HomeMy WebLinkAboutExecutive Committee Comp. Plan Update EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, - June 13 , 1989
The committee meeting was brought to order by Jeff Davis at 7 : 39
P.M. at the Carmel City Meeting Hall.
Committee members present were: Jeff Davis , Chairman, George
Sweet, Will Wright, Bob Boone, Ila Badger, Alan Potasnik, Sue
McMullen, Jim Dillon, Greg Binder and Lindley Meyers .
Staff members present were: Wes Bucher, David Cunningham, Rick
Brandau, Terry Jones and Dorthy Neisler.
Ms. Joanne Green stated that they have refined previous
information and have reviewed the land use plan.
Aerial photography plan development was displayed indicating the
program development proposed for the City of Carmel . A plan
showing identified traffic zones which we will be used for the
analysis .
The presentation of base line information regarding land use
zoning and program development and has been obtained through a
number of sources .
Briefly described the generalized categories for analysis where
are: Agriculture residential areas, Low density residential
areas, Medium density residential areas, High density residential
areas . Also, Employment Uses and those are broke down into
commercial office areas, heavy commercial office areas,
industrial manufacturing areas and other uses public and semi-
public areas.
One of our key finding in existing land use evaluation, generally
more densely populated residential development has been focused
around areas to the east and south where good transportation and
waste water service has been readily available. Lower density
residential development has been in the western section of the
community.
The majority of land in the township is zoned S-1. This zoning is
exclusively west of Springmill and East Gray. The next largest
group is zoned R-1, R-2 and R-3 , medium density residential
category, 6700 acres or 20% of the total study area. Land zoned
8-2 the low density residential category is the third largest
category of land area of approximately 4200 acres or 12% of the
study area. The business and industrial manufacturing area
categories are also found within the central portion of the study
area. Combined these zoning categories account for a total of
approximately 3100 acres, land zoned B-2, 3--5 , B-6 and 8-8 which
are the remaining categories are the largest segment of this
group accounting for approximately 1100 acres or 3% of the total
study area.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE - June 13 , 1989
In addition to the program uses there are a total of
approximately 4200 unbuilt dwelling units in existing
subdivisions . This number when compared with the total built
dwelling units, 11065 is quite significant.
Flow charts were passed out to all committee members . (which is a
part of the official minutes and attached to the Master Copy) .
Mr. John Myers discussed the flow charts .
Mr. Myers showed graphs on the overhead projector which displayed
listings of most recent traffic counts that they have in Carmel
on Keystone Avenue, U.S. 31, Range Line Road, 116th St. , Carmel
Drive and Main St. , and 126th St. from previous years past.
The traffic zone study map was shown.
There was further discussion on how, where, when and the cost of
doing traffic counts in the Carmel area .
Ms . Joanne Green passed out a summarization that was presented.
Ms. Green felt there were some major issues for discussion.
There are three primary areas of concern that have been
identified up to this date:
1.Large currently undeveloped infill parcels located along
key transportation corridors or within or adjacent to established
areas.
2. Large tracts of land currently used primarily for
agricultural purposes from Gray Road east to the White River,
3 . Large tracts of land currently used primarily for
agricultural purposes west of Meridian Street and north of 116th
Street. Additional general areas of discussion could include the
relationships and compatibility between the varied and wide mix
of land use in the central core of the community and they hope to
disperse some discussion in regards to this .
In regards to the zoning, some specific discussion points and
questions they have are:
1. Should there be a new zoning category which limits the
development of agricultural lands to densities lower than the
1500 square foot of lot area per dwelling if there is a community
sanitary sewer system?
2. Should there be lands which will be designated as
"Agricultural Preserves" in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan Update?
3 . Should development be "clustered" at higher densities in
certain areas of the S-1 zoned sections to allow for preservation
of open space and desirable features of the natural environment?
4. Can the proliferation of the "B" zones be simplified and
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE - June 13 , 1989
streamlined to achieve more specific development intents .
In regards to Programmed Development:
1. What will the impact of proposed sewer system expansions
have on development proposals in the near term and in the long
term?
2. Are the proposed developments outlined in Section 1.4 . 1
the projects that could reasonably be considered to have an
impact on the transportation system within the next five years?
