HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence • • Page 1 of 1
W
Lillig, Laurence M
From: David Day [day @cchalaw corn]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 12.34\PMl
To: LLillig @ci carmel.in.us J 4 %P\
Cc: Allen Cradler (E-mail) �_, ' RECEIVED
Subject: Plat Vacation/Carmel SchoolsspJ 22 2003
DOCS Jul)
I have reviewed the statutory cites ana or telephOne conversation and have revised the
recordable document for the plat vacation in Carrhelwood. That revision is attached. I made
rather general findings as you indicated th you did not want specificity.
I am still concerned that I am missing something. I thought that I was asked to respond only
with respect to this one document but perhaps I am wrong. I am asking Allen Cradler to advise
me if there are other things needed from me.
I will be out until 3:30 this afternoon but back in the office at that time and all day Wednesday
after 10. I will do whatever is needed to get this done.
Please advise.
David R. Day
Church, Church, Hittle & Antrim
938 Conner Street
P. 0. Box 10
Noblesville, IN 46061
(317) 773-2190 (voice)
(317) 773-5320 (fax)
*** eSaf-e has scanned this email for malicious content and found it to be clean ***
*** IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders ***
4/22/2003
• •
CERTIFICATE OF PLAN COMMISSION ACTION �F/i/eO 1 't
Ramona Hancock, upon being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follow,P 4--049
s
1. She is the secretary of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission and.the keeper
of its books and records. '" , . ,-, ",s"
2. The Carmel/Clay Plan Commission on the 18th day of February, 2003, as
Docket No. 165-02 PV considered the petition of Carmel Clay Schools to vacate a part of
the plat of Carmelwood, a subdivision in Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof,
recorded in Deed Record 136, page 365, in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton
County, Indiana and made the following findings:
A. The conditions in the platted area have changed so as to defeat the
original purposes of the plat;
B. It is in the public interest to vacate a part of the plat; and
C. The value of that part of the land in the plat not owned by the
Petitioner will not be diminished by the vacation.
3. Based on these findings, the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission rendered the
following decision:
IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission that
the Petitioner's request under Docket No. 165-02 PV is granted and the plat
of Carmelwood, a subdivision in Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof',
recorded in Deed Record 136, page 365, in the Office of the Recorder of
Hamilton County, Indiana, including, but not limited to, all covenants and
commitments set forth therein, is vacated as to the real estate described in Exhibit
A attached hereto, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes (which
conditions are incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this decision.)
Ramona Hancock
STATE OF INDIANA )
) SS:
COUNTY OF HAMILTON )
Before me, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared
Ramona Hancock, Secretary of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission who acknowledged
the execution of the foregoing Certificate of Plan Commission Action.
x
• •
WITNESS, my hand and Notarial Seal this day of April, 2003.
My Commission Expires:
Printed:
Notary Public, A Resident of
County, Indiana
This Instrument Prepared by: David R. Day, Church, Church, Hittle & Antrim,
938 Conner Street, P.O. Box 10, Noblesville, IN 46061
EXHIBIT A
Lot 3 in Carmelwood, a subdivision in Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof,
recorded in Deed Record 136, page 365, in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton
County, Indiana.
Lot 4 in Carmelwood, a subdivision in Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof,
recorded in Deed Record 136, page 365, in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton
County, Indiana.
Lot 8 in Carmelwood, a subdivision in Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof,
recorded in Deed Record 136, page 365, in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton
County, Indiana.
Lot numbered 17 in Carmelwood, an addition to the City of Carmel, Indiana, as per plat
thereof recorded in Deed Record 136, pages 365-67 in the Office of the Recorder of
Hamilton County, Indiana.
Lot 18 in Carmelwood, a subdivision in Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof,
recorded in Deed Record 136, page 365, in the Office of the Recorder of Hamilton
County, Indiana.
u U
~8~annin~owey \~~Yl
Associates, me.
~~
Architects Engineers Consultants ~~ C9,,~
"'cP '~
T R A N S M T T A L i?
