Jul 20, 2021 Carmel Plan Commission

[A. Call Meeting to Order]

[00:00:11]

I WILL CALL TO ORDER MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION.

[B. Pledge of Allegiance]

I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

THANK YOU. MR. SECRETARY, WOULD YOU CALL

[C. Roll Call]

[D. Declaration of Quorum]

[E. Approval of Minutes]

>> PARTICIPANT: THAT CONSTITUTE A QUORUM.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM OUR JUNE MEETING.

THANK YOU, CHRISTINE. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I.

AND HE OPPOSED? THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED.

COMMUNICATIONS BUILDS EXPENDITURE, REPORT OF LEGAL COUNSEL. MR. REESE?

[G. Reports, Announcements & Department Concerns]

>> NOTHING TO IT REPORTED. >> ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE

DEPARTMENT? >> WE HAVE THE OUTCOME OF THE PROJECT. THE GAS STATION SETBACK AND STANDARDS AMENDMENT WAS SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A VERITABLE RECOMMENDATION. .MABLETON AUXILIARY LOT AND DETAILED CENTER WAS SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION AND THAT BANK OF AMERICA PROJECT WAS SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION THREE TO ONE.

AND THAT THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE, THE APPLE SIDE POINT TOWNHOMES WAS SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION 3-0 AND THE ALBANY VILLAGE SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED 3-0. WE HAVE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT. WE ONLY HAVE OLD BUSINESS TO VOTE ON FOUR OF THE PAST ITEMS THAT I JUST MENTIONED.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE NEW BUSINESS TONIGHT.

WHICH IS A PRIMARY PLAT AND -- AMENDMENT.

AND SO THOSE ARE NOT PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THOSE CAN BE VOTED ON TONIGHT. OR THEY COULD BE SENT TO A COMMITTEE. THANK YOU.

[I. Old Business]

>> THANK YOU. SO WE WILL MOVE STRAIGHT TO OUR OLD BUSINESS ITEMS. WE HAVE THE DOCKET ITEM.

THE APPLICANT SEEKS APPROVAL FO5 WEST 146TH STREET WHERE THE ZONING IS THE DEVELOPMENT UNDER ORDINANCE.

THE PETITION IS FILED BY JIM AND JOHN ON BEHALF OF HOFFMAN DEVELOPER. JOHN, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

>> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING.

WE REPRESENT THE APPLICANT, ON BEHLF OF THE PETITIONER'S IS STEVE PITTMAN. ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, THE BUILDER AND MIKE LAWRENCE, THE ATTORNEY WITH OUR OFFICE AS NOTED, THE APPLICANT SEEKING APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED TOWNHOMES BUILDINGS UNDER THE PAD BY WAY OF GENERAL BACKGROUND, THE ORDINANCE WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 7TH OF LAST YEAR. THIS STEP INTO BOWMAN PROCESS A DEAL IS FOR THE TOWNHOME PROJECT IS REQUIRED FOR CONFIRMATION THAT THE PROPOSED PLANS ME THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE AMBLESIDE ORDINANCE.

BEHIND HERE IS A COLOR VERSION OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TOWNHOME AREA. THE ENGINEER PLANS ARE INCLUDED UNDER TAB THREE OF YOUR INFORMATIONAL BROCHURES.

THE PLAN COMPLIES WITH THE STANDARDS REQUIRED FOR THE POD AND THE APPLICANT HAS ENHANCED THE PLAN BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. ENHANCEMENTS INCLUDE THE GREATER DISSIPATION OF AMENITIES INCLUDING KIOSKS AND SHORT-TERM BICYCLE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING AT THE ENTRANCES BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND IN PROXIMITY TO THE OUTSIDE SEATING AREAS.

THESE NEXT COUPLE OF EXHIBITS SHOWS THE PROPOSED DESIGN ON THE TOWNHOMES AND ENHANCEMENTS MADE BY THE APPLICANT.

ATHLETIC THERE WILL BE FOUR UNITS, FIVE UNITS, AND SIX UNIT BUILDINGS. THEY ARE HERE ALONG 146TH

[00:05:01]

THE ELEVATION IS NOTED IN RED, IDENTIFYING THE ENHANCEMENTS AREAS WHERE THE APPLICANT HAS ELECTED TO EXCEED THE PURITY STANDARDS. IT IS REQUIRED ONLY ON THOSE ELEVATIONS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED. AND LIKE WAS THAT THE ELEVATION IS NOTED IN BLUE. ONLY REQUIRED A LITTLE MASONRY.

55% MAIN STREET PROVIDE ON THE -- PROVIDED ON THE ELEVATION AS WELL. IT INCLUDES A TWO STORY MASONRY AS SHOWN ON THE FIRST PAGE UNDER TAB EIGHT.

THE SPECIFIC DETAILS REGARDING ARE INCLUDED BEHIND TAB SEVEN.

THIS IS THE ELEVATION IDENTIFIED UNDER TAB SEVEN, WHICH AS OF 86 UNIT BUILDING. TAB EIGHT INCLUDES THE ELEVATIONS OF ALL ELEVATIONS, THE FOUR OR FIVE AND SIX UNIT BUILDINGS. THOSE ARE INCLUDED BEHIND TAB H.

-- EIGHT. THIS IS AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE

FOUR UNIT BUILDING. >> THESE TWO SITES SHOW THE ENHANCED MASONRY THAT YOU WILL SEE FROM THE STREET OR COMMON INTERSITE AND DISSES THE INTERIOR SIDE.

PRIMARY BUILDING MATERIALS ON ALL THE TOWNHOMES WILL CONSIST OF BRICK AND STONE MASONRY AND EXTERIOR MATERIAL VARIATIONS AND SIGNIFICANT WINDOW TREATMENT. THEY FULLY COMPLIANT WITH THE STANDARDS OF THE POD AND IN SOME AREAS SIGNIFICANTLY EXCEED THE DESIGN OR REQUIREMENTS IN REGARDS TO USE OF MASONRY MATERIALS INCLUDING BRICK AND STONE MATERIALS.

IN CONCLUSION, AS EVIDENCED BY THE DEPARTMENT REPORT, THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE TEN WHO BUILDINGS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPLE SITE OF THE P.O.D. AT THE CONCLUSION OF ITS REVIEW. THE COMMUNITY VOTED THREE HAPPENS OUT TO FORWARD IT BACK TO THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.

AS NOTED IN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT, STAFF IS REQUESTING CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS WHICH WERE DISCUSSED AT COMMITTEE REGARDING THE USE OF MASONRY AS WELL AS THE PATTERN OF HOME ELEVATIONS BY BUILDING. THE DEPARTMENT IDENTIFIES THESE ITEMS IS NOT REQUIRED BUT ASKS THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DISCUSS THE COMMENTS BEFORE VOTING.

TO THIS END, THESE ARE BEQUESTS THAT HAVE COME UP PREVIOUSLY AT THE REZONING STAGE WHEN MASONRY% -- MONOTONY MEDICATION WERE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE STANDARDS REGARDING THE SAME WERE ULTIMATELY APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AS INDICATED, THE APPLICANT HAS PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED THE REQUESTS MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT AND WITH ANTICIPATES RELYING ON THE APPLICATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE.

ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THE APPLICATION OF THESE REQUIREMENTS AS EVIDENCE IN THE PLANS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING FOR CONSIDERATION WILL RESULT IN A HIGH-QUALITY PRODUCT AND ATTRACTIVE ADDITION TO THE COMMUNITY.

WITH THAT SAID, WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE VOTE TO APPROVE IT AS REQUESTED THIS EVENING AS THE PLANS ARE IN FULL COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT IS THE ORDINANCE. THANK YOU.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU, JOHN. I GOT A REPORT FROM THE

DEPARTMENT. >> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU.

ALEXIA LOPEZ WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES.

130 NEW TOWNHOMES AND 30 BUILDINGS.

FROM THE VERY FIRST MILK TO THIS VINYL MEETING, THE STAFF HAVE WORKED TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THE PROJECT NOT ONLY MEETS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS BUT GOES ABOVE THOSE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS TO MAKE IT AS BEST AS CAN BE. SOME OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE ADDING MORE WINDOW TRIM SO THAT THEY MET THE FRONT ELEVATIONS AND THAT IS MORE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE GROUP ARCHITECTURAL STYLES. THE ADDED A CITING TO BREAK UP THE LONG EXPENSES OF ALL OF THE WHITE SIDING ON THE BACK.

AND ADDITIONAL BRICK WAS ADDED TO SOME OF THE INTERNAL -- THE PETITIONER MADE SOME REQUESTED CHANGES TO INCLUDE MORE AMENITIES INTO COMMON AREAS INCLUDING FINCHES AND BIKE RACKS DISTRIBUTE THROUGHOUT. THE CULT WERE TWO ITEMS MENTIONED IN THE REPORT THAT STAFF REQUESTED TO MAKE THIS PROJECT EVEN BETTER. BUT.

CHARACTER IMAGES AND PROVIDE SOME DIVERSITY FROM BUILDING TO

[00:10:03]

WE SUGGESTED A UNIT MIX FROM BUILDING TO THE BUILDING SO THAT EACH BUILDING IS NOT EXACTLY THE SAME AND TO HELP DO THAT JUST ADD SOME UNITS. WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED TO THE STAFF FOR THIS PROJECT. WE THOUGHT THOSE WERE SOMETHING THAT THE PETITIONER COULD DO AND THAT WOULD REALLY HELP IMPROVE THE ARCHITECTURE FOR THE PRO PROJECT.

THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS DISCUSSED THESE ITEMS AND WORK SUPPORT OF THE STAFF'S REQUEST THAT THE PETITIONER DID NOT AGREE AND FELT THEY WERE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE P.O.D.

IN THE END, THE COMMITTEE VOTED -- 43 HAPPENS OUT TO SENT THIS BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A FAVORABLE AUGMENTATION.

WE RECOMMEND YOU DISCUSS THIS ITEM AND THEN AFTER ALL COMMENTS ARE APPROVED, VOTE TO APPROVE THE ITEM THIS EVENING.

THANK YOU. >> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU.

SO, ANYTHING TO ADD FOR THE COMMITTEE REPORT?

>> PARTICIPANT: I THINK THE DEPARTMENT SUMMARIZED IT VERY WELL. THE COMMITTEE WAS DEPORTED -- DISAPPOINTED THAT THE PETITIONER IT WOULD ONLY COMMIT TO THE COMMITTEE REQUIREMENTS. I WOULD LIKE TO NOT SO MUCH NOTE OF THAT REPORT BUT IN DISCUSSION THAT OF THE FURTHER IF OTHER PEOPLE HAVE A CHANCE. THANK YOU.

