The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMidtown Redevelopment Plan 2012 DRAFTMIDTOWN, CARMEL, INDIANA A RED'EVELOPMENT PLAN OKAF SUBMITTED JANUARY 1 5, 201 2 SPECK Sc ASSOCIATES LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Existing Conditions 2 Design Principles 4 Design Strategy: Urban Triage 8 Design Process 10 Monon Avenue 16 The Illustrative Plan 19 Phasing_ 33 Plan Capacity 34 The Regulating Plan 40 Thetesign Regulations - Appendix This planning enon.Naa spansnned try. he Cty or Carmel and Inn Carmol Redevelopment Corn- mssion. 11 was completed by Jen Speck NCP, James %Vassdl, and',Rulhaaly Weich under he. lea0ershl? of Cily and CRC stall .Including Mayor James Braking,. Michael Hdaargh. Adrierno, Neel ng. Les IJIds, and Matthew Wolll'ley SPEC1K: 6` A'i,919.0 PC I'AiT1E'far 'LG4.LIC CARMEL. INDIANA INTRODUCTION This plan addresses'a parcetofland'that,'thanks to history. and some: intelligent prior decisions, has become perhaps the most important location for the future development oftheCity of Carmel. 0verthe past severaldecades, three significant developments have begun to transform Carmel from an. auto -oriented suburb into.a walkable•ur- ban environment hilts owriright: The.tirst,ol,lhese Is the redesign and Intensification o'the :City's .tra- .ditional Main Street as a fullymixed-use,;pedestri= an•friendlyshopping and entertainment hub. With rebuilt sidewalks, public.art, lively restaurants;and a collection of new•three- 'tofiie-story buildings: .this redevelopment has introduced to Carmel a quality of urbanlifenot otherwise available'in the Indianapolis suburbs: The Main Street and its sur- rounding blocks' have 'become known as:the;Arts• •and Design district,given their concentration of ,galleries and interior -design businesses, 'includ- ing.the large now Indiana Design•Center located a block south o1 Main Street.. Alan street Carmel The second. important recent development has been the, construction of Carmel's civic 'heart, exactly one-halfmilesouth at City:Center Drive. This areal -raids the new Centerfor.the: Perform- ing Arts—including the 1600 -seat Palladium•con- cert'hall—and alsothe eight -story nixed-use'City Center complex. Appropriately, This site Is located quite close to Carmel City Halland other municipal facilities„'lust t� its south. It is';alsoiadjacent'-to< the well-designed Pedcor companyheadquarters, with nearbyhousing to its west. me Pafad.4m and City Gamer These two anchors are bisected by the; third im portant development, the Monon Trail, the 15 -mile .recreational -.axis that connects camel, to India- napolls, completedin.2002. This trail establishes, an'important pedestrian Iink•between'MainSlreet and the. Civic Center, and alsoimplies the potential intogration of these_two:distinct' places•into some- thing.greater, an entire walkable downtown core. Currently, Main. Street and the Civic Center are each first=rate mixed-use urban' environments. In either place, visitors are likely to, arrive bycar.,. park once,,and access a variety of locations hap- pily on: toot. But each'is.quite.small, and does not. contain a' large. enough ,residential or workplace component to offer many people the full live/work/ play. litestyle.that _one finds' in older urban centers. Residents in one location, traveling tothe.other, are most likely to drive. The redevelopment. of MidTovin, the largely'indus- trial parcel between these two anchors,is therefore important for.two reasons. First,'itwill create an ur- ban axiS r-banaxis that; more than a recreation trail) provides, the'interest and activity, that will encourage walking from one anchor to.the.other. 'Second,'andmore significantly, when combined.with Main Street and the Civic Center, MidTown will completes continu- ous!dewntown core of such•intensity and critical mass that it can constitute a complete and largely sell -reliant urban environment. If MidTown'isprop- erly designed,,workers,will choose to become resi= dents. and: residents workers. Rather than."park- once" locations, the pieces of downtown Carmel will coalesce into a greater Whole in which walking, biking, and transit are able toprovide .a convenient alternative to the car -bound lilestyle&that has be- come the norm in suburban. Indiana and, indeed, across America. 9 Pt.E'C'K S A'9I9"O:IC-KA. T 9191 `L LIC`-) C. Rr1CL, I.NOI A NAiii EXISTING CONDITIONS Boundaries .As suggestedabove„the•study, area is bounded by:Main Street toits north .and City Center Drive toits,south. fiange.Line Road was chosen as an east- em boundary (including:properties on both sides) because,: although largely developed, it has potential. to be:reshapediover time'Into'!a more welcoming corridor—as has already begun to happen. To thewest, the study: area was expanded .to include industrial properties'beyond.3rd Avenue SW, bounded by the single-family neighborhoods that backup to this industrial zone. Buildings Within the study area, no ;industrial buildings were considered as meriting preservation. Along Range Line'Road,.it'was presumed that change would happen slowly, and that it would be possibte over timet replace those build- ings-that:do not provide a positive:edge;to the. street.. East of the Monon trail, the residential and design-businessproperties south ot'Main street were protected from intervention, reaching as;far south as'the.quaint multicolor 'designer's,alley' just north of 3rd. Street SW. Further:south; at the corner of. Range Lihe Road and City Center Drive; -.the entire Mohawk Plaza shopping center was considered prime for redevel- opment, but only in a later phase; since:most of its buildings are currently leased.. Finally,:between Main Street; 2nd Street SW, 4th -Avenue SW, and 'the Monon:Trail, three'olocks"currently contain.mostly'single.family'fiouses. While the'southern one of these btocks'is kept unchanged, thelwo'northern ones, directly against'Main Street,.were.considered 'as meriting transforma- tion into more intensive uses.. Three utility sites within the study area warranted special consideration. First, the water tower along the Monon trail was deemed ready for replacement; by a 750,000 -gallon structure to beiocated.fairly close to the existing structure. - The 'adjacent Ernergency`Medical Servicesantenna, 300-feettall,wes`con- sidered prohibitively expensive..to move. Similarly, an. electricalsubstation dueeast of these two structures was also recommended for retention: (o spare high relocation costs. N/061gp!1p1Y�p 1 �f '� . I•F�C. .""re ,i,.,, a irjsitnetittibint. s CARMEL., INDIANA '115111E]CIIK'-& SA.6y9'WIIC II A',TjEIS',IL 0:1C THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN Ilk ;II .4 11. L i I' I he illostrailve Plan (north al Ian/ uPocac3c acsoosuovse sae CARMEL, INDIANA THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN As with most similar exercises, this effort produced both an Illustrative Plan and Regulating Plan. Only the latter will eventually have the force of law, but the former,represents an idealbuild-out of the site; and thus contains a 6realeramount of detail about what is imagined. The Regulating Plan ensures that the ultimate outcome will achieve its urban ob- jectives, but is less specific about thosethings that matter less, such as.the footprints of.thebuildings, the divisions: among; lots, the design of parking, and the distribution of land uses that are shown or implied by the Illustrative Plan. In describing the Illustrative Plan; we will endeavor to make clear which aspects of its design are required 'and '•which are not. Any•questions'in this regard can'be.an- swered by reviewing the Regulating Plan and De- sign Regulations included in this report. The. paragraphs that follow walk through the Il- lustrative Plan, highlighting its .key features and explaining its recommendations. We begin to the north, where the'Monon Trail intersects Main Street. PAO 20 CARMEL. INDIANA '9 PIE CO( 'a A 9 9 0•.C9 A,TdE!6 ; LIL'C' THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN c Dv NonOmm Sector.. -1 LIU LI mfl El El 1u 0 SPCC K &'A S GO Csr,A.T.ELS LLO I CARMEL. INDIANA PAGE 21 THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN The Northem Sector In its first block from Main Street'south..the Trail maintains its current trajectory along. the nicely landscaped lawn adjacent to Bazbeaux. Pizza's outdoor dining area. ,Halfway down the block, it begins to:broaden, and by the.time.11.reaches 1st Streetit has split Into the threeseparate paths that will carryit down the Avenue. To thewest. taking advantage of an existing curb cut on MainStreet, the narrow first block of.theAv- enue is introduced: carrying,two way traffic'against a single. west -side parking lane. In the:adjacent :block,: the large ,green area, currently undevel- oped; is replacedbythe Corner' Plaza; and the remainder. of the;block is redeveloped' in keeping with of its location, wIthbuildings fac- ing the two A -streets: Main Street; and the Avenue. It is likely that developing. these two block, faces properly will require that the block .faces, against 1st Street and 3rd Avenue' remain unbuilt, sothat there-is,room for parking. As in all similar circumstances, parking tot edges against sidewalks will beshielded by adecorative wall atthe minimum. However, where the noses of cars face a sidewalk, it is recommended:that these parking spaces be' placed in :garages,.as already occurs in Carmel at 1st Street and .1st Avenue SW. Better,,yet, these garages should serve as a ground' floor' to' inexpensive housing. above, them, as proposed byte "Lot Liner"Ibuilding advanced by Duany Plater-Zyberk & Co., which provides' an opportunity for attainable market -rate housing:as a way to hide parking lots from sidewalks.. This type df. building could; ideally be deployed throughout Carmel, especially along the east, side of Veterans Way (1st Avenue) as it' connects: the. City Center .development .toCarmel City Hall. SII ri ill- nitmi. II,I �I&Ilil. lud Gehlfit\ .n _au_ n. go a a. .0 AEI tt.D0�-0.. I r . r 1 TJI,TR YnmI FP.-11F1.11El:IILii L This Lot brat building designed. by OPZ. a.9aws a pathIng g Alta g'ro 0 lacrery lana a the slrvet: Whilea ivariety'of solutions are possible, the plan shows a.practical outcome in which 3- to 5 -story 'mixed-use buildings sit against Main Street and surround the' Corner Plaza, and —tuck:under' rowhouses front the Avenue. These rowhouses, 'which can easily belive-work units holding busi- nesses, have:garages at their backs/freeing up the entire 'parking lot for the mixed-use building. This lot achieves maximum efficiency by allowing each: aisle to: access 3rd Avenue. One block west, redevelopment takes a higher intensity, all the way to, the '4th Avenue: roundabout, with .a block that is a mirror image of its neighbor, but without the .comer plaza. As the Monon Trail meets 1st Street it acquiresthe space necessary to broaden into the full-fledged Avenue. Centered on the expanded Trail, and bounded to the west by the old, trainstation and to the east by attractive condominiums, the. Avenue absorbs the area currently occupied by 2nd Av- enueand itsadjacent parking lot. In so doing, it gives the new housing .aproper. deeper Sidewalk •with trees. The parking lot's two -dozen spaces aro .amply; replaced by curbside: spaces' along the. Av- enue. Given its new higher-quality:address,,Bub's Cafe; atthe comer of the Avenue and 2nd Street, is asked to replace its unattractive Iront•parking lot with a landscaped lawn, built in conjunction with the Avenue. :11 necessary, newparallelspaces along the Avenue can be reserved for Bub's cus- tomers'as well. As an alternative to this new lawn, Bub's is also allowed to build a front addition that reachesto the sidewalk'edge, it it so wishes. Patel 22 CARMEL, INDIANA BSP EaC' K & /A SICK C.1 A T.E.g LiL C THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN However, in the interest of. creating 'new monu- ments that are of use, we should .turn :to the Wa- ter Tower, which marks the center of Square. At 750,000. gallons, this.structure•is anticipated to reach 140 feet In height, with a'. tank diameter of 60 feet and a base. diameter of 30 feet. Turning such'a top-heavy structure into.a piece of..civic,art is no small task, but it can be done. The proposed designshown'here—with a'dramaticfountain 'at its base—adds' about forty percentto.the.cost:of the towe'r,'.butcan be justified on the basis of the eco- nomic spinoff that such an attraction can generate. (As'it lends value to surrounding properties, this feature should resUltln ,increased tax revenues that:justifylitscost:) That said, ifthe,tower can- not bewrappedin an attractive way such as that proposed.here; it should be moved away from the center of'the'Avenue, into: a mid -block location: Ar rho hose of fM pow Wnlnr I n apocia! walarsp ul' foA,feln !routes :i proaaben pinta of cbf n,G. To the east and west of .the Central Square, 4th Street Integrates •the Avenue into its surround neighborhood. Headingeast, underutilized sites on thestreet are proposed to hold buildings facing thesidewalk.with parking behind.. As a principally automotive street, 'Ist•Avenue is the site of most- ly. parking. lot ost-ly.parking.lot edges, which can be shielded with garages or Lot Liner buildings:as desired: Along Range.Line Road,two new:buildings are proposed to reinforce. .the !street edge on either side of the unusual niidcentury modern Kwik Kleen• laundry building, which receives a small front green. These additions anticipate.the removal iron their limper - ties of less valuable structures:such as tho.Frame Designs and 'Suzuki buildings, which df course Could only be expected to happen ohly.over time. To the west, 4th Street reaches out tofhe new Tur- bine Square. which resolves the trajectories of'4th Street, 4th:Avenue, 3rd Avenue, and•a realigned Industrial Drive. This plan anticipates the.removal of the existing AT&T structure to the north of Indus- trial Drive, which.may.bea long time coming: But once that propertyis,vacated, it allows for another publicspace;ol unique character that.will.raise the value of surrounding: properties: Giventhe-neigh- boring uses, itis imagined that these;will become single-family. residential lots, with the exception of the deeper property to'the.northwest, which could efficiently hold.multitamilyhousing,. workplace,; on both. PSC, 26 G4RMCL. INDIANA s Etc Ic,K 1& ,A 5,'3-O',C jl 6T19 LLIL'C THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN 47 Ue Genital Squaw. ilio Wro .rag K*?s a tst IM, water tOFiv.. Each Monk contains a sW&T9 LVN that nEgns 'ntho 'ned- 1h ck pissoyo own IM etlradig buildings. - .. . parking is most efficient on its own footprint, rather than In basements, and taller structures are less costly per space than shorter ones. This proposed structure, if built,, could handle (he majority of the parking needs. of the entire-surrounding,:area,,al- lowing surface.parking on theother blocks to serve mostly residents, .who more often demand that parking be located on site. The structure would be hidden to the north by a thin edge of apartments, and to the .west by rowhouses, whose. rear 'alley tlanks.the parkingdot. Two, other vertical features merit discussion. First, the existing•EMT antennashould be luhied into a positive featureby wrapping its.base in an attrac- tive:envelope, ideally,as. a. part. of its surrounding building. There is'no,reason for it to stand-alone as.apiece of equipment, when Wean be integrated into the facades that line the curb. 'Second, the ex- isting grain elevator -to its north; while a compelling presence, is'a.necessery casualty of this plan. It is not possible to,properly build a straight avenue, lefalone'the central.square, if it is retained, .and no individual or organization has been located who isiwilting to invest ih lis adaptive reuse. It:such artentity can be identified, it might make sense to modify the plan to.save it. That said, grain elevatorcreates'quite an impression on out- ofrtowners, this building is loss meaningful to most. locals, who are familiar with many that are taller than the one here. 9 PJE.0 K 5 A.9 EKO C4 A4LLC' CARMEL. INDIANAfa THE ILLUSTRATIVE'PLAN The Central Sector As the Avenue headssouth and approaches itsin- tersection with 4th Street, it broadens into the Cen- tral Square. Once within the Square, the Monon Trail' is reconfigured briefly pinto: two paths so that it may pass around he Water Tower. Thesquare itself contains a dramatic fountain and seating ar- eas surrounding the Tower,•and small sitting: areas on each flank. Each,block surrounding the Central Square contains 4- to 6story buildings',that give. a lirrit,edgelto Ole .space. While. the nurnberof buildings is;not deter- . mined, it is required that, at the middle'of each block face overlooking The square, a central passageway provides pedestrian-access'to the"centerot'each block, where parking.,is, located. These passage- ways may be open:air or covered, but it is suggested that they,expand al their centers to create courts, like the famous paseos of Palm Beach, Florida. Each set of buildings:contains parking at its rear, but the parking:configuration differs.based onsite conditions. To.tho southeast, much'of the parking area is taken up by,the electrical substation, which suggests that these buildings will•haie to locate some of their,parking•off-s'te: The lot .tothe.north- east.is also potentially undersized: In contrast,,the larger block to:the:northwest contains the oppor- tunity lora centralized -shared parking facility;'ide- ally in the"form of:a 5-sto y'structure. Structured Rio Con'mI Scam ®' CARMEL.. INDIANA ie'I E'•CIK i5 -,A s s,'o,CfrAW,IE l6. ILgC1C I THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN Perhaps the greatest challengein this part of the plan is'the proper northern termination of•the.Av- -enue: As it narrows'at 1st'street,. a civic -axis of great length Is aimed with tremendous focus at the southern end of a condominium building that was not designed to be. viewed in this:way..As,seen here, Its facade Is uncomposed. and centered on a screened collection of:air conditioning units. .1:4_11 • - It The northern termTha!;on et thn:'hroadawd avenue is the sne'rrarr al a cnntlbrmnivm bP(Arg: 11,,, 'ilajacent dsHdu g, la mo right, lacks suft.'cant sYbwaR depth end swot vacs. Thisunfortunate circumstance .presents .an oppor- tunity for the plan's first significant piece of civicart, which is a gateway that both welcomes trail -users to the Avenue and recomposes this facade into a proper vista termination. Happily, the majority of the: facade 15 sot backslightly,. and its windows are The Proposed erapart gatewaydmdes the Tmdinto de Throe polM andgrtns an bnpmwdsanlem face to the ac(nceni nsring • ocated in a way that it can be enfranted with a tripartite archway'of equal width to the three-part trail to its west. The result is a double gateway that both frames the trail and beautifies the building, as illustrated here.. Aside from thecohstru�lionot the Avenue.,no oth- er significant changes are proposed for this sector. To the east, on Range-. Line Road, the plan indi- cates where two new buildings are needed to'give proper shape to'that corridor. 