[00:00:08]
JULY 2ND MEETING OF THE COMBINED COMMITTEE FOR THE CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION. GLAD YOU ALL COULD MAKE IT HERE. THE FIRST -- JUST TO GIVE EVERYBODY A QUICK RUNDOWN AND ANYBODY PAYING ATTENTION AT HOME, BECAUSE WE ARE NOW COMBINED COMMITTEE, WESTERMEIER IS THE CHAIR OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE AND I, KIRSH AM THE CHAIR OF THE OTHER COMMITTEE.
WE DECIDED AS CO-CHAIRS OF THE COMBINED COMMITTEE, RESIDENTIAL ITEMS WILL BE LED BY SUE, RESIDENTIAL ITEMS WILL BE LED
[1. Docket No. PZ-2024-00044 DP/ADLS: Courtyard by Marriott Hotel. ]
BY ME THAT WE WILL STILL BE WORKING AS A COMEDY AS A WHOLE.SEEMS STRAIGHTFORWARD TO ME AND I'M SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT. I WILL READ AND DOCKET NUMBER PC 2024-004. THIS IS COURTYARD BY THE MARYLAND HOTEL. THE APPLICANT SEEKS APPROVAL FOR A NEW FULL-SERVICE HOTEL WITH 102 ROOMS. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 1328 FIVE ON ILLINOIS STREET ZONED MC FOR THE CORRIDOR FILED BY JIM JACOB, THE OWNER. MR. JACOB OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVE, IF YOU WANT TO JOIN US, THANK YOU.
>> HI, MY NAME IS SAM PATEL, I AM REPRESENTING. WE WERE HERE ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO AND PRESENTED THE PLANS. THE ONLY THING WE DIDN'T HAVE WAS -- INSIDE THE BUILDING. WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THE BUILDING SO THAT CAN GIVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THE BUILDING WOULD LOOK LIKE.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. STAFF, DO YOU WANT TO ADD TO
THIS? >> YES, I CAN. RACHEL KIESLING FOR THE RECORD. APARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. THERE WAS A SMALL LIST OF ITEMS THAT THEY WERE WORKING ON FULFILLING BETWEEN THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION AND NOW. WE NEEDED THE LONG-TERM BICYCLE PARKING SPACES TO HAVE AN ACTUAL SPACE WITHIN THE HOTEL. THAT WAS ONE. THAT ITEM HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF. THE VARIANCE THAT THEY NEED FOR THE MODERATE LOT WITH, THEY HAVE FILED FOR THAT AND IT WILL BE HEARD ON JULY 22ND. AND THAT IS VARIANCE THAT WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF. REGARDING THE ARCHITECTURE, THERE WERE A FEW MISMATCHES BETWEEN ELEVATIONS AND THE RENDERINGS THAT THEY HAD SO I WAS WANTING THEM TO FIX THOSE UP AND AFTER TALKING WITH THEM IT WAS KIND OF A RUSH TO GET THE RENDERINGS QUICKLY, SO THAT IS WHY THERE WERE SOME MISTAKES. BUT I'VE BEEN TALKING WITH THE ARCHITECT AND THEY'VE MADE SOME REVISIONS TO THE RENDERING SO THE RENDERINGS NOW LOOK CORRECT AND I WILL CONTINUE WORKING WITH THE PETITIONER TO MAKE SURE THE ELEVATIONS ARE CORRECT AND EVERYTHING IS JUST SO WHEN THIS PROJECT IS ALL DONE AND APPROVED. THEY'VE GIVEN ME A COMPREHENSIVE PACKAGE OF ALL THE EXTERIOR LIGHTING ON THE BUILDING AND THAT IS ALL COMPLIANT WITH ANY REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE. SAM, CAN YOU GO THROUGH A COUPLE OF THEM? I WANT YOU ALL TO SEE SOME OF THE
CHANGES THAT THEY MADE. >> THIS IS THE ONE IN THE FRONT LIKE IF YOU ARE STANDING FROM ONE SIDE OF THE BUILDING CLOSERE OF THE BUILDING, STILL LOOKING AND THIS IS LOOKING FROM THE BACKSIDE OF THE BUILDING, THE SOUTH ELEVATION OF THE
BUILDING. >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALL TALKED ABOUT WAS THE VIEW FROM THE RAMP, GOING ON 31 AND HOW TALL THE RAMP WAS COMPARED TO HOW TALL THE BUILDING IS.
THE RAMP IS ABOUT HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING AND ABOUT 25 FEET TO THE TOP OF THE RAMP SAFETY GUARD. SAFETY RAIL.