3 . Is the information presented in Section 1. 4. 1 correct
with regards to data to be considered in estimating impacts on
the transportation network for the next five years?
Mr. Davis questioned is there a genuine agricultural land left in
Clay Township, although it is being used for that now, is that a
reasonable use for it? If we were going to establish
agricultural preserves how would that property owner be
compensated or would he just be required to farm it even though
that were not a probable use of the land? How would we go about
clustering properties of higher density to leave larger open
spaces, is it larger clustering that you are talking about?
Obviously all the developers would provide the land for the
clustering, who would provide the land for the open spaces?
Should the people who are going to provide this land for
agricultural preserves, if that became something that desireable
for this area, will they be compensated in some manner or will we
just be telling them that it is not probable to farm this land
that they should more reasonably sell it? Can we do that as a
matter of zoning ordinance? Is that even legal?
Mrs. McMullen requested if at all possible to receive this
information on the summarization prior to the meeting so the
committee has a chance to read before the meeting?
Ms . Green stated that would not be a problem.
Mr. Davis stated that they do not have any good graphs of the
build out of the sewer. There is a lot of conjecture of how it
is going to be built, how it is going to be financed. Mr. Davis
stated he has seen plans that include sewage for almost all of
Western Clay Township. How serious and how soon?
There was a great deal of discussion regarding sewers in western
Clay Township.
Mr. Davis stated that we would have our own traffic study in
order to do this analysis for the Comprehensive Plan Update.
Mr. John Meyers stated the traffic issue is going to be a very
difficult issue. Mr. Meyers stated that traffic will increase on
Springmill Road because Meridian is filling up and people will
use city streets.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE - June 13, 1989
Mrs . Badger questioned under the Key Findings, with your
percentages that you have listed for land uses the distribution,
that includes all of the acres that are now zoned for those
different uses, is that correct? And, it makes no
differentiation between the amount of land that is now developed,
the amount of land that is undeveloped?
Ms. Green stated that was correct. That comprises the entire
study area.
Mrs . Badger questioned do you have any plans of coming up with
any figures as to how much of those categories are already
developed. Is there any general percentage that seems to be
acceptable in a town as to how much or what percentage the land
should be zoned for residential use, what might be zoned for
commercial and what might be zoned for business manufacturing,
whatever that tends to be in the overall a fairly well balanced
number?
Ms. Green stated they do have that information. No, there are
just so many factors involved. One of the primary factors is the
location with regards to a major city, the traffic impact of
that, which is exactly Carmel. If your close to that and have a
lot of traffic movement in and out of a large city into that
community then there are certain results from that. And can say
that there is some general percentage, if there is I am not aware
of it.
Mrs. Badger questioned if they would have any feel of this
situation and will you be able to recommend to us that maybe we
are at capacity on one thing or that we are lacking in another
area?
Ms. GReen stated yes and again think that will tie itself in a
very direct way to the thoroughfare portion of the work.
Mr.Boone questioned if we were to take in a reasonable proximity
to the Meridian Corridor and to develop housing, apartments,
single family, that would be affordable to the work force in the
office buildings, would that be in fact make a substantial
diminishment of the traffic?
Mr. Meyers stated yes it would make an impact . As much as you
could develop residential close by jobs you are going to have
positive effects on a number of things and especially traffic.
It is a worthwhile goal.
Ms. Sue Dillon asked several questions ;
1. Are you taking into consideration traffic flow on 106th and
Springmill & Ditch?
2 . Have you studied other areas as far as changing zoning sizes
of lot sizes?
Ms. Green stated that not at the present time.
3 . Are you keeping track of the progress of the Comprehensive
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE .7 June 13 , 1989
Plan that is being drawn up by Hamilton County?
Ms. Green stated that she was not aware of this and would like to
know who to contact and would check on it.
4. Do other communities require a portion of land to be set aside
for a community park?
Ms. Green stated that there will be no ordinances come out of the
update.
There was further discussion.
The next Comprehensive Plan meeting will be July 19, 1989.
