Minutes SpecStdy 09-05-06of CA
�VNONE y�A C i t y RTOMORROW o
/NDIMAN
CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2006
Minutes
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Special Studies Committee met at 6:00 PM on September 5,
2006 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana.
Members in attendance: Leo Dierckman, Mark Rattermann, Steve Stromquist, Madeleine Torres, and
Susan Westermeier, thereby constituting a quorum.
Matt Griffin and David Littlejohn attended the meeting on behalf of The Department of Community
Services.
The Special Studies Committee considered the following items:
1. Docket No. 06060007 ADLS Amend: Manor Care at Summer Trace Signage
CONT TO OCT 3
The applicant seeks approval for a two new signs.
The site is located at 12999 Pennsylvania St and is zoned OM/MF.
Filed by Brandon Reinoehl for Site Enhancement Services, Inc.
2. Docket No. 06060018 DP Amend: Village Center /Peripheral Retail -VOWC
The applicant seeks to modify the existing site plan and Development Requirements for
the Village of West Clay— Village Center and Peripheral Retail Area.
The site is located at Towne Road and 131S Street, and is zoned PUD.
Filed by Keith Lash of Brenwick TND Communities, LLC.
Present for petitioner: George Sweet and Keith Lash, Brenwick Development. The petitioner is
requesting three modifications to the development requirements for the Village of WestClay PUD
Ordinance. The modifications were presented at public hearing on August 15, 2006 before the
Plan Commission.
The first modification relates to detached, single family housing in the Village Center —the core of
the community. Currently, the single family dwellings within the Village Center are bound by the
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
primary area building guidelines. The primary area extends to 131 Street and Towne Road. The
petitioner is requesting a separate lot category single family, detached homes—in the Village
Center core.
The second modification relates to swapping the senior housing and four retail area parcels. The
request is to relocate two, four -unit buildings that were approved in the initial design in 2004.
The buildings would be located more into the middle of the development, closer to the multi -story
building. This alteration is on the basis of a request from the senior housing developers in an
attempt to get the 8 units closer to the mass building where all of the services are located. This
particular request does not alter the number of units in the senior housing or the square footage of
retail permitted west of Towne Road.
The third modification relates to the maximum letter height of signage in the peripheral retail
area —the area of retail west of Towne Road approved in 2004. Currently, the PUD Ordinance
caps the maximum letter height up to 12 inches and limits signage on buildings to 45 square feet.
This particular request is to eliminate the letter height requirement and going to a square footage
limit that would be in keeping with Carmel's Ordinance. The Village of WestClay imposed the
limit on itself in an attempt to make the design of the signage an architectural statement an
element of the buildings. Under the PUD guidelines, the signage takes away from the architecture
of the buildinga 12 -inch letter height does not fill out the sign board on the building and
detracts from the statement of the architecture.
Regarding the maximum height of the Village Center, single family detached dwellings, the
request is to create a separate lot category for the Village Center and in doing so, the maximum
height of residential units is increased from 30 feet to 50 feet, only in the core of the development.
50 feet was not an arbitrary number; currently the Village of WestClay PUD Ordinance permits
commercial, multi family, condominium buildings, and mixed -use buildings to be built to a height
of 50 feet in the Village Center. Brenwick is asking that a designer of a single- family detached
dwelling be allowed the opportunity to build a building in keeping with the mass of other buildings
in the vicinity in the Village Center to keep the streetscape. The building height in the Village
Center is not being raised —they are currently permitted to be 50 feet in keeping with the
streetscape.
Another comment at public hearing was regarding the swapping of the senior housing in the
peripheral retail area. The senior housing along Towne Road was a requirement or request of the
City Council in its review of the project. Keith Lash circulated site plans from 2004; the senior
housing is not along Towne Road at its northern edge —there is a commercial building on that
corner. Between October 7 and October 26 some of the senior housing buildings were re-
located to the north. The reason for the change is that the developer of the senior housing project
came back to Brenwick and asked to only build 40 units —two of the buildings were eliminated.