THE BUILDING IS ABOUT 56 FEET TALL. SO WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY ISSUES SEEING ANY KIND OF ROOFTOP MECHANICAL UNITS OR ANYTHING UNSIGHTLY AT ALL. BECAUSE IT WILL BE TALLER THAN THE EXISTING CMC OFFICE BUILDING AND I THINK YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THOSE JUST FINE. FROM PERSPECTIVE VIEWS COMING FROM ALL DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. THE OTHER THING THAT THEY DID WITH THE DESIGN ON THE BUILDING WAS, INSTEAD OF HAVING A DARK
[00:05:05]
COLOR BEHIND THE SIGN NAME, ESPECIALLY ON THE BACKSIDE, I TALKED TO THE ARCHITECT ABOUT CHANGING THE WHOLE SECTION OF THE BUILDING TO BE DARK SO THAT THERE CAN BE SOME CONTINUITY AROUND THE BUILDING AND IT GIVES MORE OF A PUNCH AND FOCAL POINT TO EACH SIDE OF THE BUILDING SO, WHERE THE COURT YOUR NAME IS, IT WILL BE AGAINST THE DARK BACKGROUND WITH WHITE LETTERS THAT WOULD BE WHITE RING THE DAY AND WHITE AT NIGHT AND SO THAT WILL BE EASIER TO SEE. SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS A VERY POSITIVE CHANGE. THAT THEY WERE MAKING.AND SO, WE HAVE A FEW LITTLE THINGS TO WORK OUT THROUGH PROJECT DOCS, LIKE I MENTIONED, WITH MAKING SURE THE ELEVATIONS WERE THE SAME AS THE RENDERINGS AND SO ON AND THEY ARE STILL WORKING WITH ENGINEERING ON A COUPLE ITEMS BUT WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU VOTE TO APPROVE THIS TONIGHT, SUBJECT TO PROVIDING THE FINAL ELEVATIONS WITH ME AND THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED FOR
THE BUILDING. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ON TO OUR COMMISSIONERS, WE WILL START WITH COMMISSIONER HILL.
AND WE WILL JUST MOVE ALONG IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
>> JUST A COMMENT. I BELIEVE I SAW YOUR FILING IN THE CARMEL CURRENT TODAY. SO AT LEAST WE KNOW YOU DID IT. JUST A SMALL
QUESTION. >> THE RENDERINGS WE ARE LOOKING AT NOW, THESE ARE REVISED? THEY REFLECT
EVERYTHING YOU JUST SAID? >> YES, THESE ARE THE CORRECT
ONES. >> THAT'S ALL. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE LOOKING AT EXACTLY WHAT WE WANTED TO BE
LOOKING AT. >> AND THE SIGN IS LIT? AT NIGHT? AS WE HAD TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO GET A SIGNOUT ON ILLINOIS. DID YOU EVER TALK ANYMORE ABOUT THAT?
>> NOTHING SO FAR YET. I TALKED TO MY ARCHITECT AND HE GOES ONCE THE BUILDING IS MOCKED UP WE WILL BE ABLE TO DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT THE SIGN OVER THERE AND IF SO WE WILL PUT AND COME IN FRONT OF YOU AND AS FOR SIGNAGE. THE OTHER THING THAT I WAS SUGGESTED TO US WAS HIGHWAY SIGNS WHERE YOU HAVE THE LOCAL SIGNS ON THE HIGHWAY AND .2 MILES AND THE ENTRANCES THEY PUT A SMALL SIGN. THAT'S ANOTHER THING THEY CONSIDERED BUT WE ARE GOING TO WAIT UNTIL THE BOX IS UP AND SEE HOW VISIBLE IT IS OR NOT BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE A SIGN ON THREE SIDES. ONE ON THE SOUTH AND ONE ON THE EAST SIDE.
>> CAN I ADD, TOO, THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE OFTEN WHICH -- WISH OTHER PETITIONERS WOULD DO IS WAIT AND SEE IF THEY REALLY, REALLY NEEDED BEFORE GOING TO ASK FOR THE VARIANCE.
SO IN A WAY WE ARE VERY APPRECIATIVE THAT THEY WANT TO SEE HOW IT LOOKS AND FEELS BEFORE THEY DIVE INTO MY YES, WE ABSOLUTELY NEED A VARIANCE. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT WE
ARE APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. >> I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THE RENDERINGS.
