H.1. PC Resolution PC-1-20-26-a: CRC Res. No. 2025-22: amends the Declaratory Resolution and Development Plan for the Flora Economic Development Area, to create a separate allocation area to be known as “Flora Residential Housing Allocation Area” pursuant to Section 39 of IC 36-7-14, and to adopt a supplement to the Development Plan, which establishes a Residential Housing Development Program in this new allocation area. (Part 1 of 2)

[H.1. PC Resolution PC-1-20-26-a: CRC Res. No. 2025-22: amends the Declaratory Resolution and Development Plan for the Flora Economic Development Area, to create a separate allocation area to be known as “Flora Residential Housing Allocation Area” pursuant to Section 39 of IC 36-7-14, and to adopt a supplement to the Development Plan, which establishes a Residential Housing Development Program in this new allocation area. (Part 1 of 2)]

IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING TO PAY ATTENTION TO. IT COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE FAR-REACHING IMPACTS, NOT JUST FOR US, BUT FOR ALL CITIES. UP NEXT IS THREE RESOLUTIONS FOR ALLOCATION

AREAS. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO DIRECTOR. >> HELLO, EVERYONE. CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR. I WILL ALSO MISS RACHEL . SHE IS PRETTY GREAT. RACHEL IS THE KIND OF CARMEL EMPLOYEE THAT ELICITS GOODWILL FROM EVERYONE THAT MEETS HER. I AM A DIFFERENT KIND OF PERSON. I AM HERE TO SPIN THAT DOWN. HELLO, EVERYONE. ALLOCATION AREAS ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THING THAN MOST THINGS THAT COME BEFORE THE PLAN COMMISSION, WHICH ARE DESIGN RELATED ALLOCATION AREAS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH DESIGN. THE STATE LAW SAYS THAT WHEN THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION IS CREATING NEW ALLOCATION AREAS THAT THOSE AREAS HAVE TO PASS FOUR CONSECUTIVE VOTES STARTING AT REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, THEN PLAN COMMISSION, THEN THE BIG ONE, COUNCIL, WHICH WOULD BE AFTER THIS IF THIS COMMISSION PASSES THESE. AND THAT, BACK TO THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. THESE ARE FINANCIAL MATTERS ESSENTIALLY. SO THESE ARE TAX INCREMENT FINANCE ALLOCATION AREAS THAT WOULD CAPTURE TAX, INCREMENT AND FINANCE FUNDS THAT FLEW INTO THIS. THERE ARE THREE AREAS ON YOUR AGENDA. I WILL COVER ALL THREE, AND THEN ASK IF IT'S OKAY THAT THEY BE VOTED ON SEPARATELY. I WILL JUST COVER ALL THREE. TWO WITH THESE COMMISSION HAS ALREADY SEEN BEFORE AND ONE IS NEW. FLORA. THIS COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY CREATED ALLOCATION AREAS OVER THE PARCELS PICTURED THAT ARE NOT HIGHLIGHTED. THOU ALLOCATION AREA ALREADY EXISTS. THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF THAT PROJECT THAT WOULD CREATE AN ALLOCATION

[H.2. PC Resolution PC-1-20-26-b: CRC Res. No. 2025-23: amends the Declaratory Resolution and Development Plan for the Old Town Economic Development Area, to create a separate allocation area to be known as “North End Residential Housing Allocation Area” pursuant to Section 39 of IC 36-7-14, and to adopt a supplement to the Development Plan, which establishes a Residential Housing Development Program in this new allocation area. (Part 1 of 2)]

AREA OVER THE HIGHLIGHTED PARCELS. THE SECOND IS RELATED TO NORTH END. IF YOU EVER LAST YEAR WE TOOK AN UPDATED NORTH END PROJECT TO CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A BOND FOR AGE RESTRICTED MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT AS PART OF THAT. THERE WERE SOME PARCELS THAT WERE RESIDENTIAL THAT WERE NOT YET IN A AREA. BUT ALSO PUTS THESE ADDITIONAL PARCELS IN A AREA.

[H.3. PC Resolution PC-1-20-26-c: CRC Res. No. 2025-24: designates an area to be known as the “146th and Towne Economic Development Area” as an economic development area pursuant to Section 41 of IC 36-7-14 and approves an economic development plan as well as a Residential Housing Development Program for the Economic Development Area. (Part 1 of 2)]

FINALLY THE LAST ALLOCATION AREA IS TOWN PROJECT APPROVED BY THIS BODY AND CITY COUNCIL. AGAIN, THERE ARE NO DESIGN ELEMENTS RELATED TO THIS. I AM HERE AS A FUNCTION OF THE WAY STATE LAW IS

WRITTEN. WITH THAT, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE THREE ALLOCATION AREAS?

>> DIRECTOR, WE HAD SOMEONE COME TO A CITY COUNCIL MEETING. JUST MAKING CLEAR OF WHAT THIS MEANS.

THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT A HOME THEY LIVED IN WAS REPRESENTED IN AN ALLOCATION AREA. THAT MADE THE FEAR THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A PROJECT THAT WOULD MEAN THEIR HOMES WOULD BE TORN DOWN, REDEVELOPED BECAUSE IT WAS IN AN ALLOCATION AREA. AND YOU ADDRESS THAT?

>> ABSOLUTELY. THEY SHOULD NOT WORRY ABOUT THAT. ALLOCATION AREAS ARE WHOLLY SEPARATE FROM PROJECT , PLAN AND DESIGN APPROVALS THAT FRANKLY GOES TO THIS BODY. ALLOCATION AREAS ARE REALLY KIND OF A BEHIND THE SCENES MECHANISM . THEY DON'T NECESSARILY AFFECT WHAT WILL HAPPEN ON A SITE. THOSE PROCESSES HAVE TO -- EVERY DEVELOPER HAS TO GO THROUGH THOSE PROCESSES, INCLUDING BECOMING -- COMING BEFORE THIS BODY. IF YOU LIVE IN A HOUSE THAT HAPPENS TO BE IN AN ALLOCATION AREA, I WOULDN'T WORRY ABOUT IT. I MEAN, THERE IS NO EFFECT ON SOMEONE LIVING IN A HOUSE AND HOW IT ALLOCATION AREA WOULD IMPACT THEM. THERE IS NO

[00:15:07]

IMPACT. >> IF IT IS NOT, WE DO IT FOR THE FINANCIAL BENEFIT.

>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> IT IS ESSENTIALLY A WAY TO CAPTURE THE TAX REVENUE FOR THE AREA. IT DOESN'T -- I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON 146 STREET AND NORTH END, THERE IS INFRASTRUCTURE THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT IN. BUT WITH FLORA THE ROADS ARE IN. IS THERE AN IDEA OF WHAT THE SORT

OF FUNDS WOULD BE USED FAR FROM AN INFRA STRUCTURE STANDPOINT? >> THERE GOING TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF SOMETHING IS ALREADY BUILT . PART OF IT CAN BE A REIMBURSEMENT. THAT IS ALLOWED TOO. IN TWO OF THESE AREAS THERE IS NOTHING ADDITIONAL. 146 IN

TOWN, CRC WILL ASSIST WITH SOME OF THE WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE ONE AT A TIME. LET'S START WITH FLORA , DO I

HAVE A MOTION? >> MOVE WE APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THIS ON TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A

FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION PLEASE A AYE. >> AYE.

>> THAT ONE MOVES ON WITH RECOMMENDATION. THE NEXT IS NORTH END , CRC RESOLUTION

NUMBER 2025-23. I NEED A MOTION. >> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THE NORTH END ALLOCATION AREA ON TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE

RECOMMENDATION PLEASE A AYE. >> AYE. >> THAT ONE MOVES ON AS WELL.

THE LAST ONE IS THE 146TH STREET IN TOWN, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREA, PC RESOLUTION

PC-1-20-26-C , CRC RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-24. I NEED A MOTION. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE TO SEND

FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL. >> THANK YOU FOR THE SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SENDING THIS WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL PLEASE A AYE.

>> AYE. >> ALL THREE ARE GOING ON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, HENRY.

>> THANK YOU. >> UP NEXT IS THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY

[J.1. Docket No. PZ-2025-00184 PUD: Illinois Street Townhomes PUD Rezone The applicant seeks PUD rezone approval to allow a new townhome neighborhood with 27 townhomes. The site is located at 220 W 106th St. and is zoned MC/Meridian Corridor. Filed by Jim Shinaver and Jon Dobosiewicz of Nelson & Frankenberger on behalf of Pulte Homes of Indiana.]

PUBLIC HEARINGS. THE ONE MATTER WE HAD, ATLS RESTORACY, TABLED. WE ARE MOVING TO OLD BUSINESS.

DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025- 00184 PUD ILLINOIS STREET TOWNHOMES PUD RESULT. THE APPLICANT SEEKS PUD REZONE APPROVAL TO ALLOW A NEW TOWNHOME NEIGHBORHOOD WITH 27 TOWNHOMES. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 220 W. 106TH STREET AND ZONED MC/MERIDIAN CORRIDOR. I WILL TURN IT OVER.

>> WE REPRESENT THE APPLICANT. HERE WITH MEMBERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM. AS THE COMMISSION WILL RECALL, WE WERE PRESENT BACK IN OCTOBER FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER AND WORKED WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE FOR THREE MONTHS AND RECEIVED A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION COMMITTEE AT THE LAST MEETING EARLIER IN JANUARY, 3-3 SPLIT VOTE ON FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. ALTERNATELY SENT BACK TO THE FULL PLAN COMMISSION FOR A VOTE. UNANIMOUSLY. I WANT TO FOLLOW UP FOR THE MEMBERS WHO WEREN'T THERE AND ADDRESS A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP RECENTLY REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS THE SITE LAYOUT YOU SEE HERE. PUD STIPULATES THE SITE WILL BE DEVELOPED WAS SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THIS LAYOUT. AS THE PLANS WERE DEVELOPED, THE NUMBER OF UNITS HAS BEEN REDUCED. 27 HOMES IS PRESENT AT THE LAST MEETING. THERE IS ADDITIONAL OFFSTREET PARKING FOR GUESTS . AS REPRESENTED ON THAT PLAN, THERE ARE FIVE BUILDINGS, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX UNIT BUILDINGS. THREE, SIX UNIT BUILDING A FIVE UNIT BUILDING AND FOUR UNIT BUILDING. THIS REPRESENTS THE AREA DEVOTED TOWARDS OPEN SPACE. THERE IS THE TWO DIFFERENT COLORS OF GREEN.

ONE REPRESENT, BOTH TOGETHER REPRESENT 47% OPEN SPACE ACROSS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY. AND THE DARKER OF THE GREEN COLORS, THE AREA OF GREEN BOTTOMMOST LOCATED ON THE PLAN HERE REPRESENTS TREE PRESERVATION AREAS ACROSS THE SITE . AGAIN, THE OPEN-SPACE REPRESENTS JUST OVER 40% OF THAT AREA. ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS IMPORTANT AS WE DEVELOP THE PLAN WAS THAT LANDSCAPING ALSO

[00:20:02]

PROVIDED ALONG THE NORTH PERIMETER. THE NORTHERNMOST , EXCUSE ME, NORTH ADJACENT OWNERS, THERE HOSPITAL FACILITY TO THE NORTH, THAT IS HERE. LANDSCAPING WAS ADDED ALONG THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY TO PROVIDE A TRANSITION IN THAT SPACE . FINALLY, WITH REGARD TO ARCHITECTURE . I WANTED TO POTENTIALLY ELIMINATE SOME MISUNDERSTANDING. NOT NECESSARILY ON OUR PART, BUT IT WAS INDICATED TO ME TODAY THAT SOMEONE THOUGHT THAT VINYL SIDING MIGHT BE A PERMITTED EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL, WHICH IT IS NOT. THE ORDINATE SPECIFIES, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE THREE EXHIBITS, THE ORDINANCE SPECIFIES THERE BE MASONRY ON ALL FOUR SIDES. AS WELL AS FIBER CEMENT SIDING. ATYPICAL BUILDING MATERIAL USED IN CARMEL USED THROUGHOUT TOWNHOMES AND SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS. THERE ARE THREE DISTINCT DIFFERENT SIDING. A HORIZONTAL SIDING THAT TYPICALLY LOOKS LIKE REGULAR SIDING. A HORIZONTAL TYPE SIDING IN A COUPLE AREAS AS WELL. FROM THE FRONT AND SIDE ELEVATION TO.

THEN THERE IS A SHAKE STYLE SIDING APPLIED IN DIFFERENT AREAS. THIS IS A TYPICAL SIX UNIT BUILDING YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE. THERE IS BOTH FIVE AND FOUR UNIT BUILDINGS. THESE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS OF A TYPICAL SIDE ELEVATION. THE SIZE THAT WOULD FACE ILLINOIS STREET ARE ENHANCED EVEN FURTHER BECAUSE MASONRY WILL BE ADDED IN THIS AREA THAT FACES ILLINOIS STREET, AND THERE WILL BE A BUMP OUT ON THE SIDE TO AVOID A FLAT FACADE. SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE ON THE FRONT OF THE DWELLING. SEVERAL MEMBERS DROVE UP TO WESTFIELD WITH A SIMILAR, BUT NOT IDENTICAL, PRODUCT TO GET A FEEL FOR HOW THAT REPRESENTS TO THE STREET. THIS NEXT EXHIBIT I WANT TO PUT UP REPRESENTS THE AMOUNT OF MASONRY MATERIALS PROPOSED ON THE ELEVATIONS. THIS WASN'T QUITE AS DISTINCT. TEAM PUT THIS TOGETHER TO HELP ILLUSTRATE. THIS IS A TYPICAL SIX UNIT BUILDING, OF WHICH THERE ARE THREE. AGAIN, 15 YOU -- AND THE SHADED IN AREA REPRESENTS THE AMOUNT OF MASONRY ON THE FRONT OF THE HOME. THERE ARE TWO DISTINCT DIFFERENT TYPES. ONE IS A STONE MATERIAL USED THAT AS REPRESENTED HERE. THE OTHER IS A BRICK MATERIAL . THAT BRICK MATERIAL, OR STONE MATERIAL, IS EITHER THE FIRST, SECOND OR THIRD LEVEL. ALL THE BUILDINGS YOU SEE WILL PROVIDE THIS MINIMUM LEVEL OF MASONRY ACROSS THE FRONTAGE. WE WILL BE BACK WITH A ADLS THAT WILL REPRESENT THIS. SUBSTANTIAL -- WE HAVE A COMBINATION OF DIFFERENT UNIT TYPES HERE. THOSE ARE SITUATED ADJACENT. IN THE SIX UNIT BUILDING, THIS HAS TO STORIES OF MASONRY. WHERE THE END UNIT REPRESENTS TWO STORIES OF MASONRY, IT WRAPS AROUND TO THE FRONT THAT WOULD FACE ILLINOIS STREET. THE SIDE WRAPS AROUND THE TWO FLOORS OF MASONRY YOU CAN SEE REPRESENTED IN RED. THIS IS THE BUMP OUT ON THE OTHER. YOU SEE THIS SINGLE-STORY MASONRY. THAT IS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING THAT HAS SINGLE LEVEL MASONRY AT THAT LEVEL. IT WRAPS AROUND. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE 26 UNIT BUILDINGS. ON THE BACK ELEVATION, THIS IS THE ELEVATION THAT WOULD FACE NORTH AND SOUTH. THAT IS A PATIO ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR. A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF WINDOWS ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS. MASONRY REPRESENTED. IF THERE IS A MATERIAL ON THE FRONT, IT WILL BE DIP LOCATED ON THE BACKSIDE. THERE IS COLOR VARIATIONS YOU GET INDIVIDUALITY BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL HOMES ON ALL THOSE UNITS. WE THOUGHT THIS WAS BENEFICIAL. THIS EXHIBIT IN PARTICULAR HELPS DISTINGUISH ABOUT HOW MUCH MASONRY IS BEING APPLIED BOTH ON THE FRONT, SIDE AND ELEVATIONS OF THE HOME. WITH THAT, I WILL CONCLUDE. WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE PLAN COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL. WE ASK THAT YOU MAKE A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. WITH THAT, I WILL CONCLUDE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO OUR DEPARTMENT STAFF OR COMMENTS.

>> THANK YOU. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. THE PETITIONER HAS MADE SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TO THE PUD AND SITE PLAN OVER THE COURSE OF THE REVIEW. WE HAVE NO MAJOR OUTSTANDING COMMENTS. ONE THING, AS STATED IN THE REPORT, ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOK AT WITH REZONES AND PUD IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE POLICIES AND GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE COMP PLAN CALL FOR THINGS SUCH AS VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES , A MIXTURE OF LAND USES, SAFE WALKING AND BIKING, PRESERVATION OF MATURE TREES, AND GREEN BUILDING PRACTICES. THIS AREA IS SPECIFICALLY IN THE DOWNTOWN WEST DEVELOPMENT AREA OF THE COMP PLAN, WHICH DOES ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. ALTHOUGH BUILDING A TOWNHOME COMMUNITY IN THE DOWNTOWN WEST IS NOT MAYBE ATYPICAL LAND-USE YOU MIGHT EXPECT TO SEE HERE, HOWEVER, IT DOES ADDRESS SEVERAL OTHER

[00:25:10]

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS. AND IT PROVIDES A TRANSITION FROM U.S. 31 TO THE EAST TO THE SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT IS TO THE WEST. THE THREE-STORY HEIGHT OF THE TOWNHOMES IS COMPLEMENTARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY NORTH AND SOUTH. AND THE TOWNHOME USE ALLOWS SOME PRESERVATION OF THE OPEN-SPACE ON THIS PARCEL, AND THE TREE PRESERVATION WE SAW. IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR SENSITIVITY TO THE NEARBY STREAM AND PRESERVATION OF THE STREAM AND BUFFER ALONG THE STREAM . DUE TO THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THIS PARCEL, AND THE LOCATION ALONG THE STREAM RUNNING THROUGH THE SITE, THE FEASIBILITY OF A COMMERCIAL PROJECT IS PROBABLY A LITTLE LESS LIKELY. WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU VOTE TO SEND THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU. OPENED UP TO COMMENTS FROM EVERYBODY ON THE PLAN COMMISSION, SUE, AS CHAIR OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD?

