>> GOOD EVENING. I WILL CALL TO ORDER THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2022 MEETING OF THE CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASK THAT WE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLE PLEASE? THE RECORD, OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE DO ALLOW FOR REMOTE PARTICIPATION AS MR. RYDER IS DOING THIS EVENING. HOWEVER, HE MAY NOT VOTE ON ANY ITEMS THAT COME UP FOR ACTION THIS EVENING. SO WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. NEXT ITEM IS APPROVAL OF OUR AUGUST MEETING MINUTES. MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU, FOR THE SECOND. ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF ADOPTING THE MINUTES AS CIRCULATED SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSED? COMMUNICATIONS BILLS EXPENDSURES AND REPORT OF LEGAL COUNCIL. >> NOTHING TO REPORT, MR. PRESIDENT. >> THANK YOU. MY FAVORITE REPORT. REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM THE DEPARTMENT. >> THANK YOU. WE JUST HAVE THE OUTCOME OF THE PROJECTS AT COMMITTEE TO REPORT. AT THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE, DOCKET P. Z. 2022, THEGOAT HAD A 4 WILL HAVE 0 FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE FULL PLAN COMMISSION, WE'LL HEAR THAT TONIGHT UNDER OLD BUSINESS THEN UNDER RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE DOCKET P. Z. 2022-00117 PUD 96 AND HALFISTIC PUD REZONE WAS TABLED TO THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6. THERE'S NO REPORT ON THAT. THERE'S NO TABLINGS TONIGHT. THAT IS IT. >> THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE A FULL AGENDA THIS EVENING WITH FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE AGENDA, ONE ITEM OF OLD BUSINESS AND ONE OTHER ITEM OF NEW BUSINESS. ONE OF THE ITEMS FOR PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING IS A MATTER FOR WHICH ONE OF OUR MEMBERS HAS ASKED TO BE RECUSED. WHEN WE GET TO THAT DOCKET, SHE WILL LEAVE THE ROOM FOR THE DURATION OUR DELIBERATION ON THAT MATTER. WITH THAT WE'LL MOVE TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS PORTION OF TONIGHT'S MEETING, THE PLAN COMMISSION'S RULES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS PROVIDE FOR UP TO 15 MINUTES FOR THE PETITIONER TO DESCRIBE THEIR PROJECT, MAKE THE CASE FOR THEIR DESIRED ACTION. THEN THE PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUES WITH OPEN COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK, A BLOCK OF TIME OF UP TO 20 MINUTES IS ALLOCATED FOR THAT PURPOSE. THE PETITIONER THEN HAS UP TO 5 MINUTES TO RESPOND TO THOSE COMMENTS. THEN AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE DEPARTMENT REPORT, THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED FOR EACH MATTER. THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT IS DOCKET P. S. 20232-00119 D. P. A. D. L. FLORA AN SPRING MILL. THE APPLICANT SEEKS SITE PLAN AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSISTING OF 12 BROWNSTONES, 12 TWO FAMILY HOMES, 10 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND 86TOWN HOLMES ON 18.31 ACRES, THE SITE IS AT 9950 SPRING MILL ROAD AND THE ZONING IS FLORA PUD UNDER ORDINANCE Z. 676-22. THE PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY INSHIM VEER AND JON DOB SZOSTKIEWICZ. AND JUST TO CLARIFY BASED ON SOME OF THE LETTERS WE HAVE RECEIVED, THIS MATTER IS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A.D.L.S.APPROVAL. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE PETITIONER IS ASKING FOR THE PLAN COMMISSION TO APPROVE THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, LIGHTING AND SIGNAGE STANDARDS FOR THIS PROJECT. THE BAROMETER OR THE MEASURING STICK THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION USES IS THE CONFORMITY OF THE PLANS TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SPELLED OUT IN THE FLORA PUD. WHAT THAT MEANS IS WHAT IS NOT UP FOR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT IS PRESERVATION OF THE WOODED AREA OTHER THAN WHAT IS ALREADY REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE PUD. WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN,
LIGHTING AND SIGN AND STANDARDS. JON, IF YOU WOULD, THE FLOOR IS YOURS FOR THE NEXT 15 MINUTES. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD EVENING, FOR THE RECORD I'M JON DOB SAY WITTS, I'M A LAND USE PROFESSIONAL. WE REPRESENT THE PETITIONER PITTMAN PARTNERS. PRESENT TONIGHT IS BRANDON KNOX OF ONYX AND EAST. OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR DEVELOPMENT TEAM AND JIM SHINAVER AN ATTORNEY WITH THE OFFICE. MY WAY OF BACKGROUND THE REAL ESTATE INDICATED BY THE PRESIDENT WAS REZONED EARLIER THIS YEAR TO THE FLORA AT SPRING MILL PUD. WHICH WE'RE REQUESTING SITE DEVELOPMENT ARCHITECTURAL LANDSCAPING OPEN SPACE AND AMENT APPROVAL ESTABLISHED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE PUTTED. AS NOTED THEPLIC AND IS SEEKING DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL THIS EVENING AS PROPOSED ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING DWELLING, DESIGN WILL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORA PUD. THE REAL ESTATE'S IDENTIFIED ON THE EXHIBIT NOW ON DISPLAY IT'S INCLUDED BEHIND TAB 2 OF THE BROCHURES AS WELL. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES AREA BOUND ON THE SOUTH BY 465. TO THE IMMEDIATE SOUTH. TO THE IMMEDIATE STREET IT'S SPRINKLER ROAD. THERE IS LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENTS EAST OF SPRING MILL. NORTH OF THE SIDE AND WEST THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, ACROSS WILLIAMS CREEK IS THE CEDAR POINT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. THAT? I DON'T KNOW HOW IF YOU CAN DO THAT. AS ILLUSTRATED THE LAYOUT FOR THE FLORA AT SPRING MILL COMMUNITY INCLUDES TREE PRESERVATION AREAS TO THE NORTH AROUND THE POND AND ADDITIONAL TREE PRESERVATION ALONG I. 465 AND SPRING MILL ROAD. THE GREEN SPACEAND COMMON AREAS AS WELL AS PEDOSIDEWALKS AND PATH NETWORKS PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT CONNECTIVITY. ACCESS AROUND THE POND WILL INCLUDE A NATURAL PATH AROUND THE PERIMETER FOR ACCESS BY RESIDENTS TO ENJOY THE AREA. VEHICULAR ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD VIA MODIFICATION TO THE EXISTING ROUNDABOUT WHICH ACCESS HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY CARMEL ENGINEERING. THE PLAN INCLUDES 120 HOMES WHERE THE ZONING PERMITS THE INSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 129 DWELLINGS. ADDITIONALLY REGARDING PARKING A TOTAL OF 347 PARKING SPACES ARE PROVIDED INCLUDING A MINIMUM OF, TWO ON EVERY INDIVIDUAL LOT AS WELL AS 63 ON STREET PARK PARKS SPACES WHICH IS DETAILED UNDER THE SUBMITTAL INFORMATION. REGARDING DWELLING TYPES AND ARCHITECTURE. THE NORA NEIGHBORHOOD INCLUDES A MIX OF HOUSING STYLE AND THAT IT'LL OFFER SINGLE FAMILY COURT-YARD HOMES THE HOMES IDENTIFIED HERE, GENERALLY ALONG THE WEST PERIMETER OF THE CITE. BROWNSTONES WHICH ARE IDENTIFIED HERE. ROOF TOP DECKTOWN HOMES, AND TWO FAMILY HOMES, THE TWO FAMILY HOMES ARE HERE AT THE CENTER OF THE DEVELOPMENT. INCLUDED BEHIND TABS 9-TAB 14 OF THE BROCHURES RESPECTIVELY ARE THE DETAILS REGARDING THOSE INDIVIDUAL HOME TYPES. THE PUD ORDINANCE SETS FORTH SPECIFIC ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL THE PRODUCTS AND REQUIRES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE UNDER THIS A.D.L.S.REVIEW. ADDITIONALLY ONYX EAST WILL PROVIDE SOUND MITIGATION EMPLOYED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOMES ADJACENT TO I. 465. -- I.-465. THIS EXHIBITS A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO SEE THE SHADINGS IN RED. EXHIBITS INCLUDED BEHIND TAB 5 OF YOUR BROCHURE. WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE PLANS. THE COMMUNITY INCLUDES TREE PRESERVATIONS AS I INDICATED TO THE NORTH. ADDITIONAL RESERVATION ACROSS 465. THE AREAS CROSS HATCHED IN RED ARE TREE PRESERVATION HERE AND ALONG THE I. 465 PERIMETER OF THE SITE. ADDITIONAL DETAIL IS PROVIDED IN THE LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR ALL OPEN SPACE AREAS. A FEW ARE IDENTIFIED HERE ON THIS PLAN EXHIBIT. THEY INCLUDE BIKE PARKING HARDSCAPE AREAS, CEDING AND PLANTING AREAS SOME OF WHICH ARE SHOWN IN THIS ILLUSTRATION. IF YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE DIGITAL COPY AND WE MAY BLOW THIS UP TO THE COMMITTEE BUT THE DIGITAL COPY IF YOU ACCESS IT ON-LINE YOU CAN ZOOM INTO THE SPACES AND SEE IT MORE READILY. THE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT WE PROVIDED IN THE PAPER
BROCHURE ARE DIFFICULT TO READ AND DETERMINE WHAT THOSE INDIVIDUAL AREAS ARE REPRESENTING. AGAIN GREAT SPECIFICITY IS PROVIDED REGARDING THE AREAS PROVIDED IN TAB 5, 8 AND 15 OF YOUR BROCHURES. IN CONCLUSION THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS WILL FULLY COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PUD. WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH STAFF TO ADDRESS THEIR FINAL REMAINING COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMITTEE MEETING, IT'S OUR UNDERRING THAT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 6 WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE. WITH THE THAT I'LL CONCLUDE AND WE'LL BE GLAD TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMISSION LAGS EITHER NOW OR -- HAS EITHER NOW OR AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUES WITH COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS OF THE BUB. CAN I SEE A SHOW OF HANDS OF THOSE OF YOU WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS PETITION TONIGHT? I SEE FOUR HANDS UP. FIVE. I'M SORRY. IN THE, AGAINST THE WALL IN THE BACK. WE'LL DIVIDE THAT 20 MINUTE BLOCK BY 5 SPEAKERS AND ALLOT 4 MINUTES PER SPEAKER, JOE. THERE IS A RED YELLOW GREEN LIGHT SYSTEM IN FRONT OF THE MICROPHONE. AT 30 SECONDS REMAINING THE LIGHT WILL GO YELLOW, AT THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD THE LIGHT GOES RED. WE ASK THAT YOU CONCLUDE SO THE NEXT PERSON HAS THEIR SHARE AT THE MICROPHONE. WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO BE FIRST PLEASE STEP UP TO THE MIKE, WHOEVER WISHES TO BE SECOND, TAKE YOUR PLACE IN LINE BEHIND THE SPEAKER TO MINIMIZE THE DOWNTOWN BETWEEN SPEAKERS. [PAUSE] AS YOU ARE APPROACHING IF YOU WOULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF BY NAME AND THE AREA OF CARMEL, NOT YOUR HOME ADDRESS BUT THE AREA OF CARMEL IN WHICH YOU RESIDE FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS MARK AND I LIVE RIGHT AROUND THE PALADIUM. MAGNA, M-A-G-D-A. I ONLY WANT TO SAY I'M AGAINST THE PLAN BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A RATHER CONDENSED THING THEY'RE TRYING TO BUILD. I THINK IT WILL ADD TOO MUCH TRAFFIC TO THE STREET THAT IS NOT BUILT RIGHT NOW TO ACCOMMODATE IT. AND I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE TO VOICE MY CONCERNS BUT I WORRY ABOUT THE BUILDING MATERIALS AND STUFF. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A LOT OF GREEN INITIATIVES GOING AROUNDS, WHATEVER IS BUILD ON THIS PROPERTY I WOULD LIKE JUST WHATEVER MEASURES COULD BE MADE TO KEEP IT AS GREEN AS POSSIBLE AND SOLAR PANELS AND SUCH LIKE THAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> MY NAME IS ANGELO DITELO. WE LIVE AT 146TH AND US 341. I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT POTENTIAL WAYS TO EXPAND THE WOODLANDS BUT THIS IS OFF THE TABLE. I'M DISAPPOINTED. BUT IF I WAS INVOLVED EARLIER IN THE PROCESS I MAY NOT BE DISAPPOINTED. THIS PLAN COUPLE OF THINGS. THERE WAS A WOODLAND EVALUATION REPORT DONE IN MAY 17TH 2021, AND IDENTIFIED, THE ARBORIST DIVIDED THE AREA IN 5 AREAS, AREAS, 1, 2, 3, 4 AND 5 AND JACKPOT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT -- I WANT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT THERE ARE MATURE WOODLANDS IN THOSE AREAS THAT COMPLIED WITH THE CITY OF CARMEL ZONING ORDINANCE. I KNOW THAT'S NOT IMPORTANT ANYMORE. BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT. BUT THE MAIN THING HERE NOW THAT THE OTHER ITEMS ARE OFF THE TABLE, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOIL EROSION. IT'S A -- IT'S A TERRIBLY EXCITING SUBJECT. THE SOIL EROSION TO WILLIAMS CREEK. WILLIAMS CREEK IS A SENSITIVE CREEK AND THERE IS A NICER PERRY WOODLANDS AROUND THE CREEK THAT HAS BEEN PROTECTED, AND I DO THANK YOU FOR THE WOODS THAT YOU DID PROTECT. BUT IN DECEMBER 2021 INDIANA TRANSITIONED FROM RULE 5 PERMITTING TO A PERMIT, FROM A PERMIT BY RULE DETAILING HOW DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS MUST PROTECT INDIANA SOIL AND WATER DURING CONSTRUCTION TO A NEW PERMITTING PROCESS CALLED THE CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER GENERAL PERMIT. SO INDIANA NO LONGERRED A MINISTERS THE STORMWATER PROGRAM. THE NEW PERMIT IS A PERFORMANCE-BASED REGULATION. SO YOU ARE
STILL REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A SWIM OR A STORMWATER POLLUTION PROTECTION PLAN AND IF IT'S DETERMINED THAT THE DISCHARGE YOUR LAND DISTURBANCE, ACTIVITIES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THE WATER QUALITY, QUOTE UNQUOTE, I WILL REQUIRE YOU TO SUBMIT AN INDIVIDUAL STORMWATER PERMIT. THEY DO DESK TOP REVIEWS MUCH THE PERMITS BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THEY VISIT AND IMPOLICE DEPARTMENT THE PLAN -- IMPLEMENT THE PLAN. LETS ASSUME THEY'RE UNDERRESOURCED. SO I WOULD SAY I WANT TO KNOW HOW THE PROJECT SITE OWNER WILL HOLD THE EXCAVATION COMPANY ACCOUNTABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE S. W. POLLUTION -- S. W. P. 3. SO YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU CHANGE, WHEN YOU GO FROM A GOVERNMENT OR A, I'M SORRY, A RULE-BASED PERMITTING PROCESS TO A SELF-MANAGEMENT PROCESS FULL, THAT LEAVES A LOT OF ROOM FOR NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES, AND CUTTING CORNERS AND DOING THINGS THE WAY YOU WANT TO DO THEM. I DON'T WANT TO SEE DURING EXCAVATION SEDIMENT DRAINAGE INTO WILLIAMS CREEK. IT SHOULD BE MANAGED. AND THE S. W. P. SHOULD BE COMPLIED WITH AND I HOPE THE OWNER, THE OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE. SO THAT'S MY POINT. SO THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [PAUSE] MY NAME IS JENNIFER CRISTY, I LIVE DOWN THE STREET FROM THE DEVELOPMENT, AND I ALSO WORK WITH ON ARGUES CALLED INDIANA FOREST ALLIANCE. YOU PROBABLY NOTICED THE 36 LETTERS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT SINCE MID AUGUST. I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN AND HEARD FROM MANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS MUCH EARLIER HAD THEY BEEN NOTIFIED. A PROJECT OF THIS SCOPE THAT WILL EXCHANGE THE COMMUNITY FOREVER REQUIRES MORE THAN THE BARE MINIMUM OF NOTIFICATION. IN FACT IT SHOULD REQUIRE ABUNDANT AND RECONNEDDANT COMMUNICATION -- REDUNDANT COMMUNICATION WITH NEIGHBORS BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAKING OUT A CENTURY OLD FOREST THAT IS LIKELY TO HAVE RARE AND ENDANGERED SPECIES AND CURRENTLY PROTECTS THE COMMUNITY FROM THE NOISE AND EXHAUST POLLUTION OF 465. IN ADDITION TO THE WATER QUALITY MENTIONED IN THE IMPORTANT CORRIDOR OF WILLIAMS CREEK. AND DOWNSTREAM. SO IT'S TREMENDOUSLY IMPACTFUL AND THERE WAS A BARE MINIMUM OF NOTIFICATION. IF YOU LOOK AT THE LIST THAT WAS GIVEN BY THE DEVELOPER ONLY 10 HOUSEHOLDS WERE NOTIFIED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEIR MAP SHOWS A DOZEN OR SO HOMES ON VENN TANA COURT AND SPRING HIGHLAND DRIVE. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW THESE PEOPLE WERE NOTIFIED BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT LISTED ON THE LIST MUCH PEOPLE WHO WERE GIVEN A LETTER. THE RESIDENTS ON HUSSEY LANE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY NOTIFICATION WHATSOEVER AND THEY'RE NEXT DOOR TO THE CEDAR PLACE THAT WAS MENTIONED. THEY DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY NOTIFICATION, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THEIR BACKYARD. SO I HAVE BIG CONCERNS ABOUT THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ON THIS PROJECT BECAUSE PEOPLE JUST WEREN'T AWARE OF IT. THERE IS ALSO A COUPLE OF LOTS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, AND I'M WONDERING WHO OWNS THOSE AND IF THEY WERE ALSO NOTIFIED OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. SO I THINK WE OWE IT TO THE COMMUNITY TO GIVE ABUNDANT NOTIFICATION, NOT THE BARE MINIMUM, AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS ACTUALLY MET. I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE CARMEL JUST PASSED THE CLIMATE PLAN, AND THIS DEVELOPMENT IS OPPOSITE TO WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING WITH THE CARMEL CLIMATE PLAN. IT IS ONE OF THE LAST WILD HABITATS REMAINING WILD FORESTS THAT ARE IN THE CARMEL AREA AND THIS ACTS AS A CARBON SYNC. I. F. A. AND THE OFFICE OF LAND STEWARTSHIP RECENTLY PERFORMED A STUDY ON URBAN FORESTS AND DETERMINED 4 METRIC TONS PER ACRE THAT IS PER ACRE ARE STORED IN ONE ACRE OF FOREST WHICH IS EQUAL TO THE ANNUAL EMISSION OF 10 CARS. SO THAT MEANS THIS AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST CARBON STORAGE ALONE NOT EVEN COUNTING THE SEE SEQUESTRATIONATION THAT HAPPENS AS THE FOREST GROWS, STORES CARBON FOR 180 CARS ANNUALLY. THAT DOESN'T EVEN COUNT CARBON SEE QUESTATION,
TO DATE THERE IS NO BETTER TECHNOLOGY THAN PHOTO SYNTHESIS WHICH IS THE BEST CARBON SEQUESTRATION METHOD PARTICULARLY FOR OLD TREES SO IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO CUT DOWN A CENTURY OLD FOREST IN THE TIME THAT WE'RE IN. WE'RE FACING A CLIMATE CRISIS AND WE HAVE A PLAN TO DEAL WITH THIS. SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO TAKE A LOOK VERY CRITICALLY AT THIS. AND I KNOW THAT WE ARE ALONG IN THE PROCESS BUT I WOULD ASK YOU TO PLEASE TAKE IME TO PAUSE, AND CRITICALLY LOOK AT THIS DEVELOPMENT. CARMEL HAS VERY LITTLE WILD NATURE LEFT IN IT. THERE ARE FEW PARKS THAT ARE FORESTED. EVEN I BELIEVE FLOWING SPRING HAS 15 ACRES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 18 ACRES OF OLD FOREST. SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO PAUSE AND MAKE A TRUE ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT ON THE PEOPLE OF CARMEL TO OUR WILD LIVE AND TO OUR FUTURE. ONCE A CENTURY OLD ECOSYSTEM IS REMOVED WE CAN'T GET IT BACK. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO TAKE A MOMENT TO PLEASE PAUSE AND TAKE A CRITICAL LOOK AT THIS DEVELOPMENT BEFORE WE GO FORWARD WITH IT. YOU HAVE TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS NANCY, I LIVE IN LEXINGTON FARMS HERE IN CAR KNELL. >> CAN WE HAVE YOUR LAST NAME. >> >> TATUM, NANCY TATUM. THE IMPACT THAT THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE ON THE WILD LIVE THAT LIVES IN THIS 18 ACRE SITE IS, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. THESE ANIMALS WILL BE CRUSHED BY BULLDOZERS. BURIED ALIVE OR PUSHED OUT INTO THE STREET TO BE HIT AND KILLED. IT'S NOPE THAT ARE MINIMAL INVASIVES IN THERE ALONG WITH FOXES, DEER, FROG, BATS, SNAKES, SALAMANDERS, AND IT'S JUST VERY CONCERNING TO THINK ABOUT THE ANIMALS AND THE IMPACT THAT IT'S GOING TO HAVE ON THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE AGE TO SURVIVE. -- ABLE TO SURVIVE. I'M ASKING THAT THIS AREA BE KEPT AS NATURAL AS POSSIBLE. LET'S KEEP NATURE NATURAL. AND SO, THEREFORE, I AM ASKING THE COMMISSION TO REQUIRE A STUDY TO BE DONE ON THIS PROPERTY TO DOCUMENT WHAT IS THERE FROM THE PLANTS AND TREES TO ANIMALS AND INSECTS. I'M ALSO ASKING THE COMMISSION TO MAKE A REQUIREMENT OF EACH DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT A SURVEY OF ANY AREA THAT IS GOING TO BE BUILT ON OR POSSIBILITY BE BUILT ON. I WOULD ASK THAT THE COMMISSION SHOWS THAT CARMEL IS FORWARD THINKING ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. SHOW US THE EVIDENCE THAT CARMEL WILL ABIDE BY THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, BY KEEPING WOODED AREAS WOODED. WE NEED UNGROOMED PARKS WITH MATURE TREES. THAT IS A SAFE HAVEN FOR WILD LIVE AND CAN BE ENJOYED BY THOSE OF US WHO SAY KEEP NATURE NATURAL. WE MUST LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE AND CONSIDER THE IMPACT. NO AMOUNT OF TREE PLANTING CAN REPLACE CENTURY OLD FOREST LIKE THIS ONE. THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT PARKS AND TREES AND WILDLIFE. IT IS ABOUT DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR THE HUMAN PSYCHE AND FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS JOE MYCINHEIMER, I LIVE NORTH OF 111 STREET BETWEEN SPRING MILL ROAD AND THE BIRD SANCTUARY, AN AREA THAT CARMEL SHOULD HELP TO PROTECT PURCHASE I HEARD AN AWFUL STORY YESTERDAY AT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PICNIC THAT THERE WAS A DEER THAT WAS APPARENTLY BEING FRIGHTENED BY TRAFFIC WHO TRIED TO CLIMB THE FENCE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND BASICALLY IMPALED ITS NECK ON OUR FENCE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PROVIDING SPACE OR ENVIRONMENT FOR THESE ANIMALS THAT WE'RE, THERE ARE THERE. THE FLORA ON SPRING MILL PUD SHOULD BE WAKE UP CALL FOR THE RESIDENTS OF CARMEL TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSEQUENCES OF A PUD WHERE THE DEVELOPER CREATES THEIR OWN ZONING. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE 18 ACRES LOCATED WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO SPRING MILL ROAD AND NORTH OF I. 465 WERE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL HOWEVER THIS PUD CRAMS 3 TIMES HOUSING UNITS GREATER THAN ALLOWED ZONING IN WEST CARMEL AND THE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE TO BE THREE STORY AND FOUR STORY TOWNHOMES AND BROWNSTONES BUT ONLY 2 STORY