9 PM C UK & A s s '01C IATC 9 LLC' CARMEL, INDIANAEl THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN The .Green Axis Continuing south, the Avenue is crossed by the Pe- destrian Mews; which serves as•an•organizing ele- ment for this entire section oIthe properly.'. As men- tioned,'this pedestrian street enlronts properties that are•.also served by•rear'alleys, and•expands into a larger residential neighborhoodto.the west. While these Mews could hold a vaiiety.of uses: they.are most naturally the site of housing, which benefits tremendously from the presenceof the front green: Whenever' they have been built in New Urban developments;,greenstreets have al- ways held the•most popular homes.. Residents, especially those with children, are often willing to pay extra for the: sense;of. calm and security that a pedestrian, street provides. In order tocreate'a strong sense of enclosure and character,;and in keeping with the denser nature of the Avenue, it is 'suggested that the homes along this axis be;parly- wall rowhousos,' in the tradition of•a British mews. As -_ they .near Monon Avenue; the Mews broaden o create a major green cross -axis -holding. central 1 MICARMEL. INDIANA ;s P E1Otx . g. A1919 0"C(IiA raE19 i 1_1.:1C I THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN 5.PK @ A•9 9.0`C I AST E',9 L L,Cr1 Tho ,erunn,errrerr ohcpr or the water towor coMNatos es kafraion wth' on. annalVaor pipes (hot would wars hi o raw stwrevrding IntMairrs CARMEL. INDIANAlia ' MI Tfl T F ll(.a CARMEL '.In`n'If:-na so Lon j 2011 5.PK @ A•9 9.0`C I AST E',9 L L,Cr1 Tho ,erunn,errrerr ohcpr or the water towor coMNatos es kafraion wth' on. annalVaor pipes (hot would wars hi o raw stwrevrding IntMairrs CARMEL. INDIANAlia THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN TYPE'I TYPE 1 TYPE'I A TYPE 2 2NDFLDCR ISr PIADR 1STRoci a' Iar FLOOR n, n n ate✓ ti; lis `id fit: P lifli Iltf I 1 ii l i1!x1I�{) JIM • U I 1 111{1„ 11 I /71 1. TYPE 1 TYPE, I TYPE I A TYPE 2 3no rLoo' Peer ROOF 2ne. Roo• As, visible in the.Illustrative Plan, the ''Green Axis narrows.and,heads east to terminate on a new frontispiecethat-.beautities the taoade;of lhe:Tres Plus building. As proposed further north, now build- ings are suggested along Range Line Road where gaps exist and front parking lots:are relocated to the rear. To the west; the Green Axisnarrows as it -crosses'3rd'Avenue and the block beyond'it,:and then'broadensinto anothermidblock•green: Nar- rowing once more, it terminates.on a.small civic site, imagined as a recreational ;center for pool. The building here can be;quitesmall: as,long;as ;it has a grand=scale facadeappropriate toa'vista termination: Forexample, a:small pool -house at Rosemary Beach; shown here. is less than ten feet thick, holding,only small changing rooms and restrooms, but it communicates,apowerfully civic :presence. Rosemary QeIsJ Fbliila: A small arc IrucIre-hardly Irate Ihun a Mac wall—can play dominant rob f destined with the proper scale of dela; Such a bohrg Is pmposei ler the xesla-n laiSrgoalion al Ifrdpreen axis. Mmholisos'awrau thrg the'Pedxsron Maws we lam sismsr eccvpyltIg •MLc Thal are 25 feel wide and roughly cililr 95'decp a 195'deep., Gmmoy Cats loo rJav-Jct Mw1b11U the rear.' Centered on the Green Axis, a new residential neighborhood, is imagined stretching west of'3rd Avenue. ,While rowhousessurround,the - axis.and anfront'3rd Avenue,'the remainder of the proper- ties are single family homes:of:varying lou sizes. Those lots with rear lanes can be relatively narrow; with`36'':and 48' feet . being typica[widths in;simi- lar'developments. 'Along the perimeter road,lots without rear alleys maintain a 60 -foot minimum width: to reduce the impact of garage doors on the streetscape: The" Regulating'plan '^ does. notrrequire. this'neigh- borhood:tobe residential, and: other usesare cer- tainly possible, buthousing'is recommended here 'for severat:reasons. Thus`area ia,surrounded to the north, south, andwestsingle-family,:subdi- visions, so rnore housing here. helps to complete that neighborhood and - draw it towards the,,Av- enue. Also,given that the bestiocation fonwork- placeis ondheavenue .itself, it would bebetternot to cannibalizethat marketby drawing it.to.this site instead., Pe0 301 CARMEL, INDIANA ISAPfEICIIS Aj5 ;5,1� CIllAT„,E.15"- .14)L ; THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN >t Fw:g«. 1 . �wuorler�uw- -�ssrn��stFnvareiasnpt?vit!e}r me Pedestrian Mews fires ma Avenue uxM1 wash; .sa<IlanMrnga cenval grurn. gardens. Pictured here, each :;end -unit -rowhouselums itsfront.dooraround. thecomer to the Avenue. A decorative wall, connects` the house.across:its garden to a,rear .garage, and also across the'Mews green to Its facing neigh- bor, where it is punctuated.by,,gates leadinginto its walks. The hemicycle end of tI-ie Mews green creates a strong sense of place asithe walk necks down to its narrower section beyond. I1 . is.recommended'.that the. Mews be lined tipigtes at2 LJ" v Ole a adds value m sunoasete real estaak by;3=story rowhouses,alongits wider'sections.;and 2- toi3story roivhouses. along its narrower sections: The'rowhouses recommended' here are of a type that bas contributed suc- cessfully to,mosbsimilardevelopments in the.t.1:S. 'On.these deeper lots, they are not the tuck -under rowheuses described previously, but rather locate their, garages in:_separate i;buildings. across arear .garden. or.patio. These outbuildings can contain a granny flahabove if desired, and are: sometimes also attacbedby a narrow breezewayorbedroomwing`alongside the garden. Typical plans for such houses are shown here. 'S'PFEAC K' fi,-IA'.S'S o c LOA tiE's, 'LIL.C; CARMEL. INDIANAEl THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN The Southern Sector South of.the Green,Axis, as; seeninthe rendering on page 18, the .Avenue ends :itsIwo-lanesection just north of Mohawk Plaza, and angles southwest at 451degreesto-meet 3rd Avenue. Thelrail'con- tinues its three -path 'trajectory 'towards City Center Drive, where it finally return to its narrower section `in. order to .cross under that street: Be- tween 'the trail and the angled 3rd Avenue,a trian- gular .block remains (see next page). Because this block: is oddlyshaped, the desire to place: friendly daceslalong all ofits sides'suggests that it should hold:a. structuredparking.deckatits denier. Such a -deck could also; serve visitors;lo the Performing :Arts .Center, just .across City Center Drive. While this block could easilywrap its perimeter with mixed-usebuildings, the'lllustrativePlan .shows in- stead amore intensive 'use :imagined by'the' 'City; 'a conference -center, with its. main ball terminating views down :th'e .Avenue. The' 'mid -block ; parking structure - 'is then -wrapped 'by narrower buildings that hide it from South ofthis location, the at- tractiveSalon.1 building acquiies a western neigh- bor that reaches tothe corner oti3rd Avenue. The ,Proposed parking -structure, notwithstanding, it .should be noted that, when redeveloped, the Mohawk Place parking 'lot will' potentially offer a solution for parking this block as well. .Even 'in,the shorter term, it seems to be.rarely,at capacity, and :the ownersmay, bowilling to,lease parking spaces toaacilities on.thfs block, -just a short walk• across the Monon trail: If the tithing works, these two :southern-blockscould be'redevelopedsimultane- ousiy,with'.a unified parking solution. As to Mohawk.. Place, it is currently well. leased, but will eventuallyneed replacement. A -600 -foot square, it is ideally' shaped to create, an "urban donut,",the.: inversion otits current scheme. With buildings facing' all 'surrounding : streets,' including the Monon Trail„ it maintains space for alargeinte- .nor,parking, lot .straddling 1st Avenue. While 'bUild- ingsasurrounding this lot will b , allowed to have reardoors, they will bo,coded to,place:their, princi- pal entrances -against the.surreundingstreets. As always; to'makebest use ,of,their; (shared) parking, these buildingswould ideally include healthybal- anceof apartments'and,workplace's. The:new, civic spaces in this csector have already been discussed. Across Range'.Line.Road; a new .square entrants :the : Unitarian Church, and the:re- builtMohawk .Place block responds with an aligned shallow greenalong.its front. Tothe :west„the.re- configuration of 3rd Avenue creates the. Triangular Green: Two final open spaces are. the- roundabouts' .that have been,'proposed for, the,now'important inter- section of City Center Drive and 3rd Avenue, and thetalready busy intersection oi'CItyCenter.Drive and Range Line Road. The former is an obvious location: to continue:Garmel's tradition of, given' the desire: to draw visitors onto the Avenue: The' latter has :long 'been considered a primeroundabout.candidate.. Unlike other Carmel roundabouts; these;.two will be planned to held a prominent ring of large treesattheir. centers. S P,C4C K"6y A'ySl(5 O1C 1°A"'2':E.'S; `C L'C,i CARMEL. INIDIAN Aei THE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN 2,4 CARMILL, INDIANA 9 P E j3 K L A 7A;9 9 Lice I A4T E 0 L. C C DESIGN PRINCIPLES The central; objectiveof the 'plan -was •to'- create, . to the greatest extent, possible,. a frilly walkable urban environment: Achieving this outcome required that thedesign be' based upon a, full iunderstanding of the various environmental factors that contribute to.walkabitity. While there are many harsh envi- ronments in-which,people. are physically able to walk, thereare.,fewifn.Which they activelyiehoose towalk,; especially;when the option: of:idnving'is available. The following.foui sectiortsprovide ahi- erarchy of'conditions that the redevelopment must satisfy:it.the .average, person is,going to make that choice. Each is necessary but not alone. sufficient. They are: - A!reason-to walk; - A safe walk; - Acomfortable:walk: and - An interesting walk: A Reason to.Watk As Jane Jacobs noted, "Almost nobody travels willingly from sameness to sameness.... even if the'physicaleffort required is trivial."' For people to choose, towalk, .:the waik.mustserve some pur- pose: In planning terms, %that; goal is achieved through mixed use: Or, more accurately; placing the proper balance of the greatest numberof.uses all within- walking distance of each'other. This ef- fort must be coupled with an identification' of. key anchors, including parking lots; so that special'at- tention can be paid to, the. paths between, them: While the market 'may :suggest'alhigher demand for one type of land use: over, another,' any large • Aubrrobrb-oripnfMdvvdcwinere Qdll isolates dittore5 an Parte uses a largowooaies alsl9Miconld slancoconnecledb dmdtryvnent(rgM):nhgra as deenem lend uses nto oemoacl mas caracoled by ninny sine streets. plan must resist he temptation to provide only those activities that seem most immediately via- ble. While plans -can ,and'should avoid committing developers to a.setamount and location ofspecific uses; they should .commit;to a healthy balance of housing, officespace,.and retail'activity, In .accordance with New Urban' best practices; the, allocation. of space between housing_and ,of- fice should be:flexible, with the caveat .that the'two uses should be, proximate 'sofhatthey can share parking areasaroundtheclock, 'since 'their park- ing, loads. are complimentary. Retail,, should be organized to optimizer-ts success,' which princi- pally. means continuity, .soithatlshops'can'support each other. "Given the retail anchors that exist an both ends of .the study;area,`itwouldaseem=.that .this'site: is not likely to -support a large amount of new shops orrestaurants; end: that any, new retail should'be located adjacent to existing shops on Main Street and City Center Drive/and also poten- tially'in a very small, new center roughly midway between them. ASafe Walk White crime is alwaysa concern, rnostpeople who avoid walking'do so because the: walk feels dan- gerous due to.the :very real threat of vehicles mov- ing at high speed near the sidewalk. Statistically, automobiles are much more dangerous topedes- trians .than :crime; and:the keyto making a,street safe is'to:keep'automobile§ at reasonable speeds and, to protect pedestrians from them. This is achieved by meeting 'the.followingeight criteria: • A network of many :small streets. Generally, isCARMEL, INDIANA 36 P E%c OC ia4 El, C'.0 I A',T iEi9. . dC;L 1E'J EXISTING CONDITIONS Thoroughfares The study'area -is characterized by a: relatively po- rous network ofnorth south streets, and 'contrast- ingly few east -west connections, thanks to the eadypresence of the Monon rail corridor, now the Monon Trail. Only;lstand 2nd; Streets, cross the Trail; with only .:the 'former continuing all the way from 4th Avenue'to Range Line Road: The only other internal.east-west street;. 3rd, exists only on the'east side of the Trail. .-All 'three of these streets .arerelatively narrow 2-Ianers that handle: little traffic and ,welcome walking. East.of Range: Line Road, only 4th. Street continues beyond the imme- diate neighborhood, albeit: circuitously. Among ':the' north -south streets, 1st Avenue:dead- ends just south of 3rd Street, although on paper it continuesihrough'to City Center Drive.-3rd.Av- enue and 4th Avenue, which once met:in a stag- gered -intersection at '2nd have recently been unified into a;single- swooping drive; com- plete with om-pletewith median,that smoothes. trajectories at the'cost of enticing:.speeding. ,3rd Avenue also widens dramatically as it nears CityCenterDrive, similarly encouraging, higher -speed .maneuvers while.potenlially discouraging -foot traffic. As mentioned, Main Street has already been trans- formedinto a.corridor that welcomespedestrians. City Center Drive,. in contrast, has been, designed to,handle,higher:traffic volumes:at-higher speeds, and its wider, lanes and streamform geometries communicate anautomotive environment. Under- standing that it is unlikelyto,attract much pedes- trian activity along onechallenge for this 'plan willbe,to ease pedestrians across it. Ananalogous :transition,from pedestrian to: auto- motive, occurs as one heads.southon Range Line Road.. As.11s.rightof way'widens, it.takes•onad- ditional .travel;and turning lanes, such that itibe- comes'Increasingly unwelcoming to pedestrians from 4th Street 'south. Most .of businesses along this stretch of road are auto -oriented;; and it will be many years before many ,ofithemhre trans- formed .into more inviting to pedestri- ans. For that reason, Range Line Road is also not best understood a likely -pedestrian corridor. A final'north-south thoroughfare, the Monon Trail, isarguably the most important‘axis'in .the study area, -given its regional nature, and its .value 'as an amenity. Itcurrently consists of 12`feet of asphalt pavement within. a 66 -foot Right of way. On its southern' half they trail contains -some young tree growth:onlits.west side, but for the'most part iris flanked by simple grass strips. On its east side: betweedlst and',2nd Streetssits a visitors park- ing lot with space for about two dozen vehicles. Landscape For; the most part„the,siteis effectively flat,except that it rises sharply to its south along City Center Drive.This rise, which 'culminates :.atthe.Monon Trail, ;allows the Trail to cross that Drive in an un- derpass..The redevelopment area is largely devoid of trees; -with-the :exception of'.along the:west side of 3rd'Avenue, a.blook north of City -Center. where there sits :a large wooded open space. Just north of this parcel cap bafound a good -size de- lentionbasin that+serves.the adjacent Subdivision, complete'with an:attractive :aeration spout. -Across.Range Line' Road from; the Mohawk; Plaza shopping centerrsits one other significant slteFthe CarmerUnited' Methodist Church, with its broad treed lawn. A proper redesign.ol this -area would preserve and .celebrate 'this community asset. St EIC.