May 19, 2026 Carmel Plan Commission

[A. Call Meeting to Order ]

[00:00:07]

>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE MAY 19TH 20, 26 MEETING

[ B. Pledge of Allegiance]

[ C. Roll Call]

THE ROLL. >> LOUGHEED?

>> PRESENT. >> JONATHAN BLAKE?

>> PRESENT. >> ADAM CAM PANAMA?

>> HILL? >> PRESENT.

>> WESTERMEIER? >> PRESENT.

>> W BUCKLER? >> PRESENT.

>> MARK AD AIR? >> PRESENT.

[ D. Declaration of Quorum]

>> THERESA AYERS? >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE HAVE A QUORUM. UP NEXT IS APPROVAL OF OUR APRIL

[E. Approval of Minutes ]

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING OUR APRIL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE THEY ARE APPROVED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[F. Communications, Bills, Expenditures, & Legal Counsel Report ]

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR LEGAL COUNSEL.

I KNOW WE'VE GOT SOME U.S. 31 PLAN.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PERSONALLY, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT, BUT ADRIAN IS READY TO REPORT THE U.S. 3 IS

PLAN RESULTS COUNCIL. >> ADRIENNE DEALING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES.

THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN ANYMORE, BUT WE HAD A PLANNED AMENDMENT, U.S. 3 IS SUB AREA PLAN WAS ADOPTEDDED BY CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 20TH. HOWEVER WE DID MAKE SEVERAL REVISIONS AND BY VIRTUE OF COUNCIL REVISIONS, IT DOES NEED TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RATIFICATION.

AND FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS 60 DAYS TO APPROVEMENT AMENDMENT, DISAPPROVE THE AMENDMENTS AND SEND BACK SUGGESTIONS OR IF YOU TAKE NO ACTION, THEN THE SUB AREA PLAN WILL BE ADOPTED AS IT WAS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL AND THERE'S NO FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED. WE DO STILL HAVE UNTIL JUNE 19TH WOULD BE 60 DAYS BUT WE DO, IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO GO THROUGH THOSE REVISIONS, I CAN DO SO.

COUNCILOR AYERS, ALTHOUGH SHE WAS NOT PRESENT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHILE WE WENT THROUGH THE SUB AREA PLAN PROCESS, SHE WAS VERY MUCH AT THE LAND USE COMMITTEE AS WELL.

SO SHE CAN FEEL FREE TO FILL IN OF ANYTHING I MAY HAVE MISSED DURING THAT DISCUSSION PROCESS. AND I WON'T GO THROUGH PAGE BY PAGE; HOWEVER, THERE WERE MANY REVISIONS AS I MENTIONED.

THE FIRST SEVERAL MEETINGS OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE WAS DEDICATED TO FOCUSING ON AND STRENGTHENING PROTECTIONS TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS LOCATED WITHIN AND NEAR THE U.S.

31 SUB AREA BOUNDARY. SO THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK AND A LOT OF DISCUSSION PUT INTO STRENGTHENING LANGUAGE AND ADDING A 300-FOOT TRANSITION AREA, WHICH IS ALL ALONG THE CORRIDOR, 300 FEET WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE OF ANY ADJACENT BOUNDARY -- ANY RESIDENTIAL THAT'S ADJACENT TO THE BOUNDARY OF THE U.S. 31 SUB AREA PLAN.

AND I'LL GO TO THOSE SPECIFIC PAGES SHORTLY.

THERE WAS ALSO A DESIGNATION ADDED TO THE MAP CALLED CORRIDOR RESIDENTIAL THAT DESCRIBES SOME EXPECTATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL THAT IS WITHIN THE BOUNDARY AND WHAT THOSE EXPECTATIONS ARE AND FINALLY, THE BOUNDARY IT TESTIFY CHANGED BOUNDARY ITSELF CHANGED A BIT. THAT'S PROBABLY THE EASTIEST ONE TO START WITH. ON THE SOUTH AREA OF THE MAP, THERE WERE TWO -- THESE TWO AREAS I'VE CIRCLED ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE U.S. 31 CORRIDOR CORRIDOR -- NORTH IS THE LEFT, WE HAD TO TURN THEM SIDEWAYS.

THESE TWO AREAS WERE PREVIOUSLY IN THE BOUNDARY.

THEY HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THE US-31 SUBAREA BOUNDARY BUT HAVE

[00:05:03]

SO WHEN HOME PLACE COMES BACK TO YOU, YOU'LL SEE THAT THOSE TWO AREAS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THAT SUBAREA.

AND THEN FINALLY, THIS AREA THAT'S SOUTH OF 465, BETWEEN 465 AND 96TH STREET WAS REMOVED FROM THE SUBAREA PLAN BOUNDARY, THAT RESIDENTIAL AREA THERE. SO THOSE ARE THE -- THOSE ARE THE BOUNDARY CHANGES ALONG WITH -- WELL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND TOUCH ON THE TRANSITION AREA AND THE CORRIDOR RESIDENTIAL, THE PIECES OF THE -- THE PLAN THAT WERE STRENGTHENED, SO I'LL TRY -- DON'T GET SEASICK HERE. I'M GETTING THERE, I PROMISE.

THERE'S TEXT THROUGHOUT, AND YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN IN YOUR PACKET THAT THERE IS TEXT IN A MULTITUDE OF COLORS.

THOSE AREN'T NECESSARILY -- THOSE AREN'T RELEVANT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW, BUT THEY REPRESENTED THE DIFFERENT ITERATIONS AS IT WENT THROUGH THE LAND USE COMMITTEE.

SO YOU KNOW, THE MAGENTA TEXT WAS ONE SET OF AMENDMENTS, THE PURPLE TEXT WAS ANOTHER SET OF AMENDMENTS.

BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO KNOW IS THAT ANY OF THE COLOURED TEXT WERE CHANGES THAT TOOK PLACE AT COUNCIL.

WE DIDN'T TAKE THE TIME TO MAKE THEM ALL ONE COLOR.

SO LANGUAGE, AN EXAMPLE, PRESERVE OR PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF CORRIDOR RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS BORDERING THE SUBAREA.

THIS WAS A STATEMENT ADDED UNDER THE COORDINATE EFFORTS PAGE.

UNDER THE DESIGN GUIDANCE, I MENTIONED THERE'S A 300-FOOT TRANSITION AREA THAT WAS ADDED TO THE STATEMENT, MAINTAIN THE TRANSITION OR STEPPING DOWN OF SCALE AND MASSING OF STRUCTURES TO MINIMIZE IMPACT TO ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

AGAIN, MORE LANGUAGE ADDED, WHILE MAINTAINING TRANSITON OF SCALE AND MASSING WHEN ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

BUT THE MEAT AND POTATOES OF THE MAIN CHANGES WERE MADE ON PAGE 23 HERE. SO THERE WAS A CORRIDOR RESIDENTIAL PARAGRAPH ADDED AND A TRANSITION AREA SECTION ADDED.

AND THE TRANSITION AREA WAS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT OF THE CHANGES, AND I'LL READ THAT QUICKLY. "THE TRANSITION AREA HIGHLIGHTED IN ORANGE -- I'LL SHOW OUT MAP -- REPRESENTS AREAS WITHIN 300 FEET OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY WHERE TRANSITION AND BUILDING SCALE BETWEEN US-31 AND EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD OCCUR. ANY NEW PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS AREA SHOULD -- "AND IT TALKS ABOUT HAVING A HEIGHT DIFFERENT FROM THOSE AREAS AND NO TALLER THAN THREE STOREYS, SHOULD AVOID LONG STRETCHES OF CONTINUOUS FACADES BY REDUCING BUILDING FOOTPRINTS OR INCLUDING FACADE OFFSETS TO AVOID IMPOSING BUILDING MASSING. SHOULD IMPLEMENT EFFECTIVE BUFFERS AND CONSIDER APPROPRIATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS AND DEVELOPMENT SITES INCLUDING THE USE OF WIDER SETBACKS, TREES AND LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS, TREE PRESERVATION, WIDE PATHWAYS AND REDUCED BUILDING HEIGHTS AND MEASURES SHOULD BE TAKEN TO MITIGATE NOISE, LIGHT SPILL, SIGNAGE AND OTHER SENSORY POLLUTANTS THAT NEGATIVELY IMPACT NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL AREAS. SO THAT'S THE CORRIDOR -- I'M SORRY, THAT'S THE TRANSITION AREA LANGUAGE.

LET ME FLIP TO THE MAP TO SHOW YOU THAT HAS BEEN MEASURED ALL ALONG THE BOUNDARY, AND THIS HATCHING IS TO SCALE BUT MEASURED FROM ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINES ALL ALONG THE BOUNDARY HERE. WHERE RESIDENTIAL IS PRESENT.

AND THEN THERE'S THE SOUTH HALF, SIMILAR SHOWN ALONG THE BOUNDARIES. SO THE OTHER DESIGNATION THAT I MENTIONED WAS THE CORRIDOR RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION, THAT IS

[00:10:06]

THE AREAS SOUTH OF CLAY TERRACE. AND THEN THE AREA DERBY FORGET T WHAT IT'S DESIGNATED IN THE HEALTH PUD, 1A OR -- IT'S THE RESIDENTIAL AREA ALONG SPRING MILL.

THAT'S DESIGNATED AS CORRIDOR RESIDENTIAL.