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WERE PERMITTED BY ZONING. THE WOODED SITE HAS FEW NEARBY NEIGHBORS. WRITTEN FOR THE FLUOROPUD REZONE. OF THOSE IN FAVOR ALL BENEFITED FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THE REMAINING LETTERS STATE IMPORTANT CONCERNS ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT WERE NEVER ADEQUATELY MODIFIED. AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON 4/18/22 ASKED IF THE FLORA PUD WERE NOT DEVELOPED ON THIS PROPERTY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE TREE PRESERVATION? THE ANSWER WAS SHOCKING. AN S. 2 SUBDIVISION WOULD HAVE A 75 FOOT TREE BUFFER LANDSCAPE OF TREES ALONG 465 BUT THE PUD ONLY HAS A 15 FOOT BUFFER OF TREE, AN S. 2 SUBDECISION WOULD HAVE A 25 FOOT BUFFER BUT THE 3*UD ONLY HAS 10 FOR THE LANDSCAPING. OPEN SPACE AND S. 2 SUBDIVISION WOULD HAVE NO MORE 15% OF MATURE TREES AND NO MORE THAN 40% OF MATURE TREES BUT THIS IS IT A MIXTURE OF MATURE AND YOUNG TREES. THE PUD HAS ONLY 20% TREE PRESERVATION AND 25% OPEN SPACE, IN SPITE OF THIS INFORMATION ONLY 3 COUNCILORS VOTED AGAINST THE REZONE PROPOSAL NELSON, GREEN AND HANON. COUNCIL HANON EXPLAINS SOME DROPS IN DENSITY BY THE DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS WILL TYPICALLY COME IN, TAKE A LITTLE OFF THE TOP BUT STAY VERY HIGH. NOW IS THE TIME TO PRESERVE MORE OF THIS ENVIRONMENT WHICH MAY, IN FACT, REQUIRE REASONABLE DRAFT AND DENSITY, 35 LETTERS WERE WRITTEN ABOUT THE COMMENT PLAN. ALL OPPOSED THE DESTRUCTION OF THIS WOODED AREA. I ASK THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION ASK THE FLORA PUD ASK UNLESS TREES CAN BE CATALOGED AND THE ARM OF FORESTED ENVIRONMENT CAN BE INCREASED TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN THE AREA OF FLORA PUD AND ALSO PROTECT THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT. I ASK THE SOUTH PRAM TER OF 15 FOOT TREE PERIMETER WILL BE THERE. MOWING DOWN THE FOREST AND PLANTING A FEW TREES WILL NOT MAKE UP FOR THE FORESTED AREA. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> HELLO, I'M MARK DOG LOSS. I LIFE IN EAST CARMEL. IN THE EDEN GLENN NEIGHBORHOOD. A LONG TIME RESIDENT, LONG TIME USER OF THE PARK CENTER, YOU NAME IT. I HAVE A FEW BRIEF COMMENTS. THE THING I THINK AND I'M LIMPING TO SOME THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS THAT -- LISTENING% TO SOME OF THE SPEAKERS, I'M NOT ABILITY DEVELOPMENT BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION BUT I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS HAPPENING, I'VE NEVER BEEN TO ONE OF THOSE THESE BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PROMPTED ME TO COME, I KNOW IT'S IN WESTFIELD BUT WHEN, WITH THE SITUATION BUT WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED UP AT 161ST AND 31ST OR 31, EXCUSE ME, WITH WHERE BASICALLY THERE WAS A PROPERTY THAT THEY DECIMATED THAT FOREST. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF THE LIMITED GREEN SPACE THAT WE HAVE AND THE CONTINUOUS FOREST THAT WE HAVE, I THINK A BIG QUESTION FOR EVERYONE IS WHAT IS CARMEL GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN 5-10 YEARS, MY BROTHER LIVES IN CHICAGO. I TRAVEL A LOT AROUND THE COUNTRY. YOU ANY WHAT IS URBAN SPRAWL LOOK LIKE? EVEN THOUGH CARMEL IS AS A PLACE TO LIVE, YOU KNOW GREAT COMMUNITY, I WILL ABSOLUTELY AGREE. I THINK THERE IS SOME CONCERN ABOUT OVERDEVELOPMENT. IT SEEMS LIKE THE DEVELOPMENT PACE HAS PICKED UP IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS TO THE POINT WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING MULTISTORY MULTIFAMILY UNITS IN AREAS THAT TYPICALLY HAVE NOT SEEN THAT DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CASES WHERE YOU HAVE HIGHER END HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THEY'RE LOOKING TO PUT A LOT OF UNIT IN A PLACE THAT FRANKLY IT'S AGAIN A LOT OF HIGH DENSITY AREA. ONE OF THE TRENDS THAT I'VE, MY WIFE AND I I WHEN WE PURCHASED OUR HOMES WE COULD HAVE LIVED AROUND INDIANAPOLIS, THIS IS MY FAVORITE TIME OF YEAR. A PREREQUISITE WE HAD WAS TO FIND A HOME WITH A LOT OF TREES. WE FOUND A PLACE, WE HAVE ABOUT AN ACRE AND ABOUT 80% OF IT IS WOODED RIGHT LEAR IF CARMEL. ABOUT 2 MILES FROM HERE, WE'VE PEOPLE STOP IN THE FALL TO TAKE FAMILY PHOTOS IN FRONT OF OUR TREES BECAUSE IT'S SO PRETTY. THE THING THAT COMES TO MIND WITH THIS AS WE'VE BEEN THINKING, I WAS TALKING TO MY WIFE ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR OUR FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY WHEN WE START THINKING ABOUT WHAT WE WANT OUR COMMUNITY TO LOOK LIKE LONG TERM. AGAIN THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. THERE HAS TO BE AN
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENT THAT IS BUILT INTO THIS SO THAT WE'RE THINKING THROUGH SOME OF THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS SAID NOT IMPACT TO WILDLIFE BUT ARE WE GOING TO BE GREEN CITY OR TREE CITY U.S.A. THE PLAN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED AROUND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. OR THERE NEEDS TO BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PLAN BUT AROUND THE CLIMATE. THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN. SO I WOULD ASK THAT THE COUNCIL OR THE COMMISSION LOOKS AT THAT MORE CLOSELY AND ESPECIALLY NOT JUST WITH THIS PROJECT, BUT WHEN YOU START THINKING COLLECTIVELY ABOUT THE IMPACT, YOU LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN FISHERS AND WESTFIELDS ZIONSVILLE I THINK HAS CONTROLLED SOME OF THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH BUT SOMETHING I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT SHORT AND LONG-TERM. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERATION. >> THANK YOU. I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM 6 SPEAKERS NOW. I HAD COUNTED 5 EARLIER. OUR 20 MINUTES ARE UP OR CLOSE TO IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO NOW THE PETITIONER HAS UP UP TO 5 MINUTES TO RESPOND TO ANY OF THE COMMENTS IF HE CHOOSES. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND WE'LL GO INTO GREATER DETAIL IN A FEW OF THE TOP OFICS AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL. NOT NECESSARILY IN ORDER BUT COMMENTS WERE MADE ABOUT THE BUILDING MATERIALS AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, THOSE ISSUES WERE VETTED THROUGH THE ZONING. COUPLE OF THINGS TO NOTE THERE ARE DEFINITIVE ARCHITECTURE REQUIREMENTS IN THE PUD REVIEW BY THE PLAN COMMISSION AND THE ILLUSTRATIONS INCLUDED IN THE PLAN AT THE TIME OF ZONING ARE THOSE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT YOU SEE TODAY HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY STAFF. AND COMPLY WITH BOTH OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS. WITH REGARD TO STORMWATER PREVENTION AND THE S. W. P. PROCESS, CARMEL ENGINEERING HAS BEEN ENGAGED IN THE REVIEW OF THE PLANS. WE WILL NOT RECEIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL THROUGH D. O. C. S. OR CARMEL ENGINEERING UNTIL WE MEET ALL OF THE STORMWATER PREVENTION REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAVE IN PLACE. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE STATE LEVEL OF REVIEW BUT I KNOW WE HAVE OBLIGATIONS TO COMPLY WITH CARMEL'S REQUIREMENTS WITH REGARD TO SOIL EROSION AND PROTECT ONSITE. THE OTHER ISSUE REGARDING NOTICE WHICH WAS, WHICH CAME UP. I BELIEVE WE CAN HAVE STAFF COP FIRM WE MET THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE PART OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT THE COMMISSION HAS IN PLACE. WITH REGARD TO THE ZONING PROCESS. SEVERAL OF THE ISSUE BROUGHT UP THIS EVENING WERE VETTED AS PART OF THE ZONING PROCESS, IN PARTICULAR FREE PRESERVATION, WE SPEND, 2, 3, IF NOT MORE MEETINGS AND AS IT WAS DESCRIBED, THERE WAS STILL DISCUSSION AT THE LAST MEETING OF THE COUNCIL BEFORE THE VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE REQUEST REGARDING FREE PRESERVATION, AGAIN THOSE ISSUES WERE CAUSED AND DIALOGUE ABOUT THE ISSUED. THAT WAS' HANDLED AT THE TIME OF THE ZONING PROCESS, THIS WILL CONCLUDE RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTS THAT THE PUBLIC MADE. AGAIN WE WOULD BE GLAD TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS THE COMPLETE MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU, JON. DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD ALEXIA LOPEZ WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. THIS PROJECT IS SEEKING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A. D. L. S. APPROVAL FOR A NEW SUBDIVISION WITH ABOUT 120 DWELLINGS. THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AS PRESENTED IS IN LINE WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN APPROVED AS A PART OF THE PUD. THERE IS A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL USES TO BRING A VARIETY OF HOUSING OPTIONS TO CARMEL. ALONG A BUS I 465 INTERSTATE. THERE IS A PUBLIC STREET THAT ENTERS THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOOPS AROUND WITH AL LES COMING OFF OF THE STREET FOR GARAGE ACCESS, THIS WILL CREATE A MORE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN THAT IS WALKABLE AND BIKABLE. THE PUD REQUIRES A MINE OF 25% OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO BE OPEN SPACE WITH 20% BEING TREE PRESERVATION. THIS AMOUNTS TO ABOUT 3 AND A HALF ACRES OF TREE PRESERVATION. CURRENTLY RETAINING WALL IS SHOWN ALONG THE SOUTH PERIMETER TO BRING THE SITE UP TO THE SAME GRADE AND ALONG THAT SOUTH PERIMETER IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A 15 FOOT TREE PRESERVATION BUFFER. WE'RE WORKING WITH THE PETITIONER ON THAT TO MAKE SURE THEY MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS. WE'RE REVIEWING THIS MAKING SURE THEY MEET THE STANDARDS OF THE PUD AND ALL THE TREES THEY SAID THEY WOULD PRESERVE WILL BE PRESERVED. THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS ARE IN LINE WERE WHAT WAS SHOWN IN THE PUD. HOWEVER THERE WERE SOME TWEAKS WE ASKED TO THE EMVACATIONS, WE ARE -- ELEVATIONS. WE'RE STILL REVIEWING THOSE, AS THIS IS A LARGE PROJECT THERE ARE MANY DETAILS AND ITEMS TO REVIEW. WE CONTINUE TO WORK
THROUGH THESE WITH THE PETITIONER. WE RECEIVED ABOUT 36 LETTERS AS WAS STATED ON THIS PROJECT. YOU HEART SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS TONIGHT WHICH WERE REGARDING TREE PRESERVATION, TRAFFIC, DENSITY. A LOT OF THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT MENTIONED DURING THE PUD REZONE PROCESS AS WELL. WE WOULD RECOMMEND AT THIS TIME THAT THE PROJECT GOES TO THE RED ACCIDENTS COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER REVIEW -- RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER REVIEW, THAT MEETING IS ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6 AT 6:00 IN THIS BUILDING. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. THAT CLOSES THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS DOCKET. DISCUSSION FROM MEMBERS OF THE PLAN COMMISSION, MR. RYDER? >> CHRISTINE, DEBBY, START US OFF. >> I LIVE IN CEDAR POINT SO I LIVE IN AN AREA CLOSE TO WHERE THIS IS, AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE IN THE ROOM, I WAS NOT ON THE PLAN COMMISSION WHEN THE PUD WAS PRESENTED AND ADOPTED. WHEN I MOVED THERE 22 YEARS AGO, THERE WAS DENSE TREE LINE AND IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WE COULD NOT SEE 465, AND ONLY COULD HEAR THE SEMIS AND MOTORCYCLES WHEN THEY WERE REFFING UP. DIFFERENT SITUATION I. P. L. CAME ALONG AND BECAUSE OF WIRING REMOVED AN AWFUL LOT OF TREES. NOW WE SEE 465 AND WE HEAR IT CONSTANTLY. BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE A MINIMUM TREE BUFFER THAT IS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS EXISTING WE'RE ON THE LONG RANGE PLAN FOR THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PUT A SOUND BARRIER WALL ALONG THERE. SO JUST I'M I GUESS I'M BEING AS HONEST AS I CAN. THE SECOND REASON I BRING THIS UP NOW IS BECAUSE ON OCTOBER 6, I'LL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND THE, BE PRESENT AT THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE. I DON'T KNOW AT WHAT POINT THIS IS CONSIDERED SELF-SERVING OR A CONFLICT ABOUT WHERE I LIVE AND WHYAR- AT THIS POINT I HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE DENSITY AND THE AMOUNT OF TREES AND VEGETATION THAT WOULD BE REMOVED BECAUSE I HAVE EXPERIENCED FIRSTHAND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT WAS THERE WHEN YOU STARTED OUT AND THEN IT'S REMOVED. SO AS PRESENTED I WOULD JUST, I WOULD LIKE TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHERE I STAND AND WHERE I STAND RIGHT NOW I THINK IT'S TOO DENSE AND I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THAT MUCH DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA. IS ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WHERE ALL OF THE TREE PRESERVATION AND MOST OF THE GREEN SPACES ALONG THE PERIMETER, AROUND THE BUFFER PERIMETER, THE AREA THAT IS IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER, THE GREEN SPACE I RECALL THAT WAS' SUPPOSED TO BE GREEN SPACE WITH WHAT IS CALLED LIMITED TREE PRESERVATION AND TRIED TO PRESERVE T. I SEE THAT YOU'VE GOT STRUCTURES. WHAT IS THE NEW PLAN? I THOUGHT THE GOAL WAS AS MUCH AS YOU COULD THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PRESERVE SOME TREES BUT IT LOOKS LIKE AT LEAST THIS AREA IS BEING CHANGED? DID THAT GET CHANGED AT CITY COUNCIL? >> IT DID NOT. THERE WERE' AREAS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED AS LIMITED TREE PRESERVATION, OTHERS AS REQUIRED. THAT WAS IN AN AREA IDENTIFIED AS LIMITED BECAUSE AFTER ZONING WE WENT THROUGH AND DID EXACT TOPO, THAT IS WHY YOU SEE THE RETAINING WALL STAFF MENTIONED ALONG THE DRIVE ALONG THIS STREET ADJACENT TO 4650. THAT WAS IN AN AREA TREES COULDN'T BE PRESERVED BECAUSE OF GRADING ISSUES. >> EVEN IN THAT ONE COMMON AREA? >> I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS SPACE HERE? >> YES, YES. >> I'LL GO BACK AND ADVANCE OF THE COMMITTEE MEETING CONFIRM WITH OUR CLIENT WHETHER OR NOT ANY TREES CAN BE PRESERVED WITHIN THE SPACE. >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS ADDITIONAL TREE PRESERVATION THAT YOU CAN DO, LOOK AT THAT AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AT RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE. >> DEBBY TOUCHED ON THAT BUT I HAVE A SIMILAR QUESTION BUT I THINK IRRAISED THIS TO MR. PITMAN BUT MY QUESTION REMAINS AND I WOULD ASK IT JON, IF THERE IS SOME
HOMEWORK YOU CAN DO BETWEEN NOW AND COMMITTEE WITH REGARDS TO THE TREE PRESERVATION ADJACENT TO 465. MANY MOONS AGO I ASKED IF HE AND I THINK THROUGH A CONSULTANT OF HIS HE REACHED OUT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE EXPANSION WORK ON I. 465. HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE TREES HERE. WHAT IS GOING ON ELEVATION WISE THAT MIGHT HELP INFORM DECISIONS. I GUESS I WOULD ASK WHAT ELSE CAN YOU FIND OUT? IS THERE NEW INFORMATION ABOUT IT. IF THOSE TREES ARE AT RISK, DUE TO WIDENING ON I. 465, CAN YOU COME BACK AND TELL US THAT EVEN IF THOSE GO AWAY, ARE WE STILL COMPLIANT WITH THE 25% TREE PRESERVATION IN THE PUD AND GIVE US AN UPDATE AT THAT POINT. I DON'T EXPECT YOU KNOW THE ANSWER NOW. IF YOU HAPPEN TO REACH OUT TO THE SAME CONSULTANT ONE EXHIBIT I SAW ON PROJECT DOCS VERSUS IN THE MANUAL WAS FOR THE ENTRY AT THE ROUNDABOUT. THERE IS AN R. 3 IN THERE OVER 40 MILES PER HOUR. CAN YOU CONFIRM WITH INNING NAEHRING THEY'RE GOOD WITH THAT BECAUSE -- ENGINEERING, BECAUSE IT SEEMS HIGH. MAYBE THERE ARE MINOR MODIFICATION THAT IS CAN BE DONE. >> THERE HAVE BEEN CHANGES MADE TO THE ENTRY PLAN BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL AND THE FINAL SUBMITTAL SO I'LL CONFIRM THAT THE FINAL SUBMITTAL MEETS WITH THEIR APPROVAL. >> OK. THANKS. >> DEBBY, A LITTLE SURPRISED TO HEAR YOU SAY THERE IS A LONG-TERM PLAN TO PUT UP A SOUND WALL THERE. I'VE NOT HEARD SUCH A THING. MY UNDERSTANDING IS SOUND WALLS ONLY GO UP WHEN THEY WIDEN THE ROAD AND THEY DO A SOUND STUDY. ONLY AFTER THAT DO WE DECIDE. I WASN'T AWARE -- >> I ASKED 3 YEARS AGO AND THEY SAID WE WERE ON THE 20 YEAR OUTPLAN. THE LONG RANGE PLAN TO PUT IN A SOUND BARRIER ALONG THERE. THAT WAS AFTER, WHAT IS IT NOW -- >> YOU ARE SAYING, I'M SORRY. ARE YOU SAYING THEY'RE WIDENING 465? >> NO, JUST WHEN ALL THE TREES WERE REMOVED, IT, IT WAS A NATURAL SOUND AND POLLUTION BARRIER IS GONE AND IT'S REALLY LOUD NOW. >> AND THEN CAN YOU REFRESH MY MEMORY. THE PROPERTY OWNER DID SOME CLEAR CUTTING ON THE PROPERTY. WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE DID THEY LOG? YOU DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF YOUR COMMITTEE. IF YOU BRING THAT TO COMMITTEE THAT'S FINE. >> I DON'T KNOW. >> AS KIND OF-- THIS IS JUST TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, AS THE PARK BOARD'S APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE TREE HUGGINGEST GUY OR SELF-PROCLAIMED TREE HUGGINGIST, MAYBE NOT THE MOST, I SEE A LOT. I'M CONFOUNDED WHAT TO DO. THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL. WE DON'T MAKE ANY DECISIONS. WE ADVICE CITY COUNCIL ON WHAT WE THINK AND WE PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO WHAT WE THINK WE CAN, SOMETIMES WE USE THE TERM HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE LAND. I WOULDN'T DISAGREE WITH ANYBODY THAT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE LAND IS LEAVING A FOREST BUT I'M STUCK WITH HOW DO I TELL PROPERTY OWNER THAT THEY CAN'T SELL OR DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY? WHEREAS A WISE CITI COUNCILOR TOLD ME IF WE SHOT THE WHOLE THING DOWN AND YOU ARE A PROPERTY OWNER YOU WOULD THEN GO CLEAR CUT YOUR PROPERTY IF IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE TREES THAT THE PROPERTY GOT SHUT DOWN. AS A PARKS BOARD APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I HAVE HELD AN EXPEDITION ON A PROPERTY THAT I TRIED TO SAVE UNSUCCESSFULLY. I THINK IF YOU THINK THAT WE'RE THE ONES WHO DECIDE IF TREES GET CUT DOWN OR NOT, I WANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR. IT'S REALLY NOT OUR DECISION. OUR DECISION IS TO TRY TO PUT THE BEST PRODUCTS THAT WE CAN AND PUT THE BEST OVERSIGHT INTO THE DEVELOP PLANS THAT WE CAN AND THEN ADVISE THAT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR, AS A RECOMMENDATION. I WANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR ON THAT. SO THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD WHAT THIS BODY ACTUALLY DOES. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE STORM WATER PLAN. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ANY NOTES FROM ENGINEERING ABOUT THE S. W. P. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ONE MORE TIME I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT YOU COULD HAVE DONE WITH R. 2 OR S. 2. WHATEVER IT ORIGINALLY WAS VERSUS WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY I WANT TO SEE, I WANT MORE CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT KIND OF DESTRUCTION TOOK PLACE
BACK THERE WHEN THEY HARVESTED TREES, THE PROPERTY OWNER HARVESTED THE TREES. THANKS A LOT, JON. >> THANK YOU. >> THE PATH THAT GOES AROUND THE RETENTION POND, HOW FAR DOES THAT EXTEND INTO THE TREES? >> IT DOES NOT. IT WILL BE AT THE PERIMETER OF THE WOODS. >> OKAY. WE DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL TREES BEING CUT DOWN FOR THE PATH? >> NO, THE PATH, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION IN THE PAST ABOUT MEANDERING IT THROUGH THE WOODS. >> THAT'S GONE? >> WHEN I SAY DISCUSSION, IT'S NOT A MANDATE BUT IT WAS THOUGHT IT WAS BEST TO ALLOW IT TO BE ALONG THE PRELIMINARY TER OF THE POND. >> OKAY. I ALSO SEE -- NOW I CAN'T FIND THE PAGE AND YOU HAVE SOME LIGHTING ALONG THE SOUTH PERIMETER OF THE POND. CORRECT? >> THERE THERE BE STREET LIGHTING, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING STREETLIGHTING IS CAN CONFIND TO THE INTERSECTION SO THERE MAY BE STREET LIGHTING IN THE VICINITY OF THIS AND THIS INTERSECTION BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS ANY STREET LIGHTS ALONG THE POND SIDE OF THAT INTERNAL STREET. >> I DIDN'T KNOW. IT LOOKED TO ME WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THE LIGHTING PLAN THERE WERE SEVERAL LIGHTS ON THAT SOUTH EDGE. NO. >> I DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE BUT DOUBLE CHECK THAT. >> WHEN YOU COME BACK TO RESIDENTIAL COMPLETE, ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE COLOR PALLETS? >> YES, WE'LL, THEY'RE INCLUDED IN OUR BROCHURE, I BELIEVE. >> BRING THEM IN PERSON? >> WE'LL DO THAT. >> OKAY. >> MINE IS REALLY QUICK. ONE MORE THING. THIS IS IN THE WEEDS BUT IF I COULD GET AN EXHIBIT TO SHOW ME WHERE RIGHT OF WAY, CITY IS VERSUS% PRIVATE PARKING OR PRIVATE STREETS LET ME TELL YOU WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS, I'VE NOTICED IN SOME DEVELOPMENTS WHEN WE HAVE VISITOR PARKING THAT IT BECOMES RESIDENTIAL PARKING. I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER ANYTHING THAT IS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TO BE SIGNED AS VISITOR OR NO RESIDENTIAL PARKING. SO THAT THAT PARKING REMAINS VISITOR PARKING AND IT DOESN'T BECOME THE AUXILIARY PARKING SPOT FOR SOMEBODY WHO WANTS A PUT A BUNCH OF STUFF IN THEIR GARAGE. THANKS. >> I'LL GIVE THE FLOOR TO ALLEN BUT TO ADD SOME COLOR TO THAT, I AGREE WITH THE SPIRIT OF THAT COMMENT. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE THAT IN MORE DETAIL AT COMMITTEE BECAUSE WHEN WE START PUTTING LABELS OR RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF PARKING SPACES, WE END UP WITH A NEED FOR MORE PARKING SPACES IN TOTAL. SOMETIMES THOSE DESIGNATED SPACES SIT UNUSED WHEN WE -- THAT'S NOT THE INTENT OF YOUR ASK. SO I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE THAT FURTHER. I THINK YOU UNDERSTAND THE GOAL AND I SHARE THAT BUT NOT TO THE DETRIMENT OF CREATING EMPTY ISLANDS OF ASPHALT JUST TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM STORING THEIR STUFF OUT IN A PARKING SPOT. >> TO THAT POINT, I THOUGHT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A NEIGHBORHOOD ORDINANCE THAT THEY COULD NOT CONVERT THEIR GARAGES INTO STORAGE, IS THAT STILL PART OF IT? >> IT'S SPECIFIED IN THE PUD AS A ZONING REQUIREMENT. >> YEAH. OKAY. >> ALAN. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. EITHER STAFF OR TO JON, I WAS, WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT SEVERAL REMONSTRAIGHTORS REFER TO THIS AREAS IN HERE AS HAVING OR BEING A FOREST. THE WORD "FOREST." AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A FOREST OR NOT BUT I WANTED TO FIND OUT IF IT'S A FOREST AND THE DEFINITION AND IF THERE ARE RESTRICTIONS IF IT IS A FOREST OVER AND ABOVE WHAT OUR ORDINANCE CALLS FOR THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW BECAUSE IT'S A FOREST. SIMILAR TO WHAT FEDERAL MANDATES APPLY TO WATERWAYS. CERTAIN WATERWAYS HAVE TO HAVE MORE PERMITS. SAME THING HAPPENED IF THIS IS CONSIDERED TO BE A "FOR ET" DESIGNATED FOREST. THE OTHER THING HAS SOME TYPE OF A SPECIES INVENTORY ALREADY BEEN DOWN ON THIS PIECE OF GROUND? WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE? >> THE PETITIONER HAS NOT DONE A SPECIES INVENTORY. WE'LL WORK WITH STAFF DETERMINING AND CONFIRMING
