The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCorrespondence .~ Carmel rejects Fortune Farm's plan Page 1 of2 " .,. N .'.;01,18 STAR 'W !t~~lIlS'JAR~J=0M 2:05 PM June 6, 2006 Carmel rejects Fortune Farm's plan By Bill Ruthhart bill.ruthhart@indystar.com June 6, 2006 The Carmel City Council Monday night voted down a residential project despite the developer's request to withdraw the plan. The Indiana Land Development Corp. had proposed a 43-acre residential development for a parcel located at 131 st Street and Towne Road in western Carmel near the Village of WestClay. Named Fortune Farms, the project includes a mix of townhomes and high-end houses. In order to build the project, Indiana Land Development needed a change in zoning that would allow it to build 2.9 units per acre, a density higher than currently permitted. Paul Shoopman, president of Indiana Land Development, tried to withdraw Fortune Farms from consideration before Monday's meeting, citing concerns by council members about the project's density. Instead of granting Shoopman's request and delaying a vote, the council voted 7-0 against the project. The decision means Shoopman can't bring the exact same project back for re-zone consideration for at least a year. Council President Rick Sharp insisted on a vote Monday, because the Plan Commission ruling would allow a re-zone if the City Council did not act within 90 days. Sharp said he didn't want to risk that happening and didn't see a need to delay the vote. Councilman Ron Carter said Shoopman did not strive to cooperate with the council, so he thought the project should be voted down. "In my decade on this council, this is the most messed up planning and zoning project I've ever seen," Carter said. Carter said he was so soured by Shoopman's work that he no longer would offer developers feedback until the council votes on a project. But Ernie Reno, a spokesman for Shoopman, said Carter's comments had no merit. "I found it appalling that Mr. Carter would call this the worst plan he's seen in his 10 years on the council," Reno said. "This project was approved by the plan commission and received a positive recommendation from the city's department of community services. "That was a careless thing for Mr. Carter to say." Reno read the council a letter from Shoopman, insisting they allow him to withdraw the project. "I appreciate Indiana Land Development's position, but we can't withdraw this," Sharp said. "When you go for a re-zone, you take your chances." Fortune Farms called for 38 townhomes with an average price of $280,000 and 92 single- http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic1e?Date=20060606&Category= LOCAL&ArtN 0... 6/612006 _______1 Carmel rejects Fortune Farm's plan Page 2 of2 .. '. family homes with an average price of $380,000. Reno said Shoopman worked closely with neighboring residents about their concerns. Many questioned the project's density, preferring that the land be developed at one unit per acre. But Reno said the parcel is next to the Village of WestClay, which has been developed at a density of more than seven units per acre. In order to develop the site at one unit per acre, Reno said Shoopman would have to build $1 million homes, which he said is unrealistic. Carter said Shoopman wasn't willing to alter his plan after discussions with council members. Reno said he's not sure whether Shoopman will change the development and bring it back to the City Council. "It's too early too tell, but we're exploring a number of options," Reno said. "Anyone who thinks Mr. Shoopman is going to go away quietly on this is mistaken." http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic1e?Date=20060606&Category= LOCAL&ArtN 0... 6/6/2006 'U__ m___ "",__,_____,_,__,_1_ / " ~ . RECENED J\.\~ - 2 '2.\\~6 uoes " " June 1, 2006 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL \ / City Of Carmel Common Council AnN: Lois Fine One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 ---- RE: FortuDe ChaDge of ZoDiDI 43.6 Aeres - SW Coner of 131H aDd TowDe Road Docket No. 05050003Z Onlinuee No. Z-491-06 Dear Members of the Common Council: In connection with the above-referenced request to change the zone map (the "Requestj, Indiana Land Development Corporation is the applicant (the "Applicant"), and Wendy Fortune, Mark Herbison, and Rebecca Herbison are the landowners (collectively the "Owners"). By this letter, the undersigned Applicant and Owners voluntarily withdraw the Request and Ordinance No. Z-491-06 and, as such, the undersigned Applicant and Owners hereby voluntarily withdraw the Request and Ordinance No. Z-491-06 from the jurisdiction of and further consideration by the Common Council. Respectfully submitted, ~ni Idvrk -fY0 ~~ ~~. Wendy Forton . ~~ cc: Carmel Department of Community Services ,.:,j,' Fortune Rezone ~r-l CN<.'1iER CALLEy Page 1 of 1 From: Carter, Ronald E Sent: Wednesday, May 17,20063:58 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B Subject: RE: Fortune Rezone ~H-;::--6-5>K&P IF loti W~(J L fI / ~1 A' cof! 0 r 2'-11/ ~00 Hancock, Ramona B "..,a,~~~~ ._~ ,::":'~......'..::-.;~..._;.. Ramona: What was submitted to the Plan Commission? .~ ll1E - Ace ot'lfAN YltV6 11<E~1kllbN :('KP~{ IN PiMA LMP JlV IN Iff? MAIL 51-of; Ron From: Hancock, Ramona B Sent: Wed 5/17/2006 2:16 PM To: Carter, Ronald E Subject: RE: Fortune Rezone What is in our file is what was submitted to the Plan Commission. If you need a copy of what was submitted to Council, that should be available thru Lois Fine in the Clerk- Treas office. Please let me know. Ramona -----Original Message----- From: Carter, Ronald E Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 12:56 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B Subject: RE: Fortune Rezone Ramona: Sorry for the confusion. I told David yesterday that what I needed was another copy of two items: the informational booklet from the petitioner and the PUD ordinance. Ron From: Hancock, Ramona B Sent: Wed 5/17/2006 9:17 AM To: Carter, Ronald E Subject: Fortune Rezone Ron, I received your request via David Littlejohn and Connie Tingley. I am unsure exactly what you are looking for--is "presentation" the video from Plan Commission, the minutes, the informational booklet from the petitioner, the PUD Ordinance? Ramona 5/18/2006 INDIA.NA Land Developmen April 17, 2006 --;'---r-... /" "ill~ ;(;" -'-- -~ " ,,'/~ i(\ '-<:. >- Y I" ~,/~\ Y \ .' ~~I IDECr::nr ':' \ \\ "'i . II \! ~ . \ '.