[A. Call Meeting to Order]
[00:00:10]
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY AND WELCOME TO THE TUESDAY, JUNE 21
[B. Pledge of Allegiance]
MEETING OF THE CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION.I CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE PLEDGE
OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD,
[C. Roll Call]
INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.>> WILL THE SECRETARY CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
[D. Declaration of Quorum]
[E. Approval of Minutes]
APPROVAL OF MINUTES. >> MOVED TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND APPROVE . WE APPROVED OUR MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THEY STAND APPROVED. COMMUNICATIONS, BILLS, EXPENDITURES AND LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT.
[G. Reports, Announcements & Department Concerns]
>> OKAY. REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND DEPARTMENT CONCERNS.> THANK YOU.
I JUST GIVE YOU AN UPDATE FROM THE PROJECTS THAT WERE AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETINGS. THERE WAS NO COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE. AS THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE,
[H. Public Hearings]
THE 510 SUBDIVISION PRIMARY PLAT AMENDMENT AS WELL AS THE SUBDIVISION WAIVER DID RECEIVE A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION, 4-0.SO YOU WILL BE HEARING THAT AGAIN FOR THE FINAL VOTE THIS EVENING. OTHER THAN THAT, WE HAVE NO TABLING'S ON THE AGENDA SO I HAVE NOTHING ELSE FURTHER.
RACHEL, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING? OKAY, THANK YOU.
WE HAVE ONE PUBLIC HEARING ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING.
IT'S DOCKET NUMBER PGC 20 20-20005 DP/80 LS, JACKSON'S GRANT VILLAGE SECTION 2. THE APPLICANT SEEKS SITE PLAN AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR 52 TOWNHOMES AND AN AMENITY BUILDING ON A .83 ACRES. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 116TH STREET AND SPRINGMILL ROAD.
IT'S ZONED JACKSON GRANT VILLAGE PUD, ORDINANCE Z-653-20, FILED BYDOUGLAS WAGONER WITH REPUBLIC DEVELOPMENT LLC . BEFORE WE BEGIN THE PUBLIC HEARING, HOW MANY ARE HERE TONIGHT WISHING TO SPEAK EITHER IN FAVOR OF OR AGAINST THE PETITION? OKAY. YOU MAY BEGIN THEN, SIR.
>> (INDISCERNIBLE) (AWAY FROM MICROPHONE).
>> THERE YOU GO! >> SORRY! CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? NOT DOUG WAGONER, LARRY MOON REPRESENTING REPUBLIC DEVELOPMENT TONIGHT.
THIS IS THE 80 LS PRESENTATION FOR JACKSON'S GRANT VILLAGE.I THINK MOST OF YOU WERE ON PLAN COMMISSION WHEN WE CAME THROUGH FOR ZONING. I WILL GIVE YOU A QUICK REFRESHER OF LOCATION ETC. HERE'S THE PROJECT LOCATION.
THE WHITE, OBVIOUSLY JUST TO THE CORNER OF SPRINGMILL ROAD AND 116TH ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER.
ON 21 ACRES. EXCUSE ME, THIS ISN'T MY COMPUTER, SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO --.
THIS SHOWS ITS RELATIONSHIP TO OVERALL JACKSON'S GRANT.
AGAIN, IT'S DOWN ON THE CORNER. HE 80 LS IS JUST FOR THE 52 TOWNHOMES THAT ARE IN THE PROJECT.
WE'VE ALREADY TAKEN THROUGH FOR ENGINEERING APPROVAL.
THE SINGLE-FAMILY PORTION OF WHICH THERE ARE 19 LOTS.HERE WILL BE ANOTHER 80 LS PRESENTATION FOR THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT, WHICH IS RIGHT ON THE CORNER, WHICH IS NOT YET READY TO COME THROUGH. THIS IS THE OVERALL PLAN.
THE TOWNHOMES WHICH ARE HERE TONIGHT ARE IN BLUE.
THERE ARE 52 IN TOTAL. YOU CAN SEE THEM UP IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROJECT AND INTERMINGLED NEAR THE COMMERCIAL AND CENTRAL PART OF THE PROJECT.
THIS JUST HIGHLIGHTS SHOWING THE DIFFERENT PHASES.
SECTION 1 WAS A SINGLE-FAMILY, WHICH IS TO THE WEST AND NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE PROJECT. THE BLUE ARE THE TOWNHOMES AND THE YELLOW IN THE CORNER IS THE COMMERCIAL.
[00:05:01]
LOOKS LIKE I WENT ONE TOO MANY. BUT THIS LANDSCAPING PLAN, WHICH IS DIFFICULT TO READ, BUT OBVIOUSLY AS WE GO THROUGH COMMITTEE, WE'LL GO THROUGH THE DETAILS THAT SHOW THE LANDSCAPING AROUND THE TOWNHOMES, AS WELL AS THE COMMON AREAS, WHICH WERE ACTUALLY PART OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY APPROVAL. AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO JOHN MCKENZIE, WHO IS HERE.THESE ARE TOWNHOMES THAT HIS COMPANY HAS DESIGNED THAT WILL BE BUILT IN THE COMMUNITY. SO IWILL LET HIM THOSE .
HE'S A LITTLE BETTER AT IT THAN I AM.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS JOHN MCKENZIE.
I LIVE AT 623 ROUND HILL ROAD IN INDIANAPOLIS.
I'M A BUILDER IN JACKSON'S GRANT.
THESE TOWNHOMES ARE A SIMILAR DESIGN OF THE TOWNHOMES WE ARE CURRENTLY BUILDING THAT ARE FREESTANDING.
THEY WOULD HAVE ABOUT SIX FEET BETWEEN THEM.
THESE OBVIOUSLY WOULD BE ATTACHED.
THERE WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONES THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY BUILDING IN HAMLET, AS FAR AS QUALITY OF MATERIALS ON THE INSIDE AND THE OUTSIDE. THEY WILL HAVE A CUSTOM HOME QUALITY FEEL TO THEM, WITH ALL THE MATERIAL ANDWORKMANSHIP .
THERE WILL BE THREE, FOUR, OR FIVE UNITS TO THE BUILDING.
THIS ONE SHOWS THE THREE UNITS. EACH UNIT, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS THREE IN ONE BUILDING OR FOUR, WILL HAVE DIFFERENT COLOR SCHEMES TO GIVE SOME DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN -- THIS GIVES YOU A VIEW OF THE SIDE. I KIND OF BLEW PAST THE -- THERE IS THE REAR. SO THE GARAGES WILL COME OFF AN ALLEY. YOU SEE THE BACK ELEVATION, WHICH HAS SOME PRETTY GOOD IN AND OUT ARCHITECTURE.
SO IT'S NOT JUST FLAT BACK THERE.
AND THEN, THESIDES WILL BE PREDOMINANTLY BRICK, EXCEPT FOR UP ON TOP WITH THE ROOFTOP. WE FOUND THERE IS A STRONG MARKET FOR THESE TOWNHOMES . IN THE QUALITY THAT WE ARE BUILDING AND THE ROOFTOPS HAVE BECOME POPULAR OUTDOOR SPACE ON UNITS WHERE YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF YARD SPACE.
THIS AGAIN SHOWS ONE OF THE SIDES.
A LOT OF WINDOWS -- BIG WINDOWS TO LET A LOT OF LIGHT IN.
THE FLOOR PLAN. THERE ARE THREE FLOORS.
ALL THREE ARE DIFFERENT, EVEN THOUGH FROM THE OUTSIDE YOU MIGHT THINK THEY LOOK SIMILAR. THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE THE MASTER ON THE MAIN LEVEL. THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE MASTER ON THE SECOND LEVEL. THERE IS A THREE BEDROOM WITH AN OBVIOUS OPTION. THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS GO ANYWHERE FROM 500 SQUARE FEET UP TO OVER 3300 SQUARE FEET.
THEY ALL WILL HAVE ELEVATORS BECAUSE OF THE THIRD FLOOR.
BUT THEY WILL HAVE IS A STANDARD FEATURE.
WE FOUND THAT IT'S A FEATURE THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE WITH THAT ROOFTOP SPACE. THE SECOND FLOOR, YOU CAN SEE HERE AGAIN, IT'S MOSTLY MADE UP ON THE SECOND FLOOR BEDROOMS AND SOME MEDIA SPACE OR LOUNGE SPACE.
AND THEY WILL ALL HAVE A ROOFTOP FEATURE WITHTHEM .
SCREENED, ETC. THAT'S ALL. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANKS, JOHN. NEXT IS THIS COMMUNITY WILL HAVE ITS OWN CLUBHOUSE SEPARATE FROM JACKSON'S GRANT, WHICH IS GOING TO BE BUILT IN A FAIRLY CENTRAL LOCATION.
THIS SHOWS THE CLUBHOUSE. THOSE ARE LOTS TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SCREEN (INDISCERNIBLE) FACING IT.