>> NO. I THINK YOU DID A NICE SUMMARY JOB. APPRECIATE THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THIS

EVENING. THIS DID MOVE FORWARD 3-3 TO FULL PLANNING TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU. I WILL OPEN IT UP TO ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY APPEAR ON THE PLAN COMMISSION. DEBBIE.

>> I WILL JUST COMMENT ON PREVIOUS COMMENTS. IT BOILS DOWN TO A CONCERN ABOUT THIS NOT BEING A MIXED USE, BUT PURELY RESIDENTIAL. I AM IN FAVOR OF IT BEING PURELY RESIDENTIAL. I MENTIONED THIS BEFORE. I'M NORMALLY NOT IN FAVOR OF TOWNHOME PROJECTS. THEY'RE NOT HIGH ON MY LIST. BUT THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO DO IT BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A NARROW STRIP OF LAND WITH SLOPING TERRAIN. THE ISSUE OF NOISE WAS RAISED. I WILL RADIATE -- REITERATE THE NOISE COMING FROM 31, THERE IS A BIGGER BUFFER THERE THAN THERE IS WITH THEE FOR DEVELOPMENT RIGHT ALONG 465. THE NOISE FROM 465 WOULD BE A LOT LOUDER, IN MY OPINION . THE NOISE THAT WOULD COME FROM 31. I RESPECT THAT THE PREVIOUS COMMITTEE MEETING SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WERE CONCERNED IT IS NOT A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, BUT THIS IS THE PROJECT BEFORE US . MEETS A HOUSING NEED WE DO HAVE IN CARMEL. I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS AND APPRECIATE ALL THE AMENDMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ALONG THE WAY. THEY HAVE LISTENED TO OUR

CONCERNS AND ADDRESS THEM. >> THANK YOU FOR ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY?

>> THANK YOU FOR SHOWING ALL THE UPDATES. FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, I'VE NOT FELT LIKE THIS WAS A GREAT LOCATION FOR RESIDENTIAL. THIS BEING RIGHT NEXT TO U.S. 31. IT IS A TOUGH PARCEL TO TRY TO FIT THIS IN. I KNOW I HAVE TALKED TO REX TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE THIS LOOK A LITTLE BIT BETTER BUT MY CONCERN IS GIVEN THE LOCATION THAT I WANTED TO LOOK NICE TODAY AND IN 10 AND 20 YEARS FROM NOW. THAT IS WHY I THROUGHOUT THE ALL BRICK AS AN OPTION. IF YOU LOOK AT SOME TOWNHOMES IT MAY BE TOUGH RESIDENTIAL LOCATIONS, THE ONES THAT STILL LOOK GOOD AFTER 20 YEARS, THERE IS A REALLY TOUGH LOCATION FOR RESIDENTIAL. BUT THOSE STILL LOOK GREAT TODAY BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL MASONRY. I APPRECIATE YOU SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF MASONRY. THAT IS HELPFUL TO SEE BUT I STILL FEEL LIKE THERE COULD BE MORE WORK DONE. FOR MY VOTE, I DON'T THINK IT IS A GREAT LOCATION FOR RESIDENTIAL. IT IS A TOUGH FIT HERE. I KNOW WE TALK A LOT ABOUT HOUSING. BUT THE ONE TYPE OF MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING WE HAVE A LOT OF IS TOWNHOMES. AS I AM LOOKING AT THAT, I WAS REALLY HOPING TO SEE A REALLY BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, LOOK GREAT TODAY AND 20 YEARS FROM NOW. I FEEL LIKE THERE IS STILL WORK THAT CAN BE DONE ON THE ARCHITECTURE PIECE OF IT IT IS A TOUGH LOCATION. THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. I APPRECIATE -- IT IS CLEARLY A LOT BETTER THAN IT WAS WHEN IT WAS FIRST PRESENTED. I

APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE SO FAR. >> IN THAT REGARD, WE WILL COMMUNICATE TO THE COUNCIL THERE HAVE BEEN RESERVATIONS MENTIONED REGARDING THE PROJECT ARCHITECTURE. AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION KNOWS, BUT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC, THE COUNCIL GO THROUGH ANOTHER REVIEW PROCESS. IT WILL GO TO LAND USE COMMITTEE. WHEN WE WERE AT THAT COMMITTEE, WE WILL SHARE WITH THEM YOUR THOUGHTS, AND OTHERS, SO THEY WILL REVIEW

THOSE MATTERS TO YOUR SATISFACTION. >> THANK YOU.

>> A LOT OF THOUGHT OF WHAT YOU MENTIONED. I AM JOINING THE CONVERSATION. MY FIRST MEETING

[00:30:10]

OF THE PLAN COMMISSION. BUT I WATCHED PREVIOUS MEETINGS AND TALK TO A FEW MEMBERS. THE LOCATION I DO UNDERSTAND. IT IS HARD BECAUSE USUALLY WHEN YOU ARE IN TOWNHOMES, A LOT OF THE AREAS, ESPECIALLY MARKETING THIS TO YOUNGER PROFESSIONALS, PEOPLE KIND OF WANT TO BE IN WALKABLE AREAS MAYBE ALONG U.S. 31 MAY NOT SEEM LIKE THE MOST IDEAL LOCATION TO PURCHASE A TOWNHOME WHEN YOU ARE NOT A PART OF A CENTRAL CORE, SO TO SPEAK. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS ENOUGH FOR ME TO SAY NO ON THE PROJECT. I AM TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND THE BUILDING MATERIALS.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD KIND OF SWAY ME ONE WAY OR ANOTHER . YOU SHOWED ME THE MATERIALS FOR THE MASONRY. IS THAT KIND OF CREATING GREATER AWARENESS WHAT YOU ORIGINALLY HAD, OR IS THAT A CHANGE COMPARED TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED TO THE PLA

COMMISSION? >> THIS WAS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED. THIS IS A REPRESENTATION OF WHAT WE HAD AT THE LAST MEETING , AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS RED HIGHLIGHTED SPACE TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF EXACTLY HOW IT WOULD FIT. IT WAS JUST A BLACK-AND-WHITE RED. IS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED, WITH PROPOSED WITH MASONRY AT FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL AT THE FRONT AND A WAINSCOT AT THE SIDE AND REAR. IT HAS BEEN ELEVATED TO ONE AND TWO STORIES ON THE SIDES, FULL MASONRY ON THE REAR

AND THIS LEVEL YOU SEE ON THE FRONT ELEVATIONS. >> OKAY.

>> IS THERE ANY CONNECTION POINTS BETWEEN THE SUBJECT SITE TO THE SOUTH?

>> THERE IS. >> OTHER THAN SIDEWALKS. >> TODAY THE PATH ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE STREET DOES NOT EXIST. ALONG ILLINOIS STREET, THERE IS A GAP IN THE PEDESTRIAN PATH. WE WILL CONNECT FROM THE ROUNDABOUT ALL THE WAY UP. SO THAT GAP IS ELIMINATED.

PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WOULD BE PROVIDED FROM OUR PROPERTY INTO THE SITE. IS THE RIGHT HERE A LITTLE BUMP OUT HERE WHERE WE WILL HAVE A SPOT FOR PEOPLE WITH A BENCH AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT

FOR AN ADDITIONAL PEDESTRIAN AMENITY. >> WILL THERE BE ANYTHING POTENTIALLY -- LET'S SAY THIS CORNER HERE WILL BE DEVELOPED IN THE FUTURE. ANY POTENTIAL FOR A

CONNECTION BETWEEN THIS AND THAT AREA? >> THE LOW-LYING AREA HAS A CREEK WITH IN A. THERE ARE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES WITH REGARD TO THE FLOOD ZONE. THERE IS NO PROPOSED CONNECTION BETWEEN THIS PARCEL AND INDIANA INSURANCE . I MIGHT SAY IT WRONG. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THEY ARE THE SELLER THAT OWN THE REAL ESTATE.

THEY HAVEN'T ASKED FOR ANY INTERCONNECTIVITY. BUT AGAIN, WE PROVIDED FILLING THE GAP ALONG ILLINOIS STREET. THERE IS NOTHING ALONG 31. WE ARE NOT TRYING TO ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC

TO SCOOT OUT IN THAT DIRECTION. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DEBBIE.

