[A. Call Meeting to Order]
[00:00:07]
>>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE MEETING OF THE CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION. WILL YOU PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE? >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR.
[C. Roll Call]
SECRETARY, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?>> JONATHAN BLAKE? >> PRESENT.
>> JEFF HILL? CHRISTINE ZOCCOLA? >> PRESENT.
>> SUSAN WESTERMEIER? SHANNON MINNAAR?
[D. Declaration of Quorum]
[E. Approval of Minutes]
>> PRESENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE A QUORUM. NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR APRIL 2025 MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE
[F. Communications, Bills, Expenditures, & Legal Counsel Report]
MINUTES, SAY AYE. UP NEXT, WE HAVE LEGAL COUNCIL REPORT. WE HAVE THREE RESOLUTIONS BEFORE I GET TO THAT. DO WE HAVE ANYOTHER LEGAL REPORTS? >> YES. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU ALL A HEADS UP. THE NEXT MEETING, WE WILL HAVE TWO COUNCIL-INITIATED TECH AMENDMENTS ON THE AGENDA FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ONE INVOLVES GROUP HOMES, THAT IS SECTION 5.72 AND 9.08 AS WELL AS DPA-ADLS AMENDMENTS. AND THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE AMENDMENTS AT THE NEXT MEETING. HOWEVER, THE MEETING IS EXPECTED TO GO LONGER
THAN NORMAL BECAUSE OF THOSE. >> WE APPRECIATE THE ADVANCE WARNING. WE'LL REVIEW ALL THAT IN ADVANCE OF THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION AND LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THE NEW ORDINANCES PRESENTED. UP NEXT THEN WE HAVE THREE RESOLUTIONS, AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THEM INTO RECORD.
>> PC RESOLUTION AMENDS THE EXISTING DECK LA TORY RESOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO TERMINATE THE ALLOCATION PROVISION OF THE ORIGINAL ALLOCATION AREA, THEN DESIGNATE THREE NEW AREAS TO BE KNOWN AS GRAMERCY EAST PHASE ONE ALLOCATION AREA, GRAMERC EAST PHASE TWO ALLOCATION AREA, AND GRAMERCY EAST PHASE THREE ALLOCATION AREA PURSUANT TO SECTION 39 OF IC 36-7-14 AND LASTLY ADOPTS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE SECOND ONE IS PC RESOLUTION PC-5-20-25-B. CRC RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-03 IT AMENDS THE EXISTING DECK LA TORY RESOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CREATE A SEPARATE ALLOCATION AREA WITHIN THE EXISTING GRAMERCY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREA TO BE KNOWN AS GRAMERCY EAST PHASE FOUR ALLOCATION AREA. AND FINALLY, THE THIRD ONE IS PC RESOLUTION PC-5-20-25-C. CRC RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-04 AMENDS THE EXISTING DECK LA TORY RESOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSOLIDATE TWO AREAS IN ONE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREA AND DESIGNATE THREE NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREAS WITHIN THAT TO BE KNOWN AS THE GRAMERCY EAST PHASE FIVE ALLOCATION AREA, GRAMERCY EAST PHASE SIX ALLOCATION AREA, AND GRAMERCY EAST PHASE SEVEN ALLOCATION AREA PURSUANT TO SECTION 39 OF IC 36-7-14. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
IF YOU HAVE A MAP, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TOO.
>> I CAN GET US A MAP ON MY PHONE IF THAT'S OKAY. AND I JUST PUT IT IN THE RED BOX,IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY. OH, LOOK AT ME. I'M ON TV. SORRY. GOOD EVENING, MADAME CHAIRWOMAN AND PLAN COMMISSIONERS, I'M DUSTIN MEAKS. THANK YOU FOR THE INTRODUCTION ON THE RESOLUTIONS. SO WHAT WE HAVE THIS EVENING IS THE SECOND STEP IN A FOUR-STEP APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TIF ALLOCATION AREAS, AREAS OF THE CITY WHERE TAX INCREMENT REVENUES ARE COLLECTED FOR USE IN OR SERVING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREAS IN WHICH THEY'RE LOCATED. IF THESE ARE APPROVED, THEY GO ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION, AND THEN ON TO A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE
[00:05:03]
CITY'S REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AFTER WHICH THEY WOULD BE APPROVED FINALLY. THERE ARE THREE RESOLUTIONS AND THE REASON FOR THE THREE RESOLUTIONS IS THE FIRST RESOLUTION SETS UP THREE AREAS, WHICH I'LL PUT ON THE SCREEN HERE. I APOLOGIZE. I'M GOING TO ZOOM IN ON IT HERE. SO THIS IS, OH THAT'S NOT VERY GOOD, IS IT LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, HENRY.>> DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR TOOK UP GRAMERCY. IT'S A GIANT PROJECT THAT INCLUDES SUBURBAN SECTION URBAN SECTIONS, IT INCLUDES FOR SALE RESIDENCES, IT INCLUDES APARTMENTS, AGE-TARGETED UNITS, AND AN URBAN PLAZA. SO TO CAPTURE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING TO FACILITATE THE DEAL THAT CITY COUNCIL VOTED ON, WE ARE HERE TAKING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STEPS OF CREATING ALLOCATION AREAS THAT WOULD CAPTURE THE TAX INCREMENT TO EFFECTUATE THE DEAL THE COUNCIL APPROVED. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THESE ALLOCATION AREAS AS DUSTIN JUST MENTIONED INITIALLY STARTS AT REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, NOW IT GOES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SO YOU'RE EFFECTIVELY VOTING ON EIGHT DIFFERENT AREAS, EIGHT DIFFERENT ALLOCATION AREAS THROUGHOUT THE GRAMERCY PROJECT. ONE QUESTION YOU MIGHT ASK IS WHY SO MANY AREAS, HENRY? WELL, UNDER STATE LAW WHEN YOU ISSUE BONDS, THE AREAS BEGIN TO RUN THEIR 25-YEAR TIF LIFE WHEN BONDS ARE ISSUED. SO IN A MULTI-PHASE PROJECT LIKE GRAMERCY THAT'S GOING TO TAKE MULTIPLE YEARS WITH CONSTRUCTION STARTING IN MULTIPLE PARTS OF IT, YOU CREATE MULTIPLE ALLOCATION AREAS SO WHEN YOU ISSUE BONDS RELATED TO PARTS OF THE PHASES, YOU CAN TAG THOSE ALLOCATION AREAS TO SPECIFIC BONDS. THIS WAY, A PROJECT THAT'S STARTING THIS YEAR ISN'T GOING TO START THAT 25-YEAR LIFE FOR LIKE THE URBAN SECTION OF GRAMERCY, REMEMBER THAT'S THE ONE ALONG CARMEL DRIVE. WE WANT EACH OF THEM TO HAVE THEIR 25-YEAR LIFE SPANS, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE SEVEN OR EIGHT DIFFERENT ALLOCATION AREAS. THAT'S ESSENTIAL LY A SUMMARY OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. HOPEFULLY AFTER YOUR POSITIVE VOTE, IT WILL GO TO THE COUNCIL, THEN BACK TO THE COMMISSION, AND WE'RE OFF TO THE RACES ON THE GRAMERCY DEVELOPMENT. WITH THAT, WE ARE BOTH HERE, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO STAFF. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO
COMMISSIONERS? >> NO. WE WOULD RECOMMEND
APPROVAL THIS EVENING. >> THANK YOU. DO MY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THEY WOULD LIKE TO ASK? SEEING NONE, ALL RIGHT, DO I HAVE A MOTION? AND CAN WE VOTE ON ALL THREE OR DO WE NEED TO VOTE ONE AT A TIME?
>> YOU SHOULD VOTE ONE AT A TIME.
>> WE'LL VOTE ON THE FIRST ONE, WHICH IS PC RESOLUTION PC-5-2025-A. THIS IS ALLOCATION AREA ONE, TWO, AND THREE. IS
>> OKAY. SO DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> SO MOVED.
>> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
THANK YOU. NOW WE'LL VOTE ON PC RESOLUTION PC-25-2025-B, GRAMERCY EAST ALLOCATION FOUR AREA. DO I HAVE A MOTION?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THAT ONE IS PASSED. THE NEXT ONE IS PC RESOLUTION PC-5-2025-C. THIS WOULD BE PHASE FIVE ALLOCATION AREA, PHASE SIX ALLOCATION AREA, AND PHASE SEVEN ALLOCATION AREA. DO I HAVE A
>> SECOND. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, THIS ONE PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THIS ONE IS PASSED. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
[G. Reports, Announcements & Department Concerns]
THANK YOU, HENRY. UP NEXT, REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND DEPARTMENT CONCERNS. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE STAFF.>> THANK YOU. JUST WANTED TO GIVE A LITTLE REPORT FROM THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING. WE HEARD A PUD FOR U.S. 425 WCD, AND THAT WAS RETURNED TO THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. YOU'LL BE HEARING THAT THIS EVENING. WE ALSO HEARD SEVERAL PETITIONS FOR NORTH END PHASE TWO. THAT WAS ALSO RETURNED TO THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION, SO YOU'LL HEAR THAT LATER THIS EVENING AS WELL. AND THEN WE HEARD AN ALDS AMENDMENT FOR THE LIFESTYLE GROUP EXTERIOR REMODEL, AND THAT WAS APPROVED.