In doing that, Brenwick elected to move two of the buildings to the north, hence the October 26
site plan. The November 3 rd site plan as it relates to the commercial and senior housing is very
similar; the main difference between the two site plans was a lengthy debate on density and the
townhomes were taken off the plan. The November 3 rd plan was subsequently approved on
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 2
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
November 9 th by the Special Studies Committee, November 16 by the Plan Commission, and
February 7, 2005 by the City Council without any changes.
Subsequent to the 2005 zoning approval, the senior housing developer asked if they could re-
locate the two northern-most buildings to the west, bringing them closer to the main building from
a site design standpoint.
The third comment at public hearing related to the peripheral retail area signage. The 12 -inch
letter height was a requirement through the process by the City—implied by the City Council.
The sign section of the PUD refers to the maximum letter height is twelve inches—as filed by
Brenwick and was self-imposed.
Department Comments, Matt Griffin: There is no issue with the urban core area of the Village
and the Department is in full support. The petitioner has given correct information in the way the
PUD is structured; technically speaking, the Department sees no real issues. From the
Department's perspective, the petitioner's request meets the PUD.
Leo Dierckman referred to a letter received this day from Councilman Rick Sharp objecting to
switching the properties and the signage.
George Sweet was given a copy of Rick Sharp's letter. The change is not that important;
however, it makes sense for the safety of the older people to be closer to the main building. The
two buildings on the north/south street should be an allowed use so the development plan should
change that. Should the Committee decide this not be done, OK, we will either deal with it later
or put a use on there that is allowed currently.
As to the sign, we started out not wanting huge sign boards in the Village; we had six inch letters.
It was modified in 2004 to 10 inch letters. The ten inch letters do not look right and it is also not
practical because the buildings are so much farther away from the street and the sign is hard to
read.
Dee Fox, Royal Court, Carmel stated that the three modifications being requested were denied
by the City Council. The signage is inappropriate; if it is neighborhood serving commercial
everyone will know what those buildings are. The most important issue to the public is swapping
the senior housing with commercial. The public is adamant about keeping commercial
development off of Towne Road. As far as the building height, 50 feet is OK for commercial, but
for residential that can be a 5 -story building, again, unacceptable.
Leo Dierckman noted that not one person living within this development has been vocal; they
seem to be pleased and happy to be living within the project. It has only been persons on the
external that have been vocal. The most people impacted by a height issue on residential versus
commercial would be those persons immediately adjacent to the property. However, the signage
on Towne Road does impact the peripheral people.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05
3
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
George Sweet agreed that minimal signage on Towne Road is appropriate —only one tenant sign
would be exposed to Towne Road —there would be no multiple signs.
Mark Rattermann said he had no real problem with the modifications —the signage was the only
issue.
Leo Dierckman asked if George Sweet was willing to withdraw the request for the commercial.
George Sweet said he could, but did not know what path he would be walking down.
Mark Rattermann felt that from a land planning standpoint, wouldn't we definitely not want
residential? Putting the commercial on Towne and the residential farther back seems like a better
fit from a land planning standpoint.
Keith Lash also noted that there is a dense buffer yard requirement along the frontage of Towne
Road —there would be significant screening, no bare wall exposure to Towne Road.
Susan Westermeier commented that there are a number of people that live on the west side that
are concerned about the modifications. If there were commitments made that there would be no
commercial on Towne....
Mark Rattermann noted that commercial is already there —that commitment was never made. The
argument was "are we getting a CVS, or Steak `N Shake," and drive -up windows were an
issue. The placement of this commercial was not the argument. Commercial on Towne will come
up again because the Guerrero property is still out there.
Matt Griffin said there was not a whole lot of ground along Towne Road to commercialize at this
point.
Keith Lash said that one of the permitted uses for that corner in the primary area is a civic use
an on -site parking lot. We could honestly be talking about the commercial building sitting not up
on Towne Road but back 150 feet, and between the building and Towne Road could be a parking
lot, or it could be multi family townhomes, single family. There is always an opportunity that the
commercial could face Towne Road, maybe not as close.