THERE IS ALSO AN OUTDOOR PAVILION THAT IS IN A GREEN AREA BETWEEN THE UNITS AND CLUBHOUSE.
MATERIALS FOR THE CLUBHOUSE -- STONE, BRICK SIDING.
THERE WILL BE AN OUTDOOR PORCH THAT WILL HAVE A FIREPLACE.
THAT'S BOTH AN INSIDE AND OUTSIDE FIREPLACE SO YOU CAN BE ON THE PORCH WITH THE FIREPLACE OR INSIDE.
THE FLOOR PLAN OF THE UNITS -- OF THE CLUBHOUSE -- GATHERING
[00:10:04]
AREA, BAR, POOL TABLE AREA. BATHROOMS. SMALL FITNESS AREA. AND OUTDOOR PORCH.YOU CAN SEE, IT HAS THE FIREPLACE.
THIS IS THE OUTDOOR PAVILION THAT SITS OUT IN THE GREEN AREA. NEXT TO IT, WE WILL HAVE A FIRE PIT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT -- BRICK GAZEBO ON TOP.
THE FLOOR PLAN OF THAT. THEN STREET SIGNS AND LIGHTS.
THEY WILL BE THE SAME AS IN JACKSON'S GRANT.
THERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES THAT ARE OUT IN JACKSON'S GRANT (INDISCERNIBLE). DETAILS FROM THE CLUBHOUSE.
AND THAT'S IT. YOU KNOW, WE GO TO COMMITTEE FROM HERE, SO I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
BUT THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU.
THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. AGAIN, I ASK, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK EITHER IN FAVOR OF ORGANS THIS PETITION? SEEING NONE, THERE WILL BE NO REASON FOR REBUTTAL, OBVIOUSLY. SO STAFF REPORT.
>> YES, THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD I'M (NAME) LOPEZ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES.
THE SITE PLAN FOR THE TOWNHOMES IS IN LINE WITH THE CONCEPT PLANS THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE PUD.
THE TOWNHOMES WILL HAVE ACCESS FROM THE PUBLIC STREETS THAT WERE APPROVED IN SECTION 1, AS WELL AS FROM A NEW PRIVATE DRIVE THAT WILL PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN THE FUTURE.LLEYS ARE PROVIDED BEHIND ALL OF THE TOWNHOMES TO EXCESS REAR LOADED GARAGES.
TWO PARKING SPACES PER UNIT ARE PROVIDED IN THE GARAGES AS IS REQUIRED FOR THE PUD AND GUEST PARKING IS ALSO SHOWN FOR THE PUD REQUIREMENTS. THE TOWNHOMES THEMSELVES HAVE A MODERN DESIGN WITH LARGE, BLACK FRAMED WINDOWS AND LARGE FRONT BALCONIES. THE FRONT AND SIDE FA?ADES ARE PRIMARILY BRICK AND COLORS VARY FROM UNIT TO UNIT.
STAFF HAS ALSO REQUESTED ADDITIONAL BRICK UNDER THE SECOND FLOOR BALCONIES ON THE FRONT AND ON THE SECOND FLOOR REAR ELEVATION. AND WE'VE ASKED FOR A FEW MORE WINDOWS TO BE ADDED TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING TO BREAK UP THAT SECOND-FLOOR FA?ADE AND PROVIDE SOME NATURAL LIGHT INTO THE BEDROOMS.N THE SITE PLAN, THERE ARE BUILDINGS FOR THREE, FOUR AND FIVE UNITS PER BUILDING, BUT WE'VE ONLY SEEN SO FAR THREE UNIT BUILDING. AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE ELEVATIONS THAT WOULD SHOW FOUR AND FIVE UNITS TO SHOW WHAT THAT WHOLE BUILDING WILL LOOK LIKE TOGETHER WITH THAT MANY UNITS. AS YOU SAW A CLUBHOUSE IS ALSO A PART OF THIS PROPOSAL AND IS LOCATED NEAR THE CENTER OF THIS COMMUNITY WITH SOME INDOOR WORKOUT FACILITIES AND GENERAL GATHERING SPACE. REGARDING LANDSCAPING.
MOST OF THAT WAS APPROVED WITH SECTION 1 FOR THE OVERALL OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPING FOR THE COMMUNITY.
BUT THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS WILL HAVE FOUNDATION PLANTINGS AS WELL. THOSE ARE PROVIDED HOWEVER, THEY ALSO NEED TO PROVIDE ONE SHADE TREE AND ORNAMENTAL TREE FOR EVERY TWO TOWNHOMES.O WE STILL NEED TO SEE THAT.
ONLY THE STREET TREES ARE SHOWN.
THE AC UNITS WILL BE SCREENED IN THE REAR WITH SHRUBS.ITH THIS TOWNHOME PROPOSAL, THERE IS A SMALL SIGN PROPOSED THAT THE ENTRY OF THE CLUBHOUSE AND THERE ARE SOME MODEL HOME SIGNAGE PROPOSED AS WELL. ALL OF THOSE WILL HAVE TO MEET THE AUDIO REQUIREMENTS. THE MAIN ENTRY SIGN FOR THIS PROJECT WAS APPROVED WITH SECTION 1. I THINK IN THE FUTURE WHEN THE COMMERCIAL COMES IN, THEY WILL PROPOSE ANOTHERSIGN UP OF SPRINGVILLE FOR THAT SECTION.
AS MENTIONED, THERE ARE SOME REMAINING COMMENTS THAT WERE IN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. IN ONE OF A FEW THIS EVENING AND WE HOPE TO CONTINUE TO WORK THESE OUT WITH THE PETITIONER AND THE PLAN COMMISSION THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE.
AND WE RECOMMEND THAT THE PROJECT GO TO THE JULY 5 RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE MEETING FOR FURTHER REVIEW.
MEMBERS OF THE PLAN COMMISSION, DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION?> I'VE GOT TO ASK THIS JUST FOR FUN. (INDISCERNIBLE) ADD WINDOWS -- ARE WE ASKING TO ADD THAT WINDOW WHERE A BAD IS GOING TO
>> I NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT (LAUGHING).
I ALWAYS ASK THAT. WHEN WE ASK PEOPLE TO ADD A WINDOW, WHERE ARE WE ASKING THEM TO EDIT? AND I DON'T WANT A WINDOW BEHIND MY BED, SO WE NEED TO
THINK ABOUT THAT. >> BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE SEEN, DO DO HAVE PLANS TO PUT IN A LAP POOL.
YOU MIGHT THINK ABOUT THAT TOO (LAUGHING)!
>> YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE MICROPHONE.
>> I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH YOU IN A BIGGER COMMUNITY.
[00:15:11]
THIS IS ONLY A TOTAL OF 71 LOTS.WE HAVE A LAP POOL IN JACKSON'S GRANT, AND I WOULD HESITATE TO SAY IT IS NOT MERELY USED AS MUCH AS YOU WOULD EXPECT IN A COMMUNITY BEFORE HUNDRED LOTS. PEOPLE LOUNGE AROUND IT AND A FEW PEOPLE TAKE LAPSE IN IT. BUT IN MY OPINION, IT'S WAY UNDERUTILIZED. SO --.
>> SO -- TELL ME AGAIN, GUEST PARKING -- OVERFLOW.
FIRST OF ALL, CAN TWO CARS BE IN THE DRIVEWAY? WHAT'S THE LENGTH OF THE DRIVEWAYS BEHIND THE UNITS?
>> THEY VARY DEPENDING. BECAUSE THE UNITS VARY IN SIZE.
I BELIEVE MANY OF THE UNITS CAN FIT TWO CARS BEHIND, BUT NOT
ALL. >> CAN YOU HAVE THAT BROKEN DOWN A LITTLE BETTER WHEN IT COMES TO COMMITTEE? THAT COULD BE 2/50 SOME. SO IF YOU DON'T MIND? WHICH LEADS ME TO ANOTHER QUESTION: HOW MANY THREE UNITS, FOUR UNITS AND FIVE UNITS -- MAYBE I COULD HAVE COUNTED THEM ON THE PLAN. I ASK THIS BECAUSE YOU ARE ONLY SHOWING THREE. AND I WAS JUST WONDERING -- ARE MOST OF THEM GOING TO BE FIVE UNITS?
>> YEAH. WE DO SHOW THAT ON THE PLAN.
IT'S EASY ENOUGH TO COUNT. >> I CAN DO THAT.
OKAY.O THE LENGTH OF THE DRIVEWAY (INDISCERNIBLE).
THE CLUBHOUSE. THE DETAILS ON THE CLUBHOUSE -- WAS THAT IN THE PUD, WHAT SIZE -- I MEAN -- MUCH WAS DEFINED FOR THIS PARTICULAR VILLAGE SECTION? JUST THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A CLUBHOUSE?