WE HAVE NO OTHER UPDATES TO THE AGENDA THIS EVENING, SO THAT'S
IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UP NEXT IS THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF OUR MEETING, AND WE HAVE TWO
[00:10:01]
PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT. AND OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE IS THE PETITIONER WILL HAVE 15 MINUTES TO PRESENT. AFTER THAT, THERE ARE TIME FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT. AFTER THAT, THE DEPARTMENT STAFF WILL GIVE THEIR REPORT. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE DEPARTMENT REPORT, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS THEN CLOSED, AND I'LL OPEN IT[H.1. Docket No. PZ-2025- 00054 PP: Baker Village Subdivision Primary Plat]
UP TO COMMISSIONERS FOR THEIR CONVERSATION AND QUESTION.PZ-2025-00054 PRIMARY PLAT BAKER VILLAGE SUBDIVISION. PRIMARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR 47 LOTS WITH OPEN SPACE AND COMMON AREAS. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN IS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 146 STREET AND TOWN ROAD. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU, JOHN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. FOR THE RECORD, JOHN WITH NELSON AND FRANKENBURG. WE'RE HERE ON BEHALF OF SHAWN BLACKBURN AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM. AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECALL, THIS PROJECT WAS REVIEWED AS THE TOWN ON 146 STREET PUD OVER SEVERAL MONTHS LAST YEAR. IT WENT UP TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION, WAS APPROVED AS AMENDED BY THE COUNCIL BACK IN FEBRUARY, AND THAT WAS RATIFIED IF YOU WILL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION A COUPLE MONTHS AGO. WE'RE HERE NOW IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR WHAT'S CALLED PRIMARY PLAT APPROVAL. A NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE SAME SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AS THE ZONING REQUEST. WE ALSO REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO OUR EAST AND SOUTH. THE REVISED REAL ESTATE IS APPROXIMATELY 15 ACRES IN SIZE. IT'S SHOWN HERE. IT'S AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF TOWN ROAD AND 146 STREET. THE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES A PLAT FOR 47 LOTS. THOSE LOTS ARE INDICATED HERE. THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT HOME PRODUCT TYPES.
EVERYTHING'S SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED FOR SALE WITH RENTAL RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE AS REQUESTED BY THE COUNCIL AND COMMITTED TO BY LENAR. THERE ARE THREE ITEMS OUTSTANDING IN THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH STAFF IDENTIFIED AT THE END OF THE REPORT AS REMAINING COMMENTS AND CONCERNS. THE FIRST WAS WITH REGARD TO A TREE LAWN AREA. I'VE HIGHLIGHTED IT HERE BECAUSE THE INFORMATION IN THE BROCHURE, I'M SORRY. THE INFORMATION IN THE BROCHURE IS NOT REVISED. THESE ARE THREE COMMENTS THAT CAME UP AFTER THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PLAN COMMISSION BROCHURE.
THE AREA HIGHLIGHTED IN ORANGE HAD THE SIDEWALK PULLED UP NEXT TO THE CURB WHERE THERE'S ON-STREET PARKING IDENTIFIED IN THE BUMP-OUT AREAS ON THE PLAN. THE PLAN COMMISSION ASKED US TO CONSIDER REVISING THAT SO THERE IS A TREE LAWN. THEY REVISED THE PLANS TO PROVIDE THAT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BACKSIDE OF THE SIDEWALK AND THE CURB. YOU CAN SEE AN OPENING HERE AND HERE AND THOSE TWO LOCATIONS WHICH WOULD ALLOW PATRONS NOT TO HAVE TO GO TO THE END OF THE BLOCK. THE SECOND ITEM WAS RELATED TO THE INTERNAL PATHS THAT ARE ON THE SITE. EVERYTHING HERE IS IN RIGHT OF WAY. THERE'S A PATH THAT COMES THROUGH OUR OPEN AREA BOTH FROM 146 AND DOWN FROM INTERNAL STREET THAT CONNECTS WITH THE PATH. THOSE HAVE BEEN REVISED. THAT AREA SHADED IN ORANGE HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT. AND FINALLY, STAFF HAD NOTED THAT THERE WERE THREE HOMES HERE THAT ARE AT THE FAR NORTHEAST QUADRANT WERE LACKING TREES IN THE FRONT YARD, AND STAFF ASKED THAT THREE TREES BE ADDED TO THE FRONT YARD. ACTUALLY, WE ADDED SIX. SO THAT'S CONSISTENT AS YOU WORK ALONG, YOU CAN SEE TWO TREES IN FRONT OF THIS HOUSE, AND IT RUNS ALL ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD WITH TWO TREES IN EACH FRONT YARD. THAT ADDRESSES THE THREE OUTSTANDING COMMENTS AND CONCERNS BY STAFF. IN ADDITION TO THAT, I CONFIRMED WITH STAFF EARLIER TODAY THAT THEY WERE SATISFIED WITH THE REVISIONS AND THAT THEY WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE IF THE PLAN COMMISSION DIDN'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS TO BE RESOLVED AT COMMITTEE ON THE SIXTH OF JUNE. THE PLAN COMMISSION CONSIDER SUSPENDING ITS RULES AND ADOPTING THE PRIMARY PLAT THIS EVENING. WE WOULD, OF COURSE, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT. IF THERE ARE COMMENTS AND CONCERNS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED ON THE SIXTH, THAT'S THE NORMAL COURSE, AND
[00:15:02]
WE WOULD BE GLAD TO ATTEND THAT MEETING ON JUNE 6TH. WITH THAT, I'LL CONCLUDE, AND WE'D BE GLAD TO EITHER ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS NOW OR OF COURSE AT THE END OF THE PUBLICHEARING. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BY A SHOW OF HANDS, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PETITION? SEEING NONE, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE DEPARTMENT STAFF FOR YOUR
COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, ALEXIA LOPEZ. THIS SITE PLAN IS IN LINE WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED WITH THE PUD. THERE ARE 47 LOTS PROPOSED AND 50 WOULD BE PERMITTED PER THE PUD. A BOARDWALK IS PROPOSED, AS SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR AN AMENITY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GO OVER A PORTION OF THAT POND. THE MAIN COMMON AREA IS DESIGNED WITH OUTDOOR SEATING AND GATHERING AREAS INCLUDING FIRE PITS. THERE'S A PERGULA AND SWINGS THERE. THERE WILL BE TWO ENTRY COLUMNS FLANKING THE STREET, AND THEY WILL BE A MAXIMUM OF SIX FEET TALL WITH A STONE BASE AND A LIMESTONE PLAQUE. THAT WILL REQUIRE A SIGNED PERMIT IN THE FUTURE WHEN THEY'RE READY. THE PETITIONER STATED THEY WILL NOT BE PROVIDING GREEN OR BUILDING ASPECTS AT THIS TIME. THEY ARE PRESERVING THE WETLAND ON SITE, AND THEY ARE HAVING NATIVE PLANKTON AROUND THE POND, WHICH WE WOULD CONSIDER SUSTAINABILITY FEATURES. THE PETITIONER DID PROVIDE STAFF WITH UPDATED DRAWINGS TODAY, AND WE'RE ABLE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE, AND THEY HAVE ADDRESSED OUR COMMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT REPORT, WHICH INCLUDED LIKE JOHN SAID THE TREE LAWN, ADDING THAT BACK BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE STREET, AND ACTUALLY SOME OF THOSE WILL BE NINE FEET WIDE EVEN. SO THAT WILL ALLOW FOR HEALTHIER TREES ALONG THE STREETS AS WELL. AND THEY'VE ADDED THE PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT AROUND THE PATH AND ADDED THE ORNAMENTAL TREES TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THERE.
THE ONLY OTHER ITEM I SAW WITH THIS SUBMISSION IS THE SIDEWALK ALONG THOSE NORTH LOTS. I THINK THAT ALSO PROBABLY SHOULD BE IN A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT. THE VERY NORTH SIDE, THAT SIDEWALK IS NOT IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. SO LET'S JUST PUT THAT IN A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT AS WELL. OTHERWISE, I THINK THEY CAN ADDRESS THAT AND ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND PROJECT DECKS. WE WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL THIS EVENING CONTINGENT ON THOSE FINAL PROJECT DOC COMMENTS.
>> BEFORE I OPEN IT UP, DID YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THE SIDEWALK
COMMENT? >> YES. LANAR IS AGREEABLE TO IDENTIFY ANYTHING NOT IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TO BE IDENTIFIED IN A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT.
>> FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I OPEN IT UP TO ALL OF YOU. JONATHAN? OKAY. JONATHAN, GO
AHEAD. >> SO QUICKLY, I NOTED THAT THERE'S WHAT SEEMS TO BE VERY LITTLE PARKING FOR GUESTS THAT MAY BE COMING TO VISIT THESE RESIDENTS. I COUNT MAYBE 32 SPACES ON-STREET PARKING. JUST A QUICK QUESTION, THOUGH. ON COCOA LANE, IS THERE PARKING ON ONE SIDE, BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET? AND THEN WHAT KIND OF RESTRICTIONS ARE GOING TO BE REPLACED ON 146TH TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM PARKING OUT THERE TO ACCESS ANY OF THOSE NORTHERN LOTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE
SUBDIVISION? >> ALONG COCOA LANE, THERE'S ADEQUATE ROOM FOR ON-STREET PARKING ON THE HOME SIDE. THERE WOULD BE ROOM AVAILABLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET FOR I THINK THREE CARS ON THE OTHER SIDE. IT'S AVAILABLE FOR ON-STREET PARKING. THERE IS THE 32 SPACES THAT ARE DEDICATED SPACES THAT ARE STRIPED THAT ARE THE NORTH-SOUTH SPACES. AND ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD, IT WOULD BE SIGNED THAT PARKING WAS
NOT PERMITTED. >> BE PROHIBITED? OKAY. AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAD RIGHT NOW IS I BELIEVE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, BUT REFRESH MY MEMORY. WITH THE POND BEING KIND OF STRADDLING THE PROPERTY LINE, HOW'S THE MAINTENANCE GOING TO BE SHARED BETWEEN THIS DEVELOPMENT?