Meeting adjourned at 9 :30 P.M.
ra(�t tJe �S {
HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF
14 February 1989
Mr. Jeff Davis
President Carmel/Clay Plan Commission
RE: Comprehensive Plan Update Work Program Priorities
Dear Mr. Davis,
Thank you for the selection of HNTB for the Carmel/Clay Township
Comprehensive Plan Update project. From our preliminary discussions with
Mr. Wes Bucher, we believe a review of possible project work tasks with the
Plan Commission Executive Committee would facilitate the development of a
Project Work Plan and Scope of Services Agreement between the Plan
Commission and HNTB.
Accordingly, the attached memorandum has been prepared in an effort to
better define work program options for the City of Carmel/ Clay Township
1989 Comprehensive Plan Update. Included in this memo is a range of
possible work tasks from which a determination of priorities will be made.
Input from the Executive Committee of the Plan Commission is needed at this
stage in the development of the work program to determine what will be the
best use of resources available for the project and to ensure that
community priorities are adequately addressed.
In addition to the listing of possible work tasks and options, space has
been provided for Commissioners to indicate their feelings as to the
relative priority of potential work tasks. From this survey, a logical
work program for consultant and city staff activities will be developed
according to the resources and time available for the project.
Priority levels should be indicated as follows;
Priority A: Those work task options which are felt to be highly
important for the success of the Comprehensive Plan Update
and the immediate needs of the community.
Architects Engineers Planners 225 North New Jersey Street,Indianapolis,Indiana 46204-2135, 317 636-4682
Partners Gerard F.Fox PE, Charles T.Hennigan PE, Daniel J.Watkins PE, Daniel J.Spigai PE,John L Cotton PE,Francis X.Hall PE, Robert S.Coma PE,
Donald A.Dupies PE, William Love FAIA. Robert D. Miller PE, James L Tuttle,Jr.PE, Hugh E.Schell PE,Cary C.Goodman AIA,Gordon H.Slaney,Jr.PE,
Harvey K.Hammond,Jr.PE, Stephen G.Goddard PE, John W.Wight,Jr.PE
Associates Don R. Ort PE, Kendall T. Lincoln CPA, Roberts W. Smithem PE, Richard D. Beckman PE, Harry D.Bertossa PE, Ralph E. Robison PE,
Cecil P.Counts PE, Stanley I.Mast PE, Robert W.Anzia PE, Walter Sharko PE, James O.Russell PE, Ross L.Jensen AIA, Frank T.Lamm PE, Ronald W.Aarons AIA,
H.Jerome Butler PE, Blaise M.Carriere PE, Michael P.Ingardia PE, Bernard L Prince PE, Stephen B.Quinn PE, Saul A.Jacobs PE, Ewing H.Miller FAIA,
Douglas C. Myhre PE, Carl J. Mellea PE, Daniel F. Becker PE, Richard L. Farnan AIA, Donald P. Keuth PE, Douglas E. Prescott PE,
Ronald L Hartje PE, Robert W.Luscombe PE,Thomas L Williams AIA, Dennis E.Conklin PE, John E.Kupke PE, Rodney P.Pello PE,Steven M.Reiss AIA
Offices Alexandria,VA,Atlanta,GA,Austin,TX,Baton Rouge,LA,Boston,MA,Charleston.WV,Chicago,IL Cleveland.OH,Dallas,TX,Denver,CO,Fairfield,NJ,
Hartford, CT, Houston, TX, Indianapolis, IN, Irvine, CA, Kansas City, MO, Lexington, KY, Lexington, MA, Los Angeles, CA, Miami, FL, Milwaukee, WI,
Minneapolis, MN, Nashua, NH, New York, NY,Orlando, FL Overland Park,KS, Philadelphia,PA, Phoenix,AZ,Raleigh, NC,Seattle,WA,Tampa, FL,Tulsa,OK,
Wilmington,DE
Mr. Jeff Davis
14 February 1989
Page Two
Priority B: Those work task options to which there are no strong
feelings positive or negative.
Priority C: Those work tasks which are felt to not be critical to the
success of the Comprehensive Plan Update at this time.
Thank you again for the opportunity to serve the City of Carmel.