THERE ARE NO OTHER DESIGNATIONS OUTSIDE OF ZONING WHICH WE KNOW FROM A ZONING STAND-POINT THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS BUT WE'LL FIND OUT IF THERE ARE OTHER ANCILLARY RESTRICTION THAT IS WOULD REFERENCE REMOVAL OF TREES. >> THANKS. >> ONE, OR ACTUALLY 2 COMMENTS. ONE THAT UNITES THOSE 2 ISSUES, JON AND I'LL, I LOST THIS BATTLE WITH THE PUD STAGE BUT I'LL BRING IT UP ONE LAST TIME HERE. THAT'S THE ONSTREET PARKING ON THE MAIN STREET. SO IT WOULD BE BETWEEN THE POND AND THE STREET ALONG THE NORTH EDGE OF THE PROPERTY. IF THOSE SPACES ARE STILL NECESSARY, WHAT WOULD BE THE VARIANCE THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO REMOVE THEM IN TERMS OF NOT MEETING A PARKING STANDARD IF THERE'S, IF THERE ARE TREES IN THE LOCATION TODAY THAT CAN BE SAVED, MY OWN PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO SAFE THOSE TREES, NOT TO PUT ONSTREET PARKING AND A MULTIUSE PATH OR SIDEWALK ALONG THE NORTH EDGE OF THAT STREET. >> FOR REFERENCE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS IS THE SECOND TO LAST PAGE IN THE BROCHURE. PARKING EXHIBIT. IT IDENTIFIES THE LOCATION OF ON STREET PARKING AS WELL AS THE OTHER ANCILLARY PARKING SPACES THAT WERE REFERRED TO THERE THAT WOULD BE WITHIN A COMMON AREA ALTHOUGH BE IT THEY WOULD BE ACCESSING THE ROADWAY. THINK WOULD BE HIDDEN SPACES, SO THERE ARE PROPOSED ONSTREET PARKING SPACES ALONG THE FRONT OF TOWN HOMES THAT FACE THE PARK BUT NOT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET. I THINK THERE WERE PREVIOUSLY SPACES ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET THAT WE HAD PARKING, AND WE DID ADJUST EVERYTHING TO THE SOUTH AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO ONLY PROVIDE THE TREE LAWN, A NARROW STREET WITH THE TREE LAWN AND THE PATH ALONG THE NORTH EDGE IN RESPONSE TO A LOT OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD PREVIOUSLY. >> THANK YOU. >> WE'RE MEETING THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF ONSTREET PARKING SPACES THAT WE HAD AGREED TO THROUGH THE ZONING. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THEN POINT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER ABOUT THE SOUTHWEST COMMON AREA THAT THE PUD DESIGNATES AS A LIMITED TREE PRESERVATION AREA. IN ESSENCE WAS CREATED AS A GAME TIME DECISION, ONCE YOU ARE ON DECIDE TOPOGRAPHY IS IDENTIFIED AND THE NEED OF ACCESS TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS FOR CONSTRUCTION, THEN THE PETITIONER WILL KNOW WHETHER OR HOW MANY TREES CAN BE SAVED THERE. I GUESS I WOULD ASK ABOUT THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO KEEP THAT ON THE TABLE SO TO SPEAK UNTIL THAT POINT IN TIME WHEN BULLDOZERS ARE ONSITE AND WE ABSOLUTELY KNOW FROM A SITE RECONNAISSANCE STANDPOINT OPPOSED TO A DESK TOP AND PAPER STAND-POINT WHETHER OR TO WHAT EXTENT TREES CAN BE SAVED IN THE SOUTHWEST LIMITED TREE PRESERVATION AREA. I HAVE SEEN SOME TEXTS THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT COMMISSIONERS' AVAILABILITY ON THE 6TH. SO I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT A QUORUM FOR THE REDEMPTION COMMITTEE ON OCTOBER 6TH. SO -- RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE SO I ASK FORWARD THAT WE MOVE FORWARD AND SCHEDULE FOR THE 6TH AIR SUMING IT GOES TO RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE BUT ASK STAFF TO CIRCLE BACK TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AND CONFIRM A QUORUM WON'T BE AN ISSUE OTHERWISE WE HAVE TO RESCHEDULE OR PUSH THIS OUT TO THE NOVEMBER COMMITTEE MEETING. >> THANK YOU. WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. >> THANK YOU. >> I WOULD MOVE WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE RESIDENCE COMMITTEE WITH -- RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE WITH VOTING APPROVAL OR COMING BACK TO THE FULL PLAN COMMISSION. >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU, FOR THE SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. TO THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE FOR THE MOMENT THAT DATE IS THURSDAY OCTOBER 6. THAT WILL BE IN THE CAUCUS ROOMS TO OUR RIGHT AS YOU EXIT THIS ROOM. SO WITH THAT, JON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, SEE YOU ON OCTOBER 6. WE MOVE TO THE SECOND ITEM ON THE AGENDA BEFORE I READ THIS IN I'LL ASK ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONERS WHO NEEDS TO RECUSE HERSELF TO GIVE US LEAVE. >> I'LL BE RECUSING MYSELF DUE TO A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST. >> THANK YOU. SEE NEW A FEW MINUTES. ITEM 2 IS POCKET P. D. 2022-00146 ORDER NAPPED AMENDMENT LEGALLY PUD AMENDMENT. THE APPLICANTS SEEKS APPROVAL TO ANDY THE LEGACY PUD TEXT IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF
PERMITTED UNITS IN THE PUD AND INCREASE THE NUMBERS OF APARTMENTS PERMITTED. THE SITE IS SOUTHWEST OF 146TH STREET AND COMMUNITY DRIVE. THE ZONING IS LEGACY PUD. THIS PETITION IS FILED BY NELSON AND FRANKENBERGER L.L.C.ON BEHALF OFFED A VIN ERR OAKLEY DEVELOPMENT L. L. C. WITH THIS PETITION WHAT THE COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING THIS EVENING AND IS THIS PETITION MOVED FORWARD IS TO CHANGE THE TEXT AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE THAT GOVERNS THE LEGACY PROJECT. SO WE'RE LOOKING TO CHANGE THE RULES OF THE ROAD TO SPUE SPEAK FOR THE PLANNED COMMUNITY. JON. WELCOME BACK. THE FLOOR IS YOURS AGAIN FOR UP TO 15 MINUTES. >> THANK YOU. >> AGAIN FOR THE RECORD JAPAN DOB SHEA WITTS WITH NELSON AND FRANKENBERGER, IN REGARDS TO THIS MATTER WE REASON ADVENIR OAKLEY L.L.C.. JIM SHINAVER IS PRESENT. THIS IS A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT PORTIONS IN ORDER TO CONCONSTRUCT A UNIQUE COMMUNITY TO BE KNOWN AS L. E. O. LIVING COTTAGES AND MULTIFAMILY. THE LEGACY PUD BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, I'M GOING TO TAKE A MINUTE. SEE IF I CAN RAISE THIS. THANK YOU. BY WAY OF GENERAL BACKGROUND THE LEGACY PUD WAS APPROVED BID CITY COUNCIL IN JANUARY 2007 APPROXIMATELY 15 YEARS AGO NOW. THE LEGACY HAS BEEN AMENDED ONE TIME IN 2018 BY ORDER DEMAND Z. 63718. THE OVERALL LEGACY DEVELOPMENT IS GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF AND AND WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO RIVER ROAD. THE SITE WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS OUTLINED HERE IN YELLOW, IT'S THE AERIAL MAP ALSO INCLUDED UNDER THE TAB BROCHURE. TAB NUMBER 2. SUBJECT REAL ESTATE CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 32 ACRES THAT IS LOCATED SOUTH ANDED A JAYSENTS TO 1467TH STREET AND ADJACENT TO AND WEST OF COMMUNITY DRIVE. TODAY THE LEGACY PUD HAS PROVISIONS RELATED TO USES BLOCKS, MAXIMUM UNIILLUSTRATE LIMITATIONS AND AMENTITYS. IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE PROPOSALLED COMMUNITY THE FOLLOWING WILL BE ADDRESSED PUD THE AMENDMENT, SPECIFICALLY THE PROPOSED LEGACY PUD AMENDMENT INCLUDES ONE, EXPANDING THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL USE BLOCK TO THE NORTH. 2, MODIFYING THE MAXIMUM UNIT LIMITATIONS AND 3, REMOVING FUTURE RESIDENTIAL FROM THE EXIST AMENT USE AREA. FOR REACH THE FACILITY WITHIN THE LEGACY LOCATED RIGHT HERE. OUR SITE LOCATED ADJACENT TO 146TH STREET TO THE NORTH. REGARDING USE BLOCKS, THE ZONING MAP FOR THE LEGACY IS ON DISPLAY. TODAY THE SUBJECT REAL ESTATE IS ZONED UNDER THE PRIMARY OFFICE USE BLOCK, THAT IS THE AREA HERE IN PINK. THE URBAN RESIDENT USE BLOCK TO THE SOUTH OF THAT IN RED. THE VILLAGE CORE USE BLOCK AT JAYSENT TO GENERALLY -- ADJACENT TO GENERALLY COMMUNITY DRIVE, THE AREA IN PURPLE. THE PRIMARY USE BLOCK IS SHOWN IN PINK AGAIN. IT'S AREA ALONG 146N STREET APPROXIMATELY 9 ACRES IN AREA. AS PROPOSED THIS USE BLOCK SHALL BE DELETED OR REMOVED FROM THE USE BLOCK MAP AND INCORPORATED INTO THE URBAN RES STEPS USE BLOCK, WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? TODAY THE PRIMARY OFFICE USE BLOCK IS ADJACENT TO THE RIGID LEGACY TO THE WEST. THE AREA IDENTIFIED IN YELLOW TO THE WEST. THIS AREA IS THE RIDGE AT LEGACY. THERE IS AN AREA OR NEIGHBORHOOD REFERRED TO AS THE MEADOWS AT LEGACY LOCATED GENERALLY HERE. THE OVERLOOK AT LEGACY IS OVER HERE AND THE GROVE AT LEGACY IS THE AREA WHERE FINE CRAFT BUILDERS IS BUILDING TWO FAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS. PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE PRIMARY OFFICE USE BLOCK AGAIN THE 9 ACRES IN PINK INCLUDE OFFICE AND RETAIL USES RESIDENTIAL LOFT OVERRETAIL, OR OFFICE AND STRUCTURED PARKING AMONG OTHER USES. THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THIS SPACE, THIS 9 ACRES INCLUDE A MAXIMUM OF 60 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITATIONS WHICH WOULD ACCOMMODATE 5 STORY BUILDING. THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE PRIMARY OFFICE USE BLOCK IS A TWO-STORY BUILDING BUT AGAIN I CAN GO
UP TO 5 STORIES IN HEIGHT. THERE ARE 162 LOST REMAINING AUTHORIZED REMAINING WITHIN THE LEGACY PUD ALL OF WHICH COULD BE FOR RENT. THOSE LOFT SPACES IN ADDITION TO KNOWS IN SENIOR HOUSING AREOFF ABOVE AND BEYOND THE STANDARDS WHICH WE'RE ASKING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO. THIS SCENARIO WOULD INCLUDE A CHANGE TO THE BASE DEVELOPMENT UNIT BUT NO LONGER PERMIT AS MANY AS 162 LOFT AS WELL AS 225 SENIOR LIVING APARTMENTS WHICH ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE BASE UNIT LIMITATION WITHIN THE PUD. THERE IS NO LIMITATION IN THE OFFICE BLOCK REGARDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. IT'S ESTIMATED AND WILL PROVIDE A BASIC SITE PLAN AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL. IT'S ESTIMATED IT WOULD ACCOMMODATE APPROXIMATELY 150,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE USE WHICH WOULD INCLUDELETS AND STRUCTURED PARKING. AGAIN WITHIN 5 STORY BUILDINGS ON THE APPROXIMATELY 9 ACRES IN SIZE. WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE AN SITE PLAN OF HOW THAT MIGHT BE LAID OUT. UNDER THE CREPT ORDINANCE AS WAS DESCRIBED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THE LAST ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA WAS A REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE A.D.L.S.STANDARDS OPINION THE IDEA BEING A PETITIONER AND WE'RE NOT PROPOSING THIS, A PETITIONER COULD RETURN TO YOU IN A FUTURE WITH A PLAN THAT COMPLIES BUILD INCLUDE THAT LEVEL OF OFFICE DEVELOPMENT, STRUCTURED PARKING 5 STORY BUILDINGS, ALL THROUGHOUT THAT PRIMARY OFFICE USE SPACE, AGAIN WE'RE TRYING TO ESTABLISH A BASIS FOR REVIEW. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING THAT LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT. . THE VILLAGE CORE USE BLOCK BEING, THE AREA IN PURNELL ALSO OCCUPIES AX PROVIDELY 9 ACRES IN THIS -- APPROXIMATELY 9 ACRES IN HAD THE DEVELOPMENT SPACE. PERMITTED USES INCLUDE RETAIL, GENERAL OFFICE, MEDICAL HEALTH EUSES, RESIDENTIAL HOSTS AND STRUCURED PARKING AS WELL. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ITSELF PRIMARY OFFICE AREA AND THAT AREA IS THE PRIMARY OFFICE AREA DOES NOT AUTHORIZE APARTMENTS. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING APARTMENTS WITHIN THAT SPACE, BUT THAT IS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE 2 SPACES BECAUSE FROM A DEVELOPMENT STANDARD STANDPOINT WITHIN THE VILLAGE CORE AREA YOU STILL ALLOW 60 BUILDING HEIGHTS BY RIGHT 5 STORIES, MINIMUM 2 STORIES IS STILL REQUIRED, IF YOU ARE ON COMMUNITY DRIVE THE -- MOST OF THE BUILDINGS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE STREET ARE ALL 3 STORIES IN HEIGHT. 120 APART ROCKY MOUNTAINS AUTHORIZED TODAY. WE'RE NOT ASKING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY OR FOR RENT FROM THE SPACE. MULTIFAMILY FOR RENT IS PERMITTED TODAY. THERE IS 120 DWELLING UNITHAT IT'S CAN BE DEVELOPED AS APARTMENTS. THE APARTMENTS ARE GOING TO BE UP ALONG COMMUNITY DRIVE. AGAIN WITHIN THIS AREA THE AREA IN PURPLE THERE IS NO LIMITATION ON NONRESIDENCE USES, WE'LL HAVE A SITE PLAN TO SHOW YOU AT COMMITTEE THAT WOULD ILLUSTRATE AS MUCH AS 180 SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL IN ADDITION TO THE 120 APARTMENTS. THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL USE BLOCK, THE AREA IDENTIFIED IN THE DARK RED HERE INCLUDES PROXIMATELY 13 ACRES, AGAIN 5 STORY BUILDING HEIGHTS ARE PERMITTED THROUGHOUT THE SPACE. THERE IS A TOTAL OF 153 AUTHORIZED DWELLINGS LEFT WITHIN THE VILLAGE, BASE UNITS. IT'S GOING TO START TO GET COMPLICATED HERE BUT WE'LL SHOW YOU THE SPREADSHEET IN THE ORDINANCE AT COMMITTEE AND DIVE DOWN DEEPER. THERE IS ACTUALLY 1800 UNITS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCE IF YOU DO SENIOR HOUSING AND LOFT AND THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. BUT THERE IS 153 UNITS UNDER BASE DENSITY ALLOWED TODAY. IF, IF 120 OF THOSE WERE DEVELOPED AS MULTIFAMILY MULTISTORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS, THERE WOULD BE A REMAINING 33 THAT COULD BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF DETACHED OR A ATTACHED DWELLINGS. APARTMENTS ARE PERMITTED USE WITHI THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL USE BLOCK SO THOSE COULD BE LOCATED ANYWHERE WITHIN THE SPACE, THE DISTINCTION HERE WITHIN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL USE BLOCK IS THOSE COMMERCIAL USES AREN'T AUTHORIZED WITHIN THE SPACE, THEY'RE RELEGATED TO THE SPACE ALONG 146TH STREET AND COMMUNITY DRIVE. SOME COMBINED AGAIN THE SITE ASK 32 ACRES IN AREA. TODAY WITHOUT AMENDMENT AS MANY AS 315 DWELLINGS, 153 COMBINED APARTMENTS DETACHED AND ATTACHED AS WELL AS 162 LOFT WOULD BE PERMITTED WITHIN THE 32 ACRES. ADVANCING A PLAN INCLUDING THIS FORMAT WOULD INCLUDE REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE LEGACY PUD REQUIREMENTS. 60 FOOT TALL 5-STORY BUILDINGS ARE PERMITTED WITHIN THE SPACE AND I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THAT
BECAUSE THE PLAN THAT WE'LL DESCRIBE MOMENTARILY IS DIFFERENT FROM THERE A IN TERMS OF BUILDING HEIGHT AND USE WITHIN THE SPACE. THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCLUDED WITHIN THE ORDINANCE. I APOLOGIZE, ONE OTHER TOPIC THAT I WANTED TO GO INTO MORE DETAIL ON. WE CAN GET INTO THIS THIS COMMITTEE. THE OTHER DISCUSSION IS WITH THE MAXIMUM OF DWELLING UNITS. AS I INDICATED PREVIOUSLYING% THERE' ONE PRIOR AMENDMENT TO THE PUD REGARDING THE BASE UNITS BEING REDUCED FROM 1344 TO 15, RATHER TO 1250. IN PART IN 2018 WHEN THAT WAS DONE, IT WAS DONE TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD CONTRIBUTE OR THE AMOUNT OF HOMES THAT WOULD BE GOING TO THE AMENITY PLANNED WITHIN THE LEGACY ALONG CHERRY CREEK BOULEVARD. HOWEVER, AS NOTED THIS IS FEWER THAN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED UNDER THE PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT SKER ANIOS INCLUDING OFFICE LOFT AS WELL AS C.C.R.OR SENIOR HOUSING DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED TODAY. ADDITIONALLY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AS YOU SEE HERE IS LESS INTENSE FROM A TRAFFIC GENERATION STAND-POINT AS I DESCRIBED THIS WOULD INCLUDE THE SPACE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE POTENTIALLY BE OFFICE WITH LOFT ABOVE. WE HAVE A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT HAS BEEN PREPARED, ANALYSIS WOULD SHOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AUTHORIZED TRAFFIC GENERATION AND THE PROPOSED TRIP GENERATION FOR THIS USE NOW REGARDING THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AS DEPICTED ON THIS EXHIBIT, IT'S ALSO INCLUDED BLIND TAB FOUR OF THE APPRECIATE BROCHURES. COMMUNITY WILL BE A MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE DEVELOPMENT COMPROMISED MUCH 230 SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED AND DETACHED RENT A HOME AMEND 120 TRADITIONAL GARDEN STYLE APARTS 789 IN THREE BUILDINGSED A JAYSENCE TO COMMUNITY DRIVE. SO THE 3 BUILDINGS SHOWN IN PURPLE ARE OPPOSITE J. C. HEART AND THEIR BUILDING IS MULTISTORY PREDOMINANTLY APARTMENTS WITHIN THE BUILDING WITH SUPPORTING USES ALONG THE FIRST FLOOR OF AT LEAST ONE OF THE BUILDINGS. THE BALANCE OF DWELLINGS ON THE SITE SHOWN IN BROWN AND BLUE ARE ONE AND TWO STORY DWELLINGS, THERE ARE PHOTOGRAPHIC EXAMPLES I'LL SHOW YOU IN YOUR PLANS. IN ADDITION TO THIS RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT THE SITE INCLUDES AN APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRE PARCEL. THIS AREA IDENTIFIED HERE IN GREEN WOULD BE OFFICE THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CORE STANDARDS WITHIN THE PUD. THE COMMUNITY, THIS PROPOSAL WILL CONTINUE THE EXIST TREES IN THE LEGACY -- STREETS IN THE LEGACY, LARSON DRIVE AND JAMES DEAN DRIVE AND HOPEWELL PARKWAY WILL CONTINUE TO EXTEND NORTH, SOUTH AND EAST WEST WITH AN ADDITIONAL RIDE IN, RIDEOUT ACCESS POINT AUTHORIZED UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCE ON TO 146TH STREET. I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO GREAT DETAIL ABOUT THE HOME DESIGN. THERE IS A LOTS OF IMAGES IN THE BROCHURES THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. TO SAY THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF ANOTHER COMMUNITY ADVENIR WAS INVOLVED IN AND THE ARCHITECTURE IS SIMILAR IF NOT IDENTICAL TO THE IMAGES THAT YOU SEE ATTACHED. THEY'RE INCLUDED BEHIND TAB 5. THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EXAMPLES OF WHICH ARE SHOWN HERE. THE MAJORITY OF HOMES WILL FEATURE FRONT PATIOS OR IMPORTANT, IF NOT CONNECTED TO INDIVIDUAL UNITS ADDITIONAL GARAGES WILL BE AVAILABLE. THERE IS SOME UNITS THAT HAVE GARAGES THAT ARE ATTACHED. THERE IS OTHERS THAT HAVE GARAGE UNITS LOCATED IN A BUILDING WITH A DWELLING UNIT ABOVE AND 3 GARAGES BELOW. ONE OF WHICH IS ENTITLED TO THAT INDIVIDUAL DWELLING. THE OTHER TWO ARE FOR LEASE AS WELL AS THE DWELLING UNIT. TWO AMENITY FACILITIES, ONE ANCHORED BY THE 1950 SQUARE FEET POOL WHICH INCLUDES AMP SPACE FOR SEATING. THE EXAMPLE WHICH IS SHOWN HERE IS NEARLY IDENTICAL TO THE ARCHITECTURE PROPOSED FOR THIS SITE. AND THE LAYOUT. IN ADDITION TO THE CLUBHOUSE AND ADDITIONAL 1500 SQUARE FEET BUILDING AREA WILL BE CONSTRUCT AS PART OF THE AMENITY SPACE WHICH WOULD BE INCLUDED IN ONE OF THE 3 BUILDINGS ALONG COMMUNITY DRIVE. OTHER THOUGHTFUL AMENITIES INCLUDING POCKET PACKETS ARE INTEREXPERIENCED THROUGHOUT THE SITE. ALL AMENITY OPEN SPACES
AND LANDSCAPING WILL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE DEVELOPER. REGARDING AMENITIES THE REAL ESTATE SHALL NOT BE PART OF THE ASSOCIATION ENTITLED TO THE USE OF THE EXISTING FACILITY WHICH SERVES THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS WITHIN THE LEGACY, THEREFORE THE NUMBER OF FUTURE FAMILIES SERVED BY THE EXISTING AMENITY FACILITY WOULD BE REDUCED BY 153 WHICH IS THE AUTHORIZED NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS THAT ARE AUTHORIZED TODAY UNDER THE ORDER ORDINANCE IF BUILT WOULD BE ENTITLED TO BE BELT BUT THIS WOULD PULL THE NUMBER OFF OF THE NUMBER ENTITLED TO USE OF THAT TODAY AND PROVIDE AMENITIES INTERNAL. ALSO WITH REGARD TO THIS SPACE, THE AMENITY AREA AS WELL AS OFFICE LEASING AREA WOULD BE BUILT ON THE FRONT END AND WOULD BE COMPLETED BEFORE OCCUPANCY BY ANY RESIDENCE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. THIS WAS A STICKING POINT EARLY ON WITHIN THE LEGACY BUT ALL AMENITIES WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE FRONT END. THAT WON'T BE AFTERNOON ISSUE IN THIS SITUATION -- AN AN ISSUE IN THIS SITUATION. IN CONCLUSION THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT INCLUDE GENERAL OFFICE, RESIDENCE LOFT OR STRUCTURED PARKING THAT OTHER USES CURRENTLY PERMITTED WITHIN THE PRIMARY OFFICE USE AREA WOULD BE ENTITLED TO. THE COTTAGES AND AAMERICANNITIES ARE PROPOSED FOR THE AREA. THIS SHOULD RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION OF THE LEVEL OF TRAFFIC AND BASED ON THE PERMITTED USING. IT DOESN'T INCLUDE RESIDENCE LOFT AMBASSADOR AS WOULD BE OTHERWISE ANTICIPATED WITHIN THE VILLAGE CORE AREA. THE COTTAGES AND MULTIFAMILIES ARE PROPOSED FOR THIS SPACE. WHICH HAS DESCRIBED WOULD BE PROVIDED ON THE FRONT END. OTHERWISE ZONED TODAY THE 153 UNITS WOULD BE AUTHORIZED TO USE AMENITIES IN THE SPACE TODAY. WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT FROM D.O.C.S.. WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM ON THEIR OUTSTANDING ITEMS, WE WOULD BE GLAD TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE NOW AND ANTICIPATE THIS ITEM WOULD BE SENT TO COMMITTEE ON OCTOBER 6. IF THAT DATE CHANGES WE'LL MAKING OUR SELVES AVAILABLE AT THAT DATE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. TIME TO CATCH YOUR BREATH OR GRAB SOME WATER. WHILE THE PUBLIC HAS THEIR TURN, THE PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUES WITH COMMENCE FROM MEMBERS OF THE -- COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. MAY I SEE A SHOW OF HANDS OF THOSE WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS PETITION? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. WE HAVE, I SEE 2 MORE HANDS GO UP OR 1. NOW WE GOT -- 5 OR 6 ON THE RIGHT. MY RIGHT HALF OF THE ROOM. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 ON THIS SIDE. SO 11. 20 MINUTES. SO JOE, SET THE TIMER PREES FOR 2 MINUTES PER SPEAKER. THE TWO MINUTES MAY NOT SOUND LIKE A LOT OF TIME BUT IF YOU AVOID REPEATING COMMENTS OR THAT WE'VE HEARD THROUGH LETTERS, THEN YOU CAN COVER NEW GROUND DURING YOUR 2 MINUTES OF SPEAKING TIME. IF THE FIRST FEW WE WOULD APPROACH THE MICROPHONE OR LINE UP BEHIND THE FIRST SPEAKER THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED TO KEEP THINGS MOVING ALONG. AGAIN WE NEED YOUR NAME PLEASE AND THE AREA OF CARMEL WHERE YOU LIVE. WE DO NOT NEED YOUR HOME ADDRESS THOUGH. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS PHILIP COSMOS, I LIVE ON, IN THE CARMEL VIEW AREA IN DOWNTOWN CARMEL. MY PARENTS LIVE ON THE EAST SIDE OF CARMEL. I ROUTINELY RIDE MY BIKE IF THIS AREA, IN 2018 I WAS RIDING ON HOPEWELL AVENUE AND I GOT TEE BONED BY A PERSON IN A CAR COMING OFF OF THE BELLEVUE THAT COMES OFF OF 146TH STREET. I WAS IN THE HOSPITAL AND OUT OF COMMISSION FOR A FEW WEEKS. SO I WANTED, I THINK THERE IS NO STOP SIGN THERE. I DON'T BELIEVE FOR THE CARS TRAVELING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEY'RE GOING AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED. I WANTED TO BRING THAT TO THE ATTENTION. I DIDN'T COME HERE FOR THIS TONIGHT BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO MENTION THAT. >> THANK YOU. GLAD YOU ARE DOING BETTER. YES, SIR. >> MY NAME IS STEVEN ELM. I LIVE AT CHERRY CREEK ESTATES. AND YOU LOOKED AT 146TH STREET BETWEEN 330 AND 5:00, THE TRAFFIC IS LINED UP. HE FAILED TO TELL YOU WHAT IS GOING ACROSS THE STREET ON THE NUBBLESVILLE SIDE. WE HAVE THE