>> AS PART OF THE APPROVAL REQUIRED BY THE SURVEYOR'S OFFICE, THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT IN PLACE THAT LENAR WILL SIGN OFF ON. AND THAT'S THE SAME AS WHAT THE SIDE HAS AGREED TO WITH
THE SURVEYOR'S OFFICE. >> TO THE POND, JOHN, I KNOW THIS WAS A TOPIC OF CONVERSATION, BUT WHEN THE
[00:20:04]
LARGER POND WAS PROPOSED, THERE WERE ISSUES RAISED ABOUT THE WATER LOAD MANAGEMENT, AND I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THAT HAD BEEN FROM THE COUNTY, ANYTHING ON THAT? TO SADDLE CREEK.>> YEAH, THERE IS A TECHNICAL REVIEW PROCESS WE GO THROUGH BEFORE WE APPEAR IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. LENAR HAS COORDINATED SEPARATELY WITH THEM OUTSIDE OF THE DOC REVIEW PROCESS. THEY HAVE TO FILE A DIRECT OUTLET PERMIT WITH THE COUNTY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LARGER POND AS WELL AS THEIR DISCHARGE. SO IT'S REALLY TWOFOLD. THE CITY GOES THROUGH A REVIEW PROCESS AND THE COUNTY GOES THROUGH A SECONDARY REVIEW PROCESS, BOTH OF WHICH LENAR HAS TO COMPLY WITH.
>> MADAME CHAIR, MAY I? SO DID I MISS THE RENDERINGS ON THE PERIMETER, THE SOUTH PERIMETER? THERE WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE TREES THERE. I DON'T REMEMBER THAT BEING IN THE PUD. I DIDN'T
SEE ANY RENDERINGS. >> WE HAVE A LANDSCAPING PLAN.
ALONG THE SOUTH PERIMETER ON THE SITE, THERE ARE PLANTINGS IN REAR YARDS OF THOSE LOTS. YOU CAN SEE THOSE HERE. THAT'S ON THE BACKSIDE OF EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT. THERE IS A 40-FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT EXISTS THERE THAT WE CAN'T PLANT IN.
SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY LINE, AND 40 FEET NORTH OF THAT IS THE SHARED EASEMENT LINE WITH THE LOTS. AND THEN ON EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT, THERE'D BE TWO SHADE TREES PLANTED.
>> AWESOME. THAT'S GREAT. AND THEN JUST A SIMPLE QUESTION ABOUT THE WARRANTY TIME AFTER, THE MAINTENANCE PERIOD APPLIES OR STARTS? DOES THIS ALSO APPLY TO THE COMMON AREAS AND THE
PLANTED TREES? >> THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION AFTER THEY TAKE TITLE TO THE REAL ESTATE TO MAINTAIN THOSE TREES BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF THIS PLAN. IN THIS THE EVENT THAT ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE FORESTRY TEAM WAS OUT ON SITE AND SAW TREES THAT HADN'T BEEN MAINTAINED OVER TIME, THE OWNER WOULD HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO MAINTAIN THAT TREE.
>> AND THE COMMON AREAS? >> SAME APPLIES. IT'S THE HOAS OBLIGATION BECAUSE IT'S IN A COMMON AREA.
>> I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS COVERED. SO THANK YOU. THANK
YOU SO MUCH, MADAME CHAIR. >> QUICK QUESTION ON THE POND.
THIS IS A REALLY INSIGNIFICANT DETAIL. TYPICALLY WE ASK FOR NATURAL PLANTINGS AROUND THE POND. I NOTICE YOU HAVE POND SEED MIX. I WASN'T ENTIRELY SURE WHAT THAT WAS.
>> YOU AND ME BOTH. >> SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT
IS? >> I'M GOING TO CALL KYLE UP
WITH HWC. >> IT'S KIND OF A STANDARD NATURAL PLANTING SEED MIX, AND IT'S KIND OF A MEDIUM HEIGHT NATURAL PLANTINGS. IT'S IN THE PLANS IF YOU WANT TO GET DETAILED ABOUT ALL THE SPECIES THAT ARE IN THERE, IT'S ON L-1.3. HERE. SO IT'S NOT JUST SHORT GRASSES, BUT IT'S INTENDED TO NOT BE MOWED. SO IT KIND OF GROWS AND ONCE IT'S ESTABLISHED, IT SUPPRESSES WEEDS AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT TO BE LOW-MAINTENANCE VEGETATION. BUT THE DETAILS ARE HERE ON THE
SHEET. >> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT
EXPLANATION. >> SORRY ABOUT TE QUALITY OF THE IMAGE UP THERE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S GOING ON. IT'S THE
LAST PAGE OF TAB FOUR. >> CAN YOU FOCUS?
>> IF YOU'RE FOLLOWING ALONG AT HOME.
>> WELL, MAYBE WE CAN'T GET IT IN FOCUS. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE EXPLANATION. SHANNON, GO AHEAD.
>> JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY WITH THE BOARD WALK, WHEN WILL WE SEE RENDERINGS OF THAT? WILL THAT BE IN ADLS?
>> THERE IS A DETAIL ON ONE OF THE LANDSCAPE SHEETS OF THE BOARDWALK. THE ADLS WILL COME BEFORE STAFF FOR THE INDIVIDUAL
DRAWINGS ON THE SITE. >> YEAH.
>> SO IT WON'T RETURN BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL ANY MORE DETAILED RENDERINGS OF THE BOARDWALK.
>> OKAY. RIGHT. SO WE DID SEE A PICTURE OF IT. AT LEAST OF AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT IT COULD BE. BUT NO, THIS DOESN'T COME BACK FOR ADLS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
>> JUST ONE MORE. >> YES, JONATHAN?
[00:25:02]
>> I WANT TO GO BACK TO MY QUESTION ABOUT PARKING. SO I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE PUD. LOOKS LIKE SECTION 4.7 SAYS THAT ON-STREET PARKING SHALL BE PERMITTED ON THE REAL ESTATE'S INTERNAL STREETS AND ALONG THEIR FRONTAGE ROAD. I HEARD YOU SAY THAT FRONTAGE ROAD WILL NOT ALLOW PARKING.
>> IT AUTHORIZES IT BUT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. SO IT'S NOT, WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE IF THE CITY WERE TO ELECT IN THE FUTURE TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND THAT WOULD ALLOW ON-STREET PARKING, THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED. UNDER THE CURRENT
PROPOSAL, IT'S NOT INCLUDED. >> YOU'RE COMMITTING THAT YOU WON'T ALLOW PARKING ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD TODAY?
>> IT'S A DECISION OF THE CITY ENGINEER AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO AUTHORIZE PARKING OR NOT. BUT WE'RE NOT PROPOSING
IT. >> STAFF HAS THE ENGINEER'S OFFICE HAVE ANY COMMENT ABOUT THAT?
>> I WANT TO SAY THAT ROAD IS STILL IN THE COUNTY JURISDICTION, THE OLD 146 STREET. I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT THEY WANT PARKING ALONG
THAT SECTION. BUT DO YOU KNOW? >> THEY HAVEN'T COME BACK TO US AND SAID YES, THEY WOULD LIKE IT. WE HAVEN'T PROPOSED IT BECAUSE THE WIDTH AND THE SPEED OF TRAFFIC ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD DOESN'T LEND ITSELF TO ON-STREET PARKING.
>> I WOULD PREFER TO NOT SEE PARKING ALONG THERE. THAT'S WHY
I'M ASKING THE QUESTION. >> UNDERSTOOD.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SO WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON THIS TONIGHT, BUT I WOULD NEED A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE
RULES. >> MADAME CHAIR, I MOVE WE SUSPEND THE RULES SO WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT.
>> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SUSPENDING THE RULES, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, RULES ARE SUSPENDED. DO I HAVE A MOTION?
>> IS THAT A MOVE TO APPROVE? >> YES, MOVE TO APPROVE.
>> AND SECOND TO APPROVE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE BAKER VILLAGE PRIMARY PLAT, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, IT IS APPROVED. CONGRATULATIONS AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO MOVING
[Items H.2. - H.4.]
