Advisory Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. [Music] Brother [Music]

[Music] is Good evening. Welcome to the town of Avon Advisory Plan Commission meeting. If you are interested in having a copy of the agenda, they are available on the tables to the right of the audience. We will be conducting business as outlined on the agenda. From time to time, the board may deviate from the agenda. As president of this body, I will inform those in attendance of any deviations. This meeting is being recorded for the public record. Because of this, we request that personal conversations are kept to a minimum and that all cell phones are set to vibrate. Any phone calls shall be taken outside of the chambers. If you are interested in commenting during the public hearing portion of the commission's deliberations, please sign up on the sheets located on the tables to the right of the audience. When your name is called, please step forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Please address your comments to the board and not to the staff or to the petitioner. Your comments should relate directly to the case at hand. During the conduct of the public hearing portion of the commission's deliberations, the petitioner will have 10 minutes to present their case to the commission. Reministrators will have 10 minutes to present objections to the petitioner. Persons in support of the petition other than the petitioner will have 10 minutes to present support for the petition while the and finally the petitioner will close the public hearing portion of the presentation with a fiveminute rebuttal period. Once the public hearing is closed, no additional testimony will be heard unless it is solicited by members of the commission during the question and answer phase of the commission's deliberations. Subdivision plat and development plan petitions are ministerial requests, meaning that if the proposal meets the

requirements set forth in the town's development ordinances, the plan commission must approve the request. In the interest of transparency, state law requires that the plan commission hold a public hearing even if the development proposal proposal must be approved. Responses to public comments and questions may be given once the public hearing portion is closed. We understand there may be several people who wish to speak in order to keep the meeting running in a timely fashion. We would request that you not repeat previous comments. Thank you for your assistance in facilitating a respectful, fair, and timely meeting. Again, welcome to our meeting and please stand for the pledge. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, let's do a roll call. Greg Zusen, present. Paul Guggenberger here. Katherine Ransburg here. Dave Kaufman here. Bill Reid here. Jennifer Spencer here. Andrew Rockerbrand here. Having all members present, we have a quorum. We now move on to the approval of the meeting minutes from the August 25th meeting. Has everyone had an opportunity to review the meeting minutes? And are there any suggested changes, questions, edits? I make a motion to approve as presented. Second. Having had a motion and a second, we'll now do a voice vote. All in favor say I.

I.

Those opposed. The eyes carry. Meaning are approved. We now move on to the public comment section of our meeting. And this is the point at which uh members of the audience can come forward and speak to any item that is on not on the agenda tonight. There's something you'd like to speak to regarding the town of Avon that is not already on the agenda. This is your your opportunity to come forward. Is there anybody present who would like to come forward and speak to anything that's not already on the agenda? Having had no one come forward, the public comment section is now closed. Have there been any requests for continuances or agenda modifications?

There have not.

Okay. We now move on to the only item on the agenda tonight, which is old business DPR 258. Ray Skilman. Okay. Um this is for the Ray Skilman uh what will be the Ray Gilman Mazda officially named Ray Gilman Automotive of Avon. It is uh located at the southeast corner of US Highway 36 and 900. If you recall we uh heard this case in in it in its entirety in June. Um, and then in July, the petitioner requested a continuence to September so they could make some revisions to the plans. And so now they're back tonight um with updated plans that you have since received. The parcel is unimproved. Um, it is or was subject of a major plat for to plat the site into four lots. It started out as 26.6 acres. We're only considering six acres of that plat tonight. Then the BZA considered two cases and and granted both of those. It was a special exception to provide for auto sales in tier 1 and then a variance in development standards to have the building set back 250 ft from US 36 and to have six rows of parking in front of the building when the ordinance limits the number of rows to two. So, from the plans you saw in June, the um overall square footage of the building has been reduced by about 10,000 square feet. So, this proposal for you today is to uh