Madeleine Torres commented that she, too, lives on the west side and believes that the Village of
WestClay is an asset to the west side of Carmel and provides commerciala gas station would
even be good.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to recommend approval to the full Commission of Docket
No. 06060018 DP Amend: Village Center /Peripheral Retail -VOWC, amended to limit the
size increase of the signage facing Towne Road at 12 inches— Carmel Sign Ordinance on the
balance, seconded by Madeleine Torres, approved 5 -0.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05
El
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
3. Docket No. 06070007 DP /ADLS: 122 Penn Development.
The applicant seeks to construct two, 3 -story office buildings, out of three proposed
buildings total, on a 27.41 -acre office park.
The site is located at the northeast corner of 122 Street and Pennsylvania Street, and is
currently zoned R1 and M3, with a B3 rezone request pending.
Filed by Paul Reis of Bose McKinney Evans, LLP for Panattoni Development, LLC
Paul Reis, attorney with Bose McKinney Evans appeared before the Committee. Also in
attendance: Fred Simmons, architect; Mary Zerbach and Nathan McClure, Panattoni; Dan
Gertam and Craig Forge, American Consulting Engineers.
The project has undergone a number of changes from the time it was first filed. The Engineering
Department has said that basically, all of the major access issues and site design issues have been
addressed. There may be some minor issues with drainage to be addressed with ACE, but those
issues would not affect the site plan.
Fred Simmons, Simmons Architects, LLC addressed the Committee. The revised site plan reflects
the winding road into the center of the property, a larger detention basin to the north and the
smaller to the south of the primary drive. The ponds will also handle the run -off from the eight
(8) acres that Panattoni owns immediately west of the site. Most all of the comments have been
addressed in terms of the site plan. Building 92 has been pushed to the north by about 40 -50 feet
from the last plan submitted.
Bio- swales have also been included in the large landscape areas to comply with LEEDS
requirements and the request of the Department. At this time, the petitioner is not requesting any
signage and will return at a later date. Photo metrics for the lighting are included in the revision.
Bicycle parking is now shown on the detailed site plan. There is a sidewalk shown on the south
side of the main entry drive; Staff has requested a second walkway. A second walkway has not
been done because the area is used as bio- swales —the site is also properly connected to all
buildings and to both 122 and Pennsylvania Streets. A comment was made regarding a pathway
around the ponds —the petitioner would be more than happy to do that, but would prefer to
utilize mulch from an environmental standpoint.
There are three picnic areas, again a LEEDS consideration as well as an amenity to the park, and
those will be constructed when the buildings are completed. The ADLS portion of this review
only relates to buildings 2 and 3 —the other building is still subject to re- design.
Fred Simmons referred to comments that the entry was not inviting and that the use of the sloped,
"glazing" element at the main entry was "trendy." In response to those comments, the entryway
has been enlarged, (doubled) the sloped "glazing" has been done away with, and some of the
more architectural treatments were added to the front of the building —the west elevation, as well
as the east elevation at the entry and the north elevation at the entry.
Panattoni does appreciate and understand the green design initiative; however, at this point in
time, Panattoni is not seeking "LEEDS" certification. Panattoni is implementing many LEEDS
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 5
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
sustainable design elements within the project and will make every effort to incorporate as many
of the items as possible.
Regarding building materials, two buildings will be compatible relative to the glass color, the
aluminum window framing, etc. Around the main entry on both the front and back will be terra
cotta tile.
Paul Reis referred to comments from Scott Brewer. Scott is suggesting more shade trees from an
energy conservation standpoint and the petitioner will comply. All of the engineering issues have
been addressed. There is sufficient right -of -way provided that will accommodate a round about.
The conceptual design and location are still being worked on, but the site plan would not change
based upon the round about.
There was some discussion regarding access to the adjacent sites. To the east are warehouses
along Hancock Street and a comment was made to do a possible access between two buildings.
The concern would be creating an easement for substantially different uses.
Fred Simmons asked that this item not be continued at the Committee level. The petitioner
believes he has addressed all of the substantial issues to the best of their ability. The owner has
made a commitment to a tenant to have the building finished and occupied by September first,
2007. Because of the way this is being constructed, an additional 30 days would put a burden on
the applicant. Unless there are considerable issues to be addressed, the petitioner would prefer a
recommending vote this evening.