>> MY EARLIER COMMENTS WERE DIRECTED AT THE LAND-USE. I WANT TO CONCUR WITH THE COMMENTS MADE ABOUT THE WAR BRICK, OR SOLID SURFACE THE BETTER. I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF ADDING TO THAT.

>> I PROBABLY NEED A MOTION IF THERE WERE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

>> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION OR TWO. I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO SIT AND LISTEN. I WAS AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING EARLIER IN THE MONTH. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. WITH A 3-3 VOTE AND THREE MEMBERS MISSING FROM THAT MEETING, I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO CONSUME AND LISTEN TO HEAR SOME OF THE FEEDBACK. I GUESS GENERALLY SPEAKING, AND I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, AND I MENTIONED IT TO THE PETITIONER. WE ARE TASKED WITH, IS IT THE RIGHT USE, RIGHT LOCATION FROM A BIG PICTURE PERSPECTIVE? THERE HAS BEEN COMMENTS FOR AND AGAINST IT, SO TO SPEAK. I HAVE STRUGGLED WITH NONCOMMERCIAL USES IN THIS PART OF THE 31 CORRIDOR. ALSO RECOGNIZING FROM TALKING WITH THE PETITIONER AND HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE HAD TO SAY THAT AN OFFICE USE OR COMMERCIAL TYPE USE MIGHT STRUGGLE GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY OF THE SITE.

CERTAINLY THAT IS A PIECE OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS. I WANT TO CONTINUE TO HEAR ANYTHING COMMISSION MEMBERS HAVE TO SAY. BEYOND THAT, IF YOU ASSUME YOU SET THAT ASIDE AND ASSUME IT WILL GO FORWARD, STILL TRY TO MAKE AS GREAT A PROJECT AS YOU CAN. APPRECIATE THE PETITIONERS CHANGES ON ADDITION OF BRICK. IF THERE IS MORE TO BE HAD, I CERTAINLY WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT . THE STREET SECTION CHANGE, THE SIDEWALK CHANGES, THE LANDSCAPING CHANGES, PLEASED

[00:35:03]

WITH ALL THOSE. I GUESS WE WILL SEE WHERE THIS GOES. FEEDBACK AND COMMENTARY. I'VE APPRECIATED

HEARING WHAT YOU ALL HAVE SAID WHEN I MISSED IT. >> ADAM.

>> I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THE CHANGES . LOVE SEEING THE BRICK ADDED. I AM GOING TO STICK TO MY ORIGINAL IMPRESSION OF THIS. I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT. I KNOW THAT IT IS THE PROJECT PRESENTED BEFORE US TODAY. I DO BELIEVE THAT THE SITE COULD POTENTIALLY BE USED FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT ALONG THE 31 CORRIDOR. I STRUGGLE WITH RESIDENTIAL AND 31 CORRIDOR. HEARING IT IS BEING MARKETED FOR A 21 TO 35-YEAR-OLD YOUNG PROFESSIONAL AUDIENCE IS ANOTHER CHALLENGE I HAVE SEEN THE VISION FOR THIS PROJECT. I APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORT PUT

FORTH ON THIS. I CANNOT VOTE FAVORABLY ON THIS PROJECT. >> I THINK YOU BROUGHT UP A POINT I HAVE ALSO BEEN STRUGGLING WITH, WHICH IS THIS DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A GREAT LOCATION FOR RESIDENTIAL, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET THE YOUNGER DEMOGRAPHIC. YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO WALK TWO THINGS. YOU KNOW, I HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO TRYING TO HEAR THE ARGUMENT FROM WHY RESIDENTIAL WILL GO HERE. THE MOST COMMONLY CITED ARGUMENT IS BECAUSE NOTHING ELSE COULD GO HERE. I'M STRUGGLING WITH THAT BECAUSE I CAN'T GET ON BOARD WITH SOMETHING BASED ON A NEGATIVE. I WANT TO KNOW THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT. THAT IS ALSO WHY I BEEN PUSHING FOR MORE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS. I KNOW THE SITE IS LIMITED. YOU HAVE FRONTLOADING GARAGES BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ROOM FOR REAR LOADING. THAT MEANS WHEN YOU PULL IN, THERE IS A LOT OF CONCRETE AND CARS PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY. THAT GIVES THE LOCATION THAT IS TOUGH FOR RESIDENTIAL ANYWAY IF IT IS NOT DONE REALLY, REALLY WELL IT COULD REALLY DETERIORATE QUICKLY. I HAVE BEEN HAVING THE SAME STRUGGLE. I STRUGGLE WITH

THIS BEING A RESIDENTIAL USE. >> AND MOST OF THE TIME THE PETITIONERS ON THEIR OWN MAKING THEIR CASE WITH REGARD TO THE FIT OF A CERTAIN USE IN THE AREA, BUT THE UPPERS -- EFFORTS GOING ON REGARDING THE 31 OVERLAY CORRIDOR , AND STAFF INDICATED THEIR PRESENTATION REGARDING THE COMP PLAN , IT F1 ENCOURAGES RESIDENTIAL TO BE INTERMIXED WITHIN THE CORRIDOR.

IT IS NOT THERE TODAY, BUT THERE IS A POLICY THAT THE CITY TO ENCOURAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO GET IN HERE. I THINK THE STRUGGLE, PERHAPS, SPECULATING, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT TODAY. BUT I THINK WE NEED THAT. WE NEED TO BE COGNIZANT OF THE NEED FOR RESIDENTIAL TO OCCUR WITHIN THE CORRIDOR TO MAKE IT MORE DYNAMIC. WE HAVE VERY DYNAMIC SPACES IN THE COMMUNITY CENTERED ALONG ROAD. YOU CAN'T TELL FROM ONE BUILDING TO THE NEXT WHAT IS RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE, COMMERCIAL. THAT MIX CREATES A LOT OF VIBRANCY. THAT IS SOMETHING THE CORRIDOR DOESN'T HAVE TODAY. THAT IS THE REASON WHY I THINK STAFF AND THE COMPANY HAS A PLAN

THAT THE CITY HAS FOR THAT SPACE OR ENCOURAGING RESIDENTIAL. >> I AGREE WITH THAT. I GUESS WHEN I THINK OF RESIDENTIAL AND U.S. 31, I AM THINKING OF A BIG MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT WHERE IT

IS INCORPORATED TOGETHER AS OPPOSED TO STANDALONE. >> I AGREE.

>> JONATHAN. >> I WANTED TO ECHO SOME OF THE COMMENTS I HAVE HEARD FROM MY COLLEAGUES. I'VE EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROJECT SINCE FIRST INTRODUCED. I UNDERSTAND AND SUPPORT MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT. MANY OF HIS PROJECTS IN THE PAST. NOT NECESSARILY HERE, BUT IN OTHER AREAS. I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT THAT WE NEED RESIDENTIAL IN THE 31 CORRIDOR. BUT I ALSO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THAT BE INTEGRATED INTO A GREATER PROJECT NOT SANDWICHED BETWEEN TWO COMMERCIAL USES. THAT IS WHAT I REALLY SEE HERE. THE FACT THAT WE ARE HAVING CONVERSATION ABOUT POTENTIALLY HAVING BUFFER LANDSCAPING OR PERMANENT LANDSCAPING ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES TO TAKE CARE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT REDUCING CITY STANDARD DRAINAGE EASEMENT FROM 30 FEET TO 15 FEET. SOME OF THE ACHITECTURAL COMMENTS BROUGHT UP. THESE ARE ALL THE CONCERNS I HAVE HAD THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. I APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE PART OF THE PETITIONER AND COUNCIL. I AM JUST STILL STRUGGLING WITH THIS PROJECT. I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT FIT FOR THIS PARCEL. THOSE REASONS I HAVE TO STICK WITH MY ORIGINAL STATEMENT . I WILL

LEAVE IT AT THAT. >> IF THERE ARE NO OTHER -- >> I HAVE A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION.

I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I WILL ASK. SPEAKING FOR THE PETITIONER COME I'VE HEARD QUESTIONS ABOUT IF THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, CAN YOU CONTINUE TO WORK ON IT STEP UP THE

[00:40:04]

ARCHITECTURE. IS THERE SOMETHING RELATED TO THAT, THOUGHT YOU GUYS HAVE HAD AS A FALLBACK PLAN? CAN THE PETITIONER COMMIT TO ALL BRICK? IS IT OFF THE TABLE? DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS

THAT OR SPEAK TO THAT AT ALL? >> I WOULD SAY THAT NOTHING IS OFF THE TABLE FOR US TO SATISFY THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. IT WILL BE BUSINESS DECISIONS THE PETITIONER HAS TO MAKE. IF THE COUNCIL IS AN AGREEMENT REGARDING ARCHITECTURE, THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL MASONRY, THEY WILL COMMUNICATE THAT TO US AND PULTE WILL MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN ACCOMMODATE THAT IN ORDER TO SECURE SUPPORT FROM THOSE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. KIND OF A LONG WAY OF SAYING THAT IF THE COUNCIL ISN'T ON BOARD WITH THE LEVEL OF MASONRY, WE WILL DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN IMPROVE UPON THAT, AND THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS THAT NOTHING IS OFF THE TABLE. WE ARE READY TO START THE COUNCIL PROCESS WITH YOUR FEEDBACK, WHICH HAS BEEN CLEAR,

AND FEEDBACK FROM STAFF AND THE PETITIONER. >> ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION?