To:
Laurence Lillig
Department of Community Services
City of Carmel
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
Allen J. Cradler, AlA ~~ J
Project ManagerlSen~ tociate
Date:
April 18, 2003
Project:
Carmel High School Freshman
Center
Carmel Clay Schools
Carmel, IN
Project No. 201105.00
From:
NO. OF COPIES
DESCRIPTION OF ITEMS
4
Exhibit Drawings for Vacations and Dedications
Sent via:
r Mail r UPS r Overnight F Hand Deliver r Pickup r Courier
r Fax I
COMMENTS:
ajc/klr
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. intends to send this information (including any attachments) only to the designated individual or entity. If
you received this information in error, please notify the sender by replying to the electronic mail (if electronic) or by telephone at the
number indicated on this document. Use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended
recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
9025 North River Road, Suite 200 "I Indianapolis, Indiana 46240-2125
(317) 848-0966 "I Fax (317) 848-0843""'l http://www.fhaLcom
u
Q
Page 1 of2
.-
Lillig, Laurence M
From: Lillig, Laurence M
Sent: Monday, April 07, 200311 :51 AM /;,1>1'(: .~
, . I I '-1)/
To: 'Allen Cradler' . '; ;:' rY '<'IJ
Cc: Dobosiewicz, Jon C; Haney, Douglas C <:JOe ~ X
Subject: RE: Carmel Schools Plat and Right of Way vacMlon
Allen,
Thank you for forwarding the documents.
approval. I will make every effort to have these reviews c
Wednesday.
Laurence
-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Cradler [mailto:acradler@fhai.com]
Sent: Monday, April 07,200311:30 AM
To: Lillig, Laurence M
Subject: FW: Carmel Schools Plat and Right of Way Vacation
Laurence,
See attached for documents developed by the School's Attorney for the plat vacation instruments. If there
is another format these should follow or standard forms, please advise or forward these and the documents
can be modified. The information obtained during the sale of the Taylor property at 420 E. 2nd Street did
not indicate that was part of any subdivision or recorded plat, thus it was not included. If there is
something specific that should be referenced for that property please advise or if that should just be added
to the listing of the Carmelwood lots, advise.
Thanks for your assistance.
Allen J. Cradler
Project Manager, Senior Associate
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc.
9025 N. River Road, Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46240
317 -848-0966 - TX
317-848-0843 - Fax
acradler@fhaLcom
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. intends to send this transmission (including any attachments) only to the designated individual or entity. It is
for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message by
electronic mail or by telephone at the number indicated above and promptly delete it from your system. This transmission may contain
confidential or privileged information and may constitute non public information. Use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of
this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. Unless otherwise stated by the sender, this transmission
(including any attachments) does not create or confirm a contract, agreement, offer, or acceptance between Sender and any recipient. The
hard copies of this transmission are to be considered the official record document.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Day [mailto:day@cchalaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 3:06 PM
To: Allen Cradler
Cc: Ron Farrand (E-mail)
Subject: Carmel Schools Plat and Right of Way Vacation
4/7/2003
0, w
-
"
o
Page 2 of2
As I understand his request, Allen wanted me to prepare the recordable instruments for
the vacation of the lots in Carmelwood and the attendant rights-of-way. I have attached
what I believe to be documents that would do that. I assume you will attach the legal
description to the right-of-way document. I have attached the legal descriptions of the
vacated lots to the plat vacation document.
I had hoped to review these with the City as there is no prescribed form for these
documents. They were all out at a planning conference so I could not do so.
If there is anything else I need to do, or if there are questions or problems with these
documents, please let me know.
David R. Day
Church, Church, Hittle & Antrim
938 Conner Street
P. O. Box 10
Noblesville, IN 46061
(317) 773-2190 (voice)
(317). 773-5320 (fax)
***
eSafe has scanned this email for malicious content and found it to be clean
IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders ***
***
4/7/2003
Page 1 of2
..
u
u
-. Lillig, Laurence M
/]:
From: Allen cradle~ [acradler@fhaLcom] m:cr i\'!:D
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 11 :30 AM f.,. _, , g :-;, c'.~
To: Lillig, Laurence M - (\
'. . nccs
Subject: FW: Carmel Schools Plat and Right of Way'V'acation
\ ." \
Laurence,
See attached for documents developed by the School's Attorney or the plat vacation instruments, If there is
another format these should follow or standard forms, please advise or forward these and the documents can be
modified. The information obtained during the sale of the Taylor property at 420 E. 2nd Street did not indicate
that was part of any subdivision or recorded plat, thus it was not included, If there is something specific that
should be referenced for that property please advise or if that should just be added to the listing of the
Carmelwood lots, advise.
Thanks for your assistance,
Allen J. Cradler
Project Manager, Senior Associate
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc.