AND I DON'T BELIEVE ANY -- THERE WEREN'T ANY ON THE SOUTH END OF THINGS. THIS IS THE IU HEALTH PARCEL AGAIN. SO THOSE AREAS WERE PUT INTO PLACE AND THAT LANGUAGE WAS ADDED TO THE PLAN.

SO WAS KIND OF PHASE 1 OF THE DISCUSSION OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE. AND THEN THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE -- THAT WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT YOU CAN'T DO IN THE PLAN AND GRAPHICALLY REPRESENTING A LOT OF KIND OF -- THESE KINDS OF THINGS ARE OFF LIMITS, THAT THERE WERE CONCERS THAT IT HAD GONE TOO FAR AND THAT THE CRUX OF THE PLAN WAS REALLY TO HIGHLIGHT THE OPPORTUNITY -- THAT OPPORTUNITIES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE US-31 CORRIDOR AND THAT THIS PLAN SHOULD HIGHLIGHT THOSE. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT -- I'LL GO BACK TO THE MAP. SOME PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT SITES WERE ADDED AND YOU'LL SEE THESE IN THIS BLUISH-PURPLE COLOR.

AND HERE IS THE SOUTH END OF THE CORRIDOR.

AND THEN REPRESENTED IN THE TEXE THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL TRANSITION AREAS AND A LOT OF DISCUSSION -- I'LL GO BACK TOWARD THE BEGINNING OF THE DOCUMENT.

WE DID ADD A PAGE THAT OUTLINED THE EXISTING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS. MAYBE THIS IS IT.

THIS WAS ANOTHER DISCUSSION IN THE CONTEXT OF PROTECTING RESIDENTIAL, THAT THE COUNCIL WANTED TO KEEP PODS AS THEY WERE ADOPTED AND TACKED. SO THERE WAS LANGUAGE IN HERE THAT TALKS ABOUT THAT BUT THAT WAS DISCUSSED THROUGH THE LENDS OF THERE ARE A LOT OF PODS THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO NEIGHBORHOODS SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE RESPECTING THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS AND KEEPING THE INTENT OF THOSE PUDS INTACT BUT THEN MENTIONED THE SECOND PHASE OF DISCUSSION, WELL, WHAT ABOUT AREAS THAT ARE MAYBE NOT NEAR RESIDENTIAL OR ARE REALLY RIPE FOR DEVELOPMENT? SO WE ADDED THIS MAP THAT SHOWS ALL THE PUDS AND LANGUAGE TO TRY TO BALANCE THE -- RESPECTING THE TRANSITION AREA BUT ALSO POINTING OUT THESE PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREAS, THAT THERE NEEDED TO BE SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THOSE PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREAS WHILE RESPECTING AND BEING GUIDED BY THE TRANSITION AREA. SO I FORGET HOW MANY COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT WE HAD. IT WAS A FEW.

AND THEN THERE WERE STILL SOME CHANGES MADE AT THE FINAL COUNCIL MEETING ON APRIL 20TH, BUT OVERALL, THAT WAS -- THE PROGRESSION WAS STRENGTHENING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASPECT OF IT AND THEN COMING BACK AND GRAPHICALLY PRIORITIZING AREAS AND GIVEN THE SIGNAL THAT, YES, WE DO WANT DEVELOPMENT IN THE U.S. 3 CORRIDOR US-31 CORRIDOR BUT RECALL FULL OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. SO THAT IS QUICKLY AS I COULD SUMMARIZE WHAT HAPPENED AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL.

[00:15:01]

NEEDED. >> WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT SUMMARY. SO I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP QUICKLY FOR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. BUT GIVEN THE BREADTH OF CHANGES, THIS MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO SEND IT TO COMMITTEE SO WE CAN ACTUALLY TALK THROUGH IT, MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND -- MAKE SURE IT MAKES SENSE. MAKE SURE THAT -- I KNOW WE'RE ALL TRYING TO STRIKE THAT BALANCE OF URGING DEVELOPMENT, THAT IS A PRIORITY BUT ALSO HAVING A NICE BUFFER WITH THE NEIGHBORS SO I THINK READING THROUGH IT, MAYING SURE WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH HOW IT'S WRITTEN AND DISCUSSING IT FURTHER MIGHT BE WARRANTED. BUT WITH THAT I'M GOING TO OPEN FOR ANY INITIAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ANYBODY HAS HERE?

ADAM? >> I FULLY SUPPORT SENDING IT TO COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

>> I DO TOO. OH, ALL RIGHT -- WAS THAT A

MOTION? >> JEFF, GO AHEAD.

>> HE'S GOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR?

>> NOT A MOTION. JUST WAS MAKING A COMMENT,

THAT'S ALL. >> I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHERE IT GOES. I WAS GOING TO ASK COUNCILOR AYERS IF THERE'S KEY FINDINGS, KEY DISCUSSION TOPICS YOU FELT IN ADDITION TO THE SUMMARY WE GOT TODAY ARE WORTH MENTIONING AT THIS LEVEL THAT WE MIGHT HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION AT COMMITTEE LEVEL WITH, IS ALL I WAS WONDERING ABOUT.

AND IF NOT, THAT'S FINE. NOT TRYING TO PUT YOU ON THE

SPOT. >> NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE WENT VERY THOROUGH IN LAND USE FOR THIS VERY RESPECTFULLY TOOK A LOT OF THOUGHT AND IT DID TAKE A LOT OF MEETINGS.

HAPPY TO SEE IT GO TO COMMITTEE, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS OR

CHANGES AT THIS POINT. >> YES, DEBBIE?

>> I WOULD JUST CONCUR THAT BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, I DON'T WANT TO SEND IT TO COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER DEBATE, I WOULD SEND IT TO COMMITTEE SO THAT WE HAD TIME FOR MORE EDIFICATION AND BE ABLE TO ABSORB -- BECAUSE WE'RE STEWARDS OF THIS DOCUMENT AS WELL AND I WOULD BE A BETTER STEWARD IF I HAD MORE THAN -- ADRIENNE, YOU DID A WONDERFUL JOB BUT YOU CONDENSED A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THIS AND THEN COME BACK AND JUST ASK FOR

ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OR -- >> I WOULD AGREE.

AND AT COMMITTEE, IF YOU COULD REALLY KIND OF BE PREPARED TO GO INTO MORE DETAILS ABOUT WHAT IS THE 300-FOOT TRANSITION ZONE, HOW FAR INTO THE -- LIKE EACH BUILDABLE LOT PLAT DOES THAT GO.

YOU KNOW, I COMPLETELY SUPPORT HAVING TO GO BUFFER, I JUST WANT TO GIVE SOME THOUGHT, AS WE LOOK DOWN THE BURNING CORRIDOR, FOR SOME OF THESE PARCELS IS THAT HALF OF THE DEVELOPABLE LAND, IS IT JUST A SMALL PIECE OF IT? JUST KIND OF WANT TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING MUCH EXACTLY HOW DOES THAT 300-FOOT TRANSITION WORK. SO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND IT.

SO YEAH, I WOULD DEFINITELY BE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THIS TO COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

WITH THAT, DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> EXCUSE ME.

I MOVE WE SEND -- >> OH, WAIT SORRY, PAUSE FOR A MOMENT. JONATHAN, DID YOU HAVE A

QUESTION? >> NO, I'M GOOD.

>> GO AHEAD, DEBBIE. >> I MOVE THAT WE SEND THE AMENDED PUD TO COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND

CLARIFICATION. >> AND WHICH --

>> CAN WE -- A QUESTION: CAN WE GIVE THE COMMITTEE FINAL -- WITH THE COMMITTEE HAVING FINAL VOTING AUTHORITY?

>> YEAH. DO I HAVE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THE REVISED US-31 PLAN TO THE COMMITTEE WITH THE COMMITTEE HAVING FINAL VOTING AUTHORITY, PLEASE SAY AYE. ALL RIGHT, THAT WILL GO TO

[G. Reports, Announcements & Department Concerns ]

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ALEXIA FOR THIS ALEXIA FOR

THIS SECTION. >> THANK YOU.

SO AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING, THE U.S. 421 DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.

AND THEN FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING, YOU WILL NEED TO SUSPEND YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE TO HEAR ITEM 1, THE STELLA HOUSE BOOKS AND CAFE. THEY MADE PUBLIC NOTICE CORRECTLY FOR THE LETTERS TO THE NEIGHBORS AND THE SIGN BUT THEY SENT -- APPARENTLY SENT THE NOTICE TO THE PAPER AND SOMEHOW IT GOT MISPLACED, MAYBE THE PAPER DIDN'T PUBLISH IT ON TIME SO THEY STILL MET THE STATE STATUTE FOR PRINTING IN THE

[00:20:03]

SO THAT WILL NEED A RULES OF SUSPENSION.

AND THEN ADRIENNE, DID YOU WANT TO UPDATE ABOUT THE OTHER TWO

ITEMS? >> WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COUNCIL ITEMS, I ASKED THE -- THESE COUPLE OF PROJECTS BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA TONIGHT. SO JUST AS AN UPDATE, THE HOME PLACE SUBAREA PLAN WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL LAST NIGHT, WITH A FEW AMENDMENTS, NOT NEARLY AS MANY AS WE SAW FOR THE US-31 PLAN. SO THAT WILL BE COMING TO YOU FOR RATIFICATION AT THE JUNE JUNE 16TH -- JUNE 16TH I THINK MEETING. YOUR JUNE MEETING.