>> -- I WILL MOVE THAT WE SEND THIS TO THE COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

>> IS THERE A SECOND? MARK? >> I WILL SECOND. >> WHEN WE CAST YOUR VOTE, I WILL ASK YOU TO RAISE YOUR HANDS. THIS MIGHT BE CLOSE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION PLEASE A AYE AND RAISE YOUR HAND.

THAT'S THREE. >> I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU MAKE ANOTHER MOTION. YOUR RULES AND PROCEDURES. I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE ANY PROCEDURAL INCONSISTENCIES OR QUESTIONS

GOING TO COUNCIL. >> DO I HAVE A MOTION IN THE NEGATIVE?

>> AS SUCH, I MOVE FORWARD WITH THE NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

>> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THIS AS AN UNFAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION PLEASE SAY AYE AND RAISE YOUR HAND. THE MOTION WILL GO ON WITH AN UNFAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. WITH THAT SAID, I WISH YOU LUCK, THOUGH, AT CITY COUNCIL, AND PERHAPS MORE

[Items J.2 & J.3]

COUNCIL LEVEL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR EFFORT TO THIS POINT. UP NEXT IS DOCKET NUMBER, THE GREENHOUSE COTTAGES. PZ-2025-00197 PUD AMENDMENT . DOCKET NUMBER PZ-2025-00198 PUD, RESTORACY OF CARMEL. THE APPLICANT SEEKS BEAUTY A MOMENT AND REZONE APPROVAL FOR SENIOR CARE DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPERTY IS 4.76 ACRES LOCATED AT GREENHOUSE WAY, GREENHOUSE COTTAGES OF CARMEL. THE NEW PROPERTY IS 1.8 ACRES LOCATED AT 240 E. CITY CENTER DRIVE AND ZONED RESIDENTIAL. ON BEHALF OF MBR CARMEL HEALTH LLC. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO KYLE.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS. PLEASE TO BE HERE THIS EVENING BEFORE YOU. WE STOOD BEFORE YOU A MONTH AGO AND INTRODUCED THE PROPOSAL ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENT AND CARMEL HEALTH WITH RESPECT TO THEIR INTENTIONS TO EXPAND THE EXISTING SKILLED NURSING FACILITY ONTO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE EAST, INTRODUCING TWO NEW SKILLED NURSING COTTAGES ON THAT NEW PROPERTY. GIVEN THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD AT THAT PLAN COMMISSION MEETING AND THE DECISION TO SEND THE MATTER TO COMMITTEE, THE PETITIONER REVISITED THE SITE PLAN TO IMPORTANTLY RECONFIGURE THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN THAT INCLUDES TWO COTTAGES TO ROTATE THOSE TWO FACILITIES AS OPPOSED TO AN EAST-WEST LAYOUT TO MORE OF A NORTH-SOUTH LAYOUT , ADD ADDITIONAL PARKING, EXPAND THE DRIVEWAYS SERVING THESE FACILITIES , AND AFFORD GREATER OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN TO THE SOUTH. WE PROCEEDED TO THE COMMISSION, EXCUSE ME, THE COMMITTEE

[00:45:03]

MEETINGS AND HAD A DISCUSSION OF THE REVISED SITE PLAN. ULTIMATELY, COMMITTEE SENT THIS MATTER BACK TO YOU THIS EVENING WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. AS I PRESENTED TO COMMITTEE, BUT I WILL REITERATE TO THE FULL COMMISSION, THE SITE PLAN HAS UNDERGONE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT ITERATIONS. WE ARE MOST PLEASED WITH THE ITERATION BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING . LARGELY BECAUSE IT PROVIDES GREATER OPPORTUNITY FOR PARKING , AS WELL AS CONTEMPLATION OF A POTENTIAL EXTENSION OF RICHLAND AVENUE FROM THE NORTH DOWN TO CITY CENTER DRIVE. AND OTHER ELEMENTS I AM PLEASED TO DISCUSS THIS EVENING. THE OPEN ITEMS WITH RESPECT TO THE STAFF REPORT, AS WELL AS THOSE COMING OUT OF COMMITTEE, WERE THE FOLLOWING THAT I CAN OUTLINE BRIEFLY HERE.

ONE, CREATING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR GREATER VISUAL ORGANOIDS BUFFERING TO THE EAST, PARTICULARLY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES TO THE EAST, CONSIDERING THIS ARTERY OFFER THE EXISTING DRIVE AND ADDITIONAL PARKING AND ACCESS TO THE TWO COTTAGES. THE SECOND BEING CONTEMPLATION OF POTENTIAL RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION CONSIDERING A FUTURE EXTENSION OF RICHLAND AVENUE. WHETHER THAT MAY BE IN THE NEAR TERM OR LONG TERM. THE THIRD ITEM , AND CERTAINLY THIS THIRD ITEM BEING IMPACTED BY THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, DEDICATION BEING THE POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE ON THE NEW SITE , AND THE FOURTH ITEM, A MINOR ITEM, JUST A CLARIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO LIVABLE SPACE VERSUS GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE SPACE IN THE NEW COTTAGES. IF I MAY, I WILL GO QUICKLY THROUGH THOSE ITEMS, AND THEN I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO DIALOGUE, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS AS THE COMMISSION SO CHOOSES. THE FIRST IS THE PETITIONER IS COMMITTING TO ADDING AN OPAQUE FENCE FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHERNMOST COTTAGE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHERNMOST COTTAGE ALONG THIS DRIVE IN THE REAR OR EAST OF THIS PROPOSED DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE . OF COURSE, THERE WOULD BE EXISTING AND NEW SOFT ESCAPE LANDSCAPING INSTALLED, BUT SIX FOOT PRIVACY OPAQUE FENCE TO ALIGN WITH THE EASTERN EDGE OF THAT NEW DRIVEWAY TO PROVIDE BOTH A VISUAL AND NOISE BUFFERING TO THE HOMES TO THE EAST, OR POTENTIAL RIGHT-OF-WAY EXTENSION OF RICHLAND. THE SECOND ITEM WITH RESPECT TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AT THE END OF LAST WEEK, WE WERE PRESENTED A NEW VISUAL THAT I WILL SHARE HERE. NEW VISUAL FROM PLAN -- EXCUSE ME, ENGINEERING STAFF TO OUTLINE A POTENTIAL NEED FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY. I WILL SWITCH OUT TO A SMALLER VERSION SO YOU CAN SEE THAT. THERE IS A REDLINE FOLLOWING THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE SITE . MOST OF THE EASTERN BOUNDARY UP UNTIL THIS POINT IS A PROPOSED 10 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. THERE IS A SMALL JOG RIGHT AT THE END OF MY PEN HERE TO INCREASE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION TO 20 FEET, CONTINUING SOUTH RIGHT TO THIS POINT , A PROPOSED 30 FOOT DEDICATION, AND YOU WILL SEE APPROXIMATELY 45 DEGREE ANGLE FOLLOWING SOUTH TO A POINT WHERE IT IS A 90 FOOT DEDICATION, AND THEN A SMALL DISTANCE TO WHERE IT MEETS THE PROPOSED 50 FOOT DEDICATION RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS WAS, AS I MENTIONED , JUST PROVIDED TO THE PETITIONER I THINK END OF THE DAY THURSDAY. WE WERE ASKED TO OVERLAY THAT EXHIBIT ONTO OUR EXISTING SITE . GIVEN THE WEEKEND AND THE HOLIDAY, THAT WAS JUST PROVIDED TO ME BEFORE THIS EVENING. I WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT . RACHEL, OTHER MEMBERS OF STAFF HAVE NOT SEEN THIS EXACT, HAVE NOT SEEN A VERSION OF THIS EXHIBIT, BUT ALL THIS DOES IS

[00:50:03]