•K'. & aS',SID4C I°AThE ,L,L C[ CARMEL, INDIANA DESIGN PRINCIPLES the post ,walkable'places are those. with the smallest blocks becausermanysmall ;blocks allow for many small'.. streets. Because traffic is dispersed among •so many;stroets, no one street is required to handle agreat amount of traffic, and that•traffic does not reach a volume or speed that is'noxious to the pedestrian. The challenge for this plan is to, create a -delicate small --block network to the 'greatest degree possible, given ; the mandate to limit cross- ings to the'Monon.TraiL This goal inevitably .Involves reaching 'aoompromise between the sanctity of the trail end the fundamental.urban need for .a.porous network. The' appropriate number of lanes. Oversized streets are more,difficutt:toloross,:and cause speeding. For this reason, Range Line Road must: receive •a "road diet": if it into>,eventu- ally. attract pedestrians,. as mush the southern end of 3rdAvenue,wherepedestrian crossing of City: Center,. Drive -should .also .be improved. Any new street within the study area should provideno more than a single lanein eachdi- motion. Skeels or many Laren. mako.crdsavgs tougher' and . rnvile .4;lim Lanesof the proper width., Different=width tsar .Fic.Ianos correspond to different travel speeds. A typical urban.. lane width is'10 feet which comfortably supports speeds )01'30 MPH. A typical highway lane width:is 12 feet which comfortablysupports speeds of 60. MPH or more.. Drivers instinctively understand the cor- relation between.lane width' and driving speed, and speed up when presented: with wider lanes,;'even' in. urban locations. The streets proposed for 'this 'plan should'all be.sized ler urbanaspeeds, with 10 -foot travel'lanes—al- thougK'slightly wider lanes are'appropdate'to eases parking motions on one-way segments. Limiting use 'and )ength:'of turn lanes.. 'Lett- handturn .lanes, although effective at reducing congestion, should be used only, at intersec- tions=where major congestion is caused by •carsturning,lelt.. When unnecessary. (or over - :long) left-handduralanes' are provided,the ex- tra pavement widthencourages speeding. and lengthens crossingldistances.. -34;,7 By, Widening; midways and removingpancnao bag felt. lanes make s11S, ks ono:Wadable and ?um busbec+as. Limitingcurb. cuts. .Every .lime ,a driveway. crosses a sidewalk, pedestrians`are *endan- gered. Front parking lots drive-throughs;;and porte-cocheres are suburban solutions that are not appropriate to walkable environments. d.furn -Any-parking lots.or drive-throughs'should be accessed off of rear all�ys,and front drop offs can be accomplishediiy. reserving a few on - street parking spaces for That purpose. Continuous on -street pal -king. On -street park- 'ing' provides a barrier. otsteel between the roadway and the sidewalk thatis necessary if pedestrians are to feel fully sat ease.. It also causes drivers to slowdown out of: concern for possible conflicts with cars•parking+or:pulling out. Everyy street should be:designed'for con- tinuous parking against sidewalks. Parked C.118 are shoot boos slow hullo 1ndp otectpedestnarte. Continuous' street trees. In the content of pe- destrian safety, street trees are similar .to parked,cers irrthe-*ay that they protect the sidewalks from the cars moving beyond,:them. They also -\create a perceptual, narrowing..of the street that lowers'driving speeds. Closely - spaced street trees should be provided along everystreet in the study area,: including the re- designed Range Line Road. .6'PrEiC, c- IP.26_lel Di,C IPA T..E SBp L,L,C CARMEL. INDIANAlill DESIGN PRINCIPLES Avoiding swooping geometries: Pedestrian - centric environments can be: characterizedby their rectilinear iand .angledgeometries: and light curb: radii. Wherever suburban swoop- ing geometries are' introduced—as where 3rd Avenue'becomes 4th -cars speed up, and pedestrians feel' unsafe. The :road network. for the: redeveiopment.should not, be ` shaped around any minimum'desigh,speed, butrather should be restricted only, by the.turning mo- tions 01 thelargestvehicles that will be using it on a daily basis. The'above eight criteria lead directly to:the'street designs. that are. included'inrthe'redevelopment's Regulating Plan. A Comfortable Walk Evolutionary biologists tell us how all animals. seek two things: prospect and refuge. The 'first allows us to see our prey and;predators.. The second --al- lows us to know thatour flanks areprotected from attack.: That need for refuge; deep'in our DNA from millenniaof survival..has ledus'.to feel most,com fortable imspaces with well defined edges. This is accomplished::in several ways: • Streets Shapedby,Buildings, The typical way in which towns shape :streets '.iswith the edges of buildings that pull up.tdthe :sidewalk. These• buildings need to be of adequate height sothat a Tib height-to-width'ratio' is' not.violated,.ide- ally approaching 1:1. All streets,within.the .re- development,iftheyare.to attract pedestrians,. need ao.be flanked by; buitdings;located:at;or near the sidewalk edge. - ConnwredvhadMb^al fgmn corners./arge club rack'ofiniorsaclpriabroadan crossing &stancas and ern -outage spacil...nst Avoiding .Object `Buildings. In' the' traditional, walkable town, •buildings :lake rectangular or other nondescript;shapes.in order to give shape .to. the :spaces they: surround — the streets and squares In'th'e.modernistcity.ol the automobile, buildings stand apart as sculpr turel objects. As;a result; -the. space between them the. public' realm — becomes residual and poorly. formed. The buildingsin this rede- velopment must :be.shaped to make spaces, not as objects. An Interesting Walk Finally; even,il a walkis useful, safe,--,and'comfort- able,: people ,will not Chbose:lolgo,om foot unless it is.also,,at least moderately'entertaining., There needs tobe something interesting to look at. Humans are:amongthe social primates; and noth- ing interests us more than other people: The goal of all:of theidesigners.whomake, our communities must be to ereate urban environments that invite, andcommunicate. the likely presence of, human activity. This,,objective"is.,accomplished by plac- ing "eyes .on the street."—windows .and doors that open—and avoiding all forms of'blank walls. Theseinclude the edges oistructured parking lois, which must be shielded'by a. habitable' building. edge,at least at ground level. 'Communities that. support"walkability do notallow;any new parking, structures to break this rule. Papc 6a CARMEL. INDIANA , P`EiC;K%S•-Ai97Bri3=;17AWEIe"ILIL.,C- DESIGN PRINCIPLES Only a narrow Luiliog ,s needed W hfdo n forgo narking garage from the stoawam. The human presence is also made palpable by a va- riety in the .architeclure.lining a trajectory,. The build= ings.that,surrbund a,route should communicatethe presence: of many hands at work. This means that the same buildings should not.be'repeated block af- ter block;,and that buildingsshould appear to have been -created.byditlerent,designers.Such an ap- proach is.quite distindt from suggesting a.variety. of architectural styles—the most beautiful places in the world tend to be justone style—nor does it suggest that buildings should have: complicated. facades or be broken up, into false,segments,(unless they are unusually large). Rather, the goal should beto cre- ate a street of: simple buildings that do' not appear to .have beon built as a single'prodect.'` As this objective applies to,the study area,, it is: also important to understand the difference between,ur- ban walking and taking walks. The Monontrail is cur- rently designed for the latter but not the former. The presence: of nature is.essential 'to'our enjoymenl,of the ,city, but landscaping islnomatchfor well-placed . building facades when it comes to enticing daily, use- fulpedestrian activity. S}PiEaC _K IA1B TlE0, -L iL1O, CARMEL. INDIANA DESIGN STRATEGY: URBAN TRIAGE The principal design strategy brought to bear an the site: was the concept of urban triage. This term refers to erribracing,the reality thatnot every streetlin a givenarea can be designed aroundthe, needs of the pedestrian.- While itis possible: to create new neighborhoods from scratch that are walkable through- out. this outcome ismuch more difficult to achieve inan existing area. Some ‘streets .may already be principally automobile-oriented—suchas.Range Line Road and'.City Center,Drive.„Others streets -must be.conscripted to perform a•service function for the streets nearby. The need forutility` sites arid park- ing'Iots, combinedwith a desire forsmaller blocks, can make it difficult;: if not Impossible, to.line every block face .with :pedestrian -friendly building fronts. This situationcallsfor a design strategy that allocates: more; and ,less -walk- able streets ,into.distinctive networksso that, while every. street is net walk- able, those that are walkable all connect into :a'network oficontinuous excel- lence.. A.community made up of 'front streets". and "backstreets" is only`a problem 'if •one,cannot stay ,on the former' while ^avoiding the latter. Urban triage is the careful assignment of, a,...more-oraess-walkable status toieach of the trajectories within the plan, and then ensuringthat. the, excellent trajec- toriesare,.notdegraded'byany of'theanti-pedestrian forces that'discourage walking. The: useful, safe, comfortable,and interesting walk is,thus-protected by allowing for its alternative elsewhere. The Urban Triage Exerciseshown here demonstrates how this :exercise•as- .signs..threestrata of walkabilityto.,thistudyarea:,First-Order Walkable; Sec- ond-Order'Walkable, and Automotive. .First -Order Walkable streets are.those that constitute -.the principal pedestrian:network, probably: best described' as those places where:people will: actively choose to walk. The.Second=Order Walkable;designalion was created for streets; like Range Line Road, that will not attract pedestrians, but will serve them adequately: Autornotive:streets.. in contrast..are;those that pedestrians are Iikely to; avoid.. Withthishierarchy established, itispossible to see where investments in walkability can be di- rected in.order lo:establishan effective pedestrian -friendly network. As it pertains to this,site, the,urban'lriage analysis'ted'to.three irnportant,ob- servations. The first thatthere need notbe,more than a single excellent Trajectory between MainStreet and City Center, Dnve•and;'indeed, thatpro- viding. Mirltiple,primaryltrajectories might -not allow anyone'slreet to achieve. AlSIEN !URBAN TRIAGE ANApSIS EXISTING Gr wwn en`rn , WALKABLE X. <,,.o.aT,.c The Urban Yawn Ernrtkw saws lliree strata of wairaWtiry p,plert Om strabr area. PAGI: CARMEL, INDIANA Ts"P-ElcjK 'sr7A-s s'c"0;r71/4j1-MIEr iC3L c- DESIGN STRATEGY: • URBAN TRIAGE a critical mass of buildings or pedestrians. The second was that neither:Range Line Road nor the 3rd/4th Avenue trajectonespresented'a promising opportunity to serve as such,a connector, given their current character and our inability to properly control redevelopment on both of their flanks: The third was that the distance between the Monon Trail and -its flanking .Avenues-(1st`and 3rd) was fairly narrow suchithat any:block'sandwiched on either side. of Ihe,Trailwould be a bit less: than the normativewidth for mixed-usedevelopment. This poses a problem in terms of new, blocks presenting a proper lace both to the Monon trail and to: either of its flanking;avenues. These .observations•presented a challenge::ilt can be said with great conlidence•thatthe Traif, itself; lacking vehicular access, will never serve as a proper address for lively mixed-use, urbanism: As attractive as the concept is, pedestrian main streets rarely' work; more than,,150 created; .na-. tionwide,inthe 1960s and;l 970s failed almost im- mediately. Whilethe taming of vehicles is always needed, theuseful andinteresting walk isnot pos; sible in'Americawithout cars. 'But, putting a' lively pedestrian axis along 1st or 3rd' Avenues would result inblocks': of buildings turning their rearends and parkingaotsto the Monon Trail, bothblighting its trajectory and failing,to take advantage of' its potential'role,as-a real-estate; amenity, All otthree:factors led.to'the inevitable conclusion that the best way and take advantage of the MohonTrail was to frameitwithin amonemental avenue:as the primary north -south trajectory'within; the -study, area. While'there may be trail,advocates'who feel .that this .solution is an- tithetical to the nature of this+regionalrecreational corridor, we,believe that'the counterarguments to that:position are considerably stronger: As de- signedr the new avenue presents few impediments to the Trail's -function -to be•tdiscussed—while al- lowing it to playa muchmoreprominent .role inthe surrounding community. Embracing it.with fronts prevents'il'.from being blightedwith backs: And, perhaps most important, 'knitting • a proper block structure around ihearail allows,the heart of Car- melto be developed-into,'a:proper neighborhood: Keeping the, trail as.aprotected:rural corridor pre- cludes that outcome. .Locating amavenueatong,the-Monon Trail;firmly establishes the Trail as the central' arbenit / and front door to this entire.half-mile'neighborhood- This orientation allows both 1st:•Avenue and the 3rd Avenue .trajectory, to maintain their current status as principally automotive 'corridors. ;While pedestrians'Wilibe welcome along them,: most•will choose instead to make!use of the new avenue: Because,'st'andl3rd.are not designed for pedes- trians first, they'carrbe flanked 'byparking'lots.and other less;appealing uses„which in':turn,will allow 'the new avenue, toyaccept only;architecture'and urbanism of, the highest quality. St JOS'S' 6., ISIS S'IIDfC IA'TME Si LiGICo4 CARMEL- INDIANAEl DESIGN PROCESS I. EXISTING NETWORK 2. AVENUE AXIS.ESTAOLISHED .3. THIRD AVENUE INTERSECTION RESOLVED. till a i _ n f�I - " ` agiitI EMOTING NETNOPK CO DREENWAY ®i PROPOSED. IMPROv04ENTK ME.EnAr: Wiih-.the decision made to locate.an avenuealong the Monon Tral,.the next challenge was to inte- grate, this nte-grate,:this avenue. into the surrounding street neta work. ClearI9,fthe.avenbe most naturally'.b'egins from'the -north ascan extension of 2nd Avenue, which.tlanks the Trail,north of Maim. Street. To the south .;however„where the Trail passes under City Center, Drive,..the.connection lothat street .had to originate elsewhere. The logical southernaermi- nus of the avenuethusbecame. 3rd Avenue;: which can be:.angled, eastto.meetitatthe northwestern corker Who Mohawk Place: Shopping Center., r� UMIM tI�-� �I� North ',of 'this .angle, •3rd Streetbecomes. a less important corndor,.since rmost of its.traffic-will be diverted onto the,Avenue. Tosimplify traffic' mo- tions, southbound 3rd 'Avenue was, thus also an- gled eastward, in, order. to intersect in a T with its. new trajectory. The resulting geometry, in which 3rd Avenue angles off its current axis and then back on, conveniently creates a new triangular open space that: is well "aligned with the attractive pond to; its. west. PAGE 1 0 CARMEL., INDIANA -;9 P'E'C'KT,V A'6(9;IDrCyI A-TjE7S-1L7L Ci DESIGN PROCESS .4. 3RD/4TH AVENUE SWOOP ELIMINATED r "&� + EiraI 5..IST AVENUE. TRAJECTORY COMPLETED 6..CROSSAXES INTRODUCED AT 4TH STREET'AND NORTH OF. MOHAWK:PLACE ZOE;:t dWR_FT- I �I1��tyR�cewIe= As It continues north, 3d avenue's swooping transition. into • 4th; avenue should be replaced,; in the long term,with something less conducive .to speeding. The plan proposes a turbine!square; a traditionalprecursor to the roundabout, that func- tions.Similarly tut withl-stop.signs, and•commurii= catesa'more pedestrian;environment: Its -location takes advantage of the proposed east -west street trajectories, to -be discussed, ahead.. P2 r� awe= East :of :'th&Trail,'1st Avenue:is proposed•to be completedalong; ts-currentpaper trajectory. This path bisects -"Mohawk Place, something that will be: possible when that property isredeveloped. Its, north-south.trajectorios.doterrnined; the next task. • was to locate. the plan's -.east -west; cross -axes: This.effort was based on a strategy. of continuing, existingtrajectories'intohhe slteand allowing them to connect'in a rational way, but that: strategy„was .tempered by the presence3of.;signiticant.existing buildings that:stood;inthe :way. Beginning from he north along .Range Line Road, 4th Street presented itself as a log'cal central con- nection -across the site. since- it continues further east,:and.could .be made:to,connect fairly aasily:to Industrial Drivo.to tho west. A second .east -west axis was placed just to -the north of Mohawk Place in.orderto.create blocks -of,reasonable'lengthbe- tween 4th Street and City:Center Drive.`Whilelhis axis might have more:logically been placed,direct- ly,in itine.with 6th Street, that location would have 'requiredshort-term demolition pt. the still active Mohawk Place. SIP.Eic IK. &- !IA ,9.9iO,O.IJAi'TIE19' -L L1C,f CARMEL. INDIANAiiii DESIGN PROCESS 7. INDUSTRIAL:DRIVE ANGLED TO MEET4TH"STREET B. PERIMETER STREET, AND NORTH -SOUTH STREET 9.. GREEN' AXIS ADDED ACROSS LONG BLOCKS ADDED TO WEST. cowman . ;a1722ffitild nBi_ r From'thewest, a slight angleplaced in Industrial Drive allows it to meettheTurbine Plaza arid -tran- sition easilyinto-4th,Street: > sa: ME:EIS mai.t_ �tttt J'' �,7 it +tf:�4 IN Et � lid' J I'le.1tA Z+ Vii •'J J'> -..+v 2 II' Y ' �IP,tc• ry\"lnMn ,f i>,1� �iy t , - r' r` y Y I��Y ;. .� §,,l.�,�, a'te��Wsl« fl", i" .`�• �4 1 I'l.N ��•'�RII! � a I ; li J�l�mlulL I ;c, > llpT F N �ryJ r t li A'�lI/d ! ^J.� * 1 in etIletio1 le ille S 1uE.' Ira ,'"�J]x�11,'.}, 5, LQ �,.L 1�`5 4� � �i 1. �L I }' Svr41:.-..'