>> YES. I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK THE PUD FOR THE SPECIFICS. BUT WHAT I REVIEWED, I DIDN'T SEE THAT THEY WERE NOT MEETING THE PUD.
BUT I CAN GET YOU THE SPECIFICS FOR THE COMMITTEE IF THERE (INDISCERNIBLE).
IN JACKSON'S GRANT? I MEAN COMMERCIAL --
>> TECHNICALLY THIS IS A SEPARATE COMMUNITY, BUT YES.
THERE'S NO MORE LAND. AND TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE CLUBHOUSE? WE DID SHOW IT ON THE PRELIMINARY PLANS WE BROUGHT IN IN THE EXACT LOCATION AND SIZE THAT WERE SHOWN IN THIS PLAN. NO DETAILS ABOUT WHAT WAS IN IT BECAUSE WE'RE STILL FIGURING ABOUT.
>> WELL, YOU HAVE A LITTLE DRAWING AND YOU HAVE A POOL TABLE AND SOME CHAIRS.
HOW MUCH GUEST PARKING IS IN THAT AREA?> I DON'T HAVE IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. AGAIN, IT'S ON THE PLAN FOR THE GUEST PARKING AND THE COMMERCIAL WILL BE NEXT DOOR TO IT. AND THAT WILL ULTIMATELY HAVE ADDITIONAL PARKING.OME OF THE PARKING RIGHT AT THE CLUBHOUSE WILL HAVE SIGNS THAT SAY RESERVE FOR CLUBHOUSE
PARKING ONLY. >> IS THERE CONNECTIVITY ALL THROUGH JACKSON'S GRANT TO COMMERCIAL GOING THROUGH THE VILLAGE SECTION? I LIVED OVER ON CLAY CENTER -- CAN I GET ALL THE WAY OVER THERE THROUGH THAT?
>> ONCE YOU ARE IN JACKSON'S GRANT, YES -- ON THE SIDEWALKS OR STREETS, GET ALL THE WAY TO THE COMMERCIAL.
NOW, WE HAD SEEN AN EMAIL TODAY CONCERNING HOA MEMBERSHIP, AND I WASN'T REALLY CLEAR -- I THINK YOU SAID THAT THE HOA -- ONE OF YOU -- THAT DEVELOPMENT IS JUST FOR THESE PEOPLE.
>> CORRECT. >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY -- THEY CAN'T USE THE AMENITIES IN THE REST OF JACKSON'S GRANT?
>> NOT UNLESS INVITED. >> AND THE PEOPLE IN JACKSON'S GRANT CAN'T USE THEIR CLUBHOUSE?
>> I'D LIKE TO ASK THE DEPARTMENT, THIS HOA LETTER, IS THAT ANY CONCERNS OF OURS? HOW THAT'S DEFINED -- DOES ECHO
INTO THE PUD? >> I THNK IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THAT WAS PART OF THE DISCUSSION WHEN PUD CAME THROUGH. THIS COULD BE PART OF THE JACKSON'S GRANT HOA IF THEY WERE VOTED ON AND IT WAS AGREED TO. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE SENDING IT FOR. TO SAY HEY, WE SENT OUT A SURVEY AND THEY VOTED NO TO NOT BECOME A COMBINED HOA.
IT DOESN'T FALL UNDER OUR DECISION-MAKING? THAT'S ALL I -- (INDISCERNIBLE).
>> WE DID COMMIT TO LET THE RESIDENCE IN JACKSON'S GRANT DETERMINE. IN THE HOMEOWNERS BOARD OR I THINK THE SUBCOMMITTEE PUT OUT A QUESTIONNAIRE TO THE HOMEOWNERS OF JACKSON'S GRANT. IT CAME BACK AGAINST BEING
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE (INDISCERNIBLE) WE WERE OVERLOOKING HERE. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
[00:20:09]
>> JOSH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF PARKING/THROUGHWAY QUESTIONS. MAYBE THEY ARE EASY ENOUGH TO ANSWER. IF YOU COULD ANSWER THEM TONIGHT OR BRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THE COMMITTEE WOULD BE HELPFUL. THE ALLEYWAYS IN THE MIDDLE, I WOULD ASSUME THEY ARE NOT FOR PARKING? AND SO THE PARKING IS AT THE DRIVEWAYS, BEHIND THE GARAGE WHERE IT FITS. IN THE GUEST PARKING -- IS THAT
FAIR TO SAY? >> AND ON THE STREET.
>> AND ON THE STREET. YOU ARE CORRECT.
IS THERE A NEED OR DO WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT MAKING SURE WE SIGN THAT THERE IS NO PARKING AVAILABLE IN THOSE ALLEYS? I GUESS I'M WORRIED ABOUT PROXIMITY TO THE GUEST PARKING WHERE SOME OF THE UNITS ARE, AND WHERE PEOPLE WILL REASONABLY TRY TO PARK. MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO TAKE A
PEEK AT. >> YOU KNOW, JOHN -- IN HAMLET, WE HAVE SIGNS FOR NO PARKING BACK IN THE ALLEYS AND IT IS IN A PROBLEM. RIGHT NOW THERE IS SO MUCH CONSTRUCTION. ACTIVITY STILL.
THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. >> I GUESS MY FEAR IS -- AND MAY BE ABLE HAVE A SYSTEMIC ISSUE, BUT IF THERE IS SOMEBODY PARKED THERE AND A FIRE TRUCK CAN'T GET TO WHERE THEY NEED, I JUST WANT SOMETHING BAD TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF IT.
>> WELL, THEY COULD TRY TO GET A FIRE TRUCK DOWN THERE.
BUT THEY ALL DO HAVE A PUBLIC STREET IN FRONT OF THEM LIKE EVERY HOUSE DOES. THE ALLEY IS A SECONDARY POINT OF ACCESS. NOT THE PRIMARY.
>> OKAY. I GUESS THAT WAS LOST ON ME.
THAT EVERY UNIT HAS A PUBLIC STREET ACCESS.
PERHAPS I MISSED (INDISCERNIBLE).
THE TWO THAT ARE JUST SOUTH OF THE CLUBHOUSE WILL BE ON THE PARKING LOT FOR THE COMMERCIAL. IT WILL BE A PRIVATE ACCESS POINT, BUT IT WILL BE A SAXON W SECOND ACCESS POINT ALSO WITH ALLEYS BEHIND.UT IT WILL BE PRIVATE.> OKAY.
37, 38 -- I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. THANK YOU.
>> I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. AND THEY TIE INTO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN. THE DESIGN OF THE TOWNHOMES, THE ROOFS I SHOULD SAY -- ARE THEY FLAT ROOFS?
>> YES, THEY ARE. >> SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF A FLAT ROOF, IT'S ACTUALLY FLAT ROOFS? OKAY. AND THE MATERIAL THAT'S GOING TO BE ON THIS: THESE ROOFS OR WHAT?
>> THE ACTUAL ROOFS (INDISCERNIBLE) WITH A SLIGHT SLOPE TO THEM, SO IT DOES PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF POSITIVE DRAINAGE. BUT THERE ROOFED WITH A PRODUCT CALLED TPO PRODUCT, WHICH IS A HEAVY ROOFING MEMBRANE THAT IS USED FOR THAT APPLICATION. THE SAME APPLICATION WE'VE DONE ON THE TOWNHOMES WE ARE CURRENTLY BUILDING IN HAMLET.
WHERE THE ROOF TOPS GO OUT, WHERE YOU WOULD ACTUALLY BE WALKING OUT THERE ON A DECK, WE ACTUALLY BUILD THOSE ON SLEEPERS ON TOP OF THAT SLOPED ROOF.
SO YOU STILL GET THE DRAINAGE AWAY, BUT YOU CAN STILL HAVE A FLAT SURFACE TO WALK ON IF YOU ARE OUTSIDE ON THAT ROOFTOP.
> SO IT'S NOT GONNA PRESENT SOME TYPE OF AN ISSUE AS FAR AS SINCE IT IS A FLAT ROOF, LEAKAGE OR LIFETIME -- LESS THAN MAY BE WHAT A SHINGLE WOULD BE?
>> OKAY. LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION WHILE YOU ARE UP THERE, JOHN. OBVIOUSLY, THE DESIGN OF THE CLUBHOUSE AND THE DESIGNS OF THE TOWNHOMES ARE DIFFERENT.
IS THERE A REASON FOR THAT? THAT THE CLUBHOUSE WOULD NOT BE
OF A SIMILAR DESIGN? >> NO, THEY WERE KIND OF DONE INDEPENDENTLY. BUT LOOKING AT EACH ONE, I THINK PROBABLY BECAUSE THERE IS A SINGLE FAMILY ELEMENT TO IT, (INDISCERNIBLE) DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURE.
AND I PROBABLY AM JUST COMPLEMENTING WHAT HAS BEEN DONE EXISTING IN JACKSON'S GRANT TO DATE.THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S GOING TO BE A SEPARATE NEIGHBORHOOD PER SE,
THAT IT STILL HAS A TIE-IN. >> TIE-IN.