APARTMENTS I THINK THEY'RE CALLED GRAYSTONE AND THEY JUST CLEARED ALL 69 MOBILE HOMES ACROSS THE STREET. KNUCKLEBALLSVILLE IS DEVELOPING THAT AREA. WE'RE JUST GOING TO ADD MORE AND MORE TRUCK TO 146TH STREET. -- TRAFFIC TO 146TH STREET. WHEN WE GO OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WE TRY TO GO THE BACK ROADS. NOW LEGACY OPENED THAT AREA UP. I BELIEVE IT'S CHERRY CREEK DRIVE IS JUST, THE TRAFFIC IS GETTING UNREAL. SO YOU BETTER LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STREET AND AND ADD THIS TO IT, 146TH STREET WILL BE BAD NEWS FOR EVERYBODY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> HI, THERE, LISA BRIE ANY, I LIVE IN LEGACY MEADOWS, I'M GOING TO BE SPECIFIC WHERE I LIVE. EVEN THOUGH I KNOW YOU ASKED FOR GENERALITIES. I LIVE ON JAMES BEEN DRIVE. IN THE PROPOSAL THIS IS GOING TO CONNECT TO 146TH STREET DIRECTLY. I'VE TWIN 7-YEAR-OLDS THAT ARE AT PRAIRIE TRACE ELEMENTARY. IN CURRENT SCHOOLS, AND IF YOU LIVE AT A MILE RADIUS TO THE CONSUMES YOU HAVE NO BUS. I ALSO AM A WORKING MOTHER AND I KNOW THAT AS I COMMUTE DOWNTOWN EACH DAY WHEN I HAVE TO, I LOOK FOR THE FASTEST ROUTE TO GET WHERE I NEED TO GO. I ALSO HAVE SEEN 146TH DURING THE TIME OF 3:30 TO 5:00 P.M.AND I KNOW HOW CONGESTED IT GETS AND I KNOW THAT IF THIS GOES THROUGH, AND IF THERE IS A DIRECT ROUTE FROM 146TH THROUGH JAMES DEAN DRIVE TO COMMUNITY, THAT THEN CAN GET SOMEONE TO RIVER ROAD TO THEN GET TO 465 OR WHEREVER THEY NEED TO GO THEY'LL BE FLYING THROUGH PLY NEIGHBORHOOD. FLYING THROUGH CHILDREN ON BIKES OR WALKING HOME FROM SCHOOL. YOU WILL PUT OUR CHILDREN AT A DIRECT RISK AS THEY WALK FROM SCHOOL WHEN THEY GET RELEASED. RIGHT. SO YOU HAVE A MASSIVE SAFETY IMPACT DAY IN AND DAY OUT. I SEE ACCIDENTS HAPPEN AT THAT INTERSECTION OF 146 AND RIVER ALL THE TIME. I THINK ALL OF US THAT LIVE IN THE AREA HAVE HEARD AN INCREASE OVER TIME IN EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES. AS WE SPEAK TO EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES I WOULD LIKE TO FURTHER UNDERSTAND HOW THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS WILL BE HANDLED IN EMERGENCY RESPONSE IN FIRE, IN PARAMEDICS, RIGHT. HOW WILL THIS BE HANDLED? THEN LET'S GO BACK TO SCHOOLS. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO HANDLE THE INCREASE OF STUDENTS? NOT JUST IN HANDLING SPACES AND SEATS BUT WITH TEACHERS AND HANDLING AIDES, SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS, CAFETERIA WORKERS, WE KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE BUS DRIVERS BECAUSE IF YOU LIVE IN A MILE RADIUS YOU DON'T HAVE A BUS SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO HANDLE ALL THIS? >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS TANYA MILLER, I LIVE AT THE RIDGE IN LEGACY. SO THIS IS VERY NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART. I LIVED IN CARMEL SINCE 1995. I'VE SEEN A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT. MOST OF IT I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH. WHEN I BOUGHT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIFICALLY I BOUGHT INTO IT BECAUSE OF THE MULTIAND PLANNED USE THERE, IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF GREEN AREA AND IT'S JUST BEAUTIFUL. SO WE HAVE APARTMENTS. WE'VE PLENTY OF SPACE. SO FOR ME TO REZONE THIS IT'S GOING TO HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT. I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC AND REITERATE WHAT WE'VE HEARD BUT I WOULD URGE THAT WE LOOK AT MAYBE OTHER AREAS OF CARMEL THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE DEVELOPED. BECAUSE WE HAVE APARTMENTS TO ADDRESS WITH THE DEVELOPER IS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. THEN WE NEED MORE BUSINESSES IN THAT AREA. THERE IS, THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY SOLD. WE WERE' SUPPOSED TO HAVE BUSINESSES ALONG 146TH STREET. I LOVE THE IDEA OF BEING ABLE TO RIDE MY BIKE TO HAVE DINNER OR GET MY NAILS DONE. WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE SO TO REMOVE THAT IS VERY DISHEARTENING. I THINK THAT PRETTY MUCH SUMS IT UP. SO THAT'S IT. THANKS SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> I'M GARY RICHMOND. I LIVE IN MOFFETT FARMS, LESS THAN 2 MILES AWAY. SHE KIND OF STOLE MY THUNDER, I'M NOT AGAINST DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA. THERE IS NOT A WOODED AREA WITH ANIMALS, IT'S KIND OF A SORE SITE. SO I DON'T MIND THE DEVELOPMENT. I LOOK FORWARD TO, YOU GET EXCITED WHEN IT'S SMALL BUSINESS COMES IN AND, THIS WHOLE LEGACY WAS BUILT AROUND URBAN DEVELOPMENT. WALKABILITY. THE PAPERS TODAY THAT THE LAWYERS PUT IN THE DOCKET TALKS ABOUT WALKABILITY. THEY'RE GOING
TO TAKE AWAY THE PRIMARY OFFICE SPACE, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO WALK TO? I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. NOBODY GETS EXCITED ABOUT RENTALS. WE PASS BY THE NEW BUSINESSES THAT OPENED UP THEIR. WENDY'S, HOT YOGA AND MEXICAN PLACES GOING UP AND A NEW VET OFFICE, I HAVE A TEENAGE DAUGHTER, WE CAN RIDE OUR BIKES TO WENDY'S THIS WEEKEND, I TELL MY DAUGHTER LET'S WE'RE TIRED OF THE DRIVE. WE CAN GO TO THE VET OFFICE, MOVE HERE, I SEE GOOD REVIEWS ABOUT THIS. WHERE IS THE SMALL BUSINESS? DO WE WANT TO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESS IN THE AREA THAT'S HOW THE PLAN WAS SOLD. I THINK THAT'S THE MAIN REASON NOT, -- THAT SHOULD GO TO THE COMMISSION TO TALK ABOUT AND REJECT THIS PROPOSAL. IT'S NOT THE RIGHT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. WE CAN GET BETTER STUFF IN. >> THANK YOU. >> JOHN MANWICK. I LIVE IN THE RIDGE, TO HIT YOU THREE IN A ROW, I MOVED HERE IN NEW YORK, WALKABLE COMMUNITY, SAME TYPE OF THING, I'VE 3 SMALL CHILDREN. I LOVE TO WALK AND GET ICE CREAM, GO TO MEXICAN RESTAURANT, WALK HOME, THIS COMMUNITY WAS DESIGNED AND BUILT NOR THAT. IF WE CHANGE THE PUD, THIS IS INDIANA, THERE IS HARDLY ANY PLACE TO WALK TO. BUT AT LEAST WE'VE RESTAURANTS AND PLACES TO VISIT THERE AND KEEP IT WHAT IT WAS SOLD TO US AS. IT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> NASH ED. DON'T ASK ME TO SPELL THE LAST NAME PLEASE, I LIVE AT THE LEGACY AT THE RIDGE. MAIN 3 POINTS ARE I'M OKAY FOR THE PLAN BECAUSE THERE'S A REASON WHY THERE IS A COMMERCIAL AREA THERE. RIGHT. BECAUSE ALL THE COMMUNITIES, EVERYTHING THAT COMES THERE LIKE EVERYBODY SAID, WALK THERE, GET SOME FOOD. BIKE AROUND, ALL THAT. MAKE THAT EVERYTHING IS APARTMENTS, THERE IS NOTHING THERE. WE HAVE TO DRIVE 5, 10 MORE MINUTES TO GET SOMETHING, THAT FEEL IS GONE. ALREADY THE CHERRY CREEK ROAD IS BUSY. THIS NUMBER OF PEOPLE, THIS IS GOING TO BE MORE BUSIER. RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO GET A BUS OR NOT. WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE SAME SCHOOL OR NOT. ARE THE SCHOOLS BIG ENOUGH TO INCREASE THE -- ACCOMMODATE THE INCREASE IN THE POPULATION? STICK WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN IF YOU CAN, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> HI, MY NAME IS WILLIAM TANGOVICH. I LIVE IN LEGACY RIDGE, MOVED HERE ABOUT A YEAR AGO, COUPLE OF MINUTES THAT I WANT TO BRING UP THAT I BELIEVE ADVENIR AND THE ATTORNEYS WERE BRINGING UP IN THIS CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW IS THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW THE ZONING WAS GOING TO CHANGE AND IF IT WAS' GOING TO BE SOMEHOW BETTER. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SENIOR LIVING, THAT DOESN'T IMPACT SCHOOLS LIKELY, IF THAT IS GOING TO MAINTAIN FROM WHERE IT WAS AT BEFORE BUT WHAT WE'RE MOVING TO IS GOING TO BE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING UNITS, IT'S A LARGE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO AND VERY GOOD SCHOOLS AND VERY GOOD NEIGHBORHOODS. THE POINT IS WE'RE INCREASING 350 UNITS THAT ARE GOING TO IMPACT SCHOOLS THAT ARE HERE. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON TEACHERS ABILITY THAT IS GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE TRAFFIC WHICH IS LARGELY NOT GOING TO BE DONE FROM 146. GOING TO COME THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD MANAGED BY THE OTHER H. O. A.'S, WE'RE PAYING FOR THE TREES TO GO IN. WE'RE THE ONES PAYING FOR THAT THEY WILL NOT BE CONTRIBUTING TO. WHO IS ACTUALLY BUILDING IT, TOO? WHEN YOU RESEARCH THE COMPANY, THEY HOLD ONS TO THE PROPERTY FOR ABOUT 4 AND A HALF YEARS. THAT'S NOT VERY LONG. FOUR AND A HALF YEARS THEY SELL OUT OF IT. THEY GET THEIR INVESTMENT BACK. THEY MOVE ON. THAT IS THEIR AVERAGE HOLDING PERIOD WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PORTFOLIO ON THEIR WEBSITE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMPLAINTS THAT HAPPENED FROM THE ACTUAL RESIDENTS OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO SHOW IF YOU LIKE TO BUT THEY'RE IN THE PETITION SO I WON'T COVER IT RIGHT NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT YOU ARE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF THE RESIDENTS HAVE SAID AFTER THEY LEFT THE PROPERTIES HAVE GONE TO TRASH THE THEY'RE NOT MAINTAINED AND NOT MANAGED. THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT. WE WANT A PLACE THAT IS GOING TO INVEST AND STAY WHICH IS WHY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DO BETTER. COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, THE AREAS ARE GOING TO MATTER. WHERE I'M WITH ON THIS IS WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STAND FOR WHAT WAS ALREADY DEVELOPED BEFORE AND WHAT HAS BEEN APPROVED. WE FOLLOW THROUGH ON THAT AND NOT AMEND THAT AND CREATE MORE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE SCENARIO, I HAVE 15 OTHER POINTS BUT THEY'RE IN THE PETITION SO I'LL DEFER THE FLOOR FROM THERE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS MICHAEL STEVENS, I LIVE IN CHERRY CREEK ESTATES. ABOUT A MILE, 1.9 MILES FROM WHERE
THIS IS PROPOSED. WE'VE BEENING WHERE WE LIVE FOR 17 YEARS IN THE AREA AND HAVE WATCHED IT GO FROM A GIANT FIELD INTO VERY DENSE HOUSING. I WOULD SAY I WALK THROUGH THERE YESTERDAY NIGHT WITH MY DOG THROUGH THE AREA, AND I NOTICED A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE. FIRST, THROUGH THE AREA ESPECIALLY ON 146TH STREET NORTH OF US, THERE IS A LOT OF TRASH. I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO SAY T. GARBAGE, PILING UP IN THE AREA. CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS, IT'S ROAD TRASH. IT'S BOT 8LES, -- BOTTLES, TRASH, I NEVER THOUGHT I WOULD SEE THAT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. FRANKLY. SECONDLY THERE IS A LARGE, I GUESS IT'S APARTMENT AREA JUST TO THE I GUESS THAT WOULD BE THE EAST OF THIS AREA THAT IS PROPOSED. JUST WALKING THROUGH THIS AGAIN I WAS SURPRISED, I DON'T KNOW WHO MANAGES IT, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT BUT I DID NOTICE A LOT OF THE FAST FAST AIDES WERE DEGRADED. SOMETHING I DIDN'T THINK I WOULD SEE IN THE AREA WHERE WE ARE. I HAVE TO SAY THAT THE THE SPEED WITH WHICH THE BUILDINGS ARE GOING UP. MY DAUGHTER LIVES LITERALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM WHERE THIS IS GOING UP AND WE'RE WATCHING APARTMENTS GO UP. THEY'RE NOT THERE ON TUESDAY, THEY'RE THERE ON WEDNESDAY, IT'S MAZING YOU CAN BUILD THINGS THAT QUICKLY BUT IT CAN'T, IT CAN'T POSSIBLY BE GOOD. I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO SAY IT. IT CAN'T POSSIBLY BE GOOD. THE LAST THING I WANTED TO SAY IS ALL OF THE NUMBERS ABOUT, I FELT ALMOST LIKE SCARE TACTICS ABOUT 5 STORY BUILDINGS GOING UP ALONG THE AREA. I WAS TRYING TO GET A SENSE IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THIS, HOW, ARE WE ACTUALLY GOING TO SEE A NET INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF HUMAN BEINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE LIVING IN THE AREA? BECAUSE THAT WAS UNCLEAR. AND I MEAN MORE PEOPLE, MORE TRASH, MORE TRAFFIC, MORE NOISE. THAT'S ENOUGH, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> TREESO STEVENS, -- TERESA STEENS, CONNECTED TO MIKE STEVENS, WE LIVE IN CHERRY CREEK ESTATES. I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING TONIGHT IS ASKING FOR YOU TO PRESERVE OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. LONG TIME CARMEL RESIDENCE. LOVE THE SCHOOLS, LOVE THE AREA. WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS SOMETHING REALLY OUTSIDE WHAT WE EVER THOUGHT WE WOULD SEE IN CARMEL. I HAVE AN AIR POLLUTION MONITOR, LOVE THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE I'M BEEN LOOKING AT IT FOR A YEAR, THIS LAST SUNDAY THE WORST AIR POLLUTION IN OUR ENTIRE AREA INCLUDING SOUTH SIDE INDIANAPOLIS WAS HIGHEST AT MY HOUSE. I NEVER THOUGHT I WOULD, I HAVE A SCREEN SHOT IF YOU WANT TO SEE IT. THINK ABOUT PUTTING MORE PEOPLE IN THE AREA, MORE TRAFFIC, WHAT IS THAT GOING TO DO TO OUR AIR QUALITY? THE ROADS, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT HAS BEEN DONE THAT IS NOT 10 YEARS OLD. AS I UNDERSTAND IT TRAFFIC STUDY IS OUTDATED BUT WE KNOW FROM WALKING ON THE STREET, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT AN ACCIDENT. SMALL KIDS, YOU KNOW, FAMILIES ARE IN THE AREA. THAT ROAD IS NOT SET UP FOR THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC THAT WE'RE SEEING. I ASK THE SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE AREA. SCHOOLS, I'VE BEEN A SCHOOL TEACHER MOST OF MY LIFE. WE JUST HAD 25% I THINK OF THE SCHOLARS COME FROM CARMEL, INDIANA, I'M PROUD OF THAT. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO OUR TEACHERS, TO OUR CONSUMES IF WE OVERPOPULATE THIS AREA? WE HAVE TO DRAW A FINE LINE. I LOVE DEVELOPMENT. BUT THERE COMES A TIME WHEN IT'S TOO MUCH. I ASK YOU TO THINK ABOUT THAT AS WELL. THINK ABOUT THE AIR QUALITY, THE SAFETY OUR SCHOOLS, SAFETY OF OUR RESIDENTS AND THEN THE TRAFFIC. I DON'T BELIEVE OUR ROADWAYS ARE SET UP FOR THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU FOR GIVING US TIME TO SPEAK TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU. >> I'M MONA, I LIVE IN MEADOWS, I WANT TO BRING UP SOMETHING THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYONE SAY YET. I WAS TOLD THAT THE DEVELOPER SAID THEY WANTED TO BUILD AFFORDABLES HOUSING. AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS A NICE WAY OF SAYING SOAKS OR SUBSIDIZED HOUSING WHICH WE DON'T WANT TO CARMEL. NEXT TO ALL THE REALLY NICE HOUSES PEOPLE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TO BUY AND TO BRING DOWN OUR PROPERTY PRICES. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IN 4, 5 YEARS WHEN THEY SELL THIS TO SOMEONE ELSE IF IT WILL BE MORE OF A SOCIAL
HOUSING FOR LOWER INCOME FAMILIES. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. IT'S JUST THAT IT WILL BRING EVERYONE'S PROPERTY VALUE DOWN. THAT CAN LAST FOR QUITE A WHILE. SO THAT'S, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE DEVELOP SER TALKING ABOUT BUT I HAVE HEARD THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. BESIDES EVERYTHING ELSE THAT YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THIS COMMISSION, THIS BODY DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE WITH RESPECT TO ECONOMIC STATUS OR HOUSING PRICES. THE CITY OF CARMEL DESIRES HOUSING OPTIONS AT ALL PRICE POINTS SO I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT AS THE COMMISSION CONSIDERS THIS PETITION, IT WILL BE DONE ON THAT BASIS. JON, YOU HAVE 5 MINUTES TO RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU. SOME OF THE TOPICS BROUGHT UP, FIRST WITH REGARD TO TRAFFIC. PUT UP THE SITE LAYOUT. . THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SHOULD RESULT IN A NET REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC BECAUSE IT REDUCE THE AMOUNT OFFICE. IN REGARDS TO THE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT, AND THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE MIXED USE AND WALKABILITY, WE'RE NOT REDUCING THAT POTENTIAL. THE PRIMARY OFFICE AREA DOESN'T AUTHORIZE THOSE TYPES OF RETAIL AN SERVICE USES, IT'S PRIMARILY OFFICE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE ALLOWANCE OF OFFICE ABOVE. SO YOU SEE THE MIX, WE'VE 2 ACRES REMAINING HERE THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME REQUIREMENTS AS THE DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STREET. IT'S NOT THAT IT HAS TO LAY OUT IDENTICALLY BUT THOSE OFFICE AND SERVICE USES THAT YOU SEE IN THE MULTITENANT BUILDINGS HERE, WENDY'S WAS MENTIONED BUT IT'S UNLIKELY THERE WOULD BE ANOTHER FAST FOOD RESTAURANT HERE BUT THEY WOULD BE USES THAT ADVENIR WOULD BELIEVE ARE APPROPRIATE TO INDICATER TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY. COFFEE SHOPS AND OTHER THINS ARE SHORED UNDER THE SPACE, OFFICE AREA WHICH IS THE BALANCE OF THAT DOESN'T ACCOMMODATE RETAIL USES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. BUT FROM A TRAFFIC STAND POINTE, SOMETHING WAS MENTIONED IF I CAN DRAW ON THIS. THIS IS THE EXTENSION I BELIEVE OF JAMES DEAN. THE IDEA WAS MENTIONED THAT TRAFFIC WOULD COME OFF OF 146TH STREET AT THERE AND EXIT AND TRAVEL DOWN TO RIVER ROAD TO BYPASS PERHAPS THE RIVER ROAD INTERSECTION, IF THAT POTENTIAL EXISTS I THINK THAT SAME POTENTIAL EXISTS TODAY TRAFFIC WOULD TURN DOWN COMMUNITY DRIVE AND ACCESS OVER TO RIVER ROAD TODAY. NEITHER OF THOSE TWO OPTIONS -- >> THANK YOU. >> AGAIN THAT OPTION OR ALTERNATIVE EXISTS TODAY AND IT'S ACCESS POINT THAT IS ANTICIPATED TO DISTRIBUTE TRAFFIC IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER THROUGH THE ROADWAY NETWORK WITHIN OUR, WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ITSELF. AND HAS BEEN PLANNED REGARDLESS OF USE THROUGHOUT THE SPACE. OTHER COMMENTS REGARDING TRAFFIC SUCH AS TRAFFIC SAFETY, INCREASE IN SCHOOLS, WE DID RECEIVE INFORMATION FROM SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION TODAY ABOUT THEIR CAPACITY. THEY ARE UNDERCAPACITY TODAY BY OVER 1,000 STUDENTS AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL. THEY'VE DONE A RECENT -- THEY'VE DONE A RECENT IMPACTS ANALYSIS AND PROJECTION ON THEIR ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND INDICATED THAT IN THAT PROJECTION THERE ARE 214 STUDENTS SHY OF WHERE THEY THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE AT THAT LEVEL. SO THERE ARE MORE THAN 1,000 BELOW WHAT THEIR CAPACITY IS, 214 SHY OF THE PROJECTED AMOUNT WITHIN THEIR ANALYSIS AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, THEY HAVE INDICATED ANALYSIS IDENTIFIES THEY'RE GOING TO FLATTEN AND DECREASE OVER TIME IN THAT CO-HORT THAT MAKES UP ELEMENTARY SCHOOLING EDUCATION. WE WERE ASKED TO REACH BACK OUT TO THE SCHOOLS AND WE DID RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION. WE CAN PROVIDE SOME MORE DETAIL AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ON THEIR LETTERHEAD YET AND THAT THEY COULD SEND ME, RECEIVED IT AS LATE AS TODAY.
ONE OTHER COMMENT MADE WITH ABOUT THE ADDITION 350 DWELLING EUNICE -- UNITS. THERE ARE MORE DWELLING UNITS AUTHORIZED TODAY APPROXIMATELY 315. SO MORE INTENSE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT WITH LOFT ON MULTIPLE STORY BUILDINGS. THE REASON WE PROVIDED ALL THAT INFORMATION IS BECAUSE THAT IS, THOSE ARE THE STANDARDS UNDER WHICH WE HAVE TO COMPLY TODAY. SO IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU ARE, YOU CAN'T NECESSARILY BASE WHERE YOU ARE GOING. WE WANT TO IDENTIFY ALL THE THINGS SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION. THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD CAUSE THE ADDITION OF APPROXIMATELY 35 ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED DWELLINGS ABOVE AND BEYOND% WHAT IS ALREADY PERMITTED TODAY AND WOULD ELIMINATE THE POTENTIAL FOR THE LOFT IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF -- LOSSES IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THERE WAS ONE ANOTHER -- IF I CAN, HAVE A COUPLE OF MINUTES. THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE THAT THERE WAS A PETITION CIRCULATED. IF WE COULD BE PROVIDED A COPY OF THE PETITION AND WHAT INFORMATION PEOPLE WERE PROVIDED TO SIGN THE PETITION. WE'VE NOT SEEN THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF I'LL ALLOW STAFF TO RESPOND. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE RECEIVED A COPY OF A PETITION. THERE WAS INFORMATION ABOUT AN OUTDATED TRAFFIC STUDY THAT MAY BE OVER 10 YEARS OLD. I'M UNAWARE OF THAT. WE HAVEN'T PROVIDED THAT TO STAFF AND REFERENCED IT IN OUR SUBMITTAL. IF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO REFERENCE THAT HAD COULD PROVIDE US A COPY OF THE, REFERRED TO TRAFFIC STUDY. NOTED SCHOOLS AND THAT WAS IT. >> THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE FORWARD TO THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD ALEXIA LOPEZ WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICE. THE PETITIONER PROPOSES TO AMEND THE LEGACY PUD ORDINANCE TO REMOVE THE OFFICE USE BLOCK AND ALLOW MORE RESIDENTIAL UNITS INCLUDING APARTMENTS AND FOR RENT ATTACHED DWELLS. THE PROPERTY EFFECTED BY THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT IS WITHIN THE VILLAGE CORE. THE PRIMARY OFFICE AND THE URBAN RESIDENCE USE BLOCKS OF THE LEGACY PUD. APARTMENTS ARE PERMITTED IN THE VILLAGE CORE AND YOU ARAN RESIDENCE USE BLOCKS. THEY ARE ASKING TO INCREASE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS AS ORIGINALLY PLANNED FOR WITH THE LEGACY PUD. WE'VE RECEIVED ABOUT 22 LETTERS AND REMONSTATIONS TO THE PROJECT. YOU HEARD A LOT OF THOSE CONCERNS THIS EVENING BROUGHT UP REGARDING TRAFFIC, CRIME FROM RENTAL PROPERTIES AND OVERBURDENING THE SCHOOLS. STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. WHAT IS PROPOSED TONIGHT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN. IT MAY NOT BE THE SAME FORM AS OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, IT'S NOT A SINGLE FAMILY FOR SALE DEVELOPMENT BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE WILL BE ANY LESSER OR WILL BRING CRIME OR WILL DAMAGE THE COMMUNITY AS REFERRED TO THE LETTERS, STAFF REACHED OUT TO CARMEL SCHOOLS ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND THEY HAVE NO CONCERNS WITH ACCOMMODATING THE INCREASE IN THE ENROLLMENT. THEY STATED MULTIFAMILY RESULTS IN FEW SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN. A CITY NEEDS A VARIETY OF HOUSING OPTIONS TO SUPPORT IT. AND THIS USE ALONG WITH ROAD IN AN AREA ZONED FOR URBAN RESIDENTIAL AND VILLAGE CORE WITH WALKABLE COMMERCIAL NEARBY IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION. THIS PROJECT HAS GOOD PEDESTRIAN, BIKE AND VEHICULAR CONNECTIVITY, AN AMENTITY CENTER WILL BE PROVIDED TO SERVE FUTURE RESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE DEVELOPMENT WILL ALLOW FOR MORE DENSITY NEAR THE CORE OF THE LEGACY IN THE RETAIL AREAS THERE ARE THERE TO SUPPORT THE COMMERCIAL AREAS. THE PROJECT WILL ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL VARIETY AND HOUSING OPTIONS. THE DESIGNS OF THE BUILDING WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE TO THE CHARACTER AMENITY IN THE PUD. WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS THE STYLE THAT WE'D EXPECT TO SEE WHEN THEY COME THROUGH FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN A.D.L.S.. THIS IS SUMS LAR TO THE CRAFTSMAN STYLE WITH FRONT PORCH, SMALLER FRONT SETBACK AND SIDEWALK CONNECTIONS TO THE STREET. THE PROJECT PROVIDES APPROPRIATE TRANSITIONS PUTTING LARGER APARTMENTS ACROSS THE MAIN ROAD THEN TRANSITIONING TO SMALLER ONE AND TWO STORY BUILDINGS TO THE WEST. THE DEPARTMENT CONTINUES TO WORK WITH PETITIONER ON THE REVIEW COMMENTS AS THIS PROJECTS MOVE ON TO COMMITTEE REVIEW. WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SENDS THIS TO THE RESIDENTIAL MEETING ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. THAT CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, IT'S 7:41. DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSION. SUE.
