape plan and said they did not want to commit fully to a
landscape plan with location and types of species at this time. The homes will be in the one million dollar
range, lots are $300,000 and we don't want to tell the potential homeowner that they have to have a certain
type of tree. The conceptual plan represents about $60- 70,000 in landscaping— pretty significant for a two
lot subdivision. The petitioner is willing to commit to the preliminary architectural residential design
standards.
Note: The petitioner has committed to a 20 -foot tree preservation area on the northern portion of the site, a 10
foot multi -use path along the southern portion of the site, and will also provide a conceptual landscape plan.
Steve Stromquist made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure on Docket No. 07080029 PP,
Westhaven, lots 1 -2, seconded by Carol Schleif, approved 9 -0.
Steve Stromquist made formal motion to approve Docket No. 07080029 PP, Westhaven, lots 1 -2,
conditioned upon submission of a conceptual landscape plan naming species of trees, tree preservation on the
northern portion, and compliance with draft residential architectural guidelines, seconded by Susan
Westermeier APPROVED 9 -0.
12 -14H. Docket No. 07080031 PP: Wellsprings of West Clay
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 11 lots on 14.3 acres. Also, subdivision
waivers requested are:
Docket No. 07080032 SW SCO 6.05.07 homes facing an arterial/collector road
Docket No. 07080033 SW SCO 6.03.07 cul -de -sac length
The site is located at approximately 12210 Shelborne Rd. and is zoned S -1 /Residence.
Filed by S. Kurt Menner of Lifesprings Group, LLC.
Charlie Frankenberger, attorney, Nelson Frankenberger appeared before the Commission representing the
applicant. Also present: Kurt Menner, Lifesprings Group; Tom Jones and Michael Sunsdal, owners; Peggy
Vernon, Realtor.
The real estate is a 14 acre parcel located on the west side of Shelborne Road, across from West Clay
elementary and between 121S street on the south and 126 Street on the north. A rendering of the proposed
plat was shown. The applicant is seeking approval for a low- density, up- scale, residential neighborhood to be
known as Wellsprings of West Clay. There is will be eleven (111) home sites within the development —point 77
lots per acre.
In order to allow the establishment of this residential neighborhood, two waivers are requested. One waiver is
to allow an interior street to conclude in a cul -de -sac that will exceed 600 feet in length; the second waiver is to
permit the sides of residences on lots one and seven to face Shelborne Road.
The view corridor along 146 Street will contain a corridor brick wall with intermittent columns and wrought
iron fencing. There will also be water features at an angle at each side of the entry -way. The center of the cul-
de -sac located on the internal street will be attractively landscaped and will be distinguished by a fountain. To
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 5
ensure the up -scale character of the homes, written architectural commitments modeled after the recently
approved architectural commitments applicable to the largest lots in the Westmont PUD. The anticipated
price range of the homes, conservatively stated, is $900,000 to one and one -half million plus.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition; the following appeared:
Public Remonstrance /Favorable:
Jeff Kimble, 3940 West 121S Street, adjoining the proposed development along the entire western boundary.
Mr. Kimble stated that Mr. Menner had been good in stating his intentions and the proposed design shown this
evening to the Commission is favorable to the Kimbles and approved by them. All of the issues that this
development could create have been ironed out with one small exception and that is the drainage. However,
the Kimbles and the applicant are working through this issue and Mr. Kimble feels they have a good
understanding regarding the drainage. The Kimbles are in favor of this proposal pending the drainage issue.
Public Remonstrance/Unfavorable: None
The Public Hearing was then closed.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department is recommending that this item would be sent to the
November first Subdivision Committee meeting. The Engineering Dept. has some minor issues with the cul-
de -sac and the future through street as well as the entrance configuration. These issues can be worked out at
the Committee level.
Rick Ripma: The wall and landscaping along Shelborne Road—does it run the entire length of lots 7 and 1?
Also, what is the reasoning for not extending the road and leaving it as is for future connection? How will that
be communicated to future home buyers?
Kurt Menner, 13250 Gatman Court, Carmel, confirmed that the wall and landscaping run the entire length of
lots 7 and 1.
Charlie Frankenberger commented on the road. As shown on the plan, the road is developed to the west side of
the cul -de -sac and the balance is left unpaved but dedicated in the event there later is a connection. Knowing
that there may or may not later be a connection, depending on whether or not the area to the west is developed,
we thought it best to leave it as a more attractive conclusion than to stub it, not knowing if development will
ever occur to the west or if it does, that the stub would be utilized. The road will nonetheless be dedicated at
this point as right -of -way to accommodate the possibility that in the future if the connection is deemed
desirable by the Dept or Plan Commission it will accommodate adjacent development.