THANKS VERY MUCH. GO AHEAD, JOSH.
>> I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS MAYBE TO STAFF.
I HEARD YOU SAY TO TREES, SO A SHADE TREE AND ORNAMENTAL TREE
FOR TWO UNITS? >> YES, FOR THE PUD
I PRESUME THAT THOSE ARE GOING TO GO ON THE FRONTAGE?
[00:25:03]
ON THE FRONT EDGE AS OPPOSED TO THE REAR?>> YES. >> THE REASON WHY I ASK IS LIKE I WAS DRIVING THROUGH CLAY CORNER THE OTHER DAY.
AND THE REARS JUST LOOKED SO KIND OF BARREN, YOU KNOW? AND I WAS LIKE OH, THERE WAS A LOT OF MISSED OPPORTUNITY FOR COOL TREES TO BE BACK HERE AND SHADY SPOTS FOR PEOPLE TO HANG OUT. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S MUCH WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT'S WHY WAS KIND OF LOOKING AT YOU GUYS FIRST. I DON'T WANT TO SACRIFICE TREES IN THE FRONT. IT DEFINITELY LOOKS LIKE (INDISCERNIBLE) FOR STREET TREES.
I IMAGINE THE RENDERING I'M LOOKING AT IS NOT FOR TO SCALE.
BUT STREET TREES IN ADDITION TO LANDSCAPING TREES.
SO MAYBE NOW I WILL TURN TO THE KNOW IF YOU ARE FOLLOWING WHAT I'M SAYING HERE, BUT THE REAR YARDS -- I JUST DON'T WANT THEM TO SEEM SPARSE OR BARREN SPOTS OF GRASS WHEN WE HAVE SOME POTENTIAL THERE FOR SOME MORE TREES.
WE'VE GOT TO PROVIDE SOME SHADER BREAKING UP OF THE REAR
THE LAYOUT FOR THESE TOWNHOMES ON THE LOT ITSELF HAS VERY LITTLE ROOM IN THE REAR.HERE WILL BE THE DRIVEWAY GOING DIRECTLY BACK THREE OR FOUR FEET.
AND THEN, ANOTHER DRIVEWAY. SO THERE IS LIMITED SPACE TO DO LARGE LANDSCAPING IN THE BACK OF THEM.
NOW, BETWEEN WHERE THERE ARE PARKING AREAS AND STUFF, THERE IS FAIRLY EXTENSIVE SCREENING THERE.
BUT THERE'S JUST NOT MUCH ROOM ON THE REAR OF THE TOWNHOME LOTS. THERE IS A PLAN TO SCREEN UTILITIES AND HAVE SOME SCREENING BACK THERE, BUT IT'S -- YOU KNOW, PUTTING A LARGE OAK TREE BACK THERE, THERE'S
JUST NOT ROOM FOR THAT. >> YOU KNOW, IT'S AMAZING WHERE THEY PUT TREES AND SIDEWALKS AND STUFF.O I WOULD CHALLENGE YOU TO MAYBE LOOK AT THAT A LITTLE MORE INTENTLY BEFORE YOU COME TO COMMITTEE. THAT'S THE LOWBALL UNDERHANDED
PITCH THAT I'M THROWING YOU. >> OKAY.
>> HERE'S THE HARDER ONE: I'M INCLINED TO NOT ASK YOU OUT OF COMMITTEE OR HAVE MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS IN THE COMMITTEE HOLD YOU BACK UNTIL YOU GIVE ME THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.
WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT NOT BEING COMPLIANT WITH YOUR PUD CURRENTLY IN JACKSON'S GRANT?
SO THERE'S TREE PRESERVATION AREAS IN JACKSON'S GRANT THAT ARE NOW BEING TAKEN OVER BY THE NEIGHBORS.
THEY'VE CUT DOWN TREES, THEY'VE PLANTED GRASS.
THEY'VE STORED EQUIPMENT. THEY'VE PUT PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND THEY'VE JUST KIND OF -- NEIGHBORS HAVE JUST TAKEN OVER THE TREE PRESERVATION AREAS.
AND -- MY UNDERSTANDING THAT HIS REPUBLIC HAS KINDA BEEN LIKE WELL, NOT REALLY OUR PROBLEM.
THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TRUE. NOT -- NOT ASKING YOU TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW.'D APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD GO BACK AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT AND HAVE THAT ANSWER FOR ME AT THE COMMITTEE.
NOW I SUSPECT THAT IN THE: IF A TREE PRESERVATION AREA HASN'T BEEN HELD UP, THERE MIGHT BE SOME OTHER THINGS TOO THAT I'M NOT RECOGNIZING. SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU EXPLORE THE TREE PRESERVATION AREA SPECIFICALLY, AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU MAY NOT BE COMPLIANT IN.BECAUSE I THINK -- I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR OTHER COMMISSIONERS, BUT I KNOW I'M RELUCTANT TO SIGN UP FOR MORE STUFF IF WE CAN'T BE COMPLIANT WITH THE PREVIOUS STUFF.S THAT FAIR?
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S FAIR. YOUR STATEMENT OF NONCOMPLIANCE WE WILL LOOK AT. I KNOW WE'VE HAD ISSUES IN SOME AREAS. HOMEOWNERS DO THAT.
WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF HOMEOWNERS -- NOT HUNDREDS, BUT MANY HOMEOWNERS WHO ABIDE IT AND TAKE ADVANTAGE THROUGH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION I KNOW FOR FACT THAT'S WHAT WE BEEN INVOLVED IN CONVERSATIONS WHERE WE HAVE CALLED THEM OUT.
HAD THEM CRACKED IT AS BEST AS YOU CAN ONCE YOU CUT DOWN A TREE THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH YOU CAN DO.
I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH IT.
WHETHER WE'VE GOT EVERYBODY BACK IN COMPLIANCE, I CAN SEE THAT FOR A FACT. BUT WE ARE DEALING WITH IT.
>> OKAY. SO YOU WILL COME BACK AND YOU'LL FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET PEOPLE IN COMPLIANCE? IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY?
>> I'LL TELL YOU WHAT WE HAVE DONE SO FAR TO BE IN
>> ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SAY ANYTHING WITH REGARDS TO THIS PETITION? WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH IT?
>> SEND IT TO COMMITTEE. >> SECOND WITH FINAL VOTING
[00:30:04]
AUTHORITY BACK TO THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION.>> IT'S BEEN MOVED TO CENTER THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE AND COME BACK TO THE FULL PLAN COMMISSION FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, SAY AYE.
OPPOSED? MR. MOON, I JUST WANT TO TAP ONTO SOMETHING BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT ITEM.
WITH REGARDS TO WHAT MR. KIRSH HAS SAID, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S NOT FAIR THAT ONCE A COMMITMENT IS MADE BY THE PLAN COMMISSION TAKES THESE COMMITMENTS VERY SERIOUSLY.
AND IF SOMEBODY FOR WHILE KNOWING PURCHASES A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT, IN THIS CASE, A TREE PRESERVATION AREA, AND THEY DECIDE THEY INDIVIDUALLY NO LONGER WANT THAT, THEN IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO ENFORCE THAT.
AND BY ENFORCEMENT, IF THEY CUT DOWN A TREE, PERHAPS NOT THE SAME SIZE, BUT TO REPLACE THE TREE AND TO KEEP IT -- A TREE
[I. Old Business]
PRESERVATION AREA. A TRUE TREE PRESERVATION AREA.SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN YOU COME TO THE COMMITTEE MEETING. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS OLD BUSINESS. THERE ARE TWO DOCKETS, ONG TO THE SAME PETITIONER, AND WE WILL TAKE THOSE TWO DOCKETS TOGETHER. THE FIRST BEING DOCKET NUMBER PC 2022-00025 PPA 510 SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT.
THE SECOND DOCKET NUMBER PC- 2022-00053 S&W 510 SUBDIVISION STREET FRONTAGE WAIVER -YOU DO SECTION 7.17.80 LOTS SHALL HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO A PUBLIC STREET, ACCESS FROM AN ALLEY AND AN ACCESS EASEMENT REQUESTED.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS PRIMARY PLAN AMENDMENT APPROVAL TO RECONFIGURE TWO LOTS INTO BLOCKS INTO THREE LOTS ON 1.59 ACRES. THE APPLICANT ALSO SEEKS A DESIGN STANDARDS WAIVER TO ALLOW TWO NEW LOTS TO BE CREATED THAT FRONT ON THE MONT ON GREENWAY INSTEAD OF A STREET. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTHWEST AND IS ZONED R-2/RESIDENCE WITHIN THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY ZONE AND MOAN IN OVERLAY ZONE FILED BY TOM (NAME) OF CUSTOM LIVING. MR. (NAME), YOU ARE ON!
