Page 1 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

The Noblesville Plan Commission met in regular session on February 20, 2019 in the Noblesville Council Chambers. Members in attendance were as follows:

Gretchen Hanes, President – Board of Works Representative Linda Wilcox, Vice President – Citizen Member Blake Anderson – Citizen Member George Beason – Jurisdictional Member Dave Burtner – Jurisdictional Member Bryan Glover – Citizen Member Jim Hellmann, Interim City Engineer Joe Mitchell – Citizen Member Scott Noel – Park’s Board Representative Darren Peterson – Council Representative N. Scott Smith – Citizen Member

Others in attendance: Sarah Reed, Director of Planning and Secretary; Denise Aschleman, Senior Planner; and City Attorney Mike Howard

DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM

Mrs. Sarah Reed, Secretary commences with the roll call and declares a quorum with eleven members present.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Mr. Burtner seconded by Mr. Anderson to approve the January 22, 2019 minutes. AYES: Smith, Mitchell, Beason, Anderson, Wilcox, Hellmann, Peterson, Glover, Burtner, Hanes NAYS: zero ABSTAIN: Noel Motion passes 10, 0, 1

OLD BUSINESS

#1 Application No. 0181-2018 Public Hearing for a Change of Zoning from “SR Single-Family Residential” to “R5 Multi-Family Residential” for approximately 9.88 acres for property located at 17419 Gray Road and approximately 285 feet east of the intersection of State Road No. 32 (Westfield Road) and Gray Road in Noblesville Township. Submitted by Bird Dog Holding, LLC, Wayne Wheeler, and Jill Ann Wilson (Owners) Westport Homes, Inc. (Applicants)

Page 2 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

#1A Application No. 0182-2018 Public Hearing for a Change of Zoning from “R5 Multi- Family Residential” to “R5/PD Multi-Family Planned Development” and adoption of a Preliminary Development Plan Overlay and Ordinance to be known as “Slater Park” for approximately 9.88 acres for property located at 17419 Gray Road and approximately 285 feet east of the intersection of State Road No. 32 (Westfield Road) and Gray Road in Noblesville Township. Submitted by Bird Dog Holding, LLC, Wayne Wheeler, and Jill Ann Wilson (Owners) and Westport Homes, Inc. (Applicants)

Ms. Aschleman states there has not been substantial changes that have been made to this petition. She states the biggest thing is (at the Plan Commission seats) was a new commitment letter. She states many of these things were in the PD ordinance, and the petitioner has called some of them out. She states specifically one of the things that was not in the original version of the planned development ordinance was item number five, which relates to some siltation in the pond in Slater Farms. She states she will let the petitioner go into a little more detail on these commitments. She states one of the things that she does want to mention is the petitioner is considering a name change. She states they have submitted the name to the department, but have not received approval from E911 on that name change. She states the proposed name is Trailside West she believes, and she cautions that the name could be rejected from E911. She states they are trying not to use it that much at this point, but the Slater Park name was approved. She asks if they have any questions for her.

Mr. Joe Calderon, 11 South Meridian Street, states he is representing the petitioner Westport Homes in this matter. He states fundamentally the project looks the same as it did when they presented to last month, but they did pay attention not only to comments that they received from the commissioners but also the folks that in Slater Run. He states the form of their changes can really be found in three different areas. He states first they want to respond to some of the concerns about architectural standards. He states they amended their plan and put into their commitments that the rear façade of every building will have sixty percent (60%) of the units with a rear architectural feature. He states that could be a sunroom, a screen porch, or something like that. He states that is a defined term in their ordinance. He states they added those to their commitments found in tab nine and that is commitment number three. He states you are not just getting a one foot bump out you are getting a significant depth requirements of at least four feet and up to eight feet for a sunroom or covered porch. He states they bumped up the requirement of that. He states as you may recall, the buildings closest to the Midland Trail are all first floor brick or masonry wrapped so that has stayed and they have put that into commitment form. He states they have also dressed up the elevations a little bit to add some more interest and less monotony on the front and rear elevations. He states those can be found in tab 6. He states this is the new front and this will be one of the larger buildings. He states you can see the kind of additional clarification and interest in the buildings and some additional treatment along the windows in terms of their trim. He states the style of this is a Craftsman theme that runs through these buildings. He states they have spoken with Mr. Peterson, as he is an architect, of things that they can use to kind of fit that theme. He states in addition to the wainscoting and some additional interest in terms of trellises above the screened in porch doors. He states this just identifies the units a little better and allows them to not have as much monotony. He states none of the trim material is vinyl. He states turning to the plans themselves, they heard a couple Page 3 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