9025 N. River Road, Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46240
317 -848-0966 - TX
317-848-0843 - Fax
acradler@fhaLcom
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. intends to send this transmission (including any attachments) only to the designated individual or entity. It is for the
exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message by electronic mail or
by telephone at the number indicated above and prompUy delete it from your system. This transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information and may constitute nonpublic information. Use. disclosure. dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended
recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. Unless otherwise stated by the sender, this transmission (including any attachments) does not
create or confirm a contract, agreement, offer. or acceptance between Sender and any recipient. The hard copies of this transmission are to be
considered the official record document.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Day [mailto:day@cchalaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 3:06 PM
To: Allen Cradler
Cc: Ron Farrand (E-mail)
Subject: Carmel Schools Plat and Right of Way Vacation
As I understand his request, Allen wanted me to prepare the recordable instruments tor the
vacation ot the lots in Carmelwood and the attendant rights-ot-way. I have attached what I
believe to be documents that would do that. I assume you will attach the legal description to
the right-ot-way document. I have attached the legal descriptions ot the vacated lots to the plat
vacation document.
I had hoped to review these with the City as there is no prescribed torm tor these documents.
They were all out at a planning conterence so I could not do so.
It there is anything else I need to do, or it there are questions or problems with these
documents, please let me know.
David R. Day
4/7/2003
Page 2 of2
u
u
-
'.
Church, Church, Hittle & Antrim
938 Conner Street
P. O. Box 10
Noblesville, IN 46061
(317) 773-2190 (voice)
(317) 773-5320 (fax)
*** eSafe has scanned this email for malicious content and found it to be clean ***
*** IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders ***
4/712003
u
Q
.~ .!:!!!!P, Laurence M
>l
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Laurence,
Allen Cradler [acradler@fhaLcom]
Wednesday, April 02, 2003 5:15 PM 4..
LiIIig, Laurence M. . :K
RE: BPWS Submissions - Carmel Freshman ceRfmFIVED
APR 8)0;),~
DOCS
We are sending over on Friday 4/4. The following items, please look for these when you
return from the conference.
1.
way legal
2.
easement
3.
Deed & Dedication and acceptance of new right-of-way along with the right-of-
description.
Deed & Dedication and acceptance of emergency access easement along with
legal description.
24x36 drawings depicting the above plus the right-of-way to be vacated.
David Day with Church, Church, Hittle & Antrim, the schools attorney, will be sending you
direct via email, the recordable instrument to vacate the lots. David had some questions
about the correct forms, so please contact him if any adjustments need to be made on the
informaton he sends. Please contact me if you have any questions about what we send or
if anything else is needed. Also, please advise what meeting and when these items will be
heard or placed on the Agenda. Hopefully we can be on the April 16th meeting for anything
that needs to go to the Board of Public Works.
FYI, bids were received on the Freshman Center project on 4/2. Bids came in favorable
and under the anticipated budget. Right now recommendations on the award of contracts
will be reviewed with the School Board on April 14, 2003.
Thanks for your assistance.
Allen J. Cradler
Project Manager, Senior Associate
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc.
9025 N. River Road, Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46240
317-848-0966 - TX
317-848-0843 - Fax
acradler@fhai.com
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. intends to send this transmission (including any
attachments) only to the designated individual or entity. It is for the exclusive use of
the intended recipient. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender
by replying to this message by electronic mail or by telephone at the number indicated
above and promptly delete it from your system. This transmission may contain confidential
or privileged information and may constitute nonpublic information. Use, disclosure,
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is
not authorized and may be unlawful. Unless otherwise stated by the sender, this
transmission (including any attachments) does not create or confirm a contr
act, agreement, offer, or acceptance between Sender and any recipient. The hard copies of
this transmission are to be considered the official record document.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lillig, Laurence M [mailto:LLillig@ci.carmel.in.us]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 12:00 PM
To: Allen Cradler; Hill, Dick B; Dobosiewicz, Jon C
Subject: RE: BPWS Submissions
Allen,
1
r
W
If you would provide me the following for review,
process:
U
I'll help you through the
1. The recordable instrument for the vacation of the lots in Carmelwood,
and the attendant rights-of-way (PC/BPW/Council)
2. The recordable deed of dedication and acceptance for the new
right-of-way
3. The recordable deed of dedication and acceptance for the new emergency
access easement.
You can send them to my attention at DOCS.
Laurence
-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Cradler [mailto:acradler@fhai.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 6:17 PM
To: Hill, Dick B; llillig@ci.carmel.in.us; jdobosiewicz@ci.carmel.in.us
Subject: RE: BPWS Submissions
Sorry for the confusion here also. However, we need some additional
assistance in understanding the process and steps we still need to proceed
with. Here is a list of the documents we have on hand.