>> TO PIGGYBACK THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE SIGNAGE, I'M TOTALLY DOWN WITH THIS PLAN. WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE IS YARD SIGNS ON ILLINOIS THAT SAYS COURTYARD THIS WAY, YOU KNOW? I JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT. RIGHT. I THINK YOU GET ME, RIGHT? OKAY. NO OTHER ITEMS. I WILL TAKE A MOTION.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT WITH THE CONTINGENT UPON THE ITEMS LISTED AND THAT WOULD BE THE UPDATED ELEVATION RENDERINGS WHICH THEY DIDN'T SUPPLY TONIGHT AND VARIANCE APPROVAL IS GRANTED FOR BUILDING THIS ONE. BUILDING
MASSING. THANK YOU. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. THANK YOU BOTH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE COUNCILWOMAN'S MOTION SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? LOOKS LIKE THE AYES HAVE IT. CONGRATULATIONS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU SEE HOW QUICK THAT HAPPENED? THAT IS WHAT YOU CALL GREAT STAFF. IT'S NOT ME, IT'S THEM. GREAT
WORK. >> THE MOTION WAS LONGER THAN
THE WHOLE HEARING. >> THAT PUTS A LOT OF PRESSURE
ON ME. I JUST DON'T KNOW . >> YOU KNOW WHAT, JOSH, I TAKE UMBRAGE. I'M JUST KIDDING. I'M JUST TEASING YOU.
[2. Docket No. PZ-2024-00064 PP: Andrews Subdivision Primary Plat. ]
>> THE SECOND ITEM, FINAL ITEM THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT IS DOCKET
[00:10:08]
NUMBER PC-20-24 00064 PP SUBDIVISION PRIMARY PLAT. THE APPLICANT SEEKS PRIMARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR 30 LOT SUBDIVISION WITH OPEN SPACE COMMON AREAS. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 4411, EAST 146TH STREET AND IS ZONED ANDREA'S PUD FILED BY MARK WITH KIMBERLY HORN ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER, NBC LLC. COULDEVENING. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MIKE, I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER WITH EMILY HORN. I ALSO HAVE MR. REX RAMAGE WITH POULTRY. WE ARE HAPPY TO BE HERE THIS EVENING SEEKING APPROVAL FOR OUR PRIMARY PLAT. AS MENTIONED WE WERE HERE AT THE PLANING COMMISSION MEETING A COUPLE WEEKS AGO SO WE REALLY WANTED TO TOUCH ON A FEW OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AND ADDRESSED BASED ON THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED FROM LAST MEETING AND WORKING STAFF. SO JUST GOING THROUGH THE LIST HERE, THERE WAS A QUESTION THAT CAME UP AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING ABOUT THE DRAINAGE FOR THE AMENITY SPACES OF THE NORTH BEND, THE DOG PARK AND THE COMMUNITY GARDEN AREA IN PARTICULAR. WHAT WE DID WAS, WE WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WHAT WE ARE SHOWING HERE IS THAT ALL THE DRAINAGE ULTIMATELY WANTS TO MAKE ITS WAY TO THE EAST AND OVER TO THE BASIN IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER HERE SO WE ARE PROPOSING A TRADITIONAL YARD INLET THAT WOULD HAVE A GREAT THAT WOULD BE SAFE FOR FOLKS TO BE WALKING OVER WITH THEIR PETS IN THAT AREA AS WELL BUT THE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE THAT WE MADE WAS THAT THE RELEASE POINT ON THE EAST AND TOWARD THE COMMUNITY GARDEN, WE MOVED THAT FURTHER EAST SO THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE A CHANCE OF STORMWATER INFILTRATING TOWARDS THOSE COMMUNITY GARDEN SPACES SO BASICALLY MAKING SURE THAT COMMUNITY GARDEN SPACE STAYS WELL CLEAR OF THAT AND STAYS CLEAN. THERE WAS ALSO A COMMENT AT THE NORTH END, I BELIEVE MR. HILL HAD NOTED THE CROSSWALK, FINDING SOME IMPROVEMENTS FOR THAT AREA SO, JEFF, I BELIEVE THIS WILL BE MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT YOU WERE ANTICIPATING ORIGINALLY OF SEEING THAT CLOSER TO 146 SO YOU DON'T HAVE AN AWKWARD SPACING OF VEHICLE STOPPING OR NOT STOPPING FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION. BUT STILL HAVING A SAFE SPACE FOR PEDESTRIANS TO CROSS WITH A REFUGE ISLAND IN THE CENTER THERE. THERE WAS ALSO A NOTE, I DON'T KNOW IT WAS CAPTURED IN THE REPORT, BUT THERE WAS A NOTE ABOUT WILLINGNESS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EXISTING TRAIL IS IN GOOD CONDITION AND POLITY IS AGREEABLE TO MAKE SURE. WE SNAPPED A FEW PICTURES AND IT ACTUALLY LOOKS PRETTY GOOD BUT WE ARE WILLING TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH STAFF IF IT IS DEEMED THAT THERE ARE A FEW SPOTS THAT NEED REPAIRS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS SAFE FOR FOLKS AND USERS THAT WILL BE USING THAT IN THE FUTURE. A FEW OTHER ITEMS HERE. THERE WAS SOME ONGOING COORDINATION WITH THE URBAN FORESTRY MAKING SURE THAT THE LANDSCAPE PLANE WAS ADEQUATE. THAT WAS RESUBMITTED THIS MORNING FOR REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER OF STREET TREES THAT PARTICULARLY MENTIONED THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS ADEQUATE, SO THAT HAS SINCE BEEN MET EAST ON THE REQUESTS AND RESUBMITTED TO STAFF. THERE WAS ALSO QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE AND I JUST WANTED TO NOTE ON THIS, THAT, PALTY HAS CONTINUED CONVERSATION WITH STAFF AND THEY ARE GOING TO PROPOSE A SIGN THAT IS WITHIN THE CODE REQUIREMENTS SO THERE WON'T BE ANY SEEKING VARIANCE. THAT'S