>> BRAD GRABOW: ALL RIGHT. AND NOW WE WILL TURN TO OPENED THE DISCUSSION FOR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

>> SUSAN WESTERMEIER: I, TO PRINT DID YOU BRING THE INITIAL RENDERINGS OF WHAT WE SAW? THIS WAS JUST THE INITIAL -- AND I'M DOING THIS NOT BECAUSE THE PETITIONER DID NOT LIVE UP TO THEIR COMMITMENTS OF THE P.O.D. THE DEPARTMENT SAID THEY DID.

IT IS BECAUSE I WANT OTHERS TO SEE WHAT WE SAW INITIALLY.

THIS IS -- AND IF YOU GO TO THE TAB SEVEN IN YOUR BOOK YOU WILL SEE THAT WHAT WE ARE GETTING IS NOTHING -- IT IS NOT REALLY LIKE THAT. THERE'S NOT THE DIVERSITY IT IS VERY ONE-SIDED ARCHITECTURE, WHAT WE ARE GETTING AND NOT THE DIMENSIONS AND THE DESIGN THAT WE SAW THERE.

ALL I CAN SAY IS I TALKED WITH OUR LEGAL COUNSEL.

AND THEY RECONFIRMED THAT YOU CAN ONLY HAVE A PETITIONER, THEY ONLY NEED TO COMMIT TO WHAT IS IN THE PUD.

SO I'M SAYING THIS TO A LOT OF US.

I HAVE BEEN AROUND HERE A LONG TIME.

I FEEL LIKE I DID NOT REALLY DRILL DOWN ENOUGH ON THIS IN THE BEGINNING BECAUSE THAT IS OUR ONLY SHOT AT THIS.

IT IS A P.U.D. AND IF WE DON'T ASK FOR 3 STORIES MASONRY. IF WE DON'T ASK FOR FRONT PORCHES IN THAT, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO GIVE IT LATER.

I'M NOT IMPLYING ANY KIND OF -- ANYTHING.

BECAUSE AT THE TIME THAT THE DEVELOPER IT WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY DID NOT KNOW WAS FAULTY OR WHO WAS GOING TO BUILD THESE HOMES. I JUST FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO BE MORE CAREFUL. THIS IS LESSON LEARNED.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THIS BUT SPACE -- IT IS JUST HUGE.

IT IS OVERWHELMING. I FELT IN THE COMMITTEE THAT OUR HANDS WERE TIED. I WOULD WELCOME ANY INPUT FROM ANYBODY. THANK YOU.

>> BRAD GRABOW: KEVIN? >> PARTICIPANT: I'M GOING TO REPEAT SOME THINGS I SAID IN THE PAST PRACTICE WILL BE REPETITIVE TO SOME OF YOU. IF YOU ARE MINIMUM STANDARDS ARE NOT HIGH ENOUGH, WE SHOULD RAISE THEM.

IF WE DON'T RAISE THEM, SHAME ON US.

WE DON'T GET TO GO BACK AND SAY, SORRY, PETITIONER, YOUR MEETING WHICH I THINK IT IS MISLEADING TO THE STATE MINIMUM STANDARDS.

IT WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO IF WE WANT MINIMUM -- IF OUR MINIMUM STANDARDS ARE NOT HIGH ENOUGH, IS THE DEVELOPER SUPPOSED TO COME IN AT 10% ABOVE THAT WHICH PURPORTS 12% ABOUT THAT? 6% ABOUT THAT? IT IS TOO DIFFICULT. WE APPROVED IT.

AND IF WE DID NOT APPROVED ENOUGH, SHAME ON US.

LET'S STOP BEATING THE DEVELOPERS OF FOR WHAT WHAT WE DID NOT ASK FOR. IT IS TOO LATE IN THE GAME.

THIS WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IT WENT THROUGH COUNSEL. AND NOW IT HAS GONE THROUGH COMMITTEE. IF WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR ENOUGH, SHAME ON US. LET'S STOP BEATING UP ON THEM.

BECAUSE WHERE'S THAT -- THE SCOPE -- WHATEVER% THEY GET, AT THAT IS HOW MUCH THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO GO ABOVE THE MINIMUM STANDARDS? I THINK OUR MINIMUM STANDARDS ARE PRETTY GOOD LET'S HAVE CONFIDENCE IN WHAT WE DO.

IF WE DON'T, I HAVE SAID, I DON'T LIKE OUR MINIMUM STANDARDS THAT IF YOU BUY LAND CHEAP ENOUGH, WHICH YOU CAN'T IN CARMEL ANYMORE, YOU CAN BUY A WRENCH WITH ALUMINUM SIDING.

IT WON'T HAPPEN BECAUSE OF LAND PRICES.

[00:15:04]

THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER: THE PRESIDENT, I HAVE A QUESTION. THE REASON WHY THIS P.U.D. DID GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED WAS BECAUSE OF THE PRICE POINT THESE HOUSES WERE IN.

BUT I DON'T WANT TO SAY AFFORDABLE BUT THERE WAS SUPPOSED A BIT MORE REASONABLY PRICED FOR RECONSTRUCTION? DO WE KNOW WHERE IT DOES NOT THOSE, BUT THE ONE YOU ARE BUILDING. YOU KNOW WHAT THE STARTING PRICE

GOING TO BE? >> COMMISSIONER: 300.

>> CHRISTINE ZOCCOLA: OKAY. WELL, I REMEMBER WHEN THIS TEAM THREE. SO WE ARE CLOSE WHERE WE WERE.

>> PARTICIPANT: IF I MAY NOT THAT THE CHARACTER ILLUSTRATIONS ESTABLISH A STANDARDS. THIS IS ONE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT THE STAFF INCLUDED. THIS IS A STAFF PRACTICAL WORK PRODUCTS THAT WORK DISPLAYED AT THE TIME OF BUILDING.

THOSE WERE ON THAT PAGE THAT BRIDGE IS ON DISPLAY.

OTHERS THAT HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED IN OTHER LOCATIONS.

THIS IS A PRODUCT THAT LAMAR HAS BUILT.

WE TALKED ABOUT THE SIDES. THIS BUILDING DOES NOT SHOW ANY MASONRY ON THE SIDE ELEVATIONS. AT THE TIME, WE COMMITTED TO -- ON ALL AND 40% MAINTENANCE THREE -- MASONRY.

GREET ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING AND THAT WAS INAD INADEQUATE. WE ENHANCED THAT STANDARDS FROM WHAT IS SHOWN HERE AS -- UP TO 40% ON THE FRONT OF THE -- WHICH OF THESE MEET AND EXCEED. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT BEING CHARACTERIZED AS SOME TYPE OF BAIT AND SWITCH.

THESE ITEMS AS I INDICATED IN THE PRESENTATION, THE USE OF MASONRY MATERIALS AND THAT MENAGERIE WERE ALL DISCUSSED AT THE TIME OF ZONING WHICH RESULTED IN THAT RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE ADOPTION OF THE COUNCIL BY THE ORDINANCE WITH THIS ILLUSTRATION IN HERE AND ONE OF THE, IF YOU LOOK UNDER THAT TAPE, THE PAGE OF THE ORDINANCE, UNDER THIS ILLUSTRATION, IT INDICATES IN TEXT, THAT THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT THE MASONRY REQUIREMENT AND THE ORDINANCE IS MUCH GREATER THAN WHAT IS SHOWN IN THIS ILLUSTRATION.

AND THESE BUILDINGS WERE USED AS THE PATTERN FOR DEVELOPING THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE.

IT IS NOT IDENTICAL. I WANT FOLKS TO DEFEAT LIKE THE APPLICANT, STEVE OR PAUL OR JOSH HAS COME IN AND SAID, WE -- AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO PRODUCE SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

THIS IS WHAT IS IN THE ORDINANCE AND THESE ARE THE BUILDINGS, EXAMPLES OF WHICH ARE PROPOSED WHICH INCLUDE GREATER AMOUNTS OF MASONRY ON ALL ELEVATIONS AS WELL AS DISTANT EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ON ALL THE HOMES THAT WERE MENTIONED.

130-FOOT UNITS. THE CLARK 36 BUILDINGS.

AND THESE 36 BUILDINGS ON THE WHOLE PLAN YOU CAN SEE THEIR DISTRIBUTION ACROSS THE SITE. MANY OF THEM ARE INTERIOR.

THE ONES THAT ARE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET COMING SOUTH, THERE'S A RUN OF THE SIDE BUILDING AND THREE FRONT ELEVATIONS THAT ANYONE DRIVING DOWN THE STREET WOULD SEE AT ONE TIME IF YOU TURN DOWN THE STREET HERE, YOU ARE SEEING MOSTLY SIDE ELEVATIONS. I THINK THAT IS LIKE THE ENHANCEMENTS WERE MADE. IF YOU WERE TO WALK DOWN THIS COURTYARD THAT IS THE VIEW FROM THE FRONT OF THE DWELLINGS ON EITHER SIDE HERE, YOU SEE THOSE SIX BUILDINGS.

SO GREAT EFFORT WAS MADE TO PARSE THIS OUT IN SUCH A WAY WHERE IT IS NOT A LONG, YOU KNOW, EIGHT OR 12 BUILDINGS IN A ROW DISTRIBUTION ACROSS THE SITE.

GROUP THREE BUILDINGS THAT ARE VISIBLE AT ONE TIME.

I THINK THE APPLICATION OF THESE MATERIALS AT THE SETBACKS, YOU CAN SEE ON THIS PAGE. AND WE DID NOT GET INTO THIS ISSUE. BUT ALONG THE FACE OF ALL OF THAT UNITS, THERE'S A MINIMUM OF 2-FOOT OFF THE.

THEY ACTUALLY HAVE 6 FEET OF A VARIATION FROM ONE ELEVATION ACROSS THE FRONT ELEVATION. SO THERE'S NO -- LOOK AT SOME OF THE TOWNHOME BUILDINGS THAT ARE BUILT INTO BUILDING ARE ALL FLAT FACE. THESE HAVE ABOUT FOUR TO 6 FEET OF UPSET. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDED AND I WANT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT THESE PROPOSED PLANS, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S BEEN AN ASK FOR MORE AND DIFFERENT THINGS.

BUT ALL OF THESE HOMES COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS.

AND WE THINK NOT ONLY MEET BUT EXCEED THE EXPECTATION THAT WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT WERE INCLUDED.

THANK YOU FOR THE EXTRA TIME TO SHARE THAT.

>> BRAD GRABOW: I READ THE DEPARTMENT'S REPORT.

AND THIS ISSUE BECAUSE MY ATTENTION.

-- CAUGHT MY ATTENTION. IT IS 130 UNITS.

IT IS, YOU KNOW, THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT ELEVATION OPTIONS.