ON, OUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING IS NORTH END. THREE MORE WAVES. TO SET THE STAGE, YOU'LL SEE WE ALSO HAVE A NORTH END PROJECT IN OLD BUSINESS AND THESE PARTICULAR THREE WAIVERS WERE FILED LATE, SO WE'LL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THESE THREE WAIVERS. I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND PROCEDURES WHEN WE GET DONE WITH THIS PUBLIC HEARING SO WE CAN TAKE ACTION TONIGHT. I'LL DEFER THAT VOTE ON THESE THREE WAIVERS UNTIL WE HEAR THE OTHER WAIVERS SO WE CAN VOTE FOR THEM ALL IN THE SAME TIME, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. I'LL RE-EXPLAIN THAT AS WE GO. THIS IS A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL THAT WE HAVE THE DOCKET SPLIT UP. SO WE HAVE NORTH END PHASE TWO WAIVERS. THE APPLICANT SEEKS THE DESIGN STANDARD WAIVER TO DEVELOP AN APARTMENT BUILDING WITH 170 UNITS FOR INDIVIDUALS 55 AND SEVEN TOWN HOME TYPE BUILDINGS CONTAINING 72 APARTMENT UNITS. WE HAVE 00082 STANDARD WAIVERS SECTION 7.13.D. NO PARKING IN A FLOOD HAZARD AREA, PARKING IN FLOODPLAIN IS REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00083 STANDARD WAIVER SECTION 7.25.E.2 DEAD END STREETS AND HAMMERHEADS NOT PERMITTED. HAMMERHEAD TURNAROUND REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00084 STANDARD WAIVER SECTION 7.10.F.3. 25-FOOT WIDE EASEMENT ALONG STREAM AND FLOODWAY REQUIRED. REDUCED EASEMENT WIDTH REQUESTED. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 300 WEST SMOKY ROW AND IS ZONED UR, URBAN RESIDENTIAL WITHIN THE MONON GREENWAY OVERLAY. FILED WE CHARLIE MATOX WITH CROSSROAD ENGINEERS.>> WANTED TO BRIEFLY GO OVER THE THREE WAIVERS AND HOPEFULLY IT'S OKAY IF I GO OVER EACH ONE CONTINUOUSLY AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS AT THE END. OKAY. THE FIRST ONE BEING THE PARKING IN A
[00:30:04]
FLOODPLAIN. THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE IS TO NOT ALLOW PARKING IN A FLOODPLAIN SO AS TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO VEHICLES OR PROPERTY. IN THIS CASE, THIS BLUE AREA HERE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER IS THE MAPPED FLOODPLAIN AREA BASED ON THE EXISTING GRADE. THE PARKING LOT BUILDING SIDEWALKS WILL ALL BE CONSTRUCTED SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THE BASE LEVEL ELEVATION IN THE FINAL DESIGN. THE BUILDINGS HAVE TO BE TWO FEET ABOVE AND THE PARKING LOT ARE AN ADDITIONAL TWO AND A HALF FEET IN THIS CASE. AT THE END, IN THE FINAL CONDITION THE PARKING LOT AND SIDEWALKS ARE GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THE FLOOD ELEVATION AND WILL FUNCTION LIKE ANY OTHER PARKING LOT WOULD FROM A DRAINAGE PERSPECTIVE. THE SECOND WAIVER IS REGARDING THE DEAD END, THIS SITE IS A LITTLE UNIQUE IN THAT WE ARE PROVIDING DEDICATED RIGHT OF WAY ALL THE WAY TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. NORMALLY, I WON'T SAY NORMALLY, BUT OFTENTIMES IF EVER A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS, THE PARKING LAYOUT WOULD BE WITHIN A PRIVATE PARKING AREA. AND SINCE IT IS RIGHT OF WAY, IT DOES TECHNICALLY MEET THE CRITERIA FOR A DEAD END. BUT THIS ESSENTIALLY IS GOING TO FUNCTION LIKE ANY OTHER PARKING LOT WOULD AND ADDITIONALLY, WE ARE PROVIDING A ROUND ABOUT TURNAROUND AREA JUST TO THE WEST. ANY EMERGENCY VEHICLES OR SCHOOL BUS OR ANYBODY WHO MISTAKENLY CAME THIS WAY WOULD MAKE THEIR TURN AROUND THERE.BUT EVEN IF AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE OR A BUS WOULD NEED TO TURN AROUND AT THE END, IT'S BEEN DESIGNED SO THEY CAN DO THAT.
AND THE TURNAROUND HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
I'LL JUST BRIEFLY GO OVER THE LAST WAIVER, WHICH IS THE WATER QUALITY PRESERVATION EASEMENT. THIS ONE AND THE ORIGINAL PHASE ONE AND THE PRIMARY PLAT FOR THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT, THIS WAS ALREADY A WAIVER THAT WAS APPROVED, BUT THE LAYOUT HAS CHANGED AND THE PRODUCT HAS CHANGED, SO THE AREAS WE'RE REQUESTING A REDUCTION HAVE CHANGED SLIGHTLY. THIS RED LINE HERE. AND THEN OVER HERE IS WHERE WE'RE REQUESTING A REDUCED WIDTH TO 10 FEET INSTEAD OF 25 FEET. THAT WILL ENABLE US TO BASICALLY ALLOW FOR THE SIDEWALKS AND THE REARS TO ENCROACH INTO THE 25-FOOT EASEMENT THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE REQUIRED. BUT IN THIS CASE, IT IS TECHNICALLY A STREAM, BUT IT'S AN UNNAMED TRIBUTARY. AND FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS THE CENTER LINE OF THE CREEK TO THE TOP OF THE BANK, IT'S ONLY THREE TO FIVE FEET. IT DOES VARY. THE 10-FOOT WILL STILL ENCOMPASS THE ENTIRE CREEK AND MORE. AND IN THIS CASE, IT IS GRASS LAWN BASICALLY ALL THE WAY FROM THESE WERE ORIGINALLY SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOTS, BUT IT'S GRASS LAWN TO THE TOP OF THE BANK, SO THERE'S NO DENSE VEGETATION OR TREES OR ANYTHING ALONG THIS ENTIRE CREEK SECTION. AND THIS WILL ENABLE US TO KEEP THE TREES THAT ARE NOT SHOWING UP ON THIS EXHIBIT HERE. BUT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROUNDABOUT, THERE'S A GROUP OF MATURE TREES, AND WE'RE AS FAR NORTH IN THIS AREA AS WE CAN BE TO PROTECT THOSE, AND WE'VE BASICALLY DESIGNED THE ENTIRE SITE AROUND DOING THAT. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPACT THE STREAM OR THE DRAINAGE. THE ABILITY FOR THE DRAINAGE TO FLOW THROUGH THERE, WE'VE ANALYZED THE 100-YEAR FLOW, AND IT'S STILL WELL WITHIN SERVING THAT AREA. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. OR IF ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC WISHES TO SPEAK, WE CAN DO THAT AFTERWARDS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS PETITION? ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PETITION? SEEING NONE, I WILL TURN IT OVER
TO DEPARTMENT STAFF. REPORT. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, ALEXIA LOPEZ WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. WE'VE HEARD THIS ITEM EARLIER FOR THE ADLS AND THE PLAT AMENDMENTS AS WELL AS VARIANCES. ALONG THAT REVIEW PROCESS, THESE ADDITIONAL WAIVERS WERE DISCOVERED, AND SO THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THOSE. I THINK THE PETITIONER DID A GOOD JOB EXPLAINING EVERYTHING. I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD AS TO WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING THEM AND WHY WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE WAIVERS. YOU KNOW, THE FLOODPLAIN, THEY ARE RAISING IT UP AS HE SAID OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN, SO IT'S KIND OF MORE OF A WE'RE DOING THIS JUST TO BE SAFE, BUT IT WON'T ACTUALLY BE IN THE FLOOD ELEVATION FOR WHERE THE PARKING AREA IS. AND THEN THE EASEMENT ALONG THE CREEK THERE, THEY'RE
[00:35:03]
REDUCING IT IN CERTAIN AREAS, BUT THEY'RE NOT REMOVING IT COMPLETELY AND PRESERVING THE EASEMENT WHERE THEY CAN. AND THEY'RE INSTALLING WATER QUALITY MEASURES ON SITE AS WELL TO HELP TREAT THE STORMWATER RUN OFF BEFORE IT LEAVES THE SITE.THE DEAD-END STREET, AS HE SAID, THERE'S A TURNAROUND A LITTLE BIT FURTHER NORTH. HE IS PROVIDING THE HAMMERHEAD THERE.
NORMALLY, WE WOULD REQUIRE LIKE A LARGER CUL-DE-SAC FOR A PUBLIC STREET, AND SO THAT'S WHAT THE WAIVER IS FOR THIS EVENING. AS HE SAID, IT'S MORE FUNCTIONING JUST TO SERVE THIS BUILDING FOR THESE MULTI-FAMILY UNITS. SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU SUSPEND YOUR RULES THIS EVENING TO BE ABLE TO VOTE ON THESE ITEMS, AND WE WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN IT UP TO MY FELLOW PLAN COMMISSIONERS ERS IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THE NET RESULT IS YOU HAVE TWO PRIVATE DRIVES TO THAT LAST BUNCH OF, I KNOW THEY WON'T BE PRIVATE, BUT THE NET EFFECT IS ONCE YOU GET BEYOND THE ROUNDABOUT AND HEAD TO THAT BACK SECTION, YOU'RE REALLY HEADED TO THOSE RESIDENCES.
>> YEAH. ANYBODY WHO'S BASICALLY GOING PAST THE ROUNDABOUT REALISTICALLY LIVES THERE OR IS VISITING. YEAH.
>> YES, DEBBIE, GO AHEAD. >> I MOVE WE SUSPEND THE RULES SO WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON THIS TONIGHT.
>> HOLD THAT FOR A MOMENT. >> JUST REALLY QUICKLY, CAN YOU SHOW US WHERE THE TRAILHEAD WILL BE IN CONNECTION TO THE PARKING LOT SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHERE IT IS? WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE PRIVATE LOT BUT IT'S NOT A PRIVATE LOT?
>> THE CONNECTION TO THE MONAN? THAT'S FURTHER NORTH. THAT'S ROUGHLY, I'M NOT SHOWING IT HERE, BUT IT'S IN THIS GENERAL
VICINITY HERE. >> THANK YOU, JUSTIN. HA, HA.
>> JUST A QUICK QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THE WATER QUALITY MEASURES. I KNOW THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS, AND I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE ENGINEERS ON THIS. AS FAR AS WHEN YOU RAISE UP THE PARKING LOT, YOU KNOW, WHAT SORT OF WATER QUALITY MEASURES THEN DO YOU NEED TO INSTITUTE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REST IS OKAY JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHAT ARE THE MEASURES YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IN PLACE?
>> THE FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION AND THE WATER QUALITY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT WE'RE DOING BOTH. WATER QUALITY WISE, THERE'S GOING TO BE A UNIT TO TREAT THE SITE, AND THAT WILL MEET THE ENGINEERING STANDARDS. AND WE'RE DOING NATIVE PLANTING AS A SECONDARY MEASURE. THE FLOODPLAIN WILL BE MITIGATED AND WE'RE PROVIDING THE SAME VOLUME WE'RE FILLING IN THIS AREA JUST SO THAT THOSE TWO THINGS ARE NOT GETTING INTERTWINED.