approve that revised square footage for the dealership. And then there are two waiverss being requested of you tonight. If you recall from June, there was one waiver from development standards which was request for the foundation plantings and then there were seven waiverss of design standards for the building. So tonight that amount has been reduced. We have one development standards waiver for the foundation plantings and then one waiver of design standards for the masonry on the building. So, they went from eight total to two total tonight. [Music] Uh, just to refresh your memory, this is a where the subject site is located again, the southeast corner of US 36 and 900 South. This is the uh zoning of the property. Um, the blue that it is shown there is C2. So it is C2 surrounded by C2 except for to the south which is industrial. This is a sideby-side comparison of what was what you saw in June, what was proposed in June and then what is being proposed uh today. It is essentially the same. Maybe you just see the the footprint of the building has changed and some additional parking is being added where the footprint of the building was reduced but essentially overall the same layout, same design, same curb cuts, that sort of thing. Uh I mentioned the uh surrounding uses already. Um the cumbersome plan which is still in effect is the 2017 plan which recommends uh aerial retail for the adjacent parcel to the west the other

car dealership and uh we think it would be logical to extend that um um area into this subject site. Um, since we did recently see the new comprehensive plan, which has not been adopted yet, uh, just so you're aware, it does also recommend commercial retail for the subject site. Aside from the two waiverss that you're going to be hearing tonight, the subject or the proposal does meet all standards of the UDO as far as development standards, setbacks, parking, lighting, that sort of thing have all been reviewed. Um and aside from the waiverss granted or the variance and the special exception granted by the BCA um it does also meet all the standards of the US 36 overlay for tiers one and two. So, we'll start with the design standards waiver request, which is the architecture uh request of the building. And this is to provide for no masonry on any of the facades when the US 36 overlay requires an 80% masonry front on the facade facing US 36 and 50% on the side facades. Um this particular waiver, if my memory serves me correctly, um was based on feedback from the commission in June was generally seen as as being something that is supportable, which is I believe why the petitioners again requesting it of you tonight. Um these are the findings of fact for a design waiver. Um the first one that it will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare um their response indicating that the masonry is being replaced by glass drive it and other pre-cast panels um not detrimental um to health, safety or

general welfare. Uh number two, the alternative will not contradict the intent of the design standards. And they're basically saying that it while it is not masonry, it is um other materials that are of a high design standard and would enhance the surrounding area, especially being that it's in the same vicinity as other car dealerships with similar architectural style. uh design waiver criteria three is that the alternative is due to conditions specific to the property and the proposed development and not generally applicable to other properties. Um they indicate that it is a dealership and dealerships do have their own design standards. We recognize that um and so that that specific item relative to this design would not be applicable to other commercial buildings in the general area. Um number four, the proposed alternative enhances the proposed development and surrounding area that it it says that it's currently un undeveloped but um that it it's proposed to be of a desirable design. We would con concur with that finding. This is the revised elevations. Um if you recall and I direct you to the previous waivers were on page eight of your staff report at the bottom. It lists all the previous uh waivers that they had requested and they they a lot of them kind of repeat the same kind of thing. They talk about uninterrupted walls, repeating patterns, facades greater than 100 ft

without projections or recesses. So they did add projections, recesses, repeating patterns, um different materials, that sort of thing that we were able to determine that all those sections have been met with the new design. Um again, with the exception of the masonry. And this is um a 3D view generally of what the building would look like um looking southeast. And the the colors are up there also. that is in color, although it looks black and white. Um the building will be a black and white um basically the color format that they're proposing. This is not the rendering of the building exactly, but it just gives you a flavor of what the style of the building will look like. It's generally in line with all MA Mazda dealerships that you'll see in the central Indiana area. Um and it also is consistent with the other dealerships that are west of here along US 36. Um so regarding uh the design waiver specifically, we do believe that the waiver is warranted and that the design of this particular structure will be um in line with the intent of the US 36 overlay which is to preserve the and enhance the aesthetic qualities of the properties adjacent to and visible from this property along the corridor. Staff does recommend approval of this waiver request. I've also included the uh photos of adjacent dealerships just to give you a a flavor of what the architectural style is of this portion of US36. And then we will move on to the development standards waiver which again is the foundation plantings which I do believe for my recollection of the