-: ",,_. ~, I .' I r ., " ..: DOCS I' / -,' \~ Attn: Matt Griffith City of Carmel 1 Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Dear Matt: Over the past 15 month's we have worked with a number of our neighbors surrounding the Wendy Fortune property on 1261h and 131 sl just west of Towne road. We are glad to inform you that I met with Bruce Young today who is just west of Wendy Fortune and we agreed that will landscape buffer his easterly property along and between lot# 37 and lot# 57 to the north with 6-8' high evergreen trees with Scott Brewer approval of course during the approval process. Bruce and Nancy have been very good to work with over the past year and we appreciate their cooperation. We will inform everyone of this during the plan commission meeting presentation being that it is too late to get this in the package. Best regards, Indiana Land Development Corporation / k'--- / // ! Ii \ \(..j "-._-_/ Paul Shoopman President Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170 Ziollsville Rd - Indianapolis, IN 46268 - (317) 415-0459 - (317) 415-0466 Fax NELSON & FRANKENBERGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW JAMES J. NELSON CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHlNA VER LARRY J. KEMPER JOHN B. FLA IT FREDRIC LAWRENCE DAVID J. LICHTENBERGER OF COUNSEL JANE B. MERRILL SUITE 170 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280 317-844-0 I 06 FAX: 317-846-8782 January 27, 2006 Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel, Division of Planning & Zoning One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 RE: Indiana Land Development - Fortune Farms Brochures for February 7,2006 sse Meeting Dear Angie: Enclosed are ten (10) brochures for the SSC meeting scheduled for February 7,2006. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. As always, I very much appreciate your assistance. Very truly yours, NELSON & FRANKENBERGER .-, C L-. Charles D. Frankenberger CDF/bd Enclosure H:\brad\lndiana Land Dev\Cannel-126th Street Fortune\Conn 012706.doc - __ .. __1______----- Griffin, Matt L From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Charlie Frankenberger [charlie@nf-Iaw.com] Saturday, October 01, 2005 10:00 AM Griffin, Matt L Hollibaugh, Mike P Indiana Land Development/Fortune--Docket #05050003Z Hi Matt, It is my understanding that Paul Shoopman has discussed this matter with Mayor Brainard, and that the conensus is to table this matter until the Special Studies Committee Meeting on January 3, 2006. I see no need for this to appear on the Agenda in the interim. Please let me know if this is ok. Thanks. Charles D. Frankenberger NELSON & FRANKENBERGER, P.C. 3105 E. 98th Street, Suite 170 Indianapolis, IN 46280 phone (317) 844-0106 fax (317) 846-8782 1 I. INDIA.N A Land Development llf September 27, 2005 Mayor Jim Brainard City of Carmel One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Dear Mayor Brainard: Thanks for your time and advice on Friday. We will table Carter Fortune until the January 11,2006 meeting. We assume that the Plan Commission will not take any issue with tabling our application and will allow us to proceed at the January 11, 2006 meeting, we will not file the other three parcels until after December of this year. Thanks for your help and assistance. Best regards, Indiana Land Development Corporation .........--., (// ./~~-- , (! ') \ \..J.._j , ' ,...--..-.....-'/ Paul Shoopman President and CEO Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170 Zionsville Rd - Indianapolis. IN 46268 - (317) 415-0459 - (317) 415-0466 Fax I __ ___ _ _ _ _ __ __ NELSON & FRANKENBERGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORA nON ATTORNEYS AT LAW JAMES J. NELSON CHARLESD.FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHINA VER LAWRENCE J. KEMPER JOHN B. FLA IT FREDRIC LAWRENCE Of Counsel JANE B. MERRILL 3021 EAST 98TH STREET SUITE 220 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280 317-844-0106 FAX: 317-846-8782 August 26, 2005 Matt Griffin Carmel Dept. of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 ~~V7 ~ ~~ ~ '6::. <2> ~ '?ti (..c.P (:f' VIA HAND DELIVERY Re: Indiana Land Development - 126th Street (Fortune) Docket Number 05050003Z Dear Matt: We will appear before the Special Studies Committee on September 6, 2005 and, to this end, we have enclosed 15 informational brochures. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call me. As always, I much appreciate your help. Thank you. Very truly yours, NELSON & FRANKENBERGER c~ Charles D. Frankenberger CDF/jlw Enclosures H:\Janet\lLD\126th-Fortune\Griffin bro Itr 082605.doc ~~ ,~ o Q i " Bruce & Nancy Young 2727 West 13181 Street Carmel, IN 46032 (317) 873-5225. Fax: (317) 873-5115 02 August 2005 The attached letter was sent late last week to Paul Shoopman at Indiana Land Development Corporation regarding his plans for his proposed "Fortune Farms" Development. This letter was sent after meeting with Mr. Shoopman and his associates on two (2) separate occasions to learn more about his specific plans for the project. To summarize: 1. We are opposed to his "transition plan" for density... especially so considering what appears to us to be the proposed smaller, lower quality residences that will be incompatible with the community. We see no need for such a plan or justification for such a density populated development but believe the developer should be willing to comply with the existing zoning standards. 2. We see one (1) car, front-load garages that will make the look and feel of this development very much "down-scale" in appearance from similar residences in the area. We are concerned about the housing that will be built right up to the property line on the western boundary. 3. We don't see sufficiently detailed construction specifications and standards for the builder(s) to whom he is planning to sell the development...thereby allowing end products that may be at significant variance to the community expectations. The developer states that the guidance for and the control of the builders work is not his responsibility. 4. We do not see any plans for his connections to the Village of West Clay to the east and with an entrance to the south and one to the north, we envision traffic and congestion problems that this project will create. 5. We question that the "commercial area" being proposed is an area that in any way represents the community's desire...regardless of the "special use" facilities being considered. 6. We have no idea about the adequate landscaping barrier on the project's western boundary to protect the quality of the area. Our strong desire is for the Carmel Planning officials to enforce their existing zoning ordinances and deny this request for a variance. t o u '; Bruce & Nancy Young 2727 West 1318t Street · Carmel, IN 46032 (317) 873-5225 · Fax (317) 873-5U5 July 28, .2005 Paul Shoopman Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170 Zionsville Road Indianapolis,IN 46268 Re: Rezone Request- Fortune Development Dear Mr. Shoopman: Nancy and I appreciated the invitations to your meeting at the Zionsville Presbyterian Church on June 30th and the very brief meeting at your office on July 21St, to discuss the referenced development While we had hoped to hear about and discuss substantive issues and changes to the proposed project... we, candidly, felt that both meetings feel very short of our . expectations. We know little more. now, after.your meetings, that we did when we arrived at each and we certainly have no idea how you intend to substantially modify the project. The development you are envisioning and promoting has... . A serious density problem combined with what appears to us to be a considerable "low quality" orientation that will be dramatically inconSistent with the neighborhood and the broader community. These type of low-.end projects damage the entire Carmel community, we believe. . What appears to us to be several poorly defined accessibility and connectivity issues and a design that will promote traffic