1. Plat Vacation - Approval by Plan Commission on 2/18
2. New Public Right-of-Way to be granted for connection of
Audubon and Sylvan
Legal description and exhibit available. Dedication & Deed
form completed and signed.
3. Existing public right-of-way to be vacated between vacated
properties
4.
available
5.
parcels.
6. Completed
entire project.
Legal description and exhibit available
Emergency access easement - legal description and exhibit
Boundary description of entire site including newly vacated
architectural and engineering documents for the
From the various meetings and emailsnothing.this is what we understood the
process to be.
Plat Vacation - approval by Plan Commission
approval by BPW
Right of way dedication - BPW approval
Vacate existing right-of-way - City Council
BPW(?)
Emergency access easement - BPW (?)
What do you recommend for our next step and is there an order in which
things should be done? Dick has provided with the dates and submission
deadlines for the BPW. I don't have anything that describes the process
for submission to the City Council.
We would very much like to keep things moving and hit the April 2nd or 16th
BPW meetings. Please advise if there is something we missed in the above
list or anything we specifically need to submit before taking the next step.
Allen J. Cradler
Project Manager, Senior Associate
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc.
9025 N. River Road, Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46240
317-848-0966 - TX
317-848-0843 - Fax
acradler@fhai.com
2
Fanning/Howey Associates, I~ intends to send this transmis~ (including
any attachments) only to the designated individual or entity. It is for the
,i exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you received this message in
· error, please notify the sender by replying to this message by electronic
mail or by telephone at the number indicated above and promptly delete it
from your system. This transmission may contain confidential or privileged
information and may constitute nonpublic information. Use, disclosure,
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended
recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. Unless otherwise stated
by the sender, this transmission (including any attachments) does not create
or confirm a contr
act, agreement, offer, or acceptance between Sender and any recipient. The
hard copies of this transmission are to be considered the official record
document.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hill, Dick B [mailto:DHill@ci.carmel.in.us]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 2:56 PM
To: Allen Cradler
Subject: BPWS Submissions
Allen-Is it critical that the plat vacation and r.o.w. dedication are on the
3/19 BPWS or can they wait until the 4/2 meeting? I am having difficulties
getting these ready to meet our submission deadline which is 4:00 today.
The dedication document has to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney
and since I didn't get the document until Monday, I may not get the document
back by our deadline. Regarding the plat vacation, the City Engineer must
submit a letter of recommendation to accompany your request. Unfortunately,
she has been unavailable and has not been able to write the letter. If it
is critical, I will ask the City Engineer if she will agree to placing these
on the next agenda as "add on" items. We avoid doing this as much as
possible, but if this is critical, perhaps we can make an exception.
Thanks.
Allen-I have just talked to Kate regarding your two BPW issues. She in turn
has discussed these with Laurence Lillig of DOCS and it appears that you are
not ready for BPW at this time. I apologize for the confusion. As far as
the plat vacation is concerned, we only serve to write the letter of
recommendation and place the item on the Board's agenda. All requirements
for the plat vacation should be handled through Laurence and DOCS. Laurence
has indicated that there is more to be submitted regarding the plat
vacation, including documents that the Board will sign. Again, I apologize
for the confusion. I believe the documentation that you have submitted for
the right of way dedication is complete and adequate. It appears that all
of the BPW requirements should be submitted for approval at one time
including the plat vacation, r.o.w. dedication and emergency access
easement. I don't remember if I told you different but BPW approval is
required for the r.o.w. vacation prior to City Council approval so that
should be submitted to the Board at the same time as the other items.
3
.
w
u
1!!!!g, Laurence M
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dobosiewicz, Jon C -' . .'-C-;;
,/ \ I ~ . I , '.-
Thursday, March 20, 20q~~19:40AMJ{~'i /
Lillig, Laurence M ;< "-/ '<,/ .,
FW: BPWS SubmiS~!9.J)s' R 1. '\/
L! i'/ r tCF//I/'fl \;; \
I I .'1, , '11 Cu )~\
:::r:::e:e11 me that you were gOing~\gUi~;?~' :~: gU~~thr
PV? \"/" , ,~/"j
"\: /.~. ~q /
'(~( .11'-rit~ \ \-~y
---- --~-'-~.~-
Thanks,
Jon
-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Cradler [mailto:acradler@fhai.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 6:17 PM
To: Hill, Dick Bi llillig@ci.carmel.in.usi jdobosiewicz@ci.carmel.in.us
Subject: RE: BPWS Submissions
Sorry for the confusion here also. However, we need some additional assistance in
understanding the process and steps we still need to proceed with. Here is a list of the
documents we have on hand.