OVERLAY THAT PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION FROM THE PRIOR EXHIBIT ONTO OUR PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN , AND THEN SHADE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION WITH A LIGHT BLUE COLOR. PETITIONER IS LARGELY AGREEABLE TO THIS PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION. THERE HAS BEEN AN ASKED BY THE ENGINEERING STAFF TO INCLUDE AN EXHIBIT LIKE THIS ONE. CERTAINLY WANT TO GIVE ENGINEERING STAFF AN OPPORTUNITY TO VIEW THIS AND DIALOGUE ON THAT . WHETHER THEY WOULD REQUIRE ANY ADJUSTMENTS. FROM THE ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE, THERE WAS ALSO AN ASK THIS BE USED AS EFFECTIVELY A CONCEPT OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION TO THE EXTENT THAT FUTURE EXTENSION OF THE ROAD REQUIRES AN ADJUSTMENT OF LINES THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE TIED TO THIS BY THE FOOT HERE IN THE SAME WAY THIS CONCEPT PLAN IS SUBSTANTIAL GUIDE TO THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

WE ARE AGREEABLE TO THAT . PETITIONER IS AGREEABLE TO THAT PART WHAT I WOULD ASK THE PLAN COMMISSIONER -- COMMISSION TO THIS EVENING, PARTICULARLY AREA AND IS POLYGON OR TRIANGULAR SHAPE HERE, AS YOU WILL SEE, AS I RETURNED TO THE OTHER CONCEPT PLAN HERE, WE HAD ORIGINALLY PROPOSED A RATHER LARGE RAIN GARDEN TO RESOLVE SOME OF THE EXISTING DRAINAGE CONCERNS AND MAKE SURE THAT TWO ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS DID NOT CAUSE ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE IMPACT , WHETHER THAT BE TO OUR EAST OR OTHERWISE. YOU WILL SEE THIS ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION WOULD EFFECTIVELY BIFURCATE THE PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN. WE HAVE SHRUNK THE PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN TO ALLOW FOR THAT ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION, BUT GIVEN WE HAVE NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANALYZE THE ULTIMATE ENGINEERING IMPACT, OF COURSE, WE WILL RETURN TO THIS PLAN COMMISSION FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSIDERATION AND OTHERWISE.

WITH THE PETITIONER WOULD REQUEST FOR TONIGHT IS THAT THE DEDICATION EXPLORED IN THE PUD WOULD BE , AT THIS POINT, WHERE THE DEDICATION EXPANDS TO 30 FEET, THAT IT JUST CONTINUE IN A NORTH-SOUTH DIRECTION. SO IT WOULD BE A 30 FOOT DEDICATION DOWN HERE. AND THAT THIS ADDITIONAL AREA BE CONSIDERED DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY TO SAY THE PETITIONER IS UNWILLING TO DEDICATE THAT PROCESS. AND REALLY, IT ALIGNS WITH THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS TO DATE THAT IT WOULD BE A COLLABORATIVE OPPORTUNITY BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND ENGINEERING TO ULTIMATELY DECIDE WHERE THIS ADDITIONAL DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY LIES SO BOTH THE RAIN GARDEN, AS WELL AS THE UNDERGROUND, AFFORDED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT , AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE POTENTIAL EXTENSION OF THE ROAD, WHICH IS COEXISTING HERE. AT LEAST FOR TONIGHT, THE PETITIONER IS AGREEABLE TO A DEDICATION OF 10 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY EXPANDING TO 20 FOOT, EXPANDING TO 30 FOOT FOR THE ENTIRE EASTERN EXTENSION OF THIS SITE. THAT IT WOULD BE A COLLABORATIVE OPPORTUNITY BETWEEN ENGINEERING AND THE PETITIONER DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN STAGE TO CONSIDER WHAT ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY WOULD BE NEEDED . THE 50 FOOT OFFICE CITY CENTER DRIVE HAS BEEN A GIVEN. SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE PUD FROM DAY ONE.

CERTAINLY AGREEABLE TO THE PETITIONER. WE'RE JUST CONSIDERING THIS ADDITIONAL POLYGON. THE OTHER CONSIDERATION WITH RESPECT TO THE DEDICATION , I WOULD ASK THAT THE DEDICATION ONLY OCCUR IF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROCEEDS WITH CONSTRUCTION. PROCEEDS WITH DEVELOPMENT. ULTIMATELY, I OFFER THAT AS A CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THE EXISTING SITE IS AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL HOME. MY CLIENT HAS THE PROPERTY UNDER CONTRACT TO PURCHASE IF THE PETITIONER DOES NOT PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT . ULTIMATELY, THE DECISION OF DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY WOULD BE BETWEEN THE EXISTING LANDOWNER AND THE CITY OF CARMEL. MY CLIENT CAN AGREE TO THE DEDICATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IF THE RESTORACY OF CARMEL CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT OCCURS, BUT CANNOT THIS EVENING INCUR A COMMITMENT FOR THAT DEDICATION IF THE

PROJECT DOES NOT CONTINUE. >> -- OBVIOUSLY, THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL THEN IMPACT THE ULTIMATE OPEN SPACE CONTEMPLATED IN THE PUD. WE HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH RACHEL ABOUT THIS . AT THE LAST -- I SHOULD SAY AT THIS TURN OF THE SITE PLAN, THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY

[00:55:10]

DEDICATION WAS 25 -- EXCUSE ME, THE OPEN SPACE WAS 25%. I WANTED TO PROVIDE A NEW NUMBER. IF WE ARE DEDICATING THIS ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY, THAT WOULD JUST BE A REDUCTION TO 20%. A SMALL ADJUSTMENT. LAST OF THE CATEGORIES I OUTLINED IN MY INITIAL LIST OF AGENDA IS JUST A DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN LIVABLE AND GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE. BISTATE CODE, THESE SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES CANNOT HAVE GREATER THAN 8000 LIVABLE SQUARE FEET. THAT IS THE EXISTING STATE LAW. THAT IS THE GREATEST LIVABLE SQUARE FOOT OF THE EXISTING SIX COTTAGES. THAT IS THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM SQUARE-FOOT , SQUARE FEET, OF LIVABLE FOR THE TWO NEW COTTAGES . THE GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE, TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING, WOULD BE 9000 SQUARE FEET. SO AN ADDITIONAL 1000 SQUARE FEET. IN PART, THAT IS LARGELY FOR THE ADDITIONAL GARAGE, WHICH IS NOT CONSIDERED LIVABLE SQUARE FEET. WITH THOSE FOUR COMMENTS, CERTAINLY ANTICIPATE A DIALOGUE HERE. IN HOPES THOSE FOUR POINTS ADDRESS THE COMMENTS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND OPEN ITEMS .

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE BEFORE YOU AGAIN THIS EVENING. FOR THE RECORD, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE PLAN COMMISSION SEND THIS TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE

RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH BUT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO DEPARTMENT

STAFF FOR THEIR COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. I THINK KYLE WENT OVER EVERYTHING VERY THOROUGHLY. THE ONLY ITEMS WE HAVE LEFT OVER TO DISCUSS WAS THE NOISE MITIGATION POTENTIAL AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION FOR RICHLAND. I THINK BOTH OF THE ITEMS THAT HE HAS PROPOSED FOR THAT WILL WORK . WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU PROVIDE US WITH AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE FENCE MAY LOOK LIKE . WE CAN GET THAT UPLOADED INTO PROJECT DOCKS. FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION TO UPLOAD A NO -- NEW EXHIBIT THAT WOULD SHOW WHAT YOU TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT WITH THE 30 FEET AS GUARANTEED, AND THEN THE TRIANGULAR PART IN FLUX. I THINK THAT WOULD BE JUST FIE FOR US TO WORK WITH HIM ON THAT. WE DID GO THROUGH LOTS OF DESIGN CHANGES ON THE SITE. VERY PLEASED WE GOT TO WHERE WE GOT TO NOW WITH THE BUILDINGS CHANGING ORIENTATION, HAVING MORE LANDSCAPING AND BUFFER YARD BETWEEN THE HOMES IN THE EXISTING HOMES TO THE EAST , AND VERY THANKFUL THEY WERE OPEN TO BRINGING THIS IDEA UP, AND THAT THERE WERE -- WAS ANOTHER DESIGN POSSIBILITY THAT COULD FIT THE SITE BETTER. WITH ALL THAT, I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU ALL FOR THIS TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ADAM, BACK OVER TO YOU. FROM A COMMERCIAL CHAIRPERSON, ANYTHING

YOU WANT TO ADD? >> NO. I MEAN, GENERALLY, WE ARE PLEASED WITH THE BUILDINGS. I THINK THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT DUMPSTER ARRANGEMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A PLACE WE CAN RELOCATE THAT. BUT GENERALLY I THINK WE DISCUSSED EVERYTHING TODAY.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTION OR COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY UP HERE? >> THANK YOU. I WILL BE VOTING FOR THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK TO DEDICATE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. I WANT TO CLEAR UP SOMETHING. I SPOKE WITH OUR CITY ENGINEER AFTER THE LAST MEETING. WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT UP, RICHLAND ROAD, A KIND OF TOOK SOME BY SURPRISE. AND MAYBE WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS SPOKEN WITH WITH THE ENTIRE COUNCIL. AND WHILE IT MAY BE A NEED DOWN THE ROAD, THERE IS A QUESTION OF HOW IMMEDIATE AND NEED IT IS. AND AT WHAT FINANCIAL COST TO CONSTRUCT THE ROAD. AND TO ACQUIRE THE LAND NEEDED. ALSO, WHAT IT WOULD MEAN FOR THE HOMES IN THE AREA. YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE A BIG DECISION IF IT MEANS JUST TAKING PIECES OF YARDS OR HAVING TO PURCHASE WHOLE HOUSES. I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION FROM CITY STAFF THIS MAY NOT BE AN IMMEDIATE PROJECT. SPEAKING TO THE CITY ENGINEER, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THE MAYOR AND HER ADMINISTRATION HAVE MADE THIS AN IMMEDIATE PROJECT EITHER. THAT BEING SAID, THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS STILL IMPORTANT.

