HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #74 Mark Dewart, fourth submissionFebruary 17, 2022
City of Carmel Plan Commission
C/O Joe Shestak Plan Commission Administrator
Carmel City Hall
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
jshestak@carmel.in.gov
317-571-2419
Re: PZ-2021-00177 CP: Carmel Clay Comprehensive Plan Update
Dear Members of the City of Carmel Plan Commission,
The Comprehensive Plan currently in effect in Carmel has a major objective that
is important to neighborhoods:
“Objective 1.4: Be very sensitive to connectivity and transitions between adjacent
areas. Discourage unplanned or harsh contrasts in height, building orientation,
character, land use, and density. If there exists contrast, utilize multiple design
principles to soften transitions.”
Carmel Clay Comprehensive Plan. Page 17
The language in Objective 1.4 about the importance of transitions has been
dropped from the draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update.
At the Plan Commission’s Comprehensive Plan Review Meeting on February 9,
2022 you can see this point being discussed. One Plan Commission member is in
favor of returning the language of Objective 1.4 to the Updated Comprehensive
Plan. One plan commission member is in favor of dropping that language about
transitions.
At the end of the February 9th Plan Commission Meeting it was left undecided on
whether the new plan would emphasize the importance of transitions as the
previous plan had.
The Plan Commission member that was worried about adding language into the
new plan about the importance of transitions was worried that it would be difficult
to have transitions for the residential areas that were adjacent to the intense
development in the Meridian Corridor.
However, the US 31 Corridor part of the current Comprehensive Plan “Part 5:
Critical Corridors and Subareas” already provides the guidance for the situation
the Plan Commission member was worried about:
• Transition the scale and mass of structures between U.S. 31 and Illinois Street
to minimize impact to residential development to the west.
• Respect transitions to adjacent neighborhoods and require appropriate
buffering.
Carmel Clay Comprehensive Plan Page 84
We have been assured that the Part 5 Critical Corridors and Subareas section of
the current plan will be carried forward into the new Comprehensive Plan. So,
there is already guidance that in the most difficult situations where residential
areas are adjacent to the US 31 Corridor, the new Comprehensive Plan will ask
for transitions to protect the adjacent residential areas.
To bring the rest of Carmel in line with the guidance that calls for planning for
transitions along the US 31 Corridor, Objective 1.4 should be added back into the
new Comprehensive plan so we continue to plan for transitions throughout
Carmel.
Carmel is often ranked by Money Magazine as one of the top 5 of Best Places To
Live. These are Carmel’s peer cities in that ranking:
1. Chanhassen Minnesota
2. Carmel Indiana
3. Franklin Tennessee
4. Flower Mound Texas
5. Ashburn Virginia
When you look at the Comprehensive Plans of these peer cities, this is the
language regarding transitions that you find:
1. Chanhassen Minnesota
“Transitions should be created between different land uses. The more
incompatible the land uses, the more important the transition zone. Whenever
possible natural features should be used to create transitions between
incompatible uses. When these natural features are absent, the Land Use Plan
supports the creation of buffer yards with increased setbacks containing
landscaping and berming to improve the separation of incompatible uses.”
City of Chanhassen 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Page 7
3. Franklin Tennessee
“Transition should be addressed between commercial buildings and their parking
areas and adjacent residential uses.”
Envision Franklin. Page 76
4. Flower Mound Texas
“Provide appropriate transitions to protect any existing adjacent neighborhoods
and to promote sustainable value.”
Town of Flower Mound Master Plan page 1.5
5. Ashburn Virginia
“Transitions between Suburban Employment uses and other developments, in
particular adjacent residential neighborhoods, are vitally important. Building
heights should step down appropriately to less intense residential uses. In
developments adjoining less intensive uses, building heights should decrease
moving outward from the center of the development, stepping down to heights
generally within one story of adjacent structures. Certain employment uses that
may not be compatible with adjacent residential uses, such as data
centers, should have transitional uses located in between.”
Loudoun County 2019 Comprehensive Plan page 86
The importance of transitions should be emphasized in Carmel’s Updated
Comprehensive Plan as it was in the previous plan.
Our peer cities emphasize the importance of transitions in their Comprehensive
Plans.
The fact that Carmel City Planners automatically plan for transitions without
needing the Comp Plan to prompt them should not be the reason that the
importance of transitions should be left out of the Comprehensive Plan. As I have
watched the Plan Commission Review the proposed draft, members of the Plan
Commission have argued several times for goals and objectives so unrelated to
land use that a lawyer had to come in and explain whether or not those goals
belonged in the plan. The Plan Commission members arguing for the inclusion of
these goals distantly related to land use felt that having those goals clearly stated
in the Comprehensive Plan would put decision makers in a stronger position in
negotiations because it would be clear that these goals had citywide support.
This is exactly why Objective 1.4 should be returned to the Comprehensive Plan
Update. Transitions between adjacent areas with contrasting building heights,
density and uses is a citywide goal and should be in the Comprehensive Plan
along with other important goals.
Sincerely,
Mark Dewart
Resident, Spring Lake Estates
12151 Teal Ln
Carmel, Indiana 46032