HomeMy WebLinkAboutHNTB Memo re: S1 zoning classification 2/19/91 HNTO to
+'+moo wiaot.s��+r+��w s�++oswoo� t!1'Qfi�1�
Correspondence
To John Myers
From Brian Pieplo� Date 19 February 1991
subject OPTIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS 70R S-1 SO)r lG CS+ARR!?ICis'It3W
*NTS PROJRC 0 13139
After discussions with
yesterday, the followingYou last week and Chris Dimond
Carmel 's interest in achieving g low r dhts evelopment o mind densities
West Clay Township than present zoning ]went de ►itiaat in
would allow:
As we know, 8-1 Zoning
is the
under current zoning rdinance.lowest density district
While stated intent was "
agricultural activities and to introducre singlesfamiily
residential uses with large lots in keeping with the
rural character of this district",
Height Requirements specified under Section 5.4 w uld d emit
minimum lot sizes of 15,000 s.f. with 40 ft sinimu*f frontt
community eat r0 ft and sanitary lot depth
. .. . when a
x".1► sewer system i• present.
A community water and sanity
proposed for the western rY . sewer system has beenportion of the planning area.
Resulting density of development could be
2.9 dw
units per gross acre if minimums were followed. *113nq
Density of development would more likelyapproximate
dwelling units per net acre (typical trat subdivsions
approximating 3 .5 or more dwelling
4 dwelling units per groes acre) unit per net acre -
• There is interest on the
part of thecreating a zoning district which would result inn COMMunilarger
minimum lots size such as one dwelling
acre. Perhaps an S-E (Estate) Distric. unit per gross
• This causes some concern whether that low density
support costs to develop community services ch uas
roads, sewers, water, police, fire, schools, etc.
• Creation of a new Zoning District would require
zoning code and rezoning property zon d S-1 to
the new category.
Y currently zoned S-1 to
• This could be achieved voluntarily or by Planning
Commission action, much action perhaps resulting
legal challenge by an aggrieved propertSn a
he purchased land on the assumption that he coulclaimingetthe
maximum density allowed and needs this density to make
the project work. (Such claim could be true or false,
regardless, in tight money time developers have been
•
MEMO TO JOfl UU
caRMSIVOLAY i-1 ZONING
gain out-of-court settlements bared
known to attempt to s imposed by a municipality in an
en ort to y b hardships needed cash. ( has had some
effort got badly
painful experiences with this)
the above issue, our client would be bast
Regarding legal opinion from a qualified land
usea
dviad to obtain a
attorneywho has no conflict of interest Indianapolis sStUdy
fi�s•
rules out localof 1�irls.
area. That suggest r Dale or Bob Manleyoinne�ti,Manley I would andFiOheGregory W Streeot,
Burke Eicher, 225 West Court contacts with
OH
,513) 751-5521 or we have
Kansa t M .for a d sclosdre of prior Kansas City with firms. lis area developers Band the
involvement with Indianapolis with I'iNT
agreeing to use any firm for consulting
city roses to the desired
Perhaps the beat and easiest app ixs that desired
lower density question would be to recognise
justtthat,
mum
standards set forth in Section rsstr+�otthat,
Perhaps the ordinance can be s regulate
whminimums. of a qualified Attorney,
dish the help based on lXim allawsd such as 2.9
development density
dwelling unity per groin acre.
to
above case, an owner
e lawabls density.is not led get
• In the et the maximum al �, of
automatically he would have to offer' sem' l f
the maximum, common green *pee*, public
access to benefit such as
aant
ccess to natural resources, preservation; These public purpose
incentives es would be spetal cified ,.n an amended S-1
incen
language• the above
n argument would be softened by the Would
Theapproach"Taxi du arq governing
bodynotbe due to the tact that the g advise the Planning
e riving an owner of rearoa�l• use of his
not be d p could
property. land use attorney a e and structure of
Commission as to appropriate language to legal
such an ordinance revision to limit exposure
challenges. ange in the
Finally, it must be recogniz� tha Jany Changes in
o can be challeng
statue -1 District or establishment of a ne approached with
exdisting S of property should b
caution
rezoning
a determination that suchaction
i vo�u�ity dl s
be
autidzx and the issue.
suspect in the ori the !,ast side thewould argue
many
HNTB Te teetsgy
ha'A C NSE:.: ES TA 4 C. ESGalCCF Tri ttta t
225 Norah Nov JIrs.y Strwt
1nd2i1 1s. .1nd1ala 46204-2!3S
(317) 536-4682
Data : --`j Timor ; S I P671 , .
To ; Ncme : S
Business : 'DOCt
Te1ecop1er. n :
..rl 1 • �•�rri�il r1■I�w��.l•
From : Ncme : JO A S
Tel scop 1 er#: (3 1 7) 533--0505
Prcject Number: / =
Number of pcges transmitted: 3
(tnc1:xi1nQ this trates,t-„411
Add i t i cnQ f i rrs,rust 1,cn or messcces :
a) 444-K-a.s.itl evd4A4D ; ] 40%0 r‘/L4tH:
• • - : r«► v ._ AJICLA ,�,,, "7/
46440406, 40 /4-.3 .
i- lAir496k. Utt., 3-0 CCI.e140teW, C 4-A.,..
OY\ /91eYNA-k._ 1‘ fr.,,VA•:"Al{+A.A.1144^..../ •
(A) l �,; - ‘4,1%,""D$
(2)642$ , . r t
If L--cram I ss►cn prcb i ama crt orpc.tsr•vrd, p1 sesa =al Vika K i nc3 at (3171 ce-4212
C