� „ 1 + lal,\� ■ _. +`,` ;Art. R(t: L . Bit -j-- ..; The .remainderofthe western study area, bound- ed by Industrial Drive, 3rd' Avenue,: and residential development to'the .south and west;was;given a 'streetnear its,pe rrete'r,.andLhen turlheraplit`into two, blocks of the proper; depth for housing;. the most likely use of this sector. Finally: the question arose as towh& -to do withfhelong blocks now stretching, roughly from 4th Streets to 6th ;Street'. More than 600 feet in lengfi',thesewould contrib-. utefo.a-more,porous.network if further broken.in halfby an additional east -west cross, street.. l I - L _: t In the interest. of both economy -and' creating a speciatexperience: in the plan, this cross axis was introduced as a pedestrian mews, an .intimate, • car -free.; street that crosses-lhe'entire study area. Because: the adjacent blocks will, contain rear;al- leys, there is no obligation to get cars to the fronts of'these properties. As: already' discussed, such a green:street cannotibe the site -of retail'. business- es, although'thereis -no reason iwhy,it could not hold workplace. Like -many. New.Urban communi- ties ,the V IIage of West Clay contains mews of this type,Fas shown ahead. tY 12, CARMEL. INDIANA Afi P!E�C+K�&`tA-5g6§OjDI I-A;IT'E',6"ILt L'1Ci DESIGN PROCESS a Iaye'6lack,in the Mews. lap° of West Coax rs s,itd'vnbd.ty apeoas 'o Hooses,on the mows, served Or. rrnir lanes: do nol tequila M1p¢. volNtW.l across. The introduction of. This„pedestrian street cpm ptetes:the principalltthoroughfare'network, which will be further served 'by. secondary network o rear alleys 'and parking lots.. Open Spaces In describing the network, We:have already.men- tioned two new open spaces on the 3rd/4th Avenue axis: the Turbine Plaza and Triangular Green. The Plaza'is hot much -bigger -than a roundabout;' but is designed to have,itsiinterior used as an amenity. The.Greenis,considerably larger, expanding the open space associated with the existing.: pond. 11 maintains the current 3rd Avenue west sidewalk as a north -south path. which''can be;met by across - axis walkway aligned with_the. existing ;aeration spout: In addition tothese.the .next step tri the planning was to determine, the ideal location of additional civic spac- es, to create a sense ot,place within the neighborhood. Three opportunities presented.themselves. .First, at the entrance to the Monon Trail at Main Street; where no roon exists for a full'two-sided avenue; it made sense .to- -announce'the presence of the Trail with a small -Comer Directlyacross:the Trail fron Bazbeaux's'outdoordining, this amenity creates a gathering place inanalready popular area, and pro- 'vides'some,spatialvariety to Main Street. This Plaza should be mosUypaved but planted with trees. .Second, the Pedestrian Mews; rather than -Simply ah .unarticulated:comdor, was..calling out to.be shaped into a series of unique spaces. inorder .to announce its presence on the Avenue, its.two,sections imme- diately abutting .lhal''axis,werewidened lo. 48 feet„to include central' gardens withhemicycle ends. Further west, an.additional' rectangular garden, was Inserted as well. Finally, it was determined that the half -mile Ave- tO. OPEN SPACE ADDED AT KEY. LOCATIONS KS 1 �q:� ��*�rlt� % 1q1 r �• wt. el u 71.1 JIMETSESSIM =MEWS ViaTahlilM nue, aten-minute walk,would benefit from aCert tral Square that could' as::the� d',physical:and social heart of this new neighborhood. Itscross- ing with4thStreet., roughly mid -way along it, .was expanded using ;the' vocabulary ()title. 3rd Street diversion, into.a diamond-shaped cen- tral square. Since the center of this square receives long views from: tour directions; it needs a central monument. Fortunately; an opportunity presented, itself in, the 6 S PrE C.Ky 6 4;S(S 40iC tri .T,.:E!9k;101 Lion CARMEL, INDIANA DESIGN PROCESS form :otthe water tower.which, as mentioned; needs to be replaced in roughly this location. By locating this tower'exactlyin the middle ofthe square, and dressing it upin appropriately civic garb—as was the norma century'ago-an investment -in neces- sary infrastructure can contribute markedly to the quality of this civic space. Shaping the Streets and Spaces' An, urban square is only is:good as ils walls, and the.sarne is true of a street: With the street network and public spaces established, the.final step in the planning process was to ensure?proper building 'faces against all pedestrian- friendly trajectories: This was, accomplished with;; the.. help of the final Urban Triage Plan; which determined twbere%itis necessary to locate,eitherthe fronts of buildings or.public green. space. The subsequent drawing shows where these' excellent-quality;street edges have been required by that:Plan.. A Strategy; for Range LIne.Road Range :Line Road is slowly transforming intoa more walkable. corridor. That said,: it will., never be as attractive a not -south axis as -the :new -Ave- nue; so. lhe need for (his' transformation -is more aesthetic than practical: as they enter the center of Carmel,. drivers should'. be presented with a more attractive tableau than they currently: experience. Current City policy requiresthat newconstruction along this corridor place buildings up against the sidewalk and parkingin back.. That abneis asuffident strategy lor its4bng-temrimprovement, if: combined with changes median would drop out where turning lanes.are to the roadway that calm traffic. This plan proposes necessary:) these changes,`and also codes ashorteetemrstrategy torimproving the surrounding buildings, in three ways: First, it specifically codes the replacement otthose -buildings which detract the most. from the current experience.. Second, it proposes the insertion of: new frontispiece on the Tires Plus building, to properly receive the 'long 'vista of the Pedestrian Mews. This intervention merits public investment, since it will beseen• hem throughout the Mews; which is roughly a third of a mile long. Third; it shapes severalgreens alongthe road where there is room to add some;reliet to the hardscape. The largest of these s actually a reduction in size of.the field enfiontingThe Methodist Church, wtiich.eur- rently lacksa,sense of enclosure. Two new;otfice buildings are recommended to frame views Of church and makemore 'productive use of lts'park= ing tot, which islargely empty weekdays. All of 'theseare shown ahead. Interms ,of the roadwayitself, current traffic -vol- umes on thecseg'ment of Range Line .Road be, tween`4th Streetand City Center Drive average close'to20;000.cars per day, which is the near the standard• through -put of a three -lane' boulevard: (Of more 3-lanersstudied by;AECOM, average daily traffic countsranged-from 15,000 to 32,000,. with- most<around 18;000;) Given these numbers, and the additional ,.north -south capacity beingoffered:by the creation- of the Avenue and theeventual completion, of r,l sPStreet, there. is no reason not to'reduce Range Lineback down to 3 lanes south of 4th Street,; inorder to provide it. withcurbside, parking and a central median. (This Iii CARMEL. INDIANA BIPtE1CJK=6:}A:BleiOpC$,I�ApT]El9 �Lf LSC_ DESIGN PROCESS URBAN TRNOE,R4Y919 PROP09t O. gelTnuorn wA\RAaI.0 CJ. SCCUNC.0ROC, N4meu Se Au no on s E f;—JiltI A Fan strata M walkabfay aro assigned lo.ehe Final Urban 'Triage Plan. URBAN! TSPOC OurCB ME PuoraT qusUry COOL RnMmro Now .?l -quality sneer ecl0es <oppeslerthy tile FusbOrdor ktaablo Nelwurk oI P10 Urban Tdago Plan. IS4PrE?C K"s.& A�9 StD C I'A'T Er CARMEL, INOIANA PA06 I5 MONDN AVENUE This plan reconceptualizes the Morton Trail, .for half.a mile, as thecenter of a major civic. space. In so doing. it celebrates and brings life to:the:Trail in away that can only,'be;described: as positive, but which some might wort could impede its:function asaregional recreational corridor. For that reason, the Trail within the Avenue: has been redesignedto enhance both its appearance and .its function. . Through (Carmel; the Monon. Trail is a -single- path of asphalt, 12 feet wide„ thatholds bicycle and pedestrian traffic in both: directions. Itis crossed occasionally by streets, where. trail users are met with. Stop signs: Within the, study area, .the Grail is currently: interrupted byMain,Street, 1st Street; and 2nd Street, each holding'2-Way,traffic. These crossings impact the ftow of:bikersand joggers on the Trail, and are not ideal„ but are one of the 'inevitable outcomes of running arecreational-trail through an urban area. The greatest, tension within this plan is the one that exists between the desire to limit the number of additional trail crossings .and. the needlto:createa viable:.urban area. Simply put, without a certain minimal trequency,of vehicular connections across .the Trail, it is impossible tocreate the porous street network essential for the success of this neighbor- hood. Snipped .vetiicular.connections areantittieti- cal to functional. urbanism. That said, goal was to keep these interruptions to a minimum. Fortunately, the desired street network .can be achieved through the .net "addition of only twosmall one-way' crossings;, around the central square: These take place in a traffic -calmed, environment inwhich itis reasonable/to-ask-cars to stop for bikes, .,and .not vice Norse. The other• change. is that/thecrossing tht2nd Street is eliminated in,fa- wocof'.anew crossing at •thebasetof the Avenue; near Mohawk Placer As aresult 'of these changes, the Trail takes on a frequency,of interruption more :similar to'its condition between East 16th and East :22nd Street in Indianapolis. Along the'Avenue,: additional traffic calming makes •crossings sater.. As designed, ;each street crossing Aeouldlplece,the Trail on araised-speed table' :..al- lowing'; fto continue at its existing sidewalk grade. Drivers -would' be made to understand; by both the table's elevation -and itscontrasting.materials„that the.traltwas':meant`to dominate the intersection. Still, the'new crossings, safeas they. maybe, rep- resent ep- resentaslight additional interruption tome Trail in the .name of urban viability. In excF ange for: this 'impact; the/redesign proposes, that the ;12-footas- plialtpettibe replaced with something'truly;gener- ous, three paths flanked by tour rows of trees,in a landscaped corridor. Specifically,a 12 -foot central jogging/walking path'isalanked by two 8 -toot bike paths, with -each -path :surrounded by 6 -foot treed landscape tiaters,'as seen inthe'accompanying illustration.. Mn,wn Avan a: including the Moron Luil aI its i, This trailseparates cyclists from joggers arid walk- ers, and .also fromthe low-speedroadwayson either sideolthe. median. These roadways are each..20-feet• wide, holding parking on their outer edges andia:single driving,lane in each direction. Deep 16400tsidewalks, also with trees, complete the 124 -foot cross section: It is that the four outer ,rowsot trees will be sycamores, while the Inner row will .be ginkgo biloba. IPACC 71 fin CARNIEL, INDIANA —191 P1E'cK?A -7A' Sj9`y D',C 117Arns i s7-111 c MONON AVENUE SI. Chador Avanuo or Now Or/nano ivo ,!s dImonvons sworla, ro Ilia ay. cruo popiiad hore.., bol lnrhdeeper &ski ip solbacks. In designing the avenue;itwas essentialto study precedents. In terms of 'dimensions', the proposed modelis .very' close to New: Orleans'. famous St Charles.Avenue,although thatstreet 'holds,atrol- ley'instead ora trail,aacks mediantrees, and had fairly deep building .setbacks on either side: Spa- tially, due to the.shallowersetbacks, the closest model is probably the .squares' 'of'Boston's South fO.Nn'a IM»n'Park nas. s. 0ua51y. "pol a. norrnwod •IOncctl End. such as. Union Park: `Fora. closer. example, there is'the Wooster Pike in. Mariemont; Ohio, but neither of these models illustrated r here ofier the central, pathways that'are proposed forMonon Av- enue.. Perhaps the,most arialogousprecedent can be found in Winter: Garden Florida, shown onthe .next ivrMirc Aka faternu is sinw'ar site. WI -Alto! anv.cmhalashiy. page, where the 19 -mile West Orange. Trail passes through its downtown in the form of an avenue me- dian. As it approachesand. leavesWinter.Garden, this, farmer rail bed resembles the Monor Trail in its mom rural stretches. But once downtown, it becomes a celebrated part of the urban fabric. For many users, .this 'is their favoFite stretch of the' trail. S,a IE'OiK & INAS SJOIC ItA'T ES LII_ CARMEL. INDIANA paac 1,7 MDNON AVEN.UE Ma Wass ()tango hail tuns pnaugh,dw'cenfnt of Winter.Ga-den. Florida. whom it es ruriouaded try'a shoppn,gavenue:. ` Replace the shops with'taller mixed-use buildings; ,andd-the head-inparking with ,parallel. parking.; and theWinter Garden example is not,too far off—ex- teener its singte,trail path Alt told, we are.simply not aware•of an avenue that offers: everythingthat is proposed here: the narrow roadways,. the triple path, ;the .four rows'of trees (pfus,two more across the•streets), and the traffic -calmed intersections: We arehopefulthatithisdesign, illustrated here; could set a new "cornplete streets standard for the world to:follow. 'Given Carmel's global leadership .on the construction of roundabouts; this does not seem an unreasonable wish. Oftgli k�1S, AlG .re; ms% rhe r,cw Anion!, aittnnp'StorombYv the bail elemenh of tn. nbovepre ednnl9 i lnnnarpar /poi henent agyw,v. It is also expected ',that.the:Avenue will 'be con- structed inaway:that.handles -:storrtiwater.in the. most sustainable manner. Given• the largefy,clay soil inthis location, it may notbe possible'to.re place,a curb -and -gutter section With:a more "light- imprint"'solution—this 'is being investigated. Were the soil found to be reasonably, pervious, it would ) be 'possible to 'construct across -section in..which the entire Avenue drains lto'its center, with ttielfour. 6 -toot landscape'strips'allowing ,stormwater to: per- colate downward. With tougher •soils, the same cross section could Still function, but assisted by.a linear collectionsystem under its center. Pact t;8 CARMEL, INDIANA 9-P-CCDC,S A -ES E3 ICr11A7 ,L71 -- C' PHASING This plan is not, expected to happenallat once: indeed: it. cannot.. Some.landracquisitions will' be easier Than others. and •'some .martake years, to accomplish. The plan, .was .organized to achieve itsprimary goals even When executed only in part. This part;•which'is considered to"be.Phase I,,con- sists of those. properties'. that surround the new Av- enue as it reaches fromMain"Street to City Center Drive. By'designi'these':are.trip properties that are considered'easiest'to reshape in. the,short'derm. Phase I. shown morespecificallyhere, toes not reach west of 3rd Avenue or east: of 1st, nor does it impact' Mohawk.Place..While notas ambitious as the. plan, this: proposal isnoless ef- fective in';unifyingiCarmel's'Main Street:and City ,Centerinto a single, '.larger downtown. core. Itis also likely tocreate' the higherJand'valuationsthat make subsequent•phases more imminent. Pu, ui • fl 1`•I uLp. Q:"n9 no Photo f tamales are Avenue axis Wavy! rorptirng (ha ancra&w of properties west of aid Avenue or E. si nt'1st (non. 11011). rl Illsia,c plK;stA'slr5lpt'cj IrAjTjcisikeldfisa CARMEL, INDIANA PLAN CAPACITY The capacity of,theplan is primarily dependent on theimpacts of parking: The following four factors will determine how many square feet of building is constructed on site: Surface or structure: If parking is •placed in structures, the plan'seapacily.grows multifold. Givedthe cost of'these facilities,,the.Illustrative Plan,imagines;only two such structures, as.al- ready described. The 'removal :of'these' struc- turesor.the,addition of otherswould result in significantly 'different numbers. Complimentary loads:. Many:parking spaces that are used by residents overnight can be used by workers during; the day As a result, the capacity,ot'the. .plan growssignificantlyas a result. of placing'residential and office uses in close proximity: Parking regulationsmust take opportunities for shared capacity into account. Reduced, auto -dependency; ''Over time, the successful development of a pedestrian -friendly environment will allow a portion' of car trips to be replaced by walking, biking,and transit. Resi- dents in particular willlfind:reason to owndewer cars and to often leave their cars at home. This factor as well must be,allowed to impact parking requirements: On-street;parking:.AU, of. the new streets in the plan,. have considerable curbside parking capac- ity, which will also reduce the demand placed upon off-street lots Parking requirements must consider on-street-spaces'to •be • interchangeable with off- street spaces... Theiestimates that '.follow .attempt to make reason- able assumptions about' the impact of the above factors -on building sizes. Phase 1 This phase -can 'be divided into five sections: the northern' block against -Main Street;,Monon Avenue north of the GreenAxis: Avenue south :of,the Green'Axis; the GreenAxis itself; and the southern block against City Center Drive:. The Main SfreetBlock holds 5 rowhouses'.that park themselves, and two mixed-use buildings totaling about 13;000`Square'.Feet (SF) per floor. It's sur- face parking lot holds about 70.spaces, with an addi- tional 10 to be found on -street. Half of hese spaces would park- 'a:retail ground floor; leaving 40 spades for upstairs use., Since.that use. is like yto;be resi= dential,we.can expect that two floors o apartments could find parking' here sda'likely oulcomtwould be two three-story' buildings: totaling 39,000 SF. • I 11W11 110 1 MononAvenue North surrounds the Central Square: It contains about 405,000 SF par floor, parked by .about 300 surface -lot spaces, 140on=street spaces, and 660 spaces in'the;proposed;(5-story): parking structure, fora total of about 110b spaces. With the strategic collocation, of residential and. commercial uses, thisnumberof; parking spaces could serve be- tween 3 and 4 stories of construction, so we can es- timate a total square footage approximating 400,000 SF: 1 if _U' L The 'evilly?", Nock Fmk'sa rtINtovses nd 00o0ta9.000 SF a nnienu Abnon Awn„ Nor h nokls. bout 00000 SF al mead usd. Monon Avenue South'contains50';000. SF for'each floor otconstruction, served,byabout250surface- totspaces and 60 on -street spaces. Here, aprop- er balance of uses would suggest between two and ihreestories of construction, totaling perhaps 120;000 SF. NCARMEL. INDIANA 6 P'EJC1KE&YAl91etcleh!ANriefo L'!LTC] PLAN CAPACITY 35,000; squarefeetand additional:. ew construc- tion totaling'abouf35,000 per floor. It. would also haveto replace the .approx. ,50 parking spaces cur- rently.serving;the-Salon 1 building. Presuming a conservative10,space per 1000 SF'ofconference center, this layout suggests'; that the additional new construction could average`3 stories; totaling 105,000,5F. �I ® Z %/'� I''l Almon Avmw Snulh &olds maul 20000 SF at mixed use.. The:GreonAxis, .in this phase,lisfined by .48 row- houses,:some ;of -which would be: expected to, have, additional granny flats on their rear; alleys: For the. sake. of simplicity, we will not;count granny flats towards the capacity totals, although their contri bution may eventually be significant. is Green q r WV. 481PMonL15.. Fina ly; the Southern Block against.