and parking problems in the complex. The overall appearance of this development will suffer from this factor alone. . A "commercial area" for some "special use facilities" that you characterized as a post office, a library or perhaps a university facility. We have asked both the Carmel USPO and the Carmel library people if they have such plans now and they have no knowledge of any nor do they have any plans at all for branch locations in this area. We see no need nor do we understarid where the demand for this piece of your development is originating. . . "Economic versus Quality Motivations". Because we understand from you and your people. who attended the 1 f o (;) ", meeting that you'll be able to sell the land in the "Sub-Area A" piece for substantially more that you can sell residential land, it appears that the motivation is primarily economic on the part of your development firm and that the justification for this area is not to meet some current or even a measured, anticipated demand. Our desire is that you drop the "commercial" or special use piece of the project completely; however, in your future, revised plan, if you are still determined to keep this "commercial area" in it, we'd like to see some type of legal commitment made that will absolutely, legally guarantee that this will never become a commercial area that will have restaurants, dry cleaners, retail shops or the like in it. If such an area is requested in the future the community should petition for it rather than developers and/or builders doing so. Your company should be willing to be liable if this covenant is violated. Related to the <6 acre piece of property that my wife and I own, which borders the proposed development on the western boundary, we tried to discuss your plans for a sufficient barrier between your development and our property. We left without an answer to this query. Additionally, you asked us about a potential "stubbed" street into our property but there was no explanation about what the purpose of your question was. That should be another clarification we'd like to have. Another topic that deserves a great deal of discussion, we believe, is your various references to your apparent lack of control of and responsibility for what a builder might build if and when you get the property rezoned per your request. You indicate the builder is not yet selected, but you admit that you have bids from builders. The bids submitted must be based on some understanding by the home builders of size, quality levels and the like. These people must know what cost/selling price range they will really be operating in so they can project their income. If you do receive approvals to develop this property, we would ask that you would take the time to significantly tighten your construction specifications and home design requirements so that the community will have no surprises when the homes are built. The community deserves to have the most complete disclosure regarding the quality of this development as possible. It would be our overall judgment that your proposed development simply does not fit well in the community and will not be compatible with its neighbors or even with other developments. Nancy and I will be attending the committee meeting on Tuesday, August 2nd and, hopefully, well join others who are strongly and ~~:~~ 2 ., o o your agents are working diligently to position this development in the most favorable light but serious problems exist that you must consider and address. We urge you to take another look at the entire concept of this project and make dramatic changes so it will compliment and enhance the area rather than be a misplaced, low-end incompatible piece of an area about which we all want to be proud. We would like to have a copy of your revised proposal prior to the August 2nd meeting, if you would kindly provide one to us. By doing so, it will give is time to study the revisions you have made since the initial presentation made by your attorney to the Plan Commission. If you will ask one of your assistants call us at our home or 'fax us (our preference) or call me on my cell (538-9328) and let us know if we can pick up a copy at your office, we'll gladly do so. We'd like to have this document tomorrow (Friday) or on Monday. Also, if you would like to discuss this letter and the assertions we have made in it, we'd be pleased to meet with you. If you'd like to visit us here at our home well arrange our schedules to accommodate you. Thank you in advance for your courtesies. Respectfully, ~~h Bruce H. Young 3 City of Carmel Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 317-571-2417 Fax: 317-571-2426 FACSIMILE TELECOPY COVER LETTER DATE: July 29,2005 TO: Charlie Frankenberger FAX: 846 - 8782 FROM: Alexia Donahue Wold Attached hereto are --Lpages, including this cover letter, for facsimile transmission. Should you experience any problem in the receipt ofthese pages, please call 317/571/2417 and ask for Alexia. NOTES: You are listed as the contact person for Docket No. 05050003 Z: Fortune Rezone. Please share this information with your Petitioner(s). Attached is the Agenda and Department Report for the August 2 Special Studies Committee meeting. Please call if you have any questions. Thanks, CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The materials enclosed with this facsimile transmission are private and confidential and are the property of the sender. The information contained in the material is privileged and is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile transmission in error, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for return of the forwarded documents to us. " u ;u. Page 1 of3 . -t""''f .' Griffin, Matt L From: Marilyn Anderson [banker@netdirect.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 8:50 AM To: Griffin, Matt L Subject: Re: Comments on Fortune Farms Rezone To avoid trouble with you being able to open, I'm pasting my letter in below. But fIrst, I received a call from Mr, Shoopman's offIce saying they are reworking their proposal and have asked to be tabled to August 2nd. The group I'm working with is not planning to come tonight. Please let me know asap if anything other than tabling this is going to happen tonight. Marilyn To Plan Commissioners June 20, 2005 Re: Docket 05050003Z: Fortune Rezone Does the Comprehensive Plan mean anything or has it just been a ploy? I can't even count the number oftimes I've heard that the Comp Plan was developed with community input. The community was absolutely emphatic in Clay West about S-1 zoning. I've also heard innumerable times, "It's a guideline" with developers, and even planners, stating that the market has changed. But if the market has changed so much that we are rezoning land from residential to commercial and increasing the density from 1.15 (the permitted density for ROSa for 25% open space) to 3.65, then it's beyond time to redo the Comprehensive Plan. Tripling the intensity of use makes a joke out of even using the Comp Plan as a "guideline." It's only pretending to have and use a Comp Plan. There is no justification for increasing the use of this land beyond a density of any surrounding developments. The most dense property, the Village of West