AND THEN ALSO, THE SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL RENTAL ORDINANCE WAS PASSED AS PROPOSED LAST NIGHT BY CITY COUNCIL.

SO THAT WILL GO INTO EFFECT AS SOON AS WE GET THE NOTICE OF ADOPTION PUBLISHED. WE'VE GOT SOME INTERNAL THINGS TO WORK ON TO GET THOSE SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PERMITS UP AND RUNNING. BUT WE'RE WORKING ON THAT.

AND IT WAS ADOPTED LAST NIGHT WITH NO AMENDMENTS SO --

>> THANK YOU. SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES OF PROCEDURES SO THAT WE CAN --

>> I WOULD MOVE TO RULE -- TO SPEND THE RULE SO WE CAN HEAR PUBLIC HEARING FOR.COM PS26- PS26-00049DP.

>> ALL RIGHT, THE RULES ARE SUSPENDED SO WE WILL HEAR THAT.COM THIS EVENING. SO THERE'S NO OTHER DEPARTMENT

[1. Docket No. PZ-2026-00049 DP Amend/ADLS: Stella House Books & Cafe Rebuild. ]

THE PETITIONER WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL COMMENTS. AFTER THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR COMMENTS.

AT CONCLUSION OF THE DEPARTMENT'S COMMENTS, THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION IS CLOSED, BUT THE REST OF US THAT UP HERE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HAVE OUR DIALOG.

WILL THAT I'LL READ IT INTO OCTOBER.

DOCKET NUMBER 91-2026-0004, DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT, STELLA HOUSE BOOKS AND CAFE REBUILD.

THE APPLICANT SEEKS DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING BUILDING AND REBUILDING OF A NEW BOOK STORE AND COFFEE SHOP.

THIS SITE IS LOCATED AT 31 SOUTH RAGE LINE ROAD.

IT IS FILED BY SHAWN CURRAN OF CURRAN ARCHITECTURE ON BEHALF OF STEM STELLA HOUSE BOOKS AND I WILL

TURN IT OVER TO THE PETITIONER. >> YEAH, AND JUST MAKE SURE YOUR MIC IS ON. THERE WE GO.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

SHAWN CURRAN WITH CURRAN ARCHITECTURE, ADDRESS IS 5745 EAST DRIVE IN INDEPENDENT YAP LESS YAP LESS AND IN INDIANAPOLIS. WE'LL GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE BOOK STORE IN GENERAL PRESENTATION HERE.

THE PROPERTY IS AT 31 SOUTH RANGELINE, SO JUST SOUTH OF MAIN STREET AND NORTH OF 1ST STREET SW.

THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE IS THE ALLEY ALONG THAT STREET.

AND THE -- WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THE -- AGAIN AS YOU MENTIONED, THE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDING THAT IS THERE, WAS RECENTLY A BRIDAL STUDIO WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 6200 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY BUILDING THAT WILL HOUSE STELLA HOUSE BOOKS AND CAFE.

THE INTENT OF THE NEW BUILDING IS THAT WE WILL ESSENTIALLY BE MIMICKING THE LOOK OF THE EXISTING BUILDING ON SITE, WITH THE ADDITION BEING ON THE BACK. THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF STELLA HOUSE, OF SHAWN AND HIS WIFE WERE TO ACTUALLY USE THE EXISTING HOUSE, ADD ONTO IT. BUT BASED ON A NUMBER OF COMPLICATIONS OVER THE PAST YEAR DETERMINED THAT IT WAS NOT GOING TO BE FEASIBLE TO DO THAT AND SO WE ARE HERE TONIGHT NOW WITH A NEW BUILDING, WITH THE LOOK OF THE OLD BUILDING, SO WE'RE BASICALLY REPLICATING OLD BUILDING ON THE SITE.

THIS IS THE DEMOLITION PLAN SHOWING THE EXISTING HOUSE, THERE'S AN EXISTING GARAGE AT THE BACK AS WELL.

THE NEW HOUSE WILL -- THE NEW BUILDING WILL SIT ESSENTIALLY ON

[00:25:01]

LANDSCAPING, WE'VE GOT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING. THEY WANT IT TO FEEL ESSENTIALLY KIND OF LIKE AN ENGLISH GARDEN, FEEL FOR THE HOUSE.

MAKE IT FEEL LIKE A COZY PLACE WHERE YOU WANT TO GO AND SIT AND READ A BOOK, NOT A COMMERCIAL -- PLACE WHERE YOU WOULD GO THAT'S A FRANCHISE OPERATION. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE INTENT OF THAT. WE DO HAVE A FEW COMMENTS THAT WE GOT FROM STAFF THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH, PRIMARILY RELATED TO SOME ACCESSIBILITY, MAKING SURE WE CAN PROVIDE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE SITE FROM RANGELINE ROAD.

SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THOSE ITEMS RIGHT NOW WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THAT IN A WAY THAT'S SENSITIVE TO THE DESIGN AS WELL AS BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE ACCOMMODATIONS.

DO YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF RENDERINGS HERE OF WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE? AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY, IT ESSENTIALLY DOES STILL -- THE INTENT IS THAT IT LOOKS THE SAME.

WHAT WE WANT IT TO BASICALLY LOOK LIKE IS IF YOU WERE TO DRIVE DOWN TODAY, LEAVE TOWN, COME BACK IN A YEAR, YOU WOULD KIND OF BY AND OTHER THAN THAT EVERYTHING IS NEW AND FRESHLY PAINTED, YOU WOULDN'T KNOW THAT IT WAS ANY DIFFERENT.

SO THAT IS LOOKING FROM THE -- LOOKING TOWARDS THE SOUTHWEST.

THIS IS LOOKING TOWARDS THE NORTHWEST AND THESE TWO VIEWS ARE -- THIS IS THE REAR OF THE BUILDING FROM THE PARKING LOT, LOOKING FROM THE ALLEY TO THE SOUTHWEST AND THEN LOOKING TO THE NORTHWEST. AND THEN WHAT WAS IN THE PACKETS AS WELL, ALL MATERIALS ARE NOTED.

AGAIN YOU KNOW, THE INTENT IS TO ESSENTIALLY MIMIC THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE AND WE'VE GOT SIGNAGE, WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH KIND OF THE MORE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE, STRUCTURE AND IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE OTHER BUILDINGS THAT ARE IN THE AREA. SO SMALLER SIGNS, THERE WILL BE SOME WALL MOUNTED SIGNS ON THE BUILDING, A SIGN OUT IN THE YARD AND SOME ALONG THE WINDOWS, KIND OF GOLD LEAF SIGNAGE IN THE GLASS. AND I THINK THAT KIND OF COVERS WHAT I'VE GOT. AND STERN WOULD LIKE HAPPY TO AS THAT YOU HAVE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. YEAH, I WON'T ACTUALLY BE USING THAT. JUST A PICTURE OF MY HAND.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU ALL TODAY. MY NAME IS SHAWN ARMY AND I ALONG WITH MY WIFE MIRANDA, WE ARE THE OWNERS OF 31 SOUTH RANGELINE AND WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE PLAN THAT OUR ARCHITECT SHAWN THAT IS PUT BEFORE YOU TODAY. I'M HERE TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR VISION FOR STELLA HOUSE BOOKS.

JUST A QUICK NOTE: MY WIFE WISHES SHE COULD BE HERE TODAY BUT SHE'S HOME WITH OUR CHILDREN, INCLUDING OUR NEW BABY WHO IS JUST THREE WEEKS OLD. STELLA HOUSE BOOKS WILL BE AN INDEPENDENT BOOK STORE WITH A CAFE AND SMALL EVENT SPACE IN THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN CARMEL. WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE MUCH MORE THAN ANOTHER RETAIL OUTLET.

AS YOU JUST SAW A LITTLE BIT OF, THE STORE IS GOING TO BE NOTABLE FOR ITS HIGH DESIGN CONCEPT, WITH THEMED ROOMS FOR EACH GENRE, AND A BREATHTAKING EXTERIOR AND GARDEN THAT EVOKES LITERARY CLASSICS AND NOSTALGIC AMERICANA.

WE BELIEVE THERE'S GOING TO BE NOTHING ELSE QUITE LIKE IT IN INDIANA AND IN THE ENTIRE MID-WEST AND FURTHERMORE I THINK IT WILL BE AMONG THE MOST BEAUTIFUL BOOK STORES IN AMERICA, RIGHT HERE IN DOWNTOWN CARMEL, INDIANA.

SO NOT ONLY WILL STELLA HOUSE BE BEAUTIFUL, WE HOPE THAT IT WILL BECOME A CORNERSTONE OF CULTURE AND COMMUNITY IN CARMEL.

ADDING TO THE GROWING ARTS AND DESIGN DISTRICT IN DOWNTOWN.