[00:20:06]

AND THOSE ARE -- THE SIX CLASSES AND FIVE TEXAS, IF YOU WILL, ARC THEY ARE SET BACK FROM NOON TO 146TH STREET AND HAVE THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THOSE UNITS AND HAVE MORE TREES IN FRONT OF THOSE UNITS. ARCHITECTURAL MONOTONY AND I'M NOT SURE IF THERE IS PART BUT IF THERE IS, IT IS MITIGATED BY THE LAYOUT OF THE PROJECT. AS JOHN JUST MENTIONED, THE COURTYARDS HAVE ONLY 18 UNITS FACING EACH OTHER.

THAT IS AN INTERNAL ISSUE. IF IT IS AN ISSUE AT ALL.

AND SO I THINK THE BREAKUP OF 130 UNITS INTO THE FIVES SIXES, AND FOR PLEXUS GOES A LONG WAY TOWARDS SOFTENING THIS ISSUE.

AND DEEP ORIENTATION OF THE BUILDINGS, YOU KNOW, INTERNAL FACING VERSUS EXTERNAL FACING IS ANOTHER FACTOR IN FAVOR OF OR THAT SOFTENS THIS ISSUE IF IT IS AN ISSUE AT ALL.

I RECALLED A POLITY -- I BELIEVE A POLITY PROJECT AT 161ST AT THE MOMENT. AND I WENT TO LOOK AT IT BECAUSE I RECALLED THERE THAT WE DO HAVE THE PROJECTS IN WESTFIELD.

THAT PROJECT DOES HAVE LONGER BUILDINGS OR MORE UNITS IN EACH BUILDING. AND IT IS LARGELY ORIENTED ALONG ONLY TWO STREETS. SO IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE INTERNAL EFFECT OR THE APPEARANCE OF MONOTONY, MIGHT BE FOUND OUT THERE. AND I WAS SURPRISED THAT WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT COMMUNITY, THE VARIETY OF COLORS AND BUILDING MATERIALS REALLY DID A DECENT JOB OF AVOIDING ANY CONCERNS ABOUT MONOTONY. SO, YOU KNOW, THE LAYOUT, THE SIZE OF THE BUILDIGS ALL CONTRIBUTED TO WHETHER THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE WITH ARCHITECTURAL MONOTONY OR NOT IN ADDITION TO THE STANDARDS AND THE P.U.D. ADDRESSING COLORS AND MATERIALS. SO I'M SATISFIED THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS PROPOSED NOW ARE GOING TO RESULT IN GOOD

PROJECT. >> BRAD GRABOW: OTHER QUESTIONS? OTHER DISCUSSION? KEVIN, YOUR MIC IS ON.

>> KEVIN RIDER: FOR A REASON. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> COMMISSIONER: I SECOND. >> BRAD GRABOW: A MOTION TO APPROVE BY MR. ROGER. IF THERE IS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE WILL VOTE TO APPROVE DOCKET.

ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

THE PLAN IS APPROVED. THANK YOU, STEVE.

>> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU FOR THAT YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.

>> BRAD GRABOW: NEXT IS THE DOCKET IN THING IN 00048.

THE APPLICANT SEEKS SITE PLAN AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR A NEW AUXILIARY PARKING LOT AND DETAIL AND SERVICE CENTER.

NORTH OF THE MAPLETON HYUNDAI DEALERSHIP.

THE ZONING IS B3 BUSINESS DISTRICT.

ON BEHALF OF EF AND CROSSROADS PROPERTY LLC.

RICK LANTZ. >> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS RICK LAWRENCE.

WE REPRESENT THE APPLICANT LLC IN REGARD TO THEIR DEEP EAT REQUEST FOR AUXILIARY LOT AND DETAIL AND SERVICE CENTER FOR THE MAPLETON ITALIAN IMPORTS AND DEALERSHIPS IN THE AREA.

PRESENT TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER IS CAIDEN A BUTTON, RICK BRENT SNIDER, TIM, WHO IS THAT LOCAL GENERAL MANAGER AND THE PROJECT ENGINEER. WE APPEAR BEFORE YOU AND APPEAR BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE AND AGAIN ON JULY 6TH.

RECEIVING A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION AT THE LAST COMMITTEE HEARING. AS A RESULT, I WILL FOCUS ON -- AS A RESULT, I WILL FOCUS THE PRESENTATION ON THE PROJECT REVISIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED ON MAY 18TH.

THAT AT THIS END, WE PROVIDED YOU UPDATED PROJECT BROCHURES.

TO REVIEW THE REQUEST CONSISTS OF A 9-ACRE PARCEL.

IT IS LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF BRENDEL DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THE OVERHEAD. AGAIN, THIS REQUEST IS FOR 80 LESS DP APPROVAL FOR A NEW SERVICE AND DETAILED BUILDING THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 20,000 SQUARE FEET IN AUXILIARY

[00:25:05]

SHORT-TERM BICYCLE PARKING IS NOT PROVIDED AT BOTH -- AT THE PROPOSED SERVICE CENTER AND THE FUTURE BUILDING SITE WITH BIKE RACKS AT EACH BUILDING LOCATED HERE AND HERE.

TRASH DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE WAS ADDED TO THE PLANS AND IS ADJACENT TO THE SERVICE CENTER BUILDING ON THE SOUTH WAS QUARTER AND AWAY FROM RAMBLE DRIVE AS REQUESTED.

THESE AREA ABOUT THE NORTHERN TENSION POND WAS ADJUSTED AND DOES NOT EXTEND IN THAT 50-FOOT BUFFER TO THE NORTH OF THE POND.

THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS SITE, THERE'S A 50-FOOT WOODED BUFFET RIGHT HERE PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS AN EASEMENT AROUND THE POND THAT EXTENDED INTO THE AREA THAT HAS BEEN REDUCED.

IT DOES NOT EXTEND PAST THAT 50-FOOT AREA RIGHT THERE.

ON-SITE CROSSWALKS HAVE ALSO BEEN ADDED, WHICH ARE SHOWN IN THIS AREA DOWN HERE AND HERE. BEHIND TAB THREE OF THE BROCHURE ARE UPDATED ELEVATIONS AND CHANGES TO THE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN AS WHITE PAINTED CONCRETE PANELS AND THEN WINDOWS WERE ADDED TO THE EAST ELEVATION AND THAT IS SHOWN RIGHT HERE IN THIS AREA.

THE LANDSCAPE PLAN WAS ALSO UPDATED.

OF KNOW, 24 EVERGREENS WERE ADDED ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE ALONG THIS AREA. PROVIDE A BUFFER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE.

SIDEWALK OVERLONG RAMBLE DRIVE IS GOING TO BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE AMATEUR STREET TREES AND THE PROPERTY LINE IN THIS AREA.

ADDITIONAL SHRUBS WERE ADDED ALONG THE SOUTH ENTRANCE IN THIS AREA. THERE WERE A COUPLE CONFLICT LETTING TENT BETWEEN SHOWN LIGHTBULBS AND SIDEWALKS BRIDGEWORK RESULT WITH THIS UPDATED LIGHTING PLAN.

BEHIND TAB SIX IS AN AUDITOR AND EXHIBITED TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT A CAR VEHICLE DELIVERY COULD ACCESS THE SITE OFF OF RAMBLE DRIVE AND GO TO THE SITE AND AN EXIT ONTO ROUTE ABOUT WHICH IS SOUTH OF THIS ENTRANCE RIGHT HERE.

ALSO TO SHOW THAT EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND CAR TRANSPORT VEHICLE COULD EXIST ON THE SITE AT THE SAME TIME, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. I CONCLUSION, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS FULLY COMPLIANT WITH ALL THAT REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNDERLYING -- WE WORK WITH STAFF TO ADDRESS COMMENTS AND CONCERNS RAISED DURING THE PROCESS.

WE REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THE 80 LESS REQUEST BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU, RICK. THE DEPARTMENT REPORT.

>> PARTICIPANT: UPDATESWERE PRESENTED AS RICK HAS GONE OVER TONIGHT. AT THE JULY MEETING, WE LEARNED ABOUT THE WINDOWS, THREE OF THE FOUR WINDOWS ON EAST ELEVATION WILL BE SPANDREL CLASS MEETING THAT -- MEANING THAT YOU CAN'T SEE THROUGH THEM. AND ONLY ONE WILL BE A VISION GLASS WINDOW WHICH WILL GO INTO THE BREAK ROOM AREA OF THE BUILDING. AND I THINK THAT THIS WILL BE OKAY. I THINK IT IS IT A GOOD COMPROMISE. AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WILL BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHICH ONE IS REAL AND WHICH ONE IS NOT. I THINK THEY WILL ALL LOOK LIKE WINDOWS. I'M VERY THANKFUL THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO ADD THOSENTO BUILDING DESIGN.

I DID SPEAK WITH THE EVAN FORRESTER ABOUT THE SIDEWALK AND THE EXISTING TREES. HE SAID THAT THE ROOTS OF THE TREES WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE TO THE NEW SIDEWALK.

HE SAID TYPICALLY IF A SIDEWALK NEEDS TO BE, RECONSTRUCTED OR REPAIRED, IT IS MORE OFTEN AN ISSUE OF HOW CONSTRUCTED AND/OR WATER AND DRAINAGE TYPICALLY PULLING UNDER THE SIDEWALK RATHER THAN THE TREE ROOT. SO THAT IS WHAT HE SAID OF THE SIDEWALK AND THE TREES AND IS OKAY WITH THE SIDEWALK BEING PUT IN A LONG RANDALL DRIVE. GENERALLY, I THINK WE MADE A LOT OF POSITIVE CHANGES TO PROJECT. AS RICK WENT OVER.

[00:30:05]

THE DUMPSTER WAS REORIENTED AWAY MORE ROOM WAS GIVEN FOR TRUCKS TO TURN AND PARK ON THAT SIDE TO KEEP THEM OFF OF RANCHO DRIVE.

ADDITIONAL TREES WILL BE PLANTED.

AND SIDEWALKS WILL BE ADDED ALONG THE EAST OF BOTH BUILDINGS FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. SO WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL TONIGHT. THINK YOU.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER: THE ONLY THING I COULD ADD TO THE GOT REPETITIVE.

GREAT JOB IN RECAPPING THAT. I SHOULD NOT SAY THE TWO.

ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE OUTSTANDING PRIOR TO THAT HAVE ALL BEEN TAKEN CARE OF AND AND THE ONLY ISSUES THAT WERE TALKED ABOUT AND NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE URBAN FOREST WITH REGARDS TO THE PUTTING IN LANDSCAPING AND PUTTING IN SIDEWALKS AND ENHANCING SIDEWALKS -- TREE ROOTS THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED. AND THAT ISSUE HAS BEEN ELIMINATED. SO THERE'S NOTHING ELSE I COULD

SAY TO ADD TO IT. >> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU.

DISCUSSION? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

>> COMMISSIONER: MR. PRESIDENT, QUICK QUESTION.