of things particularly from the neighbors. He states they pertain to two different things. He states he will address the first one from their friends to the south in Slater Run and they were concerned about kind of the light spill effect and the proximity of the cul-de-sac and the light spilling into their neighborhood, which lies just to the south. He states what they have done is they have reexamined their buffering plan for that area. He states they have added significantly more evergreen trees, which are shown kind of on the outside of the bulb of the cul-de-sac, and they have lined that bulb with three deciduous trees as well. He states they have had additional discussions with Jim Redding who will speak and they have asked them to consider rerouting the connection to the trail, which will provide a little more room for planting. He states they are certainly willing to do that and they are willing to reroute the sanitary sewer line to make sure that they have the maximum amount of planting area. He states in talking with staff they feel like they can come up with a sufficient buffering plan to satisfy any issues that they may have as Plan Commission members and their neighbors. He states they also heard an awful lot about drainage. He states it is not particularly their drainage area shown on the plan, but the fact that it connects to the existing drainage basin as it connects into Slater Run. He states you may recall a fair amount of concerns from the neighbors about sediment and whether or not that pond could handle their drainage. He states there was a lot of debate back and forth. He states they have looked at that situation and they have agreed to do a couple of things. He states one can be found in commitment five in tab 9 and that is simply this. He states they will go out and they will measure the depth of the existing pond. He states following their construction activity they will go out and re-measure and to the extent that they have created any changes to that depth through sediment or other issues resulting from construction activities they will fix that and return it to its original state. He states they have been asked to consider going a step further, and he thinks they are willing to do this, but they have not put it into commitment form because the conversations have been late this afternoon, and that is the fact that Slater Run HOA believes that the entire pond may need to be reconstructed to match what its original specifications were. He states they do not know all of that because it is not their pond, but they are willing to participate in some type of contribution towards that reconstruction. He states they do not want to create any problems for their neighbors, and they want to be good neighbors. He states they know that drain situation was a point of concern that was expressed to the Commission last month. He states he would like to draw attention to the commitments about a conversation that had happened at the Commission and among the neighbors with what the product is going to be and how it would be marketed and whether it was going to be rentals or homeowners. He states they stated orally that this was all for sale product that really fits within the missing middle described in the housing study right around the $200,000 price range. He states what they have proposed to do to make it abundantly clear that they are not interested in playing any tricks on the City of Noblesville is put in a new commitment six that all of these units will be marketed for sale to third parties, not investors, and leasing has to come afterwards and it has to comply with federal law. He states there are fair housing requirements both in FHA financing as well as fair housing laws that say that you really can’t have a blanket no rental rule, but they put in what they felt was a fair way to manage that this was for sale product. He states you cannot tell someone in the military that might buy a unit that he or she cannot rent the unit. He states they have put in language to match what they believe to be the current requirements under the law might be, but to make it clear this is not going to be rental product out of the gate. He states those were Page 4 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

kind of the highlights from what they had discussed and taken notes from following last month’s meeting. He states they are also proposing a name change to Trailway West. He states there is a little asterisk on the front of the book saying that it is still under review. He states their neighbors at Slater Run did not want there to be any confusion and they are not affiliated with their development, and they did not want there to be additional confusion. He states they think that they have been fairly responsive particularly behind the scenes with their neighbors to the south. He states they have also been working with their neighbors along Gray Road. He states they are continually analyzing the drainage situation there, and they think that it is going to be better than it was before. He states they think the proposal tonight with the additional buffering, additional commitments, and additional architectural features warrant a favorable recommendation to Council. He states they have their civil engineer here to answer any questions that they have.

Mrs. Hanes asks if the Commission has any questions. She asks about the agreement about the reconstruction of the pond. She asks how something like that happens and if they have something specific in mind.