Clay, is 2.1. It's density is averaged over all its land, but area residents have repeatedly been told that's why they should not be upset over the density on one section of it because the average balances it out. Do not, do not, do not use one piece of it to try to justify a density here of 3.65. Let me remind you: This area is the only area zoned as S-1 Residential Estates. Any land used for other zoning purposes, reduces the amount of S-1 Residential Estates that can ever be built. The Village of West Clay and the City of Carmel has maintained all along that it's plan is not only good for the entire area, but could stand on its own. Area residents have repeatedly been assured that the approvals given to the Village of West Clay would not result in changing the surrounding land zoned S- 1. We've heard time and again that The Village of West Clay is so desirable that other developers would be happy to build S-l subdivisions adjoining it. This PUD would violate all those assurances. And this increased density absolutely means developers for surrounding land would press for increasing their intensity as well. This has to stop. There is no meaning to the Comprehensive Plan if it is repeatedly 7/5/2005 .:- ." -- u o Page 2 of3 violated. I personally live farther away than many opponents. I live downstream. You may recall that while on the Plan Commission, I strongly supported roadway connectivity. But the land south, on the way to Indianapolis and 1-465, does not have that connectivity and never will. You cannot solve the problem of 1 mile grids south of 116th. You cannot keep increasing density and traffic magnets/commercial uses without building gridlock into the system even with intersection improvements. For about two months, going east-bound on 96th between 4:30 and 6:30 has meant a 8-10 minute wait to get through the stop- sign at 96th & Towne! Why? In April, the bridge just east of Towne Road on 1 o 6th was closed. Don't suggest using 116th St. across-it's closed at Springmill. The problem of one-mile grid of roads south of 116th must be taken seriously and should be a serious reason not to increase density north of 116th. Alternatively, the 1 mile grid streets could be expanded to be like Keystone or Range Line. But that's not in the plans. Besides, I'm right back to what does the Comprehensive Plan and an S-1 zoning mean if it's just ignored? Any and all development is not good. That's why there is a Comprehensive Plan. But a Comprehensive Plan is worthless ifit's not followed. As to the request for a commercial/civic zoning, there is no "civic zoning" in any ordinance. This plan presents airy pie-in-the-sky ideas when the result would be a rezone of S-1 land to commercial use. At this point, any serious consideration for a library, post office, or church should have generated meetings with minutes or notes by at least these civic organizations. What documents can they present to back up their claim for a potential library, post office or church? I am sure that once the land is rezoned to commercial, the developer would be back stating that the market changed, that the "civic" uses just couldn't be satisfactorily arranged and that they need to expand to traditional commercial uses. Speaking of which, how do we possibly get from S-1 zoning to a 4 story commercial building? Or a preschool? The Comprehensive Plan does permit Neighborhood Serving Commercial. That is clearly defined as 100,000 sq.ft. maximum on 10 acres or less. The area already has it's Neighborhood Serving Commercial area in the Village of West Clay. The Comp Plan does not support changing this area to a regional commercial area. There are no plans to develop the roads around into a Keystone Ave. or a Rangeline Ave, which would be needed when combining this with the commercial uses in The Village of West Clay. This rezone is not appropriate for the area and is not supported by the Comprehensive Plan. It would make sense to wait to rezone S-1 residential land until the developer has much more specific plans. Until the developer has a plan that is much more ready-to-go, it is only an "idea" of a "possible concept." It is a leap-of-faith to ask us to trust that the uses are desirable to area residents. The track record in this area does not support that kind of faith and should not be asked for in a rezone. Without concrete commercial/civic plans the developer is willing to commit to, it clearly is not an integrated part of the proposed development. In fact, what is the justification for a PUD at all? All I see is the desire to increase density and change S-1 land into future commercial use. Deny the rezone for the commercial/civic area entirely and deny the huge increase in density called for in this PUD. Stop the 7/512005 ........ . -"l' u u Page 3 of3 ~ camel's nose under the tent right here. Marilyn Anderson 3884 Shelborne Ct. Carmel, IN 46032 873-6022 cc: City Councilors Mayor Brainard ----- Original Message ----- From: <2riffin,MattJ., To: banker@net!:tire.ctnet Sent: Friday, July 01,20054:13 PM Subject: Comments on Fortune Farms Rezone Ms. Anderson, Dee Fox read some of your comments to the Plan Commission at the June 21st meeting, but we never got a copy of your letter for the file. Is there any way you can send me one (via email would be fine)? Thanks. Matthew Griffin, AICP Planning Administrator Department of Community Services City of Carmel One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 P 317.571.2417 f 317.571.2426 7/5/2005 ~/,: ~1", ..0. NELSON & FRANKENBERGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW JAMES J. NELSON CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHINA VER LAWRENCE J.KENWER JOHN B. FLA IT FREDRIC LAWRENCE Of Counsel JANE B. MERRILL 3021 EAST 98TH STREET SUITE 220 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280 317-844-0106 FAX: 317-846-8782 July 1,2005 VIA HAND DELIVERY Matt Griffin Cannel Dept. of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Re: Indiana Land Development - 126th Street (Fortune) Docket Number 05050003Z - Request for a Continuance Dear Matt: The public hearing before the Plan Commission occurred on June 21,2005, following our initial meeting with nearby residents on May 24,2005. After the Plan Commission hearing, Paul Shoopman and other representatives from Indiana Land Development again met with nearby residents on June 30, 2005. We have received additional input and believe that further dialog and discussion will be helpful and, to this end, we respectfully request that the Special Studies Committee meeting of this matter now scheduled for July 5, 2005 be continued and rescheduled for the Special Studies Cohunittee meeting on August 2, 2005. Very truly yours, NELSON & FRANKENBERGER C'L- Charles D. Frankenberger CDF/jlw H:\Janet\ILD\126th-Fortune\Griffin Itr 070105.doc ,; " ..' u U i ~ Karen Vandertleet - Muehlenbein Dan Muehlenbein 2995 West 126th Street Carmel, IN 46032 June 20, 2005 Carmel Plan Commission One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 RE: Docket No. 05050003Z : Fortune Rezone Dear Commission Members, Karen Vandertleet-Muehlenbein is the Owner of the 38.65 Acre tract ofland on the south side of 126th street, directly across the street from the south boundary of the