June meeting the commission was generally in support of and I will I'm going to skip the findings for now and go show you the site plan. It's kind of hard. I'm going to point to the the site plan behind you I guess. Um I'm sorry Andrew. So this is the north half of the site. So the building is right in here. And foundation plantings are here and they will be further south of the building over here. The only place they're not showing foundation plantings are right along this front here. There there's a door here, a door here. So they wouldn't be needed there. So it's only this, you know, about 50 ft of frontage. the south half of the site plan. There are foundations all along here along the south side and as well as the east side. So again, the the waiver request is we believe uh fairly minor request in that it's only this 50 ft in here. And going back to the findings, um the first one being that it does not create conditions detrimental to the public safety, health, welfare. Um because the petitioner's response is the elimination of the building frontage landscaping will have no health, no impact to public health safety. Um it provides for a wider walkway. Uh the overall pedestrian walkways throughout the the front end of the site um we think are are good are superior for the amount of walkways that a dealership would normally have. Uh finding number two, the purpose and intent of the district um that the proposal is harmonious with the purpose and intent of the zoning district. Um, foundation plings are provided again for most of the building.

It's just this one portion of the frontage that they are not. I will um go on to say that the foundation plings that would be required in that area, they have proposed and relocated to another portion of the site. So, they are not reducing the amount of landscaping they're required. They've just relocated that one small portion. Um the proposal enhances the overall development plan. The budding streetscapes and neighborhoods. Um there's they indicate there's more space for customers walking location of the pedestrian walkways. Um opens up the front facade for internal ve vehicular display. Number four, the proposal does not produce a site design that is impractical or detracts from the appearance of the proposed development. Um the foundation planting would be again 250 ft back from US 36. So the foundation planting is meant to break up or interrupt the facade and the impact of a a harsh facade as being seen from the street. This facade where the foundation planting is going to be would likely not be seen from US 36 being that it's so far back and then six rows of cars in front of it. um the foundation or the landscaping that's out on 36 and all through the parking lot we think are excellent. So the foundation or the landscaping impact is not going away. It's just this one location where it's being relocated. Um and then the last finding that it it provides improved site design. um they believe that the increased area of the walkway um coming to the store um from the continuous pedestrian walkway that they've provided and I'll show you that um and then that everything is provided on site and this is the walkway here that they're providing from the

what they're they're adding a sidewalk on US 36 and then a continuous walkway from 36 straight to the door so it would hit right where the foundation plantings would be. Um staff, just a quick overview that we think that the site design is good, the landscaping is excellent at this location. The general intent of the ordinance would be met because the landscaping is just being relocated and we are recommending approval of the foundation planting waiver request. And then the overall recommendation for the development plan review um is approval if the waiverss are granted subject to the standard three conditions that you see here that are um on all of our development plan reviews. And I'd be happy to answer any questions. Questions for staff. As always, thank you for the extremely well put together report. If there are no questions for staff, we'll have the petitioner come forward. Good evening. Derek Ste with Crossroad Engineers 115 North 17th Avenue here

258. I'm joined here tonight by Justin Muny with Trace Father Group and Tom McGomery with Montgomery Architects. Thank you, Linda, for the uh very thorough staff report and favorable recommendations.

Everybody got all that right. Probably didn't get get recorded, but none of that wasn't important info. Um, so most of this information I have in the presentation is all essentially the same uh as the uh prior plan commission hearing. So I will go through that pretty quickly in the interest of time to kind of get to the the uh important parts that we're requesting the waiverss and the overall DPR. So again, this project is located on US 36 between 800 East and Ronald Reagan Parkway. More specifically, as Linda had indicated, it's at the southeast corner of US 36 and County Road 900 East. Uh the yellow area is the overall approximate overall boundary of the companion uh final plat application that was filed along with the DPR. Uh as indicated in the staff report, the property is zoned mostly C2. Uh there is a small portion of I2 and that is the uh existing Ray Skilman collision center located uh on the far south end of the property. Um the Mazda dealership to be located on lot one is in the tier one and tier two of the US 36 overlay. Uh land uses consist primarily of uh other auto dealerships to the west and a small bit of industrial in the southwest corner. Um mixed use retail on the north side of US 36 industrial to the east and the C CSX rail yard to the south. Uh this slide just kind of shows the overall subdivision layout. And uh if you look closely, you'll notice that the building layout is the old one, but just to give you an idea of how this fits with the surrounding properties. Um obviously we have the race Gilman Hyundai, Andymore Kia, Andymore