Department Comments, Matt Griffin: Any time there are outstanding issues, the Department does
not recommend an item be "moved on." If there is a comfort level that can be resolved with the
few remaining, small issues, the Department does not have a problem forwarding this item.
Regarding those few remaining issues: a detail should be submitted showing the plazas and what
they will contain—outdoor seating, or shelters, etc. There should also be some sort of pedestrian
connection into the plazas so that they can be utilized to traverse the site, perhaps mulch paths
into the network to get people around the ponds. In terms of the internal path of the sidewalks,
the Department would like to see it double, but there is no requirement.
Regarding an access easement to the east to align between the two existing warehouse buildings,
Matt Griffin will check with Engineering Dept—if they do not feel this is a valid access point, the
Department has no problem with that.
Most of Scott Brewer's comments on the landscape plan were species related. Scott will want to
see details on the bio swales.
If all requested items are provided, the Department will recommend that this item be forwarded to
the full Commission with a positive recommendation.
Susan Westermeier commented that she would like more information regarding the bio swales at
the full Commission meeting.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Fred Simmons offered to meet with Carol Schleif to go over some of the architectural details.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to recommend approval of Docket No. 06070007
DP /ADLS, 122 °d and Penn Development, subject to Matt Griffin's approval of the bio swales,
submission of details on the bio swales, and pedestrian paths, seconded by Steve Stromquist,
approved 5 -0.
4. Docket No. 06070019 ADLS Amend: Sky Bank Signage
The applicant seeks approval for two new signs.
The site is located at 3675 W 106th St and is zoned B -5.
Filed by Tony George for the Sign Craft Industries.
Amanda Gates, project manager for Sign Craft Industries appeared before the Committee
representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Andrew McCleeny, Sign Craft Industries.
The petitioner is amending his initial request for signs from two to one sign on the building. The
original signage is currently located on the north elevation. The proposal provides for removal of
the sign on the north elevation and places Sky Bank signage on the west elevation, the front
facade of the building.
Department Comments, David Littlejohn: The petitioner is taking down two signs and putting up
one sign. An outstanding issue with this particular site is that when Union Federal Bank initially
came through the process, their Development Plan included a recreation path, however, the path
was never installed. The Department is seeking written commitment that the petitioner will install
the recreation path.
Christopher Hoarsley, Hokanson Companies property manager said the previous set of plans
shows the walking path. Karyn Ryg with Carmel Alternative Transportation is in process of
determining whose responsibility that is, whether it is the initial developer or Union Federal Bank.
Matt Griffin responded that it is the current landowner's responsibility.
There was discussion regarding the path and the installation —the commitment was made to install
the path at the time the initial Development Plan Approval was granted.
Leo felt that this is one of those instances where the petitioner needs the sign, and the City needs
the path.
Mark Rattermann felt that the Committee could do one of two things: Either deny the sign which
will then make someone else pay or the petitioner will get a court order making the City approve
this because it is not related OR, approve it and then the City would sue for the completion of the
path.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 7
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06070019 ADLS Amend, Sky
Bank Signage, conditioned upon an escrowed dollar amount 100% equal to a bid for
constructing the path in question, said bid must be approved by the Engineering Department,
seconded by Susand Westermeier, Approved 5 -0.
5. Docket No. 06080029 ADLS Amend: Public Storage Signage
The applicant seeks approval for a new wall and ground sign.
The site is located at 1099 Range Line Rd and is zoned B -3.
Filed by Amanda Gates for Sign Craft Industries.
Amanda Gates, Sign Craft Industries, appeared before the Committee requesting permission to
remove the existing facia of the Shurguard sign and install replacement faces for public storage.
The hardware will be painted as well as the poles. The wall sign face would be removed and the
Shurguard Storage would be replaced with a public storage space.
Department Comments, David Littlejohn: Both signs comply with the Ordinance; they are merely
re- facing the existing signage. The Department recommends approval.
There is limited landscaping around the sign—officially they would be required to have a
landscape bed around the sign.