Even if the connection is put in as a stub, people still object if and when it is connected. The petitioner will
make it known to the homeowners—if it is desired to have something of record, perhaps in the title
commitment —it will appear of record when homes are purchased.
Kevin Heber noted that there is a mature, very large Sugar Maple at the corner of the north entrance and
Shelborne that is showing to be cleared. What can be done to tweak the path and turn lane to preserve the
tree?
Tom Jones, property owner, 12210 Shelborne Road, said the tree is actually a Silver Maple and not in very
good condition —the tree should not be preserved. Mr. Jones said he had planted the majority of the trees on
the property. There are some nice trees on the property and Mr. Menner has made a strong commitment to
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 6
retain those trees.
Carol Schleif commented that the detention pond is very steep and very geometric rather than being natural. Is
there any way to make the pond more natural in shape? If the pond slid to the south end of the development, it
might allow the lots to be a little wider and a little less long and narrow. It is a fairly flat site.
Charlie Frankenber responded that the petitioner would consider at Committee making the shore lines appear
more natural through undulation and if possible, diminish the slope.
Carol Schleif noted that the Engineers could help with the slope; however, the plan looks rather tight and there
is no real useable space —the lots are large and narrow. With this configuration, all possible space has been
filled with detention pond or change in grade. There may be a reason for that, but it looks odd.
Steve Stromquist asked that the Subdivision Committee members to take note of the comments made by Mr.
Kimble regarding the drainage issue.
Rick Ripma asked that the petitioner come to committee with additional landscaping on lots 1 and 7 to further
block the homes.
Docket No. 07080031 PP Wellsprings of West Clay was referred to Subdivision Committee for further
review at 6:00 November 1, 2007 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
15 -19H. Docket No. 07080036 PP: Rosado Hill
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 3 lots on 9.05 acres. Also, subdivision waivers
requested are:
Docket No. 07080037 SW SCO 6.03.03 6.04.04 stub streets to adjacent parcels
Docket No. 07080038 SW SCO 6.05.01 all lots shall abut a public right of way
Docket No. 07080039 SW SCO 6.05.07 6.03.19 homes must face a parkway /arterial
road
Docket No. 07080040 SW SCO 8.09.02 installation of paths /sidewalks
The site is located at the southeast corner of 106 St. Spring Mill Rd. and is zoned S-
2 /Residence.
Filed by Joseph Scimia of Baker Daniels, LLP.
Joe Scimia, attorney, Baker Daniels, 600 East 96 Street, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Scmia
represented the actual homeowners rather than any developer, and those homeowners are in attendance this
evening.
The property consists of approximately nine (9) acres and is located at the southeast corner of 106"' and
Springmill Road. Previously, the property had two homes on it, served by a single entry. The intent is to raze
the existing homes and build three homes; a plat is required in this instance.
The plat provides for subdividing the property into three equal lots of 1.42 acres. The balance of the property
will be dedicated and maintained as common area and preserved in its natural state. There is a formal set of
Declarations that govern this property and each homeowner would be a member; the declarations would also
provide for mandatory assessments to maintain the common areas and facilities that consist of primarily the
open area. The site contains a lift station at the corner of 106"' and Springmill, currently grass is trying to be
grown in the roundabout, although there is difficulty getting it started. The site is very high topography, but it
is heavily wooded.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 7
The private road off of Springmill would service all three homes in the form of a roundabout in the center of
the project and would basically be a private drive; this unique configuration necessitates the request for
waivers. One waiver is for lots fronting a collector street; another is for lots abutting a public right -of -way.
Because a single drive serves all three homes and has the common purpose of maintaining existing tree
preservation, not all of the lots have road frontage and do not face a street —they face the private drive.