Sincerely,
Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff
JO4(ht Y ` V144
Joann K. Gree
Project Manager
HNTB
LISTING OF POSSIBLE WORK TASKS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE WORK PROGRAM
CITY OF CARMEL/CLAY TOWNSHIP
-FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-
TASK
1: WORK PROGRAM
Priority Task Elements/Options:
1.1 : Meet with Plan Commission President and Director of
Community Development to discuss project goals, direction
and baseline planning year.
1.2: Develop project work program options including; possible
work tasks, resource requirements and schedule.
1.3: Review project work program options with Executive
Committee of Plan Commission, establish priorities. (one
meeting)
1.4: Prepare project work program based on priorities as set by
Executive Committee of the Planning Commission; determine
project schedule, responsibilities, critical path, number
of meetings, and project deliverables.
1.5: Seek approval of project work program and contract by
Plan Commission. (one meeting)
TASK 2: COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
Priority Task Elements/Options
2.1: Meet with Director of Community Development and Plan
Commission President to identify key participants, their
roles, powers, and duties. (one meeting)
2.2: Determine methods and channels of communication and
dissemination of information.
2.3: Set schedule and agenda for a "Focus Group Session" for
information gathering purposes and general discussion of
community issues and concerns.
2.4: Assist with coordination of and conduct focus group
session and document findings in memorandum form to
planning commission executive committee. (one meeting)
_ - HF4TB
CARMEL/CLAY TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
POTENTIAL WORK PROGRAM TASKS
2.5: Meet with Planning Commission Executive Committee to
discuss significant findings or concerns discovered from
Focus Group Session. (one meeting)
2.6: Working with Department of Community Development Staff,
supervise the design and execution of a public opinion
survey of up to 300 households and businesses by telephone
using computerized data base programs.
2.7 : Compile data from survey and prepare a report of
significant findings and implications to the project.
2.8: Present report to Executive Committee and discuss key
issues to be considered in the preparation of
Comprehensive Plan Update sections . (one meeting)
TASK 3: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INVENTORY
Priority Task Elements/Options
3.1: Contract for study area (approximately 54 square miles) to
be flown and produce black and white prints at suitable
scale for planning purposes and for use as baseline
graphic documentation for plan elements. (Scale: 1"=1/4
mile)
3.2: Contract for study area photography to be flown with land
references such as fire hydrants and manholes marked for
general engineering data inventory purposes. Produce
black and white photographs at 1"=400' scale for use by
the Department of Community Devlopment staff and other
City staff departments.
3.3: Contract for study area photography as in Task 3.2 and
produce digitized base mapping informaion from aerial
data collected.
TASK 4: POPULATION AND ECONOMY
Priority Task Elements/Options
4.1: Review pertinent data presented in last Comprehensive Plan
Update as well as any relevant statistical data compiled
by the Department of Community Development or from other
agencies to identify and note any significant trends which
can be determined.
4.2: Establish criteria for the development of future
population, employment and distribution scenarios to be
used for land use planning purposes.
HNTB
CARMEL/CLAY TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
POTENTIAL WORK PROGRAM TASKS
4.3: Work with the Department of Community Development staff to
develop alternative population and employment distribution
scenarios for the community.
4.4: Present scenarios to the Executive Committee for review
and selection of population, employment and distribution
scenario for the planning year to be used for the
Comprehensive Plan Update.
TASK 5: DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
Priority Task Elements/Options
5.1 : Review data compiled by staff regarding existing land use,
approved and programmed (proposed) development
information. Data should include information on land use
either, existing or proposed, by type, by quantity, by
area (or density) .
5.2: Working with City staff, compare baseline data presented
in the most recent Comprehensive Plan Update with findings
discovered in Task 5.1 using computerized spread sheet
analysis methods.
5.3: From Task 5.2, determine recent development trends and
compare with adopted future population, employment and
distribution scenario from Task 4, and assess differences
and implications for key areas.
5.4: Describe significant findings in text and graphic form.
TASK 6: LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS
Priority Task Elements/Options
6.1: Review pertinent data presented in last Comprehensive Plan
Update as well as any relevant statistical data compiled
by the Department of Community Development or from other
agencies to identify and note any significant trends which
can be determined.
6.2: Document significant changes in text and graphic form.