•City'Center Drive has; two possible configurations; onewith: a. conference center and one without. In the former case,, about 700. structured parking.spaces,:(in a •` — 5 -story: deck) arid 50 on -street 'spaces would•pro- r 5r' R x pro' vide parking tora one -story -conference center of 230,000 al enuredllso. a 35.00J SFcommute center Ora abot 'i N, no canfelonco!ecMp N court -hold atxiia If no:conference center were built,, thenew ;pe- rimeter.:building, would :total+about 67,000 SF per floor, in which case the same parking configuration would: allow'.. it to average betweenl3 and 4 -stories in height If Its uses were sufficiently mixed, result- ing in about esult-ing'.inabout 230,000SF of new construction. Totaling all.of:,the'.above,'Phase I can be summa- rized cumulatively as follows: isle1E10)K' fen (AfSitSTO CAl iN71E19 ',LILYC CARMEL, INDIANA PLAN CAPACITY MIDTOWN CAPACITY PHASEI Main: Street Block Monon Avenue N Monon AvOnue S Green Axls Southern Block Square Footages Units ' Parking Mixed -Use 'Conference 'Rowhouses.'Structured. Surface Street' 39000' 0 400000 0 120000' '0 O 0 105000 35000 8 0 0 48 0 16 ;660 0 96 700 70 140 :250 0 0 ,664000. 35000 56 1472 .al 3000.SF ea. 168000; SF houses Total Square Footage 867000 Total Parking 2370 460 Notes: Total SF of Rowhouses Is based upon average unit size of 3000 SF: If no conference center is bulli„mixed-use SF, rises by,125.000 and total SF rises by 90,000, Io. 945;000. Subsequent Phases As mentioned, the.expansion of,this plan east and west are: considered' a longer-term goal than the completion: of the central core. ,The -redevelop- ment ,o'these areas:inmost easily understood if split"inlo'five sections: Main Skeet Block 2; the West'Side;the Eastern Axes; Mohawk Place; and Range Liner Road. The tirstfourof these consti- tute.large scale transformations -that can best: be achieved throughthe purchase of significant Prop- erties. In contrast,. Range' Line., Road_ is expected to, gradually .redevelop pover' lime, withrmost'of its. land ownerships remaining ;intact. 10 300 60 18 50. 438 The MainStreet Block 2' looselymirrors the irsl- phaseblock to. its. east. It holds,8 rowhouses that park !themselves, anda mixed-useing containing>about ;9;000..SF per 'floor. It's .surface parking jlot ?holds:about''55 spaces, with an -additional 10 to befound on -street. Halt of these -spaces would park a'retailground floor, leaving;about.30 spaces for upstairs use. As in.the •adjacent:block, two, floors•, of apartments could find:parking:here, so the:likely outcome, would be.athree-story building totaling 27;000 SF. The . Phase 2 noaheai beck Inland rowhouses and aeoU.18.000 SF a( nem, use The'. West Side describes the :arealwest'of 3rd'and 4th Avenues,whose reconfiguration at the Turbine Plaza is.considered .central to the expansion of the redevelopment. Once the requisite;propertiesare consolidated and thestreet plan in place; this area of.approximately 15 abres'is expected to be recon- stituted as a primarily residential development. As ,detailed inthe Illustrative plan, this area in- cludesthe; followinghousing,mix, which could eas- ily be modified: • 71 rowhouses, typically '25' wide, rear -lane: served. 26cottages, typically22' wide on 32i -wide lots, rear-lane.served. Pwsc 36 CARMEL, INDIANA +v'P E�C,ryK+6=A;5yS.-D C 1-A'-'r�EF6�La.aCy PLAN .CAPACITY 16 larger houses, ,typically .50' wide on 60' -wide lots„including front -loaded garages. These are supplementedby mixed-use buildings to:thenorth .and 'west of:the.Turbine Plaza. The northern'building. has .a'footprint.of 9O0O SF. and could`be,parked in the structure to its 'north,ide- ally totaling 27,000 SF on3. floors. The;western buildings hide a 100 -space parking.. lot behind a combined footprint of 28,000 SF, surrounded;by as many as,50 additional on_street parkingspac- es. Presuming some combination of office and residential wouldresultin2-story buildings totaling 56;000 SF.. Thus, .the,entiretyof,non'single-family 1 uses In thisareawould total . about .83,0OO'square feet.. The Eastern Axes are two locations where the Av- enue.connectsto,Range Line„Road: at 4th,Street and.atong the Green Axis, Along,4th Street .'two new buildings are' proposed JO from :1st Avenue. towards they businesses on Range Line, framing the street. These total)22;000•SF irr foot- print. and are parked pnncipally:in the;surface lots; to their.north:andsouth Giventheir limited park- ing,,these. buildings dre,likelyto be onestory tall if commercial; two-to.three stories"i1,residential. Al- though not depleted as such;4hey could also take the form:oftuck-under rowhouses..Their eventual square';footage can: beestimated at35,000, which presumes arbalance '.ot uses. Along the Green Axis; 16.additionaE.rowhouses_ifrante the^pedes- trian mews between 1st Avenue and Range:Line businesses: j Gni-nnn,nlnur-.,_.. _ .c, 7hv west;$tdo'holds;n3'snpbdany muses and aboid.33000 SF of mhml use. Mohawk Place; as redesigned: contains 120,000' SF footprint ;ol . buildings surrounding; more than 5O0:parking.spaces,.supplemented byanother 60 spaces or street: Although Pone of;the;buildings on this.biock would be required'to include'retall,:it 1 ,I - fie Evsnrn Aros nvM 1O runlouses and 000ul 35.000 SF of mixed Iso. Esti=LcitISTAPA!tei ellols.trgiriLElellr4cX CARMEL. INDIANA IF-'< PLAN CAPACITY is expected that most brall of those on,Range Line 'Road and, City Center C rive would _choose .tondo so, totaling as much: as 65,000 SF of commercial. These buildings, would most.likely be tall one-sto- ry. structures, and would, use up about hall of the available perking. The remaining buildings;:if prin- cipally residential, could ,average 2.5;stories :.tall, resulting in. another1 40;000 SF'of"development, for a block total of 205,000,SF. A limited amount of. office space in this.. location could further increase square,footages bytaking 'advantage''of daytime residential parking vacancies. Range Line Road'is anticipated to redevelop:in piecemeal fashion over 'many yyears. While other buildings May be replaceddaswell„this.plandes- ignates new properties north ,of• Mohawk Place totaling 46,000' SF in footprint; most 61 which are expected to by 1 -story retail. A'dditionally,:the,two new;oftice,buildings framing the;Methodist.Church .green present .a.combined footprint: of 22.000 SF. Since .the :.Church'sparking lot typicallycontains more than 400 empty spaces during. the work week„ those buildings could probably beat;. least 4,stories each. totaling 88,000 SF of ofiicespace. MohasA Place holds about2O5,CCO SF of mixed use: In addition ro Mo e U. Lc,e road is proposed to to 1146,000 SF, plus 88.0Go SFoI space tiam5ig tlie:4felhodk G r 1 C''.; (North dl I ) 0�1 CARMEL. INDIANA fflelPaelc,ina kASegSjo3c IIrAyTielsalmi part iQ Q • a r®, week„ those buildings could probably beat;. least 4,stories each. totaling 88,000 SF of ofiicespace. MohasA Place holds about2O5,CCO SF of mixed use: In addition ro Mo e U. Lc,e road is proposed to to 1146,000 SF, plus 88.0Go SFoI space tiam5ig tlie:4felhodk G r 1 C''.; (North dl I ) 0�1 CARMEL. INDIANA fflelPaelc,ina kASegSjo3c IIrAyTielsalmi part PLAN CAPACITY Compiling-allof'the above information,. the subsequent phases depicted in the•Illustrative Plan can be sumrnarized.as follows: LATER PHASES Square Footages Single -Family: Housing Mixed -Use •Retail On Office On Rowhouses Cotta. es LHouses Main Street Block 2 27000 ,0 O 6 26 16• West Side 83000 .0 0 71 26 16 Eastern Axes 35000. 0 0 16 0' 0 Mohawk Place 140000.. 65000. 0 0 0 0 Range Line Road 0 46000 88000 0 0. 0. .285000. 111090 Total Square Footage 1021000 88000 .05 52 at 3000 SF oa. 537000 SF houses 32 Note thatgiven the greater uncertainty ofthis calculation; parking counts were not included in the table. Interestingly, the total square, footage of these phases are only obit larger.than,those of Phase 1', pro- ducing•a total project'size of approximately 1.85 million squarefeet(or'1.95.million SF if no conference center•is built)!. As before,, it is. important to: stress teat this outcome is the. specific result of;limiting,the amount of structured parking to the two lots proposed, and also making. the most ofopportunities;to'limit parking loads through•the.strategic :mixing (of complimentary,landuses: 9. PyE"C7 K'::j6. 'AkS1S O}-C41,i:OPE`9, ILII ] CARMEL. INDIANAlia THE REGULATING PLAN As discussed,. the Regulating Plan'dislills.the .General .Plan intothose aspects of thedesignthat are necessary to ensure the urban performance of the rede- velopment.. It issupplemented'- by the'.Dosign Regulations that follow this narrative. IPLAN Kr? M111.416 4.1•1 SLIAIMAIRy• Or PRINCIPAL FCATu4C9 l }'rw�v r it . .ITNaranuc NrAnr. DibirNNlo Na k 1,1 417- n"HI ) %•I ..SIA..,- n,. • PnC 4❑ CARMEL, INDIANA '•`�5 PYE,FCi(K C6 sq JB '6 �O•CHIA :TaE S iL�LiC THE REGULATING PLAN Comparing the Regulating. Planwith the. 11- ,lustrative Plan; it becomes• clear how certain features 'of the Illustrative Plan are: not con- sideredessential to the ;.redevelopment's .suc- cess. For example, the blecks`are shown to their full buildable extent, without -noting build- ing footprints or parking configurations. But,.as further;delineated'within the Plan and'Regula, tions .themselves, .'the Regulating..Plan is quite precise in describing:th'e following twelve types of requirements: Streets: As described' in the' above discussion of pedestrian safety, the.: street configurations and dimensions are key to encouraging the driving behaviors. that befit a walkable {com- munity. For this reason. each of the redevel- opment's,ten different'etreet'types-are clearly tocated.lntthe plan: and thenfullydimensioned at right. as .well: .Asan example; two typical street. designs are shown here: the lwider•and narrower Standard Street. Thesestreets,occur in both Urban and Suburban versions;with the latter replacing hardscape,with ;a green edge; In' these' drawings,.. the location, and dimension of all travel, lanes, parking lanes,sidewalks; and planting facilities: are; clearly indicated.. Siresf con1VJl.ralions and dnaro ; it 7 10.10j 7.0 514 Civic Spaces: Thirteen public spacesere:ahown in the plan, and their basic design is important to their function.. Future developers are welcome, to suggest improvedlayouts kir these spaces, ;but the ones"shi wn in the.Regulating Plan are considered as minimum requirements. These are:. The Corner Plaza, where the Monon Trail meets Main Street; The Motion Trail Transition, wherethe Trail wid- ens to become the Avenue; Tne d9j,1c1rn1 d Ina Pond iGrca,e shO.9 iho focotbn of Ffdcvu Om .tIL,eaied in Ma eegulafng Plan areas:ar,d was. asry 'Bub's Lawn, replacing' the parking lot in front of Bub's Cafe; The. Turbine 'Green at 4th Avenue and 4th Street; The Central. Square at Monon Avenue and 41h Street; The. Pond 'Green;•.east of•the'existing pondon 3rd Avenue; The.two Roundabouts along,City'Center Drive; Treed Lawns 1, 2, and 3; repiacing,shallow parking lots add expendable'.structures';along Range Line Road; The. Church. Green, in,which the open area'in 'front,of the Methodist Church .is transformed into aproper.publiospace; and The: Church Green Wesf, across .Range Line Road'Lfrom' the. Church Green. Civic Structures::Six.specific"Civic Structures are required by the Regulating; Plan. These:are: The Norther Gate where Monon Avenue broad- ens at -1 road=ensati st Street; • The Water Tower at the center of the .Central Square;, • The EMT Antenna, whose:base is to beproperly Wrapped in its current location; • The. Pool. House, a: civic, structure terminating theGreen Axis to its west; The Eastem,Fmntispiece to Tires Plus; terminat- ing the Green Axis to Its east; and:. The Southern Tower, incorporated into the facade that terminates Monon'Avenue to its south. S.PIECIK, &, /A'S SjWWC IA'T. EPSs LtC'.l CARMEL, INDIANA THE REGULATING PLAN Frontages: The Frontage] :nes indicated in the Regulating,Planensure.that.buildings.Wallswill be properly located to provide successful edges to public, spaces: The Regulating Plan distinguishes between Primary. Frontages and Secondary'Front- ages; based on whether:a building .edge tacos a ;street .that is ,more or less pedestrian -oriented. Primary.: Frontages'regaire.a. higher 'level mf'urban performance than Secondary Frontages. Frontage Setbacks: Each frontage :is marked in the.9egulating Plan withanassigned setback dis- tance. 'Along is-tance.'Along Primary Frontages, Setbacks speoify the:proper location of the building facade, and are thus'rurther understood; as"build-to" lines. Along Secondary frontages: Setback distances: are uh-. derstood:instead. as minimums,, similar to conven- tional setback Lines. Building Heights: Behind its Frontage Line, each build- ing edge is also'.marked with `a'minimum;and a maxi- mum allowed building height. These height ranges are a function of the desired spatial quality of the enfronting streets, and are tallest in the Plan's most urban areas. Retail: Ground -floor Retail: (or.dning/entertainment) Use is required al certain Frontages, allowed at others, and prohibited . in theremainder of the plan. These 're- strictions'allow retail to' succeed by being properly lim- ited and consolidatedat the best locations. Trees: The Regulating' Plan. and Design Regulations are specific in requiring frequently -spaced shade trees along streets and in surface parking tots, and also with- in Civic Spaces. ith-inCivic:Spaces. Inthe'latter:case cnly„Area locations are most effectively communicated by showiingltiem in the, Plan itself. Vista Terminations: The Pian contains: numer- ous locations where a street aims prominently at a building. facade =- called w vista termination: Buildings locatedat vista terminations are required to.respond: with a building, element ofappropriate size'and' impact to terminate the:vista-meaning- fuily. Extension Required: Certain significant Vista Terffiinahonsrhut respond to their location with an emphatic full -height building Extension. This extension occupies the building Setback and reaches to PropertyLine. Curb Cuts: Because they, undermine sidewalk safety, curb. cuts; are allowed along frontage, lines only in :those, places specifically indicated in the :Plan. -They are not regulated in Secondary- or non- Frontage locations; which -ares lesspedestrian-ori- ented, :Residential Driveways:. Due to the. above 're- quirement, the specific :location, of all residential driveways must be -called out, so lhaticurb cuts are allowed. for non -alley served houses: The' lo- cation ofthese' driveways :would -need to,change'fl the,fmnt-loaded-single-family, lots to the west Were platted' differently than asiindicated :in the illustra- tive plan. Atypical blodi from the. Regulating Plan is shown here, -including' many o -the .graphic, indicators described above Note the sold line that becomes :dashed :'to indicate Pdmary,vs. Secondary Frontages, the circled, numbers' Indicating setbacks and, minimax building heights,:and the more and' less dense dotted fines indicating, required and:optlonal retail. frontage. ,(This A lyp,cal block from the Regulating Flan ....710 setbacks and Mignl raves Indicaled as wall as retail rer♦rmromonts and the location a' primary vs: sec onVeia'iy rcorages. block does not include vista Terminations. or Curb Cuts.); The -letters in the surrounding streets name eachstreetlype, and.the plan of the adjoining; Civic Space indicates its general *out and Tree locations. The Design Regulations follow:. This document and its plans”are"submittedwith alconfidence that; if properly executed. the reconstruction of Mid Town can unify. Carmel's,most. promising .mixed- useneighborhoodsinto a -single, lively downtown core. This .downtown, already a regional draw, will then* be poisedto becomethedestination o1 choice for sustainable•urban-style living. in subur- ban Indianapolis. leCARMEL• INDIANA Ls.P,EiC X 6. "AIS t9404CJ1;.'A'.Tile 1S V, in_ kc APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS MIDTOWN', CARMEL DESIGN REGULATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DefinitionsA.1 1)..Civic Spaces A.2 III: Civic Structures A.3 IV. Thoroughfare. types A.4 V. Thoroughfare design A.5 VI. Parking A:6 -VII. Parking Design A.7 VIII. Building Uses A.8 IX -General Building Design A.8 X. Heights A.9 ,XI. Bui ld ing. Fronts A.9 XII. Buitding