The third waiver is to not require that the property be stubbed to adjoining properties. The fourth waiver is to
not install paths /sidewalks —not that sidewalks are not appropriate —the problem is some of the unique
attributes of this site and the associated costs. The applicant is already making a significant contribution to
the public by providing in excess of an acre of land for required right -of -way, even though these three homes
will not necessitate the widening of the road. Also, the inherited drainage situation is a misnomer. Because of
some problems upstream with adjacent property owners that have caused some impediments to drainage in this
area, the applicants are being asked to remedy the situation by dedicating some of the area to serve as a legal
drainage -way by the County Surveyor. The applicants are willing to comply within certain parameters. The
applicant will be asking the County Surveyor to restrict the legal drain to a certain area. The concern is that
the home on lot one has been set up and designed to overlook the bank and 106"' Street. If the legal drain area
is completely clean of all vegetation and trees for drainage needs, if the right -of -way is completely improved
and all of those trees taken away, it would destroy one of the true amenities for this site. As a compromise, the
applicant is trying to limit the legal drain to a configuration that allows the retention of the trees within the
green area.
The applicant is requesting an opportunity to appear at Subdivision Committee to work out the drainage
issues.
Joe Scimia noted that the proposed homes do not meet the residential architectural design guidelines —they are
stucco with glass, more of a contemporary style, chimneys that do not comply with the requirements
however, Joe Scimia assured the Commission that the expense and design of these homes greatly exceed the
standards that we are being asked to commit to.
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: Regarding the subdivision waiver for stub streets to adjacent parcels, the
Department may be able to withdraw that waiver in view of the shared driveway rather than a street. The
waiver for installation of paths and sidewalks —the City routinely requires paths and sidewalks due to adding
to the overall community pedestrian/bikeways /pathways. The Department does recommend that this item
would be forwarded to the Subdivision Committee for further review on November first.
Letters of support were received from Stephen and Marianne Ackmann, northeast corner of 106"' Spring
Mill Road; Richard Wickliff and Barbara Layton.
Wayne Haney: Clarification on architectural requirements requested.
Angie Conn: The Department is suggesting that the petitioner commit to the draft architectural guidelines;
those can be seen in the Department Report—it is in the Westhaven Dept Report.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 8
Wayne Haney thought that most of the requirements listed would be geared to a dense neighborhood, not in an
area where the house would take advantage of the topography, the vistas, the views, etc. Anyone with a large
tract of land that is well off the highway should be allowed to do whatever he wants.
In response to questions from Steve Stromquist, Joe Scimia stated that there is access to the property off of
Springmill Road, not 106 Street.
Sally Shapiro asked for comments from Mr. Scimia on the letters received from Mr. Kilmer on behalf of the
Ackmanns and also a note from Wickliff and Layton.
Joe Scimia said that the Ackmanns are on the opposite side of 106' Street and they wanted to be able to
continue hunting mushrooms on the site —that can be worked out between the Ackmanns and the property
owner. Wickliff and Layton are in favor of the project.
Carol Schleif Comments: This particular site is a good reason to have a waiver where geography can really be
a problem; this site is very steep. This waiver makes a lot of sense; a path would be really difficult. It is
slated on the Thoroughfare Plan to be up- graded in some fashion, and I can see the dollars going down the
tubes because of that, because it wasn't done exactly the way the City wanted later. There may be some other
arrangement that can be worked out. It seems that it might be a wasteful proposition to have it done at this
point.
Joe Scimia said that discussions have been held with Department Staff regarding a monetary contribution
and that is certainly an option. We are not trying to be difficult, we are looking for a little relief and fairness
and that is the reason for the request. At the minimum, we would like to look at some options as to when the
sidewalk would be installed or when the monetary contribution would be appropriate.
Sue Westermeier asked about the installation of sidewalks —the timing, the cost, and whose expense. Susan
pointed out a sentence..... "It will be the City's full responsibility to implement them (sidewalks.)" Is that a
rule?
Angie Conn responded that the developer must either install the sidewalk or contribute money to a non-
reverting Thoroughfare Fund. The City may construct the actual sidewalk in connection with other roadway
improvements.
John Molitor opined that he did not disagree with that blanket statement —if a Subdivision does not have
sidewalks, it is not the City's obligation to install sidewalks. In the case of an annexation, that might be
something the City would undertake in order to satisfy the requirement, but that is not what is being discussed
here.
Joe Scimia thought the questions was whether or not the City can be forced to install a sidewalk if,
subsequently the homeowners decided they wanted sidewalks. Mr. Scimia did not think that was possible. The
point is, if we don't have to put them in—unless the City of Carmel voluntarily agreed to do it, or the County,
then sidewalks will not go in —this is your chance to make the developer put them in.
We can't figure out where we would put the sidewalks anyway—it would require retaining walls and two
footbridges it does not seem like a fair trade-off. The sidewalk is a true public amenity that will be used by a
lot more people that these few homeowners, and that should be part of the cost of the road widening project.