A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN GATHER, ENJOY A CUP OF COFFEE, FIND A NEW BOOK TO EXPAND THEIR WORLD VIEW, ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION OR HEAR A NEW PERSPECTIVE AND BUILD COMMUNITY.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE ALREADY FAMILIAR WITH OUR PROJECT OR IF YOU'RE BEEN FOLLOWING US ON SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU MAY BE PERPLEX PERPLEXED AS TO WHY WE ARE HERE GIVEN WE ALREADY HAD AN APPROVAL LAST YEAR AND A GROUNDBREAKING IN NOVEMBER THAT WAS ATTENDED BY THE MAYOR. UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAD TO

[00:30:02]

IN ADDITION, AFTER HIRING SHAWN CURRAN AND HIS TEAM, AS THE ARCHITECTURE FIRM FOR OUR PROJECT, AND WITH FURTHER EXAMINATION OF OUR PLANS AND THE STRUCTURAL NEEDS OF THE STORE, IT WAS WITH HEAVY HEARTS AND MANY DISCUSSIONS THAT WE FOUND IT WAS NOT THE BEST PATH TO RENOVATE THE ORIGINAL BUILDING BUT THAT IT NEEDED TO BE REBUILT FROM THE GROUND UP.

NONETHELESS, AS YOU SAW IN THE PLANS, WE HOPE TO REBUILD THE BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF DUTCH REVIVAL ARCHITECTURE THAT HAS SAT ON RANGELINE FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY.

THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING IS IN OUR LOGO, RIGHT.

IT'S INSPIRED THE AESTHETIC AND BRANDING OF OUR COMPANY AND WE HOPE TO REBUILD IT NEARLY EXACTLY AS IT WAS, WHILE ALSO ADDING A BEAUTIFUL ADDITION ON THE BACK THAT WILL BE THE CAFE AND EVENT SPACE. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I CAN TURN IT BACK OVER TO SHAUN.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SHAWN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE OR DO YOU -- OKAY. THIS IS PUBLIC HEARING SO BY SHOW OF HANDS, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION? GO AHEAD, COME ON UP HERE TO THE PODIUM. PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

IS THERE MORE THAN ONE? GO AHEAD, WE'LL GIVE YOU 3 MINUTES APIECE. AND PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND STATE GENERALLY WHERE YOU LIVE AND WHEN SHE'S DONE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME UP, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>> OKAY, HELLO. MY MAIM IS VIRGINIA BARRY.

I'M HERE RECENT*RG REPRESENTING THE MUSEUM OF MINIATURE HOUSES AND OTHER COLLECTIONS, WHICH IS AT 111 MAIN STREET.

WE'RE JUST KIND OF BEHIND, AROUND THE CORNER AND FROM WHAT WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THIS PROJECT, WE'RE VERY THRILLED THAT IT WILL BE THERE. AND WE THINK WE'RE VERY COMPATIBLE WITH THAT. WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ANYTHING THAT WE'VE SEEN OR HEARD ABOUT IT.

AND WE WILL COME INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOPE THERE COULD BE SOME COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS PERHAPS WITH OUR INTERESTS. I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.

I REPRESENT THE BOARD OF THE MUSEUM.

AND I SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY WHO THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT IDEA.

AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR COMPLETION AND OUR PARTICIPATION

IN YOUR COFFEE SHOP. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

UP NEXT -- DID HE JUST STEP OUT? OH. HE'S CHECKING.

WE'RE GOING TO GIVE HIM A SECOND.

I KNOW WE HAD ONE OTHER PERSON WHO WANTED TO SPEAK AND HE SEEMS TO HAVE JUST STEPPED OUT. SO HE HAS LEFT.

PETITIONER, YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO OFFER REBUTTAL COMMENTS, IF YOU WOULD LIKE. YOU'RE GOOD? OKAY THANK YOU. I WILL TURN IT OVER TOAL EX-IA

FOR LECHIA. >> ALEXIA LOPEZ WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. PETITIONER DID A GOOD JOB I THINK GOING OVER THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT.

THIS BUILDING IS CONSIDERED A CHARACTER BUILDING IN THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY. HOWEVER, IT'S ZONED C2 AND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE C2 GOVERN -- SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE REVIEWING THIS OFF OF. THERE'S AN ADDITION TO THE BACK WITH FOUR PARKING SPACES BEHIND THAT.

THEY ARE ADDING A RETAINING WALL ALONG THE ALLEY THERE AND IT WILL RANGE FROM 2 TO 4 FEET TALL.

SHAWN BROUGHT UP ONE OF THE THINGS WE LIKE TO KEEP WORKING THROUGH WHICH IS THE ADA COMPLIANT ENTRANCE, TO DUE TO THE SITE'S GRADE, THAT ENTRANCE IS ON THE REAR OF THE BUILDING AND CURRENTLY THERE ISN'T AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO GET FROM THE SIDEWALK ALONG RANGE LINE TO THAT BACK ENTRANCE.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO BEHIND THE PARKED CARS AND UP THE RAMP TO GET INTO THE BACK. ALSO WE WOULD HIKE TO HAVE SOME INFORMATION FROM THE STAIRWAY TO RANG LINE ON THE SIDEWALK.

SO WE WANT TO SEE HOW THAT DETAIL IS GOING TO WORK OUT.

AN 8-FOOT SIDEWALK WILL BE REQUIRED ALONG RANGELINE ROAD.

I THINK THERE WAS -- WE NEED TO WORK WITH THE PETITIONER ON THAT. NORMALLY THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU WOULD HAVE TO INSTALL THAT WITH THE PROJECT.

THEY WERE SHOWING ON-STREET PARKING WITH THIS AS WELL, BUT THERE IS ALSO A LARGE TREE AND WE'RE TRYING TO WORK AROUND THAT AND SEE IF WE CAN SAVE THAT TREE AND THE TREE LAWN, STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED WITH THE C2 ZONING SO WE'RE STILL CONTINUING TO DISCUSS THAT. SO THEY WILL BE KEEPING THE

[00:35:03]

WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT THAT RETAINING WALL IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE, WHAT'S THAT GOING TO BE, THE STAIR CONNECTION TO THE SIDEWALK ALONG RANGELINE AND THEN DISCUSS THE ON-STREET PARKING AND 8-FOOT SIDEWALK ALONG RANGELINE.

SO WITH THAT, WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTES TO SEND THIS ITEM TO THE COMMITTEE, WITH THE COMMITTEE HAVING FINAL VOTING AUTHORITY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SIR, I SAW YOU JUST WALKED BACK IN. WE HAVE MOVED ON.

DID YOU -- I WOULD RE-OPEN AND LET YOU MAKE YOUR COMMENTS IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO? GO AHEAD, IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE PETITIONER? OKAY.

>> AND STATE GENERALLY WHERE YOU LIVE.

>> THAT LADY THAT WAS SITTING NEXT TO ME --

>> PLEASE GO TO THE MICROPHONE SO EVERYBODY AT HOME CAN HEAR

YOU TOO. >> THE YOUNG LADY THAT WAS SITTING NEXT TO ME, SHE WAS ONE YEAR OUT OF BUTLER.

THAT WAS ABOUT 37 YEARS AGO. SO SHE'S A REALLY RESPECTED PARTNER. WE OWN THE BUILDING WHERE CARMEL TATTOO IS. AND WE JUST WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION, IS THAT WE HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT PARKING.

IT'S NOT UNUSUAL FOR US TO GET A CALL EVERY MORNING THAT SOMEBODY IS PARKING IN OUR RESERVE PARKING PLACES.

WE HAVE YET TO CALL AND HAVE IT TOED EVEN THOUGH THERE'S TOWING SIGNS ALL OVER THAT BACK PARKING LOT.

WE ANTICIPATE CONTINUED AND INCREASED PARKING ISSUES.

IF WE LOOK AT THIS DIAGRAM CORRECTLY, ARE THERE FOUR PARKING PLACES? SO THOSE FOUR PARKING PLACES ARE

TO SERVICE EMPLOYEES? >> SIR, PLEASE DIRECT YOUR QUESTIONS TO US SO THAT WE CAN -- IT'S NOT A BACK AND FORTH CONVERSATION. JUST MAKE YOUR COMMENTS.

>> WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO BE AND WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PARK. I WOULD ASSUME THAT THERE'S A PUBLIC PARKING PLACE. IT'S ON A DIAGONAL ISSUE.

THAT PARKING LOT RIGHT NOW IS OWNED BY THE CITY AND IT'S FULL ALL THE TIME. IT'S FULL WITH -- WELL, THERE'S A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION AROUND. IT WAS FULL OF CONSTRUCTION PEOPLE AND IT WAS VERY HARD TO FIND A PARKING PLACE.

WE HAVE I THINK 9 -- 6 PARKING PLACE, ASSIGNED TO OUR BUILDING ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS, HISTORICAL.

AND IT'S NOT UNUSUAL TO HAVE ONE OR TWO PHONE CALLS EVERY MORNING FROM SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO PARK -- WHO IS PARKING THERE AND OUR RENTERS CALL AND THEY'RE NOT HAPPY CAMPERS, BECAUSE THEY -- THEY OWN THE PARKING PLACES IN THAT PARKING PLACE.

SO IF WE HAVE FOUR SPACES AND EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO BE THERE AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE THERE IN THE MORNING, OH, GEE, I CAN'T FIND A PARKING PLACE, THIS ONE LOOKS GOOD BUT IT'S NOT RESERVED BUT I GUESS IT IS -- I'M GOING TO PARK THERE ANYWAY.

THAT WE CONSIDER A CHALLENGE. BECAUSE OUR TENANTS TAKE PRECEDENT OVER THE REGULAR PART-TIME PARKING PEOPLE.

AND WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE -- I'M A RETAIL GUY, NOT A COMMERCIAL GUY PER SE.

BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE -- THIS FACILITY GO GANGBUSTERS BUT WE ALSO WANT TO PROTECT OUR PARKING PLACES AND OUR TENANTS.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THAT'S IT?

>> THAT WAS YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD TOO, SIR?

>> PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME AGAIN SO WE'VE GOT THE RECORD.

>> I'M STEVE HALLOWAY AND MY PARTNER IS SHERRY MOORE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

[00:40:01]

IT'S A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STEP DOWN FOR YOUR 3 MINUTES. THANK YOU.

AND PETITIONER, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND, YOU MAY.

>> IN REGARDS TO THE WONDERFUL POINT THAT HE BROUGHT UP, I AGREE THAT PARKING IS A CONCERN. I THINK FOR ANYBODY WHO HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, DRIVING AROUND DOWNTOWN CARMEL RECENTLY, IT HAS GOTTEN INCREASINGLY MORE DIFFICULT TO FIND A PARKING SPACE. HOWEVER, THERE ARE -- THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS PARKING GARAGES BUILT JUST NEAR AND CLOSE BY.

SO I WOULD SAY YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T CREATED ANY FORMAL POLICY AS TO WHERE OUR EMPLOYEES WOULD PARK.

I MEAN, WE'RE STILL PRETTY FAR OUT I THINK FROM PROJECT COMPLETION AT THIS POINT. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THOSE FOUR SPACES WOULD BE PRIMARILY RESERVED FOR CUSTOMERS, WE WOULD NOT HAVE EMPLOYEES PARK IN THOSE SPACES, NOR WOULD, YOU KNOW, THE OWNERS, MYSELF AND MIRANDA, WOULD WE PARK THERE EITHER SO --

>> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO ALEXIA GAVE HER DEPARTMENT REPORT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO I'M NOW OFFICIALLY CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THIS MEETING. AND I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO MY FELLOW PLANNING COMMISION MEMBERS FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST?

COUNCILOR AYERS? >> I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS AND HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS WILL THERE BE ON RANGELINE ROAD?

>> PETITIONER, CAN YOU PLEASE COME BACK UP HERE.

THANK YOU. >> I THINK WHAT IS SHOWN IN THE PLAN IS WHAT WAS -- THAT THE CIVIL ENGINEER HAS ASSUMED WAS GOING TO BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY AS PART OF ONGOING IMPROVEMENTS IS WHAT I UNDERSTAND ALONG RANGELINE -- I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WERE ANTICIPATING PUTTING THOSE IN CURRENTLY.

THEY'RE KIND OF SHOWN DASHED. >> AND WILL THERE BE ADA ACCESS FROM THE PARKING ON RANGELINE ROAD TO --

>> YES, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING AS ALEXIA MENTIONED, WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR CIVIL ENGINEER ON PROVIDING ACCESS FROM RANGELINE ROAD TO THE BUILDING VIA A RAMP SYSTEM.

>> AND THEN THE PARKING SPOTS, THE FOUR PARKING SPOTS, THOSE ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING, CORRECT?

>> YES, THEY'RE TO THE EAST. >> IS THERE ADA ACCESSIBILITY

FROM THAT -- >> YES, THAT'S WHERE THE ADA

SPACE IS. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE, QUESTIONS?

YES, JEFF? >> I HAD SIMILAR QUESTIONS.

ITCHES JUST GOING TO ENCOURAGE THE PETITIONER TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH STAFF SO THAT HOPEFULLY WE CAN HEAR AT COMMITTEE THAT THE FRONT ENTRANCE IS ADA ACCESSIBLE AND THEN I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT WHERE EVERYONE WAS GOING TO PARK, IF THERE'S ANY FOLLOW-UP OR ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HE CAN PROVIDE WITH REGARDS TO PARKING REQUIREMENTS, NEEDS AS FAR AS VISITORS, STAFF AND WHERE THOSE FOLKS ARE GOING TO BE ENCOURAGED TO GO. I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

AND THEN THE OTHER THOUGHT I HAE INFORMATION YOU'VE PROVIDED, SHAWN OR OTHERS ON THE TEAM CAN HELP ADDRESS THIS AND AGAIN AT COMMITTEE IS FINE. BUT OVER THERE ON THE EAST SIDE IS WHERE THE PARKING IS, THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING WHERE WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO BE ABLE TO TO PARK, WALK TO THE BUILDING.

THE LIGHTING INFORMATION JUST SHOWED LOOKS REALLY DARK ON THE EAST SIDE, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO JUST GET SOME ADDITIONAL LIGHTS SO THAT FOLKS FEEL SAFE PARKING THERE, WALKING INTO THIS KIND OT PIECE OF IT.

>> ADAM? >> YEAH, I'LL JUST MAKE SOME QUICK COMMENTS. LOVE THE RENDERINGS, LOVE THE MISSION, THINK IT'S A GREAT PROJECT.

ONE THING THAT STOOD OUT TO ME -- AND AGAIN I UNDERSTAND WE'RE ABUTTING TO A PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH -- I'M NOT A FAN OF ALL THE SIGNING ON THE SOUTH SIDE FACADE.

IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO POTENTIALLY FOR DIFFERENT MATERIALS AND/OR WINDOWS? I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE TO DRESS THAT SOUTH FACADE UP A LITTLE BIT MORE.

ANY IDEAS OR SUGGESTIONS ON THAT?

>> WE CAN EVALUATE THAT. THE PLACEMENT OF WINDOWS AND THINGS ARE RELATIVE TO BOOKCASE PLACEMENT, SO THAT KIND OF AFFECTS SOME OF THE WINDOW PLACEMENT.

YEAH. >> WELL, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY -- AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- THAT SOUTH SIDE FACADE ACTUALLY WON'T BE VISIBLE FROM THE ROAD, BECAUSE THERE IS A HOUSE DIRECTLY NEXT TO US RIGHT NOW.

[00:45:03]

AND SO I THINK THAT WHERE THAT SIDING IS, THAT'S WHERE THE KITCHEN IS GOING TO BE FOR THE CAFE.

WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK INTO SOME OPTIONS, BECAUSE AGAIN, I TOO AM NOT A HUGE FAN OF JUST BIG BLOCKS OF SIGNING, I'M WITH YOU ON THAT. BUT I THINK THAT THE DECISION WAS MADE TO GO THAT ROUTE BECAUSE NOBODY WAS GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT ANYWAY, BECAUSE IT'S BEING OBSCURED BY THE PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO US, WHICH IS VERY, VERY CLOSE.

>> APPRECIATE THAT, YEAH. I WOULD SAY FOR NOW, RIGHT.

FOR NOW YOU CAN'T SEE IT. >> FOR NOW, YEAH.

>> WE CAN'T LOOK IN THE FUTURE BUT JUST AS I'M LOOKING AT IT HERE, I SEE A LOT OF SIGNING AND I AM LOOKING AT THE CURRENT GOING GOOGLE GAPS VIEW.

AND I JUST THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DRESSED UP QUITE A BIT.

>> JONATHAN? >> YEAH, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD WAS REALLY FOR STAFF. RELATED TO THE PARKING.

IT LOOKS LIKE THE LOT TO THE NORTH IS OWNED BY THE CRC.

SO TYPICALLY THAT WOULD BE PUBLIC PARKING.

SO CAN YOU CONNECT WITH HENRY AND CRC TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS TIED TO THAT PARKING LOT THAT WOULD RESTRICT PARKING TO SURROUNDING USES? BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE CONTRARY TO WHAT WE TYPICALLY SEE.

>> YES, I CAN LOOK INTO THAT. I BELIEVE THAT WAS ONE OF THE PARKING LOTS THAT WAS MENTIONED, THAT'S A PUBLIC PARKING AREA, THAT ONE DIRECTLY NORTH OR EAST. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING?

>> THAT'S THE ONE I'M ASKING ABOUT BUT IT SOUNDED HIKE FROM ONE OF THE RESPONDENTS THAT THEY WERE SAYING THEY OWNED PARKING IN THAT LOT, UNLESS I'M MISTAKEN.

>> OH, YOU'RE -- SO THE ONE TO THE EAST I THINK IS PUBLIC.

THE ONE TO THE NORTH IS WHERE THEY HAVE THE RESERVED SPACES I BELIEVE. BUT I CAN ASK ABOUT --

>> ON GIS IT SHOWS UP AS OWNED BY THE CRC SO THAT'S WHY I'M

ASKING. >> GOT 'YA.

>> BUT IN TERMS OF THE OVERALL LOOK AND FEEL OF THE PROJECT, I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT. I DO CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUES IN TERMS OF THE KIND OF SOUTH FACADE, IF THERE'S A WAY WE CAN DRESS IT UP, I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT BUT OVERALL I THINK THIS

IS GOING TO BE A GOOD PROJECT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DEBBIE?

>> ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WAS HERE THAT HAD TO LEAVE JUST ASKED ABOUT TRASH REMOVAL. DOESN'T NEED TO BE AN ANSWER TODAY BUT AT COMMITTEE, THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE THAT WOULD NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AS WELL. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER -- YES, JEFF? >> I APPRECIATE THE ARCHITECTURE AND STICKING WITH THE CHARACTER ELEMENTS OF THE HOME.