Attachments A.11 XIII. Openings A.11 XIV Roots 'A.12 XV.,Retail Design A.12 XVI:,, Retail' Sig nage A.12 XVII.. Details A.13 XVIII: Existing Buildings and Uses A.13 9.PjE&9IK.lfi (0.15SSMICklSAt71Ei�13' CLIC. APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS I. DEFINITIONS Block: An area surrounded by Streets. Note that Streets are distinct from Rear Lanes,•which occur within Blocks. Buibout: An area where the .sidewalkvexpands.to include the width of the parkinglane.ln..order to narrow.a'Street's crossing,distance. Civic Space: Anropen'spacerinthe Ptan that'is neithera. right of: waynor a. platted private property.Civic Spaces may ultimatelybelong to the 'City, of Carmel. a homeowners"association; or another association identifiedby the City: Civic lStructures: 'A. structure, specifically built,to enhance. the public realm. Such a structure may standalone or, may constitute part of a',public or private building: Curb Cut: A Location where a private drive or driveway' crosses a sidewalk: along -.a Frontage: Extension:.A.fuII-heightprotrusion from the' front iof,a+building, between 20 and 50'feetin width, that that occupies the buildingSetback andreaches; to. the Property Line. Frontage: :An,edge oia,propertythat faces :a:public '.space such asaIStreet or square. Edges along Rear Lanes, toi exam`ple;:are notprontages. Front - 'ages are marked . in.theRogulatingPlan with Frontage Lines. Tho Regulating Plan distinguishes •between Prirnary Frentages and Secondary Frontages. While all Frontages are assigned specific'Setbackdistances;,PrimaryFront- ages require a higher level of urban performance than Secondary Frontages.. Frontage Line: .Asindicated imthe Regulating Plan,a Frontage Line-desig- nates'the location ot:a:building edge. Monon Avenue:,The new [thoroughfare proposed to embrace the Monon Trail and•connect West Main Street'to,City Center Drive. Also referred-toein these:Regulations as the Avenue. Paseo: A:principally,paved.passageway between buildings.that connects'a rear parkingiot to a front: sidewalk. pedestrian Mews: A,public thoroughfare that qualifies•as;aStreetbut does not welcomevehicular traffic. Rear Lane:; A; public service thoroughfare that provides.vehicularaccess.to the rears of properties and the centers Of Blocks. Rear Lane Opening: The corner where a Rear Laneopens onto a Street. Redevelopment Arear Thesite proposed forredevelopment, whose bound- aries are indicated by the' Sent of the'MidTownRegulating; Plan, This: Plan ezplioitly:describes $nly4hose features that are recommended'for redevelop- ment. For example; Street curbs are .drawn only where Streets are proposed forreconstruction,<andFrontages"are &awn only where new buildings are recommended. RegulatingPlan: TheMldTown Carmel Regulating Plan, which applies the details ofthese:Regulations tothe;Redevelopment Area. Regulations: When capitalized, the MidTown.Carmel Design Regulations— this document. Retail:As used in thisdecument,Retail refers toretail, dining; entertainment, or similar uses., Rowhouse:'A•single-familyhouse •that is.attached on one or both sides to another.similar houseand: served bra Rear Lane. Granny Fiat:'An apartment located atop asingle-family houses garage. Setback: The distance of a building's primary facade from its. Front property like. JS,LP`,EtC; .& A'j5 ,9so c I(A„T;E CARMEL. INDIANA APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS Street: Apublic thoroughfare typically handling vehicular,bicycle, and ;pedes- trian traffic, characterized byits location at the fronts of properties. For' the purposed •of'these Regulations the 'Pedestrian Mews is characterized as a Street, while the Rear:Lane:isnot. Street Wall:A freestandingmasonrywall located alonga Frontage Line. where no building waltis present: Vista Termination: As indicated onthe ;Regulating Plan, a location on a building that is perspectivally`framed:by.a long view down a 'Street, and re- quired to receive an appropriately -scaled; architectural' feature. II. CIVIC SPACES Thirteen Civic Spaces are indicated in iheRegulating Plan, shown In the most basic schematic design, including the locations of trees and .paths. These de- signs are' tote respected„elaborated:'upon— and/or. potentially: replaced by something better with Cityapproval. They include 'the ;following: 1: The. Corner Plaza: AlongMain Street, ..an,open space:approximately 70 feet square is created' to announcethe entrance to the'Avehue. 11is'pri- marily paved,but should beshaded, by consistently-spaced,trees that align with thesurrounding/street trees: Its. design: shall•facilitete retail use on its, south and west flanks and, a gateway into midblock parking at its southwest corner. This gateway shali;be attractively detailed' and contain -:an.opening between :4.and6,feet in width. 2. The Moron Trail Transltion: Beyond the restaurantdiningpatio'southof. Main Street,. the Trail widens gradually from its current 12 -foot dimension to awidth o1 40 feet to align with its trajectory within the Monon Avenue me- dian. Within•this transitionalzone,•pavement'markings direct pedestrians into a central pedestrian lane of 12 -foot width, flanked by two bicycle lanes of 8 -foot -width, separated by: two landscape wedges _ofmax. 6 -foot width.. Oncethey reach 3 feet in width,' these; landscape wedges are planted with aligned Ginkgo Biloba treeswith an on -center spacing of approxifiiately20. feet Bub's Lawn: With the cooperation of its owners. it is recommended that the surface parking lot enironting Bub's,Cate be replaced with a shade -treed lawn;: since front parking lots discourage .pedestrian :activity. If necessary. parking spaces along the new. Avenue can be, dedicated for'Bub's Cafe's exclusive use" during. business hours, The'lawn:trees,shall.be` located to align, with the flanking Street trees. As an alternative: Bub's.Cafe shall' be allowed. to build a frontaddition (hat occupies this location and roaches as lar east as the sidewalk edge. 4: The Turbine. Green: The' sweepingciirve that connects' 4th Avenue SW to 3rdAvenue SW has. been replaced by a small rectangular green with a tur- bine traffic'eonfiguration, atraditienal antecedent to the roundabout. This Green is,paved at its east and west ends, and contains a central16-toot- wide sidewalk that holds two` benches' facing a fountain or similar amenity at its center. Flanking this sidewalk are two landscape strips holding shade tree'slocated,to align with the, flanking Street trees. 5. The Central Square:The main'civic.feature of theplan, this Square con- tains::anew -water 'tower -anis center, around which the MononTrail.splits. As it enters the Square from the north and south, the Monon Trail combines pedestrian and bicycle trajectories into` one north and one;southtrajectory, each of. min: 12 -foot width: These diverge around the water tower, and the space between them becomes the pools tor two fountains.. Paths tram the east andwest split in a. similar'way.,creating two similar fountains. Each of the Square's four flanking sidewalks includes a small hemicycle of benches at its center; facing thestreet and framing another path' acrossthe square. The triangular areasbetween these paths shailbe surfaced in lawn grass. The. Square contains two types of trees. Thoseat the edges align withand match the trees across the street (see.Thoroughfare,E): The grassy areas between the Square's inner paths each contain a group of understory trees which is planted with' the. intention of forminga continuous leaf mass over its lawn. 6. The pond Green: Where 3rd Avenue SW turns northeast to become Monon Avenue; a' green is' created enfronting the existing retention ba- sin with its- aeration. plume. This Greencontains a 12 -foot -wide' western sidewalk that continues the trajectory ot the 3rd Avenue sidewalk,, and a central east -west sidewalk that aligns with the pond'saeration plume. This 16 -foot -wide sidewalk holds two benches facing a.fountain or similar ame- CARMEL. INDIANA ' ;61P7ETC1K-(E /A.ei6io1C1AA—rIEt9',.L9LQC 1 APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS nily just east of its 'intersection with the: western sidewalk. large shade trees flank all sidewalks in the confrgurabon suggested in the Regulating Plan, and are located toalign twith' ftanking ;Street trees. 7. Roundabout.1: This two-lane=Roundabout'.replaces :the . current intersec- tion otjour lane City Center Drive with two=lane 3rd Avenue SW While its center: isentirely decorative and not meantfor visiting;; it shall distinguish itself: from,otherlocatroundebouts byholding: a. ring of ginkgo biloba.trees. 8., Roundabout 2:;This two-lane•Roundaboutreplaces the.current.intersec- tion of four -lane City Center Olive ,withfour-lane;Range.Line •Road. Itstiall be landscaped identically. to Roundabout1. Note,that.Range ,LineRoad enters the Roundabout from the soulh:as 4 lanes, but exits north as 2 lanes (plusmedian). 9... Treed Lawns::With tho.cooperation of property owners; civic spaces 9-11 are allsuggested as shade -treed lawns replacing shallowfront parking lots along ,Range Line Road; made possible by additional parallel parking along the curb anct &possible reconfiguration of parking at midblock. These MEL. oLawns are recommended:.in anticipation ofireplacementbuildings on their sites. The lawn trees shall be planted to alignwith the flanking Street trees. 10.,See 9. 11. See 9. 12. The. Church Green: The: attractive facade of the Carmel. United Methodist Church,suggests.the,creation of .a framed green between its ta9ade' and 'Range Line'Road. With.the:Church's 'cooperation. this Greenwoukl have .flanking 8 -foot -wide sidewalks to the north; south,: and bast,and a. central 16 -foot -wide sidewalk that holds two' benches facing. &fountain or similar amenity at its eastern. edge:, The buildings flanking this Green would �ide- ally receive an office use, to take advantage ;of:the.large church'. parking, lot which is empty on weekdays.: 13. Church Green West: When the Mohawk Place :Shopping _Center is're- placed,. a shallowshade-treed lawn shall be:placed to align with the Church: Green,adross the street (see '12)..The lawn treesshall beplanted :toalign with the flanking Street trees: III. CIVIC STRUCTURES The Regulating: Plan designates.6: distinct._ Civic Structures designed to play importantplacemaking roles within the community. They are astollows: 1. The Northern Gateway: Northward views up the new Monon Avenue aim directly at building facade that was not designed to serve as such an im- portant VistaTermination: For this reason, and to frame entry of:the Morton Trail:intothe :Avenue, a prominent gateway is required' to both shield the existing faqade and to span the width of-the'trail. This gateway.shall place prominent piers: tothe west: of the trail, to the east of trail, and to the immediate west of the existingbuilding's rearrsouthern'protrusion. These three piers divide the Gate Into two halves, each of whichshall,be.subdivid- ed Into Ihree,parts:with additional columns: These,cofumns will separate the three sections of the Trail and also'correspond:with the .existing building 'sfa9ade composition. This Gate; approximately 3 feet thick and 30Ieet tall, will be located immediately south of the existing building' s' air condition- ing unit. andscreenthat unit Willi a low wail. It shall, a decorative frieze that states "Monon or "Monon Avenue.' 2. The Water'Tower: The.existing,watertower is scheduled to be replaced, with its replacement relocated to the center of.the•Central;Square: This Tower shall be adomedwilh an armature that functions as a dramatic.foun- tain to bring life lo Me Square. The Tower shall be surrounded at its base with a decorative, bench -and -wall structure of min. 20 -foot height which supports water spouts serving-the'surrouniling fountains. 3. The EMT Antenna: The existing EMT Antenna does not need to be moved, and shall be incorporated into the building proposed for its site. In order to best support the Antenna visually, the:area of the building surrounding its base shall be'clad'in masonry and Shall .Hie one story above .the building's facade height, appearing to supportthe Antennarising above it. 4. The PooLHouse: A-small.but grand -scale buBding;shaII bedesigned to properlylerminate the'western end of.,the'Redestiian'Mews. It isanticipat- ed that this.westem:section of the Plan will be developed as a residential neighborhood; in which. case this building would ideally be a pool house or other recreational' facility. If it.isa, pool housera shallow building contain- ing men's andtwomen'schanging rooms: flanking: a;centrat:gateway could S Peg bCIK. &” A":p)SE:Osc I A•TIE S i LrL CF'. APPENDIX: THE. DESIGN REGULATIONS provide a prominentfacade:in this location., Whatever the ultimate uses of this sector otthe. plan,' it Shall 'indlude:a;Civic'Structure in this location. 5. The'Frontispiece:*When extended east, the�Pedestrian•Mews,wilfaim directly at Twee Plus, a: building facade thatwas not designedto serve as such animportantVista Termination. This building shall' receive a new western facade; with a minimum 20 -foot=fall parapet that properly receives this vista. 6. The Southern Tower:.Southward views,on Monon Avenue terminateon a.comerofaproposedbuilding. This corner shall receive .atower feature that is at least onestory, taller than the adjacent building facades.. IV. THOROUGHFARE' TYPES Ten different thoroughfare types: occur in the Regulating, Plan. These are Indicated by the letters A-.1 inthe 'Plan and further described below: A. Monon Avenue,i'n,which two one-way roadbeds with one-sided parking surround a central median including the Monon' Trail. Due to the absence. of an opposing travel lane, each travel land is.12.feet wide, and'eachpark; ing lane 8 feetwide, to ease parking motions. The roadbeds; are flanked by. 16 -foot -wide: sidewalks: each composed'of 11 feet 0? scored concrete flanked by 5 teat of brick pavers creatingapervious surface above continu- ous',curbside treetrenches.containing structural soil and.sycamore,,trees Planted in grates spaced approximately 30 feeton-center,-The Monon Trail: median .consists;of:two 87foot bicycle lanes;and'one 12:foot pedestrian lane,; separated and flanked by: a total of four 6 1001 landscape. strips: The outer twoaandscape.strips contain sycamore trees:aligned with the trees across :the' roadbed, while the inner two landscape ;strips,contain ginkgo ; biloba trees, With each pair of, ginkgoesiocatedmidway:betweeneach pair of.flanking sycamores. WheretheMonon Trailcrosses a•:street, the three, trailways shall maintain their elevation part of a speed table, in which the outer two•ol the four 6 -foot landscape strips serve as the: elevationtransi- tion zones. B. SouthRange Line Road, which is designed to eventually bereconfigured from City Center Drive to 4th Street SE to encourage a more pedestrian - friendly environment. This reconfiguration restripesthe .ezisting 52 -toot roadbed to include two •12-foot:driving lanes, Iwo 8-footparking lanes, and a 121ooLmedian. This median' has a` consistent; width: and, replaces and supplements; the existing streamlorm median in this location..•As indicated' in the Regulating Plan: the median" transforms into a left-handturn lane of: :moderate length where necessary.. Sidewalks along the: reconfigured segment Range bne Road vary in width but all shall becomposed of scored concrete..flanked:by 5 feet of brick pavers'creating.a pervious sur- face above continuous curbside tree trenches containing structural soil and shade trees planted in grates spaced approximately,30 feet on -center. C. 