>> JUST THIS IS NOT -- ASSUMING THIS WAS APPROVED AND NO BASIS FOR THAT STATEMENT AT ALL RIGHT NOW. THIS WILL NOT COME BACK FOR A.D.L.S.. SO THIS WILL JUST BE A REVISION TO THE PUD. CORRECT. >> I BELIEVE IT'LL COME BACK FOR -- >> IT WILL, OKAY. I WANTED TO BE SURE. BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT REALLY THE DRILLED DOWN ON THE DETAILS. YOU SHOWED AND EXAMPLE OF OLD MONROVIA. WHERE IS THAT, IS THAT AROUND HERE? >> HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA IS WHERE THAT DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED. >> I'M SORRY. >> HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA. >> WON'T BE SEEING IT THEN, WHEN I SAY A.D.L.S.I MEAN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN LIGHTING AND -- >> LANDSCAPING AND SIGNING. >> WE'VE BEEN SAYING IT FOR SO LONG I APOLOGIZE, NOT EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT ACRONYM THIS MAY SOUND PETTY BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU GIVE AN EXAMPLE IN COMMITTEE ON THE POOL AND THE CLUBHOUSE AND FIND A PLACE IN CARMEL THAT YOU CAN COMPARE IT TOO IN SIZE, I'VE HEARD WE PUT DEVELOPMENTS IN AND THAT IS A POSTAGE STARCH, NOT REALLY DESIGNED OR BUILD FOR THE SIZE OF THE COMMUNITY YOU ARE TRYING TO SUPPORT. SO IF YOU WOULD DO THAT. I THINK IT MIGHT BE TIME TO LOOK AT A TRAFFIC STUDY AGAIN. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN ALSO INCLUDE WHAT IS BEING BUILT ACROSS THE STREET WHICH IS NOT PART OF CARMEL OR HOW THAT GOES BUT SINCE THIS WENT THROUGH AND I WAS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEN IT WENT THROUGH, I CAN'T REMEMBER, MANY, WERE YOU ON? [LAUGHTER] PUDS WERE RELATIVELY ONE, NEW. AND THIS SEEMED LIKE THE BEST THAT WE COULD GET BECAUSE IT WAS SUCH A MIXED USE AND IT DID HAVE COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE AND COUPLE OF TYPES OF HOUSING. IT SEEMED LIKE WE REALLY HIT. I'M KIND OF SORRY TO SEE THIS COME IN BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE WORKED SO HARD ON IT AND I UNDERSTAND THERE IS CHANGES IN COMMERCIAL IN OFFICE BUILDINGS TODAY. IT MAY NOT BE AS MUCH OF IT DEMAND FOR IT AS THERE WAS BACK THEN BUT I THINK WE NEED TO BE COGNIZANT EVER THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE MOVED IN OVER THE YEARS. AND WHAT THEY WERE ANTICIPATING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHAT WOULD BE THEIR NEIGHBORS, WHAT, BY THAT I MEAN THE TYPE OF FACILITIES, THE GREEN SPACE, EVERYTHING THAT WAS COMMITTED TO IN 9 PUD -- THE PUD. IT WAS DESIGNED AS A MULTIUSE COMMERCIAL WALKABILITY PLACE. I GUESS THAT'S ALL. I'LL LET EVERYBODY ELSE TAKE A CHANCE AT THIS. >> ONE THING CAN I SAY, THAT THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO THE ORDINANCE NO NO WAY IMPACT THE LEVEL OF OPEN SPACE THAT WOULD BE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THERE IS AS MUCH OPEN SPACE UNDER THIS PROPOSAL AS AND IN FACT MORE GREEN AREA UNDER THIS PROPOSAL THAN THERE WOULD BE 23 DEVELOPED-- IF DEVELOPED UNDER THE SCENARIOS THAT I DESCRIBED EARLIER. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. WE'VE HAD A LOT OF NUMBERS TONIGHT. FOR CLARIFICATION, HOW MANY MORE UNITS DOES THIS BRING THAN WE ORIGINALLY HAD? >> LET ME PULL UP THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THIS IS BRINGING AN ADDITIONAL 350. >> 35. >> I'M SORRY, 3 50 TOTAL. >> AS PROPOSED THIS INCLUDES 350 DWELLINGS. >> OKAY. >> BUT AS PER WHAT WAS, WHAT HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED UNDER THE EXISTING PUD THERE WOULD BE AS MANY AS 35 ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS. THAT IS NOT CONSIDERING IF THE SITE WERE DEVELOPED WITH A C. C. R. C. WHICH WOULD RAISE THAT NUMBER BY POTENTIALLY ADDITIONALLY 225 DWELLING AUTHORIZED UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCE, DEPENDING ON HOW YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S AS MANY AS OR AS FEW AS 35 ADDITION OR SOME FULL REDUCED BID 225 AUTHORIZED C. C. R. C. OR SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT UNITS. >> A PROJECT LIKE THIS, WHO MAINTAINS THE EXTERIOR? I MEAN -- >> IT WOULD BE IDENTICAL TO THE FORMAT UNDER WHICH J. C. HART MAINTAINS THEIR FACILITIES. BY THE OWNER. THE OWNER MAINTAINS AND MANAGES ALL THE GREEN SPACE THAT IS ON SITE. THEY MAINTAIN ALL THE PARKING AREAS. THEY MAINTAIN ALL OF THE BUILDING EXTERIORS BOTH IN 3 STORY BUILDINGS ALONG COMMUNITY DRIVE AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER DWELLINGS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. >> SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
SIDING, WINDOWS, LANDSCAPING -- >> 100%, ANYTHING VERTICAL AS WELL AS THE PARKING FIELDS AND THE LANDSCAPING MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE WHICH APPLY IN THIS SITUATION THAT DON'T NECESSARILY APPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY IS UNDER THE D.P.L.A.WE'D COME BACK AND SAY HERE IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT IS PROPOSED. STAFF HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO INSPECTIONS WHICH I KNOW THEY'VE BEEN DONE ON A REGULAR BASIS, IF THEY SEE A SITUATION WHERE THERE IS A DEAD UNMAINTAINED PLANT MATERIAL STAFF HAS THE AUTHORIZE TO REQUIRE US TO, REQUIRE THE OWNER TO REPLACE THAT UNDER A TIMEFRAME PRESCRIBED BY THE URBAN FORESTER. THAT DOESN'T TYPICALLY APPLY TO RESIDENCE DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL BUT IT DOES APPLY IN SITUATIONS WHERE YOU THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS AUTHORITY OVER DEVELOPMENT. >> SO THE TENANT IS ONLY REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN THE INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY? >> WHEN YOU SAY MAINTAIN, YEAH. THEY DON'T PAINT. THEY DON'T DO THAT. THE OWNER PAINTS THE INTERIOR. THE OWNER OF THE DEVELOPMENT MAINTAINS ALL THE UTILITIES. THEY MAINTAIN ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE WASHER, DRYER, OVENS. MICROWAVE. >> BUT THEY'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING THAT SHOWS TO THE PUBLIC ON THE EXTERIOR? >> THE TENANT? >> THE TENANT. >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. YOU KNOW I THINK THIS IS A PROJECT THAT IS NEEDED IN OUR AREA. I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS THE SPOT FOR T. I THINK THAT LEGACY, THAT DEVELOPMENT IS SO DENSE AS IT STANDS. I REALLY BELIEVE THAT COMMERCIAL, MORE COMMERCIAL, RETAIL IS NEEDED. ON THE EAST SIDE OF CARMEL, ONCE YOU PASS, I MEAN YOU ARE GOING TO NOBLESVILLE ONCE YOU GET EAST. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN CARMEL ON THE EAST SIDE. I JUST, I ALREADY THINK THAT WE'VE GOT, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT IN THE PUD AND I UNDERSTAND THE PERMITTED USE USES AND WE CAN HAVE APARTMENTS BUT THIS SEEMS LIKE WE NEED TO LOOK AT TRAFFIC. I MEAN I JUST, THAT, ESPECIALLY IN WE HAVE DEVELOPED OF A DENSE DEVELOPMENT GOING IN ACROSS THE STREET. I THINK THIS IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER. I DO LIKE THE PROJECT, I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT PUTTING IT THERE. >> JON, IS THERE A MASTER H. O. A. THATTEN COMPASSES THE ENTIRETY OF LEGACY TODAY OR IS THIS A SORT OF PIECE MEAL IS THE WRONG WORD BUT IS IT PROJECT BY PROJECT SUBDIVISION BY SUBDIVISION EACH HAS ITS OWN OWN OWNER ASSOCIATION -- >> I'LL STAND CORRECTED BUD THERE ARE MULTIPLE H. O. A.'S AS I DESCRIBED. THERE IS THE OVERLOOK HERE, MED ORBS AREA, GROVE AREA. AND THE RIDGE AREA. ALL HAVE THEIR SEPARATE ASSOCIATIONS AND THEY'VE DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES INTERNALLY TO THE POD. BUT THEY ALSO PARTICIPATE IN A MASTER ASSOCIATION, THE MASTER ASSOCIATION HAS VERY MUCH LESS TO MAINTAIN BUT ALSO MAINTAINS THAT AMENTITY FACILITY LOCATED RIGHT HERE WITHIN THE OVERALL. SO INDIVIDUAL, CALL THEM STATES AND THEN A NATION THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE OVERALL AMENITY AREA. I THINK THERE MAY BE A COUPLE OF OTHER SPOTS WHERE THE MASTER OR THE NATION TAKES CARE OF A COUPLE OF SIGNS AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. BUT I CAN GET YOU A LIST IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE OF WHAT THEY MAINTAIN BY STATE AND BY NATION IF YOU WILL. >> SO WHAT WOULD BE THE OBLIGATION OF THIS PROJECT TO PARTICIPATE IN OR SUPPORT FINANCIALLY THE NATION?S. >> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM THE OWNER TO UNDERSTAND, TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT AND I CAN GET IT TO THE COMMITTEE. I DON'T HAVE IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. APOLOGIZE. >> IS IT THE NATION GROUP TO CONTINUE YOUR ANALOGY -- THAT -- WETLANDS. >> THERE IS THE WOODS THAT ARE ON THE WEST SIDE OF COMMUNITY DRIVE. WHICH I BELIEVE MAY STILL BE UNDER THE OWNERSHIP OF THE MASTER DEVELOPER OR THEIRAIRE THERE HEIR. THE AREA THAT EXISTS HERE UP TO AND INCLUDING THE ADJACENT TO COMMUNITY DRIVE, THAT IS SPACE THAT IS TODAY OWNED BY THE CARMEL CLAY PARKS DEPARTMENT. OR THE BOARD. IT'S THE CARMEL CLAY
PARKS. >> LASTLY, COMMUNITY DRIVE IS ALREADY A PUBLIC STREET MAINTAINED BY THE CITY OF CARMEL? >> YES. ALL THE STREETS WITHIN THE LEGACY ARE PUBLIC WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE AREA THAT IS INTERMITTENT HERE, THAT IS WITHIN THE MULTIFAMILY. THE EXTENSION OF HOPE WELL PARKWAY JAMES BEEN AND LARSON WILL BE PUBLIC. OTHER INTERNAL DRIVES TO OUR COMMUNITY WOULD BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED. >> THANK YOU. >> MR. PRESIDENT. >> JOSH. >> JUST CLARIFICATION. I THINK THE PARKS FOUNDATION TECHNICALLY OWNS THE PARK SYSTEM, THE PARK THERE. BUT IT IS GOING TO BE TRANSFERRED TO CARMEL CLAY PARKS AND IT'S IN COMMUNITY MASTER PLANNING RIGHT NOW. SO THAT WOULD BE THE NATURE PRESERVATION AREA, IT INCLUDES THE HOME OF A COUPLE OF WELLHEADS AS WELL. SO ANYWAY PUBLIC INPUT. MASTER PLANNING. CARMEL CLAY PARKS.ORG, LOOK IT UP. I THINK IT'S INTERESTING WHAT WE'VE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO COME TO US AND SAY, WE WANT WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENT TO US, EVEN IF IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE DENSE. I HEAR THE COMMUNITY IN THIS ROOM QUITE FRANKLY TALKING A LITTLE BIT OUT OF BOTH SIDES ON THEIR MOUTH ON THE SUBJECT, BUT LET'S STICK WITH THE NOTION OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY SUPPOSED TO BE THERE SHOULD PROBABLY GO THERE. I THINK ESPECIALLY IF I WAS SOMEBODY WHO MOVED FROM NEW YORK AND THEY WERE EXPECTING CARMEL TO BE THE WALKABLE, LOVEABLE PLACE THAT WE TAUGHT IT TO BE AND -- TOUT IT TO BE AND INSTEAD WE GOT NOT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE LAND. THAT'S ALL I GOT. >> ONE LAST QUESTION FOR ME AND IT'S FOR STAFF. IN THE COMMENTS, STAFF RAISES THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THE NUMBER COUNT SHOULD BE APPLIED TO APARTMENTS VERSUS ATTACHED DWELLINGS WITH THE RATIONALE THESE ARE ALL FOR RENT UNITS THEREFORE THEY SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS APARTMENTS. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE THINKING BEHIND THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE ME BECAUSE WHEN THE PUD WAS ENACTED, THE CONCEPT OR THE PRODUCT OF A RENTAL DETACHED HOME, A COMMUNITY DETACHED RENTAL HOMES AT LEAST WASN'T IN MY MIND SET WHEN THE PUD WAS, CAME THROUGH THIS BODY. SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DISTINCTION THERE AND WHY THAT CHANGE IS IMPORTANT? >> SURE, SO WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH IS THAT EXISTING PUD AND DEFINITIONS THAT WERE ALREADY SET UP IN THAT PUD. SO BASED UPON THAT DEFINITION OF ATTACHED DWELLING IN THE PUD, IT'S DWELLINGS WHICH ARE ATTACHED VERTICALLY OR HORIZONTALLY INCLUDING DUPLEX, QUADRYPLEX THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY IT MAY BE COLD AS CONDO, INDIVIDUALLY DEEDED LOTS. ALL REFERENCES IN THE LEGACY ORDINANCE TO ATTACH EXCLUSE APARTMENTS. MY INTERPRETATION OF THAT IF IT IS, THOSE ARE MEANT FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED FOR SALE PRODUCTS, IF THESE ARE GOING TO BE FOR RENT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE WRITTEN CORRECTLY BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF UNITS THAT ARE ATTACHED, YOU KNOW, TWO UNITS ATTACHED TOGETHER. THAT THE WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS AN APARTMENT IF IT'S FOR RENT. >> I'LL NEED TO LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE OF THE PUD BECAUSE IT'S SORT OF IF IT QUACKS LUKE A DUCK AND WALKS LIKE A DUCK, IS IT REALLY A DUCK? WE'RE BASING THAT OR WHETHER IT'S FOR SALE OR FOR RENT? YOU DRIVE DOWN A STREET IN THIS COMMUNITY AND YOU WILL SEE WHAT APPEARS TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY FOR SALE PRODUCT. SO -- >> TAKE A LOOK -- >> FOR MY OWN HOMEWORK I NEED TO LOOK AT THAT FURTHER AND BE SURE WE'RE TREATING IT IN A WAY THAT GIVES THE BEST POSSIBLE OUTCOME. >> RIGHT. APARTMENT IS DEFINED IT SAYS A DWELLING INTENDED PRIMARILY FOR RENTAL. I DON'T THINK WE'RE OPPOSED TO THE LAYOUT OR THE DESIGN OR THE USE OF WHETHER IT'S ATTACHED OR DETACHED. JUST
MAKING SURE WE'RE QUALIFYING IT THE CORRECT -- CLASSIFYING IT THE CORRECT WAY SO IT IS APPROVED FOR THE FUTURE. >> ONE MORE COMMENT. THE JAMES DEAN CUT THROUGH I THINK ABSOLUTELY THAT'S GOING TO BE USED BY PEOPLE TO BYPASS THAT CORNER. THAT AREA IS HIGHLY DENSE IN THE MORNING AND IN THE EVENING WITH TRAFFIC. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FIND THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE. THAT'S GOING TO BE IT. SO ANYBODY WHO THINKS THAT PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO TAKE THAT AS A CUT THROUGH, IT'S DIFFERENT WHEN THEY CUT THROUGH ON COMMUNITY DRIVE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING THROUGH A NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE ARE NO HOUSES, JAMES DEAN IS COMPACT WITH HOUSES. I THINK THAT'S DANGEROUS FOR THOSE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE ON THE STREETLE. >> I THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING ISSUE. JON, IF YOU COULD RESEARCH, YOU STATED JAMES BEEN WILL BE A CITY DEDICATED PUBLIC CITY CONTROLLED STREET. >> REGARDLESS OF THE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO JAMES DEAN WOULD BE A STREET CONSTRUCTED AS ANY PART OF ANY PLAN THAT WOULD COME IN FRONT OF THE PLANNINGITION. >> THE QUESTION WOULD BE THEN BEING A PUBLIC OR DEDICATED CITY STREET, WHAT CAN THE CITY DO IN TERMS OF STOP SIGNS AND SPEED LIMITS TO MAKE IT NOT THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE. I AGREE -- >> ANOTHER THING WE DID BASED ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING, THIS PLAN STAFF REQUESTED WE REALIGN THAT STREET AND REMOVE ANY DRIVEWAYS FROM IT SO WE DON'T HAVE DRIVEWAYS BACKING ON TO THE STREET. IT'S FREE FROM ANY INDIVIDUAL DRIVEWAYS, LIKE WISE THE HOPEWELL PARKWAY THE PRIOR PLAN ORIGINALLY SUBMIT HAD HAD DRIVEWAYS ACCESSING THAT STREET. THAT WAS' MODIFIED TO CORRECT THAT. SO THE HOPEWELL PARKWAY AND JAMES DEAN DON'T HAVE DRIVES ACCESSING, THEY'VE EFFECTIVELY STREET INTERSECTIONS ACROSS THE PLAN. WE'VE GOT, I MEAN ALL STREETS WHETHER THEY'RE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE WOULD HAVE SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREETS, AS REQUIRED UNDER THE ORDINANCE. SHORTLY.) >> UNLIKE SOME OTHER PROJECTS WHERE WE HEAR PETITIONERS, IT'S TRANSITIONING FROM AN EMPTY FARM FIELD TO SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT. WE'VE GOT A PLAN IN PLACE, SO I GUESS IF YOU CAN SPEAK TO TONIGHT OR AT COMMITTEE ON WHY ARE THERE MARKET FACTORS DRIVING THIS? WHY IS THE CHANGE NEEDED? WHY IS THIS BIT ARE FOR ALL AS PETITIONERS? WHY IS IT BETTER FOR THE CITY. ? THERE IS DATA OR ANECDOTAL THOUGHTS YOU CAN BRING TO FURTHER THE THOUGHT ON WHY SHOULD THIS BODY BE INTERESTED IN THIS? I WASN'T AROUND IN 2018 WITH THE PUD THAT IS IN PLACE BUT I'VE NO DOUBT THAT FOLKS WORKED HARD ON WHAT IS THERE, WHY CHANGE THIS OTHER THAN THIS IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT? >> WE'LL BE PREPARED TO OUTLINE THAT AND SPECIFICALLY REGARDING TRAFFIC, THE PETITIONER HAS PREPARED TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, I'LL GET IN TOUCH WITH ENGINEERING, FIND OUT WHAT
SCOPE IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL REVIEW THEY WOULD WANT TO DO. WE CAN PRESENT THAT TO THE COMMITTEE AS WELL. >> IS THERE A MOTION? >> I BLAKE A MOTION WE SEND THIS TO THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE WITH THE VOTE COMING BACK TO THE WHOLE COMMISSION? >> YOUR SECOND, DEBBY, THANK YOU, MR. HILL AND THANK YOU FOR THE MOTION AND SECOND. >> ONE FINAL ITEM, WE WERE ASKED TOE AND WE AGREED TAF A SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. WE HAD A NEBBED MEETING LAST WEEK FOR RESIDENTS THAT RECEIVED NOTICE OF TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING, THAT IS GOING TO BE ON OCTOBER 19TH OR 0TH. WE'LL SEND OUT ADDITIONAL NOTICE WITH THAT AND WE'RE GOING TO NOTICE ALL NEIGHBOR WINCE THE RESIDENTS. EITHER THE 19TH OR 20TH OF OCTOBER. SECOND MEETING, ALL RESIDENTS WOULD GET NOTICE OF THAT WITHIN LEGACY. WE CAN CONTINUE TO REVIEW WHAT THE EXPECTATIONS WERE AT THE TIME VERSUS WHAT IS PROPOSED TODAY. >> I DON'T HEAR YOU ASKING FOR IT BUT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT I'M NOT HEARING IT, IS THERE A, DEFER THE START OF THE COMMITTEE'S WORK UNTIL AFTER THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS HAVE BEEN HELD? OR IS IT YOUR CLIENT'S PREFERENCE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OCTOBER 6TH COMMITTEE MEETING? >> WE'D PREFER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OCTOBER 6TH MEETING UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S, OUR EXPECTATION THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE ONLY, THE ONE AND ONLY COMMITTEE MEETING WITH REGARD TO THE REQUEST THAT IS ANTICIPATED THERE -- >> RIGHT. OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. >> JUST TO CONFIRMED MOTION WAGS PASSED SO THIS GOES TO THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE CURRENTLY SCHEDULED TO MEETING ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6. THANK YOU. >> GOING TO MOVE FORWARD TO OUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING WHICH IS THE HILT ON TEMPO HOTEL AT CLAY TERRACE, IF THOSE WHO ARE NOT STICKING AROUND WOULD CLEAR THE ROOM QUICKLY AND QUIETLY. WE WOULD BE GRATEFUL. (CAPTIONS WILL RESUME SHORTLY.) >> THE SITE IS ZONED UNDER PUD Z. 6 662-20. THE PETITION HAS BEEN FILED BY MARK LEACH ON BEHALF OF LISA CAL AN HARKES ON CHRISTOPHER CHEAT OF EK WHICHCO HOTEL GROUP L.L.C.. I SAW STEVE, THERE HE IS. SO STEVE WILL BE SPEAKING FOR MARK THIS EVENING. SHORTLY.) >> I'M PLEASED TO BE HERE WITH LISA CAL AN HARKES FROM CLAY TERRACE APARTMENTS BACK HERE IN THE BACK. YOU MAY HER HERE FROM 2020 AND CHRIS WHITE IS HERE AS WELL. THE TEAM ARCHITECT DAVID ROUSH IS HEAR AND ANOTHER PERSON IS HERE AND OUR LAND PLANNER MARK LEACH. FIRST OFF THE TEAM IS THANKFUL TO BE WOULD BEING WITH RACHEL AND THE CITY'S TEAM. HOPEFULLY THE PACKAGE YOU'VE SEEN IS WELL DEFINED AND THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF GOOD FEEDBACK ON THE BACK. I'LL GO OVER IT WITH YOU. SO IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH CLAY TERRACE, THIS IS SHOWING YOU WHERE WE ARE IN YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED IN THE LOCATION OF THE ONE ACRE SITE FOR THE NEW HOTEL TEMPO BY HILTON. AND IT'S WHERE THE LOCATION IS RIGHT NOW. THIS IS TO ORIENT YOU. THIS IS NORTH. 146TH. HIGHWAY HERE. IN CLAY TERRACE DRIVE, BOULEVARD RUNS THROUGH THE MIDDLE. A LITTLE BIT MORE AFTER ZOOMED IN LOOK. >> THERE IS A COURT-YARD
AREA OPENED IN THIS AREA WHERE A FIRST FLOOR, THERE IS THE LOBBY. FRONT DESK. THE BAR. KITCHEN, NUMBER OF ROOMS ON THE FIRST FLOOR. SECOND THROUGH 4TH FLOORS AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS AREA THROUGH HERE, THESE ARE ALL, WILL BE HOTEL ROOMS, THEN AT THE TOP FLOOR, ONE OF THE THINGS THE TEAM HAS BEEN WORKING ON WITH THE CITY IS THIS 5TH FLOOR. WE'LL HAVE AN OUTDOOR COVERED OUTDOOR AREA HERE, THERE WILL BE A BAR. THERE IS A DINING ROOM INSIDE WITH A COUPLE OF PRIVATE DINING ROOMS AS WELL. THERE IS THE FITNESS AREAS ON THE 5TH FLOOR ALSO. FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL PERSPECTIVE, THE TEAM HAS WORD CLOTHESLY WITH THE CITY. THAT IS MAIN BRICK WHERE THE TOWER IS ALONG THE BASE. (CAPTIONS WILL RESUME SHORTLY.) >> LONG TERM BICYCLE PARKING IS BEING PROVIDED INSIDE. WE'LL GET THAT UPDATED PLANS FOR THAT COMMITTEE MEETING. WE DO HAVE PLENTY OF BIKE PARKING. QUESTIONS ABOUT EXTERIOR LIGHTING AND ROOFTOP LIGHTING. THOSE ARE GOING TO BE INCORPORATED. THERE'S QUESTIONS ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT FIRST PAGE ABOUT PROVIDING DETAIL ABOUT THE SCREENING OF THE ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT. THAT HAS BEEN ACCOMMODATED AS WELL. WE'LL WORK WITH STAFF BETWEEN NOW AND THE COMMITTEE MEETING TO WORK IN THE DETAIL TO MAKE SURE THAT IS ALL THERE. THE PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT ARE TO MOVE FORWARD TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION IN 2023. YOU'LL BE SEEING AS WE GO THROUGH THE COMING MONTHS THE TEAM IS CONTINUING TO WORK WITH THE CITY ON THE REST OF THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT A FEW YEARS AGO. WE HAD A PANDEMIC THAT INTERVENED IN THE BEGINNING OF THAT. WE'RE BACK WITH THE FIRST PART OF THE PROCESS. I'M GOING TO WRAP UP AND RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOU TO FORWARD THIS ON TO YOUR COMMITTEE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, STEVE. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. CAN I SEE HOW MANY MEMBERS IN OUR GALLERY WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS PETITION. I SEE TWO HANDS. FIVE MINUTES APIECE. WHOEVER WISHES TO SPEAK FIRST, STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE. >> GOOD EVENING, I'LL BE BRIEF. I'M JESSICA SHERMAN. I'VE NEVER BEEN TO ONE OF THESE BEFORE. I'M HOPING I'M IN THE RIGHT MEETING. I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A MAJOR OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS HOTEL. BUT I BELIEVE IT FALLS IN THE AREA OF THE CLIATERAS DOG PARK WHICH I FREQUENTED IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS WITH MY DOG. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU HAVE DOGS HERE, BUT IF YOU DO, AND YOU'VE BEEN THERE YOU'LL PROBABLY NOTICE IT'S A GREAT COMMUNITY AND A LOT OF ACTIVITY. REALLY ALL I WANT TO ASK FOR IF THIS IS THAT LOCATION, I'M HOPING THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A SPACE FOR THAT TO BE RELOCATED SOMEWHERE IN CLAY TERRACE. THERE IS A REALLY BIG NEED FOR THIS IN THE COMMUNITY. THERE AREN'T MANY DOG PARKS IN THE AREA THAT ARE FREE. THERE'S ANOTHER ONE IN CARMEL BUT YOU HAVE TO PAY TO GET INTO IT AND THERE'S CURRENTLY A WAIT LIST. MY ONLY OTHER ALTERNATIVE IS HAMILTON TOWN CENTER. THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M ASKING FOR. AND I KNOW THERE WERE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE PARK I THOUGHT MAYBE WOULD BE HERE. BUT I DON'T SEE THEM HERE. SO I GUESS I'M THE LONE REPRESENTATIVE. AND WHAT WE'RE HOPING FOR IS THAT THIS IS THE CASE, WE CAN GET SOME SORT OF TEMPORARY LOCATION IN THE MEANTIME IF THERE IS A PERMANENT RELOCATION PLAN FOR THAT. BECAUSE THERE'S -- I MEAN, I'M PROBABLY THERE THREE TIMES A WEEK, AND MANY OTHER PEOPLE ARE AS WELL AND IT'S JUST A HUGE ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. YOUR FELLOW DOG OWNERS LET YOU SPEAK FOR THEM. YOU DID SUCH A GOOD JOB. >> THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR. >> I'M NOT A DOG LOVER BUT, IT IS GOING WHERE THE DOG PARK IS,