Volkswagen, Andymore Nissan, and Andy Moore Andymore Toyota directly to the west. So this is kind of car dealership row if you will. And then the Ray Gilman collision center uh in the southwest portion of the of the overall subdivision. Is that dep detention pond currently there? There is an existing pond. Uh we're going to drain it and expand it to meet the current ordinance as part of this project. You're welcome.

Uh so uh as indicated, this is uh was filed with a companion uh final plat application as well. And uh lot one is where the proposed dealership for the excuse me, the proposed Mazda dealership will be located. And that's outlined in red. Uh block A outlined in blue will remain unimproved but could be developed in the future. Uh the parcel outlined in green is the existing Ray Gilman collision center. And then block B outlined in orange U again would be undeveloped and could be developed in the future. The existing detention pond is located in that souththeast portion, the southern portion of block B. And um as I mentioned, it'll be drained and expanded to meet the current stormwater ordinance.

To that detention pond, are you doing it for the future use of the orange as well? Yes. Yes. So the the detention pond is sized uh master plan for the entire development.

Okay. exclusive of the collision center uh because it does not currently drain into that pond. So this next slide is just the north half of the proposed site plan. Um as Linda had indicated u this layout is primarily the same as uh what was presented back in June. The difference is uh at least as it relates to the site is that the building itself has been uh the footprint has been reduced. Um there will be connected excuse me pedestrian connectivity from the new sidewalk being installed along the frontage of US 36 uh due south to the front door. And then uh there's a new sidewalk to be installed on 900 East with pedestrian connectivity to the west side of the building with a large pedestrian path to the front side. Uh and as shown here, a new drive access off of U County Road 900 East will also be constructed.

And that drive is not going to connect with the Andy Moore Drive, will it? No.

Okay. Uh and then this next slide is the southern half of the proposed site plan. Uh so in addition to the new drive off of 900 East, a new driveway off of Kingston will also be constructed slightly further east than the current drive to align with the um the main vehicle pathway around the east side of the building. uh in the southeast and and west sides of the uh parking lot will be used for new car customers, inventory, maintenance and service customers as well. And then uh as you may recall when this project came through for the primary plat approval um there was a waiver requested and approved as part of that application for the driveway separation along 900 East uh which the plan commission granted at the March 24th hearing. So, this exhibit just shows that um the driveway separation is consistent uh on these DPR plans with the previously approved waiver. Uh and then as Lyn had as Linda had indicated, excuse me. Um there are uh there is a waiver from the foundation planting uh being requested. The overall number of plantings um required by ordinance is being met but they've been moved around. Uh this is the north half of the landscape plan. uh primarily and I have it in a different slide that's kind of colorcoded but um generally speaking the the additional plantings have been provided uh along the US 36 frontage and then some additional trees and some islands uh along with the shrubs that have been kind of moved

around and uh as opposed to the frontage on US 36. six. Additionally, there's uh street and park street trees and parkway trees along US, excuse me, County Road 900 East and Kingston Street as shown on the landscape plan on the southern half. So, at this time, uh I'm going to welcome Tom McGomery with McGomery Architects up to discuss the building design. I think uh primarily that has been the biggest change from the prior filing. And so I'll introduce Tom, let him come up and discuss the building. Thank you.

Okay.

