Plan Commission continues Farm Building 3 development plan to Nov. 17 for revisions to Sycamore Street facade

The Plan Commission continued review of docket 202566DP — a development plan for a 13,198-square-foot multi-tenant commercial building (six tenant suites) on a 1.24-acre site in The Farm PUD — to its Nov. 17 meeting after commissioners requested additional design work for the Sycamore Street-facing side of the building.

Planning staff explained that the site lies in the professional office use block of The Farm PUD and that, although the project’s uses (restaurants and general retail) are permitted by the PUD, an earlier iteration of the project would not have met bulk standards because it proposed two separate structures. The current plan consolidates the proposal into a single building, which staff said brings the bulk standards into compliance. Staff also noted a potential technical issue: if the commission deems the Sycamore Street facade a rear facade, the project may not strictly meet the PUD’s architectural requirements for facades that face Sycamore or Michigan Road, but staff suggested the articulation, elevation change and landscaping could allow the commission to treat that elevation as a front-facing treatment for review purposes.

Commissioners raised concerns about the length and horizontal monotony of the Sycamore Street elevation and asked the design team to explore ways to add vertical and horizontal articulation (height variation, depth, stronger canopies or simulated entries and glass treatments) while recognizing that the back of the building will contain tenant service areas and utilities. Architect Jim Jewett of Newdel Architects and the project team said materials on the rear elevation will be consistent with the front elevation (brick and cast stone), rooftop units will be screened and several options (height articulation, corner glass, deeper canopies where feasible) could be added to improve the elevation.

Commissioners asked the design team and staff to collaborate on preliminary options before the next meeting and to return with revised elevations and more detailed illustrations; the petitioner agreed and the commission voted to continue the matter to Nov. 17 so members could review a revised design and vote then.

The commission noted that the site’s grade change reduces the visibility of the rear elevation from Sycamore Street in some places and that landscaping and screening will be required, and the petitioner said rooftop units would be screened and that an outdoor seating area had been added at staff request. The commission made no final approval and will take up the revised plan at its Nov. 17 meeting.