TASK 7: DEVELOPMENT SUPPORTS ANALYSIS
Priority Task Elements/Options
7.1: Review pertinent data presented in last Comprehensive Plan
Update as well as any relevant statistical data compiled
by the Department of Community Development or from other
agencies to identify and note any significant trends which
ran be determined.
a ,
IHNTEI
•;
CARMEL/CLAY TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
POTENTIAL WORK PROGRAM TASKS
7.2: Document significant changes in text and graphic form.
TASK 8: PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES
Priority Task Elements/Options
8.1 : Review key findings and issues raised from Tasks 3 through
7 and summarize composite concerns in text and graphic
form.
TASK 9: GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Priority Task Elements/Options
i I
9.1: Conduct a review of previously adopted goals, objectives
and policies from last Comprehensive Plan Update.
9.2: Note significant deficiencies between adopted goals,
objectives, and policies and existing conditions, future
trends, and a current understanding of community-wide
problems and opportunities.
9.3: Present findings and recommendations for modifications of
goals, objectives and policies to the Director of
Community Development and the Planning Commission for
review and adoption.
TASK 10: LAND USE AND HOUSING PLAN
Priority Task Elements/Options
10.1: Review previously prepared Land Use Plan as well
as findings and needs identified in Tasks 3-9 to compile a
revised land use and housing graphic and descriptive text
based upon adopted land use, population, and employment
distribution scenario.
TASK 11: CIRCULATION PLAN
Transportation Data Collection
Priority Task Elements/Options
11.1: Review existing traffic count program and data currently
being collected by City staff and recommend modifications
as necessary to benefit data needs for the Circulation
Plan component of the Comprehensive Plan Update.
CARMEL/CLAY TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
POTENTIAL WORK PROGRAM TASKS
11.2: Work with City staff to identify and compile data for
IDOH, existing Traffic Impact Studies, and other sources
for use in the Comprehensive Plan Update.
11.3: Monitor the 24-hour traffic count program and intersection
turning movement count program currently underway by City
staff.
11.4: Document findings from Tasks 11.1-11.3 in tabular and
graphic form.
11.5: Compile and review traffic accident data from law
enforcement agencies to identify high hazard locations.
Thoroughfare Plan Development
Priority Task Elements/Objectives
11.6: Identify existing major thoroughfare needs based upon
current traffic levels and existing network
characteristics.
11.7: Identify anticipated traffic levels and major thoroughfare
needs based on existing and committed development
information provided by City staff in Task 5.
11.8: Identify anticipated traffic levels and major thoroughfare
needs based on above plus "build out" of vacant property
as planned/zoned, or based on adopted land use
distribution scenario from Task 4.
11.9: Perform preliminary review of cost, necessary right-of-way
and assessment of possible environmental impacts of
proposed network changes.
11.10 Develop a 20-year thoroughfare plan based on anticipated
needs.
11.11 Review/update existing and planned functional
classification system for transportation facilties.
11.12 Review/update general design standards based on functional
classifications.
Transportation Improvements Funding
Priority Task Elements/Options
11.13 Review public sources of aid for transportation
improvements and identify requirement for procurement.
11.14 Review impact fee options, sources and requirements.
11.15 Develop impact fee assessment policies and implementation
.grams
HINITB
• CARMEL/CLAY TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 1
POTENTIAL WORK PROGRAM TASKS 1
Traffic Impact Studies for Proposed Developments
Priority Task Elements/Options
11.16 Identify level of service standards for plan development
and project impact reviews.
11.17 Identify general parameters for traffic impact studies
(objectives, assumptions, format prints, etc.)
11.18 Identify information to be provided by City staff and
information to be provided by developers as part of the
traffic impact studies process.
11.19 Participate in Indianapolis DMD effort to develop traffic
impact analyis guidelines.
11.20 Develop detailed traffic impact analysis guidelines for
Carmel and Clay Township.
.— TASK 12: ORIGINAL DOWNTOWN PLAN
12.1: Review previously prepared Original Downtown Plan as well
as findings and implications of decisions made in Tasks
3-9 to compile a revised Original Downtown Plan in graphic
and text form.
TASK 13: FINAL PLAN PREPARATION AND DOCUMENTATION
Priority Task Elements/Options
13.1 : Compile text and graphics prepared in Tasks 3 through 12
into one Comprehensive Plan document to be submitted to
City staff and the Planning Commission for review and
comment.