CORRECT? THERE WAS A RUMOR IT WAS GOING TO BE MOVED DOWN BY THE POND. AND THAT WAS GOING TO BOTHER ME. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE CITY OF CARMEL >> COULD WE GET YOUR NAME PLEASE FOR THE RECORD? >> I'D LIKE TO THANK THE CITY OF CARMEL FOR EVERYTHING THAT'S DONE. YOU GUYS ARE PUTTING UP WITH A LOT. IT ALWAYS DOES GET BACK TO TRAFFIC THOUGH, DOESN'T IT? ALL YOUR NEW PROJECT. WELL THAT'S BECAUSE THE TOWNS ARE BUMPING INTO EACH OTHER. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A TRAFFIC PROBLEM THERE ALSO. BECAUSE IN ADDITION TO THE HOTEL GOING UP I BELIEVE CLAY TERRACE IS ALSO GOING TO PUT APARTMENT COMPLEXES UP. THAT WAS THE LAST PLAN THAT WE WERE ADVISED OF THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY APPROVED. AND THEN IN THE CLAY TERRACE ITSELF, THEY WERE GOING TO REDUCE THOSE DRIVE LANES DOWN TO ONE LANE ON EACH SIDE, NORTH AND SOUTH, AND HAVE A BIKE PATH GOING UP EACH SIDE ALL FOR BIKES. I'M NOT ARGUING ABOUT THAT. BUT THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO GET MORE AND MORE HEAVY THROUGH THAT AREA. ONCE THE HOTEL'S THERE AND ONCE THE APARTMENT COMPLEXES ARE THERE. I THINK IT WAS A GREAT IDEA FOR PUTTING THAT NEW PATHWAY FROM RANGE LINE OVER TO LOWE'S WAY. THAT WAS GREAT. BUT IF YOU WANT TO SEE TRAFFIC, GO TO LOWE'S ON 146TH STREET BETWEEN 4:30 AND 5 O'CLOCK EVERY DAY, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT TRAFFIC BACKED UP GOING EAST ALL THE WAY TO CARRIER ROAD. BUMPER TO BUMPER. SO IT GETS DOWN TO TRAFFIC. AND THEN THE OTHER THING IT GETS DOWN TO IS SAFETY. WHEN THEY FIRST BUILD CLAY TERRACE, WE HAD PROBLEMS. I LIVE IN CLAY -- I LIVE IN WALTERS PLAZA. AND I'VE BEEN THERE SINCE '97. AND THE PROBLEM WAS THAT THEY PUT THE BARRIER WALL IN LAST. THEY BUILT CLAY TERRACE AND THEY PUT THE BARRIER WALL IN BETWEEN CLAY TERRACE AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT FIRST. AND I THINK WHENEVER YOU'RE LOOKING AT ADDITIONS THAT ARE WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD, TELL THE CONTRACTS BUILD THE BARRIER WALLS FIRST. AND SECONDLY, YOUR FIRST THING ON THE PLAN SHOULD BE WHAT AM I GOING TO DO CONSTRUCTION WISE THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BECAUSE THAT GETS PEOPLE UPSET AND THEN THEY'RE IN HERE AND THEY'RE COMPLAINING. TRAFFIC I STILL THINK, I WISH THEY WOULD HAVE PUT AN EXIT ON TO 31 BETWEEN ON NORTHBOUND SOUTH, OR NORTH, RATHER, AND CLAY TERRACE BOULEVARD. IF YOU CAN STILL DO THAT, THAT'S GOING TO HELP THE HOTEL. IT'S GOING TO HELP PEOPLE GET TO THE HOTEL AND GET AWAY FROM THE HOTEL. THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. SIR, IF WE COULD GET YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> SURE. JAMES CHIATO. >> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS PETITION? VERY WELL. THEN WE'LL PROCEED TO THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. EXCUSE ME. PETITIONER HAS A CHANCE TO RESPOND TO ANY OF THOSE COMMENTS. I'M SORRY, STEVE. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I THINK WE HAD TWO COMMENTS. THE FIRST ONE FOR MS. SHERMAN. SO YOU'LL BE PLEASED TO HEAR THE ANSWER TO THIS, WHICH IS THAT YOU ARE CORRECT. NUMBER ONE, THAT THAT IS IN THE LOCATION WHERE THE DOG PARK IS. AND THE CLAY TERRACE FOLKS ARE VERY GLAD THE COMMUNITY ENJOYS THE AMENITY THAT THEY'VE BEEN PROVIDING TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. IT'S NOT A CITY OWNED PARK. IT'S OWNED AND MANAGED AND MAINTAINED AT NO COST TO THE PUBLIC, THE CUSTOMERS THAT COME THERE TO CLAY TERRACE. THEY'RE HAPPY PEOPLE COME TO EJOY IT. AS PART OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEY DO PLAN TO RELOCATE IT. IT'S NOT CONFIRMED WHERE IT WILL BE YET. SECONDLY, WITH MR. CHIATO'S COMMENT ABOUT TRAFFIC. WE DID TALK A LOT ABOUT TRAFFIC. THERE WAS LOTS OF TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND ROAD IMPROVEMENT. SO WE'RE HAPPY AT THE COMMITTEE THE DESIGN TEAM WILL BE THERE TO PROVIDE REFRESHERS. TRAFFIC WAS SOMETHING MUCH DISCUSSED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. WE'RE HAPPY TO GO BACK OVER THERE IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. NOW THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS RACHEL KISLING. AS WE HAVE HEARD TONIGHT, PETITIONER PLANS TO BUILD A NEW HOTEL IN CLAY TERRACE. THIS IS THE FIRST PROJECT THAT IS COMING BEFORE US AFTER THEY REVISE THE PUD. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. AND THIS HOTEL MEETS NEARLY ALL OF THE PUD REQUIREMENTS AS I STATE IN THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. AND AS STEVE KIND OF WENT OVER THE ITEMS THAT THEY DO NOT MEET ARE JUST ITEMS I WAS NOT ABLE TO FIND OR WE JUST NEED MORE INFORMATION ON. SOME OF THOSE THINGS LIKE THE LONG TERM BIKE PARKING THAT'S REQUIRED FOR A HOTEL. THIS WILL NEED TO BE IN A CENTRAL LOCATION ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOTEL SO THAT IT'S WORKERS. I ASKED ABOUT EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL LIGHTING SO THAT WE COULD KNOW HOW THE BUILDING WILL BE ILLUMINATED EITHER WITH LIKE SCONCE TYPE LIGHTS ON THE ACTUAL BUILDING. OR UP LIGHTS SHINING ON TO THE BUILDING. THOSE ARE THE KIND OF DETAILS THAT WE WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT. ONE OF THE THINGS THE PUD SAYS IS THAT ROOFTOP LIGHTING IS PROHIBITED. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MAJOR ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT ABOVE THE RESTAURANT BAR DOES NOT HAVE INTEGRAL LIGHTING OR LIGHTING THAT SHINES UP INTO THE SKY. DETAILS ON THAT WOULD BE GOOD. AND THEN THE LAST THING AS FOR CLARIFICATION ON WAS THE ROOFTOP, WHERE THAT WILL BE AND HOW IT WILL BE FULLY SCREENED. THE PLAN DOES HAVE ENOUGH PARKING. AND PART OF THAT IS SHARED PARKING WITH THE REST OF THE SHOPPING CENTER. THERE ARE NO NEW PARKING GARAGES PROPOSED AT THIS TIME. BUT THERE MAY BE WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, FUTURE PHASES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF CLAY TERRACE, I MEAN. THERE ARE SIDEWALKS AROUND THE BUILDING AS WELL AS CONNECTIONS BEING PROVIDED TO CLAY TERRACE BOULEVARD AND TO THE PATH ALONG U.S. 31. THE BUILDING DESIGN IS MODERN WITH BRICK ARCHITECTURAL PANELS, STONE, GLASS AND METAL PANELS. AND I MENTIONED A MINUTE AGO, THE ROOFTOP BAR AND RESTAURANT WILL HAVE A REALLY UNIQUE ROOF FEATURE KIND OF RESEMBLES A WING OR SOMETHING LIKE SWOOPING UP TOWARDS THE SKY, AND IT OPENS OUT ON TO THE SOUTH COURTYARD IN THE EXISTING GREENSPACE THAT'S OUT THERE RIGHT NOW. NEW LANDSCAPING WILL BE PROVIDED ALL AROUND THE BUILDING. SOMETHING TO NOTE IS THAT THE EXISTING PLAYGROUND IN THE CENTER OF THE EXISTING GREENSPACE WILL BE REMOVED. THERE'S ALSO A PLAN FOR A FEW OF THOSE LARGE TREES TO BE REMOVED IN THAT CENTRAL GREENSPACE. THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT IN FAVOR OF REMOVING THOSE TREES. WE'VE HAD THE URBAN FORESTER GO OUT TO INSPECT THE TREES, AND HE BELIEVES THERE'S NO REASON TO TAKE THEM DOWN. THERE'S ALSO A PROPOSAL FOR SOME OF THE TREES ON SITE TO BE RELOCATED INTO THE CENTRAL GREEN AREA. AND WE'RE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T RECOMMEND RELOCATING TREES THAT ARE 6" OR GREATER IN DIAMETER. AND SOME OF THESE TREES THAT MAY BE RELOCATED ARE GREATER THAN 6". SO WHILE IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO PHYSICALLY RELOCATE THEM, IT MAY NOT BE THE BEST FOR THE FUTURE LONGEVITY OF THE TREE AND WE MIGHT BE BETTER TO START OVER WITH NEW TREES IN SOME OF THESE SPOTS. LASTLY, PROPOSED TO MEET THE PUD REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF NUMBER AND SIZE OF THE SIGNS. BUT WE WILL CONTINUE TO REVIEW THAT AS WELL AS THE OTHER ITEMS I'VE DISCUSSED AS WE WORK THROUGH THE REVIEW ON OUR PROJECT DOCKS ELECTRONIC SOFTWARE REVIEW. SO WE RECOMMEND THAT THIS GOES TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE MEETING ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6TH FOR FURTHER REVIEW. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:20 P.M. DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSION. JEFF. >> COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS. AND STEVE AND TEAM, I DON'T KNOW ANSWERS TODAY. YOU CAN REGROUP AT COMMITTEE. I CAN'T EVEN READ MY OWN NOTES. OH, IF THEY'RE NOT LOOKING FOR FIRM COMMITMENT BUT IF YOU CAN SPEAK MORE INTELLIGENTLY ABOUT TIMELINE OF DOG PARK AND ANY PROGRAMMING THAT HAPPENS IN THAT GREENSPACE, AND IS THERE A PLAN WHEN THE PUBLIC CAN GET BACK TO IT AGAIN. MIGHT HELP SET SOME EASE. I GUESS A QUESTION SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING. IF YOU LOOK AT AN AERIAL TODAY, THE PARKING THAT'S THERE, IT
RUNS ALMOST AT A STRAIGHT LINE KIND OF NORTHWESTLY. MAYBE YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS. THE NEW PARKING JUTS OUT CLOSER TO THE HIGHWAYS, OR SOMETHING HAPPENING ELEVATION WISE. SO THE GROUP MIGHT UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING. CAN YOU EXPLORE WHETHER THE TRAIL THAT IS IMPACTED CAN BE RECONSTRUCTED FIRST SO THAT THAT PEDESTRIAN PATH IS MAINTAINED. AND THEN AT THE RISK OF SPEAKING OUTSIDE OF AN AREA I KNOW VERY MUCH ABOUT, THE NORTHWEST FACES THE BUILDING LOOKS VERY PLAIN TO ME. THE OTHER ELEVATIONS LOOK GREAT. THE KIND OF WING, THE BALCONY, THE GLASS ON THE FIFTH FLOOR. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO SPRUCE UP THE NORTHWESTERLY FACING SIDE OF THE BUILDING? THANKS. >> STEVE, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THERE WILL BE VALET PARKING TO SUPPORT THE ROOFTOP AMENITY? AND THE REASON I ASK IS WE DON'T TYPICALLY DESIGN AROUND THAT POSSIBILITY. AND SO YOU HAVE VALET PARKING STAFF COMPETING WITH PATRONS AND SORT OF A MIXTURE OF TRAFFIC FLOWS. SO IF THE POSSIBILITY EXISTS AND IT'S SIGNIFICANT, THEN IT WILL BE GREAT TO DESIGN FOR THAT FUNCTION, NOT TRY TO SHOE HORN IT INTO A MORE STANDARD PARKING FIELD. >> THE ANSWER IS YES, THAT IS DEFINITELY A POSSIBILITY. WE'LL GO INTO THAT WITH THE COMMITTEE AND TALK MORE ABOUT IT. THANK YOU. >> MY OWN TWO CENTS WORTH FOR STAFF, LIGHTING STANDARDS ARE PRETTY CURRENT. BUT LIGHTING DESIGN AND LIGHTING PRODUCTS AND LIGHTING TECHNOLOGY ARE STILL MUCH MORE UP TO DATE THAN ARE LIGHTING STANDARDS. ANY UNIQUE FEATURES THAT ADD INTEREST WITHOUT OVERLY COMMERCIALIZING THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE MY SUPPORT, FOR ONE. TWO CENTS WORTH. >> DEBBIE. >> EXCUSE ME, JUST A QUICK COMMENT. IS IT POSSIBLE TO REVISIT THE TRAFFIC ENTRANCE AND EXIT? I REALIZE THAT'S NOT THE PLAN BEING BROUGHT. BUT IF THERE'S GOING TO BE MAJOR CONSTRUCTION THERE, IS THIS THE TIME TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN? I JUST KNOW THAT WHEN THAT WAS ALL REDESIGNED, IT'S NOT EXACTLY INTUITIVE FOR HOW TO GET TO POINT A TO POINT B. I'M JUST ASKING IS IT POSSIBLE TO LOOK AT THAT IN THE CONTEXT OF DEVELOPING THE OVERALL PLANS. I REALIZE IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE PER SE. THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO LOOK AT IT, REVISIT IT >> DO YOU MEAN ON TO 31? >> YES. >> OKAY. >> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE STATE IS NOT INTERESTED OF ANYMORE ENTRANCES AND EXITS ON TO 31. AND THE LESS, THE BETTER, IS MY UNDERSTANDING. >> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. >> I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT REVISITING THE -- OR VISITING THE ENTRANCES, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE ENTRANCE TO THIS PROJECT? OR THE ENTRANCE TO THE ENTIRE SHOPPING CENTER? >> MY QUESTION WAS ENTRANCE TO 31. BUT YES, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OVERAL DESIGN, NOW MIGHT BE THE TIME TO REVISIT. ESPECIALLY IF THE NORTH SIDE DRIVE WITHIN CLAY TERRACE IS GOING TO BE NARROWED. THERE'S GOING TO BE LANES REMOVED. NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO REVISIT THAT SO THAT YOU DON'T CREATE MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION RATHER THAN MAINTAIN TRAFFIC AS IT IS RIGHT NOW. >> MR. PRESIDENT, MAY I? YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS KIND OF CONCERNED WHEN WE START OVERSTEPPING OUR REACH, AND WE SHOULD LET THE ENGINEERS AND FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THOSE PEOPLE DO WHAT THEY DO. AND IF THE CITY ENGINEER WANTS TO MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION, I GET WORRIED WHEN WE START TO BECOME TRAFFIC AFICIONADOS OR WHEN WE OVERSTEP OUR BOUNDARIES. I JUST WANT TO REMIND THE COMMISSION. >> MR. PRESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO JUMP ON AFTER JOSH THERE AND SAY
WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT, CLAY TERRACE WAS THE MAIN NORTH-SOUTH DRAG. IT WASN'T BUILT JUST AS A SHOPPING CENTER. IT WAS BUILT AS THE MAIN AVENUE TO CARRY TRAFFIC NORTH AND SOUTH THERE. AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE ANYMORE WITH THE UPGRADES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE TO 31. SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE AS WIDE AS IT USED TO BE. >> ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER, GUIDANCE AS WE HEAD TO COMMITTEE? >> I CONCUR. I'M NOT TRYING TO OVERSTEP BOUNDS. I JUST SAY WHILE A PROJECT IS IN THIS STAGE, IF THOSE WHO HAVE AN INTEREST IN THAT WOULD WANT TO LOOK AT IT AGAIN, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO IT. THAT'S ALL I'M RAISING. >> STEVE, IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO NOT NECESSARILY TONIGHT, BUT AT SOME POINT TO RECAP WHAT WE ACCOMPLISHED IN OUR LAST VISIT WHEN THERE WAS SORT OF KIND OF A SATELLITE LEVEL REVIEW OF HOW THE WHOLE CLAY TERRACE PROJECT MIGHT CHANGE UNDER WASHINGTON PRIME'S OWNERSHIP. I THINK THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL. >> IS THERE A MOTION? >> I WOULD MOVE WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE ON, I THINK I HEARD OCTOBER 6TH, FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH VOTE COMING BACK TO THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION. >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU, MR. HILL AND MS. BUCKLER. I'M SORRY. SUE FOR THE SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THIS WILL GO TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER WORK, TO RETURN TO THE COMMISSION FOR FINAL ACTION BEGINNING ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6TH. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> OUR LAST PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING, FIRST AVENUE SOUTHEAST C-2 REZONE. THE APPLICANT SEEKS TO REZONE FOUR PARCELS R-2 RESIDENTIAL AND R-3 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE -- SUB AREA TO THE C-2 MIXED USE DISTRICT. THIS SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FIRST AVENUE SOUTHEAST BETWEEN FIRST STREET SOUTHEAST AND SUPPLY STREET. FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE CARMEL PLANNING COMMISSION. WITH ALL THOSE STREET NAMES AND CHANGES IN STREET NAMES, I DON'T THINK THIS LOCATION COULD GET ANYMORE CONFUSING TO IDENTIFY. YET I THINK WE ALL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO TELL US ABOUT, ADRIAN. ADRIAN IS HERE FOR THE PLAN COMMISSION TO PRESENT THE PETITION. >> YES. I'M ADRIANE KEELING, AND I BROUGHT A MAP. THIS IS THE CORNERS OF FIRST AND THIRD WE HAVE. THE PROPOSAL THIS EVENING IS TO REZONE FOUR PARCELS IN YELLOW. THIS IS MAIN STREET AND THIS IS RANGE LINE ROAD. AND THIS SITE IS BOUNDED BY FIRST AVENUE SOUTHEAST, FIRST STREET SOUTHEAST, SUPPLY STREET, WHICH IS STREET SOUTHEAST, AND THIS ALLEY. TO THE WEST. IS ANOTHER LANDMARK. THIS IS THE BLOCK. THIS IS THE EAST HALF OF THE BLOCK DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE INDIANA DESIGN CENTER ACROSS RIDGELINE. THE SITE CONTAINS A SMALL LAW OFFICE AND TWO RETAL HOMES. I WILL TURN ON THE ZONING LAYER HERE AND ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT. TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION. THE SITE IN QUESTION, AGAIN, OUTLINED IN YELLOW CONTAINS R-2, R-3, AND B-5 ZONING AS WELL AS THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY. HOWEVER, THE WESTERN HALF OF THIS BLOCK, AND THIS BLOCK THAT I'LL REFER TO IN MY PRESENTATION IS OUTLINED IN BLACK. THIS WESTERN HALF OF THE BLOCK IS ZONED C-2. THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROPOSAL THIS EVENING IS TO EXTEND THE C-2 DISTRICT ACROSS THE ENTIRE BLOCK TO ALLOW FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL TO BE REVIEWED UNDER A SINGULAR ZONING DISTRICT AND SINGULAR PROCESS. NORMALLY I WOULD SAY DURING THE
C-2 REZONES, NOTHING HAS BEEN FILED AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION IN TERMS OF SITE INFORMATION. HOWEVER, IN THIS INSTANCE, WE DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE SITE. THE CITY COUNCIL RECENTLY APPROVED THE CARMEL REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION TO PROCEED WITH THE ACQUISITION OF ALL OF THE PARCELS IN THIS BLOCK FOR A PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. DURING THAT DISCUSSION AT THE AUGUST 1ST COUNCIL MEETING WHERE THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED THAT ACQUISITION, THERE WERE DRAFT RENDERINGS SHARED. AND YOU MAY HAVE SEEN MEDIA COVERAGE FOR POTENTIAL MIXED USE. PLANS FOR THE 1933 LOUNGE RESTAURANT CONCEPT WITH UPPER STORY OFFICES. ALSO SHARED DURING THAT AUGUST 1ST MEETING WAS A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE BLOCK, WHICH INCLUDED TOWNHOMES ON THE EASTERN HALF OF THE BLOCK WHICH WOULD POTENTIALLY FACE SOUTH AVENUE EAST. HOWEVER, THAT CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN IS A CONCEPT. SIMPLY A CONCEPT AND IT HAS NOT BEEN DESIGNED OR ANYTHING APPROVED. BY THE CRC. WE HAVE RECEIVED A FEW COMMENTS. MOSTLY IN REACTION TO THAT CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THE REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS RECEIVED THOSE COMMENTS, AND HAS INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD TAKE THOSE INTO CONSIDERATION AS THEY WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO DESIGN THE SITE. DIRECTOR HENRY MATHESKI IS HERE IN THE AUDIENCE IF ANYONE WISHES TO SPEAK THIS EVENING. AFTER DESIGN OF THE PROJECT, THIS IS OF COURSE CONSIDERING IF THE C-2 IS APPROVED ACROSS THE ENTIRE SITE. C-2 INCLUDES SEVERAL STEPS, INCLUDING REVIEW BY THE REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. AN ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE OF THE CRC AND THE COMMISSION ITSELF. IN ADDITION TO CRC REVIEW, THE PROJECT IS REVIEWED BY DOCS STAFF, THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS HEARING OFFICER. THAT PUBLIC HEARING HAS ALL THE SAME METHODS OF PUBLIC NOTICE AS PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE FULL PLANNING COMMISSION. THAT INCLUDES NEWSPAPER NOTIFICATION, SIGNS AND LETTERS TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. THAT'S THE EXTENT OF MY PRESENTATION THIS EVENING. BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION. AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT YOU SUSPEND YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE THIS EVENING TO SEND THIS ITEM TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUES WITH COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. HOW MANY FOLKS ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS PETITION TONIGHT? ONE, TWO. MR. THOMAS? OKAY. ONE, TWO, THREE. OKAY. SO FOUR MINUTES APIECE. >> LET'S SEE IF THIS WORKS. YOU KNOW WHAT, CAN I USE YOUR -- THERE IT IS. IT LINES UP. SORRY. IS IT OBVIOUS IT WAS MY FIRST TIME? BOB CAMPBELL. I LIVE IN THE CARMEL'S ARTS AND DESIGN DISTRICT. I WILL ACTUALLY BE THE NEIGHBOR TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT. I LIKE A LOT OF WHAT HAS BEEN DESIGNED INTO THIS. AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD ADDITION TO THE AREA. HOWEVER, I DO HAVE A COUPLE REQUESTS. BECAUSE WE'RE JUST IN A DESIGN STAGE BECAUSE OF A COUPLE
CONCERNS. THE FIRST ONE IS THESE TOWNHOUSES ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING INTO OUR BACKYARDS AND DOWN INTO MY HOUSE. SO I WOULD FIRST ASK THAT IN DEVELOPMENT THEY ARE AT LEAST 15 FEET BACK FROM THE CURB. SECOND, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE THREE STORIES HIGH WITH A BALCONY ON TOP VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT IS GOING UP NEXT TO OUR FIREHOUSE HERE. AND WITH THAT, I WOULD ASK THAT THEY ARE SET FOUR FEET DOWN BECAUSE THIS IS ALL OBVIOUSLY FIRST AND SECOND STORY HOUSES HERE. AND THEN ALSO IF THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE BALCONIES ON TOP, HAVE THEM FACE WEST TOWARDS RANGE LINE BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO COME UP AND ENTER ON TO THAT WAY. THEY'LL HAVE A BETTER VIEW OF THE FIREWORKS. AND THAT'S MUCH BETTER THAN MY BACKYARD. AND THE OTHER REQUEST IN REGARDS TO THE TOWNHOUSES IS THEY HAVE A TREELINE. NUMBER ONE, AS THEY GROW, I ALSO OWN A TOWNHOUSE ON CITY CENTER DRIVE. SO I KNOW HOW THIS BLOCKS OUT THE SUN AND MAKES IT MUCH MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT AND GIVES THEM LESS OF A VIEW INTO THE SIDE OF MY HOUSE WHERE I HAVE SOME OPEN WINDOWS, INCLUDING ONE THAT LOOKS INTO A LARGE WALK-IN SHOWER THAT WAS PUT THERE WITH OPEN LIGHTING, ET CETERA, NOT KNOWING THAT 3RD STORY TOWNHOUSES WERE GOING TO GO UP THERE. SO ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THAT THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS NOT ALLOWED TO GO SOUTH OF SUPPLY ROAD ALONG FIRST AVENUE SOUTHEAST. AND THAT IT STOPS THERE. THERE'S NOT A PLAN B, PLAN C, ET CETERA. SO ALSO ONE OF MY OTHER CONCERNS WAS THE FIRST STREET SOUTHEAST. THIS LITTLE AREA RIGHT HERE. SO OF COURSE WE HAVE THE LIONS CLUB AND WE HAVE THIS PUBLIC PARKING LOT HERE. THE 1933 LOUNGE I THINK IS A GREAT ADDITION. ANY USED RESTAURANT GROUP COMING IS A FEATHER IN OUR CAP. I DO KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE VALET PARKING. WITH THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, AND YOU HEARD A LOT TONIGHT ABOUT TRAFFIC, THAT SEEMS TO BE A COMMON WORD. AND IT IS ALWAYS A CONCERN IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT. SO THAT SMALL STREET THERE, FIRST, RIGHT NOW THERE'S PUBLIC PARKING THERE. SO IT IS A NARROW STREET. SO WE WOULD WANT -- AND MAYBE IT'S NOT THE COMMITTEE BUT IT'S OUR OPPORTUNITY TO SAY IT, WE WOULD WANT A NO PARKING ZONE OR RESIDENTS ONLY PARKING WITH A ZONE STICKER THERE. AND ALSO NOT ALLOWING THE VALETS TO USE THAT PARKING LOT FOR THE LIONS CLUB. BECAUSE THAT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THE VALET PARKERS RUNNING IN A RUSH, IF THERE'S A LOT OF PARKING THERE, A LOT OF ISSUES CAN HAPPEN WITH THAT. SO THE CITY'S DONE A GREAT JOB DESIGNING PLENTY OF PARKING STRUCTURE. DEVELOPMENTS IN AND AROUND THE ARTS AND DESIGN DISTRICT. SO THERE SHOULD BE PLENTY OF PARKING WITHOUT USING THAT LOT FOR THE VALET PARKERS. I DID SEND AN EMAIL DETAILING ALL THIS AND A FEW OTHER THINGS TO HENRY. SO IF ANYBODY WANTS IT. I COPIED A LOT OF PEOPLE. I DON'T KNOW IF I GOT EVERYONE. AGAIN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT. I HAVE SOME CONCERNS. SO I HAVE SOME REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. THANK YOU >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JANET RAYMOND. MY HUSBAND MARK AND I LIVE ON THE MAP, WE'LL JUST SAY. WE LIVE ON SOUTH RANGE LINE ROAD A COUPLE OF BLOCKS SOUTH OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. AND WE DO APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO, SINCE WE'RE EARLY ON IN THE CONCEPT AND DESIGN PHASE, TO VOICE SOME CONCERNS OR THINGS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE TAKEN UNDER CONSIDERATION AS PLANNING MOVES FORWARD. I THINK I ECHO THE SENTIMENTS OF MOST IN THE GROUP THAT WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S PART OF WHY WE CHOOSE TO LIVE IN DOWNTOWN CARMEL AND INVEST IN THE AREA. WE JUST ASK THAT THE GROUP BE MINDFUL OF LONG-TERM RESIDENTS THAT HAVE LIVED IN THE AREA. WE'VE ACTUALLY OWNED OUR PROPERTY SINCE 1991. SO WE'VE SEEN ALL OF THIS CHANGE HAPPEN. AND IT'S WHY WE CONTINUE TO LIVE HERE. TO ECHO SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN VOICED, I THINK VALET PARKING WHICH YOU ASTUTELY MENTIONED. I THINK WE'VE ALL SEEN TRAFFIC BACKED UP TO ANTHONY'S. WE'D LIKE TO AVOID THAT IN THIS AREA. VEHICLE ENTRANCES TO THE PROPERTY. IF THOSE COULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO DIRECT TRAFFIC OUT ON TO RANGE LINE ROAD OR TO MAIN STREET TO AVOID FIRST AVENUE AS WELL AS THE ALLEYWAY THAT RUNS BEHIND OR KIND OF IN BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY. AND STRANGELY ENOUGH, BEHIND OUR PROPERTY AS WELL. I THINK THAT WILL BE HELPFUL FOR THE COMMUNITY. LOADING DOCKS AND DUMPSTERS. WE'RE GETTING A LOT MORE ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA. SO IF THOSE COULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE LOCATED CLOSER TO EXISTING COMMERCIAL LOADING DOCKS AND DUMPSTERS SO WE CAN KEEP THAT NOISE KIND OF CENTRALIZED AND BUFFERED FROM THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. I ALSO AGREE WITH THE SETBACK OF THE TOWNHOMES SO WE CAN MAINTAIN THAT RESIDENTIAL LOOK AND FEEL ON FIRST AVENUE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS WELL. SO THEY'RE NOT JUST RIGHT UP AGAINST THE SIDEWALK. AND THEN ANY TYPE OF TREE OR HEDGE BORDER AT THAT SOUTHEAST END TO BUFFER EXISTING RESIDENCES AND APARTMENTS ALONG THAT EXISTING AREA WOULD BE SOMETHING WE'D LIKE TO HAVE CONSIDERED ALSO. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE]. >> I'LL BE REAL QUICK HERE. TR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE MY OWN DANG HOUSE IS. THERE YOU GO. NORTH IS OBVIOUSLY GOING THIS WAY. MY NAME IS JEFF WATKINS. WE LIVE AT 121 FIRST STREET SOUTHEAST. JUST BRIEFLY, I JUST WANTED TO BACK UP WHAT JANET AND BOB SAID. BOB IS MY NEIGHBOR. BOB DIDN'T SHOW IT BUT BOB LIVES RIGHT HERE, AND WE LIVE RIGHT HERE. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY THE LIONS CLUB PARKING LOT HERE. RIGHT HERE IS GOING TO BE THE TOWNHOMES COMING THROUGH HERE. AND THEN YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY AS BOB HAS INDICATED, HEIGHTH AND HOW THOSE ARE CONSTRUCTED AND HOW THEY LOOK TOWARDS THE HOMES THAT ARE ONE AND TWO STORIES HERE IS CONSIDERATION. THE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. WELL WHAT I TELL MY FOLKS IS, AND AS I GO THROUGH LIFE, THE THINGS I THINK ARE WHAT ARE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. WHAT ARE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT OR A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THAT? I DON'T KNOW. BUT A COUPLE OF THEM THAT I WROTE DOWN ARE PARKING AND NEIGHBORHOOD LIGHTING. I CAN SAY ON THIS STREET RIGHT HERE, IT'S DARK. SO IF SOMEHOW THIS IS GOING TO BE PART OF THIS, WHAT KIND OF LIGHTING IS GOING TO BE HERE? WE DO NOT WANT STRONG LIGHTING BECAUSE WE PREFER WHAT WE HAVE. WHAT I WOULD ASK FOR CONSIDERATION ON THE PARKING IS THAT THIS LITTLE STUB STREET HERE CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN FOR NO PARKING ON THIS. AS BOB PREVIOUSLY ALLUDED TO, THIS IS GOING TO BE THE RESTAURANT SUPPOSEDLY ACCORDING TO THE PLANS. AND THIS I'M ASSUMING MAY BE USED FOR PARKING FOR THE RESTAURANT. WE WOULD ASK THAT THAT CONSIDERATION OF NOT ALLOWING THE VALET PARKING HERE BE CONSIDERED. SO THAT'S REALLY, WE'RE 100% FOR THIS. WE APPRECIATE THIS DEVELOPMENT. WE LOOK FORWARD TO IT. BUT SOME APPROPRIATE CONSIDERATIONS OF THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF HOW THIS WILL HIT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS WHAT WE ASK FOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER. >> SORRY, I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE HAD A LONG NIGHT SO I'LL TRY TO BE PRETTY QUICK. LET ME PUT THIS ON THE NORTH SIDE. SO I REPRESENT A FEW OTHER NEIGHBORS AND I'VE BEEN ASKED TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS ZAK JUDANSICK. I'VE BEEN A LONG TIME OWNER ON SUPPLY STREET.