1. Plat Vacation - Approval by Plan Commission on 2/18
2. New Public Right-of-Way to be granted for connection of Audubon and Sylvan
Legal description and exhibit available. Dedication & Deed form completed and
signed.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Existing public right-of-way to be vacated between vacated properties
Legal description and exhibit available
Emergency access easement - legal description and exhibit available
Boundary description of entire site including newly vacated parcels.
Completed architectural and engineering documents for the entire project.
From the various meetings and emailsnothing.this is what we understood the process to
be.
Plat Vacation - approval by Plan Commission
approval by BPW
Right of way dedication - BPW approval
Vacate existing right-of-way - City Council
BPW(?)
Emergency access easement - BPW (?)
What do you recommend for our next step and is there an order in which things should be
done? Dick has provided with the dates and submission deadlines for the BPW. I don't
have anything that describes the process for submission to the City Council.
We would very much like to keep things moving and hit the April 2nd or 16th BPW meetings.
Please advise if there is something we missed in the above list or anything we
specifically need to submit before taking the next step.
Allen J. Cradler
Project Manager, Senior Associate
Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc.
9025 N. River Road, Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46240
317-848-0966 - TX
317-848-0843 - Fax
acradler@fhai.com
1
\ Fanning/Howey Associates, I~ intends to send this transmis~ (including any
attachments) only to the designated individual or entity. It is for the exclusive use of
J\ the intended recipient. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender
by replying to this message by electronic mail or by telephone at the number indicated
above and promptly delete it from your system. This transmission may contain confidential
or privileged information and may constitute nonpublic information. Use, disclosure,
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is
not authorized and may be unlawful. Unless otherwise stated by the sender, this
transmission (including any attachments) does not create or confirm a contr
act, agreement, offer, or acceptance between Sender and any recipient. The hard copies of
this transmission are to be considered the official record document.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hill, Dick B [mailto:DHill@ci.carmel.in.us]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 2:56 PM
To: Allen Cradler
Subject: BPWS Submissions
Allen-Is it critical that the plat vacation and r.o.w. dedication are on the
3/19 BPWS or can they wait until the 4/2 meeting? I am having difficulties
getting these ready to meet our submission deadline which is 4:00 today.
The dedication document has to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney
and since I didn't get the document until Monday, I may not get the document
back by our deadline. Regarding the plat vacation, the City Engineer must
submit a letter of recommendation to accompany your request. Unfortunately,
she has been unavailable and has not been able to write the letter. If it
is critical, I will ask the City Engineer if she will agree to placing these
on the next agenda as "add on" items. We avoid doing this as much as
possible, but if this is critical, perhaps we can make an exception.
Thanks.
Allen-I have just talked to Kate regarding your two BPW issues. She in turn
has discussed these with Laurence Lillig of DOCS and it appears that you are
not ready for BPW at this time. I apologize for the confusion. As far as
the plat vacation is concerned, we only serve to write the letter of
recommendation and place the item on the Board's agenda. All requirements
for the plat vacation should be handled through Laurence and DOCS. Laurence
has indicated that there is more to be submitted regarding the plat
vacation, including documents that the Board will sign.
Again, I apologize for the confusion. I believe the documentation that you
have submitted for the right of way dedication is complete and adequate. It
appears that all of the BPW requirements should be submitted for approval at
one time including the plat vacation, r.o.w. dedication and emergency access
easement. I don't remember if I told you different but BPW approval is
required for the r.o.w. vacation prior to City Council approval so that
should be submitted to the Board at the same time as the other items.
2
To:@&'~ a~~:0v'
Fax: J 4 -- ()cf f6
Fax
Phone:
u
u
CITY OF CARMEL ."
Department 9fCommunity Services "' ~
" ~ . ~ #- ... . ..,
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 4E032
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
From:
~OXJ
Pages: ...3
Date: c:2 - /C;; - 00
RE:~r-J/T)rz/)-I- ~.?brr
,
PRO.1ECT: Ci.-~~?~ ~iO-(
DOCKET NUHBER: /6..5/?;;),o1/
Fax
u
u
CITY OF CARMEL "
'Department 9fCommunity ~r:vices H :
" . ,#-'.., ,... .
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 4aJ32
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
To: ~O~
Fu: f-'TI--' ~ f-i3
From:. J/}
Pages:
4'
,/
Phone:
:~alll~~~
DOCKET NUMBER: /6~O';< /iJ
Date: /-029-6
RE: .5()6di~;:S'D/) 4/JVid9
L/
PROJECT: ~~~ II xl a~
u
u
CITY OF CARMEL
. Department of Community Services
~ ... ' '" 1 ..