SOMETHING WE WILL CONTINUE WORKING ON WITH STAFF AND THE FOLKS ARE CURIOUS THERE'S BEEN MORE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NAMING OF THE SUBDIVISION SO MEADOW STONE IS WHAT IS BEING OPPOSED CURRENTLY. A FEW OTHER NOTES THAT CAME UP PREVIOUSLY, ONE IN PARTICULAR WAS THE CONCERN ABOUT MAKING SURE THERE IS ADEQUATE SIGNAGE AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PROPERTY TO ENSURE THERE IS NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING DOWN AT THE SOUTH END IS WHAT YOU WOULD TYPICALLY SEE FOR A ROAD CLOSURE. IT IS THE TYPE THREE BARRICADES WHICH ARE WHAT YOU SEE, THE METAL FRAMES WITH THE ORANGE BARRIERS ACROSS IT TO MAKE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN AND ASSIGNED THERE THAT WOULD SAY NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC, SO I FEEL LIKE I'VE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED THAT MATTER. A COUPLE OTHER THINGS HERE WERE AGREEABLE TO WORK WITH THE URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT ABOUT THE TREE PRESERVATION SIGNS AND THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT THE SIZE AND HOW IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO HAVE A LARGER QUANTITY OF SMALL SIGNS AS OPPOSED TO MORE
[00:15:05]
INTRUSIVE -- OBTRUSIVE SIGNS THAT ARE MORE SPACED OUT SO WE ARE HAPPY TO WORK WITH THEM ON THAT MATTER AND I THINK THE ONLY OTHER COUPLE ITEMS HERE , THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ALL OF THEM.THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO NOTE WAS THAT WE DID RECEIVE A COMMENT FROM STAFF FROM THE GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION THIS AFTERNOON. I COME TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE HAD FURTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. LIKE I SAID, WE RECEIVED THAT WITHIN A FEW HOURS AGO. SO WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO GO DEEP DIVE AND DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO TALK WITH ENGINEERING STAFF BUT WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT BASED ON THE GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION PLANS THAT I WAS ABLE TO RECEIVE BETWEEN THE TIME OF OUR LAST HEARING AND THIS HEARING, I'VE GOT A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF COMFORT THAT IS SOMETHING FROM A PERSPECTIVE THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION DOCS PROCESS.
THERE CERTAINLY A STORY TO TELL BUT WE FEEL JUSTIFIED IN HOW WE ARE GOING ABOUT THINGS AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS OUR BURDEN TO PROVE THAT WE ARE MEETING THE CODE AND THE DRAINAGE CODE IS PART OF THAT PROCESS. OTHERWISE, HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. I THINK WE WILL START DOWN AT THIS END AT THIS TIME. AFTER THE STAFF GIVES
THEIR REPORT. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, ALEXIA LOPEZ WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. MIKE DID A GOOD JOB GOING THROUGH OUR REMAINING COMMENTS IN THE REPORT. I THINK HE SATISFIED ALL OF THOSE THAT WERE MENTIONED EXCEPT FOR MAYBE ONE WHICH IS THAT THE CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SIGNAGE SO IT ALSO REFERENCES SIGNAGE ALONG 146 AND GRAY ROAD. I THINK THAT INTENT WAS SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T COME INTO GREAT OAKS AND THEN GET TO THE CUL-DE-SAC AND HAVE TO TURN AROUND AND GO BACK. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHERE THOSE WOULD BE OR WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE TO DIVERT THE CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC FROM GREAT OAKS AND THEN, WITH THE DRAINAGE FROM THE DOG BACK TO THE COMMUNITY GARDEN , I ACTUALLY SPOKE WITH MIKE EARLIER TODAY ABOUT THIS AND WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD EXTEND THAT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER EAST. I WAS WORRIED THAT IT WOULD STILL HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO FLOW SOUTH. IT LINES UP ALMOST DIRECTLY WITH THOSE PLOTS SO, I THINK HE SEEMED AMENABLE TO THAT TO JUST MOVE IT, JUST SO WE ARE CLEAR OF ALL THOSE GARDEN PLOTS WITH ANY DRAINAGE THAT WOULD BE COMING FROM A DOG PARK. OTHER THAN THAT, THOSE ARE OUR OUTSTANDING COMMENTS AND I THINK THOSE CAN BE ADDRESSED GOING FORWARD HOWEVER I ALSO SPOKE WITH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND THEY WERE NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE CURRENT DRAINAGE SYSTEM LAYOUT AND I THINK THEY HAD CONCERNS THAT MAY BE IF SOME OF THE DRAINAGE NEEDED TO CHANGE IT COULD POTENTIALLY CHANGE THE LAYOUT IN THE SUBDIVISION SO I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND, IN THE REPORT I RECOMMENDED APPROVAL IF THEY COULD ADDRESS OUR COMMENTS THAT I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND WE TABLE IT UNTIL WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THOSE DRAINAGE CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED AND WE WON'T SEE ANY CHANGES LATER. WE DON'T WANT THEM TO APPROVE THIS PRIMARY PLAT LAYOUT AND COME BACK LATER AND SAY EITHER THEY HAVE TO CHANGE IT OR SAY, WELL, THE PLAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED.