13.2 Revise draft Comprehensive Plan and produce camera ready
copy for delivery to City staff.
13.3: Print 100 comb bound copies of Comprehensive Plan report
for distribution by City staff.
13.4: Prepare Executive Summary poster highlighting key issues
and decisions contained within the Comprehensive Plan
Update.
13.5: Review draft mock up of poster layout and content with
City staff and the Planning Commission.
13.6: Revise poster as requested and produce 1000 printed copies
for distribution by the City staff and the Planning
Commission.
HOWARD NEEDLES
N
1-1 N T B ARCHITECTS EN GIN EERSEPLANNERSNDDFF
New Jersey Street
Indianapolis,Indiana
46204-2135
(31 7)636-4682
July 14, 1989 FAX(317)633-0505
Steering Committee Members
1989 Comprehensive Plan Update
City of Carmel and Clay Township
Hamilton County, Indiana
Re: Plan Steering Committee Meeting July 19, 1989
Dear Steering Committee Members:
As promised, we have assembled a packet of materials for your review prior
to the next Plan Steering Committee meeting. Enclosed are the following
items;
1. Meeting notes from 6/13/89 Plan Steering Committee Meeting
2. Agenda for 7/19/89 Plan Steering Committee Meeting
3. Project Schedule and Gantt Chart
4. "Attachment B- Services to be Provided by the Planner" from
Consultant's contract with the City.
5. Map indicating availability and vintage of traffic counts in study
area
6. Listing of committed developments from Plan Commission dockets
In addition to the above referenced items, we have included copies of
articles from recent periodicals related to land use planning practice and
law. These articles may be helpful in answering some questions raised at
the last meeting by Steering Committee members and by the general public.
We hope the enclosed materials will help you prepare for the next meeting
and look forward to seeing everybody Wednesday at 7 :30 pm. Thank you for
your time and continued support of this important project.
Sincerely,
HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN a BERGENDOFF
•
Wef
Joann K. Green, ASLA
Project Manager
cc: Wes Bucher w/ attachments
Partners Charles T.Hennigan PE.Daniel J.Spigai PE.John L.Cotton PE.Francis X.Hall PE,Robert S.Coma PE.Donald A.Dupes PE.William Love FAIA,
Robert O.Miller PE,James L.Tuttle,Jr.PE,Hugh E.Schell PE,Cary C.Goodman AIA.Gordon H.Slaney,Jo PE,Harvey K.Hammond,Jr.PE,Stephen G.Goddard PE,
John W.Wight,Jr.PE.Richard O.Beckman PE
Associates Don P.Ort PE.Kendall T.Lincoln CPA,Roberts W.Smithem PE.Harry O.Bertossa PE,Ralph E.Robison PE,Cecil P.Counts PE,Stanley I.Mast PE,
Robert W.Anna PE.Walter Sharko PE,James O.Russell PE.Ross L.Jensen AIA.Frank T.Lamm PE.Ronald W.Aarons AIA,H.Jerome Butler PE.Blaise M.Carriers PE,
Michael P.Ingardia PE,Bernard L.Prince PE,Stephen B.Guinn PE,Saul A.Jacobs PE.Ewing H.Miller FAIR,Douglas C.Myhre PE.Carl J.Mellea PE.Daniel F.Becker RE,
Richard L.Farnan AIA,Donald P.Keuth PE,Douglas E.Prescott PE,Ronald L.Harte PE.Robert W.Luscombe PE,Thomas L.Wi lliams AIA,Dennis E.Conklin PE,
John E.Kupke PE,Rodney P.Psllo PE,Steven M.Reiss AIA,Robert A.Leick PE,Glenn O.Sadulsky PE,Ben,amvn A.Whlsler PE
Offices Alexandria.VA,Atlanta,GA,Austin.TX,Baton Rouge.LA.Boston.MA,Charleston,WV.Chicago,IL,Cleveland.OH,Dallas,TX,Denver,CO,Fairfield,NJ,Hartford,CT,
Houston,TX.Indianapolis,IN,Irvine,CA,Kansas City,MO,Lexington.KY.Lexington.MA,Los Angeles,CA,Miami,FL,Milwaukee.WI,Minneapolis.MN,Nashua,NH,
New York,NY,Orlando,FL,Overland Park.KS,Philadelphia.PA,Phoenix.AZ,Raleigh.NC,Seattle,WA,Tampa.FL,Tulsa.OK,Wilmington,DE
1989 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PROJECT SCHEDULE
Gantt Chart Project CARMEL 13-Jul-1989
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
13 27 13 27 10 24 8 22 5 19 3 17 31 14 28 11 25 9 23 6 20 4 18
IIITI 1 I 1 f I 1 1 1 1 1 t I 1 1 1 1 1 1
A.Start •
BEGIN PROJECT
14-Feb-1969
B.SC MTG.#1
DISCUSS WORK PROGRAM PRIORITIES
14-Feb-1989
C. TASK I •
DEVELOP PROJECT WORK PROGRAM
14-Feb-1989
14-Mar-1989
D.DCD MTG.#1 i
DISCUSS WORK PROGRAM PRIORITIES
22-Feb-1989
tit')MTG./2 ....g ... ... ... ... ...