HOW TALL WILL THE TREES BE AT PLANTING?

6 FEET. >> CHRISTINE ZOCCOLA: IS IT

6 FEET? >> COMMISSIONER: TYPICALLY.

>> CHRISTINE ZOCCOLA: ARE THE EVERGREEN TREES AS OPPOSED TO -- OKAY. OKAY.

AND WHAT WAS DECIDED ON RETENTION? IS THAT PLANTINGS? I GUESS IT IS DRY RETENTION. ARE THE PLANTINGS INCLUDED IN THE? I KNOW JOSH WAS ASKING ABOUT

THAT. >> PARTICIPANT: NO.

IT MIGHT BE NATIVE GRASSES. BUT NO OTHER PLANTINGS OF SIN THAT. IT IS ON THE NORTH SIDE.

>> CHRISTNE ZOCCOLA: OKAY. THE COMMITTEE, ARE THEY DOING -- ARE YOU GUYS PLANTING MORE GRASSES? I KNOW JOSH WAS ASKING ABOUT THAT.

OKAY. OKAY.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS. THANK YOU.

>> BRAD GRABOW: SO? >> SUSAN WESTERMEIER: THE DEPARTMENT DID A NICE JOB. I HAVE A QUESTION THAT CAME FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND I DID NOT HEAR AN ANSWER IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE APA OR OUTDOOR LOUDSPEAKER?

DID THAT EVER GET DISCUSSED? >> BRAD GRABOW: WE HAVE

COMMITTED NO SPEAKERS. >> ALAN POTASNIK: OKAY, I JUST DID NOT SEE IT. THANK YOU.

-- >> SUSAN WESTERMEIER: OKAY, I

JUST DID NOT SEE IN PARTICULAR. >> BRAD GRABOW: I JUST HAVE --

>> COMMI >> BRAD GRABOW: AND I HAVE QUESTION FOR STAFF. HOW ARE WE GOING TO MATURE THE SIDE LOOKS GET BUILT HIGHER THAN THE STANDARD THAT WE HAVE FOR

SIDEWALKS? >> COMMISSIONER: I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WILL BE BUILT HIGHER ARE YOU REFERRING TO WHAT I SAID DARREN SAID TYPICALLY THEY ARE JUST NOT BILLED WILL.

IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE? YES? OKAY.

WE DO HAVE INSPECTORS THAT GO OUT ON-SITE AND MAKE SURE THERE'S PROPER COMPACTION OF THE SUB MATERIAL AND FILL -- I CAN ONLY RELY ON THEM TO INSPECT IT AS THE PROJECT MOVES ALONG.

>> NICK KESTNER: MY QUESTION IS, THE -- WILL GO BY OUR STANDARDS.

BUT WE ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING MORE THAN AS STANDARDS.

HOW ARE WE GOING TO -- >> PARTICIPANT: I DON'T KNOW IF WE ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING MORE THAN OUR STANDARDS.

I JUST -- WHAT DARREN WAS REFERRING TO WAS ONE SOMETHING -- FAIL, HE BELIEVES IT IS BECAUSE IT WAS NOT BUILT VERY WELL. I DON'T THINK I'M SAYING THAT THEY NEED TO BUILD IT BETTER. BUT THEY DO NEED TO BUILD IT

WELL. >> NICK

>> NICK KESTNER: THEY WERE NOT BUILT TO OUR STANDARDS WOULD BE

-- >> PARTICIPANT: YEAH, THEY BRENT

[00:35:02]

BUILT TO OUR STANDARDS. >> NICK KESTNER: MAYBE PROPERLY IS THAT BETTER ADJECTIVE OR ADVERB?

>> COMMISSIONER: HAVE THERE BEEN ANY ISSUES WITH VEHICLES BEING DISPLAYED IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ON THE GRASS OR IN ANY WAY THAT

IS A VIOLATION OF CITY CODE? >> PARTICIPANT: I'M NOT AWARE OF

THAT. >> BRAD GRABOW: OKAY.

OKAY. GOOD.

MR. PRESIDENT? KEVIN?

>> KEVIN RIDER: WE GOT A COMMITMENT FINALLY THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO UNLOAD TRUCKS ON YOUR DRIVE.

ONCE THE ATTORNEY LOOK AT THEM AND TOLD THEM THE ONLY ANSWER WAS, YES, WE WANT TO DO IT. BECAUSE OF THE WORK DOES YOUR WORK THAT YOU SAVED ME EMOTION. WE WILL LEAVE THAT IN.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU.

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU, SO.

WE APPROVE THE DOCKET. DPA AND MAPLETON DIETL CENTER.

ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES.

THE PLAN IS APPROVED. THANK YOU, RICK.

NEXT IS THE DOCKET MEETING IN 00062.

GAS STATION SETBACKS AND STANDARDS AMENDMENT.

THE PETITION IS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION.

ADRIENNE? >> PARTICIPANT: GOOD EVENING.

ADRIENNE KILLING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMITTEE SERVICES. WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE SETBACK OF GAS PUMPS AND PUMP ISLANDS FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED OR USED PROPERTIES. THE CURRENT SETBACK IN THAT YOU DO IS 80 FEET AND THIS ORDINANCE PROPOSES TO INCREASED UP TO 500 FEET AND ALSO APPLIED AT 50S AS WELL.

THE COURT WAS A WIDE RANGE OF DISCUSSION AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEVERAL QUESTIONS WERE RAISED REGARDING THE APPLICABILITY TO SCHOOLS AS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, NURSING RETIREMENT AND CONVOLUTION FACILITIES.

GROCERY STORE GAS STATIONS HOW P.U.D.'S WOULD BE ADDRESSED AND LIGHTING FOR THE CANOPIES AS WELL AS PROPER -- PROBABLY THE MOST DISCUSSION OCCURRED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AND AT THE COMMITTEE REGARDING HOW TO APPLY THIS TO ALL OF THAT ZONING DISTRICTS AND NOT JUST THOSE WHERE GAS STATIONS ARE CURRENTLY PERMITTED USES. SO WE TALKED ABOUT SEVERAL THINGS AT THE COMMITTEE, SEVERAL OF THOSE THINGS AND DETERMINED THAT SCHOOLS, NURSING HOME FACILITIES, GAS STATIONS, STORES, WOULD ALL BE AFFECTED BY THOSE AFFECTED OR PROTECTED BY THIS ORDINANCE AND THEN WE MOVED ALONG TO THE -- ALL OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS. WE DETERMINED THAT EVEN THOUGH WE DID NOT WANT TO ADD THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS TO THAT LIST OF ICONS AND THAT YOU DO, WE INSTEAD OPTED TO ADD AN APPLICABILITY PARAGRAPH BECAUSE THE FEAR IS, WHAT IF THERE'S A CASE THAT GOES TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR A USE VARIANCE THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT SETBACK, INCREASED SETBACK WOULD ALSO APPLY.

SO ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE PROPOSED AT THE COMMITTEE WERE TO AND AN APPLICABILITY PARAGRAPH TO PARAGRAPH A AND YOU WILL FIND IT AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE ONE.

AND I WILL GO AHEAD AND READ IT ALOUD.

IN ADDITION TO THE DISTRICT OFFICE -- DISTRICTS LISTED ABOVE, THE STANDARDS SHALL APPLY TO ANY DISTRICT IN WHICH AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION OR AN AUTOMOBILE FILLING STATION IS PERMITTED BY A VARIANCE OF USE. SO WE BELIEVE THAT TAKES CARE OF ANY APPLICATION THAT WOULD GO TO THE BZA THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF

[00:40:04]

THE DISTRICT DISTRICT AND THEN THE OUTCOME OF ADDING THAT PARAGRAPH A IS THAT WE CHANGE THE -- WE ADDED A PARAGRAPH B AND CHANGED THAT TITLE HEADING TO THE STANDARD.

AND THAT IS WHERE YOU WILL FIND THE SETBACKS AND THAT LETTING PROPOSED STANDARDS THAT WERE ALREADY -- THAT YOU HAVE ALREADY SEEN. THE OTHER PROPOSAL THAT ACTUALLY CAME UP AT THE PUBLIC HEARING BUT WE PRESENTED IT THE COMMITTEE WAS TO CLARIFY THE UNDER CANOPY LIGHTING TO BE MORE APPROPRIATE AND INSTEAD OF JUST STATING FLUSH MOUNTED WE SPECIFIED THAT IT SHALL USE FULL CUTOFFS RECESS LUMINEERS WITH FLAT LENSES. THOSE WERE THE ONLY TWO AMENDMENT THAT WERE PROPOSED IN COMMITTEE.

AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS OR HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. THE ONE OTHER PIECE OF DISCUSSION THAT WE COVERED HAVE THE WAS UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND HOW THOSE WOULD BE AFFECTED AND I WILL REPEAT, THIS DOES NOT AFFECT ANY P.U.D.S. HOWEVER, THAT 500-FOOT STANDARD CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO ANY NEWLY PROPOSED PLAN UNIT INVOLVEMENT THAT MY PROPOSAL TO ALLOW GAS STATIONS.

SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD CERTAINLY BE INTERESTED IN DOING THE DEPARTMENT WOULD DEFINITELY PUSH FOR THAT AS WILL.

ONCE QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED, WE RECOMMEND THAT THIS GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ADRIENNE.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE TO BE ADDED FROM THE DEPARTMENT? AND FROM THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE?

>> COMMISSIONER: ADRIAN HAS DONE A GREAT JOB.

THANKS. >> BRAD GRABOW: GREAT.

I WILL OPENED THE DISCUSSION FOR US WITH TWO QUESTIONS.

LINES 84 AND 85 DEFINITION OF STORAGE OR SALE OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS INCLUDES RETAIL OR WHOLESALE STORAGE OF FLAMMABLE LIQUID. POP HOW DO WE NOT PUT UP PAINT STORES OR CHARCOAL OR LIGHTER FLUID RETAIL SALES AND AVOID THE

CONSEQUENCES IN THAT DEFINITION? >> COMMISSIONER: THIS PARTICULAR USE, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO AFFECT OTHER THAN CONSOLIDATING A NUMBER OF THINGS TO SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT FOSSIL FUELS, WHICH WE ADDED A NEW DEFINITION FOR.

>> BRAD GRABOW: SO WHERE DOES THAT DEFINITION HAVE SIGNIFICANCE ELSEWHERE IN THAT YOU DO?

>> THE FOSSIL FUEL DEFINITION? >> BRAD GRABOW: THE PETROLEUM

PRODUCTS DEFINITION. >> PARTICIPANT: THAT IS, I BELIEVE LISTED UNDER AN INDUSTRIAL TYPE USE.

IN VARIOUS ZONING DISTRICT. AND IN THE USE TABLE.