Uh good evening. Tom Montgomery with Montgomery Architect, 6235 Northshore Drive, Unionville, Indiana. Um all right. Okay. This is a uh condensed version of what you saw in June. Um the previous footprint was 31,000 ft². This is 21,360 ft. Um same layout. Um you got the showroom portion of the building on the north side of the building that's facing 36. Um you got the service drive on the east side of the building where the cars enter to uh get their cars checked out. And uh on the south side of the building that runs parallel to 900, you have the service department. Um got a small second floor. It it greatly got reduced um by about 8,000 square ft. The entire building got reduced probably I think it went from 42,000 to 24,500 ft. So it got significantly reduced. Um um let's see. This is your prototypical Mazda design. Um the majority of the front of the building are metal or aluminum composite panels. These are white aluminum panels. I have samples to pass around if if anyone's interested in seeing them. Um and these are this is black aluminum panels on the front. So it's a mixture of black and white and uh curtain wall. This is called This is the actual jewel box where they actually uh display elevated cars. Um the curtain wall uh the frames are black with clear glass and there's some additional glass um in the showroom portion right here on

the east side of the showroom. And that's that's about it. Um this is the north and south elevation. Um this is the north elevation that you just saw. The proto prototypical design. Our service drive entrance will be on the the east side and this will be white aluminum panels, black aluminum panels with black frame glass. Um on the south side of the building um we have a combination of drive it uh stucco type material. This would be black driveet that would match the metal pill panels on the front of the building. Um, you got we got scored pre-cast concrete pre-cast panels on the back on the south side. Um, anticipating that it'll match the white aluminum panels on the front of the building. We're going to score it the same. We're going to paint it the same. So, it'll the front of the building will essentially match the back of the building. The materials will be slightly different. This is the back of the service drive that you that you see from uh 36. Oops. Uh this is the east and west building uh west elevations. Um the front half of the building uh the showroom portion. This is the this is the service portion right here. The front half uh northern part of the building will be uh the bottom of it will be black. drive it. The top of it will be white aluminum panels and a mixture of glass and uh um uh that's about it. Glass ephus and aluminum panels. The back of it will be a mixture of scored pre-cast panels. That'll the scored panels be matching

the white ACM uh panels on the front. And then you got the black uh drive it projections. Those they project I think approximately 36 inches out from the service walls just to give you the undulation of the building to give it a little more character. Um pretty much the same on the west side of the building. The front half will be aluminum panels at the top of the uh the second story. The bottom of it would be the black drive it and the service portion of the building will be uh scored pre-cast panels with the ephus um black ephus uh projections and uh we're not using all these materials entirely. We're mostly using the white aluminum panels, the black aluminum panels and uh black ephus. And we're using white paint to match the ACM on the service portion of the building. And that's all.

Do you have anything anybody else to speak on your presentation? Okay. I don't know if you want to I would be interested in the samples if you would pass those around your hand just mention that. Uh just a follow form. Is there anybody here who would like to remmonstrate against this development? Anybody other than the pet petitioner who would like to speak in support of the development? I'm assuming you don't want to rebut the lack of response here. So okay. uh discussion or questions for the petitioner I should say.

Yeah, I have a couple questions. Uh number one, thank you for the revised design. I think that really met and removed a lot of the um changes or the um waiverss that were required from last time. I think it's a a significant improvement to the design. Uh did have a couple questions. First about the drive area. Um I think we discussed this last time, but I want to verify with with you and the rest of the committee about um the south entrance on Kingston. So I know we there are rules about aligning drives and I think this was a case where we couldn't align the drive because uh with the race coming south because of the distance from the curb or distance from the uh 900 east. Is that true or did you move it on this one just to align with your um drive and now it's offset the the drive to the south?

Yes. So we shifted that east uh so that it would align with kind of the main vehicle pathway around the building. Uh this area here, it's a little bit hard to see, but there's a service drive or I'm sorry, an overhead door into the service area here. And then there's an overhead door for this service area. So the thought was that we would have uh basically this would be the main and main um drive aisle around the building for uh you know new car customers. We wanted to keep that separate from the uh maintenance and service area drive just to avoid conflicts of traffic with people coming in and out and the different uh users. So, we opted to shift this drive to the east um in order to to better accommodate uh you know traffic flow on site.

So, does does that align with the uh requirements that we'd had? I know the and this is not a a like a true well maybe it is an an entrance cutout that don't don't align with adjacent properties. So during plotting the entrance drive onto Kingston was discussed and the distance it needed to be from 900. You're correct. Okay. I'm trying to remember that's moved since the last plat review, right?