Steve Stromquist made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080029 ADLS Amend, Public
Storage Signage, seconded by Madeleine Torres, Approved 4 in favor, one opposed
(Dierckman.)
6. Docket No. 06080006 ADLS Amend: Opus Landmark Meridian Phase II
The applicant seeks approval for the construction of a 124,215- square foot, four -story
office building in an existing office park.
The site is located at 10333 North Meridian Street and is zoned B2.
Filed by Steve Foster of Opus North.
CONTINUED to October 3, 2006
7. Docket No. 06050001 Z: Legacy /East Carmel PUD Rezone
The applicant seeks to rezone 509.234 acres from S -1 to Planned Unit Development for
the purpose of creating a primarily residential, mixed -use development.
The site is located north of 126 Street, south of 146 Street, and on either side of River
Road. Filed by Steve Pittman and Paul Rioux of Pittman Properties.
Note: Heard last, out of sequence.
Charlie Frankenberger, attorney with Nelson Frankenberger appeared before the Committee
representing the applicant. Also in attendance: Paul Rioux and Steve Pittman.
Charlie gave a quick overview of the progress to -date. A lot of positive changes have been
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
made —the large lot area in the northwest corner has been made less isolated and more connected
to trails. Character exhibits with mid- century, commercial architecture have been included. The
number and location of drive- thru's have been limited. Written, architectural standards have been
included. The development standards have been re- located out of the Ordinance into an exhibit.
Granny Flats are permitted and referred to in the Ordinance as "Accessory Dwellings." The
procedural provisions have been revised to require ADLS /DP of everything except detached,
single family.
In addition, a large change was made. Originally, the Ordinance as proposed had separate and
distinct use pockets. It was thought that the Ordinance should permit a better blend of uses. We
went from a fixed land plan and fixed Ordinance to a very flexible Ordinance. It was the very
flexible Ordinance that was discussed at the last Committee meeting and it was determined then
that we had made it too flexible. We were asked to confer with the Department in an effort to
strike a better balance between predictability and flexibility. We meet with the Department and
received a lot of good suggestions. Tonight, we want to discuss those with the Committee,
conceptually, receive input and for the next Committee in October, we would revise the text of
the PUD to correspond to the revised vision for this land plan.
Paul Rioux then addressed the Committee. Pittman Partners started off with the idea that they
had a pretty determined plan, shown the first time, waivered back to a open, three phase concept
where there was open space, mixed -use and residential. Most of the site plan being shown does
not require the degree of flexibility that would allow an Ordinance that is wide open.
The roadway that comes through and connects to Hazel Dell Parkway is laid out in concert with
the Thoroughfare Plan. In addition, it makes its way through some poor soil areas so that it can
be built with the problems that they had with 146 Street. The roadway that runs west to east is
relatively fixed—it will move a few feet, but not across the site. North of The Legacy, the Pedcor
apartment community is being constructed and the road will align at their entrance to give The
Legacy a north/south road. There are some soils that are unsuitable for construction; so, there
will be some natural open spaces, prairie restoration, etc., but it starts to define what we can do
with the site. We have made commitments to the neighbors that the area north of the ridge and
west would all be large lot, single family homes.
There have been some minor changes. There is a connection to Haverstick that was requested
there is a stub street there today. One of those two entry points onto the boulevard will be done
away with so that traffic can be minimi
The single family area is another area that does not have a large degree of flexibility. A retirement
community, a church, school, civic use, accessory uses are allowed. There has been some
conversation that perhaps the school could use a little more land, also maybe a 50 -70 foot buffer
that could be incorporated into the property. We are not looking for a tremendous amount of
flexibility there. That pretty much leaves us with the core or village area. When we talk
flexibility, this is generally the area referred to in the Ordinance.
To summarize, we have come back from "total flexibility" to some flexibility of the language and
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 9
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
allowing most to stay as planned in the initial presentation.
A plan has now been created for the open space and this is pretty much an on -going process with
the Department, Earlham, and Connor Prairie.