Mr. Calderon states he is going to let Mr. Redding explain the concept. He states they had a conversation out in the hallway. He states they believe that for their part either it is a side agreement that is read into the record or perhaps they can modify their commitment to whatever is agreed. He states it does relate to a pond that is off the property. He states they do want to make it clear to the commission that they are willing to cooperate in that fashion. He states they do not have all the details because it was just presented, but the important first step is to do their part to clean that pond following their construction activity. He states step two would be some type of participation in a more global reconstruction, and if they need to amend their commitment to satisfy the Commission or it could be a side agreement.

Mr. Howard states it will depend on how you put the motion. He states he would see no reason why they could not have an amendment resolved by the time that they get to the council level. He states one of the things in construction is that a lot of the times getting the contractor there and mobilized is the big cost, and then the marginal cost of digging a little deeper or a little wider there are some real economies of scale. He states the real issue is who does the first part of it, and they are committing to doing the first part, and the marginal cost will be past. He states Mr. Calderon has drafted more complex agreements, and he is sure that he can have one ready in three weeks that is ready for council.

Mrs. Hanes states she appreciates the changes and enhancements that they have made.

President Hanes opens the public hearing. She asks that they limit their comments to the changes that have been made by the petitioner. She asks them to approach the podium, state their name, address, and position. She states comments are limited to three minutes except those speaking on behalf of a group who will have five minutes.

Mr. Jim Redding, 4945 Waterhaven Drive, states he is speaking as the representative of the Slater Farms Homeowners Board. He states the issues dealing with their pond have been an issue Page 5 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

since day one. He states this is a picture from the last week with the rain. He states this is the south end of the north pond that picks up water coming from the other side of Gray Road. He states you can see that the water level is up and over the water intake. He states there are four inlets to this pond and one exit. He states with this rain all four inlets were covered. He states you can see that they have surface water that will come down, and it will cause erosion. He states the next picture is looking back at the inlet coming in from the main Kirkendall Drain. He states you can see the water level is completely over it. He states he did not have a good picture of the water level at the outlet. He states they were at the top and in his conversation with Steven Cash at the County once the water level starts to get above the outtake you can start to have problems because of the airlock stuff and it will not drain. He states this pond has been a mess and it needs to be resolved with or without this development. He states they think that they are on the right track for that to happen. He states what has happened was that before the pond was put in you had sediment coming in from the side of the hill, and when they put in their drainage system you had silting take place, and then when the Fischer community came in you had silting, and the new development that came in on the north side. He states during the construction time on that development it was not the ideal time to be doing that and you had a lot of run off from that. He states Steve Cash from the County met him out there and went over this and he recognized major silting going on over here. He states it was the result of the moving of the drain and then this new one comes in. He states Engineers from both the City and the County have assured him that it gets them into a metered situation where there is a pond over here that should help their pond if they can get rid of the surface water that is causing the erosion. He states it is very nice that they have offered and they accept that when they leave it will be back to where it started, but they want to go back to 2003. He states they want to get the pond there, and he agrees with what Mr. Howard said that if they had someone come in just one time with their heavy equipment and figure out how the funding happened. He states the next item goes back to the twenty-five foot versus the fifty foot and the issue with the cul-de-sac. He states normally in a cul-de-sac you would have houses coming around and they would help with blocking. He states he states so you have cars coming straight down here. He states he went out there today and he has a photo looking straight down and he is approximately twenty-five feet from the fence line. He states as cars are coming down this cul-de-sac the lights would be coming in and would be shining across these three homes and possibly two others that could be affected. He states they are asking for just twenty-five feet and of that twenty-five feet the City is requiring a path and the proposed path is coming from the street and meanders along paralleling the Midland Trace and ties into the entrance to their community. He states that is eight feet and to put a clearing of at least one foot on each side before you plant that’s ten feet and that leaves just fifteen feet for those trees to be planted in. He states that is one proposal that he proposes is that the City allow them to change this path so it comes up between these two buildings to free up more room for the plantings. He states the other complication is the sewer line he knows he has talked to them about plantings in that area, and no one really knows how close it will be to their property line or close to the building, but if you keep that path there, it lessens the area to plant. He states he would like some consideration that they might be able to redirect the sewers so something can happen between that path and the sewer line so they can get adequate plantings. He states they have shown him a drawing of evergreen trees. He states one of the things that he wants to make sure of is that the trees are sized to be a screen Page 6 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

on day one. He states it is straight on into one house. He states obviously this is their least preferred alternative this multi-family and joint housing. He states they would prefer single family homes in there, but this is far superior going commercial or industrial back there so it is their least favorite. He states lastly he does thank them for communicating back and forth and the name change.