WE CAN'T ADDRESS THE DRAINAGE COMMENTS. THAT WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION, TABLE IT TO THE AUGUST COMMITTEE SO I CAN MAKE SURE THOSE COMMENTS ARE TIED UP BECAUSE THERE WERE A COUPLE I MENTIONED, ONE, THE PROPER OUTLET FROM THE POND, ONE ABOUT A WETLAND THAT THEY ARE STILL WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM AND THERE WAS A THIRD ITEM. SO THAT WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION.
THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT, COMMITTEE. ANY
OTHER COMMENTS? >> I WOULD LIKE TO REFER TO OUR DRAINAGE EXPERT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS TABLE.
>> HE WILL HAVE HIS CHANCE. >> SAME, I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE AND BEING SO RESPONSIVE TO EVERYBODY'S SUGGESTED REQUESTS SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH BUT I WILL HAVE TO DEFER TO THAT AND ON THE DRAINAGE ISSUE, SO, JEFF
AND COUNSELOR MINNAAR? >> I KNOW THAT AT LEAST COUNCILWOMAN MINNAAR HAS BEEN COPIED ON THE SAME EMAILS THAT I'VE BEEN COPIED ON WHEN I WEAR MY OTHER HAT SO I KNOW THERE'S STUFF TO WORK THROUGH. I WANTED TO TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION SIGNAGE BECAUSE I'M A BIG FAN OF
[00:20:05]
SIGNS. I AGREE WITH STAFF, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING OUT ON GRAY ROAD. THE GRAY ROAD STUFF, MY OPINION IS, THE GRAY ROAD STUFF SHOULD SAY NOT JUST NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC BUT SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF WHAT'S THE NEW NAME? ACCESS TO MEADOW STONE VIA 146TH STREET AND IT SHOULDN'T BE ONE OF THOSE SMALL YARD SIGNS IT SHOULD BE ONE OF THE GIANT YARD SIGNS PUT IN WITH METAL STAKES NOT FRAMES THAT BLOW OVER AND GO MISSING. SOMETHING THAT'S KIND OF OBNOXIOUS ALMOST. THE REASON I SAY THIS IS BECAUSE THE RESIDENTS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WENT TO SEE A BIG OBNOXIOUS SIGN THAT SAYS NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AND LIKEWISE ON THE BARRIERS, AS YOU ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU ARE TRYING TO GO BACK THROUGH GREAT OAKS, THOSE COULD JUST BE STANDARD SIGNS THAT SAY NO EXIT FOR CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC TO GRAY ROAD. MUST EXIT VIA 146TH STREET. WHAT I'M TRYING TO EMPHASIZE IS PLEASE DON'T MAKE IT JUST SAY NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. BE MORE DELIBERATE WITH THIS IS WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO. AND I AM NOT A DRAINAGE EXPERT BUT THAT OUTLET PIPE NEAR THE GARDENS I WOULD BE CURIOUS WHAT ENGINEERING STAFF THOUGHT ABOUT, A PSEUDO-BIO SWELL OR GRASSES STUFF ? SOMETHING THAT IS DEEP PENETRATING AND CATCHES PARTICULATE IF YOU WILL? I'M NOT MAKING THAT REQUEST. I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO HEAR WHAT JOHN THOMAS HAS TO SAY ABOUT THAT. IN FACT, I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT STAFF THINKS. ABOUT MORE BIOLOGICAL MATTERS , GRASSES, NATIVE PLANTS AND STUFF IN YOUR DETENTION AREAS TO TRY TO ALLEVIATE THE CONCERN OF SEDIMENT BUILDUP DOWNSTREAM WHICH I THINK IS SOME OF THEIR CONCERN IS MAINTENANCE, ET CETERA. I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW BUT I'M ASKING YOU TO DISCUSS THAT WITH ENGINEERING STAFF. THANK YOU.>> JOSH ADDRESSED MY FIRST QUESTION. MY SECOND QUESTION IS A PROCEDURAL ONE. FROM A TIMELINE STANDPOINT, YOU ARE RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE POSTPONED TO THE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING IN THE COMMITTEE MEETING WOULD BE IN 30, MIDMONTH IN OUR NEXT REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS. IS IT -- I'M ONLY ASKING, NOT ADVOCATING, I'M ASKING, CAN WE BRING IT BACK? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RESOLVED IN TWO WEEKS AND BRING IT BACK TO THE FULL COMMISSION FOR A FINAL VOTE AS OPPOSED TO HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE COMMITTEE AGAIN BEFORE IT GOES BACK?