referenced project. We have reviewed the documents on file at the City of Carmel Department of Community Services in regards to the subject project and have several objections to the project as currently proposed. Our objections are as follows: 1) The North - South Street shown on the site plans to intersect 126th Street Is located directly across the street from the two residential house located on the northwest comer of my property. These residences are shown on the Ariel photo included in the bound submittal of the subject project. Traffic turning onto 126th Street form the proposed street will be disruptive to the residents of these two houses, especially at night when the headlights of the turning cars will shine into the bedrooms and the living areas of these two houses. This disruption could adversely affect our ability to lease these residences or reduce the rental income. We propose that the North-South Street be relocated to the east such that the west right-a-way line of the street be located 320 feet east of the northwest comer of my property. This would place the North-South street across the street from the vacant farm land portion of my property. This would also align the North - South street with the most likely location of a future street into my property should it be developed in the future. The residence at 2995 126th Street was designed as though the lot would eventually become a comer lot and therefore the garage was placed at the northeast comer of the house, with the living and sleeping areas away from the northeast comer, to shield them form traffic at the future street intersection northeast of that comer. 2) The proposed single family homes shown in the renderings do not appear to be equivalent to the homes in the subdivisions of Laurel Lakes, Wexley Chase or the Village of West Clay, which currently surround my property. The proposed houses appear to be built on a slab on grade rather than on a basement or a crawl space, as is typical in the surrounding subdivisions. A basement or Crawl space . '" "' ~..' ..' u u 2 """ foundation which would give the proposed houses a higher and more appealing street profile. The proposed houses also lack the degree of Architectural detail that is typical of the houses located within the Village of West Clay. Houses similar to those proposed have been observed in other areas of metropolitan Indianapolis, and they only provide a Historical Fa~ade on the street side of the house and do not carry the historical theme to the other sides of the house. In contrast, the houses in the Village of West Clay have a consistent historical theme on all sides of the house, the proposed houses should be required to do the same. In addition the development standards outlined in the submittal allows a single family residence to have a minimum of 1,400 SF. This size home is considerably smaller than the majority of the homes in the surrounding area. We request that if the some quantity of smaller homes is to be allowed in this project, that the size and quantity of smaller houses be limited to the same size and percentage as currently exists in the Village of West Clay. We request that the Plan Commission consider our objections and proposed revisions to the subject project and take action to mitigate the negative impact the proposed project could have on my property and its future value. ~c-- {f(~ . an Muehlenbem ,.. u u h ; -~ Hancock, Ramona B From: Brian and Nadine Baker [chavez6469@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, June 20,20056:29 PM To: ddutcher@ncaa.org; dkk49@hotmail.com; jerrLchomanczuk@conseco.com; leo&dierckman@conseco.com; whaney1393@aol.com; Hancock, Ramona B ~ Cc: Rattermann, Mark; Carter, Ronald E; Sharp, Rick; Griffiths, Joe; Kirby, Kevin; Mayo, Brian D; Glaser, Fred J Subject: Feedback regarding PUD proposal on Fortune property west of VWC Dear Carmel Planning Commission members- I hope you are all well and just wanted to send you this letter to outline the concerns I have regarding the PUD proposal for the Fortune property west of Towne Road between 126th and 131st streets. I hope to be able to attend this Tuesday's meeting but believe I may have a work-related conflict on that evening. In the event that I cannot attend I wanted to share my thoughts with you and my concerns on the proposal, which I have outlined briefly for you below: 1.) page 5 - section 3.1 - while the listed commercial uses are not offensive and are certainly needed (library branch, post office, and medical centers) they would be used by more than just the residents of this PUD and should be considered community-serving versus neighborhood- serving. Therefore, I believe these are better suited for the Michigan Road commercial area. I also would like to ask that commercial development not be allowed on this PUD and that any such uses be incorporated into the existing VWC. 2.) page 6 - section 3.4 - the density that is being proposed is concerning. 3.6 units per acre is higher than the VWC density. Since there is a decent buffer between the VWC and the Fortune property I would like to ask that you consider asking the developer to keep the current S I zoning and not allow further commercial development in this PUD (as previously requested above). 3.) page 7 - Section 5 - This section mentions the use of commercial structures on 131 st street. As this is a residential street (and area residents hope that it will not become a major thoroughfare) I would like to ask that you consider not allowing commercial structures altogether but certainly not facing 131 st street if they are allowed. This also opens up the land north of 131st Street and west of Towne Rd to further commercial development. 4.) page 8 - section 5.3 - This section mentions that commercial structures can be up to 4 stories high. Neighborhood-serving retail would not need to be of this height. When I think of 4 story retail I envision community serving, which would be better suited in the Michigan Road commercial district. 5.) page 13 - section 6.5 - I would just like to ask that the developer add a cap on top of the low wattage lihghting to prevent light pollution from escaping upward. 6.) page 18 - section 9.1.F - I would like to ask that all substantial alterations to the plan be brought forward to the entire Planning Commission and not a "Committe thereof'. This will ensure that that the public has an opportunity to provide input in the event that there are major changes to the plan at a later date. I appreciate your time and attention in listening to my comments. I know that you often hear the 6/21/2005 [- -- .'