Kevin Heber asked about the outlook on road widening......
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 9
Joe Scimia said it was policy that when a plat is brought in, the City would typically ask for dedication of
whatever additional right -of -way is required to comply with the Thoroughfare Plan. Originally, we thought we
were OK because we were complying with the County Thoroughfare Plan; however, the County Thoroughfare
Plan is in the process of being up- dated. Also, the County talked with City Engineering and has switched to
ask for Thoroughfare dedication of 65 -foot one -half rights -of -way on both 131S Street and Spring Mill. We
understand that this is the plan for the future and if the City decided to expand in the future, they would have
right -of -way available without having to wait to start a project. The only deviation proposed is on 106
Street -65 feet for 500 feet and 55 feet thereafter was requested. That has been done on Spring Mill, but on
106' Street, it is only 375 feet; the reason is we are still trying to preserve some trees on lot one. We believe
that this is acceptable because what is proposed there is 4 lanes and a median-60 feet. 65 feet each half is
more than enough.
Docket No. 07080036 PP, Rosado Hill was referred to Subdivision Committee for further review November 1,
2007 at 6:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
20H. 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
Adrienne Keeling, Department of Community Services appeared before the Commission representing the
applicant. The proposed amendment would place a square footage limit on cultural and entertainment uses in
the US 31 Overlay Zone. The proposed limits match the limits currently in place for retail uses in the Corridor
in that they would be limited to 15% of the gross floor area of the building or up to 30% in any building if the
total square footage does not exceed 15% of the entire development plan. The retail use would need to be
located either on the ground floor or below grade level.
Currently there are several cultural and entertainment uses that are excluded completely from the corridor. The
uses in appendix A will remain as prohibited or excluded from the Overlay— however, there are some uses that
this proposal would affect and those are listed in the informational packets. Those uses include art gallery,
art/music center, full service hotels, catering establishments, restaurants without drive -thru facilities, meeting
or party hall, museums, stadiums or coliseums. The Department is proposing that the language match exactly
with what is in place for the retail and service uses in the corridor.
This item could be forwarded to Committee or voted on this evening if the Commission is comfortable with
that.
Members of the public were invited to speak in favor or, or opposition to the petition; no one appeared and the
public hearing was closed.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department would suggest that this item be sent to the Special
Studies Committee rather than Subdivision.
Sue Westermeier asked what precipitated this proposal.
Adrienne Keeling responded that there was a request from a member of the Plan Commission and the City
Council that the Department look at tightening the uses in the corridor. The corridor is full of offices and it is
really the "financial machine" in Carmel and the City wanted to further protect the corridor and clarify that the
cultural and entertainment uses, including restaurants, would be limited the same way that retail uses are
limited.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 10
Susan Westermeier made formal motion to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to vote on Docket No.
07090002 OA, US 31 Overlay Hotel/Cultural Entertainment uses, seconded by Carol Schleif, Approved 8 in
favor, one opposed (Seidensticker.)
Sue Westermeier made formal motion to forward Docket No. 07090002 OA, US 31 Overlay Hotel/Cultural
Entertainment uses, to the City Council with a positive recommendation, seconded by Steve Stromquist,
Approved 8 in favor, one opposed (Seidensticker.)
I. Old Business
Add -On Item: Docket No. 07080028 OA: Carmel Drive 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.
Adrienne Keeling, Department of Community Services appeared before the Commission representing
the applicant. The Subdivision Committee met in a Special meeting prior to the Commission meeting this
evening. he Subdivision Committee voted to send the Carmel Drive Range Line Road Overlay Sunset
Amendment to the full Commission with a favorable recommendation, provided that the Department would
mail some type of written notice to the property owners within the Overlay notifying them of the City
Council meeting date so that their opinions and thoughts on the expiration date can be heard.
Rick Ripma, chairperson of the Subdivision Committee confirmed the action of the Committee— Docket No.
07080028 OA was forwarded to the full Commission with a 4 -0 recommendation.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department recommends that the Commission forward this item
to the City Council with a positive recommendation.
Eric Seidensticker made formal motion to forward Docket No. 07080028 OA, Carmel Drive Range Line
Road Overlay Sunset Amendment to the City Council with a favorable recommendation, conditioned
upon written notification via first class mail to property owners in the Overlay of the City Council hearing
date, seconded by Rick Ripma, APPROVED 9 -0.