I don't believe so. Not not since primary plat approval. I don't believe. Okay. Okay, I was I was unclear about the history of the position of that drive relative to the old race skill. So if I'm wrong on that, that's fine. It's been approved by the platting and

I'm just double checking for you. If you want your next question, I'll continue. And then the other thing about Kingston is is that the town has plans to make that a secondary uh access through the um east west corridor there. And the the improvements are great. I think it makes a much better view. Is there any plan for signage or anything along Kingston uh in the future to you know bring out your your company from from the the secondary drive that that'll cross um to the south of the building? Uh, I believe that they will have just some minor directional signage. Um, you know, there may be a um maybe a a sign for service entry on this side. Uh, but there wouldn't be any kind of ground sign or pylon sign, I don't believe. Is that correct, Justin?

Justin Bunty, 7606 Oakrove Drive, Indianapolis, Indiana. It's a tough question to answer because the requirements from Mazda will be the ones that are tough to for instance Hyundai just came back says we have to add a sign that says EV charging station. Um there's different requirements that sometimes change as the business develops. Um but we'll obviously have to comply with what your signage regulations are. So if they if Mazda wants it and you deny it, then they won't be there. If Mazda wants it and you'll approve it, then we would probably like to request it at that time. Okay. We're not at that stage. Um I think 36 is their main focus. And then physically on the building like you see that is their sign package.

Yeah. I should say from the south and east you can't tell it's a Mazda dealership. Correct. I would like to have signs back there to Okay. show that it's a Mazda dealership. Okay. But would it be fair to say that your intent based upon uh what you said ear what you said earlier is to keep the service traffic separate from the purchasing customer traffic. Um just just in term just in terms of uh drive safety and all that sort of thing. Yes. Correct. Okay. The service department's busier than the sales department, right? on a daily pattern. And you've got a lot more carage happening back there. We try to prevent accidents.

Yes. Try. That's all I Thank you. That's a word. So, I have a question that sir, you wouldn't go away because you may be the one to answer this. So, I'm curious on how much flexibility you have in your design standards with Mazda. Yes. Nearly zero. So they've already wrote letters that I could present to you, but I chose to just Okay. How can you help me understand then the difference between you lost 10,000 square feet approximately? That was cost. That was cost So there's flexibility in the design of the building as far as the size requirements. We were overbuilding anticipating not having to build again.

So So design standards don't dictate your square footage. They do, but we're we're way over what Mazda would require even at the 21,000. Okay. I think that the requirement is minimum square footage, right? Yes. And they were considerably over that initially. Okay. Thank you. Then as far as like color scheme, I assume is what Mazda wants wants you to comply with their color scheme and signage and stuff. Materials and colors. Yes. So I got a question on I know we've had this discussion on the commission over here. Drive it. Can you explain what drive it is? I don't know who is there. That's a Tom.

I have a sample of it. It's It's basically it's a stucco type material. It's u like a exterior plaster, but it goes over uh insulation. So like acrylic cover, then you go over some mesh and then you go over insulation and and it creates like a stucco type finish. Okay. In a lot of places it's considered masonry. Well, but uh I don't think here it is. Yeah, that that's the texture that that will be black. Okay. And I'm glad you brought that for us to look at. So, I'm going to ask staff like is drive it approved materials in the overlay.

I think it is. It seems like we've had this discussion over the years. So they are prohibited except when being used as accent materials covering the balance of the wall once the masonry is applied. So if you take the masonry off as long as it's an accent material, well first it says accent, then it says covering the balance of the wall. So we would say as long as it's less than 50% of the wall, it is allowed. So with what you know of the design so far does that does this design meet what you just discussed its accent material?