/ t='~ i<, ,,-~ u u Page 2 of2 -.:it i negative comments and not the positive ones when it comes to development. I tried to keep my comments factual and neutral, not negative or positive. I thank you for taking my feedback into consideration and appreciate all that you do on the Planning Commission. Thank-you and have a good day. Respectfully Submitted - Nadine L. Baker 2495 Durbin Drive - Crossfields 6/21/2005 I u u City of Carmel Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 317-571-2417 Fax: 317-571-2426 FACSIMILE TELECOPY COVER LETTER DATE: June 17, 2005 FAX: Charlie Frankenberger ~1~ FAX: 846 - 8782 FROM: Alexia Donahue Wold Attached hereto are !I.....a pages, including this cover letter, for facsimile transmission. Should you experience any problem in the receipt of these pages, please call 317/571/2417 and ask for Alexia. NOTES: You are listed as the contact person for this docket. Please share this information with your Petitioner( s). Attached is the section of the Department Report for the Carmel Plan Commission meeting June 21, 2005, which applies to your petition. Please call if you have any questions. Thanks, CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The materials enclosed with this facsimile transmission are private and confidential and are the property of the sender. The information contained in the material is privileged and is intended only for the use of the individual(s) orentity(ies) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this te/ecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile transmission in error, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for retum of the forwarded documents to us. u u NELSON & FRANKENBERGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW JAMES J. NELSON CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHINA VER LARRY J. KEMPER JOHNB. FLATT FREDRIC LAWRENCE DAVID J. LICHTENBERGER OF COUNSEL JANE B. MERRILL 3105 EAST 98TH STREET SUITE 170 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280 317-844-0106 FAX: 317-846-8782 June 10, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERY Ramona Hancock Carmel Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel IN 46032 Re: Indiana Land Development, LLC - Docket No. 05050003Z Dear Ramona: For the upcoming Plan Commission hearing on June 21, 2005, enclosed you will fmd 18 informational brochures. I included three above the fifteen required. Should you have any questions or comments, please call me. As always, we much appreciate your help. Very truly yours, NELSON & FRANKENBERGER e~ Charles D. Frankenberger CDF/jlw Enclosures H:\Janet\1LD\1261h-Fortune\Hancock bro Itr 061005.doc Fax u u O~6 Sd6~ . CITY OF CARMEL Department of Community SelVices One CMc Square Carmel, IN 46032 (317) 571-2417 Fax: (317) 571-2426 To: C14tW-L..1 ~ i1eA~~ ~NRE'Q.[It~ From: Fax: <6 JCo -?;l ~ ~ Pages: Phone: Re: Date: cc: ~A- ~ ,'AU'. Q,\Jer G/lo 1 05 o Urgent D Far Review 0 P.lease Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Please Recycle Cf\~f'L\ a ?L.ftN C()~A\5.51tYN. ~"6~"Pl\- ~) w u NELSON & FRANKENBERGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATIORNEYSATLAW JAMES J. NELSON CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHINA VER LAWRENCE J. KEMPER JOHN B. FLATI FREDRIC LAWRENCE Of Counsel JANE B. MERRILL May 17,2005 Pam Babbitt Cannel Dept. of Community Services One Civic Square Cannel, IN 46032 Re: Indiana Land Development - Rezone of the Fortune Parcel Docket No. 05050003Z Dear Pam: Enclosed are Owner's Consents. Please place these in the file. Thanks. Very truly yours, l 317-844-0106 FAX: 317-846-8782 NELSON & FRANKENBERGER ~L- Charles D. Fmnkenberger CDF/jlw Enclosures H:\Janet\ILD\l26" Street-Fortune\Babbitt Itr 051705.doc u u o 6650od3 NATURAL RESOURCES PLAN REVIEW AND COMMENT Hamilton County Soil and Water Conservation District 1108 South 9th Street, Noblesville IN 46060 Ph- 317-773-1432 or Email at .iohn-south@iaswcd.org Project Name- Fortune Site Rezone Location- Sec. 29 T- 18N R-3E Acreage- 43 ac Owner/Developer- Mr. Paul Shoopman Indiana Land Development 8170 Zionsville Road Indianapolis, IN 46268 Engineer- Plan Review Date: May 17,2005 Soils Information: Br Brookston silty clay loam This is a poorly drained soil with a seasonal high water table at 0.0 to 1.0 ft. This soil is located on depressions and is subject to ponding; slopes are 0 to 2 percent. The native vegetation is water tolerant grasses and hardwood trees. The surface layer is silty clay loam and has moderate to high organic matter content (2.0 to 6.0 percent). Permeability is moderately slow (0.2 to 0.6 inlhr) in the most restrictive layer above 60 inches. Available water capacity is high (10.0 inches in the upper 60 inches). The pH of the surface layer in non-limed areas is 6.0 to 7.3. This soil is hydric. Wetness is a management concern for crop production. This soil responds well to tile drainage; it is designated not highly erodible (class 3) in the Highly Erodible Land (HEL) classification system. Cr A Crosby silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes This is a somewhat poorly drained soil with a seasonal high water table at 0.5 to 2.0 ft. This soil is located on rises on till plains; slopes are 0 to 3 percent. The native vegetation is hardwood forest. The surface layer is silt loam and has moderately low to moderate organic matter content (1.0 to 3.0 percent). Permeability is very slow (< 0.06 inlhr) in the most restrictive layer above 60 inches. Available water capacity is moderate (6.2 inches in the upper 60 inches). The pH of the surface layer in non-limed areas is 5.1 to 6.5. Droughtiness and wetness are management concerns for crop production. This soil responds well to tile drainage; it is designated potentially highly erodible (class 2) in the Highly Erodible Land (HEL) classification system. Additional information about soils is available in the "Soil Survey of Hamilton County". The engineer and/or developer should consider the need for an onsite soils investigation. u u I have reviewed the plans for this project and have the following comments: . Basements are not recommended on Brookston silty clay loam due to the high water table. . Are the wetlands shown on the plan proposed or existing? Do you have additional information such as a wetland deliniation? . I do not oppose this rezone. Should you have questions concerning these comments, please contact me. Submitted By: John B. South P.E. Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control Cc: Jon Dobosiewicz, Carmel DOCS Greg Hoyes, County Surveyor File .. ~ u u City of Carmel VIA email: charlie@nf-law.com Original by mail May 16, 2005 Charlie Frankenberger Nelson and Frankenberger 3105 E. 98th St. Ste. 170 Indianapolis, IN 46280 COpy RE: Fortune Rezone (05050003 Z) Dear Mr. Frankenberger: This letter is in response to your rezone application for the Fortune Site. The following is our comments and concerns: 1. As a "stand alone" site, the design presented is acceptable. Given that this site is surrounded by the Village of West Clay, it is the strong desire of staff to see cooperation between the applicant and Brenwick TND Communities (Owner and Developer of Village of West Clay). As shown, there is some redundancy in access that could be avoided with cooperation between these projects. 2. Please provide signage details. 3. Section 9.1 D, E, and F: Remove the term "Final Development Plan". Development plans shall be wholly approved by the Plan Commission. Secondary Plats will remain administrative approvals. These sections should only focus on future Secondary Plats. 4. Section 9.1 H: Detached single family residences will not require ADLS approval. Only attached townhome buildings will be required to go through the standard ADLS process. 5. Please provide elevations of proposed townhomes. Elevations of single family residences that are representative of the PUD ordinance should also be submitted. 