Charlie Frankenberger commented that the agreement that governs is clear that they take title
eventually from Earlham, subject to the zoning restrictions that will be specified in black and
white in the PUD. Right now, the Deed to the land on the east side of River Road is held in
escrow from Earlham College to Connor Prairie. The Deed will be conveyed when the closing of
the sale of Earlham to this applicant (Legacy) occurs. The reason it is held in escrow until after
the zoning is so that everyone is sure that it is conveyed subject to the zoning restrictions. Per the
escrow agreement, the zoning restrictions are literally attached to the deed as restrictions. The
zoning occurs, the deed restrictions are defined that are attached as an exhibit to the Deed, and
the Deed gets conveyed out of escrow. That way, we are assured that they take subject to the
zoning restrictions that are literally deed restrictions in the deed.
Leo Dierckman said that the CCRC and Granny Flats should be included in the overall density.
Mark Rattermann asked if there were any kind of written commitment from the school. Mark
wanted to hear that another elementary school would not have to be constructed because of this
development. This is a primary concern.
Steve Pittman was certain that such a commitment could be produced. The school is not
concerned about the elementary school level —they have plenty of capacity left. Because of
Gramercy and the Legacy proposal, the school is going to up -date a new study.
Madeleine Torres commented that the school is very reactionary and for us to think that they
would be pro- active, it would be a shock.
Mark Rattermann said that this is a PUD and we can impose restrictions or not. We can tell the
developer we want patio homes we really need to force the school system to look at this.
Steve Pittman said the school has actually looked at this development and the petitioner has met
with Dr. Underwood and their facilities planner. Steve Dillon is up- dating their report.
Leo Dierckman commented that there is not that much land on the east side to be developed.
Prairie Trace already handles all of the kids east of Hazel Dell. You can literally look at Cherry
Tree —kids were shifted to Prairie Trace to increase the enrollment.
Steve Pittman said that when they met with the school, they were actually encouraged to
incorporate more family -type housing; however, that is not what we are hearing from the City.
Mark Rattermann asked that language be put in the text that this is preliminary so that it could
change and morph.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 10
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Leo Dierckman said that this is such a big project, we would rather not have to do this on a
regularly scheduled Committee evening. It would be better to go over this in a special meeting.
Conceptually, it is a good project.
Department Comments, Matt Griffin: This is a huge project and it will take some time. It seems
as if we are pretty much on the same page now, although the deliverable has not yet been seen.
The Department made a laundry list of things we want to see the petitioner commit to physically.
The Department would like to see street layout, pedestrian plan, open space plan, environmental
systems plan, and "use blocks." The use blocks will be defined in detail in the PUD Ordinance.
Our concerns at this point, legally, as you read through the PUD, it is pretty circular and a lot of
holes in it. We are really trying to tighten this up. In terms of the mixed -use component, the
Department is concerned that the retail node would bleed up to 146 Street and become retail on
146 with residential behind it. While there is limited retail on 146 Street, it is easy for retail to
pull you into the core of this development. We want to see a flex of uses, but caution that the flex
should not open the door to 146 Street and not the core. The Department is going to submit a
first attempt at a "red -line" to the petitioner. At some point, we need to sit down to go over the
PUD line -by -line, just as we did with Gramercy.
Legacy /East Carmel PUD Rezone was continued to October 3, 2006.
8. Docket No. 06080013 ADLS Coastal Corporate Center Signage
The applicant seeks approval for a new sign package.
The site is located at 10439 Commerce Dr and is zoned B -5.
Filed by Doug Staley Jr. from Staley Signs.
Doug Staley, Jr. appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. The buildings are
garden- style, professional offices, four -sided architecture. In this particular phase of the project,
there are four building that front Commerce Drive. The buildings will be divided up into a variety
of ways; therefore, a little flexibility is required in how the tenant signage is done.
The tenant signage is in the small, EFIS sign band area—no sign will be located outside of those
areas. The petitioner is proposing ten -inch tall letters, painted black, one quarter inch thick
routed aluminuma heavy weight, individually cut, non illuminated letter that would mount on
the space. It is more a location -type sign for people looking for a doctor, dentist, whoever might
be in the space, but not a huge, advertising type of sign.