THAT'S REFRESHING TO SEE. IN THAT, HAVE YOU GUYS HAD ANY DISCUSSION WITH HISTORIC PRESERVATION? I KNOW THIS IS NOT ON THE MORE RESTRICTIVE SURVEY BUT HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH MARK DELOSSY AND LANDMARKS AND

COMMISSION? >> I DID, AT ALEXIA'S REQUEST WHEN SHE SENT THE INFORMATION OVER, WE DID GET THAT INFORMATION ABOUT REACHING OUT TO THEM.

I DID REACH OUT TO THEM BUT I HAVE NOT HAD ANY RESPONSE BACK

SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW UP. >> I THINK THEY MEET NEXT WEEK I BELIEVE. AND THERE'S FUNDS AVAILABLE TO POTENTIALLY MOVE THE STRUCTURE, I KNOW IT'S PROBABLY IMPRACTICAL, BUT THEY MAY WANT TO DIVE INTO THAT, I DON'T KNOW.

THEY HAVE A MEETING NEXT WEEK AND WOULD PROBABLY LOVE TO TALK

ABOUT IT. >> AND JUST TO ECHO WHAT JEFF SAID, IT IS REFRESHING TO SEE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE SAME LOOK OF THE CURRENT STRUCTURE.

I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS -- YES, SUE? >> HATE TO BEAT TO DEATH PARKING BUT I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, BECAUSE I THINK IN YOUR MODEL, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO PARK THERE FOR A LONG TIME.

THEY MIGHT BE THERE FOR HOURS, AS YOU SAID READING A BOOK.

THE PRIOR PLACE THERE, WAS THERE AN ISSUE WITH PARKING AT ALL IS

>> ALEXA -- I'LL LET ALEXIA. >> I DON'T HAVE -- I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE BEFORE. I THINK THEY HAD THE SAME AMOUNT OF SPACES WITH FOUR IN THE REAR THERE.

I CAN HOOK AND SEE IF WE HAD ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT PARKING FOR

THAT BUT -- >> WELL, WITH THE EXPANSION OF THIS BUILDING, THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS, WAS THERE MORE PARKING BEFORE. SO I DON'T -- I DON'T HAVE TO

HAVE THIS -- >> I THINK IT'S ALSO GOOD -- WHAT JONATHAN IS BRINGING UP IS WHAT IS THE SHARED PARKING OPTION AROUND THIS AREA. AND YOU KNOW, ARE THERE MORE

[00:50:02]

>> A SOMEWHAT LARGER SCALE, JUST A DRAWING OF WHAT'S THERE, WHAT'S AVAILABLE, BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I SEE PROBLEMS WITH THE PARKING. AND I KNOW YOU ALL DO TOO AND YOUR EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PARK, AND WHAT ARE GOING TO

BE YOUR HOURS OF OPERATION? >> SO CURRENTLY WE'RE STILL PLAYING AROUND WITH WHAT THOSE HOURS WILL BE.

WE'RE THINKING PROBABLY SOMETHING LIKE 10 A.M. TO 8 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY. THAT WOULD BE THE ANTICIPATION.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> GREAT, THANK YOU. ANY LAST QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, DO I HAVE A MOTION?

JEFF? >> I MOVE WE SEND THIS TO COMMITTEE WITH THE COMMITTEE HAVING THE FINAL VOTING

AUTHORITY. >> SECOND.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THIS DOCKET TO COMMITTEE WITH GIVING THE COMMITTEE THE FINAL VOTING AUTHORITY PLEASE SAY AYE. NOBODY IS OPPOSED.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL SEE YOU AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING. THANK YOU.

[2. Docket No. PZ-2026-00082 OA: Fee Amendments for Engineering and HEA 1001 Compliance. ]

FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION AND WE HAVE OUR LEGAL COUNSEL.

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, BOARD, RATHER COMMISSION. SERGEI [INDISCERNIBLE] COUNSEL.

THE DIRECTOR IS IN THE AUDIENCE. BUT I WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF THE ORDINANCE THAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU AND A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND WHY WE'RE HERE.

SO THIS ORDINANCE DOES TWO THINGS.

IT AMENDS THE PROVISIONS AND UDO SPECIFIC WITH SECTION 129.

IN RESPONSE TO THE RECENT AMENDMENT OF INDIANA CODE 32- 32-25.2-2-4, WHICH IS -- WAS INCLUDED IN THE OMNIBUS BILL, WHICH IS HEA SO HOUSE [INDISCERNIBLE] ACT 1001.

AND YOU WILL SEE A COUPLE OF ORDINANCES THAT WILL AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF UDO COMING UP YOUR WAY THIS YEAR AND MAYBE EVEN THE YEAR AFTER. BECAUSE IT WAS QUITE A BIG BILL.

ONE OF THE PROVISIONS IN THAT BILL IS RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE OF FREEZE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN VARIOUS MUNICIPALITIES. OUR FEES HAVE BEEN TRADITIONALLY ELECTED BY DOCS AND AGAIN LISTED IN UDO SECTION 129.

SO ON THAT FRONT, THERE IS A CHANGE THAT -- REQUIRED BY THE STATUTE THAT CURRENTLY THE FEES ARE AMENDED YEARLY, ON A YEARLY BASIS, BASED ON INFLATION. SO THE STATUTE HAS CHANGED IT WHERE THE CITIES CAN ONLY AMEND THESE FEES ONCE IN FIVE YEARS.

SO WE HAD TO CHANGE THAT LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THE CHANGES IN THE STATUTORY FRAMEWORK. AND THE AMENDMENTS TO THE FEES CAN BE BASED ONLY ON CPI, BASED ON EACH YEAR IN THE PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS, OR IF THERE IS AN EXTRAORDINARY INCREASE IN ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROCESSING COSTS, WE CAN COME IN FRONT OF YOU AND THEN COUNCIL TO AMEND THOSE IN KIND OF EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES, IF YOU WILL. SO THAT'S NUMBER 1, AND NUMBER 2 WHICH IS REALLY THE BULK OF THIS ORDINANCE, IS THE INTRODUCTION OF ENGINEERING FEES FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

HISTORICALLY, WITH CITY THE CITL HAS NOT CHARGED THOSE FEES.

CITY AND ESPECIALLY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAVE SIMPLY ABSORBED THEM, EVEN THOUGH ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN CHARGING THEM FOR QUITE SOME TIME. FRANKLY I'M NOT SURE WHY WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING THIS. THE DISCUSSION POPPED UP HERE AND THERE FOR YEARS NOW. I THINK IT REALLY GAINED TRACTION THE LAST TWO YEARS AND REALLY GAINED TRACTION THE LAST YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF, AFTER THE CITY HAS BEEN DEALING WITH BUDGETARY PRESSURES THAT WERE THE RESULT OF SB1, THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND YOU ARE PROBABLY AWARE OF THAT AND OUR STATE AMENDMENT

[00:55:03]

AND EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO DO SO, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DECIDED TO COMPLY WITH THAT PROVISION, SO NOW THE FEES ARE REQUIRED TO COVER ONLY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, COSTS OF PROCESSING AND REPORTS TO A PETITIONER SO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS DONE TREMENDOUS WORK ON THAT FRONT AND THAT'S WHY IT TOOK A LITTLE BIT LONGER FROM THE PASSAGE OF A STATUTE UNTIL TODAY TO REALLY DETERMINE THE FEES AND JUSTIFY ALL OF I GOT TO SAY AND DIRECTOR FEE WILL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT THIS: I DON'T THINK THERE'S A SINGLE FEE HERE THAT COVERS THE ENTIRE COST OF ADMINISTRATION AND PROCESSING.

SO SOME OF THOSE EXPENSES WILL NOT BE RECOUPED BECAUSE WE CONSIDER THOSE -- WE DON'T WANT TO SHOCK THE FEE STRUCTURE AS IT STANDS TODAY, BECAUSE IT IS A CONSIDERABLE AMENDMENT TO A FEE STRUCTURE OF THE CITY. SO THIS IS THE SUMMARY AND KIND OF THE -- A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORICAL BACKGROUND.

NOW -- AGAIN I CAN GO KIND OF PAGE BY PAGE, BUT REALLY, THE MEAT OF IT -- OF THE ORDINANCE BEGINS ON PAGE 2 AND THAT'S WHAT DIRECT THE FEES IS GOING TO DIRECTOR FEE IS GOING TO GO AND EXPLAIN TO YOU. IT'S ALL BLACK AND WHITE BUT THE EDIT -- IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HIGHLIGHTED BUT A LITTLE BIT

DARKER. >> IF WE GET SOME FEES, MAYBE WE

CAN PRINT IN COLOR NEXT TIME. >> I'LL ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT AND MAYBE WE DIDN'T HAVE FEES BEFORE WHY CARMEL IS PRO-BUSINESS. EVEN AFTER THESE FEES WE STILL WANT TO BE PRO--BUSINESS. SO THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE FEES, WHILE I LOVE OUR DEVELOPING PARTNERS, GETS A LOT OF OUR DEVELOPMENTS -- THE PLANNING SUBMISSIONS TO BE SUB PAR. THEY RELY ON OUR TEAM TO DO THE ENGINEERING FOR THEM BECAUSE IT'S A FREE SERVICE SO WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO STRIKE A BETTER BALANCE AND KEEP OUR DEVELOPERS A LITTLE MORE HONEST. OTHER THAN THAT, SIR, YOU KIND OF LAID IT OUT PRETTY WELL. ALL THE FEES ARE BASEONED ACTUAL LABOR HOURS THAT WE WOULD PUT TOGETHER, THEY'RE VERY CONSERVATIVE. WE WENT THROUGH THAT EXERCISE FIRST AND THEN COMPARED TO ALL OUR NEIGHBORS JUST TO MAKE SURE NOTHING WAS OUT OF LINE. AND WE'RE IN LINE WITH ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS SO -- IF ANYBODY HAS A QUESTION DERBY WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM BUT IF ANYBODY HAS A QUESTION ON THEM -- O I CAN GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM.