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL FOR HEARING TODAY. OUR AMENDED PLAT THAT WE ARE HOPING TO PASS. AS A QUICK REVIEW, WE HAVE CURRENTLY A TWO BLOCK AND TWO LOT SUBDIVISION THAT WE ARE HOPING TO AMEND INTO A THREE LOT SUBDIVISION.
FOR REFERENCE, THIS IS 1ST AVE HERE.
THIS IS THE ALLEY ON FIFTH. AND CURRENTLY, THERE IS A YELLOW HOUSE WITH A SHED BEHIND WITH THE DRIVEWAY ACCESS.
AND THEN, THERE IS GRAVEL ACCESS TO A TWO-STORY CARRIAGE HOUSE IN THE BACK. THE TWO LOTS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TWO SEPARATE ARE SHOWN HERE.
ON THE ATTACHED -- OUR HOPE IS WE CAN TAKE -- ONE OF THE BLOCKS WAS A LANDLOCKED LOCK IN THE LAST VISUAL, AND CREATE THIS TO ALL BE ONE LOT. THIS IS PROPOSED LOT 3. AND THEN ON THE SOUTH BLOCK, WE ARE PROPOSING TO HAVE AN EXCESS WAIVER FOR A PRIVATE DRIVE. AND TO CUSTOM HOMES, YET TO BE DETERMINED ON ARCHITECTURAL PRINTS.
WE HAVEN'T MET WITH CLIENTS YET OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THESE ARE JUST SHOWING BLOBS WHERE TWO HOUSES COULD GO.
SO NOTHING TECHNICAL THERE. HE EXCESS DRIVE WOULD BE HERE, WITH THE UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT COMING FROM FIRST TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE UTILITIES TO THE BACK TO NEW LOTS. AS A HISTORY OF THE SITE.
IN 2001, THE CURRENT SITE WAS REDEVELOPED BY (INDISCERNIBLE).
OF THE AFFIDAVIT, IT WAS NOT THEIR INTENT TO RESTRICT
[00:35:07]
BUILDING IN PERPETUITY. THAT WAS NOT THEIR INTENT WHEN THEY DID THE REDEVELOPMENT. THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT TO EVERYBODY FOR THEIR REVIEW. I CAN ALSO PASS IT DOWN IF ANYBODY DIDN'T GET A CHANCE. OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS, THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE DOOR.OFF THE MONT ON TRAIL. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THIS LOT WAS NOT DEVELOPABLE BACK WHEN THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT WAS MADE FOR THE SUBDIVISION IN 2001 WAS THERE WAS 150 FOOT EASEMENT THAT RAN THROUGH THE BACKYARD HERE STOP AND THAT WAS THE JW ARE O-LINE. WHEN I FIRST MET RUTH AND RUSS, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY SHARED THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED. SO I MET WITH THE CITY.
THE CITY DIRECTED ME TO TALK WITH ALEX AND ALSO HAMILTON COUNTY. WENT THROUGH HAMILTON COUNTY'S DRAINAGE BOARD. BACK IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR, THEY REMOVED THE EASEMENT FOR THIS DRAINAGE LINE SO THAT IT COULD BE DEVELOPED. SO WE MOVED FORWARD WITH RUTH AND RUSS IN HOPES THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO THEN DEVELOP THESE TWO NEW CUSTOM HOMES BACK HERE. OVER THAT SAME TIME PERIOD, ONE OF THE THINGS I'VE SHOWN IN THIS, WHICH I BELIEVE YOU GUYS SAW BEFORE, WAS THIS IS JUST THE SAME ROAD WHERE THIS IS 1ST AVE HERE AND THE ALLEY, FIFTH, HERE.
OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS, AS THE MONT ON BECAME THE MAIN ARTERY OF DEVELOPMENT FOR DOWNTOWN CARAMELS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE PICTORIALS IN PURPLE ARE HOMES THAT WERE EITHER TORN DOWN AND BUILT NEW OR HAD SIGNIFICANT REMODELS DONE TO THEM. THE HOMESITES IN YELLOW WERE AREAS THAT WERE SUBDIVIDED IN SIMILAR FASHION FOR NEW HOMES TO BE ABLE TO BE BUILT ON THEM. SO THROUGHOUT THESE LAST 20 YEARS, LOTS HAS HAPPENED. THE LAST TIME DURING OUR HEARING, THERE WERE SOME NOTES THAT I WAS SENT BACK WITH TO FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION. SO I'VE GOT THOSE TO HELP PRESENT TODAY. AND AT OUR LAST MEETING, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS DISCUSSED WAS THAT I HAD MET WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ON THEIR HOPES FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH THEIR SUPPORT. AND THE MAIN SUPPORTING PIECE FOR THEM WAS TO HAVE A LADDER TRUCK THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE TWO NEW HOMESITES, AS WELL AS FOR US TO PROVIDE A SIX-INCH HYDRANT TO THE BACK AREA AT THE TURN FOR THE RIGORS OF THE EXISTING HOMES. AND THEN, ALSO THE NEIGHBORS BACK HERE, TO HAVE QUICKER ACCESS TO WATER.
CURRENTLY, THE HYDRANT LOCATIONS ON THE BLOCK -- EXCUSE ME -- ARE UP ON TWO BLOCKS TO THE NORTH AND TWO BLOCKS TO THE SOUTH. SO IN TALKING WITH THE FIRE CHIEF, WE ACCOMMODATED THAT TO PUT A HYDRANT BACK THERE FOR THEM, AS WELL AS TO ENSURE THAT THE TURNING RADIUS WOULD MEET ENGINEERING SPECS. IN OUR PROPOSED, YOU CAN SEE THAT -- KIND OF -- THIS IS THE HYDRANT LOCATION HERE.
SO AS A LADDER TRUCK TURNS, THEN THEY ARE ABLE TO LATCH ON AND ACCOMMODATE THE HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE AROUND FOR MORE SAFETY, AS WELL AS THESE TWO HOUSES HERE.
AS A FOLLOW-UP FROM THE LAST MEETING -- I DID GO BACK TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO GET A LETTER OF CONFIRMATION THAT WE DID HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, OF WHICH IS HERE. SO THIS IS CAPTAIN ALLISON'S LETTER THAT WE DID, IN FACT, DISCUSS THINGS AND THEY DID GO THROUGH THAT. I ALSO MET WITH JOHN FOSTER, DEPUTY CHIEF, WHICH THIS LETTER WAS ALSO SUBMITTED TO THE GROUP THAT WE HAD CONVERSATIONS AND THAT THE SAFETY STANDARDS WERE BEING MET BY WHAT WE WERE DOING FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT. ANOTHER AREA OF DISCUSSION WAS THE 10 FOOT ALLEYS. AND ACCESS FOR THESE TWO HOMES, OF WHICH THE CURRENT HOUSE ON THE SOUTH HAS THAT WAIVER OF ACCESS. THEY BOTH DO.
THE ENTER OFF OF THE ALLEY. WITH THESE NEW HOMES BEING OFF A 10 FOOT ALLEY -- I WALKED THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE ABLE TO SHOW
[00:40:01]
THE OTHER 10 FOOT ALLEYS THAT ARE IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE DOOR.THE ONES THAT ARE IN YELLOW ARE TWO WAY ROADS, AND THE ONES THAT ARE IN BLUE ARE ONE-WAY ROADS THAT HAVE 10 FOOT ALLEYS AS ACCESS POINTS TO THE HOUSES. UP HERE IN THE FIRST AND SECOND CORE DOOR, THOSE HAVE OVER 20 HOUSES THAT ARE ON THE 10 FOOT ALLEY AS ACCESS POINTS, VERSUS A REQUEST OF TWO.
ONE OF THE OTHER CONCERNS WITH THAT 10 FOOT ALLEY WAS HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE IF SOMEBODY WAS PULLING INTO THE NEW DEVELOPMENT -- WHAT WOULD THAT CAUSE FOR SOMEBODY? SO I GOT ONLINE TO BE ABLE TO PULL WHAT THE SPEEDS WOULD BE IF SOMEBODY WERE TO BE PULLING OUT THE ACCESS -- THE PRIVATE DRIVE ACCESS. THE CURRENT HOMEOWNER IS 160 FEET FROM THE ROAD, WHICH IS A CORRECTION FROM THE COMMITTEE MEETING OF THINKING IT WAS 100. IT'S 160.
SO I PULLED THAT 160 FEET AND DID A CALCULATION OF 10 MILES AN HOUR TO FIRST STREET. AND THAT WOULD BE 11 SECONDS.
IF SOMEBODY WAS GOING 12 MILES AN HOUR, IT WOULD BE NINE SECONDS. SO SOMEBODY SAW SOMEBODY PULLING INTO THE ALLEY, THEY WOULD BE WAITING ROUGHLY 9 TO 11 SECONDS BEFORE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO EXIT TO RUN THEIR ERRANDS. ANOTHER THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE COMMITTEE MEETING WAS THE TREE PRESERVATION.