The petitioner has set a maximum letter height of 10 inches but will stick to the Carmel Sign
Ordinance of 30 square feet. If there were a list of attorneys with 4 or 5 names, one tenant could
possibly utilize 20 to 30 square feet. All signs would mount on the west elevation of the building;
this complies with the Carmel Ordinance to make certain that every sign is a street frontage,
Commerce Drive. There will be no signs on the rear of the building.
The address sign is 2 X 4 feet, a significant portion is the address with very small, two inch
aluminum slats that identify the tenant in a particular entry; that sign would be on both sides.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 11
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Department Comments, David Littlejohn: The sign package complies with the Ordinance.
Susan Westermeier made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080013 ADLS Coastal
Corporate Center Signage as presented, seconded by Madeleine Torres, APPROVED 5 -0.
9. Docket No. 06080016 ADLS Amend: The Centre CVS Signage
The applicant seeks approval for a new wall sign.
The site is located at 1390 S Range Line Rd.
Filed by Nancy Long for A -1 Expeditors.
Nancy Long, A -1 Expeditors, appeared before the Committee. Currently there is a banner that
replaces the former Osco Drug sign. The previous sign was 4 feet high; the petitioner is
requesting two feet high. The total square footage is 33, the height is 16 feet, 8 '/2 inches. The
sign being requested is smaller than the previous existing sign.
CVS purchased Osco Drug; hence the necessity for the change in sign.
Department Comments, David Littlejohn: The Department is recommending approval.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080016 ADLS Amend: The
Centre CVS Signage, seconded by Madeleine Torres, APPROVED 5 -0.
10. Docket No. 06080017 ADLS Amend: Ingersoll Rand Signage
The applicant seeks approval for a new wall and ground sign.
The site is located at 11835 Pennsylvania Rd and is zoned B -2.
Filed by Craig Carpenter for Atlas Sign Company.
Craig Carpenter with Atlas Sign Company appeared before the Committee representing the
applicant. Permission is being requested to remove the Conseco signage and install the Ingersoll
Rand logo and monument sign, almost in the same location as the previously existing sign. The
Conseco sign was not lit —the Ingersoll Rand sign will be halo lit.
Department Comments, David Littlejohn: The petitioner is merely replacing a permitted, existing
sign and the Department is recommending approval.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080017 ADLS Amend:
Ingersoll Rand Signage, seconded by Susan Westermeier, APPROVED 5 -0.
11. Docket No. 06080019 ADLS Amend: Club Canine Signage
The applicant seeks approval for a new wall sign.
The site is located at 457 3rd Ave SW and is zoned I -1.
Filed by Kera Slowitsky for Club Canine LLC.
Kera Slowitsky's mother appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. A rendering
of the sign logo was displayed. The business opened today.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 12
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Department Comments, David Littlejohn: The sign complies with the Ordinance and the
Department is recommending approval.
Susan Westermeier made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080019 ADLS Amend: Club
Canine Signage, seconded by Steve Stromquist, APPROVED 5 -0.
12. Docket No. 06080020 ADLS Amend: Parkwood Crossing Cingular Wireless
Signage
The applicant seeks approval for a new wall sign.
The site is located at 900 E 96th St and is zoned PUD
Filed by Blaine Paul for Duke Realty Limited Partnership.
Aaron Reynolds, Duke Realty Corp. appeared before the Committee. Also in attendance was
Rick Trempe, Vice President of the Indianapolis office group.
The ADLS Amend petition is requesting a change of the original sign location for the Parkwood
IX Building. The new, proposed location is just above where the original location was proposed.
Photographs of existing signage on the building were circulated.
Department Comments, David Littlejohn. The sign required a variance and that has already been
granted by the BZA for square footage. Since the petitioner is just moving the sign, the
Department is recommending approval.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080020 ADLS Amend:
Parkwood Crossing Cingular Wireles Signage, seconded by Steve Stromquist, APPROVED
5 -0.
13. Docket No. 06080028 ADLS Amend: Carmel Woods Signage
CONT. TO OCT. 3
The applicant seeks approval for a new ground sign.
The site is located 1010 Clubhouse Ct. and is zoned B -3.