>> I DID NOT ASK THE QUESTION AS CLEARLY AS I COULD. I WAS GOING TO HAVE A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION, AND YOU ANSWERED THEM BOTH. SO
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? SO I HAVE A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES. AND TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS TONIGHT, DO I
>> OH, SECOND, THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SUSPENDING OUR RULES SO WE CAN ACT ON THIS, THIS EVENING, SAY AYE? WE'LL SUSPEND OUR RULES. WE'LL DEFER VOTE ON THESE THREE WHEN WE VOTE ON THE REMAINDER 10-7 BECAUSE WE HAVE TO VOTE ON EACH OF THEM ONE AT A TIME. SO WE WILL TAKE OUR VOTE, YES, ON ALL OF THEM AT ONE TIME WHEN WE HEAR THE NEXT PART OF THE NORTH END. UP NEXT, WE'RE
[I.1. Docket No. PZ-2024-00222 PUD: US 421-WCD PUD Rezone]
MOVING ON TO OLD BUSINESS, WHICH WE HAVE DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2-2024-00222 PUD U.S. 421-WCD PUD REZONE. THE APPLICANT SEEKS REZONE APPROVAL TO ALLOW A NEW 360-UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY WITH COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL USES ALONG MICHIGAN ROAD. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 9998 NORTH MICHIGAN ROAD AND IS ZONED I-1 INDUSTRIAL WITHIN THE U.S. 421 CORRIDOR OVERLAY. I'LL TURN IT BACK OVERTO YOU, JOHN. >> WE REPRESENT THE APPLICANT EDWARD ROSE AND SONS. WITH US THIS EVENING ON BEHALF OF EDWARD ROSE ARE MEMBERS OF THEIR TEAM AND A MEMBER OF OUR OFFICE. I
[00:40:02]
WANT TO GIVE A BRIEF BACKGROUND OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN WITH THIS REQUEST WE FILED WITH STAFF LATE LAST YEAR AND HAD INTENDED ON HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING IN JANUARY AND THAT WAS DELAYED UNTIL FEBRUARY. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THERE WERE SEVERAL LETTERS PROVIDED TO THE PLAN COMMISSION IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. AS TO OUR SOUTH, WHICH THEY'RE LOCATED RIGHT HERE, MIKE WAS PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING IN FEBRUARY AND SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST. HE AND OTHER MEMBERS OF HIS TEAM ARE WITH US THIS EVENING. WE HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 18TH AND THEN WE WENT TO THE APRIL 1ST COMMITTEE MEETING. WE MADE SEVERAL ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PLAN AT THE REQUEST OF STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION. WE WORKED THROUGH THOSE ISSUES AND THE COMMITTEE FORWARDED US TO THEIR MEETING IN MAY. WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH STAFF, IRONED OUT THE LION'S SHARE OF ISSUES, AND CAME BACK WITH A RED-LINE ORDINANCE AS WELL AS REVISIONS AS REQUESTED BY STAFF. WE LEFT THE APRIL, EXCUSE ME RATHER THE MAY 6TH COMMITTEE MEETING WITH A 6-0 VOTE FROM THE COMMITTEE, THE MEMBERS OF THE PLAN COMMISSION BACK TO A PUBLIC HEARING IN FRONT OF THE, RATHER A PUBLIC MEETING TONIGHT IN FRONT OF THE PLAN COMMISSION. AT THAT LAST MEETING, COMMISSIONER BUCKLER ASKED US TO REACH OUT TO AGENCIES WHO DEAL IN THE REALM OF PROVIDING SERVICES FOR ADULTS WITH DISABILITIES. AND WE REACHED OUT TO STAFF. STAFF PROVIDED US SEVERAL DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS. THE VILLAGE OF MORICIE WAS ONE OF THEM. MEMBERS FROM OUR TEAM REACHED OUT TO THE LEADERSHIP AND WERE INFORMED ABOUT THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE TO DEVELOPMENT, FOLKS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES. THEY PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE IN AN APARTMENT COMMUNITY. THEY CAN BE ANYWHERE ON SITE, EVEN COLLUDING AT HOMES OR APARTMENTS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. AND IT WAS A REALLY GOOD SUGGESTION BECAUSE EDWARD ROSE FOUND OUT THEY NOW HAVE AN ADDITIONAL RESOURCE TO PROVIDE TO THEIR TENANTS IN THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THEY CAN REACH OUT TO THE VILLAGE AND GET THOSE SERVICES. THEY'RE PROVIDED THROUGH GRANTS AND AT COST TO PATRONS OF THOSE, AND THEY ALSO PROVIDE OTHER SERVICES THE VILLAGE DOES THAT ARE FREE TO THE PUBLIC. AGAIN, A REALLY GOOD SUGGESTION. I'M GLAD IT WAS MADE, AND EDWARD ROSE NOW HAS ANOTHER OPTION OR OPPORTUNITY, A RESOURCE THEY CAN POINT TENANTS TO IN NEED OF THOSE SERVICES. AND FINALLY, THE STAFF REPORT INCLUDES OR INCLUDED RATHER THREE DIFFERENT ITEMS. IT WAS REALLY TIGHTENING UP THE WORDING WITH REGARD TO THE ARTISTIC GLOBE ELEMENT THAT'S ON SITE. IN TERMS OF WHEN THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED, AS WELL AS THE TIMING PERIOD FOR WHICH IT WOULD START THAT WE WOULD COMMIT TO RESERVE IT. THE FINAL ITEM WAS WITH REGARD TO THE COLORED CONCRETE WALKS. STAFF WANTED THAT LANGUAGE TIGHTENED UP. WE DID THAT, SUBMITTED IT TO STAFF AFTER THE REPORT WENT OUT ON THURSDAY WHEN IT WAS MADE AWARE TO US, I'D BE GLAD TO REVIEW THAT WITH THE PLAN COMMISSION IN DETAIL.EDWARD ROSE WOULD REQUEST THAT IT BE MADE AS AMENDED. STAFF CAN CONFIRM THOSE THREE ITEMS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THEY REQUESTED HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. WITH THAT, I'LL CONCLUDE. AND AGAIN , IN THE EVENT THE PLAN COMMISSION WANTS TO LOOK AT THOSE IN DETAIL, WE CAN DO THAT.
>> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO STAFF FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU. THE PETITIONER HAS MADE MANY CHANGES TO THE PUD ALONG THE WAY. SOME OF THOSE INCLUDE ADDING A REQUIRED PLAZA TO THAT RETAIL AREA AND INCREASING THAT SIZE. NOW IT WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE 6,500 SQUARE FEET. THEY'VE ADDED ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS TO MAKE IT A MORE UNIQUE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY SPACE THAT WILL COMPLEMENT THE APARTMENTS.
THEY'VE ADDED THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS TO HELP REQUIRE MORE OF WHAT WE SEE IN IMAGES BUT MAKING SURE THAT'S PART OF THE PUD FOR THE APARTMENTS. THEY HAVE ADDED THAT THEY WILL SEEK APPROVAL FOR A SIGNALIZED CROSSWALK ACROSS MICHIGAN ROAD.
THEY'RE REQUIRING SHORT TERM AND LONG-TERM BIKE PARKING AS PART OF THE PUD. THEY'VE INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF ACRES
[00:45:03]
THEY'RE COMMITTING TO PRESERVE IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER WITH THE TREES THERE. THEY'RE PRESERVING TWO ACRES OF THAT NOW, AND SO THEY'VE REALLY WORKED WITH US A LOT. I THINK MADE A LOT OF GOOD, POSITIVE CHANGES. JOHN DID HIGHLIGHT THE ITEMS THAT WERE REMAINING IN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. AND HE DID SEND US THOSE REVISIONS IN THE PUD, SO I WAS ABLE TO LOOK AT THOSE. SOME OF THESE WERE CHANGES THAT HE MADE SINCE THE LAST MEETING AND WE REVIEWED IT AND WANTED SOME OF THAT LANGUAGE TIGHTENED UP. LIKE HE SAID, JUST MAKING SURE THAT IF THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO SAVE THE RCI GLOBE, WE WANT IT TO HAPPEN DURING THE ADLS PROCESS.WE WANT TO LOOK AT WHERE THEY CAN PLACE IT ON SITE. THEY HAD A TIMELINE OF 150 DAYS WHERE IF NOTHING HAPPENS WITH THE GLOBE, THEY CAN'T FIND A SPOT FOR IT ON THE SITE, OR ANOTHER ORGANIZATION DOESN'T WANT IT, THAT WOULD LET THEM REMOVE IT FROM THE PROPERTY. WE JUST WANTED TO SPECIFY THAT WOULD START WHEN THEY COME THROUGH FOR THEIR DP-ADLS. FINALLY, THE CROSSWALK. THEY'VE SHOWN NICE WHAT WE MIGHT THOUGHT MIGHT BE BRICK. WE WANT IT TIGHTENED UP TO MAKE SURE IT IT WAS REQUIRED, AND IT DOES SAY IT WILL REQUIRE COLORED CONCRETE OR SOMETHING SIMILAR FOR THESE CROSSWALK AREAS. SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND THIS EVENING THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION VOTES TO SEND THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE ABLE TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS
FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO VOTE ON. >> GREAT. THANK YOU. AS CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD TO THE DEPARTMENT REPORT?
>> GREAT SUMMARY. NOTHING TO ADD.
>> GREAT. I DO HAVE ONE, I DO WANT TO GO THROUGH AND TALK ABOUT THE PERMITTED USES ON THE RETAIL PIECE. BUT BEFORE I GET TO THAT, I THINK IT'D BE HELPFUL IF YOU COULD SHOW THE THREE CHANGES. THE CHANGE TO THE LANGUAGE ON THE CROSSWALK, THE CHANGE TO THE LANGUAGE ON THE RCI GLOBE, AND WAS THERE A
THIRD? >> THE TIGHTENING UP OF THE LANGUAGE REGARDING THE COLOR CONCRETE. THESE ARE THE TWO CHANGES, ONE AND TWO WITH REGARD TO THE GLOBE. IT'S DURING THE DP-ADLS PROCESS AND THE TIME PERIOD WOULD COMMENCE AT THE SUBMITTING OF THE APPLICATION FOR AREA A. THE SECOND IS NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE THAT IT WOULDN'T BE REMOVED UNTIL SUCH TIME AS EDWARD ROSE TAKES POSSESSION OF THE REAL ESTATE.