>> BRAD GRABOW: OKAY. SO WE ARE NOT -- BUT WE ARE EDITING THE DEFINITION HERE, WE ARE NOT IMPLEMENT ANY NEW SETBACK STANDARDS OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS FOR THAT?

>> PARTICIPANT: CORRECT. >> ALAN POTASNIK: BACK.

>> BRAD GRABOW: OKAY. AND 76 AND 77 STATION, AUTOMOBILE WILLING. ANY PLACE OF BIT BUSINESS HAVING AS ITS PURPOSE THE SALE OR THE SELLING OF MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL AND LUBRICANTS AT RETAIL. SO WHERE DOES THIS THE PROPOSED SETBACK REQUIREMENT APPLY WHERE FUELS ARE DISPENSED BUT NOT SOLD? SO FOR EXAMPLE, A FLEET DEPOT, SCHOOL BUSES, AN INDUSTRIAL OR COMMERCIAL USER HAS A FLEET OF TRUCKS THAT THEY REVEAL THEMSELVES?

>> PARTICIPANT: WE TALKED ABOUT THAT BRIEFLY.

, AND WE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THAT OCCURS.

BUT WE FELT LIKE THE CHARGE OF THE ORDINANCE WAS TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS FROM THE NEW WE TOLD INSTALLATIONS WHERE

[00:45:05]

AND OF COURSE, THE CONCERN WAS WITH THE DISPENSING ENTER AIR ABOUT THAT AND THE BENZENE AND OTHER THINGS RELEASED.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU. SUE?

>> SUSAN WESTERMEIER: IT WAS JUST A QUESTION THAT I HAVE BECAUSE I'M NOT THAT FAMILIAR. AND C1, C2 ZONING AREAS THAT DO NOT FALL UNDER US, OUR GAS STATIONS, IS THAT STILL, WOULD THAT GO TO THE BZA FOR A BILLIONS IF IT WAS IN THAT AREA? I DID NOT SEE IT ADDRESSED IN HERE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT IS HANDLED.

>> PARTICIPANT: ANY QUESTION OF USE, C1 AND C TO IS NOT ONE OF THE DISTRICTS THAT PERMITS THOSE.

SO ANY QUESTION OF USE WOULD STILL GO TO THE BZA.

>> ALAN POTASNIK: OKAY. THANK YOU.

-- >> SUSAN WESTERMEIER: OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER: I MOVED TO

APPROVE. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU BOTH. MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE FORWARD THE DOCKET TO THE COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, ESSAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THIS WILL GO ON TO THE CARMEL COMMON COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS, ADRIENNE. NEXT UNDER OLD BUSINESS IS DOCKET ENDING IN 00075, BANK OF AMERICA, THE BRIDGES.

THE APPLICANT SIX SITE PLAN FOR A NEW BIKE BRANCH WITHIN THE BRIDGES. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ILLINOIS STREET AND SO TECH DRIVE WITH A PLANT ADDRESS OF 11530 NORTH ILLINOIS STREET.

THE ZONING IS UNDER ORDINANCE Z-550-11.

JON? >> PARTICIPANT: GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS JON SHEIDLER. HE IS JOINING BY TELEPHONE.

HE DID NOT MAKE THE TRIP FROM DENVER THIS TIME.

HE CAN ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS AND CAN SPEAK TO THE CHANGES OF THE BUILDING THAT WERE MADE. JUST A BRIEF REVIEW, THE PROPOSED SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 1 ACRE LOT LOCATED HERE IN THE NORTHWEST -- I'M SORRY GOT NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE EXISTING PARKING LOT OF THAT MARKET DISTRICT SUPERMARKET LOCATED BETWEEN SPRING MOUNTAIN ROAD AND ILLINOIS STREET.

JUST KIND OF CATTY CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF ILLINOIS STREET AND IS OUR TECH TRIBES -- SO TOOK DRIVE.

THIS LANDSCAPE PLAN OR SITE PLAN IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET. WE MADE A FEW MINOR UPDATES SINCE THE PACKETS WERE PROVIDED. BUT GOING INTO COMMITTEE, WE HAD REDUCED THE PARKING ACCOUNT. WE TOOK FOUR SPACES OFF RIGHT HERE TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE.

WE TOOK FOUR SPACES OFF TO AN ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE AS WELL.

AFTER COMMITTEE, BASED OFF COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION WITH PLANNING STAFF, THERE WERE THREE REMAINING SPACES ON THIS BACK ROAD NEXT TO THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AND WE WENT AHEAD AND REMOVE THOSE AS WELL. JUST TO PROVIDE ONE OPEN GREEN SPACE IN THE BACK. BOTH ENHANCE THE LANDSCAPING IN THESE GREEN AREAS. ONE OTHER ITEM STEMMING FROM DISCUSSION WAS FROM COMMITTEE AND PLANNING STAFF WAS ACTUALLY WE HAD A LOT OF INTERSECTION. THERE WAS A CONCERN THAT IT WAS ALMOST TOO MUCH AND THERE WOULD BE VISIBLE TO CONCERNS.

SO WE CHANGED A LOT OF THOSE SHADE TREES TO ORNAMENTAL TREES.

THEY ARE SMALLER AND ARE SHOWN IN PINK.

WE ALSO CHANGED THESE TREES BACK HERE WHERE WE ADDED THE GREEN SPACE. FROM ORNAMENTAL TO SHADE TO SORT OF PROVIDE A SHADED LAWN AREA BACK HERE THAT WILL BE MORE DESIRABLE. AND THEN IF KEVIN CAN SPEAK, I

[00:50:06]

>> KEVIN RIDER: GOOD EVENING. I HOPE YOU CAN HEAR ME WELL.

>> JON SHEIDLER: WE CAN. WELCOME, KEVIN.

JON SHEIDLER THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, WE WERE AS TO PROVIDE SORT OF MOTIVE AT THE VERY TOP, AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ADDED A PRAIRIE FLOWER DESIGN AND THAT OCCURS ON THE ENDS OF THE DESIGN ON EACH CORNER OF THE BUILDING OTHER WAY AROUND AROUND THE BUILDING.

THE DESIGN, IT IS A POWDER COATED METAL PANEL.

IT GIVES IT AN INTERESTING THREE DIMENSIONAL LOOK.

IF YOU COULD GO TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING FOR ME.

ON THE REAR SIDE OF THE BUILDING, WE MADE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE INTERESTING. ONE MORE SHEET, JOHN.

-- JON. THERE WE GO.

THE BOTTOM ELEVATION THERE. WE ADDED TWO EXTERIOR WINDOWS.

MAKING IT A LITTLE BIT MORE INTERESTING.

WE ALSO EXPECT IT THE CANOPY ACROSS THESE WINDOWS.

-- EXPANDED THE CANOPY ACROSS THESE WINDOWS.

I BELIEVE THOSE WERE THE ONLY DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT WE WERE TO

ADDRESS. >> JON SHEIDLER: OVERALL, THE ONLY UNDER NECKLACE OTHER ITEM TO MENTION, I THINK WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING, A LITTLE BIT OF WE NEEDED TO CONFIRM WHETHER THIS PARTICULAR OUTLOOK ON THE SITE WAS CONTEMPLATED IN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING, WE CONFIRMED THAT WAS. IN THIS GENERAL AREA.

SO WE CAN DISCUSS THAT FURTHER I WANTED TO ♪ ♪ THAT THAT WAS CONFIRMED. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AFTER

THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU, JOHN.

RACHEL? >> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU.

WE DID DISCUSS THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE AS WELL AS THE TWO NEW WINDOWS IN THE REAR. A SIDELINE STUDY WAS PROVIDED T% ASSURE HAT THE ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT WILL NOT BE SEEN FROM THE NEARBY STREETS. THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BRIDGES SITE WAS DISCUSSED AND THE OWNER WAS PRESENT VIA ZOOM.

AND THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO FIXING THE PAVEMENT ISSUES THAT EXIST. I ALSO GOT IN TOUCH WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT TO FIND OUT WHAT KIND OF PAPERS WERE USED AT THE RIGHT ABOUT THAT IS INSTALLED RIGHT NORTHEAST OF HERE. AND THE BRIDGES PROPERTY MANAGER WAS INTERESTED IN FINDING OUT WHAT THOSE PAPERS WERE.

SO CHRIS WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT TRACK THAT DOWN AND I FORWARDED IT TO LAURA, SO THEY SHOULD HAVE THAT AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL BE ABLE TO FIND THOSE AND GET THEM INSTALLED BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, THIS CONSTRUCTION CYCLE, WHICH IS WHAT THEY COMMITTED TO. WHEN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT WAS RELEASED, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN HAD NOT YET BEEN FINALIZED.

YOU ARE SEEING THAT FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT THEY HAVE NOT APPROVED. WE TALKED TODAY.

HE LOOKED AT IT AND THOUGHT IT LOOKED GREAT AND THAT THE ADDING OF MORE GREEN SPACE ON THE WEST SIDE WOULD ONLY HELP THOSE TREES GROW AND THRIVE MORE. LET'S SEE.

WHAT ELSE? AND WHEN TALKING WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THE OWNER OF THE BRIDGES AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING, WE LEARNED THAT THE ONLY OTHER POSSIBLE LOCATION FOR A SECOND OUT LOT IS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE MARKET DISTRICT PARKING LOT. ADJACENT TO SPRINGVILLE.

AND THE REGIONS BANK. CIRCLE FOR ME.

YEAH. THANK YOU.

BUT THEY SAID IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON OR MARKETING. THEY HAVE NO TIMELINE OR CERTAINTY THAT THIS WILL EVER HAPPEN FOR US.

SO I DON'T THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN REALLY HOLD ONTO OR THINK ABOUT THAT IS GOING TO BE VERY -- COMING VERY SOON.

SO GENERALLY, I THINK THAT IS GOOD.

AND IF SOMETHING -- COME IN AND IF IT -- COME IN IN THIS ERIC THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PARKING LOT, I THINK WE WOULD

[00:55:04]

BUT I DON'T REALLY THINK THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE FOR US TO DO ABOUT THE OVERALL GREATER BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT AT THIS TIME OR WITH THIS PROJECT. TWO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DID STAY AFTER THAT LAST MEETING AND TALKED WITH LORI PFEIFFER TO PROPERTY MANAGER FOR THE BRIDGES AND TOLD HER ABOUT WAYS THAT THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD IMPROVE THE BRIDGES PROJECT.

AND SO I THINK THEY MIGHT BE TRYING TO WORK TOWARDS THOSE GENERALLY OUTSIDE OF OUR PROCESS.

SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS GOOD THAT SHE WAS THERE AND LISTEN.