DISCUSS PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
1-Mer-1989
F.SC MTG./2
APPROVE PROJECT WORK PROGRAM
14-Mer-1989
G.CBPW MTGg1
CARMEL BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS REVIEW
17-Apr-1989
H.CBPW MTG#2
CONTRACT APPROVAL
1-May-1989
I. TASK 2 ... 7 ...
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY/BASE MAPPING
1-May-1989
12-May-1989
J.TASK 3 7111.1
EXISTING LAND USE AND DENSITY ANALYSIS
15-May-1989
26-May-1989
K. TASK 6
EXISTING AND PROGRAMMED TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
22-May-1989
7-Sep-1989
L.TASK 4 -NS
EXISTING ZONING ANALYSIS
30-May-1989
5-Jun-1989
11..8C MTG#3 ... ...
DISCUSS LAND USE FINDINGS AND MODIFICATIONS
30-May-1989
N. TASK 5
PROGRAMMED LAND USE AND DENSITY ANALYSIS
6-Jun-1989
12-Jun-1989
P.TASK 7 Inn
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
l3-Jun-1989
26-Jun-1989
0. SC MTG#4
UPDATE ON LAND USE & TRANSPORATION FINDINGS
13-Jun-1989
Q.TASK 8
DEVELOP FUTURE LAND USE SCENARIOS
27-Jun-1989
9-Aug-1989
R.SC MTG#5
DISCUSS LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
19-Jul-1989
T. TASK 9
THOROUGHFARE PLAN DEVELOPMENT&TESTING
8-Aug-1989
5-Sep-1989
S.SC MTG#6
SELECT PREF.LAND USE SCENARIO FOR TESTING
8-Aug-1989
V.TASK 16.1
PREPARE FINAL LAND USE &TRANSPORATION PLANS
5-Sep-1969
18-Sep-1989
U.SC MTG#7
REVIEW RESULTS,SUGGEST MODIFICATIONS
5-Sep-1989
W.TASK 10.2
COMPILE RECOMMENDED CHANGES FOR REVIEW
19-Sep-1989
9-Oct-1989
X.SC MTGp8
REVIEW PROPOSED CHANGES TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
10-Oct-1989
Y.TAsl 16.3 •
t_
PREPARE REPORT AND SUMMARY POSTER
10-Oct-1989
6-Nov-1989
Z.DCD MTG#3 1
PLAN COMPATIBILITY ASSESSMENT SESSION
1B-Sep-1989
1.SC MTG#9
APPROVE REPORT&POSTER/FORWARD TO COUNCIL
7-Nov-1989
2.TASK 10.8 ---111hl
PRODUCE FINAL REPORT AND SUMMARY POSTER
14-Nov-1989
8-Dec-1989
3.COUNCIL .•
i •
COUNCIL REVIEW OF REPORT AND POSTER FOR ADOPTION
14-Nov-1989
4.End I W
DELIVERY OF FINAL REPORT AND SUMMARY POSTER
8-Dec-1989
1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I l I 1 1 1 1 I f I I