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. >> I'M LOOKING AT OUR LEGAL
COUNSEL. >> PROCEDURALLY, YES. THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO. IT'S MORE A QUESTION OF CAN EVERYTHING BE DONE IN TIME FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
>> THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN IS TWO WEEKS ENOUGH? REALLY IT'S ONE WEEK BECAUSE WE HAVE FOURTH OF JULY THIS WEEK. THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SUBMIT ANYTHING FOR A PACKET NEXT WEEK WOULD BE OUR DEPARTMENT BOARD IS DUE AND IN THE MEETING IS THE 16TH SO IF THEY WOULD HAVE TIME TO MEET WITH ENGINEERING STAFF AND REVISE ANY DRAWINGS IF THAT WERE NEEDED . ALSO SOMETHING ELSE TO CONSIDER IS WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ON THE JULY 16TH MEETING RIGHT NOW. THIS WOULD BE THE ONLY ITEM SO, WE WOULD NEED TO -- I GUESS IF WE DECIDE TONIGHT WE WOULD JUST HAVE THIS AS AN OLD BUSINESS ITEM ON THAT
MEETING. >> THEN, IF I MAY, WOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE TO ALL PARTIES CONCERNED IF THIS IS DEFERRED UNTIL THE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING WITH THE COMMITTEE MEETING HAVING FINAL DETERMINATION?
>> WE DO ALREADY. >> I KNOW, BUT --
>> SO WE COULD TABLE IT AND YOU COULD STILL DO APPROVAL COMMITTEE. THAT WOLDN'T CHANGE .
>> OKAY. SO BASICALLY, IT NEEDS ANOTHER 30 DAYS FOR EVERYTHING TO GET DONE THAT NEEDS TO GET DONE TO GO THROUGH THE
PROCESSES, CORRECT? >> I'M NOT AN ENGINEER BUT I WOULD THINK SO JUST TO GIVE TIME TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE
PLANS. >> ALL RIGHT, OKAY. THANK YOU.
[00:25:01]
>> NO COMMENT. >> I'VE GOT A TON OF DRAINAGE COMMENTS AT THIS POINT IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL COORDINATION ON OTHERS RELATED TO AN OVERALL SCHEME THAT THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT BUT I GUESS I DO SHARE MR. KIRSH STARTS THAT IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THIS WOULD BE HARD TO UNDO OR VICE VERSA SO I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF EITHER THIS COMMITTEE VOTING TO SEND IT BACK TO THE FULL COMMITTEE AND TRYING TO TAKE ACTION IN TWO WEEKS OR TABLING FOR ANOTHER MONTH. I AM APPRECIATIVE OF THE CHANGES YOU MADE TO THE TRAIL ENTRANCE PROXIMITY TO THE DRIVEWAYS SO THANKS FOR DOING THAT.
APPRECIATE THE ONGOING CONSIDERATION FOR ANY TRAIL FIXES THAT NEED TO BE MADE. I WOULD -- WELL, I WILL BACK OFF.
I'LL SAY IT OUT LOUD AND THEN BACK OFF. THE CONFIGURATION OF THE CROSSING IS A LITTLE SKEWED. I WOULD JUST SAY MAKE SURE IT IS A.D.A. COMPLIANT. I HAVE NO DOUBT WHEN YOU GET TO FULL CONSTRUCTION PLANS YOU WILL GET TO DETAIL THAT TO THE HILT AND PROVE THAT. SO I'M NOT CONCERNED THERE. I'M GOOD.
BUT ALL THE DRAINAGE STRUCTURES RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE RAMPS.