6. As per the Alternative Transportation Plan, a 10 foot pedestrian path will be required along the rights of way of 126th Street and 131 st Street. Please provide, or commit to funding the future installation of such. 7. A copy of the landscape plan approvalletter/e-mail from the Urban Forester is required prior to secondary plat approval and signature. Page 1 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL. INDIANA 46032 317/571-2417 1- '- .. u u Please wait to submit revised materials until after the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) has met on this application. The resubmitted materials should include edits addressing the above comments along with any requirements that arise from the TAC meeting. Additional comments may be made after the requested revisions have been submitted. Sincerely, ft4ii1kr ~~ Ma~ew Griffin, AICP Planning Administrator 05050003 Z Fortune Rezone Page 2 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2417 u u C~lJrJillel ,i.N May 12, 2005 Mr. Paul Shoopman Indiana Land Development 8170 Zionsville Road Indianapolis, IN 46268 RE: 43 acres located south of 131 st - 2555 W131 st; Docket #05050003 Dear Mr. Shoopman: o5CPoCC>~ I have received and reviewed the documents for the above-mentioned project. At the present time, I see nothing in the plans that would hamper law enforcement efforts. If we can be of any further assistance to you, please contact us. Sincerely, ~ .D.lfi Michael D. Fogarty Chief of Police MDF:vb cc: Dept. of Community Services orcement Agency Fax (317) 571-2512 (317) 571-2500 A Nationally Accredit MAY-12-2005 07:24 FROM:HAMIQ'l CO I+IY OEP 3177769814 0317 571 2426 P.002I'002 HAMILTON COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT CARMEL T .A.C. COMMENTS J'rom; MIke Mclrlde- Staft'E~ JIamtltoa C::ounIJ Highway D8pu1ment DIlle: : MAY 11. 200S /"\1'\ 2:M,,8A ~ 9:40 llo\I'Ja lO:OO~ 10:15 80m, lJU,O.J!JJ!a UMS!W!,b II~Jun.. IJ'20a1Q. 11 :40 a.m. 12:00 p.m. 12:15 O.m. boewmt N.. 05D50002 SP: VDlu It M0l'g811 Creek We bc~icve tbllt this is outside ataur jQdsdieUOft Docket No. G804OO08 Dr Amead/ADLS Amend: Bto~8tone BODIeJ It Guilford JleIervo We ~icvc tIllt this is oumde our juriJ4lcdon. i Doekef Ne. _30024 PP: Sweet Clulrity Butta. PriDllJ')' Plat We ~ 1IOt received an application and fee as of5l11/05. Will this be ann8lt8d? ~ No. 05040017 DP/ADLS; West Cannel Center om" Park 1levi~not c:omplets IS of5l111OS. ! DM~ No. 050"001 DPfADL8: Nlcbdagale IIo1JIe BaIthearo We hc~ovc that !bill ;8 owlde our jurlsdictiou. i Dockef No. 1!I04OG26 Dr/ADLSt Burford Ot1lce Park We bc~Gve tbat tb1s I, outside our juriSdictio1l. ~ No. 05050003 Z: Fortune _De We ~icvc that thfs is outside our ju.risdicticm. I Docb~ No. 050S0004 z: Arden Tcnmboml:ll We bc~Cl that this .. Q1l.t$f4e our jurtsdicdoD. ; i Doeket No. 05050005 "1 Yorktown Wooda . Primary Plat We be~c that thi. is outJridll 01U' jurisdiction. I ~t N.. 050S0013 TACt VlDAa. or Welt aa, - Repoqr 1 Building We ~ieve be tht. is outride Om' jurlsdiction. DoeJcet NIL O5IJ_J, TAC; M.,aower Park. BJk 6, Lot 5: Uown80ludoas R.evitn.V lIDt oomple1O IS or SIll/OS. . i Do~_ No. 05050021 ADLS: tfjfb Stre8t Prot'llllllJoul !'1n'1( - BuDdh.l' , W II befevo dun this ta oUl8idc our j1lriBdictio~ 1700 South 10" Street Noble."i11c. JD. 46060 l'fln\/,co.bamilton.ln.lIs Oft'leo (317) 773-0mO Fall (317) 776.-9814 INDIANA Land Development May 4, 2005 Matt Griffin Carmel Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Re: Fortune Property - 43 acres located south of 131 5t - 2555 W. 1315t; Docket #05050003 Dear Matt: Enclosed is a copy of the letter we sent to the T AC members regarding this property and a list of the names and addresses of those who received this distribution. Thank you. Sincerely, Indiana land Development Corporation Paul Shoopman President and CEO Enc: Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170ZionsvilleRd - Indianapolis, IN 46268 - (317)415-0459 - (317)415-0466 Fax INDIANA Land Development May 4, 2005 City of Carmel T AC Submission Re: 43 acres located south of 131st--2555W 131st; Docket # 05050003 Dear T AC Member: Enclosed are plans pertaining to our requested change in zoning classification. We look forward to receiving your comments at the T AC Meeting scheduled to occur on May 18, 2005. In the interim, please call with any questions or comments you may have. Thank you. Sincerely, Indiana land Development Corporation Paul Shoopman President and CEO Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170 Zionsville Rd - Indianapolis, IN 46268 - (317) 415-0459 - (317) 415-0466 Fax ~ - - - - - - - - ~W"3IST~ - - ~_ ~ in .1 I . I >> H UxIIO" 'I TOWN HOMES SO'X150' SINGLE fAMilY I I ,I ~I SO'X ISO' SINGLE fAMilY l~i SITE DATA GROSS SITE AREA EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING ~ DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM +/- 43.6 AC 5-1 PUD SUB-AREA 'C' AREA: SINGLE FAMilY: TOTAL UNITS: 17.09 AC 61 UNITS 61 DU SUB-AREA 'A' AREA: 8.87 AC COMMERCIAL I CIVIC USES PERMITTED ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENT OPTION: TOWNHOMES: 7.0 DUlAC [net areaJ SINGLE FAMILY: 3.6 DUlAC [net areaJ SUB-AREA 'B' AREA: TOWNHOMES: SINGLE FAMILY: TOTAL UNITS: 17.68 AC 43 UNITS 23 UNITS 66DU o 100 200 300 ~(D" ~ o a ~ SCALE: 1"= 100' LandDesign. 05.04.05_#3005022 FORTUNE SITE INDIANA Land Development ~ APR/25/2005/MON 02: 44 PM \. IHII,t:}.OV:I ,,;\lOIIYI 0."'''''' '~""l\~"....l\""" u P. 006 OWNER'S CONSENT .AND JOINDER IN PBmIONS The undersigned, being 1he 0'Mlef of the real awe de.scribed in what is a1tIcl1ed hereto aDd iDcmporated beldD 'by refere~ IS EdUbii "A" (the ~ &1Bta") heleby IIIJthori7.es and directs IDdiau Lud DevelopmU CoIporatioa. m IlldiIN COJpOrIlio.l1 (lLILD"). along with its employees> and designated enginem.1and platmen.llttDrMYS, and agectS. as follows: 1. To :file, for emd. on behalf of the undorsigncd, any and all appIicatious ami petitions to o'btaiu alllPPfOVals deemed necessar,y by ILD with!espect to 1:be Real Estate iucludh1& without limi~ approwls of ehan&eI in :roniDa ~ or r:ezones. priI:uary plat ap~ov&ls. secondary plat approval~ aDd all other appro"W1s aud permits required by the Camlel ZoDJDg and/or Subdivisioa Comrol ~ 8Zld deemed ncc:assary by lID to develop ~ Real Estate (collectively the .. Approv&1e"); and 2. To represent tbt 'UIldersiped ill CODneCIion wiCh the Approvals, before the Carmel i'lan Commission 8!l4 its Cwnwmtl:~ 'the Cmn.cl CouociI. amy apncy CJf Carmel, acd any other munioipal or S1ate as=cies. . Further to this Olmer's Consent ami JoiDder in Petitions. the unclersisned (i) joins in mi ratifies all app1ieatioms and petitions, if any, already filed by lLD wi1h the Cannel Plm Commission and the Cllmel City Cound.1 in conueotion with the Approvals. and (11) ~knowledges that this Owners COnsent ad Joinder in Petitions shall coDStitotc the execution by the '\mdf;z'sipcd of all such petitions and applicaticms :filed by ILD, now or in '/he fbtme, In furtherImce of the Approvals. Dam:. t:s-/3/ OS- 71/~,j/~ MmJi'G. Herbison Date: {;13IoS- 16 .l~Cf{ g r ~ 11 i Jk1~ Rebecca A. Herbison B..'\1111Kll\1:lld1aD1.aI4 Dn.'