We we have gone through these this design with a fine tooth comb and this ordinance and we believe this design meets the code with the exception of the waivers. Okay. And I I asked that question because you know, yes, I think somebody mentioned the the automobile dealership row there is like we have the the dealerships and they're definitely like can be high quality and I know Ray Gilman's there against Andy Moore Toyota. So I'm sure you do too. So that's why I'm asking the question and I appreciate you bringing this example in. So that's all I need. Thank you. Okay,

Andrew to answer your question, the drive is shown where it was for the plat and the waiverss in involved and it was because of the separation from 900. So Ken, I do have a question. You said that this is even though you reduced the square footage significantly, it's still over the minimum standard for Mazda or the minim minimum requirement for Mazda. Yes. In terms of square footage. Correct. And that the reason it's so much smaller is because the improvements we asked for meant increased cost. Correct. Okay. We appreciate you accommodating us that way.

How does this dealership compare to the Is it a Hyundai that Rice Gilman has? Size, architectural standards.

Uh it's very similar. it'll it's um Mazda's went upscale um probably about 10 years ago really their their transaction price is quite a bit higher than Hyundai. Um so their standards are like they're following suit of that. Um almost all manufacturers there's only two manufacturers that do the the metal ACM panels and they do that so that it doesn't fade because they have their reputation as well. Uh and our statute in the state I believe is seven years they cannot require us to do a major improvement. Um, so they want to use a material that's high quality so that it does not disparitly show on their reputation as the the franchise. So the ACM panel is very very expensive. I would prefer not to do any of it, but um it it does look nice. So we're we're building a very high-end quality building. Um it looks very luxurious on the inside. A lot of wood trim, a lot of accent points. Um it's it's very expensive to build.

Thank you. Any further questions for the petitioners or staff? I have one more question. On a lot of the dealerships that are currently there on Kingston Street Lane on the other side of Kingston and that's where they kind of use uh a staging area or they keep new cars or rental cars or whatever. You don't have that luxury. But are you planning on putting them in the design that you showed in the orange right well right above that at this time? No. I staging area.

No. I believe the parking lot is roughly 430 spots roughly. Uh and I believe that's sufficient for this franchise. Um the sales in this area, I'll give you an example. Hyundai uh was 135 to 40 a month. Mazda will be 50 to 60 per month. So it's about onethird of the sales currently. Can you go back to the layout of the orange area to the east of this parcel? Does somebody have that remote? So the Mazda is the is here and this is the uh the property that

Okay. And you are not going to be putting any cars on that property. It's undeveloped at this time, right? But the question is, you're not going to put any cars on that property. I believe there's a small pole barn that is there that has some paving um that we do some service work out of. Um but we have the the collision center as well. We will not be parking on grass. I think what what Justin's referring to is there's a pole bar here with a little bit of basketball in front of it that's not being demolished as part of this project because we're not developing that property at this time.

And my my concern or question is because you still own the other parcel that is not part of this because you're the owner, you have the ability that if you wanted to park something there, you could park something there. And I don't want that to be a parking lot or staging area when you have the parking spaces on site here behind the building. That was all. Any further questions for the petitioner? Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. discussion. I would like to say I appreciate the petitioner the efforts that you have made to accommodate our ordinances and uh that we've especially that we've gone down from eight waivers to two. I just personally appreciate that. Well, be a long night if we had eight waivers.

I will say the um of the waivers like the the waiver for development standards of removing the foundation plantings in the front that that seems to be consistent with what we've seen and staff has indicated that the plantings and the number of plantings and the petitioners said this are made up throughout the site. So, we're not losing that. We're just losing the location of that. And you I will agree, you know, when you're you've got product that you want people to see through the front. You don't want anything obscuring that. So, I think that's a an appropriate waiver that I would support and I think staff did a a good job of indicating that in the write up. Um, as as far as the materials go, um, I mean, it's consistent with what we see. uh the the the comment that was made about the cost and the the quality is, you know, I think it's one of those where what we've seen is the exchange of masonry with a higher high quality metal. Um I'm sorry, the drive it is one of those or I'm I'm on the fence as far as the quality of that, but you know, the the quality of what they're looking with the glass and the the panels gives it a quality look. So I understand and I think staff did a good job of of writing that up and indicating their support of that. So I would support that too.