THEIR CONCERNS, GENERALLY. COMING BACK TO THIS PROJECT, IT HAS PROGRESSED SINCE THEY FIRST CONTACTED ME ABOUT THIS BEING A SITE THEY WANTED TO DEVELOP. IT WENT FROM THEIR STANDARD ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN THAT THEY DO EVERYWHERE TO A UNIQUE DESIGN THAT IS COMPLEMENT GREAT TO PRAIRIE STYLE ARCHITECTURE AND MEETS THE P.U.D.S REQUIREMENTS AND IT WILL ALSO COMPLEMENT ALL THE OTHER BUILDINGS AND ALL THE HARD WORK AND TIME THAT WE HAVE PUT INTO THE OTHER BUILDINGS IN MAKING THOSE LOOK THE BEST THAT WE CAN IN THE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE BRIDGES.

SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TONIGHT OF THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU. >> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU.

ALLEN, WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO AD FROM THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE?

>> PARTICIPANT: I THINK RACHEL PRETTY MUCH COVERED EVERYTHING.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID TALK ABOUT IN SOME DETAIL WAS THAT LOOKING AT THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE ARCHITECTURAL APPEAL OF ADDING PRAYER DETAILS AND SHE USED WEED AND ROUGH STONE THAT WAS AT THAT WAS NOT SEEN IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN.

ALSO, EXCUSE ME. SINCE THE DISCUSSION CAME UP AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, I BELIEVE IN WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT OVER PARKING THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE PETITIONER AGREED TO REMOVE SOME OF THOSE SPACES IN THE REAR AND ENHANCE HE LANDSCAPING STEP IT UP A GREAT DEAL AND AS WELL AS FIXING DEFICIENCIES IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN AS FAR AS THE A.D.A.

COMPLIANCE WAS CONCERNED AND THE ROUNDABOUTS.

SO THOSE WERE ADDITIONAL ISSUES THAT THE DEVELOPER AGREED TO.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU. COMMISSION DISCUSSION?

NICK? >> NICK KESTNER: I WAS THE ONE THAT VOTED NO. I'M NOT AGAINST THE PROJECT AT ALL. I JUST, AT THE TIME, WE HAD MEMBERS CAUGHT LOOSE ENDS THAT WERE NOT FINALIZED SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN FINALIZED REGARDING THE LANDSCAPING.

BUT ALSO TALKED ABOUT MAY BE A PICNIC TABLE OR SOMETHING ON THAT WEST SIDE AND THAT IS NOT MENTIONED HERE.

BUT THAT WAS MY REASONING AT THE TIME.

>> BRAD GRABOW: AND BRAD, IF I'M A?

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU. RACHEL CRANE.

>> RACHEL KEESLING: WE DID TALK MORE WITH THE PROPERTY MANAGER AFTER THAT MEETING AND SHE SAID THAT SHE WOULD LOOK INTO WORKING WITH THE BANK OF AMERICA PROPERTY OWNER TO DECIDE IF IT IS A REGULAR BENCH, IF IT IS A PICNIC TABLE, AT WORK WITH THEM ON WHAT COULD BE PUT INTO CACH AND THEN ALSO RUN THAT BY US.

WHEN THEY DO GET TO THE POINT. SO THEY DID TALK ABOUT ADDING

SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> COMMISSIONER: AND IF I MIGHT, THAT WAS PART OF THE INTENT OF THIS AREA, WITH ADDING LAWN SPACE AND THE SHADE TREES TO KIND OF CREATE THAT SETTING FOR THE POSSIBILITY THAT INCORPORATE THOSE DETAILS IN THE FUTURE.

WE JUST HAVE NOT SPECIFIED THEM AT THIS POINT CAUGHT THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE PLACES THERE FOR THEM, PICNIC TABLE OR BENCHES THAT ARE A RELATIVELY SIMPLE THING THAT COULD BE

ADDED. >> BRAD GRABOW: I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT IDEA. IT IS NOT REQUIRED BY THE P.U.D.

[01:00:01]

IS THAT CORRECT? >> RACHEL KEESLING: NO.

>> BRAD GRABOW: BUT IT WOULD NOT VIOLATE THE P.U.D.

>> RACHEL KEESLING: NO. IT WOULD BE A NICE ENHANCEMENT.

>> MR. PRESIDENT, KEVIN. >> KEVIN RIDER: I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DOCKET, BANK OF AMERICA.

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> BRAD GRABOW: FINALLY.

YOU HAVE BEEN TRYING. YOU HAVE BEEN TRYING ALL NIGHT.

IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE APPROVE DOCKET PC-2 PC-2021-00075. THE PLAN IS APPROVED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JOHN. THANK YOU, KEVIN.

[J. New Business]

THE APPLICANT SIX MINOR SUBDIVISION PLAN APPROVAL FOR 2 LOTS. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 1277 WEST 136TH STREET WHERE THE ZONING IS S1 RESIDENTIAL.

IT IS FILED BY LEIGH ANNE FERRELL ON BEHALF OF OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

YEP. WELCOME BACK.

IF YOU WOULD HIT THE BOTTOM ON THAT BASE OF YOUR MICROPHONE.

YES. AND IF YOU WOULD INTRODUCE

YOURSELF BY NAME. >> LEIGH ANNE FERRELL: I CERTAINLY WILL. WE ARE MICHAEL AND MARYBETH FLEMING. WE OWN THE PROPERTY THAT IS BEING DISCUSSED. WE HAVE OWNED THEM FOR THE PAST 33 YEARS. WE ARE SEEKING IS EXPLAINED IN THE AGENDA, WE ARE SEEKING TO DISCUSS THE TWO -- LOT WE ARE SEEKING YOUR APPROVAL FOR A RESIDENCE, A SINGLE RESIDENCE TO GO ON LOT TWO. LOT ONE IS OUR HOME FOR 33 IS COPING AND LOT ONE IS ALSO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN AS OUR HOME. WE WOULD LIKE TO OFFER THE LOT THAT IS REFERRED TO AS LOT NUMBER TWO.

AND IT IS UP THERE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I DON'T HAVE A POINTER. IF I DO, I DON'T.

HENLY CREEK FLOWS THROUGH ON A DIAGONAL FROM THE NORTHWEST TO SOUTHEAST PRINT AND OUR HOME ENTERS FROM 136TH STREET, OUR HOME DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE FROM 136 STREET AND LINES ITS WAY BACK INTO THE WOODS AS IT CROSSING OVER HENLY CREEK AND IT LEADS TO THE HOUSE. THE DRIVEWAY IT HAS BEEN THE GOPHER FOOTMAN IS COPING AT THAT TIME, WE PUT THE DRIVER IN.

WE WERE GIVEN A VARIANCE, A SPECIAL PERMISSION FROM THE HAMILTON COUNTY DRAINAGE BOARD AND THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN UNCORRUPTED BY WATER FOR THE PAST 33 YEARS.

SO THERE WE GO. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT I'M NOT COVERING THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE COVERED OR SOMETHING ELSE TO EXPLAIN THAT YOU TO HAVE EXPLAINED, I WOULD HOPEFULLY BE

ABLE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS. >> BRAD GRABOW: OKAY.

THANK YOU. THE REPORT FROM THE DEPARTMENT.

>> COMMISSIONER: YES. THANK YOU.

FOR THE RECORD, ALEXIA LOPEZ. THIS PROJECT IS A MINOR SUBDIVISION. IT IS THE FIRST THAT WE HAVE HAD SINCE THE U.D.O. HAS BEEN IN PLACE.

IT IS A SIMPLER AND QUICKER PROCESS AND GOES THROUGH SECONDARY PROCESS. THIS PROCESS IS MEANT FOR SIMPLE LOT SPLITS LIKE THIS ONE AND THEY ARE PROPOSING EIGHT AND A HALF ACRE LOT TO BE SPLIT INTO TWO.

THE LOTS WILL SHARE THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY INSTEAD OF HAVING TWO CUTS. THE EXISTING HOME IS SET BACK FAIRLY FAR FROM 136TH STREET AND WILL REMAIN WHILE THE NEW HOME WILL BE LOCATED CLOSER TO 136TH ON LOT TWO.

THE HENLY OPEN DRAIN RUNS THROUGH THE PROPERTY AND WILL BE PRESERVED IN A REGULATED DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

WE ARE CONTINUING TO WORK ON STORMWATER COMMENTS.

THE FULL RIGHT OF WAY IS PRESENT FOR 136TH STREET AS IS THE

[01:05:05]

AND THEY HAVE ADDRESSED ALL OF OUR COMMENTS, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMENTS. WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUSPEND ITS RULES AND COMMISSION THAT APPROVED THIS EVENING. THANK YOU.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU. DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS FOR THE

COMMISSIONER? >> COMMISSIONER: I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. THIS PROPERTY IS BEAUTIFUL.

IT IS GORGEOUS. >> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU.

>> COMMISSIONER: I UNDERSTAND, WHY WOULD THEY COULD NOT BE TWO DRIVEWAYS? I'M CURIOUS WHY YOU WOULD NOT

HAVE A SECOND DRIVEWAY. >> PARTICIPANT: WE CAN ANSWER

THAT. >> CHRISTINE ZOCCOLA: OKAY.

>> PARTICIPANT: WE THOUGHT THAT IF SOMEONE WERE TO PURCHASE THIS LOCKET WE THOUGHT THAT THE SIMPLEST WAY TO DO IT WITHOUT GOING BACK INTO ANOTHER APPEAL OF SOME SORT WOULD BE TO USE THE ENTRY THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. AND THE ENTRANCE FROM 136TH STREET, THE ENTRANCE FOR OUT DRIVEWAY IS EXTRA WIDE.

BECAUSE WHEN CARMEL WHY DIDN'T 136 STREET, WE REQUESTED -- WHYY DIDN'T THE STREET, WE REQUESTED. AND I AFTER THE HAVE THE APRON TO THE DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE EXTRAWIDE.

AND THEY THOUGHT ABOUT THAT FOR A WEEK OR SO.

AND THEN THEY SAID, FINE WE CAN DO THAT.

SO THE OPENING TO THE DRIVEWAY ON 136 STREET BE THOUGHT THAT WHOEVER IT PURCHASES THE LOT, THE NEW OWNERS WOULD HAVE THEIR CHOICE OF USING THAT SAME ENTRANCE AND COMING IN.

I DON'T KNOW. ONE-THIRD OF THE WAY TWO-THIRDS OF THE WAY, WHATEVER BUILD THAT IS WORKING ON THIS PROJECT WHATEVER THAT BUILDER IS, OR WHOEVER THE BUILDER IS, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM, THE SITE -- DECIDE WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE TO CUT INTO THE PROPERTY. THAT WILL BEEP BASED ON THE DESIGN OF THE HOUSE THAT THE BUILDERS ARE BUILDING AND IF THEY DID NOT WANT WHAT IS TERMED A SHARED DRIVEWAY.