AND THAT, I GUESS, WHILE I'M ON THAT TOPIC I'M SURPRISED TO SEE A TRAFFIC MAINTENANCE PLAN ATTACHED TO A PRIMARY PLAT WHEN ALL WE ARE LOOKING AT IS LOT CONFIGURE AUCH -- CONFIGURATION. BUT WHATEVER. IT DOESN'T HURT ANYTHING BUT I WOULD'VE EXPECTED THAT CONSTRUCTION PLANS LATER BUT
THIS BODY NEVER SEES. >> I DO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT AND ALSO FOR REALLY TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO THE GREAT OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEIR CONCERNS AND TAKING THIS APART. I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THAT. THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE SO, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR DOING
THAT. >> IF I MAY? REX RAMAGE, FOR THE RECORD. THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION THE LAST TWO WEEKS ABOUT CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SIGNAGE. I 1000% AGREE WITH JEFF THAT THIS IS NOT AN ITEM THAT SHOULD BE DISCUSSED HERE BUT IT IS SO, BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT I THOUGHT I WOULD DO A QUICK HIGHLIGHT. I'LL PUT THE DOCK CAM UP. THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL.
THANKS. SECTION 845 WAS A SPECIFIC SECTION CRAFTED IN THE MEETING BASED ON ALL OF THE -- ET CETERA. SO THERE'S MULTIPLE LAYERS. ITEM A IS, WE WOULD POST SIGNAGE AT BOTH ENTRANCES.
AT 163 STREET AND ON GRAY ROAD THAT SAYS THAT CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SHOULD ENTER THROUGH OUR SUBDIVISION ON 146TH STREET. THE SECOND LAYER BEING THE CONNECTION POINT AT OUR SOUTHWEST CORNER WHICH ISTHE GREAT OAKS ROUNDABOUT OR TRAFFIC CIRCLE SO TO SPEAK THAT THERE WOULD BE A -- NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SIGN AT THAT -- IN ADDITION TO THE THREE BARRICADE THAT MIKE REFERENCED. THEIR SUBSEQUENT LANGUAGE ABOUT WHEN THE BARRICADE CAN COME DOWN . BUT IT WOULD CERTAINLY BE AFTER ALL THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES OCCURRED SO WHEN THOSE HEAVY EQUIPMENT TRUCKS ARE THERE THAT WOULD BE ACCESS. AND THEN LET'S SEE HERE. RIGHT. SO. TO THE EXTENT THAT IT NEEDS TO SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT, WE ARE HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. PLAC GROUND, HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT AS WELL. SINCE THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ON WHERE AND WHEN AND WHY IT RIGHT LOOK LIKE, I JUST THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THIS BODY TO SEE AND THEN, SECONDLY, THE EXHIBIT REFERENCE IN THAT SECTION, THE IMAGES WOULD BE LIKE SO. MR. KIRSCH, IF THE TOP IMAGE IS NOT SUFFICIENT BECAUSE IT IS SUBJECTED TO -- WE ARE HAPPY TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT A WAY.
>> I THINK YOU ARE MEETING THE LETTER OF THE PUD AND DEFINITELY HITTING THEM WITH A BIG OBNOXIOUS SIGN AND THE BASE IS A SOLID BASE. IT'S NOT GOING TO FALL OVER. MY COMMENT IS MORE FROM FORMER DALTON EDUCATOR THAT PEOPLE TEND TO LIKE TO KNOW WHY THE RULES ARE THE WAY THEY ARE AS OPPOSED TO JUST KNOW CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. THAT CLEARLY DOESN'T APPLY AND ALTHOUGH THE NEIGHBORS ARE CONCERNED, PROBABLY ABOUT BIG BULLDOZERS BEING PULLED THROUGH, IT'S GOING TO BE THE FINISH CREWS THAT REALLY ANNOY THEM IN THE END. NAILS FALLING
[00:30:01]
OFF OF THOSE TRUCKS AT CETERA. SO, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE HIT THE LETTER OF THE LAW. I JUST -- ANYMORE THOUGHT THAT MAKES A BETTER NEIGHBORS MAY BE MY RECOMMENDATION SO I APPRECIATEYOUR CONCERN. >> I GUESS THE LAST LAYER THAT IS NOT SIGNAGE RELATED TO THIS WHOLE CONCEPT IN THE ORDINANCE WAS, PALTY IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ALL OF OUR VENDORS WITH MEMO AND WITHIN THAT IS GOING TO BE A SUGGESTED TRAFFIC ROUTE TO ACCESS THE SITE SO ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS, I THINK THE SAME NEIGHBOR THAT SENT THE EMAIL EARLIER THIS MORNING, SHE IS LIKE, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE GUY WANTS TO COME UP GRAY ROAD? THEY ARE GOING O CUT THROUGH US. WE ARE GOING TO EXPLICITLY TELL THEM THE ROUTE THEY SHOULD TAKE TO ACCESS OUR DEVELOPMENT THAT GETS THEM EASTBOUND ON 146TH STREET BECAUSE WE ARE RIGHT -- AGAIN, AN ADDITIONAL LAYER THAT IS NOT DAY TO DAY TRAFFIC SIGNAGE RELATED BUT WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ALL REMEMBER THAT AS PART OF THE CONVERSATION.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT AND WHAT TO EMPHASIZE FOR THIS BODY, WE CAN DO OUR BEST TO DO THIS BUT IT'S STILL PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. WE DON'T GET TO DECIDE WHO USES IT, TECHNICALLY. WE CAN ASK FOR THESE KIND OF GOOD, NEIGHBORLY RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE CAN PUT THEM ON SIGNS THAT I'M HOPING THE NEIGHBORS SEE THE ATTEMPT BUT WHEN PUSH COMES TO SHOVE, A POLICE OFFICER DOESN'T GET TO PULL OVER A DUDE IN A PAINTING TRUCK BECAUSE HE DROVE THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. KEEP IT REAL.