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
Fax
To: ~~;~
Fax: 511' ,/8[1-9
Phone: r?/S-39~ 2-
Re:
'-
Fra..~.~
pages:0~. ~
Date: / --;;2 9 --tJ.3
cc: ~. &~
o Urgent 0 For Review 0 P.lease Comment 0 Please Reply
o Please Recycle
u
u
CITY OF CARMEL
: DePaIt!"~1jt Of com"munitY Services
... , ~~ ~ '.... -
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 4Ei032
(317) 571-2417
FalC (317) 571-2426
Fax
Re:
Fro""~~)
Pages: 7 uJ. c..mX./L./
Date: / -- c:L 9 -fJ3
cc: ~J~
TO:tJ/~~A-
Fax: ~ t.(&-- -() ?lf3
Phone: ?'-I ~ -6' 9 rP ~
o Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply
o Please Recycle
Fax
u
u
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
I,J _ r'
One Civic SC(U3re
Carmel, IN 4Sl32
(317)571-2417
Fax: (:317) 571-2426
TO:~AJa~
f 1/1-- 0;/13
~.".
Fram:,
Pages: 8
Fax:
Phone: Date: /-c2Y-t\.3
.' ~
R~;-.J(~<--~ttJ...-CCl
o Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply
o Please Recycle
~d-/? /0b-O~ /f7 .
C'~~~i~~a~
, "
;/
Carmel/Clay Plan Commission
MEMORANDUM (page 1 of2)
Date: January 24,2002
TO: Plan Commission Members
FROM: Paul Spranger, President
.. SUBJECT: CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL PLAT VACATION
It is normal to make the assumption that a plan proposed by a governmental agency has been
carefully reviewed. Unfortunately, in this case the site plan proposed by CarmeVClay Schools is
flawed:
I
l) PARKING. Ifwe were reviewing a Site Plan for a new 1000 student high school, the
parking requirements for teachers, administrators, support staff and visiting parents would be
substantial.
Ouestion: Given the new 1000 student facility and existing parking deficiencies, what would
be reasonable in terms of additional parking spaces for teachers, staff and parents?
a) 150?
b) 100?
c) 50?
d) II?
CarmeVClay School proposal: (d) A net increase of approximately 11 parking spaces.
Historically, parking requirements have been skirted by claiming the stadium parking.
However, the new additional staff alone will number nearly 100. While student parking is a
low priority, there are situations including medical, that require close-proximity student
parking. Even if only 5% of the projected student body need close proximity parking at any
given time, that would amount to 225 spaces. If 20% of the students were involved in events
where a parent would attend on a given night, it would require in excess of 1000 parking
spaces, including teachers and staff.
The distance from the center of the closest stadium parking lot to the nearest entrance is iust
over .4 miles. The West stadium lot to the same entrance is over Y2 mile to the nearest
entrance. assuming securitv permits it to be unlocked.
Would we permit an office site plan to claim a parking lot Y2 mile away? Is it appropriate to
require Grandparents or very small children to walk Y2 mile to basketball games, fine arts
performances or PrO meetings in winter weather? It is fair to adjacent homeowners to force
parking onto side streets, blocking driveways because of poor planning?
*'
#
2) CONNECTOR ROAD DESIGN ( Re-routed street to connect 2nd Street to the North
parking lot)
The obvious questions are:
a) Why are they are proposing what is in effect. a four-way intersection only 50' from a
three-way intersection at the comer of2od Street and 4th Avenue? When school is let out,
there will be a convergence of school buses from the West lot, cars attempting to vacate
the new parking lot and through traffic from the North 10t/136th Street. Stacking through
both non-signalized intersections could be problematic. Now add the students who walk
West into adjoining neighborhoods through these intersections. It is a poor design.
b) Whv is perpendicular parking permitted on the inside of a curve? Visualize a mother in a
full size station wagon who is parked, waiting for her student, between a Mini-van with
tinted windows and a tall Suburban. She then attempts to back out, in the blind as the
other parked vehicles block her view, into through traffic. Compounding this dangerous
scenario is she will be backing directly into a que line of vehicles at the curb in front of
the new Freshman Center. The pick-up/drop off traffic will not only include the current
student population, but the additional students generated by the 1000 student Freshman
Center. This is all happening on a curve.
c) How many cars can safely que-up in front of the oroposed pick-uo point before backing
up and blocking the parking lot curb cuts, effectively narrowing the width of an already
too narrow street, during the busiest time of the day?
d) Is there sufficient width to allow for easy passage of school buses and emer2encv
vehicles if other vehicles are "parked" on one edge of the roadway waiting for passengers
after a game or other activity? We must plan for today's reality. Fire trucks and
ambulances are large vehicles. Don't count on the other connector road East of Carmel
High School. It is only 16' wide and clearly substandard. So much for past planning.