IT WOULD ONLY BE SHARED FOR A CERTAIN DISTANCE.

AND THEN THEY WOULD CUT OFF INTO THEIR AREA.

IF THEY DON'T LIKE THAT, IF THAT MIX THEM NERVOUS OR WHATEVER THE REASON IS, THEN I WOULD THINK THAT IT WOULD BE THEIR DUTY TO APPEAL TO CUT IN A NEW DRIVEWAY OFF 136 STREET.

>> CHRISTINE ZOCCOLA: THAT ALL MAKES SENSE BUT YES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT ALL MAKE SENSE.

>> BRAD GRABOW: ZOTEC AT THAT POINT, AN ACCESS EASEMENT TO COMPLETE THAT DRIVEWAY WOULD COME LATER ONCE THE OWNER OF LOT TWO KNOWS MORE ABOUT WHERE THEY WOULD NEED THAT.

>> PARTICIPANT: YES. YES.

>> ALEXIA LOPEZ: AND THERE IS A PARTIAL EASEMENT ALREADY.

WE MIGHT WORK WITH THEM TO SEE IF THAT NEEDS TO BE EXTENDED OR NOT. OTHERWISE, WOULD HAVE TO BE AMENDED. BUT THERE IS ONE EXISTING.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS IN ON --'S ON THIS IMAGE.

THAT WOULD BE SHARED ACCESS FOR THAT FIRST PART OF THE DRIVEWAY.

>> BRAD GRABOW: OKAY. AND THE LOT IS -- LOT TWO IS INTERESTINGLY SHAPED. WHEN YOU ALLOW FOR THE SETBACK LINES AND FOR THE SHEEP OF THE LATKE CLEARLY, THE HOME WILL NEED TO BE SITUATED SOMEPLACE IN THE UPPER THIRD OF THE LOT BEFORE IT NARROWS DOWN. UNLESS THE SIDE SETBACKS WOULD

AREA. >> PARTICIPANT: WELL, I DON'T HAVE TO PAPER WITH MEET THIS EVENING.

THERE IS A STATEMENT THAT LEIGH% ANNE FERRELL SENT US SHOWING ALL SETBACKS FROM THE DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE LOT AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A VERY ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THE HOUSE TO GO AND STILL BE WITHIN YOUR REQUIREMENTS OF SETBACKS.

SETBACK FROM 136. SETBACK FROM THIS BOUNDARY RIGHT HERE, WHICH IS THE EAST BOUNDARY FROM HERE.

>> BRAD GRABOW: UH-HUH. >> PARTICIPANT: AND ACTUALLY, THE PURCHASE OF THE LOT WOULD END RIGHT THERE, ON THAT LINE.

[01:10:04]

HENLEY CREEK. BUT IN REALITY, WE HAVE OUR HOME BACK HERE AND WE ARE IN THE VERY BACK PART OF THE LOT.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK OUT FROM OUR HOUSE AND LOOK AT OUR BOUNDARIES, WHEREVER IT -- THIS DRIVES ME CRAZY.

OKAY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR BOUNDARIES, WE LOOK RIGHT DOWN TO THE CREEK. ACROSS THE CREEK.

AND AFTER WE LOOKED AND WE SEE ACROSS THE CREEK, WE REALLY CAN'T EVEN SEAT WHAT IS THIS LOT.

AND I THINK THE HOUSE WOULD BE ANGLED.

THESE BUILDERS ARE FASCINATING. THEY WORK WONDERS.

I HAVE SEEN PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT I THOUGHT WERE DISASTROUS AND THEY PUT GORGEOUS, WELL-DONE HOMES ON THEM.

I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THAT PART OF IT.

YOU KNOW, THERE IS NOT A LINE THERE.

SO WHEN YOU ARE SITTING IN YOUR HOUSE, YOU ARE WALKING AROUND OR TAKING CARE OF YOUR PROPERTY, IT I WOULD HOPE TO HAVE PUT IN WRITING THAT THEY WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE LAND ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE CREEK. MICHAEL AND I HAVE MAINTAIN NOT BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE HELPED US WITH THAT YARDWORK.

WE HAVE MAINTAINED THAT THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THAT CREEK AND WE HAVE KEPT IT LOOKING LIKE A PARK.

FROM APRIL 1ST UNTIL OCTOBER 1ST, WE HAVE A MAN THAT COMES IN AND WEEDS THE CREEK BANKS, THE ENTIRE FLANKS OF THE CREEK. THE CREEK IS TOTALLY, CLEAN.

OF DEBRIS. THINGS THAT STORMS BRING WITH IT. UP A LOT IS NOT ONLY GOING TO -- IT IS LIKE YOU TAKE CARE OF RIGHT DOWN TO YOUR BANK OF THE CREEK. NO-BURN THAT MANY PEOPLE MOVE BUYING TODAY DO NOT HAVE ANY INTEREST IN TAKING CARE OF CREEKS, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM SHARE THE CREEK WORK WITH US IF SOMEHOW THAT NEEDS TO BE WORKED OUT WITH SUBDIVISION RESTRICTIONS WITHIN OUR OWN CONTROL.

EITHER THROUGH THE BUILDER OR THE PURHASE OF THE LAND.

IT SHOULD BE LANGUAGE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THAT.

>> BRAD GRABOW: YEAH. THANK YOU.

OF THE DISCUSSION? GO.

>> COMMISSIONER: THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER: WEEK MAKE A

MOTION TO EXTEND THE RULES. >> BRAD GRABOW: CARRY.

APPROVE -- SUSPEND THE RULES AND VOTE ON THIS.

YES, THANK YOU. >> BRAD GRABOW: SECOND.

>> BRAD GRABOW: ALL IN FAVOR OF SUSPENDING RULES TO THE SIDE OF THIS PETITION THIS EVENING, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

ANY OPPOSED BOOKS THE RULES ARE SUSPENDED.

CARRIE? >> CARRIE HOLLE: I MOVED TO APPROVE THIS. WE ARE NOT -- I MEAN, THE BUCK

STOPS HERE, RIGHT? >> COMMISSIONER: WE COMMISSION UPON THE FINAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL.

>> CARRIE HOLLE: YES. >> COMMISSIONER: PLEASE.

DID YOU HEAR ME SECOND? >> SUSAN WESTERMEIER: SECOND.

>> BRAD GRABOW: ALL IN FAVOR. ALL OPPOSED?

THE PLAN IS APPROVED? >> THANK YOU.

>> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> PARTICIPANT: THANK YOU. >> PARTICIPANT:

>> BRAD GRABOW: THE NEXT IS 000998 ELS AMEND ED MARTIN BUICK GMC SERVICE BAIT ADDICTION. THE APPLICANT SEEKS SITE PLAN AND DOES NOT APPROVAL TO THE EXISTING SERVICE CENTER WHERE THE OVERALL SITE IS 7.35 ACRES LOCATED AT 9896 NORTH MICHIGAN ROAD. THE ZONING IS I ONE INDUSTRIAL AND THE SITE IS ALSO WITHIN THE U.S. 421 OVERLAY.

THE PETITION IS FILED BY BRIAN CROSS.

BRIAN? >> BRIAN CROSS: GOOD EVENING.

BRIAN CROSS. I'M HERE EVENING WITH MARK HARRISON, THE PRESIDENT OF ED MARTIN AUTOMOTIVE GROUP.

WE ARE SEEKING AMENDMENT APPROVAL OF 4,348 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ADDITION. IT IS LOCATED AT 99TH STREET AND MICHIGAN ROAD IS THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT.

[01:15:02]

AND ALSO DID A BUILDING EXPANSION ON THE WESTERN END OF THE BUILDING HERE. ALONG WITH THE CAR WASH BAIT THAT WAS ADDED. WHAT YOU HAVE HIGHLIGHTED HERE IS THE PROPOSED SERVICE BAIT ADDITION IN RED.

THAT DEPICTS THE LOCATION OF THAT.

IT IS CURRENTLY ALL PAVED AREA. IT IS ASPHALT AND CONCRETE.

WE ARE NOT REPLACING ANYTHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, IT IS ALL IMPERVIOUS AREA. BUILDING MATERIALS.

JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA, WE ARE GOING TO USE A COHESIVE APPROACH TO THIS USING THE SAME MATERIALS ALREADY ON THE BUILDING.

BRICK, CUSTOM, PARAPET THAT YOU WILL SEE ON THE TOP YEAR.

THESE ARE EXISTING -- HERE. THESE ARE EXISTING SITE PICTURES. THAT IS THE IMPERVOUS AREA.

CARS CURRENTLY PARKED THERE, WHETHER THEY ARE AND EIGHT CUSTOMER PARKING, OR SERVICE VEHICLES.

SO TURN INTO THE SITE PLAN REAL QUICK, KIND OF HARD TO SEE IN THE SHADED VERSION HERE. BUT THIS DEPICTS THE AREA OF CONSTRUCTION WORK WITH THE NEW BUILDING ADDITION IS GOING TO POP WE WILL GET TO LANDSCAPE PLAN SEPARATELY.

ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS AGAIN. THIS IS THE SOUTH ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING ADDITION. IT CONTAINS THE SIX SERVICE BAYS WITH GARAGE DOORS THAT WILL MATCH THAT SAME THAT ARE ON THE SURFACE ENTRY ON THE EAST FACING PORTION OF THE BUILDING.

THE FLOOR PLAN OF THE BUILDING ADDITION SIMPLIFIED WITH SIX SERVICE BAYS. THERE'S AN EXPANDED TO AREA FOR MECHANICS, STORAGE AND ALSO PARTS, INVENTORY STORAGE AREAS BEING EXPENDED AS WELL. SO THOSE ARE THE MAJOR ELEMENTS OF THE BUILDING EXPANSION WE ARE PROPOSING.

ONE ITEM WE WANTED TO DISCUSS WAS LANDSCAPING.

WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF AND THEIR GROUP.

WE MET WITH HIM ON SITE JU JULY 8TH.

REALLY TO DISCUSS FRONT LANDSCAPING AREA.

I WILL JUMP BACK TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LANDSCAPE PLAN FROM THAT YEAR 2000. THE HIGHLIGHTED AREAS HERE IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE THIS AND READ ALL OF THE ELEMENTS HERE.

THIS WAS PROVIDED BY DARREN AS A CONVERSATION PIECE.

TAKE A LOOK AT THE EXISTING PLANTINGS ON THE SITE.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT WAS PLANTED ALONG MICHIGAN ROAD AND THIS QUARTER HERE THE SPECIES THAT WERE CHOSEN AT THE TIME, THEY ARE NOT QUITE GOOD FOR AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIPS AND NEW CARS. THEY ARE HIGHLY LUCAS.