'The Standard Street,in;which a 34 -toot roadbed includes. two l0-foottrav- el:lanes,'two.7-foot;parking Janes: LiketheNarrower Standard Street (0), this Street appears in"either, an Urban or a Suburban: configuration, as, des- ignated in the regulatingplan with: a U or 5, respectively..Cuis flanked by ivio'12-foot sidewalks each composed of 7 feet of,scored.concrete 'flanked by .5 of brick: pavers creating a pervious surface above continuous curbside' tree trenches containing structural soil and shade trees plantedin 'grates spaced app roximatety 30 feet on -center Cs is flanked by two toot landscapestrips containingishade treesspaced •approximately:30.feet on - center, and then,two5-foot. scored concrete sidewalks at theedges .ofthe right of way. D. - The Narrower Standard Street, in which a 2746ot roadbed includes two 10-footltravel lanesflanked by one .7 -foot parking lane. Like the Standard Street (C), this'Street appears in either'an Urban or;a5uburban configu- ration, as designated' in' the regulating, plan with a, U or 5, respectively. Like C„ D'is,flanked by,.two, 12 -foot' sidewalks each composed ;of>7feet of scored concrete flanked by 5 feet of:brick pavers'creatingapervious surface above ;continuous .curbside : tree trenches containing structural soil and Shadetrees planted n grates spaced approximately, 30 feel on -center. Like C , Ds is flanked by two'7-foot landscape strips containing, shade trees spaced approximately 30 feet on -center, and then two 5:foot,scored:con- cretesidewalks at the edges of the right of way. E. The Central Square One -Way; where Monon. Avenue splits around the Square. It maintains a consistent 20 -foot cartpathand 16 -foot outboard sidewalk•(see Ar-bitthe inner sidewalk on the square is like that along an urban ;Standard Street and, therefore only 12.feet•wide (see C): For both the outerandinneredges, a,Consistent shade •tree .species:shall be used, distinct. from Sycamore but similar in size: 11 CARMEL. INDIANA 5*'PtE6 K 6 °AjS-5a❑;ICII°A`T,IEGS•.IL3L:Cf APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS F. The: Turbine. Green One -Way, where. Standard .Streets .split. around the Green. It maintains a consistent12-foot outboard sidewalk (see C); but the inner, curb ontherGreen receives a sidewalk onthe;eastand westends and a landscape strip to the north and south. The landscape strips receive shade,trees.that align withthose across(the atreet;.as describedin` 11.3 above. Unlike'the. Standard Street, this One-Way.has 12 -foot travel lanes and 8 -foot parking lanes,. toease. parking:motions: G. The:Residential Street, -designed ',for . low :volume 'flow„with.a.central 16 - foot driving. lane- handling travel; in. both`.directions, and' a9 -loot parking space.on one side;: only. Given its more 'suburbannature,. this Streetis' flanked by two 7 -foot landscape stripscontaining shade :trees spaced ap- prozimately: 30 leet,on-center, and'then two_5-foot-scored.concreteVside- walks. H. The.Rear Lane, which -also,appears.in:.both! Urban. and (Suburban con-• figurations:. The'Urban version (H) containsan 18=footroadbed handling. traffic in both directions,. flanked 'bytwo' 6-foottlandscape-strips:hotdirg a variety of smallertree; species planted in clusters.: The Suburban. version (H�) isosimilar, but with''a 12 -toot roadbed flanked by two 9 -toot landscape` strips (and the sametree;solution). I. MononTrall!South,the_reconligurationof;theiMonon.Trait.fromjustnorth of CityCenterDrive to.whero it meets'MononAvenue. In this area; with- out cars: without.cars: the Monon;Avenue median maintains'its configuration and' tree pattern tofill its right of way with two 8 -foot.: bicycle lanes: and one 12 -foot pedestrian lane, separated by 6=footlandscape Strips. These lanes merge into the current 12 -foot conlguration.in order to pass, under City Center Drive. The outer two landscape Stripscontain sycamore treesspaced'ap- proximately.30 feeton-center;while the inner two landscape strips contain ginkgo bilobe trees, with each pair ol ginkgoes locatedmidway between each pair offlanking: sycamores. J. The Pedestrian Mews, a:unique'.thoroughfare tor bicycles and pedestri- ans only: This Street` takes a narrower and a wider configuration, with transitions + between' the two occurring,as:indicated in the Plan. The"nar- rowerconfiguration contains -a central 6 -toot sidewalk flanked by,two9-foot landscape strips within a 24 -foot 'right of way: The wider' configuration con- tains two 6 -foot sidewalks flanking.a 36=foot central,green:within a 48 -Foot right'otway.'Both 'cohtigurationscontain'pairs-:of' flowering trees spaced approximately;25ifeet on -center east to west. with each:pair'18 feet apart north to"South. _(In the:narrower configuration, the trees flank the path, while in the widerconfigurabon, the paths flank'.the trees.). Each. Block of the. Mews contains a singledistinct species of tree. Each wide -configured segment of'the 'Mews holds two benches facingafountain or:sirnilarame- nity' at its centor. V. THOROUGHFARE DESIGN Curbs: Curbs shall be vertical without horizontal lips (no gutter: pans). Roll- overor: rounded curbs are only: permitted where required to facilitate truck motions.. Crosswalk Materials: :Crosswalks shall be,located to continue. all sidewalk trajectories across all intersections and shall be surfaced 'Ina:material that contrasts withthe Street surface: Left Hand TuraLanes:.Left handiturn .lanes shalt be limited to the shortest length:deemed reasonable to handle peak, turning demands. Bulbouts: Bulbouts only occur in:throe:locations in the plan:.surrounding the Iwo Roundabouts; and at the,southwestcorner of East MainStreet and the new'Street adjacent to the; Monon Trait. Cuib Radii:'The curbvelum radius at. Street comersshall be 10 feet alcor- ners without or-ners-without Bulbouts and 15 feet at corners with Bulbouts (with exceptions sunoundmg;'the Roundabouts). The obit return radius.at.Hear Lane;;ends shall be 5.feet., Ifsuch radii'.are:not adequateto:provide for the turning mo- tions of trucks—with the'.truckrallowedto swervetemporarily into the eppos; ing;Iane-then they:may be increased' by only as much as is, necessary to m ake. such, turn i ng motions: possible. Curb Cuts: Curb Cuts' are: permitted at Primary Frontages only in those loca- ,tions specifically, indicated in the Plan. Standard Curb;Cuts May not:exceed 18.feetrinwidth, plus-3'feet corner curb radii where necessary. Residential Curb,Cuts, also indicated, may not exceed 12 feet in width, plus •1'fool corner rs a;c x! &L.-,Mpta.:oic 1rA'T CARMEL. INDIANAa APPENDIX: THE, DESIGN REGULATIONS .curb radii where necessary. Curb Cuts are not regulated at Secondary Front- ages or in non -Frontage locations, Street Planting: The street-treepatternshallbe spaced consistently at the approximate distances- _'described: in the Thoroughfare.Types•above:Street trees shall be Iocated at corners as described ahead;and;then spaced :regu- larly ;from corner to corner. At corners; the corner tree's distance from the intersection shall beden,feet further from the intersection than a that extends. (across thesidewalk) the frontproperty..line of. the property. around the corner. Tree Type/Quality: Each Street shall have a Single' consistent tree type for its entire length,,with the exceptionof Monon Avenue (twoaypes)'and,the Pedes- trian Mews.(one type per block). Street treesshall=have a minimum height of, 10 feet anda. minimum caliper o1:3 inches attimeof; planting. Lighting: Street: lights: shall ;be .located attheouter edgeotiall'sidewalks, shallbe 10 feet to 15feet' .tallyandshall :-be spaced regularly. Thelightspac- 'ing distance on a,given Street shall range from 20 feet on=center in.the,most urban locations to 100,feet.on-centerin the most suburban locations, tote further -documented in:a'streetaighting,plan... Monon Avenue:•shall receive •aunique :decorative, lighting design that continues consistently.. for iis•entire length.. The pedestrian Mews: shall boilit nofby streetlights, but by footlights Banking , its sidewalks and/or uplights•onks trees: Lighting Standards: Streetlighting standards shall be sized appropriately to •their low height, and shall use an energy-efficient, L, E. D., lamps- Lights shall notbe sized and locatedaround the;goal'of providing uniform koJerage,.as varying lighting levelsare more .attractive ,to'pedestrians. Sldewalk.,Ob)ects:;Anydire hydrants, ,,mailboxes,..parking meters,, bicycle racks, orother impediments to foot traffic shell belocated in the planting zone towards:the curb. Benches shall be provided •at retail Frdritages:ata mini- mum'of one per Block face.. Benches shall be Iocated facing the -Street with their backs.against the building fronts. Benches .built .,into -building facades are encouraged and`may:encroach:upon.the.sidewalk.to amax..depth of feet. Bicycle;Racks ar&required at aminimum ofone ,per.200'llnear feet of sidewalk edge on all streetseast of 3rd' Avenue,' inclusive. Rear, lanes:. Wherever possible, RearLanes'shalt:be the principal. location of utilities, such as water sewer eloctricity gas; cable television, and trash pickup.,.RearLanes maybe, used for targe•commercialdeliveries but noffor mail or package service_ Rear Lanes shall -have a reverse crown;. with French drains where necessary. Transformers, lift stations, boxes, util- ity meters. HVAC equipment, and other such machinery: shallnot be located at Frontages'or where they -are readily, visible:. at: Frontages, but shall instead be located Rear Lanes and parking lots: vl: PARKING General:Approach: Parking,:demand in mixed-use development functions differently fromparking; demand in conventional suburban development, for sevoratreasons: A pedestrian -friendly environment allows. people towalkrather than.drive such that; for example:: a: resident or. pffice worker does not need a parking space at a nearby, store. orrrestaurant.. Large amounts of on -street parkingcontribute to the number of spaces available. • A:collectiveparking.supply (rather than.site-bysite) allows' the system to function and be'regulated asan'integrated organism. Complementary.uses surrounding the collective parkingsupply allow spec- eslo:serve:difterentfunctions around the clock,, that, forexample,:a single space'cari serveianofficeworker during', the day and a residenbat night.. These'•four-factors—a park -once environment; onstreet parking, collective isupply,•and complimentary loads—ailimpactthe off-street<parking:require- ments as follows: Park=Once Environmentr.Efficiencies duelto Increased pedestrian activity lead tithe following -general requirements: CARMEL. INDIANA _ s.p,SEIC+K &r AJs slojC1112A';riE e- Lei l`ipd APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS Single-family homes, including .Townhouses, shall provide a minimum of 2 oft -street spaces per unit. Unlike with other uses these shall be located -On :site, and are thus notimpacted..bythe factors thatfollow. All other usesshall provide a:minimum of 1.5'spaces,perunit, on or offsite. All other uses shall provide: a minimum of 3 spaces per 1000 interior square feet,on or off-site. Sidewalk dining is encouraged and thus shall notcount towards this total: On -Street Parking: Parking, supply calculations shall include adjacent on - street parking spaces.as the full equivalent of off-street parkingspaces. Collective Parking Supply: Parking calculations;niay be made comprehen- sively across :multi•Block:areas. . tfnototherwise;assigned,.any spot within a 3 -minute walk (1000 feet) of;itsuse may be counted .:towards;thatuse. Complimentary Loads: The minimum required. quantity of parking may reduced..when shared, parking; is; used. The following,share factors.shaltbe used to determine'the reductions'due to°shared Parkirig: • Residential and Office: 1.4 • Residential and Retail: 1.2 • ',Residential: and Lodging: 1.1 • Office and: Retail. 1.3 • Glee and Lodging: 1.7 • ',Retail and Lodging: 1.3 To determine the Shared Parking Factor,.divide the sum of' the parking re- quirements for Iwo: functions by the applicable ratio to arrive at the total num- :her of required,;spaces. For example, is combination of•10,000. square feet ofretail and 40 apartments would'be required W..provide on- and,off?street parking totaling (110' 3) +140 •1.5))'/-1.2 =.(30+ 60)1 1.2 = 75 spaces.. Shared parking, to qualify :as.such, shaltbe Iodated within 500 feet of each Use. VIL,PARKING DESIGN Structured Parking: Parking structures shall be.hidden entirely from Primary Frontage View by being ,set behind an occupied building,edge. While.as little as 20,feet of single -loaded building depth cam hide:a:.garagerthe more eco- nomical solution'is to place a double -loaded building-againstthe,sidewalk, separated from the garage byan interior courtyard. In this configuration, the garage walls shall receive a Green'Screen:oranother sort of planted edge to improve the quality of; the courtyard. Entriesiinto.structured parking'tots shall be no widerthannecessary to provide required :access, and neverwider.than 50feet. across. Recommended Structure Location: Although notrequired, a large parking structure is recommendedfar the center of theBlock'directlynorthwest'of the Central Square. Surtace.Parking:-Any new surface ilots on shall' contain a 5 -foot -min. wide landscape:; strip between each 607foot parking aisle, holding shade trees plantedapproximately 30 feet.on-center. Building•Orlentatlon: Buildings that abut RearLanes or pi:king'.lets at their rears shall allow:onlysecondary access .from -these edges maintaining prin- cipal orientation towardsaheir Frontages. Specifically: Retail uses: mayprovide one -rear.. door (op double -door) for: use by,em- ployees and%suppliers: Supermarkets;and other businesses.from.which the typical, buyer leaves with a heavyburden of productsmay,also.allow, customers touse 'this `door. Office -and' residential Lies may have a'single, rear door (or'double-door), but this dootshall.be. clearly . hierarchically ,inferior to the front door. Inboth of the above cases,:the Frontage door must be located'in a place that, appears appropriate toga front-loaded•businessi'and,must bekept unlocked Whenever any, other:access doors are unlocked: 'Paseos: The above regulations function properly' when regular Paseos are: provided between rear parking.lots'and front sidewalks. Paseos shall main - IK. A4949101Cy,?AIT;E9i CARMEL, INDIANA APPENDIX: THE. DESIGN REGULATIONS fain a minimum width :of 10 feet, with -a. wider area .suggested at, mid -way, .perhaps25feet square, containing'a shade ltree, :benches, and a fountain or similar amenity. Paseos may be.uncovered,ormay lbe located underneath. a continuous upstairs story, in which: case no mid -way widening is.recom- mended..Paseo edges are considered Primary Frontages for the, purposes of the Regulations. When buildings separateirear parking from front sidewalks, Paseos are required such that`no:more than -400 feet ofcontinuous'building edge,ever separates rear parking from front sidewalk. VIIL.BUILDING USES Mixed Use: This plan is intended to includea healthy mix:of awide range, of uses, including Retail, Residential,' Office; Lodging, Institutional,and other non -nuisance uses. Retail: Ground -floor Retail (ordining/entertainment) use is required at certain Frontages and allowed'at others; as indicated in the Plan. Such useispro- hibited at all other Frontages. Office: While the Regulations. are. flexible, the Plan anticipates, that office. •andinstitutional uses will be located principally in buildings.surrounding the Monon trail and to its east.. These buildingswould ideally alternate with. mul- tifamily,buildings (or todging)';for mostefficientsharing•of parking. Lodging: While not required, itis recommended theta hotel.he'included in tho development: An ideal location is on the Central,Square. Location for Shared Parking: 'Any large office ;development:shaltlocate its parking to 6e shared,with a large: amountof adjacent residential or hotel units. Residential: While the Regulations:are flexible; the Plan: anticipates.the fol- lowing,distributionofditferent residential building•typesb. Multi-faniily.buildings surrounding the Monontrail andto Its east: These bulldings.would ideally alternate:with office buildings, for most efficient sharing of parking: Rowhouses surrounding the pedestrian Mews. Freestanding houses on narrow lots in Rear -Lane -served locations west of 3rd Avenue SW: Freestanding houses on wider lots-in.non-Rear-Lane=served locations west of3rd .Avenue SW. IX: GENERAL. BUILDINGDESIGN Rowhouse. Requirements: The following' rules applyto:Rowhouses:. All Rowhouses oma given, Stock <segment shall be, attached :into :a.single group. In other words, gaps between Rowhouses shall only occur at rights of.way. Rowhouses at Street cornersshall locate their entrance on the long facade (turning the comer). Rowhouse lots shall,be between 12 feetand 25 feet in width, with that dis- tance;supplemented on corner lots byany required corner Setback. Two Rowhousetypes are,permitted in the. Redevelopment Area. Traditional Rowhouses place a rear garage against, a: Rear Lane, separated from the principal structure by a patio no less than 15.feet deep: Arear ;wing or. :breezeviay may connect the house ,to•the:ga- rage,as: long as.a.l2=foot patio, width is maintained:. Each,patio shall contain a"shade tree. Tuck -under Rowhouses;contain their garages within the•rear of•the principalstructure; and'thus do not provide -a rear garden. A rear deckabove theback half of the garage is recommended. Tuck -under Rowhouses are prohibited at Rear Lane Openings. Freestanding;House Requirements: The following rules apply to.treestand- ing houses: leCAWIIEL. INDIANA " .Sl P'K [& .A'B79'01C;1 'Aur'c:s 7L)LIC APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS • Freestanding, house Tots In Rear -Lane -served locationsshall be between 30 feet and 60 feet in width: Freestandinghouse lots' in'non-Rear_Lane-servedaocations,shallbe•be- tween50.feetand80 feet inwidth. Thesd houses; shall place their. garages a minimum of 20 feet behind the Frontage Line.. Freestandinghouses shall have sidesetbacks 01.5 feet minimum. Granny:Flats: Granny Flats °araallowed on:all Rear -Lane served lots con- taining single=family houses, and are required. on all singledamilylots at Rear Lane Openings—including'Rowfiouse lots.. Fornon-Rbwnouselots,'an addi= tional parking space for the Granny Flatshallbe; provided next'.to the garage, or in a3-cargarage. For Rowhouse lots; this parking requirement is waived,. and any additional tenant shall be welcome :to;park'on:street. Granny: Flats maycontain a.finished:(third floor)',attic,story. X. HEIGHTS Building Helghts:'Each.Frontage 'is assigned:a minimumand 'a,maximum allowedbuilding height, as`further defined in the' :Regulations; When two, different height requirements meet at a corner,.the- taller 'requirement : takes precedence around the corner to a distance:of al toast 30' feet but no: more -than 80 feet from the Frontage Line.. Heights are measured inreference 'to the sidewalk at the center of the front facade. Attics: Buildings:may'contain an additional.storyin the roof if the floor of said .storyis no more. than; 3: feet below the eave line. Towers: To encourage:an interesting skyline, .building areas with; a' footprint of Less that 200 square feet shall have no.height limit. Story Heights:. Retailspaces shall have a minimum ceiling height o1,12 feet, but 18 feet' is recommended.. Office spaces shall have a minimum,'ceiling heightb610;feet. Residential spaces shall have a minimum ceiling height of 8.feet for. upper stohes and 91eet for the.firstlloor. Ground Floor. Heights: All retail Spades 'aSl be'located on aground floor placed at grade: Buildings with residential first floors shall locate ell first -floor residences a minimum of 18 inches above adjacent sidewalk grade. This requirement becomes 3feet when said'lloors are located within 5 feet of sidewalk edger Handicapped access; when provided ;on:a building, with, an elevatedfirst.floor,.shall be located in non -Frontage location's .whenever' `pos- sible. Tall Frontages: One-story commercial buildings: where permitted, shall maintain 'a minimum 20.: foot parapet height at the Frontage Line: Single- family houses with sections of different height. shall place the tallersectlon`at the Frontage Line and the lower section behind. Xl. BUILDING•FRONTS Frontages: The.Regulating,Plan distinguishes between Primary Frontages and Secondary Frontages...While all Frontages areassigned!specific Set- back distances, Primary Frontages require <a higher level of urban -..perfor- mance than. SecondaryFrontages. Frontage Setbacks: All'Frontages are assigned Setbacks in the.Plan. Along Primary Frontages,Setbacks specify the proper:;location of the building fa- cade, as' further defined in these -Regulations. Along Secondary Frontages Setback di tances`ar'e.understood insteadas minimums, at or behind which the :buildingedge shall be located. Primary Frontages:All buildings: shall place a building edge,along no less than 80%of their Primary frontage Lines. (For freestanding houses,»that number shall' be calculated after side setbacks have': beensubtracted from the total) The.small,gaps in'Frontageallowed by that percentage shall not occur at building corners:. with the exception that corners may beroundedor chamfered. Street Waite: With the -exception of freestanding .single-family houses, all buildings shall.place a Street Wall along those:portions ofthe :Frontage Line where,no building is present. (Where a portion of a building is.setback from -.90:9" E.