To summarize, we have before us a site plan that ifbuilt, may result in needless risk/injury not
mention a glaring deficiency in parking. The fact that Carmel/Clay School District is engaged in a
shortsighted attempt to minimize land costs does not relieve us of our responsibility to the
community. A school capital budget is separate and distinct from the operating budget under
Indiana Law. Additional land can be easily accommodated in the capital budget. It will not result
in any loss of teaching positions, as they are in the operating budget. The operating budget
challenges are due solely to an ill-conceived state expenditure cap per pupil, not Carmel/Clay's
growing tax base.
The original concept for 1000 student Freshman Center was a separate site with sufficient land.
That need still exists. It is time for both the School District and the community to face up to the
reality more land is necessary. Past planning errors should also be corrected during this last major
expansion to Carmel High School.
Should we not ask for a new site plan? Should it not include additional land to properly
accommodate parking, improved connector road design, expanded pick-up/drop-off area and
proper buffering? The reputation of our school system is central to the future of Carmel/Clay.
The decision rests with you.
TION
NG NORTH
-t6-
~.
~'-
1
/
~/
/'
rgl
litd
CARMEL
G
HIGH
SGHOC
f-- ~
,.---
.
........ .--
'"
"._.....4\
SUGGESTED SITE PLAN
.
250 parking spaces added (expandable to 350)
in close proximity of activity areas.
.
'~'\"II '7---./ _
/,<::\"...., i:'>'A
1(~9)Y"~--<;;(<;~:.~ .
;.:} RECFlVED \~
I.;"";:,' JAN 1'28 2003 ,~
\;\ DOCS ;--./
.
Intersection problem at 2"" St. & 4dl Ave.
eliminated.
.
Perpendicnlar parking eliminated for safety,
changed to dual pick-upldrop-offlanes for
improved capacity.
'/
'.,/ '-' ..,- - .'- I \. .-'
. Site for future building, with skywalk to enhance
secnrity and access to second pick-upldrop-off laue
without students crossing at grade.
...J
. Improved ingress/egress at all high volume
traffic intersections.
. Enhauced buffering for the neighborhood West
of the schooL
Respectfully submitted by Paul Spranger
\
-..
j'-.-'.'''' '."-. -'.
: . I'"
!.,l' !
'i .' j
_1 !
I ;
. !
III ~
LJl\~ .'
'~l .
. .0 l>
t
KIrl
O'~-
(I) :--1MD1
. 18A1CA1ID.1'RI!I
~ ..... TO IE .
[;,
" ,.'
IlSlOhl__.:_gt;H;ow~
U~L!~ociates mc.
Architects Engineers eo;;;itants
Ft=f==l
SITE PLA!
CARMEL CLAY SCHOOL
CARMEL HIGH SCHOC
....
.....
-
.....
..'''~_ 'C',a
PLANING ISSUES
(PROPOSED SITE PLAN):
. ButTering issues with adjoining neighborhood to the West.
.
A second "intersection" just 50 feet East of the intersection
of 2nd Street and 4'" Avenue. Bus and parking lot traffic
converging with main line traffic. It is further compounded
by students crossing who walk from nearby neighborhoods.
Glaring parking deficiency. Less than 20 parking spaces
(net) added to a Site Plan with historical parking problems.
The degree of reliance on remote parking % mile away
is inappropriate. Available close-proximity parking is less
than 45% of the total parking required by ordinance. The
Carmel/Clay Library, churches, businesses, nearby
homcowners and parents are unfairly burdened by
poor planning.
....''-\ .',r'1\
/' ", Jj,,,.f
/. ,>y'.'-' -~,',
;F'0 .! -. (",
tirY;' RECfI'1Et)\~
~' J~" \ is 1003
--\ ' {'-
Q~\. DOCS ift?
, /'--..
'<~~Z~1uIJ}~S~
.
*
. Perpendicular parking proposed on the inside of a curve
and directly across from traffic in que for the
drop-otTIpick-up area adjacent to the new Freshman
Center. A dangerous design, forcing drivers to back up
into main line traffic and directly into the line of cars
parked in the proposed drop-otTIpickup line.