WE CAN'T GIVE WHAT WE DON'T HAVE. WE WANTED TO PUT THAT IN
THERE. >> QUICK QUESTION ON THAT. I ASSUME YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT LANGUAGE?
>> YES. >> HAS ANYBODY LOOKED INTO, I MEAN I KNOW THE GLOBE IS AN INTERESTING ARTWORK. IS THERE SOME SORT OF HISTORICAL HISTORY? THERE IS? I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PRESERVING IF THERE IS SOME HISTORY TO IT.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR IT? >> I'LL GET IT AFTERWARDS.
>> I BEG YOUR PARDON. THERE'S INTERESTING INFORMATION, AND I'LL MAKE IT VERY BRIEF. WHEN CRYSTAL OWNED RCI AND IT WAS HEADQUARTERED BY THE PYRAMIDS, SHE HAD ARTWORK COMMISSIONED FOR A GLOBE. IT WAS A THIRD SMALLER SIZE THAN THE GLOBE THAT IS OUT IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY OF RCI. THAT IS A REPLICA THREE TIMES LARGER. WHEN SHE SOLD THE COMPANY AND IT MOVED TO ITS PRESENT SITE ON MICHIGAN ROAD, THEY PUT HER ORIGINAL ARTWORK COMMISSIONED GLOBE OUT THERE. THEY SAID THAT'S TOO SMALL. SO THAT'S IN STORAGE SOMEWHERE, AND THAT I DON'T KNOW. BUT THEY CREATED THEN A REPLICA, WHICH IS WHAT YOU SEE OUT THERE NOW. AND NOBODY KNOWS THE METAL CONTENT OF IT.
>> OKAY. VERY INTERESTING. I LEARNED SOMETHING NEW. THANK
YOU. SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT? >> YES.
>> HOW IT IS? AND THEN THE CROSSWALK? OR THE COLORED
CONCRETE? >> WE ADDED THE TEXT FROM THE EXHIBIT TO THE TEXT IN THE ORDINANCE SO THAT IT WOULD MATCH. AND THE COLOR CONCRETE OR SIMILAR MATERIAL SHALL BE REQUIRED IN THESE AREAS. AND SO THAT WASN'T NEW, IT WAS CAN WE TAKE THE LANGUAGE WE PUT IN SMALL PRINT ON THE EXHIBIT AND PUT IT INTO THE BODY OF THE ORDINANCE? AND WE DID IT.
>> I WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. MY ONLY OUTSTANDING QUESTION IS ON THE PERMITTED USES FOR THE RETAIL SPOT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY DID A COMPARISON BETWEEN WHAT YOU HAVE ELIMINATED VERSUS WHAT IS PERMITTED IN THE B-3.
[00:50:03]
WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE B-3, AND WE CAN GO THROUGH THAT NOW IF WE NEED TO, BUT WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE LIST OF USES IN B-3, THERE WAS A FEW I WOULD PROBABLY STRIKE AND PROHIBIT FROM THIS.THEY ARE SHOOTING GALLERY. BECAUSE I DON'T THINK A SHOOTING GALLERY NEXT TO A RESIDENTIAL USE WOULD MAKE SENSE. A SELF-SERVICE LAUNDRY SINCE THEY ALL HAVE THEIR LAUNDRY UNITS, AND WE WANT SOMETHING MORE VIBRANT FOR THIS AREA. I ALSO IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PERMITTED USES, AND I'M GOING TO TEE THIS UP FOR MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WHETHER WE STRIKE THESE. UNDER THIS, THERE'S RADIO-TELEVISION STUDIO, WHICH IS PROBABLY OKAY. RADIO-TELEVISION TRANSMISSION TOWER, MOTOR BUS OR RAILROAD PASSENGER STATION, A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT. SO THOSE WERE JUST SORT OF SOME I THOUGHT WE SHOULD ADD TO OUR LIST OF PROHIBITED USES. IF WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THEM ALL AND DO A COMPARISON, WE CAN. COUNSELOR SHANNON MINNAAR HAS SOMETHING TO ADD. CAN WE ELIMINATE SHOOTING GALLERY?
>> WE CAN ADD THE USES THAT YOU ENUMERATED.
>> ADD IT TO THAT SECTION 3.2.B. >> I'LL GO BACK WITH STAFF, EDIT THE VIDEO, AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE EACH ONE OF THE ONES YOU LISTED. I THINK I GOT FOUR OUT OF THE FIVE.
>> I WENT A LITTLE BIT QUICKLY. >> IF YOU HAVE IT IN WRITING?
>> I PRINTED OUT THE B-3. REALLY, IT'S BECAUSE YOU GOT RID OF A LOT OF THEM, BUT THERE'S STILL, YOU KNOW LIKE I SAID, SELF-SERVICE LAUNDRY IS UNDER RETAIL AND PERMITTED USE.
MISCELLANEOUS PERMITTED USE, PROBABLY ALL OF THOSE NEED TO GO. SHOOTING GALLERY. AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER MINNAAR, I KNOW
YOU HAD A QUESTION AS WELL? >> AFTER TALKING TO MY COLLEAGUES ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL AREA, AREA B AND THE USES, THERE WAS A STRONG DISLIKE FOR A DRIVE-THRU 100%. I JUST WANT TO BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION. THERE WAS A VERY, VERY HARSH REACTION TO A DRIVE-THRU IN THAT SECTION. SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU GUYS MAYBE RECONSIDER THAT AND TAKE THAT OUT OF THE PLAN FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS. JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
>> AND WE REVIEWED IT AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING. AND THE TEXT WE ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ONLY BE AUTHORIZED WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. SO IT'S NOT ENTITLED WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. WHEN YOU MENTIONED YOU DISCUSSED IT WITH COLLEAGUES, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUR COLLEAGUES ON THE COMMISSION VERSUS YOUR
COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCIL. >> COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCIL.
>> I WOULD PREFER TO PICK THAT UP WITH THE COUNCIL ONCE THE RECOMMENDATION IS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IF THAT'S
ACCEPTABLE. >> SURE. ABSOLUTELY. JUST WANTED
TO BRING IT TO YOUR ATTENTION. >> THANK YOU.
>> APPRECIATE IT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS? >> JUST A QUICK COMMENT.
>> YES. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, DEBBIE?
>> I WANT TO COMPLIMENT ROSE FOR REACHING OUT AND FINDING OUT MORE ABOUT HOW YOU CAN SERVE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABILITIED RESIDENTS. I APPRECIATE YOUR DOING THAT.
>> NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO WE WILL BE VOTING ON THE AMENDED PUD WITH THE ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO THE USES IN SECTION 3.2.B. I THINK THAT'S IT.
>> I MOVE. ACCORDING TO WHAT YOU JUST STATED.
>> I'LL SECOND. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE PUD, THE AMENDED PUD WITH THE ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO THE USES, PLEASE SAY
>> ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, IT IS PASSED. CONGRATULATIONS. GOOD LUCK AT CITY COUNCIL. I THINK IT'S A REALLY BEAUTIFUL
[Items I.2. - I.12.]
NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UP NEXT, THE NEXT ITEM IS I THINK WE'RE BACK TO NORTH END. OKAY. I'M GOING TO READ THEM ALL IN TO THE RECORD. SO HERE WE GO. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00012 PRIMARY PLAT AMENDMENT NORTH END PRIMARY PLAT AMENDMENT. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-000014 ADLS, NORTH END PHASE TWO MULTI-FAMILY. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00015 ADLS, VIVA[00:55:04]
BENE AT NORTH END PHASE TWO. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00030 VARIANCE, UDO SECTION 2.18 MAXIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK, MORE THAN 50 FEET REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-0031 VARIANCE UDO SECTION 2.18 SIX FEET MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR PARKING.ZERO FEET REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00032 VARIANCE, UDO SECTION 3.50.D, 20 FEET PARKING LOT SETBACK BEHIND FRONT LINE OF BUILDING IN FRONT OF BUILDING REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025- 00034 VARIANCE, UDO SECTION 5.05.C.2, GROUND FLOOR DESIGN TO CHANGE EVERY 50 FEET. LONGER FACADE DESIGNS REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00035 VARIANCE, UDO SECTION 5.05.D.3 TWO PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS COVERING 70% OF LOT WIDTH REQUIRED, ONE BUILDING REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00036 VARIANCE, UDO SECTION 5.05.E, BUILDINGS GREATER THAN THREE STORIES 1458 BE STEPPED BACK. NO STEP BACK REQUESTED. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00037 VARIANCE, UDO SECTION 5.31.C.1, 1.5 PARKING SPACES PER DWELLING REQUIRED.
1.25 SPACES PER DWELLING REQUESTED. THE APPLICANT SEEKS SITE PLAN AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR AN APARTMENT BUILDING THAT INCLUDES 170 UNITS FOR INDIVIDUALS OVER THE AGE OF 55 AND SEVEN TOWN HOME TYPE BUILDINGS CONTAINING 72 APARTMENT UNITS. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 300 WEST SMOKY ROW. FILED BY CHARLIE MATTOX ON BEHALF OF OLD TOWN COMPANIES AND AVENUE DEVELOPMENT.
>> CAN WE REPEAT THAT? >> THE FLOOR IS ALL YOURS.