Mr. Smith asks if Mr. Redding gave the developers the proposal he has.

Mr. Redding states no sir. He states they talked just moments ago about the path. He states the path came down as a city requirement, and he does not know if that included the location.

Ms. Aschleman asks to address that real quick. She states one of the things that we do is that it now goes to council before it comes to the Plan Commission for preliminary comments. She states one of the comments that was made was to loop a path. She states they were showing a path and to loop that path around the lake to give a kind of internal loop on the development so that they did not have to go onto the Midland Trail if they did not want to. She states they could just walk their dogs, and it opened up the opportunity for a small amenity area on the southwest corner of the pond. She states they are not sure what it will be, but it will be a small amenity area.

Mrs. Reed states the only requirement that we have is that a development this size should have only one entrance onto the Midland.

Mr. Redding states theirs only has one. He states it is not a straight shot so they do not have the light issues and they can plant around it.

Mr. Hellmann states he knows they are concerned about headlights coming onto the rear of the houses. He states a suggestion would be to make the connection directly south of the pond because they would need a clearing there. He states that could be a consideration as well. He states between lots 38 and 39 and 31 and 30 from the drawing that he has there he does not see any utilities. He states if there are not any utilities and it is not a violation of any zoning you could probably squeeze that easement down as long as there were no hard pipes in there and they could offset that closer to the trail. He states maintaining the trees there along with reconsidering where they do their trail connection it could help some with the light concern and buffering.

Mr. Redding states he also told them that the difference between twenty-five feet and fifty feet with no landscaping to help is not what they are looking for. He states they want to make sure that they are protected from the lights.

Mr. Hellmann states at the same point they do have certain limitations on plants that could be planted over the lines because the roots can be problematic.

Mr. Calderon states they have discussed some of Mr. Hellmann’s ideas with the civil. Page 7 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

Mr. Craig Smith, 4962 Waterhaven Drive, states he would just like to address some of the architectural features on the building, especially pertaining to the rear side of the building. He states he appreciates the effort to add sixty percent of the units with some sort of a design feature on there. He states he is not sure how that is broken up when you have four units on the building. He states it is a flat shot right across there so some type of feature would be very helpful. He states the roofline is flat all the way across there. He states when you are looking at the front of the buildings unfortunately, they are designed for everything to move to the middle. He states inside the community, but from the outside all you see is the straight shot of the roof and it is clear to him by what you mean when you say sixty percent. He states with a four unit building it would seem easier to him if it was something like every other unit or if you staggered the walls and the roof so you added some interest. He states he is just concerned that they live in a nice neighborhood area, we are putting an architectural design that is not very imaginative, and they would like to just point that out and have some consideration of that.

Mr. Gary Richter, 4972 Waterhaven Drive, states his property backs up to the Midland Trace Trail. He states it is not one of the three in Mr. Redding’s photo, but they are just down the way. He states he would just like to echo and support the comments that Mr. Redding made. He states they had a meeting the other day and they are aware of his discussions with the developer. He states the real concern that they have is to urge them not to grant a waiver that would reduce the barrier distance between the development and the Midland Trace Trail. He states it is important to maintain as much barrier there as is provided in the law.

President Hanes closes the public hearing.

Mr. Smith states he had another question for Mr. Redding and the Commission. He states when they hear a representative say that they have issues with a development he certainly respects that viewpoint. He asks on their side of the argument he does not believe there are any plantings and if there is any reason why there could not be evergreens put on their side of the trail to help with the issue of light.