AND WHAT WE WOULD MAKE SURE WE WOULD BE DOING (INDISCERNIBLE) PRESERVED. I MET WITH DARREN ON SITE AND WE WALKED THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF.
HE SAID THAT WE WERE MEETING ALL LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS WITH HOW WE MADE THE ADJUSTMENT BASED ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO RUN THE TREE PRESERVATION ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE NORTH OF THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF. SO ON OUR PRINT HERE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A TREE PRESERVATION LINE THAT RUNS THE EXTENT OF THE NORTH TO SOUTH CORRIDOR HERE.
WHICH IS ROUGHLY 55 FEET OFF THE MONT ON.
SO THAT AREA WOULD BE PRESERVED WITH THIS PLAT.
ANOTHER FOLLOW-UP FROM THE COMMITTEE MEETING WAS WHAT WOULD WE WOULD DO AS A LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
I MET WITH ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS, TERRY, HE WAS OUT GRILLING SO I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING HIM (LAUGHING).
I WALKED TO THE BACKYARD. AND TALKING WITH DARREN, HE GAVE US A FEW SPECIES OF TREES THAT WOULD WORK WELL, GRASSES THAT WOULD WORK WELL. IN MEETING WITH TERRY, I OFFERED WHAT WOULD BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE BUFFER.
SO WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT, I'LL GO TO THE NEIGHBORS AND WE WILL JUST DISCUSS BASED ON JOSH'S RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE SURE I'M ACCOMMODATING SOME OF THEIR NEEDS STOP IF SOMEBODY IS PULLING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, IF THERE IS A FLASH OF LIGHT, HOW DO WE PROTECT THAT? SO WE TALKED ABOUT BLUE SPRUCE IS A LITTLE BIT AND SOME OTHER FERNS TO HELP PROTECT THAT.
AND WE WOULD ACCOMMODATE THAT AS WE GO FORWARD AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR. THE OTHER PIECE THAT WE WALKED THROUGH. WAS TRAFFIC WITH THE REQUEST TO MEET WITH JEREMY AND ALEX, IF THEY HAD ANY TRAFFIC CONCERNS WITH THE 10 FOOT ALLEY ACCESS TO THE TWO NEW HOMES.
IN MEETING WITH THEM, THEY SUBMITTED AN EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE THAT SAID THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THE TRAFFIC FOR ACCESS FOR THESE TWO NEW HOUSES.
SO WITH THAT, ME CHECK MY NOTES WERE QUICK.
THERE ARE TWO OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE OF QUESTION.
MALE IS A WALKING AREA . SO THE MALE PERSON WILL BE ABLE TO WALK TO THOSE HOMES AS THEY CURRENTLY DO AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE OTHER QUESTION WAS FOR TRASH PICKUP. WHAT A GARBAGE TRUCK BE PULLING DOWN THE ALLEY AND POTENTIALLY BLOCKING SOMEBODY IN, OF WHICH THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE. IN TALKING WITH REPUBLIC, THE TRASH CANS WOULD HAVE TO BE TAKEN OUT FIRST BY THE HOMEOWNERS ON TRASH DAY AND THEN TAKEN BACK IN.
SO WITH THAT, I THINK I'VE COVERED THE REQUESTS OF THE COMMITTEE AND TRYING TO SEEK OUT THOSE TOPICS.
I THINK THAT WAS IT. SO -- YET.
I'LL PASS FOR NOW AND IF THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS I CAN
ANSWER THEM (INDISCERNIBLE). >> THANK YOU.
[00:45:05]
THE PETITIONER DID A GOOD JOB OF DOING AN OVERVIEW FROM WHERE HE STARTED AND WHERE HE WENT THROUGH WITH COMMITTEE.WHAT HE'S DONE WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT CAME UP AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING. THE DEPARTMENT IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS PRIMARY PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE WAIVER FOR SEVERAL REASONS, INCLUDING THE NEW LOTS ARE IN CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE GOALS OF THE COMP PLAN AND IS CONSIDERED A BEST FIT NEXT TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY STANDARDS AND THE MONT ON OVERLAY STANDARDS WILL BE MET.
THE TREE PRESERVATION WILL BE REQUIRED ALONG THE MONT ON AND HE HAS ADDED THAT TO THE PLAT. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS APPROVED THE DEVELOPMENT. ACCESS TO THE LOTS WILL BE FROM AN EXISTING PUBLIC ALLEY THAT CURRENTLY IS SERVING TWO HOMES.
AND ONLY TWO MORE HOMES WILL BE USING THIS ACCESS.
THE PLA RESTRICTION IS CURRENTLY LIMITING THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY WHILE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ABLE TO USE THEIR LAND WITHOUT THE SAME RESTRICTION. BUILDING TWO SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES NEXT TO EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES WILL NOT HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND WILL LIKELY ONLY INCREASE PROPERTY VALUES AS HAS BEEN SEEN TO HAPPEN THROUGHOUT THE OLD TOWN AREA.
THE COMMITTEE DID DISCUSS THE DEED RESTRICTION ON THE PLAT, AND TO SUMMARIZE THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT SAID BECAUSE THE GRANTOR AND THE GRANTEE ARE THE SAME, THE OWNER OF THE PLAT AND HE OWNS ALL THE LOTS -- BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME, THE PLAN COMMISSION DOESN'T HAVE THE LIMITATIONS TO BE ABLE TO REMOVE THAT RESTRICTION FROM THE PLAT.
THEREFORE, WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU VOTE TO APPROVE BOTH ITEMS THIS EVENING. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. MEMBERS -- QUESTIONS? CONCERNS? MOTIONS?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THOSE ON THE COMMISSION THAT WERE AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING OR ON THE COMMITTEE.
I AGREED THE TWO LOTS ARE A GOOD FIT.
IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE.
WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THE REMAINING PROPERTY TO THE NORTH? AND IF THOSE DEVELOP, HOW DO
YOU GET ACCESS? >> IF MEMORY SERVES ME -- MAYBE YOU CAN COME UP HERE FOR SECOND AND CONFIRM THIS FOR ME?T'S PROBABLY MORE HELPFUL IF WE ACTUALLY SEE THE PLAT TOO.
THANK YOU, SIR. (INDISCERNIBLE).
CAN WE ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT, HAL? THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU, HAL.
CAN WE SHIP THAT PIECE OF PAPER DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT? THERE WE GO. OKAY.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, JEFF?
>> SO WHAT HAPPENS IS, THOSE TWO OTHER LOTS BECAME ONE GIANT
I GUESS WHAT I'M WONDERING IS WILL THIS COMMISSION, SOMEDAY, MAYBE NOT NOW, BUT WILL LOT 3 BE SPLIT?(INDISCERNIBLE).
CONSISTENT USE, HOW WOULD YOU GET TO THOSE LOTS? IF THERE WERE TWO OR THREE LOTS BACK THERE? X YEAH, WE DID NOT TALK ABOUT THAT.
WE JUST DISCUSSED -- THAT LOT 3 BECOMES ONE, KIND OF, MEDICAL LOT.
WE SAW THAT WE WERE LIKE OH, (INDISCERNIBLE).
IS IF THE LAND TO THE NORTH DEVELOPS, TO BE GO FROM TWO HOMES TOFIVE OR SIX ? AND I KNOW IT IS SUPPOSING SOMETHING THAT ISN'T BEING ASKED TODAY.
I'M JUST CURIOUS -- (INDISCERNIBLE) BECAUSE IT'S SIX LOTS INSTEAD OF TWO? MAYBE IT DOESN'T HAVE AN ANSWER
RIGHT NOW? >> DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING?
>> IT'S NOT OUR INTENT TO DEVELOP THOSE IN THE FUTURE.
WELL -- THIS HOME HERE, IF MY WIFE AND I MOVE IN THERE, OR IF A FRIEND MOVES IN THERE, PART OF THE REASON WE DID NOT DEVELOP THAT WAS BECAUSE IT'S GORGEOUS AND IT'S JUST A NICE BIG BACKYARD. IF THERE WAS THAT IN THE
[00:50:05]
FUTURE, PART OF TALKING TO ENGINEERING WAS THAT'S WHY THEY WANTED THIS UTILITY AND ACCESS. IT ORIGINALLY STOPPED HERE.SO IF FOR SOME REASON THAT HAPPENED, THEN THERE COULD BE POTENTIALLY WHERE THIS IS A ROAD THAT COMES THROUGH ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO SERVICE THINGS.
BUT RIGHT NOW, THE GOAL IS TO KEEP ALL OF THIS TOGETHER.
BUT ENGINEERING WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS HAS ACCESS AS UTILITY UP TO THAT LINE. BUT IN 20 YEARS, I'M NOT SURE.
>> SO NO, WE DID NOT. >> ANYONE ELSE?