>> GOOD EVENING. JUSTIN MOFFETT WILL OLD TOWN. I HAVE THE AVENUE TEAM WITH ME. I WILL SPARE YOU A LONG PRESENTATION. YOU'VE SEEN THIS PROJECT ENOUGH IS MY GUESS. I DO APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE WORKING WITH US AND ALEXIA AND HER TEAM A FEW WEEKS AGO THERE WERE OUTSTANDING ITEMS AND PROJECT DOCS. I THINK WE NEGOTIATED A SOLUTION AND MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE BACK TO THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION. APPRECIATE THE PARTNERSHIP IN THAT. IT WAS OUR BELIEF THAT MOST OF THE ITEMS REMAINING WERE EITHER MISUNDERSTANDINGS OR CLARIFICATIONS THAT NEEDED TO HAPPEN BETWEEN OUR TEAMS AND ALEXIA WAS KIND ENOUGH TO GIVE OUR TEAM AN AUDIENCE TO HAMMER THROUGH ALL THE ITEMS. I BELIEVE WE CAME BACK WITH A CLEAN REPORT. ALL BOXES HAVE BEEN CHECKED AND ALL CLARIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE. RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION TONIGHT. ON THE PRIMARY PLAT ITEMS, THE AMENDMENTS, THE WAIVERS, AND OF COURSE THE ADDITIONAL WAIVERS THAT WERE CAUGHT AS WE WERE
GOING THROUGH OUR REVIEW. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DEPARTMENT STAFF.
>> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, ALEXIA LOPEZ WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. WE WERE ABLE TO GO THROUGH ALL THE OUTSTANDING COMMENTS. WE TALKED ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURE FOR BOTH OF THE PROJECTS, THE LANDSCAPING FOR THE SITE, PARKING GARAGE, BASICALLY WENT THROUGH MY LIST OF COMMENTS FROM PROJECT DOCS.
THEY MADE SEVERAL CHANGES, AND WERE ABLE TO ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE COMMENTS ACTUALLY. THERE WAS ONE THAT HAS COME UP SINCE FROM THE ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR.
THEY'RE SHOWING BIKE PARKING. WE ASKED THEM TO SPREAD IT OUT FOR THE TOWN HOME BUILDINGS SO MORE OF THE BUILDINGS COULD ACCESS IT, WHICH THEY DID. THEY'RE SHOWING ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S ON THE SITE PLAN AS WELL THAT WAY THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. I THINK THEY CAN ADDRESS THAT AS WE CONTINUE THROUGH PROJECT DOCS. WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU APPROVE ALL OF THE ITEMS THIS EVENING, INCLUDING THE VARIANCES AND THE WAIVERS. WE WENT OVER THOSE IN THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE VARIANCES, AND THOSE ARE INCLUDES IN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT AS WELL. WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF THOSE. SO WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDRESSING ALL REMAINING REVIEW COMMENTS AND PROJECTION DOCS.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL
[01:00:02]
OPEN IT UP TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT WE WILL BE TAKING A VOTE ON EACH ONE OF THE VARIANCES SEPARATELY. SO IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT A SPECIFIC VARIANCE, NOW IS THE TIME TO ASK THAT QUESTION. WHICH I'M SURE THEY'VE ALL BEEN ADDRESSED BY NOW, BUT IF THERE'S ANY LINGERING ONES. ANYQUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> WE DID GET A LATE E-MAIL. WE DID GET A COMMENT FROM THAT. DID YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT?
>> THANK YOU, MADAME CHAIR. JUSTIN, DID YOU GET THE E-MAIL FROM A VERY KIND LADY? I'M NOT SURE, DID YOU FORWARD IT ON TO
JUSTIN? >> I FORWARDED IT. LET ME SEE IF
>> I HAVE A PHYSICAL COPY TOO. >> I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT IN THIS E-MAIL HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED BY OLD TOWN AND JUSTIN, SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY AND MAYBE JUST SPEAK ON THAT SINCE I RECEIVED IT LATE LAST NIGHT AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT FORWARDING IT SOONER. IT WAS SENT TO MY PERSONAL E-MAIL, WHICH I DON'T CHECK EVERY DAY, SO I APOLOGIZE ABOUT THAT.
>> I THINK AS A GENERAL COMMENTARY ON TRYING TO TAKE IT ALL IN, I THINK IF I WAS GOING TO ADDRESS IT JUST FOR AWARENESS FOR CITIZENS, THERE'S A COMMENT ABOUT GREEN SPACE, VERY LITTLE GREEN SPACE. I READ IT AS MAYBE JUST A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT OVERALL. WE ACTUALLY, I THINK WE COVERED THIS IN OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS. SIGNIFICANTLY MORE GREEN SPACE THAN ORDINANCE. THE REALITY IS URBAN RESIDENTIAL IS DESIGNED TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, SET UP FOR LIKE A DENSE, WALKABLE AREA. THIS IS A UNIQUE PROJECT IN THAT IT'S NOT QUITE MID-TOWN CARMEL WHERE IT'S TRULY DENSE AND URBAN. WE WORKED TO PRESERVE MORE GREEN SPACE THAN UNDERLYING ORDINANCE REQUIRES. AND REALLY WHAT'S NOT EVEN DISCUSSED IN OUR PLANNING DOCUMENTS, I'M GOING TO POINT TO THIS ONE HERE, IT'S KIND OF OFF THE MAP IS ALL THESE SIGNIFICANT GREEN SPACES THAT AREN'T EVEN PART OF THE PROJECT FILING. WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT GREEN SPACE PRESERVED. THERE'S ADJACENT GREEN SPACES, THE URBAN FARM, AND THEN THIS WATER QUALITY AREA. IN TOTAL, FAR MORE THAN IS REQUIRED PER ORDINANCE. I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THE LETTER, BUT PROBABLY JUST MORE MISUNDERSTANDING WHAT THE
PROJECT IS. >> THANK YOU, JUSTIN. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT ESPECIALLY OUR SENIORS UNDERSTAND THERE IS GOING TO BE A WALKING PATH FROM THAT WEST SIDE TO THE EAST SIDE, CORRECT? I MEAN, JUST SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT. CORRECT?
>> I'M SORRY. I WAS SCANNING THE LETTER AGAIN. NO. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I DIDN'T BLOW OFF ANY OF THE CONCERNS RAISED. I THINK WHAT'S CAUSED THIS IS THE STARK CHANGE IN LANDSCAPE. IT EXPOSED THE UGLY OLD HOUSES THAT ARE DILAPIDATED AND FALLING IN ON THEMSELVES. I CAN SEE HOW THAT RAISED THE CONCERN. BUT OBVIOUSLY MULTIPLE TRAILS CONNECTED, NOT JUST COMPLETING THE NETWORK INTERNAL TO THE SUBDIVISION, BUT THEY CONNECT FROM THE PARM TO THE DEVELOPMENT. SO I THINK IT WILL DO A GOOD JOB TO CREATE ANOTHER LOOP. THE HAGENBURG TRAIL, OUR PLANNING FOR NORTH END WAS TO FIND A MEANINGFUL WAY TO CREATE ANOTHER LOOP THROUGH OUR PROJECT. I THINK THAT'S A UNIQUE FEATURE YOU CAN ADD ANOTHER MILE LOOP THAT DOESN'T
EXIST TODAY. >> TO HER CONCERNS ABOUT NOT BEING ENOUGH WALKING AND GREEN SPACE, THOSE HAVE BEEN ASSUAGED.
>> QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. THE REDUCTION OF EFES, DO WE HAVE A FIRM NUMBER OF WHAT THAT IS OR PERCENTAGE?
>> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A FIRM NUMBER. THERE ISN'T A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT FOR A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE ALLOWED IN THE UR ZONE, BUT IT WILL BE AT LEAST EIGHT FEET ABOVEGROUND, WHICH IS ONE OF OUR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AS WELL. IT'S NOT ALONG THE LEVEL WHERE IT COULD EASILY BE DESTROYED OR HAVE SNOW AGAINST IT OR PEOPLE IMPACTING IT. SO IT WILL BE UP. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THE ELEVATIONS, BUT THEY HAD IT ALONG SOME OF THE BUMP-OUTS, AND THEY HAD IT ON THE FLAT PART, AND THAT WAS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE BUILDING. THEY REMOVED IT ALL ON
[01:05:01]
THOSE FLAT PARTS. THE BUMP-OUTS WILL HAVE IT, BUT THE INSIDE AREAS TRANSITION TO A SIDING INSTEAD.>> SO IT'S ONLY THE BUMP-OUTS AND ABOVE EIGHT FEET NOW WOULD
>> SPEAKING OF ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES, I KNOW THERE WERE SOME OTHERS. I'VE SEEN THE APARTMENTS. THOSE CHANGES LOOK GREAT. WHAT OTHER ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES WERE MADE? LOOKS LIKE YOU MIGHT HAVE ADDED MORE WINDOWS. WHAT ALL CHANGES WERE
MADE TO THAT STRUCTURE? >> THERE WERE A VARIETY. SO ONE OF THE ELEVATIONS HAD MOST THE ELEVATIONS HAD A PEAKED ROOF ON PORTIONS OF IT, AND THEN ONE ELEVATION HAD MORE OF AFLUTTER ROOF OVER SOME OF THOSE BUMP-OUTS. WE JUST WANTED SOME CONSISTENCY AMONGST THE BUILDINGS. IT WILL BE PEAK ROOF AROUND ALL FOUR SIDES OF THE BUILDING. AND THEN ALONG THE EAST FACADE WHERE THE GRADE CHANGES, THERE'S LIKE 12 FEET CONCRETE WALL BEFORE THEN THE REST OF THE BUILDING STARTS. AND YES, THANK YOU, AND THEN YOU GET INTO THE BRICK AND THE SIDING.
SO THEY'VE ADDED WINDOWS ALONG THE SOUTH PART OF THAT WALL UP A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE ADDING SOME PLANTINGS AS WELL TO HELP BUFFER THAT CONCRETE WALL. THOSE WERE THE MAIN I THINK COMMENTS ON THIS BUILDING THAT WE HAD. OH, ALONG THE BASE TOO, THEY MADE THE BASE MORE CONSISTENT. IF IT'S CHANGING MATERIAL AS MUCH ALONG THE BASE AND THE WINDOW TYPES WILL BE THE SAME WITH THE SAME HEADERS ALONG THE BASE OF
THE BUILDING. >> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. SO WE WILL NOW START VOTING. SO EACH ONE OF THE VARIANCES WE HAVE TO VOTE SEPARATELY. WE CAN TAKE THE THREE PLAN COMMISSION DOCKETS AND VOTE ON THEM TOGETHER, CORRECT? I'M LOOK AT LEGAL.