Mr. Redding states that would be the homeowners’ choice and expense, but there would be no reason why they could not do that. He states that would be an expense them because of this development because of how that cul-de-sac is working without being blocked.

Mr. Smith states he just did not know if there was a prohibition.

Mr. Glover states he would agree with Mr. Smith’s comments regarding the architecture design especially in the rear. He states it is very monotonous. He states he would love to hear the petitioner’s comments on what they could do to make that more attractive both in terms of the roofline and the rear façade.

Mr. Chris McKinney, Westport Homes, 9210 North Meridian Street, states they have multiple four and five unit buildings. He states they have one six unit building. He states the six unit building, in the back of that building, has the largest surface area. He states sixty percent would mean that at least three units on a four unit building would have a rear architectural feature. He Page 8 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

states that regulation would mean that the smaller buildings far exceed the requirement. He states there are single story units on each end of the building. He states this is the six unit building. He states they understand the commitment earlier was not necessarily enough. He states this is what fifty percent would look like. He states they would have to add an additional element to the rear of the building. He states this particular building shows a small two-foot bump out in the middle of the building, and they know now that this would need to be either a four-foot or an eight-foot. He states it would be a screened porch or a covered patio. He states they added additional trim elements to the sliding doors, and one thing that the rendering is no indicative of is this is a fiber cement community with trim boards. He states they are missing some of those details on this rendering. He states on the corners there would be trim boards and anywhere there is a transition they would have to use trim boards because they cannot use J channels. He states the rear of the building gains some additional interest. He states this building has the largest back. He states if you could imagine losing that complete center section and more flow horizontally.

Mrs. Wilcox states that from her perspective it looks like one big building. She states she thinks what Mr. Glover is saying and what she is looking for is being able to see the definition between each individual unit. She states she has lived in condominiums before so she knows this is not something that is unusual, but the back of that building, even with all that they have done, it is still a not attractive second floor.

Mr. Glover states he thinks that Mrs. Wilcox summarized his concerns well. He states he is looking at the six unit building and it is just not very attractive.

Mrs. Hanes asks if they have any more comments or suggestions to mitigate that concern.

Mr. McKinney states on one of the buildings they added cedar shake to the front gable and painted that in an accent color. He states they could extent the accent color paint. He states it could vary from structure to structure to break up some of the monotony that they are seeing. He states they could paint the accent color and it would give the building some dimension. He states that is going to be subjective.

Mr. Glover states that maybe he cannot visualize it. He states it may be because it is one really big run.

Mr. McKinney states in complete respect with the ARB process they do not want to completely redesign the buildings that were approved by the ARB Board.

Mr. Peterson states the pictures from the pond are a really big mess. He states it does look like a much bigger problem that he is not sure that Westport Homes can commit to. He states with this construction we are going to open up a can of worms, and suddenly we are in pretty far and these commitments may show there are not deep enough pockets when we get into it. He states adding landscaping to the back of those homes across the street they will eventually just wash into the pond it looks like. He states they think they keep having this contradiction of we want to screen this product from the Midland, but at the same time the city has made a huge Page 9 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

investment in the Midland and we need to celebrate it. He states this is sort of a conflict between a product that has chosen to go there and what really the city has done with the Midland Trail. He states they can kind of sneak up on some of these architectural standards, but they still feel like apartments. He states that is the problem, and his concern. He states you add bits and pieces, and he does applaud them for coming a long way. He states he is just afraid it still feels like apartments.

Mr. McKinney states Westport would entertain a commitment for brick on the structures closest to the Midland and wrap first floor for the entire community. He states it is certainly a possibility that they could take to council if they think that makes the structures look appealing.

Mrs. Hanes states she is interested in hearing about the trail access and possibly moving the sanitary sewer line.

Mr. Hellmann states when the go through the TAC review with the Engineering Department they have the Noblesville Alternative Transportation Plan, standardized signs, and they will be given the details to those. He states it will be consistent with the theme out there.

Mr. McKinney states as far as Westport Homes is concerned the location of the trail access point is not a concern for them. He states they are happy to move it as Mr. Hellmann suggested over closer to the amenity area. He states they would also increase the buffering on the end of the cul-de-sac. He states they could add a structure and bring the sanitary along this route and it would alleviate any concerns about the plantings for buffering off the cul-de-sac.

