HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #38 Dale & Susie AnkromOctober 16, 2023
Carmel Plan Commission Members and Staff Members
Re: 11335 N. Michigan Road, Docket PZ-2021-00205.
All,
After many letters and conversations, this proposed development is in your hands for a vote.
PLEASE review again, consider and explain to the public:
1. Last year the Commission denied approval of this project with 236 units and less ground coverage.
Why would this project, with 238 units, more buildings and increased land coverage be approved?
2. The staff and Commission members identified a need for more living units for Carmel. They DO NOT have to
be in this location! Zoning documents have been in place for a long time to protect against such large
developments along 421. This project is NOT just to provide nice housing for Carmel residents. It’s a
financial investment for profit by the owner and developer plus tax income for Carmel.
3. Traffic: By approving this development, you are responsible for adding hundreds of additional vehicles to the
421 corridor, making it extremely difficult and hazardous for all drivers to navigate that area. You got what you
wanted with a requirement for a pedestrian crossing at Bennett Parkway, but you seem to ignore the overall
potential problem with adding 394 (and very likely many more) vehicles in that specific area.
4. Tree removal: The developer and you can attempt to justify removal of “invasive” trees, but the real reason is
to be able to fit the amount of parking, drives and buildings crammed on the site. It’s also been communicated
about caring for the environment and wildlife. Large numbers of wildlife habitat will be destroyed and animals
killed, but the justification is a pollinator field, paths and a dog park.
5. The “Plan Commission Department Report”, “Explanation of Request” and the “Development Standards
Variances” are not coordinated or are incorrect. The following need to be reviewed and hopefully modified:
a. Docket #: PZ-2023-00157V. The site is 23 acres per the Legal Description. The code is 5,000 s.f per unit =
200 units permitted. The request is shown in different places as either 2,899 sf or 3,067 sf / unit. If 2,899 sf,
then 346 units would be permitted. If 3,067 sf, then 327 units would be permitted. Both would actually permit
more units to be built than the petitioner identified.
b. Will the “Explanation of Request” be part of the approval documents? They should be.
The above discrepancies should be corrected if this request is to be approved.
The “Development Standards Variances” state: “The approval of the requested variances will not be injurious
to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because the applicable square
footage limitation per unit does not address intensity of use associated with the development of the site as it
does not address square footage of dwellings or number of bedrooms. The proposed development will provide
less intense development based upon number of bedrooms and associated related metrics for the site than
what would be otherwise allowed under the UDO requirements.”
This statement is not accurate.
Woodhaven has a very active and successful real estate broker and per her letter and assessment, - if approved,
the “continued quality of life and property values.” will most certainly be negatively affected for the
surrounding neighbors.
If you approve the project as submitted, you are demonstrating a care much more for money than what is right
and considerate for the neighbors or the in-place codes as written.
Please request the petitioner to modify plans and resubmit for this specific development.
Thank you very much for your help and consideration for your community.
Respectfully,
Dale Ankrom (Indiana licensed Architect - AR 10600132) and Susan Ankrom
Woodhaven Drive