>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> WE'LL START WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOCUMENTS. WE'VE GOT THE NORTH END PRIMARY PLAT AND THE TWO ADLS. ADLS FOR NORTH END AND VIVA BENE. DO I
HAVE A MOTION? >> MOVE TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE THREE PLAN COMMISSION DOCKETS, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THOSE THREE HAVE PASSED. OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO START AT THE TOP WITH THE THREE WE HEARD FIRST EARLIER THIS EVENING. SO WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE STANDARDS WAIVER FOR THE NO PARKING, WELL FOR THE PARKING AND THE FLOODPLAIN. SO THAT WOULD BE DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00082. DO I HAVE A
>> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THAT ONE PASSES. THE SECOND ONE IS THE HAMMERHEAD TURNAROUND THAT'S REQUESTED. THAT'S DOCKET PZ-20-25-00083 STANDARD WAIVERS.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> SO MOVED.
>> SECOND. >> IS THAT A MOTION IN FAVOR, MOTION TO APPROVE? OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS STANDARDS WAIVER VARIANCE, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, OKAY, THAT ONE PASSES. THE NEXT ONE IS THE REDUCED EASEMENT WITH REQUESTED WITHIN ALONG THE STREAM AND FLOODWAY. THIS IS PZ-2025-0084 STANDARD WAIVER. AND DO I HAVE A
>> SECOND. >> THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS WAIVER, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, THAT ONE IS PASSED. NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE SET THAT IS ON OLD BUSINESS. THE NEXT ONE IS THE MAXIMUM FRONTYARD SETBACK. MORE THAN 50 FEET IS REQUESTED. PZ-2025-00030. IT'S A VARIANCE.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> SO MOVED TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS VARIANCE, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THAT ONE IS APPROVED. THE NEXT ONE IS THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR PARKING, ZERO FEET WAS REQUESTED. THAT IS DOCKET PZ-2025-00031. AND I NEED A MOTION.
>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE MOTION AND THE SECOND. THAT ONE PASSES. THE NEXT ONE IS THE VARIANCE FOR FRONT OF THE BUILDING THAT PARKING SETBACK IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. SO
[01:10:06]
PZ-2025-00032 VARIANCE. >> MOVE ITS ADOPTION.
>> MOVE TO APPROVE AND SECOND. THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. THAT ONE IS APPROVED. NEXT IS THE VARIANCE PERMITTING A 50,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING. PZ-2025-0033, AND THIS IS A VARIANCE. AND I NEED A
>> SECOND. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS VARIANCE, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THAT IS APPROVED. NEXT IS THE VARIANCE PERMITTING A LONGER FACADE DESIGN, AND THIS IS PZ-2025-00034. AND IT'S A VARIANCE. AND I NEED A MOTION.
>> MOVE ITS APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS VARIANCE, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, IT IS APPROVED. THE NEXT ONE IS THE VARIANCE REQUESTING ONE BUILDING RATHER THAN TWO BUILDINGS, AND THIS IS DOCKET PZ-2025-00035.
AND IT'S A VARIANCE. AND I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> AND THANK YOU FOR THE SECOND. ALL THOSE IF FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS VARIANCE, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THIS IS APPROVED. THE NEXT IS THE VARIANCE FOR NO SETBACK BEING REQUESTED. AND THIS IS DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00036. AND IT'S
A VARIANCE. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THIS IS APPROVED. AND THIS BRINGS US TO OUR LAST VARIANCE, 1.25 SPACES PER DWELLING REQUESTED. PZ-2025-00037
VARIANCE. AND I NEED A MOTION. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.
>> THANK YOU. AND A SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THE THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THAT VARIANCE AND THEY HAVE ALL BEEN APPROVED. JUSTIN, THANK YOU.
[LAUGHTER] >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO THAT
WAS A LONG ONE. SO THANK YOU. >> REALLY APPRECIATE THE COLLABORATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF ON WORKING THROUGH A REALLY COMPLEX FILING. BUT I THINK IT WAS A GOOD PROCESS. GLAD WE GOT SOMETHING ACCOMPLISHED TOGETHER. THANK
[J.1. Docket No. PZ-2025- 00053 ADLS Amend: Convivio Patio. ]
YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT. IT'S NEW BUSINESS.
PZ-2025-00053, ADLS AMENDMENT CONVIVIO PATIO. THE APPLICANT SEEKS DESIGN APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE UNDERUTILIZED BRIDGES BOCCE BALL COURT WITH A PRIVATE DINING PATIO FOR THE RESTAURANT. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 11529 SPRING MILL ROAD. IT IS ZONED PUD FILED
BY ANDREA MELANI. >> LONG STORY SHORT, WE'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE 2016. WE GOT THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD A BOCCE BALL COURT. IT SOUNDED LIKE A GOOD IDEA AT THE TIME, BUT OVER TIME NOT SO MUCH. THE REASON WAS BECAUSE IT'S FACING WEST, SO IT'S VERY EXPOSED. WE DID A LOT OF ENHANCEMENT TO GET THE BOCCE BALL COURT READY AND IN 2019 WHEN WE WERE READY TO KIND OF ROLL IT OUT AND GET IT GOING, 2020 COVID HAPPENED, SO WE COULDN'T DO IT. ABDOMEN WE BASICALLY ENDED UP USING THE SPACE FOR OUTER SEATING. SINCE THEN, WE USE IT AS A PATIO.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S UNDERUTILIZED BECAUSE THE EXPOSURE TO THE SUN. SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS AN ENHANCEMENT OF THE SPACE, WHICH IS BASICALLY THIS AREA BACK HERE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS THE BOCCE BALL COURT. SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS TO ACTUALLY CONVERT A BOCCE BALL COURT INTO AN EXTENSION OF OUR CURRENT PATIO. FILLING IN THE SPACE AND PUTTING TWO PERGALAS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE ON THE PATIO RIGHT NOW. THE PERGULAS WILL BE PROVIDED BY SMART
[01:15:04]
PERGULA, ADDING SOME PLANTERS, AND SHOULD BE AN ELEVATION OF WHAT THE PERGULA WILL LOOK LIKE. I THINK I HAVE A PICTURE OF SOMETHING THAT WILL REFLECT WHAT THE STRUCTURE WILL LOOK LIKE.WHICH IS THIS RIGHT HERE. AND THEN IT WILL BE SIMILAR TO THIS, BUT A DIFFERENT COLOR BLACK. THE NEXT STEP OBVIOUSLY WILL BE IF THESE WILL BE APPROVED TO FILL IN THE BOCCE BALL COURT. THERE WAS DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY IN TERMS OF AGREEING WHAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP. THERE'S AN AGREEMENT IF WE WERE TO EVER LEAVE THE SPACE, THE CITY WILL, BASICALLY THE LANDLORD AGREED TO RECONVERT THE SPACE INTO A COMMON AREA. ALSO THE LETTER IS PROVIDED OVER HERE FROM THE LANDLORD AND AGREED BY THE CITY.
SO THAT'S IT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO DEPARTMENT STAFF FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, I'LL PROVIDE A BIT OF ADDITIONAL CONTEXT. AS I MENTIONED, THE BOCCE BALL COURT WAS REVIEWED ADMINISTRATIVELY WITH STAFF AND WAS GOING TO BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO COVID. AT SOME POINT, IT WAS FENCED IN PRIOR TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REQUIRING FENCE PERMITS, WHICH DID MAKE THE AMENITY FOR THE COMMUNITY SEEM A LITTLE BIT MORE PRIVATIZED AND SPECIFICALLY USED FOR CONVIVIO. THEY DID PROVIDE THE LETTER FROM THE LANDLORD. IT WILL REVERT BACK TO A COMMON AREA IF THE TENANT EVER VACATES THE BUILDING. THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINED THE CONVERSION OF THE SPACE FROM A PUBLIC AMENITY TO MORE OF A PRIVATE DINING AREA HAS A SUBSTANTIAL ALTERATION TO THE CONCEPT PLAN, WHICH DOES REQUIRE APPROVAL, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT. FROM THE BRIDGES PUD, THESE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS COMPLY WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS AND COMPLIMENT THE EXISTING DESIGN THERE ALREADY. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM TONIGHT.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? ADAM?
>> IT'S SO SAD TO SEE A BOCCE BALL COURT GO AWAY. I'M JUST CURIOUS. IS THE PERGOLA, IS IT A THREE SEASON?
>> OUR CURRENT PERGOLA, WHICH IS ON ONE SIDE OF THE PATIO, THAT IS LIKE A FOUR SEASON. THESE TWO SMALL PERGOLAS WILL ONLY BE USED
DURING THE SUMMERTIME. >> OKAY. THAT WAS IT FOR ME.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I KNOW YOU NEED EXTRA SEATING. I ALWAYS HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING A SEAT IN YOUR RESTAURANT. SO I KNOW
MORE SEATING IS NEEDED. >> I THINK THE BIGGEST THING FOR US IS TO REALLY ENHANCE THAT AREA BECAUSE IT IS A PRETTY AREA. IT SEEMS LIKE EVEN ON THE OTHER SIDE, MORE THAN ANYTHING IT'S UNDERUTILIZED. WE WOULD LIKE TO UTILIZE IT AT ITS FULL CAPACITY GIVEN THE INVESTMENT WE'RE MAKING TO PUT TWO PERGOLAS AND MORE LANDSCAPING. WE WANT TO MAKE IT COMFORTABLE
FOR EVERYONE. >> WONDERFUL. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, DO I HAVE A MOTION?
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> I WILL SECOND.
>> OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS DOCKET, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, CONGRATULATIONS, YOU ARE APPROVED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. SO
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.