[01:00:01]

AND SO, I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO MISCONSTRUE US WANTED TO GET THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH EVERY PROJECT HAPPENING IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, OR THAT IT WILL HAPPEN -- THERE IS NO PROMISE OR COMMITMENT THERE. BUT BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY, IT IS APPRECIATED AND NEEDED FOR US TO

GET THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. WE THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> THANK YOU. WE ARE PLEASED WITH THE ADDITIONAL SPACE WE WERE ABLE TO FIND IN THE SETBACK. WHEN WE PRESENTED TO YOU IN DECEMBER, THERE WAS ABOUT A 10 FOOT EAST SIDE YARD THAT HAS BEEN INCREASED TO 25 FEET.

GIVEN THE REORIENTATION TO AFFORD THE DEDICATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE FENCE . COULD YOU SHOW WITH YOUR PEN WHERE THE FENCE WOULD

START AND END? OKAY. >> THOSE APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS. I WOULD ALSO CALL OUT THAT THE REAR OF EACH COTTAGE WILL HAVE A FENCED IN COURTYARD . WE WOULD -- THE PETITIONER WOULD INTEND TO USE A SIMILAR FENCING PRODUCT TO EXTEND THE FENCE ALONG THE DRIVEWAY.

>> THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION. IF I LIVE IN A HOUSE BEHIND THE NORTHERNMOST -- IF I LIVED THERE

, AND MY LOOKING INTO A BREAK BETWEEN THE FENCES? >> A BREAK, BUT YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE REAR ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING. THERE WOULD NOT BE A NORTH TO SOUTH BREAK . WE WILL WOULD ALIGN THE NORTHERNMOST CORNER OF THE FENCE TO THE SOUTHERNMOST CORNER OF THE

BUILDING SO THERE WOULDN'T BE -- >> OKAY. LITERALLY CONNECTS TO THE BUILDING FOR ALL PRACTICAL

PURPOSES. >> THERE MIGHT BE SOME GAP FOR ON-SITE CONSTRUCTION. BUT YES.

>> THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION. BECAUSE IF I LIVE IN THOSE TWO HOUSES, I WOULD AT LEAST LIKE TO SEE CONSISTENCY OF WHAT IT IS GOING TO BE. IT WOULD NOT BE A WHITE VINYL FENCE.

>> DO YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE? >> WORKED WITH STAFF ON THAT ONE. JEFF.

>> YOU KIND OF ASKED THE QUESTIONS I WAS GOING TO HAVE. I WAS GOING TO ASK WHAT KIND OF FENCE YOU WERE THINKING OF WITHOUT SEEKING A FIRM COMMITMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY DISCUSSIONS. COULD IT BE WOOD, POLLY, WROUGHT IRON ? YOU KNOW, MASONRY CORNER POSTS. JUST CURIOUS MORE THAN ANYTHING. IF YOU CARE TO ENLIGHTEN US, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. IF YOU DON'T, THAT'S FINE TOO. SPEAKING OF THE FENCE, YOU WERE DESCRIBING EARLIER WE ARE PROPOSING THE FENCE ALONG THE EASTERN PART OF THE DRIVING LANE, IF YOU WILL. IF THE CITY OPTS TO BRING RICHLAND DOWN SOMEDAY, DOES THAT MEAN YOU WOULD NOT CONNECT TO IT? IS THAT

FAIR TO SAY? >> WITH ONE OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN , THIS EAST-WEST ARTERY WAS SET ALIGNED WITH CONCORD COURT . WITH THE REALIGNMENT OF THE BUILDINGS, IT DOES NOT ALIGN PERFECTLY EAST TO WEST. OF COURSE, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT. THE CURRENT INTENTION WOULD NOT BE TO CONNECT THEM. BUT ULTIMATELY, I THINK THAT FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE, A PROTOCOL PERSPECTIVE, BUT ULTIMATELY, THERE IS NO OBJECTION TO THAT. I THINK WE PURPOSEFULLY AT LEAST ALIGN THIS ARTERY CLOSE TO ALIGNMENT WITH CONCORD DRIVE TO AFFORD THAT ABILITY AND RECOGNIZE THAT A FENCE, AND PARTICULARLY THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, MAY REQUIRE

RELOCATION IF ONE DAY THAT ROAD COMES DOWN. >> OKAY.

>> -- THINKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT SCENARIO ABOUT WHAT COULD BE THERE TODAY VERSUS SOMEDAY DOWN THE ROAD. WHETHER EVERYONE WAS THINKING ABOUT BOTH SCENARIOS IN CASE THE ROAD GETS EXTENDED. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD, AND MAYBE IT IS MORE FOR STAFF OR PROCEDURALLY, HAS THIS ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED? AND I DIDN'T HEAR IT? BUT IF RICHLAND DOES GET EXTENDED IN THERE IS NEW ROAD, IS A SETBACK DIFFERENT? IS THAT ACCOUNTED FOR? IS THERE A VARIANCE NEEDED FROM A FRONT

YARD SETBACK VERSUS SIDE YARD? IS IT DIFFERENT? >> NO VARIANCES WOULD BE NEEDED

[01:05:02]

FOR THIS NOW THAT WE HAVE PLENTY OF SPACE. >> JONATHAN.

>> I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK YOU AND YOUR TEAM HAVE DONE ON THIS. THANKS TO THE PETITIONER AS WELL. EARLY ON WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT RECONFIGURATION OF THE BUILDINGS. THAT OBVIOUSLY TOOK PLACE. THE SETBACKS WERE A CONCERN. THAT WAS TAKEN CARE OF.

AND THE WILLINGNESS TO COMMIT RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE CITY IF AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE THE

PROJECT DOES MOVE FORWARD. JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU. >> I'M GOING TO SAY DITTO ON THAT. AT THE FIRST PLAN COMMISSION MEETING WILL BE ASKED TO CONSIDER ROTATING BUILDINGS, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A BIG ASK. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT AND MAKING ALL OF THESE ADJUSTMENTS.

I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. I HEARD YOU SAY IF THIS DOESN'T GO THROUGH WITH CONSTRUCTION THAT YOU BASICALLY WANT TO VACATE THE RIGHT OF WAYS. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE EVER DRAFTED A PUD LIKE THAT, BECAUSE ONCE WE ADOPT IT, THAT IS ZONING ON THE LAND. I DON'T KNOW IF -- IF THEY DON'T GO THROUGH WITH CONSTRUCTION, COULD THE PERSON COME BACK AND JUST GO BACK PUD APPROVED WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS ON IT. AND THEY ARE ASKING FOR THIS CAVEAT ABOUT, WELL, IF WE DON'T GO THROUGH WITH CONSTRUCTION -- THAT IS A UNIQUE SITUATION. WE HAVE NOT HAD THAT COME UP HERE AS FAR AS DRAFTING OF A PUD. I AM LOOKING TO YOU FOR SOME HELP ON THAT.

>> ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THIS IS A VERY REASONABLE REQUEST. BECAUSE DEDICATIONS IN THE STATE OF INDIANA ARE CONNECTED TO THE ACTUAL INPUT OR EFFECT ON THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE. IF THERE IS NO EFFECT ON CITY INFRASTRUCTURE, THE DEDICATION WOULD NOT BE A CORRECT ACT TO TAKE. SO MAKING SURE THAT DEDICATION IS CONNECTED TO THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT MORE SO. I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH IT WHATSOEVER. IN FACT, IT IS ACTUALLY A VERY, SOMETHING THAT WE MIGHT NEED TO THINK ABOUT JUST HAVING IT AS A REGULAR LANGUAGE. I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY DEAL IS STRUCTURED FROM FINANCE STANDPOINT , WHAT KIND OF CONTRACT THEY HAVE CURRENTLY, WHETHER IT IS GOING TO BE OWNERSHIP, ET CETERA. IT SEEMS LIKE -- THAT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE TO ME.