THERE'S NO CHANGE IN WHAT WE'RE DOING.

WE'RE JUST CHARGING FOR THE SERVICES NOW.

>> GREAT, THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PETITION? SEEING NONE, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO OUR STAFF FOR THE DEPARTMENT REPORT.

>> ADRIENNE KEELING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. NOTHING REALLY TO ADD, OTHER THAN -- WELL, THERE IS ONE SMALL THING TO ADD.

THE STATUTE -- CURRENTLY WE HAVE A 90 DAY WAITING PERIOD FOR FEES TO GO INTO EFFECT AND THE STATE STATUTE INCREASED THAT TO 180 DAYS OR 6 MONTHS FOR FEE INCREASES TO GO INTO EFFECT.

SO IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE SENDING THIS TO COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION, YOU CAN DO SO.

HOWEVER, IF YOU STILL WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS AND REVIEW FURTHER, WE RECOMMEND GOING TO THE COMMITTEE MEETING WITH FINAL VOTING AUTHORITY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO DEFINITELY THERE'S AN URGENCY

TO GET THIS DONE. >> YEAH, LET ME JUST CLARIFY ONE THING. SO THIS PROVISION DOES NOT KICK IN UNTIL JULY 1ST. SO RIGHT NOW IT'S 90 DAYS IF WE DON'T PASS THE ORDINANCE, WE DON'T PUBLISH THE ORDINANCE, RATHER, BEFORE JULY 1ST, IT WILL INCREASE TO 180.

SO IT'S A BIT OF AN URGENCY. AND WE WORKED WITH AD MRCHTION, ASKED THAT SAME QUESTION, HOW IMPORTANT IT IS -- IT'S BASICALLY THREE MONTHS OF FEE, BECAUSE THERE'S COST IMPLEMENTING THE ACTUAL COLLECTION STRUCTURE IF YOU WIL.

[01:00:02]

>> I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP TO MY FELLOW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

>> YOU MENTIONED THE RATES BEING COMPARABLE TO OUR NEIGHBORS.

WE TALKING ON PAR -- STILL A. >> LEN: LITTLE LESS THAN OUR NE-

>> GENERALLY LESS. THOSE ARE SPECIFIC TO THE FEE

BUT WE'RE STILL GENERALLY LESS. >> GOOD TO HEAR YOU, THANK YOU.

>> JONATHAN? >> JUST WANTED TO SAY I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS PUTTING ALL THIS TOGETHER.

I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF MIXED MESSAGES COMING FROM THE LEGISLATURE IN RECENT YEARS. IN SOME CASES THEY THINK LOCAL COMMUNITIES CAN MAKE BETTER DECISIONS AND IF OTHER IN OTHER, THEY DON'T. SORRY TO SEE THAT THIS HAS BEEN AN URGENT MATTER BUT APPRECIATE YOU GUYS WORKING ON IT.

>> THANK YOU. >> JEFF?

>> I GUESS I WOULD ECHO SOME OF THE THINGS ALREADY STATED.

I GUESS I'M NOT SURPRISED TO HEAR THAT MAYBE YOU KIND OF SHOT LOW SO TO SPEAK VERSUS TRYING TO SADDLE OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS WITH ADDITIONAL FEES. I GUESS I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SURPRISED THAT CARMEL DID THIS FOR FREE.

SO THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'VE DONE.

MY OPINION IS IT'S PROBABLY TIME FOR SOME CHANGE.

I GUESS I'M GLAD YOU WENT LOW. THE ONE THING I THOUGHT ABOUT COMING HERE TONIGHT IS YOU KNOW MONTHS AGO, WE HEARD A DISCUSSION ABOUT PARK IMPACT FEES AND WE KNOW HOW IMPORTANT OUR PARKS ARE. I THINK IT'S ALSO VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET, YOU KNOW, HIGH QUALITY REVIEWS SO WE ULTIMATELY HAVE GOOD PROJECTS AND IT TAKES TIME TO GET THOSE REVIEWS DONE, TO DO THE INSPECTIONS, TO WORK WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, AND I GUESS MY GENERAL STATEMENT IS I WOULD SUPPORT EVEN HIGHER FEES. AND IT'S NOT THAT I WANT TO KIND OF REALLY PUT SCREWS TO THE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, BUT I THINK WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR FREE FOR A LONG TIME AND THESE COSTS DON'T COVER OUR STAFF COSTS TO GET THIS TYPE OF WORK DONE. AND SO WHETHER THAT'S 5% OR 10% OR SOME NICE ROUND NUMBER, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION, SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HIRE STAFF THAT COMPLETES GOOD REVIEWS TO GET REALLY, REALLY GOOD PROJECTS, SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO GREAT THINGS HERE IN CARMEL, ONLY MY OPINION. I'LL BE INTERESTED TO HEAR WHO OTHER FOLKS HAVE TO SAY. SPECIFICALLY THOUGH, ONE OTHER ELEMENT THAT I FEEL IS MISSING, MAYBE WE NEED TO DO SOME HOMEWORK HERE, WOULD BE IS THERE A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT FEE? I WAS ALWAYS SURPRISED THERE WASN'T ONE.

IS THAT IN HERE? DID I MISS IT?

>> WE CONSTITUTED INSTITUTED THO YEARS AGO.

IT'S A 50-DOLLAR FREE. AT LAND USE WE'LL HEAR AN

UPDATED RIGHT-OF-WAY ORDINANCE. >> THE THING I THINK ABOUT IS THAT LOW COST FOR UTILITY PARTNERS THAT AREN'T PURSUING THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, THEY'RE USING OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY OR EASEMENTS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A SPOT PROJECT HERE, THERE MIGHT BE A SMALL COST, YEAH, WE CAN COVER THAT. BUT WHEN THERE'S A MILE LONG SET OF POWER POLES THAT WE'RE HAVING TO COORDINATE WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND OTHER UTILITIES, CERTAINLY THE COSTS CAN ADD UP.

SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO MAKE SURE SHEETS PRICED APPROPRIATELY TOO.

>> YES, THAT IS IN OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY ORDINANCE, THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT INSTEAD OF JUST THE 50-DOLLAR ADMINISTRATIVE FEE SO WE'RE GOING TO RECOUP SOME OF THOSE COSTS AS WELL.

>> GREAT. >> TOTO FOLLOW UP ON JEFF'S QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FEES, HEARING HIS SUPPORT FOR HIGHER FEES, ARE WE SET AT THIS? ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? DO YOU WANT TO GO UP HIGHER OR IS THIS WHERE WE'RE GOOD? AND THEN I GUESS -- AND THIS MIGHT BE MORE FOR SERGEI.

WITH THE WAY THE STATUTE IS WRITTEN, FOR YOU TO INCREASE YOUR FEES, IS IT SOLELY TIED TO THE PPI OR -- SO WHEREVER WE SET IT, WE CAN ONLY -- WE CAN ONLY SET IT BASED ON -- WE CAN'T GO THROUGH AND LIKE WE RECENTLY -- WE CAN'T GO THROUGH AND SAY DUE TO LABOR COSTS THIS WOULD BE MORE FAIR AND -- BUT ARE WE LOCKED INTO CPI INCREASES GOING FORWARD?

>> GENERALLY CPI IS THE STANDARD.

HOWEVER THERE IS THAT EXCEPTION THERE IN THE STATUTE THAT ALLOWS US TO UPDATE THE FEES IF THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE PROCESSING COST, ADMINISTRATION PROCESSING SO USUALLY MEANS LABOR [INDISCERNIBLE] COSTS ET CETERA.

SO OUR THINKING WAS WE WILL EVALUATE HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT COUPLE YEARS AND SEE IF THE LABOR STAYS

[01:05:04]

AND THIS IS KIND OF A STARTING POINT.

BUT IF WE REALIZE THAT, HEY, IT REALLY DOESN'T COVER, DOESN'T REALLY RECOUP EVEN, YOU KNOW, A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THAT, WE WILL CERTAINLY REVISIT UNDER THAT PROVISION THAT ALLOWS US TO DID IT, IF THE PROCESSING COSTS REALLY GO UP.

>> OKAY, SO BASICALLY YOU WOULD JUST HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING TO DOCUMENT, WE HIRED MORE PEOPLE, WE'RE SPENDING MORE HOURS, WE'R-

>> LABOR COSTS GO UP -- >> WE INVESTED IN NEW SYSTEMS, THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DOCUMENT THAT WOULD

JUSTIFY A HUGE INCREASE. >> EXACTLY, YEAH.