>> I AM JUST CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT COUNCIL DISCOVERED ABOUT PLAT VERSUS A DEED? IN TERMS OF WHEN INFORMATION
CONFLICTS OR IS ABSENT? >> ANYTHING SPECIFIC REGARDING (INDISCERNIBLE)?
>> THE RESTRICTIONS WOULD HAVE SIMILAR EFFECTS ON EITHER A PLAT OR A DEED. HOWEVER AS I DISCUSSED IN MY MEMO, WE ARE DEALING HERE WITH A RESTRICTIVE NOTE.
AND IT'S QUITE DIFFERENT FROM RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, THAT USUALLY HAS A GRANT OR W GRANTOR AND GRANTEE.
FOR EXAMPLE, YOU ENTER INTO RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS EVERY TIME YOU BUY A HOUSE IN A SUBDIVISION.
HOA WOULD PROBABLY BETHE MOST COMMON EXAMPLE .
HERE, THE GRANTOR AND THE GRANTEE IS THE SAME ENTITY.
THE SAME PERSON. SO THE LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT APPLY IN INDIANA CODE 36-7-4-714 SIMPLY DON'T APPLY HERE. BECAUSE THAT SECTION DEALS WITH SITUATIONS WHERE -- (INDISCERNIBLE) OR REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. HERE IS NOT THE CASE.
SOME NOT EVEN SURE IF WE ARE DEALING WITH THE TRUE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT HERE. (INDISCERNIBLE).
IF YOU READ THE NOTE CAREFULLY, IT IS MY OPINION THAT IT DOES NOT RESTRICT DEVELOPMENT IN PERPETUITY.
IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT A REASON WHY IT CANNOT BE DEVELOPED IS BECAUSE IT DOES NOT HAVE AN ADEQUATE FRONTAGE ON A PUBLICLY DEDICATED STREET. THAT'S ONE.
AND THAT'S THE SECOND ISSUE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.
THAT'S WHY WE ARE ASKING (INDISCERNIBLE) WAIVER.
AND 2, IF WE READ FURTHER IT SAYS THAT THE DEED RESTRICTION NOTE SHALL BE PLACED ON THE DEED AS STATED.
BY THE WAY, IT WAS NOT PLACED ON THE DEED.
NO IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE MADE TO REAL ESTATE EXCEPT IN CONFORMITY WITH ALL APPLICABLE GOVERNMENT ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS. THAT'S WHY THE PETITIONER IS IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY, IS TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE GOVERNMENT RESTRICTIONS, REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES.
SO I DON'T READ THE RESTRICTIVE NOTE AS RESTRICTING DEVELOPMENT, RESIDENTIAL OR OTHERWISE, IN PERPETUITY.
I READ THE NOTE THAT AS LONG AS THE STREET FRONTAGE OR WAIVER IS GRANTED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF ACCESS, AND AS LONG AS THE PETITIONER COMPLIES WITH ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS, THOSE PLOTS IN FACT CAN BE DEVELOPED.
>> APPRECIATE THAT EXPLANATION. THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.
>> YEAH, I WAS IN THE SAME SITUATION.
I WAS HANGING MY HAT ON INTENT. AND I THINK FROM THE LEGAL STANDPOINT, YOU'VE ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION?
>> I MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT AND THE WAIVER
REGARDING THE STREET FRONTAGE. >> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO APPROVE THE 510 SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT AND DOCKET NUMBER PC 2022-00025 PPEA AND THE WAIVER AND DOCKET NUMBER PC 2022-00053 S&W.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, SAY AYE.
[00:55:02]
ANY OPPOSED? IT'S BEEN APPROVED.[J. New Business]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS NEW BUSINESS. DOCKET NUMBER PC 2022-00073 AL DS GENESIS AUTO DEALERSHIP. APPLICANT SEEKS SITE PLAN AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR NEW AUTO DEALERSHIP.HIS IS THE ANTICIPATED DEALERSHIP AS PART OF THE MABLETON AUXILIARY LOT AND DETAIL CENTER PROJECT. DOCKET NUMBER PC 2021 -000 FOUR ATP/80 LS. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 4240 E.96TH STREET. IT'S ZONED B-3/BUSINESS DISTRICT. IT IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN ANY OVERLAY ZONE. FILED BY RICK LAWRENCE OF NELSON AND FRANKENBURG ARE ON BEHALF OF EF AND CROSSROADS PROPERTY LLC.JOHN (NAME), YOU MAY BEGIN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND GOOD EVENING AGAIN FOR THE RECORD JOHN (NAME). LAND-USE PROFESSIONAL WITH THE LAW FIRM OF NELSON AND FRANKENBURG ARE.
WITH ME TONIGHT FROM MABLETON IS TIM GUILMETTE.
RICK LAWRENCE WITH OUR OFFICE AS WELL AS OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR DEVELOPMENT TEAM.HE APPLICATION BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS 480 LS APPROVAL OF A NEW GENESIS DEALERSHIP ON THE NEW PROPERTY THAT WAS THE SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL IN 2021. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 4240 E.
96 STREET AND IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH OF THE EXISTING HYUNDAI DEALERSHIP. IT'S OUTLINED ON THE DISPLAY IN YELLOW. THE SUBJECT (INDISCERNIBLE) IS APPROXIMATELY NINE ACRES IN SIZE.
THIS NEXT EXHIBIT IS INCLUDED BEHIND (INDISCERNIBLE) OF YOUR BROCHURES. WHILE IT IDENTIFIES EXTENT OF THE NINE ACRE PARCEL OUTLINED HERE, THIS PETITION RELATES EXCLUSIVELY TO THE ADDITION OF THE 9000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING WHICH IS THE GENESIS DEALERSHIP.
BACK IN 2021 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN INCLUDED AN EXALTED EVERY LOT AS WELL AS THE DETAIL AND (INDISCERNIBLE) TO SUPPORT THE HON DAY AND HE HAD DEALERSHIP' .
SALES AS WELL AS LANDSCAPING ASSOCIATED WITH ALL OF THIS, AGAIN BACK IN 2021. THE LIMITED NATURE OF THIS REQUEST PERTAINS EXCLUSIVELY TO THE 9000 SQUARE-FOOT NEW BUILDING AND THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF LIGHTING, SET: SIGNAGE AND LANDSCAPING WHICH SURROUNDS IT. IN REGARDS TO THE NEW BUILDING.
THE IMAGE ON DISPLAY IS ONE OF TWO PERSPECTIVE ILLUSTRATIONS INCLUDED BEHIND TAB FOUR OF YOUR BROCHURES.
THERE'S DETAILED BLACK-AND-WHITE ELEVATIONS INCLUDED IN TAB FIVE. DICK -- -- THE COLOR SCHEME CONSISTS OF GRAY AND BLACK EXTERIOR WALLS WITH SIGNIFICANT VISION GLASS ON THE STREET FACING SIDES OF THE BUILDING.
AS YOU ARE LOOKING FROM THE SITE, (INDISCERNIBLE) ROUNDABOUT.
APPROXIMATELY HERE. AND YOU ARE LOOKING GENERALLY NORTH AND WEST INTO THE SITE WITH THE SERVICE ENTRANCE, THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. THE RANDALL DRIVE FRONTAGE IS POSITIONED OVER HERE TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE IMAGE SO THAT VIEW FROM RANDALL DRIVE IS LOOKING INTO THE SITE FROM THAT ANGLE. IN CONCLUSION, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS I INDICATED REGARDING LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING AND SIGNAGE ARE INCLUDED BEHIND TAB FIVE.
RATHER, 67 AND EIGHT. AS NOTED IN THE REPORT, WE WILL COORDINATE WITH STAFF REGARDING THE (INDISCERNIBLE) VARIANCE REQUEST REGARDING THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE.
THE APPLICANT WILL ALSO MAKE SPECIES SUBSTITUTIONS FOR A FEW TREES AS INDICATED BY THE URBAN FORESTRY PRIOR TO REQUEST FOR THE LOCATION PERMIT.HIS WILL CONCLUDE OUR PRESENTATION.
WE WOULD BE GLAD TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS THE COMMITTEE MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME. I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING MATTER, AND LOOK FORWARD TO ADDRESSING ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. AS PETITIONER MENTIONED, THIS WOULD BE A NEW DEALERSHIP BUILDING THAT WAS ANTICIPATED FOR THE PAD READY SITE THAT WAS TO BE SOUTH OF THE DETAIL BUILDING THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LAST YEAR.
[01:00:04]
THE PROJECT MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE NUMBER OF SIGNS THAT THEY PROPOSED BECAUSE IT FRONTS ON ONEPUBLIC STREET FRONTAGE WHICH IS RANDALL DRIVE TO THE EAST . ONE SIDE WOULD BE ALLOWED AND THE SIGNS ARE ALL ORIENTED SOUTH.THERE IS THE LOGO, THE NAME OF THE DEALERSHIP, GENESIS, PARKSIDE AND A SERVICE SIGN. SO THOSE WOULD REQUIRE VARIANCES IN FRONT OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, SIMILAR TO OTHER CAR DEALERSHIPS HAVE HAD TO DO IN THE PAST.