>> KYLE, YOU'RE GOING TO WRITE INTO THE TEXT OF THE PUD THAT SHOULD CONSTRUCTION NOT TAKE PLACE FOR SOME REASON, THAT -- THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION WOULD ALSO NOT BE GIVEN? IS THAT

BASICALLY WHAT YOU ARE WRITING? >> I AM HAPPY TO PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE THAT MAKES THE PLAN COMMISSION MORE COMFORTABLE. WE COULD ALSO TREAT IT AS A COMMITMENT WHERE ULTIMATELY THE COMMIT -- PETITIONER COMMITS -- HAPPY TO INCLUDE IN THE PUD LANGUAGE THAT CAPTURES THE 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY HERE. BUT THEN, PERHAPS WE TAKE OUT OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE PUD, BUT MAKE A COMMITMENT THAT SAYS IF THE PETITIONER PROCEEDS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT, CONSISTENT WITH THE REZONE, THIS DEDICATION OCCURS. AND THEN, ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE ABOUT COOPERATION. HONESTLY, I THINK THIS POLYGON, IF YOU WILL, THAT DEDICATION IS GOING TO BE RESOLVED ALONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS. WE WILL KNOW WHAT THAT ULTIMATE DEDICATION. OF COURSE, THE DEDICATION DOESN'T OCCUR UNTIL THERE IS AN INSTRUMENT THAT AFFECTS THAT. IS NOT REALLY THE PUD THAT AFFECTS THAT. I AM HAPPY TO ALIGN WITH COUNCIL

STAFF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THAT BEFORE THEY VOTE. >> THAT SEEMS PERFECTLY

REASONABLE. >> I AGREE. I CONCUR COMPLETELY. I THINK IT MAKES PROBABLY EVEN MORE SENSE TO PUT IT IN THE COMMITMENT. IT WOULD BE CLEANER THIS WAY. THIS WAY WE DON'T NEED TO DEAL WITH PUD LANGUAGE. IT MIGHT CHANGE DEPENDING ON HOW DEVELOPMENT WILL GO. BUT

COMMITMENT IS GOOD LEGALLY, IF NOT BETTER. >> PROCEDURALLY, DO WE NEED

MOTIONS ON THIS OR COULD WE BUNDLE THEM INTO ONE? >> YOU CAN MAKE IT INTO ONE

MOTION WITH DEDICATION AS DISCUSSED. >> I MOVE WE SEND THIS OVER TO

CITY COUNCIL A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND.

>> WITH THE COMMITMENTS. AND RESOLVING ALL OUTSTANDING ISSUES, INCLUDING FENCING. I HAVE A SECOND FROM MARK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH

FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION PLEASE A AYE. >> AYE.

[K.1. Docket No. PZ-2025-00265 ADLS Amend: The Moher Speakeasy The applicant seeks design approval for a building addition and remodeling the exterior of their tenant space. The site is located at 904 W. Main Street. It is zoned UC/Urban Core and is not located within any overlay district. Filed by Logan Weaver of The Moher LLC.]

>> THIS IS GOING ON WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL YOUR WORK

FOR GOOD LUCK AT CITY COUNCIL. >> THANK YOU, PLAN COMMISSION. >> THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS DOCKET

[01:10:04]

NO. PZ-2025-00265 ADLS AMEND: THE MOHER SPEAKEASY THE APPLICANT SEEKS DESIGN APPROVAL FOR A BUILDING ADDITION AND REMODELING THE EXTERIOR OF THEIR TENANT SPACE. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 904 W. MAIN STREET. IT IS ZONED UC/URBAN CORE AND IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN ANY OVERLAY DISTRICT. FILED BY LOGAN WEAVER OF THE MOHER LLC . I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE PETITIONER.

>> HOW WE DOING, GUYS? MY NAME IS LOGAN WEAVER. COUPLE NEW FACES. COUPLE OF POINTS WE WENT OVER LAST TIME . WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE EAST. WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE EAST AND WEST SIDE PARKING PENDING A SIGNATURE CURB CUT WHERE THE DUMPSTER AREA IS NOW LOCATED. WE ENDED UP MEETING WITH THE CITY ENGINEER GOING OVER, BASICALLY, HE STATED WHY DO WE NEED THAT CURB CUT. JUST TO GET RID OF THE WEST SIDE PARKING AND EASTSIDE TWO SPOTS OVER HERE. WE ENDED UP WORKING WITH THE CITY ENGINEER AND RACHEL GETTING RID OF THE WEST SIDE PARKING IN ADDING IN PARALLEL PARKING SPOT SO WE CAN WORK WITH THAT DRIVE AISLE ON THE ADDITION. WE ENDED UP MOVING THE DUMPSTER AREA TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY , WHICH HELPS WITH THE PUBLIC VIEW THAT RACHEL ALSO WORKED WITH AS WELL . A COUPLE OF OTHER POINTS WAS RACHEL TALKING ABOUT THE DRIVE AISLE HERE AS WELL. WE WENT AHEAD AND LABELED THAT MEASUREMENT. IT DOES GO WITH CODE. SAME HERE AS WELL WITH THE PARALLEL PARKING. AND THEN, ALSO SOME COMMENTS WERE MADE ON THE BIKE PARKING.

THIS IS LABELED OVER HERE. IT IS 12 SPACES. THE CONCRETE PAD IS 16 FEET BY SIX. AND SOME COMMENTS WERE MADE ABOUT WHAT THOSE WILL LOOK LIKE. JUST A BASIC BLACK VIEW WITH CITY CODE.

WE HAVE THOSE ALREADY AT A COUPLE OTHER LOCATIONS . HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT. RACHEL ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE DUMPSTER DESIGN. IT IS ACTUALLY IN THE PACKET ON PAGE 6 OF THE DESIGN OF THE DUMPSTER. LET ME GET THAT. WE DO HAVE THAT DESIGN. A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES UP HERE. A CLEAN-CUT BLACK DUMPSTER PANELING. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS WE HAD LAST TIME .

I THINK ADAM AND A COUPLE OTHER MEMBERS MENTIONED FROM FACADE CHANGE WITH THE PANELING OVER HERE. YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE ON THIS DRAWING. IT WAS BRICK, BUT WE RECOMMENDED TO MOVE IT TO ALL METAL PANELING. IT LOOKS MORE SMOOTH FROM MAIN STREET ON THE FACADE. IT LOOKS CLEANER. OVER HERE THERE WAS A METAL BANNER OVER THE GARAGE DOORS. THAT WAS RECOMMENDED TO TAKE AWAY TO MAKE IT MORE LOOK CLEAN-CUT. WE DID THAT AS WELL. I WILL PUSH IT OVER TO RACHEL WITH ANY OTHER

COMMENTS OR CONCERNS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. WE DID GO THROUGH QUITE A BIT OF CHANGES SINCE THE LAST MEETING. THAT WAS ENCOURAGED BY THE COMMITTEE . I HAD A TALK WITH BRAD, CITY ENGINEER, MULTIPLE TIMES. HE FELT THAT THE BEST WAY TO ALLEVIATE THE ISSUE OF THE ONE-WAY PARKING DRIVE AISLE WAS TO CHANGE IT COMPLETELY AND JUST TO PARALLEL PARKING ON THAT SIDE, AND THAT WAY THERE WOULD BE MORE SPACE BETWEEN THE PARKING SPACES AND THE BUILDING ADDITION, AND ALSO A MORE DIRECT ROUTE FOR THE TRASH TRUCK TO GET TO THE DUMPSTER . IT JUST KIND OF KEEPS EVERYTHING CONTAINED ON THEIR SITE. WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT. THAT IS FINE. THEY DID MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING IN RELATION TO SOME OF THE THINGS YOU GUYS HAD SAID AT THE MEETING, WHICH IS FINE. WE DID TALK WITH MARK FROM INDIANA LANDMARKS . WE WERE BASICALLY TALK ABOUT THE MIDCENTURY MODERN DESIGN OF THIS BUILDING AND THE WEST HALF OF THE BUILDING WITH A VERY LARGE GLASS WINDOWS IS LIKE THE KEY COMPONENT OF IT . THAT JUST DOESN'T REALLY GO WITH WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO AS FAR AS BUILDING WITH THE ADDITION AND USE ON THE INSIDE. AND SO, MARK SAID THAT LEAVING IT AT THE FLAT ROOF, LEAVING IT WITH THE BEINGS IN THOSE KINDS OF THINGS

[01:15:09]

SUFFICED , BASICALLY. THE ONE THING THAT MARK SAID WAS THAT HE WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE DARK COLOR. BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A PREFERENCE OF THE PETITIONER THAT THEY WANT TO GO WITH A DARKER COLOR. I AM IN DIFFERENT TO THAT. YOU ALL CAN TALK ABOUT THAT . HE DID ANSWER THE QUESTIONS I HAD FROM THE DEPARTMENT REPORT . AND SO, IF WE ARE ALL IN AGREEMENT TONIGHT,

A RECOMMEND -- I RECOMMEND YOU APPROVE THIS TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ADAM, AS