‘C,K'-6":A.i9"93090 1:4AKT' EF9r +LTL (ci CARMEL. INDIANAErsi APPENDIX: THE DESIGNREGULATIONS the.Frontage.Line, such:a wall is not required.) This requirement applies to both Primary and'' Secondary Frontages: Saidwall shall, be between 18 inch- es and 3 feet in height along Prirnary Frontages., its height along. Secondary Frontages; shall be between 3 feet:'and 5 feet if.enfronhng. a. surface parking lot or other unattractive use, and otherwise, between 18 inches and 3`feetin height Street Walls,at Primary: Frontages+ may contain gates for pedestrian access, and 'openings for vehicular access: in locations where Curb Cuts are explicitly allowed. Street Walls at Secondary Frontages may includegates for pedestrian access as well as openings for vehicular access as reasonably warranted. Sight Triangles: While they improve visibility, sight triangles increase vehicle speeds and can undermine 'pedestrian safety. Anyrequirements pertaining to;sighttriangles in currently enforced codes shall be waived when in conflict with the Frontage' Linesin the Regulating Plan, or with these Regulations' tree -planting requirements. Rear Lane Openings: To limit Views into Rear Lanes, all single-familyhous- es at Rear Lane Openings shall place a oear garage tncluding an upstairs Granny Flatonthe Frontage Line with'a 0 -foot setback from the Rear Lane. •All other buildings'at.Rear 'Land entrance corners sh'ell:maintain a'Ocfoot+set- back•from the:Rear Lane at the corner: Vista Terminations: The 'Plan contains. numerous locations on buildings that are, perspectivallyframedbya long view down a Street—called aVista Termination: Buildings located:at Vlsta'Terminalionsshall respondiwith''an appropriately -scaled architecturalfeature, such as a tower or multi=story par- tico.iin order to properly,receive.the vista. These shallte.aligned properly,to be framed'syrilmetrioally in thevista-.'Proper Vista Terminations' include large bay windows, prominent gables, .grouped window compositions, towers, and cupolas. Extenslon:Required, Certain significant' Vista Terminations present' the fur- ther -requirement of full -height building-.Extensionthat Occupies the building Setback and. reaches to ,Property,Line,. as;indicated:'inthe Regulating Plan. These Extensions shall be between '20 feet and 50 feet'.inwidth, Materials: Building materials, shall beuseddn a. manner appropriate to their intrinsic formal;',properties: including 'their structural;capacities as demon- strated in openings and spans. Metal elements shall be,natural colored galvanized steel, stainless.steel. anodized or electrostatic plated' aluminum, Ma -rine -grade aluminum, copper; or bronze. Wood elementsshallbo painted orsealed withan opaque: or semi=solid stain; except walkingsurfaces„which maybe IefLnatural. Siding 'shall,be' weeder cementitious,(Hardie .Board or equivalent) and present 8'inches maximum siding width to the weather. All stucco shallbe steel toweled 'with no evidence -of the mark of the -trowel: Sand cement render shall be'applied,withoutcontrol joints. ,Corner beads are prohibited Exterior trim:shall be:indistinguishable from wood when painted and shall be sized appropriately to its location: Wail Configurations: Each building facade shall contain at most two different wall materials (not counting foundationwallsand trim). Buildingwalls shall be one color per material used. (excluding-trim).''Materials may'only transition across horizontal lines; for example. between building stories, and not `across vertical lines, except in the case of attachments such as bay windows. When two:materials are stacked horizontally, the heavier -looking material shall sit below the lighter -looking material, such as, brick below Hardie -board or stone below stucco: When.a material transition occursaround a corner, the transi- tion shall occur at a distance from the corner that is appropriate for the materi- als represented,:for'example 12 or 16 inches for brick. Expansion joints shall 'bea.rational part of.:the.wall composition and shall be colored to match the wall. Trim. except at is required Where there is a change in material 'or plane. Trim around lights, outlets, vents, meters,.etc.: shall match the wall :color, not theobject color. 'Style: Buildings:shall ,not present a historical; pastiche. Buildings designed inatraditional style shall limit themselvesto that style alone and shall;em- body that style convincingly: Keystones, quoins and: superimposed. multiple gables ,(one :gable overfappinganother) are prohibited: Double,front doors are 'prohibited Onsingle,tamily homes. CARMEL- INDIANA ::i51e�IEtC+K, •'6�WIG S';D/C,I*Ar,T4E reg lL'LC",Ct' APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS XII. BUILDING ATTACHMENTS. Location: Any -attachments such as bay windows, balconles, porches, :stoops, awningsandoavos shall extend 'forwardofpe line of thebuilding front.. Single-family houses shall provide either astoop'or:a porch at the front door. All 'other buildings -shall 'provide:some.iorm: of shelter, from rain at the front door. Encroachments: Awnings are ahe only.first-foorattachmentsallowedtooc- cupy.thepublic right-of-way. On the second floor aridabove, balconies, bay windows eaves Imghts and signs may occupy the public:' right-of-way. No :attachment may extendabove:a vehicular. roadbed&atafheight & lessthan 15 feet; or abovea sidewalk at aheight of less than 7,feet..Attachments:other .than roof eaves may not extend'over adjacent. private properties. Attachment Dimensions: Bay windows and balconies shall beno more than 3 feet deep; stoops shall bei feet to 6 feetdeep;'porches shall be between 6 feet and 10 feet deep. Limited. Balconies: • Balconies, porches, and loggias'. shall not constitute more than50%.of any facade: Railings: Railings shall have top and bottom rails. The openings between spindles or balusters may not exceed 4 mnches Bottom' railsshall clear the floor. •Privacy; Walls and. Fences: Single-family houses shall, provide a• wall ,or fence 5 feet to 6feetin height between rear yards and•against Rear Lanes where no garages is present. -' Postal Number: Every building shall have'a,postal numberapplied within,5 feetof the entrance area This may, not be taller than six unlesscon- structed:as-asignaturesculptural element.. Yard Trees: All single-family homes with front setbacks of 10 feet or greater shall berequiredto,planta.front ,yard tree of a,species matching theiadjaaent street tree if,front attachments (such as afront porch) withimthe Setback pro- vide an available spaceno less :than 100 square` feet in size. 'Said tree'shall be':located5;feet fromthe front property line and 5 feet minimum fromany side properly, line. XIII, OPENINGS Fenestration Ratio: The ratio of fenestration to area of .the building facade shall be:between 25% and75%,.except for retail frontages where 4 shalt be 60%to;95%.. Retail establishments shall place,windows regulady,at all Front- ages. Each' facade;shall. bemeasured .independently. Blank.Watls:'.Walis,at. Primary Frontagesmay not be.blank,.and shall' have at leastione window per structural bay. per floor, in a pattern that suggests habitation.. Window Materials: Windows shall have: clear '(notftinted)glass. Window Panes: Each, building facadeshall be,composed of windowsthat are all'constructed from the 'same •size or proportion of window pane, with:the exceptionota single custom window usedin one or several special, locations. Mullions::Mullions,tif:used,ahall'either,be true divided lights or:be- affixed .to the exterior .surface.ofthe window to cast a shadowline. Mullions are recom- mended tor.residential,windows where' stylistically appropriate, and discour- aged for retail windows: Shutters:. Vertically -hinged shutters, when provided,shall coincide.in.size toithe opening with which they are.associated, such lhatclosing themwould cover. the window area. Grouped Windows: When two or morewindows occur in single opening or dormer, they -shall be separatedbya 4"x4" post. aIP'eip 16 A.......................... , a! 4L1SJ CARMEL. INOIAN APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS XIV. ROOFS Rooftop Equipment:.The.screening'ofrooftop mechanical equipmentis re- quired. All e-quired..AII rooftopmechanical equipment. shall be screenedfrom view.from all directions;and from allelevations of equal height orlower,:to minimize the negative aesthetic: impact upon the view from neighboringbuildings'and from street level. Said screening shall:be consistent with the .architeceure'of the building. Dormers: Dormers shall be habitable and stied no largerthan'necessary to hold window(s) and framing. Skylights: Bubble skylightsshallaot be visible'at'Primary Frontages. Flush skylights, ,where . visible: at Primary Frontages, shall be,organized into :a com- posed:pattern. XV. RETAIL DESIGN No Malls: All retail spaces shall give direct access to a`public sidevialk. Noy. retail space may'exisuabovethe ground floor except as a mezzanine within'a space.that.f aces; a: ground-lloor sidewalk. Awnings:.Retail Frontagesshall contain awnings fora minimum.of50%' of the total. retail Frontage. Awningsshall be.a minimum of -'6 feet deep and shall be metal with colored fabric; or: glass: Fabric awnings shall have a met al structure covered with canvas:orsynthetic canvas, and be.rectangular, in: shape with straightedge'sand no side panels or:soffit. Awnings shall not, be backlit orused as signs,.except:for a possible single inscription on the flap, not toexceed 6.inches in height: All awnings on asingle shop shall have the same depth; material,and color. Fabric'awnings:are not. permitted- on resi- dential buildings. Kneewail: Front.gtazing on retail establishments- shall 'begin ,above ;a knee - wall located 12 inches,to 16: inchesabove sidewalk grade. Blocked Windows: Drug stores. andothercommercial lenants.shall not place inner partitions in widows That significantly block views into the store. Interior Lighting: All retail establishments shalllbe lit in the incandescent (warmer)apectrum,-whatever technology. is used. Smallspotlights are rec- ommended rather!than.a uniform wash of light. Sidewalk' extension: All retail uses shall pave their Setbacks to match the adjoining sidewalk. Alcove: All retail.uses shall locate their;primaryentrances within a small,ad- ditional setback between 30 and 100 square feetin•size; paved 10 match the sidewalk.. Sidewalk Use: Retail establishments are: encouraged to place tables, chairs, anditemporary. displays onthe public sidewalk as'.long;a 5 -foot -wide clear corridor is.maintained' for pedestrians. Rails and other, barriers separating tables fromlihe pedestrian'flow'are .notpermitted (unless state law requires said.rails;for..alcohof sale). nor is any;permanent construction in the public sidewalk. Outdoors, restaurants .shall use ceramic,, glassmetal and clothtor plates,glasses,. silverware, tabieclothsand napkins, rather than paper and plastic products. XVI. RETAIL SIGNAGE Limitations: The shop -front door, signage and lighting shall.be designed as aunilied'designl There:.are four types of signage permitted'onbusfnesses: a) a signage band, b) a pedestrian blade sign, c) a,window...logo, and d): an awning band. 'These are further.limitedas follows: Sign Band: Each building may, have a.singto sign band 60% maximum of the width of the building Frontage•max.: with''aheightnet to exceed eighteen inches. Jf a building hold. multiple tenants, the use of the sign band width shall be divided among tenants on a pro -rata basis determined by their,ground- floorisquaretootage. Thesign 'shall be integrally designed with'the'building or the associated storefronts in material;and color. The sign band.may not be internally lit. Blade.SIgn: One two-sided bladesignis permitted for.each•business with a door on thesidewalk level. The blade sign shall be securely affixed to the CARMEL. INDIANA Jr. k&'to S.ISMICdl,•Aq%E(S'.- tLVI fC'; APPENDIX: THE DESIGN REGULATIONS facade or storefront and'may project overthesidewalk'so,long:as it does not _.interfere with pedestrian flow. The blade sign may not exceed 4 square'feet. (includingniounting-hardware) in`area -'many shape'and may not be:translu- 'cent. Logo: A:logo'inscribed on'the storefront glassispermitted (one perbusiness. per buildingtace),:or the name of the storein permanently -affixed cutout let- tering. Logos shall hot exceed foot in height and lettering shallnot exceed 6 inches in height. Upstairsbusinesses are also allowed logos with the same. .limitations. :OtherSignage: Billboards and•other'freestanding advertisementsare pro- hibited, as are rooftop, flashing, moving, er interniitteritly illuminated signs. No sign shall be attached above the second story of any structure. XVII. DETAILS Consistency:'Streets, squares: and other public,spaces,shall be; designed •with,a:.common vocabulary of.paving,:curbing, ..fencing and'.walls, landscap- ing; signage, and lighting.. This does' not mean thatall'detthils will be'consis- tent,: but rather that all detailswill; be understood to belong to the same family and/or era of design. Block Variety:.The appearance ?fa "project".or of -"megabuildings" shall, be avoided`by.not allowingthe same exterior:design to be used.onblock•after block,of buildings: While:even'smaller units,ofdesignare,encouraged,. no more than'250 feetotcontinuous Street Frontage may appear to have been designed bya singlearchitect.. Building Variety: Buildings used'repeatedlyinthe;plan„suchas Rowhouses and apartment houses. may only be repeated with similar. facades: to the degree that 'such repetition adds•. up to a total front footage -of 300 feet or Mess. For example, a 25 foot -Wide Rowhouse may be repeated only 12 times. Beyond ihis:point,a',truly distinct`facade. shall 'be.introduced, as if' a different architect was', responsible: The one exception to this rule'is along, the. Pedes- trian Mews; where each•block'ofRowhousescan be matched byanidentical blockacross the Mews;fora . symmetrical outcome. Eyesores:Antennas, radar dishes,. chain Ilnk fence, Viriyl fencing, barbed wire, razor wire, and chicken wire' shall' not be permitted Where.visible'from Primary Frontages., Dumpsters,and trash shallbe: screened behind enclo- sures 'built ;for that purpose,and: said enclosures: shall not occur at.Primary Frontages. XVIII- EXISTING BUILDINGS AND USES General:;Inanumber otlocations .onthe :Regulating Plan, mostly on Range LIne:Road', requirements are;shownfor properties containing existing build- ings and uses. While these requirements pertainto the replacement of ex- isting,buildings and'uses with new.ones,they do not mandate such replace- ment, and..such, redevelopment can Unlit occur with :the' owner's. consent. Existing uses are thus "grandfathered” In. However,•when.existing buildings and uses are -replaced, they shall be, replaced ;according,to.the requirements of these Regulations.. Range.Line:Road: The Regulating'Plan indicates Frontage Lines and other requirementsfor'certeiripotsalong Range Line Road, but; not all. Unmarked properties'are not considered in need.of.replacement. However, whenever any unmarked property onRange Line Road between Main•.Streotand 6th Street SE is' replaced, Its replacement,shali,lake one of two configurations. (1) if it!contains retail use on the ground floor, it shall treat its front property tineas a Primary Frontage Line; dr (2) if it contains no retail Use on the ground floor, i1 shall enlronta Primary: Frontage Line that is set back 10,teet from the front property, line.. In bothcases, on-site.parking shall be located only iiiithe rear half of the property. SlPYE,fC IK' „6 YA 9.e, C]gC,IA� ,Ej�6: t LiCI[ CARMEL. INDIANA PAO C. A:'-1 3 MIDTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, CARMEL, IN SPECK Sr ASSOCIATES LLC.