AND I BELIEVE WE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS SEVERAL TIMES, AND WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO RAISING THOSE FEES, WE JUST REALLY THOUGHT WE WOULD GO A LITTLE MORE CONSERVATIVELY TO START WITH, BECAUSE WE'RE NEW BUT I THINK CERTAINLY THE DISCUSSION WOULD BE OPEN IN FRONT OF COUNCIL AND IN FRONT IF

ANYTHING COMMISSION. >> THAT WOULD BE MY SENTIMENT, IS THAT THAT RECOMMENDATION FROM JEFF OR FROM THIS COMMISSION GOES TO THE COUNCIL, HOWEVER YOU FEEL THEY SHOULD BE HIGHER FOR OUR AREA OR LOWER, BECAUSE THEY WILL ULTIMATELY KIND OF REHASH IT ALL ANYWAY AND MAKE AN ASSESSMENT OF WHAT THE FEE

SHOULD BE. >> SO AGAIN -- SORRY TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, SO IF WE SEND THIS TO CITY COUNCIL AND THEY MAKE CHANGES TO THE FEES, DOES IT HAVE TO COME BACK TO US AGAIN OR IS IT -- JUST TRYING TO MIT YOUR TIME HIT YOUR

TIME LINE. >> NO, IT WOULDN'T.

THE REASON WHY IT HAD TO COME BACK FOR THE 31 ROAFER 31 OVERL- BECAUSE IT WAS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

BUT THE ZONING AMENDMENTS, THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE STATUTE WHERE IF A COUNCIL MAKES ANY CHANGES OR REZONES OR TAX AMENDMENTS, IT DOESN'T NEED TO GO BACK TO THIS BODY FOR RECERTIFICATION. BUT THAT AMENDMENT DID NOT TOUCH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS OF THAT'S WHY WE'RE STILL IN FRONT

OF YOU TO CERTIFY. >> OKAY GREAT.

SO IF THE CITY COUNCIL WERE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, THERE'S NO DELAY AND AS FAR AS FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT -- YES, SUE?

>> AND I THOUGHT THIS BODY WAS NOT REALLY ONE SET UP TO SET FEES. I THINK WE SHOULD BE JUST LOOKING AT THE PICTURE AND NOT THE FEES AND LET THE COUNCIL TAKE THAT UP, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT DOESN'T COME BACK.

THAT WOULD BE MY OPINION. >> DEBBIE?

>> I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHEN YOU SAID THAT IN COMING UP WITH THESE FEES, ARE THEY AN AVERAGE OF FEES FROM OUR -- SOME SURROUNDING JURISDICTIONS OR ARE THEA MEDIAN?

ARE THEA BALLPARK. >> WHEN WE CAME UP WITH FEES WE FIGURED OUT HOW MANY HOURS IT TAKES TO DO THE ACTIVITY.

CHECK THOSE AGAINST WHAT OUR NEIGHBORS WERE CHARGING AND IF IT WAS WITHIN THE RANGE, THEN WE KIND OF LEFT IT AT THAT.

IF IT WAS OUT OF THE RANGE, THEN WE LOOKED AT IT A LITTLE BIT CLOSER. SO LARGELY IF WE JUST FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH IT ACTUALLY COSTS US TO DO THE REVIEWS FOR THESE DIFFERENT ITEMS, THAT'S WHERE THOSE FEES CAME FROM.

>> SO WITH THAT EXPLANATION, THEN MY COMMENT IS ONCE FEES ARE ESTABLISHED, IN MY OPINION IT'S EASIER TO START WHERE YOU WANT LOWER AND THEN KEEP ESCALATING SO IF THERE'S AN ADJUSTMENT TO BE MADE, TO MAKE THEM MORE REASONABLE SINCE WE'RE IMPLEMENTING THEM FOR THE FIRST TIME.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT REVISITED AND I AGREE WE'RE NOT THE BODY THAT NEEDS TO BE DETERMINING WHAT THOSE FEES ARE.

SO THE SECOND PART OF MY QUESTION IS IF IT GOES TO COMMITTEE, IF WE SEND IT TO COMMITTEE, WHAT WOULD WE ACCOMPLISH -- TWO PARTS TO MY SECOND QUESTION.

IF WE SENT IT TO COMMITTEE, WHAT WOULD WE ACCOMPLISH? AND IF WE JUST VOTE TO SEND IT TO THE COUNCIL, WON'T THE COUNCIL HAVE SEVERAL STEPS THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH BEFORE THEY APPROVE A FINAL SET OF FEES I.

>> IF IT GOES TO COUNCIL IT WOULD THEN GO TO FINANCE COMMITTEE AND -- I DO AGREE WITH BOTH OF YOU, THAT WE SHOULD SET HIGHER FEES BUT -- IF WHICH MOVO COUNCIL, NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, IT WILL GO TO FINANCE. OR WILL BE APPROVED WITH -- WEL-

>> MAYBE BOTH MAYBE. MAYBE THEY WILL VOTE ON IT THAT NIGHT. LIKELY IT WILL GO TO FINANCE -- I WILL SHOW THEM MORE INDEPTH PROBABLY, SIT DOWN, WHERE WE

[01:10:03]

THEM SO -- >> BRAD, WOULD YOU PREFER FOR US TO SUGGEST A BIGGER CUSHION? I MEAN TO BE, BE HONEST HERE.

>> YOU'VE ALREADY SUGGESTED IT AND I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT -- SEND THIS ON TO CITY COUNCIL FOR A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION BUT THEY WILL ALSO KNOW, BOTH FROM DIRECTOR FEES AND ALSO FROM COUNCILOR AYERS THAT WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF HIGHER FEES AND THEY CAN PROBABLY DELVE INTO THE FINANCE PIECE OF IT AT CITY

COUNCIL. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE SPECIFIC VOTE BUT WE SEND THIS ON WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION AND WE ALL AGREE --

>> IT'S PART OF THE RECORD. WE'VE HAD THAT CONVERSATION SO --

>> BECAUSE IT'S AN ONGOING DISCUSSION AND WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOUR REACTION WILL BE AND NOW WE DO, SO WE'LL GO BACK TO THE BOARD AND MAYBE RE-EVALUATE SOME OF THEM.

I KNOW SOME OF THEM WERE REDUCED FROM A SUGGESTED AMOUNT, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, I'LL JUST GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.

THE MINOR PLAT, RIGHT -- SOME MINOR PLATS, IF YOU SPLIT TWO LOTS, IT'S NOT GOING TO TAKE MUCH TIME.

HOWEVER, WE HAD A MINOR PLOT JUST LAST TIME WHICH WAS PROBABLY THE MOST UNIQUE PLAT I'VE SEEN IN MY CAREER, IN THE LAST 15 YEARS, WITH CONDITIONS, ET CETERA, FIVE DIFFERENT LOTS.

A LOT OF HISTORY. THAT PROBABLY TOOK CONSIDERABLY LONGER THAT THAT HAPPENED. BUT YOU KNOW, GENERALLY IT'S PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT LOWER. SO SOME HAVE BEEN REDUCED JUST TO REFLECT THE COMPLEXITY OF MAYBE NOT A MAJORITY BUT A LOT OF [INDISCERNIBLE] SOME OF THEM ARE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER, SOME ARE A LITTLE BIT LOWER, SO WE CAN GO BACK AND SEE IF THOSE WE CAN BEEF UP A LITTLE BIT. ALSO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, REALLY DEPENDS ON THE DEVELOPER.

IF IT'S A BIG PUD, IT WILL TAKE I CAN GUARANTEE YOU IT'S GOING TO TAKE SEVERAL TIMES THAT NUMBER.

SO MAYBE THAT'S ANOTHER AREA WHERE WE CAN GO BACK AND REALLY

PUSH FOR HIGHER. >> ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN COME UP WITH TONIGHT.

TO YOUR -- SERGEI, TO YOUR POINT ON THE DEADLINE, IS THE ADVANTAGE OF DOING THIS MORE QUICKLY, HAVING APPROVED -- IF IT'S APPROVED BEFORE JULY, THEY WILL GO INTO EFFECT IN 90 DAYS.

IF IT GETS APPROVED AFTER JULY THEN WE'RE WAITING 180 DAYS, SO JUST TO MAKE THAT MORE CLEAR AS FAR AS THE URGENCY.

YES, DUBBIE? >> WELL, I THINK YOU ARE MAKING MY POINT. WHICH IS WHY I WAS ASKING THE EARLIER QUESTIONS. IF WE SEND IT TONIGHT, IF WE SEND IT TO COUNCIL, WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION AND THE OPINION THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT HIGHER FEES, IF THEY'RE JUSTIFIED AFTER FURTHER ANALYSIS, THAT KEEPS THE TIME LINE WITHIN GETTING IT DONE. TO COMMITTEE I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE WOULD ACCOMPLISH THERE --

>> SOUNDS LIKE YOU MADE A GREAT MOTION THERE.

>> THANK YOU. SO THEREFORE, IF YOU'RE READY TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION, I MOVE THAT WE SEND THE FEE AMENDMENTS FOR ENGINEERING PROPOSAL -- WHAT DO WE CALL IT? ORDINANCE, THANK YOU -- TO THE COUNCIL THAT A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION AND NOTED THAT WE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF ADJUSTING

RESEARCH. >> SECOND.

>> THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SENDING THIS ON WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION, ALONG WITH THAT NOTE OF SUPPORTING HIGHER FEES WHERE THEY'RE JUSTIFIED BASED ON FURTHER RESEARCH, PLEASE SAY AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE.

WELL THANK YOU. IF THIS IS GOING ON WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS. THIS WAS A HUGE PROJECT.

I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT YOU SPENT COUNTLESS OF HOURS DOING THIS.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO WE HAVE NO OLD BUSINESS, NO NEW BUSINESS. SO WE ARE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.