.OwIIef's ~Dft.diDCl APR/25/2005/MON 02: 45 PM ('I _.. IIrJl, i,"). J.1JV"J " V'JII'/1 ,--,,1o~\J1' I ~MI1"'"~'''~''' u P. 007 EXl:IIIBIT (,I. A'" T%act. One, hx'ce.l 3: t'art of the Soul:heut QUarter of 'Section 2', '1'cwuhi.p 1i K~th, bJ:).ge 3 J3aSt, i: Cla.y 'I'OW.tl$h:1p, JiaTA:l.lt:OZl. r.:lQUl'lty , t~dJ.e%l8., dellcmtsd a. follCNS; ~il3g on 'bhfll ucn:h l~ of ~h. $O\Ltheut. Quarte'J: Of Sect.:lo:c. :3! I' 'l'O'In1E/b.i.p 11 ~o,..t:.b., b.Dge .! ~t at a point. 4.1)9,54. feet lCJortb 99 dei=eee 25 m~tes DO s2CQads Jest tasBume4 b~) ~rom the northwest co:aun: ogn.:J.4 S<<L~h..s~ Quattel: t thence No~ 89 degrees 25 minutes 00 5eu:0x:a4s kat 02:l 5a:1.d. north line 204.77 :feet, t.ha.ce liOl.\th 00 &Jgrus U mnut.ee :1;a I51;OC>>1ds 'East poxallel 'With the we.,t; li),ie of laid. S~1:.hu.st Qut.='~o:- 1.:1.9 is . ~o teet to a point 02:1 a line which beus Karch S S degrees 41 ~te8 )6 sec:cm4G kst f:v0\'8 a po;.nt on l;ha weult 11.nQ. of _id S=.at.heaBt QuB:r:tex- that: is j.303.'6 feet. swl:.h 00 deg.r:ee'l!l 12 mlnute$ J:l .~ Zast 0'; the =::thWeft C:O:'U%' of sLicl. Sout:.bee.$t Querte:t'1 t.beJ).ee Scu.th B8 a.es:e.. 41 \1l:Z.:mt.e8 35 secauds "es~ of said line 204.80 feet to a point 409.60 feet NO'.I:Cb. e B desJ:ees ..1 m~ut.es )5 ..CCDdS Bait on said point on tl).$ WHe line ct said southeast Quilnu; thenc:e ;Rc:rth 00 degree$ 12 ttdnuce. 32 .,eanda ~ase ~a%~lel ~1~ .ala we8~ line ll~B.Vl feet to the place of beg:umins, contwiug 5 .1&3 ~exes, l1\O;l:e I:)%, 1ess. ~~c:el 4; Put of the Sou.~st. ~.:r of S~t.i= 2:;1, TOWDShip 1.21 North, br1~ ]' East in Cl~ 'row.nship, :!!amilton CO\m.ty, Ind:ia:oa. 4eam:ibed a.s follQtlrs, .a~ en the 1100tl1 Une of t:l1e SoutheaSt Q\l4l.,rt.er: of Section 29, 'l'oW.s1tt.p 19 North, Range ~ .last. at a 'point '14,31 feet Noz:t:h U CeSJ'X"=M 25 m.:i.Jmtes OD 15eCOAd& :East:. (assum.a bea:z:iXlg) :t:a:om ~ ~~bwut: ~ of. nie! SOIUtl:l...;t:, Qua:ctU'~ thEmce North e 9 c!egreelil 25 mDl,l.t,.6 0 C) e'ilc=ds J!:ast C)C saici Il.orch liue 204.76 feet to a point :LB37. GO teet 8wtl:l 89 degrees 25 1II.1J1utes 00 seconds W.at of the northeallt c;:r:):me~ o.f said. SCUthe.si Q\1a1:terr tbence Swth 00 deSIre.. ~., miDutes os sec:=6s West 11'3. '7S 1!Ht to a ~int on a line which bea:ts Worth 88 deg':(ees 41 =-mttes 35 sec:oiDds Bast. frora e po:lnt: OQ. the west liD.e of said. Southeast Qua,rte:t' t:.hat. is 130:9 .96 feet South 00 deg:reu 1.4- mic'l:l.~" 32 seClonds hst ,,~ r:ha ~t:::aweR C03:Doe%' ~f sa.:i4 SouthMst CUart:~; the.ce: Sou.~ 88 degrees 4J. ~ee. 35 seconds West on said ltna 197." ~eec to a point ~4.40 f~et No~~ ;U ~ee' 4.;1. minutes :i5 .eu:Qnde su.et on _aid point: a~ the west line of ~aid SO\1t,beut. QllaJ:te: thence North OD degrees 12 m,tZJ,l.'ttQ 33 srec:onda :Jut puallel 1dth aaic1 west :1.1.218 1196.20 eat: co the 'Place "f l:leg:'~9, cor:.~g S. 53 e,o'U, rlIOt'e or less. APR/25/2005/MON 02: 43 PM r. '. Arll.L'.LUU~ j:Vfl'lVl WI.~VIV rl\/'\I'MII\,l~I\V~1I (,) P. 004 )'VIo ,,/..;"" v OWNER'S CONSENT AND JOINDER IN PEnnONS The undersisDed. boiDg the owa.er of the real estate descr1be4 in ".bat is rd:tacbed he1:eto and incorporated herein by ref=nco as ExhIbit "A" (the "Real Estate") hereb,r authorlzzs and di:octs IndiaDa Land. Development ColJ'oraIkm, an I:ndiam corporation ("lID"). along with its employees, end designated eqirJ.eezs. hmd planners, attoI:Dey5, and agents. as follows: 1 , To me, for md on bcba1f af the undersigned, IDJ" and all applica1lcms IDd petilions to obtain all approvats deemed necessary by aD with respect to the Real Estate iDclwhg, without Jimita1ion, apJ)tCMIls of chanps in !OIliq classilcation or 1'OZ011I', primary plat approvals. secondaty plat approvals, aDd all other appzo'Vals IU.1d permits reqoi1'ed by the Carmel Zoning Imd/or Subdivision CcmtIOl Ord;nA1lCe and deemed neoeseary by ILD to develop tho haI Estate (ooIlective1y the .. App~j;1DlS 2. To represent the undenianed jn connlOti~ ..1m the App;rova.Is, before the Camlel Plan CommissioD and 118 CMnm;~ tt. Catmel CollDOll, any qency of C.IIm'Ie\ aDd my ather municJpal or State agcK1des. Fmther to this: Ovmer'1 Consent mad JoiDder in Petitions, 1hIJ undetsJped (1) joins in aud dOes all appHca1Io:os and. petidoDs, jf lIlY, already filjd by JLD with the Cumd PIm ColWliufon 8D4 the Catmd City CouDcil in connection with 1he A;pprovaJs, and (ii) acknowledges that this Owner's COnsent and Joinder in Petitiolls shall oOG!tituto 1he exeQUbOl1 .by the ~saed of aU such petiUODS and appliadiobS filed by IW, now or in the ftztare, ic :- 1brtbaance of the Approval!. Dam: ~~/OS H:IJ.-\tftdiamalad ~.'OwtrKfi OoIucIU"onwo.- ~ u u . e<.1-I 1c1 ,r ~ A " Port of the Southeast O!.Jorter of Section 29, Township 1!j North, Rance 3 East in Cloy Town$hip, Hamilton Coul'lLy, Indionc. described os follows: . Beginning on the South line of the Southeast Ql.larter of Section 29, Township 18 North, Range .3 East 1351.40 feet South 89 degrees 03 minutes 05 Seconds West (assumed bearings) from the Soutl'leost comer of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 00 deqrees 56 minutes 55 secc.""':" West 8.00 feet; thence North 52 degrees -4-2 minutes 1 9 seconds East 14.45 feet; thence North 23 degrees 04 minutes 39 seconds East 27.27 feet; thence North 00 degrees 1453.10 feet; thence South 89 degrees 25 minutes 00 seconds West parallel with the North line of soid Southeast 107.69 feet; thence North 00 degrees 11 minutes 13 seconds East 1138.58 feet to a point on the North line of said Southeast Quorter which is 1443.58 feet South 89 degrees 25 minutes 00 seconds West of thwe Northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 25 minutes 00 seconds west on said North line 39.3.42 feet: thence South 00 degrees 07 minutes 05 seconds West 1193.76 feet; thence South 88 degrees 41 minutes 35 seconds West 153.:11-6 feet; thence South 00 degrees 34 minutes 29 s"'~(')nds East 1441.57 feet to the South line of tr.... Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 03 minutes 05 seconds East Or"l said SOl.lth line 627.20 feet to the ploce of begInning. Containing 32.447 acres more or less. ... u NELSON & FRANKENBERGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS.AT.LAW u JAMES J. NELSON CHARLES D. FRANKENBERGER JAMES E. SHINAVER LAWRENCE J. KEMPER JOHN B. FLATT FREDRIC LAWRENCE ofcounseI JANE B. MERRILL 3105 EAST 98TH STREET SUITE 170 INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46280 317-844-0106 FAX: 317-846-8782 April 22, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERY Jon Dobosiewicz City of Carmel - Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Re: Indiana Land Development Rezone Application to PUD Business District Dear Jon: Enclosed please find the following as it relates to the above matter: 1. An original and one (1) copy of a Rezone Application to the PUD zoning district. 2. Five (5) copies of the proposed PUD, including the following exhibits: a. Legal description; b. Regulatory plan; c. Tree preservation plan d. Street sections After you review the enclosures, please advise me of the filing fees for the above- referenced applications. As usual, thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this matter, and contact me with any questions. Very truly yours, NELSON & FRANKENBERGER ~L Charles D. Frankenberger CDF/jlw Enclosures H:\Janet\Burford\Dobosiewicz Itr 0421OS.doc