Ms. Aschleman states one of the suggestions that Mr. Hellmann made earlier was shortening up the utility easement between those buildings. She states that would allow them to shift the buildings ten feet north, and that gives you an additional ten feet outside of the sanitary easement that they could plant outside of as well. She states they have some options that we can work through and there are no deal breakers at this point. She states there are some things that could be done that we could make sure that there is not a conflict between the landscaping and the sanitary line.

Mrs. Reed states as much as she is sure that the petitioner is not excited about another continuance, she does know that council from their perspective does not like to be the ones to fit something into the box. She states the product reworking is not something that they are interested in doing. She states she would hate to see them make a decision tonight, and then they are the ones trying to fit it into the box. She states she would offer up the suggestion that they come when we have some more descript landscaping at the end of the cul-de-sac, and if there are options for adjusted renderings we could talk about that internally as well. She states she is just going to throw that out there for the petitioners to decide on.

Mr. McKinney states no, respectfully the ARB process, they have no problems making additional commitments here this evening. He states their time constraints with the seller will not allow this to be continued. He thanks Mrs. Reed for the offer.

Mrs. Reed states at this point she would entertain a motion with some commitments. Page 10 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

Mr. Howard states he is going to suggest to Mr. Calderon because we will be putting a lot of conditions into this motion, and he thinks that they should allow Mr. Calderon to put in what he knows he needs to add. He states this is going to be vague. He asks him to state what he sees his commitments to be in addition to those that were written prior to the meeting.

Mr. Calderon thinks that that additional commitments would be as follows: come up with a more global solution to the pond in Slater Run, and add that to their existing commitment; adjust the site plan to provide for a relocation of the sanitary line to provide additional buffering to the south; adjust the connection point to the Midland Trace to provide more meaningful buffering; seek to reduce the thirty foot easement between the southernmost buildings to provide some additional room for buffering; architecturally either looking at plan revisions for additional masonry and/or other treatments. He states he thinks those are the major ones. He states he hopes they appreciate the dilemma they have contractually speaking with the seller.

Mr. Smith states he just has a quick question. He states he had some concerns about how the back looked. He asks why it is sixty percent, and why could not it be one hundred percent.

Mr. Calderon states he believes the note was Mr. Peterson asking for sixty percent, and that is what they responded to.

Mr. Howard asks if it is sixty percent per building.

Ms. Aschleman confirms sixty percent per building.

Mr. Hellmann states on the additional commitments he just wants to make sure that something is clear. He states they mentioned narrowing the easement and also moving the sewer. He states if there is a utility, they will need the thirty-foot easement.

Mr. Calderon states they understand that.

Mr. Smith asks if these additional commitments will be on the rezoning ordinance or the preliminary development plan motion.

Ms. Aschleman states they would be on the preliminary development plan motion.

Mr. Peterson states it is difficult to sit up here and design these buildings as we go through this process with just the presentation in front of us. He states the commitment in front of them still feels the same. He states he does not know if they have made a significant stride.

Motion by Mr. Noel seconded by Mr. Burtner to forward with an unfavorable Recommendation to the City Council for denial of the change of zoning from SR (Suburban Residential) to R5 (Multi-Family Residential) for approximately 9.88 acres for property located at 17419 Gray Road and approximately 285 feet east of the intersection of State Road 32 (Westfield Road) and Gray Road as per submitted application LEGP 0154-2018. AYES: Burtner, Anderson, Glover, Peterson, Mitchell, Beason, Wilcox, Noel NAYS: Smith, Hellmann, Hanes ABSTAIN: zero Motion passes 8, 3, 0 Page 11 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

Motion by Mr. Noel seconded by Mr. Burtner to forward with an unfavorable recommendation to the City Council for denial of the Change of Zonings to R5/PD (Multi-Family Residential/ Planned Development) as per submitted application LEGP 0182-2018.