II. Docket No. 07050013 PP: Forestal Estates Minor Subdivision
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 3 lots on 2.33 acres. The applicant also seeks
the following subdivision waiver request:
Docket No. 07050019 SW SCO Chapter 6.03.19 Access to Collector Roads
The site is located at the northeast corner of 141 st St. and Ditch Rd. and is zoned S-
1 /Residence. Filed by Badger Engineering Assoc. Inc, (formerly filed by DeBoy Land
Development Services, Inc.)
Chris Badger, Badger Engineering, 117 Elm Street, Lebanon, appeared before the Commission representing
the applicant. The applicant is requesting primary plat approval for 3 lots on 2.3 acres located at the northeast
corner of 141S Street and Ditch Road. The waiver being requested is for access to a collector road, since the
driveways would connect directly to an arterial road. The applicant considered installing a cul -de -sac, and a
frontage road, but both took up so much of the property, it was deemed of no benefit.
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 I I
There are two existing drives that were installed approximately the end of 2006 or the first of 2007. There is a
newly constructed round about at Ditch Road and 141S Street. The applicant is proposing to do no
improvements along Ditch. The City Engineer took additional right -of -way in 2005 for the roadway
improvements and recently requested an additional 2,000 square feet in right -of -way/
The petitioner agreed to the additional right -of -way grant as well as a right in/right out, due to the close
proximity of the round about. The petitioner has also granted a covenant that the first lot on 141 st Street
would be subject to the same right in/right out rule. The property will have a wet detention pond that will
connect to the existing rear yard drains. Again, there were two buildings on the property and two drives; the
current proposal is for three buildings and three drives —not a huge difference in terms of calculations.
The property is ringed by very colorful landscape and the landscape requirements have been met. Regarding
tree preservation, the petitioner is preserving the existing north fence line and east fence line. The west and
south fence line will be preserved as well.
Regarding utilities, the petitioner is currently requesting a sanitary easement that will go to the north and
connect into Kingsborough Subdivision. The petitioner has been working with Clay Regional Waste and has
worked out a solution; this will come during the construction process. The lots will be "Estate Lots," half -acre
minimum.
Rick Ripma reported for the Subdivision Committee. This petition was reviewed thoroughly; the drainage was
examined, the fencing was removed, the petitioner committed that the person who buys the middle lot will be
made aware that his drive may be blocked by the boulevard. The subdivision voted a positive
recommendation.
Department Comments, Angie Conn: The Department is recommending that this item be approved with the
condition that the last few outstanding comments regarding the tree preservation plan are addressed with Scott
Brewer, Urban Forester.
Carol Schleif asked if Scott Brewer had reviewed the landscape plan.
Angie Conn responded that Scott Brewer had spoken with her today and there were only a few, minor tweaks
required.
Carol Schleif commented that she was really disappointed in the preservation attempt. There are a number of
very large trees on the site and they are not on the drawing.
Chris Badger said that Scott's comments were that some of the preservation areas should have been termed
conservation because the trees were on the lot. The petitioner has agreed to stay away from the tree line and
those were the only trees that Scott had major concern with, both on the north and east side—nothing will be
disturbing those trees. The petitioner will be removing the old fence along the north line and any dead trees.
Scott was not too keen on keeping the Silver Maples, but that will be up to the homeowners to decide. The
very large Oak on the site will be conserved.
Rick Ripma made formal motion to approve Docket No. 07050013 PP, Forestal Estates Minor
Subdivision, together with Docket No. 07050019 SW, seconded by Susan Westermeier, Approved 9 -0.
2 -3I. TABLED to NOV. 20: Docket No. 07070040 PP: Chesterton Woods Subdivision
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 12
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 14 lots on 9 acres and also seeks the following
subdivision waiver approval:
Docket No. 07070042 SW SCO Chapter 6.03.15 street curvature radius
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.
4I. TABLED TO NOV. 20: Docket No. 07070058 PP: The Legacy (Residential Phase 1)
The appheani seeks primary plat approval for- 126 lots on 93.34 aer-es. The site is leeffted
i o f i th c� a PUD/Pl ft a Unit n ��tl�- 6g89 -ble� 4 A- ��zex�° �evelopnent.
Filed by Fleming of S-teeppetwefffi As^secs Pl Pfopef es, Ll
There was no further business to come before the Commission and the meeting adjourned at 7:45 PM.
Leo Dierckman, Chairperson
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
S:/P1anCommission/Minutes/PC /2007 /oct16 13