YOU PROBABLY KNOW ME FROM THE NEWS. I'M A BIG PROPONENT. I'VE BEEN INTERVIEWED MULTIPLE TIMES BY THE INDY STAR, ALL NEWS OUTLETS. I LOVE WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IN CARMEL. BEFORE WE GET AHEAD OF OURSELVES, THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING HERE. TONIGHT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REZONING. WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS IF YOU FLIP THIS TO C-2, IT GOES TO THESE FINE FOLKS WHO HAVE DONE A LOVELY JOB. BUT THEN WE DON'T HAVE A PARTNERSHIP. IT GOES TO THEM AND IT'S GONE. WE DON'T GET TO REVOTE. WE DON'T GET TO TALK ABOUT THESE CONSIDERATIONS. IT SAYS A PARTNERSHIP FOR TOMORROW. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS A PARTNERSHIP. AND THE ABILITY TO HAVE A SAY IN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THIS PROPERTY. IF YOU VOTE TO FLIP IT TO C-2 TONIGHT OR TOMORROW, IT GOES TO MR. MATESKI AND IT'S GONE. THAT'S FINE TO REDEVELOPMENT. WE WANT A PARTNERSHIP. SO CAN WE START AT STEP ONE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT COLOR THEY ARE, WHAT THE ELEVATION IS. CAN WE START AT STEP ONE. WHAT IS THE PLAN? THEY'VE EVEN SAID THIS IS THEORETICAL ON WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN. TOWNHOMES. I DON'T KNOW, YOU DON'T KNOW. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME AS A PUBLIC AUDIENCE TO EVEN TALK ABOUT IT. YOU GUYS VOTED TO FLIP IT OVER. I DIDN'T GET NOTICE AT ALL. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME I GET TO TALK TO YOU GUYS AND CREATE THAT PARTNERSHIP. THIS OVERLAY HERE WAS DESIGNED. AS YOU GUYS TALKED ABOUT, THIS WAS A PLANNED CITY. THOSE THAT CAME BEFORE YOU PLANNED THIS CITY. THIS IS COMPLETELY CHANGING THAT PLAN. THESE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE SINGLE STORY HOMES. THESE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE BUNGALOW TYPE COMMUNITIES. WE'RE NOT FIGHTING AGAINST 1933. NOBODY WANTS THAT. I WANT THE DEVELOPMENT. IT ONLY HELPS MY PROPERTY VALUE. WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR AGAIN IS A PARTNERSHIP. AND THIS ISN'T A PARTNERSHIP KICKING IT OVER TO C-2. YOU GUYS DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON. NO OFFENSE, YOU DON'T. I EVEN CALLED A COUPLE OF YOU AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT YOU WERE VOTING ON YESTERDAY. WE'RE VOTING ON THINGS WE DON'T UNDERSTAND. UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, THAT'S A GREAT POINT. WE HAVE NO CLUE. THEY COULD DO WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH THIS PROPERTY. I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S WHAT'S BEST FOR THE CITY. JOSH HAD A GREAT PHRASE, I WISH I COULD SAY IT. I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME OR THE RIGHT PLACE TO DO THIS DEVELOPMENT. OR JUST MAGICALLY FLIP IT TO C-2 AND THEY GET TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT. BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE REZONING OF IT. WE CAN GET TO THE NEXT STEPS. BUT IF YOU FLIP IT TO C-2, THERE ARE NO MORE STEPS. WHILE YOU GUYS SAID THERE ARE. THERE ARE NONE FOR US. THERE'S NO PARTNERSHIP. IT GOES AND GETS DONE. AND THAT'S MY PIECE. MY PEACE. >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK TONIGHT ON THIS PETITION? OKAY. THEN ADRIANE, IF YOU'D CARE TO RESPOND. >> HENRY, IN WHAT CAPACITY ARE YOU SPEAKING TONIGHT? >> HI, MR. PRESIDENT, I WANTED TO MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE IF THE COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU. ADRIANE, YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS WE'VE JUST HEARD. >> THERE ARE A LOT OF SITE PLAN CONCERNS AND THINGS THAT WERE ADDRESSED SITE PLAN WISE. WE'RE SIMPLY NOT TO THAT LEVEL OF DESIGN YET. HOWEVER, IT IS GOOD TO BRING THOSE THINGS UP EARLY IN THE PROCESS BEFORE THINGS ARE DESIGNED. THERE'S MENTION OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS AND THAT SORT OF THING. THOSE ARE NOT PART OF THIS SITE. HOWEVER, THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE CITY COUNCIL'S AND CITY CODE PURVIEW RATHER THAN A ZONING, AND THIS REZONE ISSUE. SPEAKING FROM DOCS -- I JUST HAD THE UDO HERE. MY PAPER HIT THE SCREEN. IT'S FINE. I'M FINE. WE'LL JUST CLOSE THIS. SPEAKING FROM DOCS, WE WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND PROJECT REVIEWS. WE HAVE RECEIVED THESE COMMENTS. WE KNOW THE REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS RECEIVED THESE COMMENTS AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO RELAY THOSE COMMENTS IF THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY RECEIVED THEM FOR TO WORK WITH THE DESIGN OF THIS PROJECT.
IT'S SIMPLY TOO EARLY. WE KNOW THAT MOST C-2 REZONES WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION WHATSOEVER. IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, WE KNOW THE CITY COUNCIL HAS AUTHORIZED THE PURCHASE OF THAT ENTIRE BLOCK. WE KNOW THAT THAT BLOCK WOULD BE DEVELOPED SIMULTANEOUSLY. SO THE PURPOSE OF THE REZONE IS TO HAVE THE ENTIRE BLOCK GO THROUGH ONE ZONING AND ONE PROCESS, INSTEAD OF HAVING HALF THE BLOCK GO THROUGH ONE PROCESS AND HALF OF THE BLOCK GO THROUGH ANOTHER PROCESS. AND THAT'S THE GENESIS OF MANY OF THE C-2 PROJECTS. IT JUST HAPPENS IN THIS CASE THAT PART OF THE BLOCK ALREADY IS ZONED C-2. SO IT'S SIMPLY NOT DESIGNED YET. BUT THE EARLIER THE BETTER TO GET THESE KINDS OF COMMENTS ON THE RECORD. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE A DEPARTMENT REPORT BEYOND ADRIANE'S PRESENTATION? VERY GOOD. THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:52. 8:52, EXCUSE ME. DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSION. START WITH SUE. >> WELL YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE THAT CAME TONIGHT AND SPOKE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF C-2 REZONES OVER THE YEARS. AND WE -- THIS IS A REZONE. AND SO THE THINGS THAT YOU'VE SEEN TONIGHT IN LEGACY OR FLORA, THOSE ARE PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECTS WHERE WE CAN LOOK AT LOADING DOCKS AND DUMPSTERS AND TRAFFIC AND LIGHTING AND THINGS THAT FALL. BUT WE'RE ONLY ASKED TO REQUEST BY THE DEPARTMENT TO REZONE THIS TO C-2. I HAVE NEVER HAD ANYBODY IN MY YEARS COME AND EXPRESS AHEAD OF TIME LIKE THIS CONCERNS. I THINK THAT'S GREAT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ON HOW PEOPLE CAN PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS IF IT GETS REZONED. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT QUESTION. AGAIN, HENRY MATESKI. WE TOOK THIS PROJECT TO CITY COUNCIL ASKING THEM THE FOUNDATIONAL QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY APPROVE A PROJECT LIKE THIS. THIS IS A WHOLISTIC PROJECT. WE CAN'T PICK AND CHOOSE DIFFERENT PARTS OF IT. WE HAVE OFFICE AND 1933 FACING RANGE LINE. AND TO TRANSITION OVER TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE HAVE FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL ACROSS FROM FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL. I KNOW THAT THE GENTLEMAN THAT SPOKE EARLIER SAID A STATEMENT LIKE ONCE A C-2, NOTHING CAN BE DONE. WELL FIRST, THE REZONING COMMISSION REPRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THE FOR SALE PRODUCT WOULD BE THE THREE AND A HALF STORY, FOUR STORY. IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE GOING TO DEPART FROM THAT. BUT ONCE IF THIS COMMISSION ALLOWS IT AND CITY COUNCIL AGREES AND IT GETS REZONED, THERE'S A PER THE UDO, A CRC ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. THAT'S WHERE WE WORK WITH THE ARCHITECTS TO REALLY BRING AS GREAT A PRODUCT AS POSSIBLE. I THINK YOU OFTENTIMES FIND THAT C ZONING PROJECTS HAVE ARCHITECTURE AND MATERIALS THAT ARE REALLY HIGH LEVEL. SO WE WANT TO CONTINUE THAT. AFTER CRC ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL, WHICH TRULY WORKS AS ALMOST LIKE A TACK PROCESS. INTERNALLY ALL DIRECTORS FROM ALL DEPARTMENTS ALL PARTICIPATE IN EVEN GETTING IT TO THE STAGE WHERE IT CAN BE FILED TO THE CITY AND GO TO THE ADLS. WE ALMOST HAVE AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PROCESS BEFORE FILED TO THE CITY. PROJECTS ARE OBVIOUSLY FILED WITH PROJECT DOCKS, WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMITTEE SERVICES. IT GOES THROUGH FULL PROCESS.
IT OBVIOUSLY MEETS STATE STATUTES. THAT HAPPENS IN FRONT OF MICHAEL HARBAUGH AS A HEARING OFFICER. AND PEOPLE COME TO THOSE MEETINGS. PEOPLE VOICE THEIR CONCERNS. AND WE ADJUST. SO I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT KIND OF CONVERSATION. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THIS PROJECT KNOWING THERE'S GOING TO BE A FOURTH STORY ELEMENT ON THE FOR SALE COMPONET FACING THE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL, THE ACROSS THE STREET RESIDENTIAL HOUSING FRANKLY AT FIRST AND FIRST. IF YOU WALK AROUND TO SOME OF THE OTHER FIRST AND FIRSTS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR CENTRAL CORE, RIGHT, THERE'S FOUR OF THESE. THEY HAVE FIVE-STORY PROJECTS ON THEM. THEY'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A CITY. THIS IS THE CENTER OF OUR CITY. AND IT MAKES SENSE THAT DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWS WHAT WE'VE ALL BEEN WORKING TOWARDS IN OUR CENTRAL COURT. >> AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT THE EVENT YOU SEE HERE TONIGHT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHEN DOES A RESIDENT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND EXPRESS THEIR CONCERNS ON LIGHTING IN THEIR HOUSE AND PARKING? I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANY OPPORTUNITY, AND IF SO, MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO THESE PEOPLE TONIGHT AND LET THEM KNOW. >> NOTHING GETS APPROVED WITHOUT ADLS APPROVAL, WITHOUT DOCS APPROVAL. EVERY COMMUNICATION TO THE CITY THAT YOU AND I HAVE RECEIVED ALL GOES INTO THE LOG FILE. ALL GOES INTO THE FILE THAT DIRECTOR HARBAUGH DISCUSSES WHEN IT GOES THROUGH DCOS APPROVAL. ALL THAT CONTINUES TO BE THE CASE. ONCE THESE THINGS ARE PUBLICLY NOTICED AS THEY'RE REQUIRED TO BE BY STATE STATUTE. THERE'S NOTICE MADE. THERE'S NOTICE IN THE PAPER. THERE'S A SIGN THAT GOES UP. ALL THOSE ARE PUBLIC MEETINGS. IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT BETWEEN DCOS AND C-2 REZONING. PLEASE ADD ANYTHING. >> IF I COULD JUST ADD. THERE ISN'T A SET SCHEDULE FOR THE C-2 PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT GO BEFORE MIKE AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING OFFICER. IT REALLY HAPPENS ON A PROJECT BY PROJECT BASIS SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A PROJECT ALL THE TIME. AND WE WORK THROUGH DETAILS AND TRY TO DO THE SAME THING THAT WE DO HERE IS WORK THROUGH ALL THE DETAILS OF THE PROJECT. MAKING SURE IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDO. AND THEN LET THEM HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING OFFICER PUBLIC MEETING. WHICH WILL BE, AS HENRY SAID, PUBLICLY NOTICED IN ALL THREE MANNERS THAT IS REQUIRED THE SAME AS IT IS FOR YOUR BODY HERE. NOTICE IN THE PAPER 21 DAYS IN ADVANCE. SIGN ON THE PROPERTY 21 DAYS IN ADVANCE. AND LETTERS TO ALL THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORS 21 DAYS IN ADVANCE. SO ALL THE SAME THINGS. IT'S JUST NOT ON A SET SCHEDULE. >> BUT WHEN THEY GET THE LETTERS, DO THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN AND SPEAK? >> YES. >> OKAY. >> BUT WITH ME, THEY CAN TALK TO ME AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE DEPARTMENT. AND I WORK WITH THE CRC. THEY CAN TALK ABOUT THE CRC. >> BUT IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. THERE'S NO PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PUBLIC. >> NO, IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING. >> FOR THEM TO SPEAK. I'M SORRY. I MISUNDERSTOOD. >> SO THEY CAN TALK TO ME ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS AND I CAN WORK THROUGH THOSE CONCERNS WITH THE ARCHITECTS AND THE DEVELOPERS FOR THEM AHEAD OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY. AND THEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS JUST LIKE THIS, BUT IT'S HELD BEFORE A HEARING OFFICER. AND THE HEARING OFFICER IS MIKE. AND THAT MEETING HAPPENS OVER IN THE CAUCUS ROOMS. WHAT I WAS SAYING IS IT DOESN'T HAPPEN ON A REGULAR SCHEDULE LIKE THIS MEETING DOES BECAUSE THEY COME AS NEEDED WHEN THERE ARE PROJECTS. BUT YOU STILL HAVE 21 DAYS PRIOR TO KNOW ABOUT IT. >> THAT'S FINE. I JUST WANTED THAT CLARIFIED BECAUSE THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE TONIGHT THAT THEY WOULD HAVE NO OPPORTUNITY TO ADD ANY INPUT. AND I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT AND FIND OUT IF THAT WAS TRUE SO THERE'S NO MISCONCEPTION. SO THANK YOU. THAT THEY CAN SPEAK. >> YUP. >> THANK YOU, SUE, BECAUSE IT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT. CHRISTINE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. SO FOR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS ONCE IT'S REZONED TO C-2, IT WOULD BE 75 FEET FOR THE PRIMARY BUILDING. BUT IT'S 35 FEET FOR A BUILDING THAT'S ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL. IN THE C-2 REZONING. I'M CORRECT, RIGHT? YES. SO ARE THESE TOWNHOMES, I'M
HEARING FOUR STORIES AND I'M ALSO HEARING THAT THEY'RE APPROVED. I'M HEARING IT'S JUST A CONCEPT. ARE YOU GOING TO BE STAYING WITHIN THAT 35-FEET MAXIMUM OR IS THERE AN EXPECTATION THAT A VARIANCE IS GOING TO BE SOUGHT? >> I KNOW THAT THEY WILL BE -- THEY WILL HAVE A FOUR-STORY ELEMENT. BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DESIGNED, IT HASN'T GONE THROUGH. WE'RE JUST NOT THERE YET. >> OKAY. SO IF IT DID END UP BEING MORE THAN 35 FEET, YOU'D HAVE TO GET A VARIANCE THROUGH THE BCA, IS THAT CORRECT? >> I'D HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK ALL THAT. BUT IF THERE'S A VARIANCE REQUIRED, THEN YES. >> ADRIANE IS THE PETITIONER, WHY DON'T YOU SPEAK TO THAT, PLEASE. >> YES. IF THE STANDARDS OF THE C-2 ZONING ARE NOT MET, THEN AS PART OF THE UDO, THE VARIANCE PROCESS WOULD BE THE PROCESS TO SECRETLY FROM THOSE STANDARDS. >> AND IS IT SAFE TO ASSUME THAT THOSE OF US WHO WISH TO CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THIS FORWARD THAT OUR INPUT WOULD BE WELCOMED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE HEARING OFFICER JUST AS ANY INPUT FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC? >> YES, ABSOLUTELY. >> GOOD. THANK YOU. >> MR. PRESIDENT. ALTHOUGH THIS HAS BEEN THE MOST FUN 17 HOURS OF MY LIFE, TRY MY BEST NOT TO MAKE THIS TOO LONG-WINDED. I GUESS, YOU KNOW, I'M HEARING THIS IS LIKE ONE BIG THING. BUT THEN WHAT I'M SEEING THESE OUTLINES LAID OVER AN IMAGE, IT APPEARS TO BE TOO WILDLY TWO DIFFERENT THINGS SEPARATED BY A SEA OF ASPHALT. I'M LOOKING AT THIS BOX IN RED AS THE TRANSITION ZONE BETWEEN C-2 AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THE OVERLAY. YOU KNOW, I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE CAN'T DEVELOP THE SECOND BLOCK JUST THE WAY WE'D NORMALLY DO IT THROUGH THIS COMMISSION. INSTEAD OF ALL DO RESPECT TO MY FRIEND, MR. HENRY, WHO DOES AMAZING WORK IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND I HEARD STAFF SAY AND I SAW THE DIRECTOR NOD HIS HEAD ABOUT THE HEARING OFFICER AND OPEN DOOR. I JUST GUESS I'D LIKE TO SEE THE SECOND BLOCK BROUGHT INTO THE LIGHT, AND SEE IT GO THROUGH THE REGULAR PROCESS. SO I'M NOT FEELING IT TONIGHT. >> EXCUSE ME. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER? SO AGAIN, TO CLARIFY SUE'S LINE OF UNDERSTANDING, THE PROCESS FOR C-2, ONCE THE REZONING IS GRANTED, IF IT'S GRANTED, THE APPROVAL PROCESS, THE OVERSIGHT PROCESS FOR WHAT EVENTUALLY IS DEVELOPED ON THAT C-2 SITE IS THE SAME AS WHAT COMES BEFORE THIS BODY, EXCEPT THAT THE DECIDING BODY IN THE CASE OF THE C-2 IS A BODY OF ONE, THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY SERVICE, INSTEAD OF A BODY OF NINE. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY. >> MIKE WANTS TO SPEAK MORE. HE COULD EXPLAIN IT. >> YEAH, MIKE. >> I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO SUE'S QUESTION. BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT'S BEEN SAID KIND OF OVER AND OVER TONIGHT, THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT AND THAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE EMAILS IS ALL EXTREMELY HELPFUL FOR A PROJECT THAT'S NOT YET BEEN DESIGNED. CLEARLY THERE'S A CONCEPT. AND THAT CONCEPT IS TIED TO THE ECONOMICS OF PULLING OFF MIXED USE PROJECT. ESPECIALLY ON EXPENSIVE REAL ESTATE THAT'S SPLIT ZONED IN THE MIDDLE OF DOWNTOWN. AND THE REQUEST TO ZONE AT C-2 IS BECAUSE THIS IS A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. AND WE'VE DONE A NUMBER OF C-2 PROJECTS. AND THE PROCESS IS VIRTUALLY THE SAME. BUT WITH EACH PROJECT, IT GETS BETTER. I THINK IT GETS BETTER AS WE
LEARN HOW TO DO REDEVELOPMENT. WE LEARN HOW TO BALANCE PUBLIC INPUT WITH THE NEEDS OF THE DEVELOPMENT. WITH THE ECONOMICS, AND ALL THAT. BUT WITH AN EYE ON THE HIGHEST QULITY PROJECT THAT WE CAN GET. AND I FEEL LIKE THE PROJECTS THAT WE'VE SEEN APPROVED AND BUILT ARE EXTREMELY HIGH QUALITY, AND ARE PART OF WHAT GIVES, YOU KNOW, CARMEL THE GOOD CONSIDERATION THAT WE DO AS A PLACE TO LIVE AND DOWNTOWN HAS COME ALIVE. AND I THEY THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW PROCESS THAT HENRY ALLUDED TO, I MEAN, THAT IS MUCH MORE REFINED TODAY. AND IN PART WITH THE HELP OF LEGAL COUNSEL, IT'S MUCH MORE PUBLICLY ORIENTED THAN IT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY AS WELL. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. BUT I DO THINK THAT THE CONSIDERATION OF THE PUBLIC INPUT TONIGHT WILL BE DIRECTLY BUILT INTO THE PROJECT. AND A LOT OF THE SAME EYES THAT BRING YOU PROJECTS ARE THE EYES THAT HELP REFINE THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. I MEAN, RACHEL, SHE IS IMBEDDED IN REDEVELOPMENT. AND SHE PAYS ATTENTION TO DUMPSTER AND DUMPSTER LOCATIONS AND SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING. AND DARREN IS INVOLVED IN THE LANDSCAPING. ALL THOSE THINGS, THESE PROJECTS GET THE SAME ATTENTION EVEN THOUGH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE NOT QUITE AS ROBUST AS THEY ARE IN SUBURBAN AREAS. BUT THIS IS DOWNTOWN. AND IT'S INTENDED TO HAVE AN URBAN DESIGN QUALITY TO IT. IT'S NOT SUBURBAN QUALITY DESIGN. I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE STREETS ARE PUBLIC. FIRST STREET IS PUBLIC. AND IF NO PARKING IS GOING TO OCCUR ON THOSE STREETS, IT'S GOING TO BE THROUGH THE RESULT OF EITHER THE COUNCIL OR THE BOARD OF WORKS POSTING NO PARKING. IT CAN'T BE SOMETHING THAT WE IMPOSE. AND WE JUST HAD TO AMEND A PUD BECAUSE THERE'S PROVISIONS FOR NO PARKING. AND THAT'S NOT OUR JOB. THAT'S NOT THE DEPARTMENT'S JOB. THAT'S EITHER THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR THE CITY ENGINEER. BUT WE'LL ALSO TAKE ALL THOSE THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION. AND THE OTHER PART IS THAT THESE ARE ALL WORKS IN PROGRESS. YOU KNOW, AS DETAILS, AS WE FIND THINGS MAYBE AREN'T WORKING, WE'RE TRYING TO IMPROVE THOSE TOO OVER TIME. WE'LL WORK ON LIGHTING AND WE'LL MAKE SURE IT'S RIGHT. AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM EITHER THROUGH CODE ENFORCEMENT OR DOUBLING BACK ON THE APPROVED PLAN TO MAKE SURE WHAT WAS APPROVED IS WHAT GETS BUILT. >> MIKE AND ADRIANE, I APPRECIATE ONE OF THE CHALLENGES OF THIS SITUATION IS WE HAVE HALF OF A PERSPECTIVE DEVELOPMENT SITE ALREADY ZONED C-2 AND NEED THE OTHER HALF. AND I UNDERSTAND AND FULLY APPRECIATE THAT USERS AND PRIVATE DEVELOPERS NEED A HIGH LEVEL OF CERTAINTY AS THEY PURSUE A PROJECT. AND EVERY DAY AS A PROJECT MOVES ALONG, THEY HAVE TO ASK THEMSELVES EVERY DAY IS A GO OR NO-GO DECISION FOR THEM. SO THE LACK OF CERTAINTY ABOUT THIS FULL BLOCK SITE IS A VULNERABILITY RIGHT NOW. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. WE HEARD SEVERAL COMMENTS ABOUT PARKING THIS EVENING. UNDERSTANDING THAT NOTHING IS CERTAIN YET, CAN YOU SPEAK TO US AT ALL TONIGHT ABOUT THE EXTENT TO WHICH PARKING WOULD BE PROVIDED WITHIN THIS CITY BLOCK PROJECT. OR I GUESS MORE TO THE POINT, WHAT DEGREE OF OFF SITE PARKING, WHAT DEPENDENCE ON OFF SITE PARKING WOULD THERE BE FOR THIS PROJECT? >> I'M GOING TO TAKE A STAB AT WHAT I KNOW UP TO THIS POINT. AND IF HENRY NEEDS TO, HE CAN SET ME STRAIGHT. BUT THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS THAT THE CONCEPT THAT WE SAW TONIGHT PARKS ITSELF. CLEARLY WITH RESTAURANT ACTIVITY. AND I THINK THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP TONIGHT ARE PROBABLY AT LEAST POTENTIALLY REAL. AND POSSIBLY THE LIONS CLUB IS AN OPTION THERE. BUT MY HOUSE ISN'T ON THIS MAP. BUT I JUST LIVE A COUPLE HOUSES DOWN SORT OF FROM MR. WATKINS. I MEAN, I KNOW HOW THE LIONS
CLUB LOT GETS USED. AND SOME NIGHTS IT'S FULL. AND SOME NIGHTS IT'S NOT. SO I DON'T THINK THEY CAN COMFORTABLY RELY ON THAT AS A OPTION WITHOUT FIGURING OUT A WAY TO RESERVE SOME SPOTS. AND THAT'S ALWAYS A POSSIBILITY. BUT THAT WILL HAVE TO COME WITH SOME SORT OF A PUBLIC PROCESS BECAUSE IT IS -- I MEAN, IT'S OUR LOT AND THE LIONS CLUB LOT AND I DON'T THINK THEY CAN JUST COME IN AND TAKE OVER. AND IF THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH STREET PARKING, I MEAN, WE HAVE STREET PARKING ALL THROUGH DOWNTOWN THROUGH OLD TOWN NOW. I MEAN, WE'RE HAVING TO LEARN TO DEAL WITH THAT. SOME OF THE PARTS OF DOWNTOWN THAT MAYBE AREN'T OR HAVEN'T BEEN AS POPULAR. CLEARLY, THIS SOUTHEAST QUADRANT HAS NOT SEEN THE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT THAT THE OTHER QUADRANTS HAVE. BUT HERE WE ARE. AND I THINK THAT PARKING IS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE. THERE'S PUBLIC PARKING RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET TO THE NORTH. AT FIRST AND MAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE. AT THE INDIANA DESIGN CENTER THERE'S UNDERGROUND PARKING, AND THE POTENTIAL FOR THAT IS AVAILABLE IN THE EVENINGS. THAT'S CLEARLY A POSSIBILITY AS WELL. I THINK THE CITY HAS DONE A VERY GOOD JOB OF BUILDING CAR PARKING INTO DOWNTOWN. AND BIKE PARKING INTO DOWNTOWN. WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE AND MORE BICYCLE PARKING, WHICH IS HELPING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF THE PRESSURE OFF CAR PARKING TOO. AND I THINK THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AND THOSE OPTIONS ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO EVOLVE AND IMPROVE. >> THANK YOU. THAT'S HELPFUL. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR REMINDING ME OF WHAT MAY BE THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN DOWNTOWN PARKING, WHICH IS THE INDIANA DESIGN CENTER GARAGE. CHRISTINE. >> TWO THINGS. ONE IS WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF REALLY SPECIFIC REQUESTS. ARE THESE THINGS THAT YOU CAN TODAY GO AHEAD AND SAY, YES, WE CAN DO LANDSCAPING. WE CAN PUSH THE SETBACKS ON THE TOWNHOMES. ARE THERE ANY THINGS YOU HEARD TODAY THAT FOR SURE YOU CAN INCORPORATE INTO? OR IS IT REALLY SO PRELIMINARY, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW? >> I'M NOT REALLY INVOLVED IN THESE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THERE'S A VERY HEALTHY TENSION BETWEEN PLANNING OPINION AND REDEVELOPMENT OPINION THAT I THINK HELPS MAKE THE PROJECT BETTER. WE'RE PUSHING THEM ON THINGS THAT WE'RE USED TO HEARING. AND THE SENSITIVITIES THAT WE THINK ARE IMPORTANT THAT I THINK YOU WOULD ALL APPRECIATE THAT SOMETIMES AREN'T LOOKED UPON THE SAME WAY BY REDEVELOPMENT. AND THE RESULT IS WE END UP BOTH AGREEING TO DISAGREE. OR AGREEING TO AGREE. IT HELPS. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK WE COULD AT LEAST RESPECT THE GENERAL PARAMETERS OF THE OVERLY ZONE ALONG FIRST, AS IT APPLIES TO TOWNHOMES. I MEAN, CLEARLY THE ZONING TODAY AND THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY DIDN'T NECESSARILY CONTEMPLATE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL. IT WAS ALL SMALL LOT. SMALLER HOMES ON NARROW LOTS. IN THIS CONTEXT, THERE'S -- THESE ARE APARTMENTS THAT SHARE ONE LARGE LOT. JUST SOUTH OF THAT, MR. SCOTT IS GOING TO BUILD EXTREMELY LARGE HOMES. LARGE HOME ON MULTIPLE LOTS. MR. THOMAS HAS DONE THE SAME THING ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH. THE GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATION THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE WITH THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY HASN'T NECESSARILY BEEN RESPECTED IN THIS AREA. THERE'S NICE SMALLER HOMES ON SMALLER LOTS THE FURTHER SOUTH YOU GO. BUT THERE'S ALSO LARGER HOMES ON SMALLER LOTS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HAS ALSO OCCURRED IN THE REST OF OLDTOWN. THIS AREA CLEARLY HAS GOOD MOMENTUM. I THINK ARCHITECTURALLY AND SPATIALLY THOSE TOWNHOMES CAN BE DESIGNED TO BE RESPECTFUL. AND I THINK THAT ORIENTATION, THE PART OF THE ORIENTATION, THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WE ALREADY CAN TALK ABOUT RIGHT NOW. BUT IT ALL SEEMS PRACTICAL AND REALISTIC TO ME. >> MIKE, I'M GLAD YOU'RE UP