AYES: Burtner, Anderson, Glover, Peterson, Mitchell, Beason, Wilcox, Noel NAYS: Smith, Hellmann, Hanes ABSTAIN: zero Motion carries 8, 3, 0

NEW BUSINESS

#3 Application No. 0017-2019 Public Hearing for the adoption of a amendments to the “Cumberland Pointe Planned Development Ordinance No. 50-11-02” regarding minimum lot area, width; side and rear yard setbacks; minimum building size; loading docks; landscape buffer; and parking islands for property located at 15270 Endeavor Drive all within the City of Noblesville. Submitted by Rockstone Investments, LLC (Owners and Applicants)

Mrs. Reed states this project is located on the east side of Endeavor Drive and is part of the Cumberland Pointe planned development. She states it is an amendment to a preliminary development plan, and the ordinance is requested by Rockstone Investments. She states this site is 2.37 acres, larger than many lots within that Cumberland Pointe development. She states Rockstone Investments is proposing a four building business park. She states one of those buildings will contain the Bedrock Builders headquarters. She states this project will receive a five-year tax phase in which indicates support from both administration and council. She states planning staff is also recommending approval as this type of employment center helps grow smaller businesses by offering mid-size space to grow into before they move into a completely new build. She states all the proposed amendments before you this evening were a team effort between staff, the petitioner, and their representatives and they are all directly related to the unique size and layout of this business park concept. She states due to the constraints of the size of the lot itself and how many buildings we are packing in there we are working on making sure we try to get the terms qualified correctly. She states a normal setback is not a normal setback when you have four buildings on such a small site so you have to create some flag lots, as you will see in the packet a little later. She states the petitioners and their legal counsel are here to and they are going to give a quick presentation.

Mr. Sam Swafford, 600 East 96th Street, states he is happy to be here tonight representing Bedrock Builders. He states Bedrock Builders and its affiliate entity Rockstone is the owner of the property located at 15270 Endeavor Drive. He states this property is about 2.3 acres in size and obviously it is vacant. He states just to give a little bit of context here, as you drive up and down Endeavor Drive it is almost like a miniature industrial complex. He states there are some industrial looking buildings, a couple of office buildings mixed in there as well, with some self- storage as well. He states what Bedrock is proposing is to develop an entrepreneurial campus on the lot pursuant to the concept plan. He states the goal of this entrepreneurial business campus is to let businesses relocate their corporate headquarters to within this development so these businesses can stay in Noblesville, grow in Noblesville, and ultimately succeed in Noblesville. He states Bedrock is doing the exact same thing. He states they are a homebuilder Page 12 NOBLESVILLE PLAN COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2019

that is relocating their office to one of these buildings within this development. He states last month the city council approved a five-year real property tax abatement as mentioned by Mrs. Reed. He states the next step within this development is that Bedrock is requesting to update some of the development standards within the applicable planned development ordinance so they can construct and build this development pursuant to this site plan. He states all of the requested changes are very internal to the real estate because each of these buildings will be on their own separate lot. He states they are not proposing to amend any of the perimeter landscaping. He states they are not requesting to change any of the permitted uses. He states this office is a permitted use. He states they are excited about this project and respectfully request a favorable recommendation.

Mrs. Hanes asks which building will be the Bedrock headquarters.

Mr. Swafford states the Bedrock headquarters will be in this building right here.

President Hanes opens the public hearing. Seeing no one; President Hanes closes the public hearing.

Mr. Anderson asks what sort of signage the project will have, and where it will be located.

Mr. Steve Hardin, 600 East 96th Street, states the plan is to not have anything out on Cumberland. He states it is not likely to have anything on Endeavor Drive as well. He states each building would have a sign pursuant to the city standards. Motion by Mr. Burtner seconded by Mr. Peterson to approve the amendments to the adopted planned development ordinance and plans as presented and discussed as per Application No. 0017-2019 and to forward a favorable recommendation for adoption to the City Council. AYES: Wilcox, Anderson, Noel, Smith, Glover, Burtner, Beason, Hellmann, Hanes, Peterson NAYS: zero ABSTAIN: Mitchell Motion carries 10, 0, 1

MISCELLANEOUS There being no Miscellaneous Business, a motion was made for adjournment. Meeting adjourned 7:04 PM

______Gretchen A. Hanes, President Sarah Reed, AICP Secretary