Filed by Thomas Langdon from Quilfire Sign and Graphic Inc.
14. Docket No. 06080031 ADLS Amend: Ed Martin Signage
The applicant seeks approval for an additional wall sign and a change to the existing
ground sign.
The site is located at 9896 N Michigan Rd and is zoned I -1.
Filed by Thomas Ely, Jr. for The Sign Group, Inc.
Tom Ely with The Sign Group appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. The
Buick franchise is newly acquired and the petitioner is seeking permission to put a Buick logo
matching the other logos on the building. Everything on the sign will stay the same except the
addition of the Buick logo.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 13
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
The ground sign currently has a Pontiac logo and a GMC logo. The petitioner simply wants to
add Buick—it would be the same size, proportional to the others. The Pontiac logo will be
moved so that they will center, side -by -side.
Department Comments, David Littlejohn: When this item initially came through, the petitioner
considered the two logos as separate signs, a total of three signs on frontage; adding this
particular logo would bring it to a total of 4 signs. The Department is recommending approval
contingent upon the approval of a variance from the BZA.
Steve Stromquist made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080031 ADLS Amend: Ed
Martin Signage, conditioned upon approval of a variance from the BZA, seconded by
Madeleine Torres, APPROVED 5 -0.
15. Docket No. 06080033 ADLS Amend: Hunter's Quest Lighting, Landscaping, and
Signage
The applicant seeks approval for alterations to the landscaping, lighting, and signage.
The site is located at 104 E. Carmel Drive and is zoned B8 within the Range Line Road
Carmel Drive Overlay.
Filed by David Fineberg for the Fineberg Group, LLC.
David Fineberg appeared before the Committee representing the applicant. Also in attendance:
Mark Fineberg with the Fineberg Group. The petitioner is seeking permission to change the
existing Development Plan in terms of the width of the signs on the wall. The signs are currently
15 feet per 20 feet of frontage. The petitioner is requesting an amendment to reflect the current
Ordinance and the sign chart under the B -8 zoning. Some type of goose -neck, small, down
lighting is also being requested; these can be run off the existing electrical.
Additional landscaping is being done that consists of re- working the existing two planters at the
front of the building. A six -foot ground sign is also being requested —this is a multi- tenant
building. The ground sign would replace the existing pylon sign at the same location.
Department Comments, Matt Griffin: The request for the wall sign size is supported by the
Department, however, we would like to see the petitioner commit to color, style, and selection.
Mr. Fineberg stated that initially in 1976 the color was gold—it is now maroon and the petitioner
would like to keep it that way.
The petitioner would like to change the existing development plan in terms of the width of the
signs on the wall; the amendment would comply with the current ordinance. The petitioner would
also like to add some small can and gooseneck lighting.
Matt Griffin further commented that there are no concerns with wall sign lighting. The
Department Report asks that the signs would only be illuminated during business hours; however,
looking at the context of the area, most of the retail signs that are illuminated are dimmed at night
If they are on at night, the Department does not have a problem with that.
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05 14
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417
Landscape Planters: Scott Brewer's comments on the species selection have not been
forthcoming. However, the Department is OK with the swap.
The petitioner said he had hired a landscape designer to do the planters. However, the petitioner
was willing to work with Scott Brewer.
Matt Griffin referred to the Department Report. As mentioned, a variance will be required for the
ground sign—no longer permitted under the Carmel Drive /Range Line Road Overlay. The
Department does support the sign variance.
Matt Griffin noted that the ground sign would require a variance and staff would support the
variance and losing the pylon sign is an aesthetic plus.
Mark Rattermann made formal motion to approve Docket No. 06080033 ADLS Amend:
Hunter's Quest Lighting, Landscaping, and Signage, subject to Scott Brewer's approval of
the species in the landscape planters and the commitment to stay with Maroon lettering and the
approval of a variance for the ground sign, seconded by Madeleine Torres, APPROVED 5 -0.
The meeting adjourned at 8:43 PM.
Leo Dierckman, Chairperson
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
s:/ P1anCommission/ Minutes Committee /SpecialStudies /2006sept05
15
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571 -2417