AND LASTLY, WHILE I HAVE THE FLOOR HERE, ANY AND ALL CONSIDERATION FROM YOU ALL THIS EVENING TO GET THIS APPROVED AND OUT OF THE PROCESS. WE ARE CERTAINLY MORE THAN WILLING TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH STAFF MY ENGINEERING, ET CETERA. AGAIN, AS MIKE SAID, IF I DIDN'T TRUST TO HAVE A SOLUTION TO THAT, THAT IS TYPICALLY TAKEN CARE OF AFTER THIS PART OF THE PROCESS. WE WOULDN'T HAVE HIRED IKE AND THIS TEAM TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. IF THERE IS ANY GRACE FROM THE BODY TONIGHT, WE REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL OF THE PLAT AND OF COURSE WE COULD GO ON TO THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND DOCUMENTS WHICH IS THE MOMENT IN TIME THAT WE WILL ADDRESS
THAT TYPE OF ITEM. >> I THINK WHAT HE'S NOT SAYING AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK STAFF IS, ARE YOU STILL AS CONFIDENT AS EVER THAT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT COULD STOP THIS WHOLE PROCESS WITH OR WITHOUT OUR APPROVALS TONIGHT?
>> I KNOW. I SEE WHAT MIKE IS DOING BACK THERE. I'M TRYING TO BE RESPECTFUL OF STAFF. I MEAN, IS THAT -- YOU KNOW WHAT I'M
SAYING. >> I THINK IF THIS GETS APPROVED THIS EVENING WITH THE LAYOUT WHICH IS THE LAYOUT THAT WAS ALSO SHOWN IN PUD, BUT THERE WERE CHANGES THAT NEEDED TO BE MADE DUE TO THE DRAINAGE AND IT AFFECTED THE LAYOUT IF WE CONDITION THE APPROVAL ON THAT FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL OF THE DRAINAGE , THAT WOULD MAKE ME MORE COMFORTABLE OF BEING ABLE TO THEN SAY, SOME THINGS CHANGE OR, YOU DO NEED TO MEET THE STANDARDS OR CHANGE THE LAYOUT, I GUESS.
>> SO MOVED . >> CLARIFICATION. WE JUST WALK THROUGH THIS. WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS, WE COULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS TONIGHT, PENDING ENGINEERING APPROVAL, PROVIDED THAT WHATEVER CHANGES ENGINEERING IS SAYING DOESN'T REQUIRE THEM TO CHANGE THE PLAT. IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? OR IS IT JUST PENDING ENGINEERING APPROVAL, BUT IF IT ENDED UP CHANGING THE PLAT, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR AMENDMENTS MUSCLE TO SPEAK .
>> IF IT'S A BEACON OF CHANGE, SOMETIMES WE SEE CHANGES ANYWAY BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PLATS BUT IF IT'S A BIG ENOUGH CHANGE THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A PRIMARY PLATT AMENDMENT POTENTIALLY BUT I DON'T WANT TO TIE ENGINEERING'S HANDS UP WITH THIS LAYOUT SAYING IT WAS APPROVED BY PLAN COMMISSION SO, IT'S APPROVED CONTINGENT UPON
THE ENGINEERING . >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.
>> MADAM CHAIR, I THINK, FOR THE RECORD, WE PROBABLY NEED TO
STATE THE MOTION. >> THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE PENDING ENGINEERING APPROVAL. AND THAT'S ALL WE HAVE TO SAY.
WE ARE MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE PENDING ENGINEERING APPROVAL. WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO THE PLAT.
>> SECOND. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED TO APPROVE THIS ITEM TONIGHT. ENGINEERING APPROVAL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,
SAY AYE. >> OPPOSED? THIS IS SUBJECT TO
ENGINEERING APPROVAL . >> THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERATION.
HAVE A GOOD EVENING. >> WE ARE ADJOURNED. WE ARE ADJOURNED. WE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.