AND KNOWING WHAT IS GOING ON THE COURT IN THE FRONT OF THE TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS THEY HAVE HAD WITH MAINTENANCE ALONG THE FRONT OF MICHIGAN ROAD, SITE LIGHTING, VISIBILITY AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, NEW VEHICLE DISPLAY BECAUSE OF THOSE TREES, IT CAUSES DAMAGE.

SO WORKING WITH DARREN THAT HE WAS GRACIOUS ENOUGH TO MEET US ON SITE. WE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS.

JUST TODAY. I DON'T WANT TO SPRING IT ON YOU. WE DID RECEIVE SOME ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FROM RYAN PRODUCED TODAY.

I DON'T WANT TO COMMIT TO THESE. IT IS KIND OF A FIRST BRUSH AT THIS. THERE AND HAS NOT SEEN THIS YET.

THE PURPOSE IS TO SHOW YOU THAT WE ARE MOVING PARTS IN THIS DIRECTION. THE GOAL IS TO REMOVE THE LANDSCAPING THAT CAUSES THE PROBLEMS TO THE NEW VEHICLE DISPLAY AND ENHANCE THAT CORREDOR WITH TREES THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE SUSCEPTIBLE TO, MAINTENANCE.

THE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED HERE ARE THE JAPANESE ALCOVE US. THEY ARE VERTICALLY RUN.

I DO KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THERE HAS APPROVED THOSE TREES ON MANY, MANY, MANY OF MY LANDSCAPE PLANTS THROUGHOUT COME UP THEY ARE VERY HARDY TREES. THEY ARE PLANTED ALONG MICHIGAN ROAD AND THERE ARE. THE GOAL HERE IS TO MITIGATE WHAT HAS BEEN A MAINTENANCE AND VISIBILITY ISSUE OVER THE YEARS AND PUT TOGETHER A NEW PLAN ALONG MICHIGAN ROAD.

SECONDLY, WHAT DARREN ASKED US TO DO WAS LOOK AT OTHER TREES ON SITE FOR HEALTH REASONS. THERE ARE SOME ASH TREES.

THEY ARE LIVING RIGHT NOW. BUT WE DON'T KNOW, IT COULD BE EIGHT YEARS, TEN YEARS, 12 YEARS.

BUT WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH DARREN ON THAT LAMENT AND

[01:20:04]

SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO DEPARTMENT REPORT.

MARK IS AVAILABLE AS WELL. AND OUR GOAL IS TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND WORK WITH DARREN AND GO TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE IN AUGUST AND FINALIZED THIS.

THANK YOU. >> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU, BRIAN. RACHEL?

>> RACHEL KEESLING: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AS WE HAVE HEARD THE DEPICT -- PETITIONER -- PLAN TO CONSTRUCT.

THE BUILDING DESIGN WILL BLEND SEAMLESSLY WITH THE CURRENT STRUCTURE. THE PLACEMENT OF THE ADDITION DISPLACES SOME PARKING BUT IT WILL NOT AFFECT SITE SECRETION AT ALL. AND THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ON SITE IS ALSO SUFFICIENT EVEN WITH THE LOSS OF THESE 14 SPACES IN FRONT OF THIS SECTION OF THE BUILDING.

AS THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD, WE DO HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ENTIRE SITE AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE U.D.O. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ISSUES.

WE NEED A CONFIRMATION ON SOME ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ITEMS, WHICH ARE LIKE PARKING RACKS THAT ONE IS NEEDED AND IS HOPEFULLY ALREADY INSTALLED THAT I JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT.

WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE FRONT DOOR.

AND THEN THE OTHER IS SIDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY.

OUT TO THAT MICHIGAN ROAD. WE ARE ASKING THAT THE PETITIONER MET WITH THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR ON THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALK ALONG THE 99TH STREET AROUND THE SITE. AND THE CONNECTION OF MICHIGAN ROAD TO THE FRONT DOOR FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONNECTIVITY. AND THAT THEY WORK WITH DAVID LITTLEJOHN THE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR ON GETTING THOSE ITEMS FINALIZED AND INSTALLED WITH THIS NEW PLAN.

PROPERTY OTHER AREA OF CONCERN THAT BRIAN MENTIONED WAS LANDSCAPING. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS SITE JUST VIOLATIONS WHICH IS PRIMARILY THE TOPPING OF TREES.

TREE TOPPING IS WHERE YOU CUT OFF THE TOP OF THE TREE TO REDUCE ITS SIZE TO PRUNE IT AND TOPPING NEGATIVELY IMPACTS THE STRUCTURE OF THE TREE AND IT ALSO EXPOSES IT TO DECAY AND DISEASE BECAUSE THE TREE IS NOT ABLE TO PROPERLY HEAL ITSELF FROM AN IMPROPER PRUNE OR CUT. PRUNING OF THE TREAT HAPPENS FROM THE LOWER BRANCHES AND YOU SLOWLY PRUNE UP SO THAT THE CANOPY CAN GROW TALLER AND STRONGER.

THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED WITH SOME OF THESE TREES.

SO AS WE HAVE HEARD, THE URBAN FOREST OR IS WORKING WITH THE PETITIONER ACTIVELY AND HAS BEEN.

THEY NOW HAVE A PLAN TO ASSIST THE HEALTH OF ALL THE TREES ON THE SITE AND THE PETITIONER HAS AGREED TO REMOVE AND REPLACE THE TREES HER LAND SKIPPING PLAN THAT WE SAW TONIGHT WHICH I'M SURE THERE WILL BE THREE EXCITED TO SEE.

UP AS OF THE WRITING OF THIS DEPARTMENT REPORT, I WAS EXPECTING THAT A LOT MORE WORK WITH NEED TO BE DONE BETWEEN THE URBAN FORESTER AT THE PETITIONER.

BUT SINCE THEY HAVE AGREED ON THIS PLAN TO REMEDIED THE ISSUE, I CAN'T RECOMMEND THAT WE APPROVE THIS PROJECT TONIGHT.

SUBJECT TO LANDSCAPING APPROVAL PLAN APPROVAL BY DARREN AND ALSO ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED BETWEEN DAVID AND THE PETI PETITIONER.

SO WE COULD SEND THIS TO THE COMMITTEE.

AND THAT WOULD GIVE IT MORE TIME BUT HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW IF WE WOULD HAVE MUCH TO DISCUSS AT COMMITTEE.

THAT IS WHY WE ARE RECOMMENDING A PROVOKED TONIGHT SUBJECT TO THOSE TWO ISSUES. THANK YOU.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU, RACHEL.

ANY COMMISSION DISCUSSION? SO I REMEMBER THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CHALLENGES WITH THIS SITE PARTLY BECAUSE IT IS ELEVATED FROM MICHIGAN ROAD. AND THAT VISIBILITY IS EVERYTHING IN THE CAR BUSINESS. IT BRINGS US BACK TO THE TREE ISSUE ALSO. DO WE KNOW -- EITHER ONE OF YOU, IF THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MICHIGAN ROAD AND THE GREAT THAT THE DEALERSHIP IS AT WHAT SUPPORT PEDESTRIAN ACCESS DIRECTLY FROM MICHIGAN ROAD IF THAT IS WHAT THE DEPARTMENT IS A

SUCCESS -- SUGGESTING? >> PARTICIPANT: I WOULD LIKE TO

[01:25:03]

COMPLIANT ACCESS FROM THE SIDEWALK ON D AND.PORTION OF MICHIGAN ROAD, THAT MAY BE A CHALLENGE.

AS YOU GO TOWARD THE INTERSECTION, RACHEL HAD MENTIONED LOOKING AT THE OPPORTUNITY TO INSTALL A SIDEWALK THERE AS WELL. I MAY HAVE MISSED THAT IN THE STAFF REPORT. MAY I ASK THE QUESTION, RACHEL, WHAT IS THE EXPECTATION THERE WITH THE NDOT, TO HAVE SOMETHING THERE? WE HAVE THE SAME GRADE CHANGE PROBLEM. IT GOES UP PRETTY STEEPLY.

IT IS EVEN STEEPER. IT COULD BE A CONSTRUCTIBILITY AND COMPLIANCE ISSUES WITH A.D.A.

>> RACHEL KEESLING: OKAY. YES.

THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN -- REQUIRE A SIDEWALK ALONG ALL PULIC STREETS. AND BECAUSE THIS PROJECT IS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD, COMPLIANCE WITH THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN IS REQUIRED. AND SO I DID INCLUDE THAT IN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. BUT WE DID NOT GET TO TALK ABOUT THAT TOGETHER. SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

SO WE WOULD NEED TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS ON HOW TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN IF IT COULD HAPPEN. PAR TO BE FULLY A.D.A. COMPLIANT. I WOULD RECOMMEND TO DOCK WITH THEM ON HOW TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN OR IF WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. FOR COMPLIANCE.

>> BRIAN CROSS: AND REALLY QUICK, I DID HEAR YOUR SUGGESTION ON RECOGNITION. I FEEL LIKE ON OUR SIDE AS A PETITIONER THAT THERE ARE SOME OPEN-ENDED ITEMS WE WANT TO BUTTON UP. SO I WOULD REQUEST THAT WE WOULD GO TO THE COMMITTEE AND SEEK APPROVAL THROUGH COMMITTEE ON

FINAL APPROVAL PAPER. >> RACHEL KEESLING: THAT WORKS.

>> BRAD GRABOW: I WAS GOING TO SO JUST THE SAME THING BECAUSE THE NEW LANDSCAPE PLAN, IF DARREN IS HAPPY WITH IT, GREAT.

BUT I THINK THAT MAJORITY OF THAT NONE OF US SHOULD BE HAPPY WITH IT ALSO. WHAT YOU SHOWED BRIEFLY IT LOOKS LIKE A BIG IMPROVEMENT. AND ANYTIME YOU CAN REMOVE HONEY LOCUST TREES, I'M ALL IN FAVOR. SO -- BANANA SEED POD DROPPINGS ON THE HOODS OF BEEN -- BRAND-NEW CARS AND THE BIRDS.

YEP IT'S GREAT. LOOKING FORWARD TO CHANGE.

OTHER DISCUSSION, NICK? >> NICK KESTNER: IN TERMS OF THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DO IT STRAIGHT. YOU MAY BE ABLE TO DO IT AT AN ANGLE. SO LOOK AT THAT ALSO.

>> BRAD GRABOW: CERTAINLY. IS THERE A MOTION ON HOW WE WISH TO SEND THIS TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE.

>> PARTICIPANT: I RECOMMEND FINAL APPROVAL.

>> BRAD GRABOW: THANK YOU BOTH. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE. AND HE OPPOSED.

THIS WILL GO TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE WHICH MEETS ON AUGUST 3 AND REMAIN THERE UNTIL THE COMMITTEE IS SATISFIED AND APPROVES THE PLAN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU BOTH. WE HAVE NO OTHER BUSINESS THIS EVENING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.