THERE BECAUSE I WANTED TO ASK YOU A COUPLE OF THINGS. IT SEEMS LIKE IF I'M HEARING WHAT THE PLAN COMMISSION IS WANTING TO DO OR MAYBE PERHAPS NOT WANTING TO DO, BUT THE POINT THEY WANT TO GET AT, THIS IS A REZONE, RIGHT? I'M SAYING SOMETHING WRONG, INTERRUPT ME AND STOP. AND IF THIS WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CDC WAS INVOLVED IN, IF THIS WAS A PRIVATE DEVELOPER COMING IN TO REZONE IT, THERE'S NO OBLIGATION ON THAT INDIVIDUAL'S PART TO DIVULGE WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS GOING TO BE AT THE REZONE STAGE, AM I RIGHT TO THAT POINT? >> FOR A C REZONE? >> NO. IF IT WAS A PRIVATE DEVELOPER WHO CAME IN. >> IT'S NOT BEEN OUR PRACTICE TO ALLOW THAT. GENERALLY, WE'D WANT TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN JUST A REQUEST. >> WHAT YOU MAY WANT TO SEE A LITTLE MORE OF A REQUEST. BUT I CAN REMEMBER A TIME WHEN THERE WAS A DEVELOPER WHO CAME IN AND WANTED TO REZONE A PIECE OF PROPERTY. WE WANTED TO KNOW WHAT IT WAS. HE SMARTLY SAID I DON'T NEED TO TELL YOU THAT. WE TAKE THE REZONE. AND WHATEVER USES ARE ALLOWED IN THAT REZONE, WE'RE ALLOWED TO BUILD. OKAY. AND THE NEXT THING I KNEW WE HAD A MIRE SITTING UP WHERE IT IS NOW. BUT HIS POINT WAS WELL TAKEN. AT LEAST THAT TIME. UNLESS THINGS HAVE CHANGED BEFORE I SAT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS TIME. YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WHEN THAT PROPERTY ACROSS FROM KENSINGTON CAME IN, I REMEMBER QUIZZING ADRIANE ON THAT. NOTHING WAS FORTHCOMING. BUT MY POINT IS IT DOESN'T COME OUT UNTIL EVERYTHING GETS WHEN I SAY DEVELOPED, UNTIL THE PLAN GOES DOWN THE ROAD A LITTLE BIT. AND THAT'S WHAT IT SEEMS LIKE IS WHAT IS THE MYSTERY HERE. BECAUSE WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS. SOME OF US DO. AND THERE ARE OTHERS WHO RIGHTFULLY SO, PERHAPS, WE DON'T NEED TO TELL YOU. AND IT'S NEITHER RIGHT NOR WRONG, IT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. IF I'M WRONG IN ANY OF THAT, YOU KNOW, LET ME KNOW. >> WELL I THINK THAT WE'VE DONE A NUMBER OF REZONES WHERE THERE WAS NOTHING PROPOSED, AND THE REZONE WAS FORWARDED ON. IT WAS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE DETAILS. BUT WE WERE TRYING TO POSITION THE GROUND. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN THE IBJ THAT SHOWS THE BUILDING ALONG RANGE LINE. AND THERE'S BEEN A FAIR AMOUNT OF PUBLICITY ABOUT THE PROPERTY THAT'S ZONED C ALREADY. I MEAN, THAT PROJECT IS FAR ENOUGH ALONG CLEARLY THAT IT WAS IN THE PAPER. >> RIGHT. >> BUT THE BACK HALF IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS. AND THE REQUEST OF THIS REZONE, I THINK THE FACT THAT WE KNOW WHAT WANTS TO GO THERE IS NOT MIXED USE, YOU KNOW, NOT A COMMERCIAL USE, BUT A RESIDENTIAL USE. WE KNOW THAT MUCH. AND WE KNOW THAT IT'S PROBABLE GOING TO BE FAIRLY DENSE. DENSER THAN THE SINGLE FAMILY THAT EXISTS DOWN THE STREET. BUT LESS DENSE THAN SOME OF THE MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL THAT'S ALREADY GONE IN IN VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THIS SITE. >> I GET THE FEEL THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION WANTS TO GET, BE A LITTLE BIT MORE INVOLVED BETWEEN WHAT THE PLAN IS AND WHAT THE PUBLIC WILL TO SPEAK. MAYBE I'M WRONG, I DON'T KNOW. ANYWAY, I'LL TURN IT BACK TO BRAD. >> WELL I GUESS TO THAT POINT I WOULD ADD THE COMMENT ONLY THAT THE C-2 ZONING CLASSIFICATION WAS ENDORSED BY THIS BODY. NOT WE NINE INDIVIDUALS, NECESSARILY AT THAT TIME. BUT BY THIS BODY. AND MOVED ON TO THE COUNCIL AND WAS ENACTED ON TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. SO WHETHER ANY OF US IS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO THE HEARING OFFICER WHEN IT COMES TO ADLS, THIS IS THE CREATURE THAT WE CREATED. AND IT MIGHT BE A FRANKENSTEIN CREATURE, IT MIGHT BE EXACTLY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOL THAT THIS CITY NEEDS.
BUT WE OWN IT. AND IF WE'RE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH IT, THEN WE MAYBE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT CHANGING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE PROCESS THAT GOES WITH THE CLASSIFICATION. BUT RIGHT NOW, THE CITY HAS THIS TOOL. AND IT HAS THE ENDORSEMENT OF THIS BODY AND IT WAS ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL. SO WE I THINK HAVE AT LEAST A -- OUR BIAS OR ALL TIES GO TO LETTING THAT PROCESS WORK THROUGH BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IS ON THE BOOKS TODAY BY LAW. IT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH IT. BUT ALL TIES I GUESS GO IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONER. MIKE. >> WE WANT YOU TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH IT. AND I GUESS A PART OF WHY WE HAVE C ZONING AND WHY IT'S SEPARATE FROM KIND OF REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION IS THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TEND TO BE SLIGHTLY MORE COMPLICATED. THERE'S A WHOLE PROJECT AGREEMENT THAT IS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND THE DEVELOPER THAT SPELLS OUT A LOT OF THE DESIGN PARAMETERS. AND IT'S A PROJECT PERFORMA THAT'S VERY SPECIFICALLY NEGOTIATED. AND THEN TO HAVE A SEPARATE PLAN COMMISSION PROCESS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO KIND OF BLOW UP A PROJECT. I MEAN, TO RENEGOTIATE PROJECT DETAILS. AND THAT'S WHY THE C PROCESS WAS CREATED SO THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION HAD A ZONING DISTRICT TO NEGOTIATE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED BY LAW. AND NOTHING REALLY EVER GETS APPROVED UNTIL REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED AS WELL AS UDO ISSUES, AND PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU KNOW. THERE'S OFTENTIMES CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT PREVENT THE PROJECT FROM BEING BUILT UNTIL THEY'RE ALL ADDRESSED. I MEAN, I THINK THAT I'VE SAID ENOUGH. >> DEBBIE. >> I'M GOING TO ASK AN ELEMENTARY QUESTION. THE AREA IN QUESTION, IS THAT CONSIDERED ONE BLOCK OR TWO BLOCKS? OR FOUR BLOCKS? THE BLACK LINE. WE'RE VOTING ON THE RED LINE. >> YEAH. >> FROM THE CITY'S OVERALL PERSPECTIVE, IF WE TAKE THE LINE OVER TO RANGE LINE AND UP, IS THAT CONSIDERED A BLOCK? >> SO FROM RANGE LINE TO FIRST AVENUE IS A BLOCK. FROM FIRST STREET TO SUPPLY STREET WOULD BE A BLOCK. >> OKAY. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE'RE ASKING THAT THAT ALL BE ZONED THE SAME. THAT THE BLOCK BE ZONED THE SAME. THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC INPUT, AND THE MOTION WOULD BE FOR THIS BODY, THE PLAN COMMISSION, TO MOVE THAT THE PROPOSAL BE SENT TO THE CITY COUNTY COUNCIL FOR REZONING TO C-2 WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. WOULD THAT BE THE PROPER MOTION? >> YES. >> THEN I SO MOVE. >> SECOND. >> IS THERE A SECOND? TO THE MOTION. I GUESS MAYBE I SHOULD BACK UP A STEP AND SAY THAT IF WE -- THE ACTION BY THIS BODY ON THIS PETITION WOULD BE TO SEND IT TO THE COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF EITHER FAVORABLE OR UNFAVORABLE. BUT FOR US TO GET THERE TONIGHT, WE FIRST HAVE TO SUSPEND OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS TONIGHT WITHOUT SENDING IT TO COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER STUDY. SO WE SHOULD BEST I THINK START THERE >> OKAY. THEN I WITHDRAW MY MOTION. I WAS TRYING TO GET IT. >> I'LL KEEP THAT ON THE TABLE. >> STEP B, STEP C. >> WE REQUIRE FOR PROCEDURAL MOTION TO BE MOVED. [INAUDIBLE] >> IS THAT OPTION COMPLETELY OFF THE TABLE? I THINK MOST PEOPLE SUPPORT -- IT IS OFF THE TABLE? IT'S NOT FOR THIS TIME. OKAY. I'M JUST ASKING. >> THEN TO BE CLEAR. WHAT YOU'RE SEEKING IS A MOTION
FOR THE PLAN COMMISSION TO SUSPEND THE RULES REGARDING A REZONING REQUEST? >> THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IF WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON SENDING IT TO THE COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF SOME KIND TONIGHT, WITHOUT SENDING IT TO COMMITTEE FIRST. >> MY MOTION I MADE PREVIOUSLY I'M HOLDING OVER HERE. IT'S NOT OFF THE TABLE. IT'S SUSPENDED. >> I HAVE IT ON THE TABLE. CHAIR HAS IT ON THE TABLE. >> THEN IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO SUSPEND THE RULES? >> YOU MAY. YES. >> WITH WHATEVER WORDS NEED TO FOLLOW THAT TO MAKE IT LEGALLY CORRECT. SO THE PROPER MOTION WOULD BE -- >> TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO SEND THIS REQUEST TO COUNCIL WITH EITHER FAVORABLE, NOT FAVORABLE, OR NO RECOMMENDATION AT ALL. >> WE STILL NEED TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND PROCEDURES. >> THAT'S WHAT HE SAID. >> CORRECT. >> SO I WOULD MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO SEND THIS PROPOSAL TO COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO A SUBSEQUENT MOTION. >> CORRECT. >> THAT'S WHAT I MOVE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND OF THE MOTION TO SUSPEND OUR RULES? >> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO SUSPEND OUR RULES? THEN WE WILL VOTE ON THE MOTION TO SUSPEND OUR RULES TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS PETITION THIS EVENING. ALL IN FAVOR SUSPENDING THE RULES SAY AYE. AYE. ALL IN FAVOR, HANDS IN THE AIR. TO SUSPEND THE RULES. MR. RIDER, ARE YOU STILL WITH US? OH, YOU CAN'T VOTE. I'M SORRY. NEVER MIND. MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES >> IS THE OTHER OPTION [INAUDIBLE]. >> NO. >> WE MIGHT. COULD BE. >> OKAY. >> TO SUSPEND THE RULES. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE. SO TO SUSPEND OUR RULES REQUIRES A TWO-THIRDS VOTE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND WE HAVE NINE MEMBERS PRESENT TONIGHT. SO THAT MOTION FAILS. >> MR. PRESIDENT. >> YES, SIR. >> I MOVE THAT WE SEND THIS TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE GIVING THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE FINAL VOTING AUTHORITY. >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU BOTH. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? THEN WE WILL VOTE ON THE MOTION TO SEND THIS TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE WITH FINAL VOTING AUTHORITY DELEGATED TO THAT COMMITTEE. ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> DO I HAVE TWO NEGATIVE VOTES? OKAY. THEN THAT MOTION CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 6-2. SO THIS WILL GO TO THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE, AND REMAIN THERE UNTIL THEY GIVE IT AN ENDORSEMENT AND FORWARD IT TO THE COUNCIL FOR FURTHER ACTION. THANK YOU. >> LET'S TALK ABOUT SOMETHING EASY. >> REBECCA, WE'RE ALMOST THERE. >> OH BOY. >> OLD BUSINESS. DOCKET NUMBER PZ-200-00118 DPLS, THE GOAT. SEEK DESIGN APPROVAL FOR [INAUDIBLE] THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 220 SECOND STREET. THE SITE IS ZONED B-2 AND IS WITHIN THE OVERLAY SUB AREA. ON BEHALF OF KEVIN PAUL OWNER. PLEASE, GET US OUT OF THE MESS THAT WE JUST LEFT. >> I SHOULD KNOW BETTER BY NOW. MY NAME IS DAN KOOTS, I'M WITH KOOTS AND WHEELER. HERE TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER KEVIN PAUL WITH TOMMAHAWK OWNER LLC OWNER OF THE GOAT. WE ALSO HAVE THE ARCHITECT. AT THIS TIME, OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE MUCH MORE TO PRESENT THAT WAS NOT PRESENTED LAST MONTH. WE WOULD JUST REQUEST THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION APPROVE THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE THAT WAS CONDUCTED EARLIER THIS MONTH AND APPROVE THE ADLS AS SUBMITTED. OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE SOME REPRESENTATIVES HERE IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSION REGARDING THE
PROJECT. >> THANK YOU. THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. SO WE WOULD GO STRAIGHT TO THE DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THANK YOU. AGAIN, FOR THE RECORD, RACHEL KEYSLING WITH DEPARTMENT OF SERVICES. TO UPDATE EVERYONE, THERE HAVE BEEN ADJUSTMENTS MADE TO THE PLAN REGARDING THE SIZE AND THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING IN ORDER TO AVOID THE STORM WATER AND UTILITY EASEMENT THAT RUNS ALONG THE BOULEVARD. THE BUILDING ADDITION THEY'VE PROPOSED IS MOVED BACK TO MEET THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THERE WILL BE 120 NEW SEATS PROPOSED IN THE ADDITION, AS WELL AS SIX NEW RESTROOM FACILITIES. WE DID DISCUSS IN GREAT DETAIL AT THE COMMITTEE THAT SIX ADDITIONAL RESTROOM FACILITIES WILL BE SUFFICIENT. THEY ALSO HAVE TWO OTHER EXISTING RESTROOMS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING. ALL COMMENTS AND CONCERNS THAT WE HAD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. AND THE PETITIONER HAS KEPT THIS PROPOSED ADDITION AND PLAN IN LINE WITH THE COMMITMENTS THAT THEY MADE TO CITY COUNCIL AS PART OF THEIR REZONE APPROVAL. THEY DO HAVE TO REQUEST ONE VARIANCE, AND THAT'S FOR LOT COVERAGE. 70% LOT COVERAE IS ALLOWED BY THE OLDTOWN OVERLAY. THEY'RE REQUESTING 80%. THAT VARIANCE WILL BE HEARD NEXT MONDAY AT THE BZA. WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT VARIANCE AS ENCLOSING THE ENTIRE OPEN AREA WAS PART OF THE PLAN TO ADDRESS THE NOISE AND THE GATHERING CONCERNS THAT WE HAD FROM WHEN THEY WERE FRST OPENED. SO WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TONIGHT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. AND THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE REPORT. >> MR. PRESIDENT, I DEFER TO STAFF'S REPORT. THERE WASN'T ANYTHING ELSE I COULD ADD TO IT UNLESS THERE WERE MEMBERS PRESENT TONIGHT. THE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE WHO WISHED TO ADD TO THE STAFF'S REPORT. >> THANK YOU, ALAN. ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE WHO WISH TO ADD ANYTHING? ALL RIGHT. DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSION. DEBBIE. >> MOVE ADOPTION. >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU BOTH. IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION, THEN WE WILL VOTE ON APPROVING DOCKET PZ-20022, THE GOAT. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? FASTER THAN YOUR DAD WOULD HAVE DONE IT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> THE GOAT SETS A WORLD RECORD TONIGHT. SOMEBODY WRITE ABOUT THAT IN THE PAPER. >> REBECCA, DOCKET NUMBER PZ -- NORTH END POOL. THE APPLICANT SEEKS SITE PLAN AND APPROVAL FOR A NEW POOL. THE SITE IS LOCATED NORTH OF MARIPOSA TRAIL AND FREELAND WAY. ZONED UR URBAN RESIDENTIAL. PETITION IS FILED BY REBECCA OF OLDTOWN COMMUNITIES. >> THANK YOU. THIS COMMISSION HAS GIVEN FEEDBACK ALREADY ON ADLS THROUGH APARTMENTS, TOWNHOMES AND THE RESTAURANT THAT'S PART OF THE NORTH END DEVELOPMENT. SO I'LL QUICKLY GIVE YOU CONTEXT. THIS AGAIN, IS ADJACENT TO 31 AND SMOKEY ROW AND NEARLY ADJACENT TO THE MONA TRAIL. WE'RE FOCUSING ON WHAT'S IN ORANGE, WHICH INCLUDES THE MAPLES RESTAURANT WHICH WAS REVIEWED AT COMMITTEE. THIS IS A FOR THE AMENITY AND POOL AREA. THERE'S TWO PERGLAS. A TANNING SHELF AND THEN THE POOL BUILDING. THE COLOR SCHEME IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. THE NEAREST APARTMENT BUILDING IS THIS ELEVATION BUILDING C. YOU SEE THE COLOR SCHEME TO THE LEFT IS WHAT'S PUT ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE POOL BUILDING. THIS GIVES YOU A SENSE OF THE FURNITURE IN THE LAYOUT FROM THE LOUNGE CHAIRS TO THE LOVE SEATS TO THE POOL LOUNGES AND TABLES. THE GRILL AND FIRE FEATURES ARE COLORED GRAY. THE RETAINING WALL IN ALMOND. THE FLOOR PLAN FOR THE POOL BUILDING INCLUDES AN EQUIPMENT ROOM, TWO RESTROOMS AND SHOWERS. ASPHALT SHINGLES FOR THE ROOF. THE FRONT ELEVATION WHICH FACES THE POOL SIMPLY HAS A DOOR, BRICK VENEER, LAP SIDING.
THE STORM WATER DETENTION AREA, ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFS AGAIN. GRAY. THERE ARE WINDOWS AROUND SOME RESTROOM AREAS WHICH WILL BE GLAZED GLASS. SIDE ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING. LIGHTING THROUGHOUT THE SITE INCLUDING LIGHTS ABOVE THE PERGLAS. THESE ARE THE FIXTURES ALREADY APPROVED ON THE MAPLES RESTAURANT WHICH IS ADJACENT TO THE POOL. LANDSCAPING. WHAT'S SHOWN HERE AGAIN WE'RE EMPHASIZING NATIVES THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. SOME PLANTERS HERE ALONG THE RETAINING WALLS BECAUSE AGAIN, WE HAVE UNDER WATER DETENTION HERE STORM CHAMBERS THAT MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO PLANT TREES. BUT I MADE AN APPOINTMENT FOR ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR TREES AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE POOL SITE. THAT CONCLUDES MY PORTION. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, ALEXIA LOPEZ, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. THIS ADLS IS LOOKING AT THE DESIGN OF POOL AT THE NORTH END DEVELOPMENT. AS SHOWN IT'S BETWEEN APARTMENT C AND THE RESTAURANT. SHOWERS AND POOL EQUIPMENT IN IT. ACCESS TO THE POOL IS FROM THE SIDEWALKS CONNECTING TO THE NORTH, AND FROM THE SOUTH AS WELL. BIKE PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED PER THE UDO. AND I BELIEVE THE PETITIONER STATED THEY WILL BE ADDING ADDITIONAL SPOTS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE POOL SO THAT THEY'RE CLOSER. THE UDO REQUIRES THEM TO BE WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE MAIN ENTRANCE. THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE POOL IS SIMILAR TO THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS, WHICH WE SUPPORT. THE COLOR SCHEME IS SIMILAR. THERE'S NO SIGNAGE WITH THIS PROPOSAL. LANDSCAPE BEDS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED AROUND THE SITE FOR THE LANDSCAPING. THAT'S MOSTLY MADE UP OF SHRUBS, GRASSES, AND PERENNIALS. WHICH IS WHY WE ASKED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL TREES AROUND THE SITE IF THEY COULD ADD SOME. AND THEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE SOUTH RETAINING WALL AND TRYING TO SOFTEN THAT A LITTLE BIT WITH ADDING ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING. THAT'S WHAT SHE WAS MENTIONING THE PLANTING THE PLANTERS. SO I THINK THEY'RE COMMITTING TO ADDING THOSE ALONG THAT SOUTH WALL INSTEAD OF AN ACTUAL LANDSCAPE BED ALONG THERE. AND LIGHTING WILL BE PROVIDED WITH DOWN LIGHTS IN THE PERGLA STRUCTURES. AND BALLARDS MOSTLY AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE POOL FENCE. THEY ADDRESSED OUR QUESTION ABOUT WHERE THOSE BALLARD LIGHT WAS. THAT COMMENT FROM THE REPORT HAS BEEN SATISFIED. AND THE ONLY OTHER TWO WAS THE BIKE PARKING, WHICH WILL CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH TO MAKE SURE THOSE ARE INSTALLED BY THE POOL. AND SEEING IF THEY CAN ADD SOME MORE TREES IN OTHER AREAS AROUND THE POOL. SO WITH THAT, WE WOULD RECOMMEND I THINK APPROVAL THIS NIGHT AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO FINALIZE THOSE ITEMS THROUGH PROJECT ACTS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. LET'S SEE, THIS IS NEW BUSINESS. SO THIS HAS NOT BEEN TO COMMITTEE YET. QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION FROM MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? >> IS THIS POOL OPEN TO ALL RESIDENTS NO MATTER? >> YES. AND AGAIN, THERE'S 168 APARTMENTS, 46 TOWNHOMES AND 10 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. >> YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THIS? I MOVE THAT WE SUSPEND OUR RULES AND ACT ON THIS THIS EVENING >> SECOND. >> THIRD. >> I'LL TAKE THAT MOTION UNDER ADVISEMENT. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. AND THAT IS, THE WALL MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURES, HAVE THOSE BEEN SUBMITTED? >> I BELIEVE THOSE WERE, YES. >> I APOLOGIZE, THEY WEREN'T IN YOUR PACKET. I WAS AWAITING THEM AND THIS IS THEM RIGHT HERE. >> IS THAT BLACK OR BRONZE? >> BLACK. >> BLACK. OKAY. >> SO NO, WE DO NOT. >> THEN I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS AS QUICK AS WE CAN. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FROM MR. PATASNICK SO I WILL TAKE THAT AS A SECOND. >> ALL IN MOTION TO APPROVE -- NORTH END POOL AND SEND US ALL HOME PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER BUSINESS FOR US
TONIGHT? WHAT COULD THERE POSSIBLY BE? >> I JUST HAD A COUPLE MORE THINGS WE COULD TALK ABOUT. >> THE ONLY OPEN QUESTION THOUGH HAS TO DO WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF A QUORUM FOR A RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE ON THE 6TH. IS SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT HAVE A COMMITTEE OF ZERO THEN. >> TRAVELING. >> IT'S OKAY. I'M PROBABLY THE ONLY ONE WHO EVER CATCHES IT. >> AVAILABILITY, ANYBODY ON OCTOBER 6TH? >> I WON'T BE HERE. >> HOLD ON ONE SECOND. >> TALKING ABOUT TO STAFF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE MEETING. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU ARE NOT AVAILABLE ON OCTOBER 6TH REGARDLESS OF YOUR NORMAL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT. NOT AVAILABLE ON OCTOBER 6TH. TWO, THREE. >> I'M SORRY. I'M THERE. >> HAND IF YOU'RE ABSENT. HAND IF YOU'RE NOT AVAILABLE. HAND UP. >> TWO. >> [INAUDIBLE]