IN MY DEPARTMENT REPORT WHILE I'M ON SIGNAGE, I DID SAY WE NEED MORE DETAILS ABOUT THAT. THEY PROVIDED THOSE DETAILS IN THEIR INFORMATION PACKET. AND THEN, WE ALSO JUST NEED TO UPDATE THE PLANS THAT ARE IN OUR PROJECT FILES, WHICH IS OUR ONLINE REVIEW SOFTWARE. SO THE PROPOSED SIGNS DO MEET THE SIZE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE.
IT'S JUST A NUMBER OF SIGNS THAT WOULD BE OF CONCERN TO US.
THE ONLY OTHER ITEM THAT WAS OUTSTANDING WAS MINOR IN LANDSCAPING. AND JOHN DID MENTION THAT.
IT'S JUST CHANGING OUT A FEW TREE SPECIES THAT ARE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR BEING NEXT TO CARS.
YOU KNOW, ONES THAT DON'T HAVE BERRIES OR OTHER KIND OF DROPPING THINGS (LAUGHING). REGARDING THE SITE PLAN.HE NEW LAYOUT THAT THEY'VE PROPOSED ONLY REDUCES THE PARKING BY 21 SPACES. SO THERE'S STILL WELL OVER WHAT'S REQUIRED AS A MINIMUM. IN THE PURPOSE OF THIS WHOLE ENTIRE LOT IS TO BE AN OVERFLOW LOT.
SO THAT IS NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACTED.
ALSO, THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LOT COVERAGE WAS 73.9 PERCENT.
NOW IT'S 74.2, SO IT'S VERY MUCH SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAD A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. THE ONE NEAT FEATURE ABOUT THE BUILDING -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY RENDERINGS OF THAT -- THERE IS A SKYLIGHT GOING TO BE ON THE TOP OF IT AND IN THE CENTER THERE WILL BE AN ATRIUM -- A GARDEN ATRIUM.
YEAH. IT WILL BE A PRETTY NEAT SPACE, I THINK, ON THE INSIDE BEING PRIMARILY GLASS.
AND HAVING EXTRA LIGHT COMING IN? I THOUGHT THAT WAS A REALLY NEAT FEATURE THAT THEY HAD.
LIGHTING WILL ALL BE THE SAME AS WHAT'S OUT THERE NOW, AS FAR AS PARKING LOT LIGHTS. THEY DID PROVIDE AN UPDATED LIGHTING FOR THE METRIC PLAN. THAT ALL MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.HERE IS NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER TO THE EXISTING APPROVAL THAT WE HAD WITH THE 50 FOOT TREE PRESERVATION AREA AT THE NORTH END OF THE SITE.
THIS IS TRULY JUST MODIFYING THIS SOUTHEAST CORNER, WHERE WE HAD ANTICIPATED FOR A NEW DEALERSHIP TO BE.
SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TONIGHT.
I WROTE THAT YOU NEED TO SUSPEND THE RULES OF PROCEDURES BUT THIS IS AN A DLS ITEM. YOU ARE FREE TO VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT. I RECOMMEND THAT YOU APPROVE IT TONIGHT SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF SIGNAGE, OR WORKING OUT THE SIGNAGE -- WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO GET VARIANCES FOR ALL THE SIGNS ARE NOT. AND THEN, JUST ADDRESSING OUR REMAINING COMMENTS AND PROJECT DOCS.
SO THANK YOU AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, RACHEL. ANYBODY ON THE COMMITTEE OR ON THE PLAN COMMISSION WISH TO COMMENT OR -- HAVE CONCERNS?
>> I MEAN, GENESIS OF CARMEL SEEMS LIKE IT HAS A RING IN IT.
EVEN GENESIS OF TIM SOUNDS COOL, BUT YOU KNOW, I'M NOT THAT PARTICULAR. AND IN THE ATRIUM, IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD GET MONKEYS OR ANYTHING COOL IN THERE? NO MONKEYS, TIM? OKAY.
>> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING PRODUCTIVE.
>> ONE OUT OF TWO AIN'T BAD (LAUGHING).
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE SUBJECT (INDISCERNIBLE) PROJECT
DOCS AND TREE SPECIES. >> I'LL SECOND THAT BUT I HAVE
SOME COMMENTS. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. WE APPROVE THIS TONIGHT SUBJECT TO THE BC APPROVAL (INDISCERNIBLE) SIGNAGE AND PROJECT DOCS. I THINK THE MONKEYS WILL BE AT
[01:05:01]
I'VE GOT SOME COMMENTS. >> YES?
>> TIM, CAN YOU JOIN JOHN, PLEASE? I GET A LOT OF EMAILS AND TIM IS VERY RESPONSIVE.
OMINOUS START WITH THAT. YOU ARE UNBELIEVABLY RESPONSIVE AND I APPRECIATE IT. BECAUSE YOU CANNOT CONTROL THE MONKEYS. WE WILL CALL IT THAT! BUT A COUPLE OF THINGS I'M ASKING FOR.
WE'VE GOTTEN IT WHERE YOU DON'T NEED A PERMIT TO PARK ON YOUR
>> SO EMPLOYEES ARE NOT IN A PARK ON RANDALL DRIVE,
CORRECTLY. >> ONCE THE ROUGH SITE WORK IS PDONE. (INDISCERNIBLE).
RANDALL (INDISCERNIBLE) (AWAY FROM MICROPHONE).
>> WELL, THERE IS NO PARKING ON ONE SIDE.
I WANT NONE OF THE EMPLOYEES PARKED ON RANDALL EVEN THOUGH THEY CAN LEGALLY DO IT. SECOND, WHEN CARS GET DELIVERED. I'VE BEEN THERE TWICE WHERE THEY HAVE BEEN PARKED IN THE STREET.
>> CURRENTLY WE HAVE -- WE PUT SOME DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE IN PLACE. TWICE THEY HAVE BEEN STOLEN.
WE PUT THEM BACK UP. AND WITH CURRENT CONSTRUCTION WE ARE UNDER AT THE HUNT A LOCATION, I THINK IT'S CREATING A LITTLE CONGESTION THERE STOP AGAIN, ONCE WE HAVE THE ROUGH GRADE IN, THAT WILL ELIMINATE THAT.
BECAUSE WE CAN MOVE THAT INTO THIS.
>> OKAY. BECAUSE ON FINAL APPROVAL YOU HAVE TO DELIVER THEM ON THAT LOT.
AND THEN, CONTRACTOR EXIT. CAN YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH YOUR CONTRACTORS BEFORE THEY SHOW UP ON THE JOB? THAT WHEN THEY LEAVE WITH LARGE EQUIPMENT AND LARGE TRAILERS THAT THEY LEAVE SOUTH AND NOT NORTH?
THANK YOU. >> CAN I PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT ONE SECOND? TIM, DON'T GO AWAY.
AND AM LOOKING AT THE SATELLITE IMAGE RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT NOW, RANDALL OFF OF 96TH STREET IS LIKE -- FOR LACK OF BETTER TERMS, IT'S LIKE THREE LANES.
IT'S KIND OF #-- IS THAT YOU ARE CURRENTLY UNLOADING? BECAUSE THE CITY ENGINEER (INDISCERNIBLE).
>> FOR THE TIME BEING. OUR DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE IS POINTING THEM PAST THE ROUNDABOUT.
HOWEVER PAST THE ROUNDABOUT IS WHERE WE HAVE THE TRAILER.
SO THEY'RE USING THE (INDISCERNIBLE) TO UNLOAD CURRENTLY. WE TRIED TO GET THEM ON THE LOT. BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE SO CONGESTED WITH THE CRANES AND THE LIFTS AND THE LACK OF ADDITIONAL FLOW IN THE PARKING LOT CURRENTLY, THAT THEY NEED TO DO THAT FOR SAFETY AND DAMAGE REASONS.
>> AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? OKAY.
AS A CITY ENGINEER, THAT'S NOT THE WORST CASE SCENARIO UNTIL WE CAN GET A BETTER SOLUTION IN THE LONG RUN.
>> ONCE THE FACILITY IS READY TO GO, THE SITE WORK IS READY, THAT'S THE WHOLE PLAN. WE ACTUALLY DID THE TRUCK ROUTES ALONG THE FACILITY. WITH THE NEW FOOTPRINT, IT OPENS UP --.
THAT GENESIS HAS THE PROGRAM THAT YOU NEVER GO TO THE DEALERSHIP AFTER BUYING A CAR AND YOU ARE MAKING THIS BEAUTIFUL DEALERSHIP.
FLOOR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED?
IT'S BEEN APPROVED. >> THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.