And just as a reminder to those who are watching online and to everyone present uh we have to approve the waiverss first and then we get to the um in to the proposal itself. Is that correct Mr. Taylor? Okay. Any further discussion? Then I would ask that we hear a motion for first the waiverss and then the proposal.

I move that we approve DPR25-08 waiver A, a request to wave Avon UDO 2.10. 10 02A to provide for no masonry when the US 36 overlay requires 80% masonry on the front facade and 50% masonry on the side and rear facades. Since it has satisfied all the requirements for waiverss under state law and subject to the approved findings effect having heard a motion and a second we'll now take a vote take a vote. Reed for Kaufman four. Ransburg four. Guggenberger for Zusan for Rockabbrand four.

Spencer four. Motion to approve waiver A of DPR 258 is passed. We now move on to D to uh do I hear a motion for DPR 258 waiver B? I'll move that we approve uh DPR25-08 waiver B request to wave UDO 6.5 to remove the requirement for foundation planting adjacent to the front of the building since it has satisfied all the requirements for waiverss under state law and subject to the approved finding effect. I'll second. Having heard a motion in a second, we'll now take a vote.

Rockabbrand four. Susan four, Guggenberger four, Ransburg four, Kaufman four, Reed four, Spencer four. The motion to approve waiver B of DPR 258 passes. And now we move on to the development plan review for DPR2508. I'll hear a motion.

I move that we approve DPR2-08 amended. Ray Gilman Automotive of Avon, a development plan review to provide for a 21,360 square foot automobile dealership subject to the conditions listed in the staff report since it has satisfied all the requirements for a development plan review under state law and subject to the approved findings of fact. I'll second. Who wants to take the second? Just for the record, having heard a motion, I second now take a vote. Reed, four, Kaufman, four, Spencer, four, Ransberg, four,

Zusen, four, Genenberger, four, Rockbrand, four. DPR 258 for the Ray Gilman Automotive of Avon proposal is approved. Thank you for your presentation and your work. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on to new business. Do we have any new business? We do not. Do we have any other business? We do not. Moving on to committee reports. I can tell you BCA meets tomorrow, so we don't have a report yet.

I guess it's up to the redevelopment commission from one week ago. I'm happy to share. Uh in addition to our invoice approvals, uh we added our final review of the 2026. Okay. Town council,

we've had two presentations of the budget. Um first meeting in October, we'll have a public hearing to approve it. We also had the uh introduction of the comprehensive plan and u there was some discussion by one council member who was also on our steering committee about the IU health corridor and what we're talking about there as well as the uh land out by Avon Middle School West about the zoning. So there those are two items. I don't know what will happen if if it is not accepted with that in there the way it is. It may come back to this body. So,

okay. Could you share with us what the zoning concerns were since this isn't a zoning

zoning? It's just a comp plan, but um I think the one concern was the potential assessed value with the Ronald Reagan there. Obviously, the intent was commercial industrial, but you've got an area now that is IU Health, and they own land on the west side of of Ronald Reagan, and in my conversations with them, they'd like to develop some office buildings there as well, and that's what we'd like to see there. But then they'd also like live, work, and play for some of their employees, you know, and more of the attainable affordable housing as well. So, but within those developments, so it it's assessed value, but I think what you have now is you're going to have a combination of of a mixeduse. You're going to have retail on on the bottom level that'll be assessed at a different rate and have your one, two, and 3% tax caps. And then you'll have a um multif family. So, um I I think the key here to anybody is that brings something to them. You could say if it was just R1, this would be your potential assessed value. R2 could be this and R3 is this and a combination is this. And I I believe the way that we've looked at this, it'll provide a higher assessed value from what it's there

in total.

In total, that was that. The other thing was is there on the the land over there west of the new middle school west uh when we did annexations out there we've made commitments some of us did that being one of them [Music] so I think that's the other that's the other thing and there would have to I suggested to bring those people in, have another conversation with them because that was I don't remember five, seven years ago. So those are the two items that were discussed. Any other committee reports? Any other business for the good of the order? In that case, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. So move.

Second. Second. We are adjourned.