. West side connector road too narrow considering
the responding Fire Station is South of Carmel High School
and potential illegal "parking" on the roadside during games.
No areas identified for future expansion.
\
Respectfully submitted by Paul Spranger,
I
'i~/i
~;i:;~\....,...; ."-,,Tif;..1,. I'
~.. ~., :;-,:.; -;, -.."
! ;
".,
.,....~..
~ .r;'!~:"
I'
~ '.~::-'":,_.._..~~l_~__.,,,".......
KSY
o
--
~,.'"
'..".' ~-"~.'
'it?~~'
.
*
~ 11&1I TO REYMI
RELCICA_.......
TREE8 TO BE RBIDVED
--~
"":
" ,~:
D'\J8~nlU
~ 5'!~owe
Associates ge.
Architects Engineers co;;;/tants
100'
200'
]00'
!Il1I1
SITE PLAN ~
CARMEL CLAY SCHOOLS ~
CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL
~
DOUGLAS D. CHURCH
.JACK G. HITTLE
.J. MICHAEL ANTRIM
MARTIN E. RISACHER
DAVID R. DAY
BRUCE M. BITTNER
BRIAN .J. ZAIGER
LESLIE CRAIG HENDERZAHS
.JORDAN D. CHURCH
AMBER D. SULLIVAN
CHURCH, CHURCH. HITTLE & ANTRIM
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
AN INDIANA LIMITeD LIABILITY PARTNeRSHIP
938 CONNER STREET
NOBLESVILLE, INDIANA 4BDBD
TELEPHONE 317-773-2190
FAX 317.773.5320
MAILING ADDRESS
P. O. BOX 10
NOBLESVILLE, INDIANA 4EiOSI
WWW.CCHALAW.COM
OF COUNSEL
MANSON E. CHURCH
January 21, 2003
/
,
~.
'.121.
lOCI
\/\
\/~.
\-
r- -,\
i-J
FI
l~'-;!
i-.j
/. '--.;
./,,'"'/
.'.T!.:_"C~\)'~/
Roger McMichael
Carmel Clay School Corporation
Re: Plat Vacation
FOR HAND DELIVERY
Dear Mr. McMichael:
You have asked that we prepare an opinion for your consideration on the following
question:
By seeking a plat vacation in order to facilitate planned construction at
Carmel High School, is the Carmel Clay School Corporation acting by and through
its Trustees liable for alleged or potential reduction in value of neighboring
residential real estate?
Our answer to this question is "No."
Reasoning:
Carmel Clay School Corporation is an Indiana Municipal Corporation governed
by both Indiana Constitutional provisions and state statutes. It is charged as a
governmental entity with providing for the common education of the citizens of its
district and, as such, it is empowered to construct buildings and facilities necessary to
meet its legal duties and obligations. No other municipal corporation is entitled to inhibit
or impair or interpret the manner and means by which the School Corporation carries out
these duties. The construction and/or existence of a school in this specific area of the
community is permitted by underlying Constitutional and statutory law as well as by the
Carmel Clay Zoning Ordinances which recognize that a school is a permitted use
pursuant to special exception. There are simply NO reported cases in Indiana or
anywhere else that we have been able to find that subscribe to the theory that a
neighboring property owner is entitled to damages by virtue of the existence of or
construction of a school nearby which does not involve the actually "taking" of a part of
that neighbor's real estate.
The issue in the circumstances now prevailing may be drawn even more narrowly
and arises from the suggestion that the school corporation participate in some form of an
appraisal exercise suggested during the Carmel-Clay Plan Comniission Subcommittee
hearings. There, we understand, it was proposed that if the "before and after" appraisals
,
concluded that there is diminished value to the neighbor's residence following the
construction of the improvements proposed on the property being acquired by the School
Corporation, then the School Corporation would be obligated to pay this difference
between the "before" value and the "after" value. For many, many reasons, we believe
that such an act would be inappropriate. Among these reasons are the following: (I) In
our opinion it would be contrary to law, for the reasons set out above; (2) Such payment
or payments could subject the School Corporation to an audit note from the State Board
of Accounts for improper payments; and, (3) Perhaps most significant, it could set a very
problematic precedent for all local government units, including the City of Carmel. As
noted above, there is no legal duty or obligation for governmental entities to pay damages
for using property that such unit owns for its governmental purposes. Distinguished from
actually "taking" property, or, exercising the power of eminent domain, this proposal
asks for the school to pay for exercising its right to "use" its property for its express
governmental purpose. If the same standard or precedent were applied to city, township,
library or other governmental "uses", you can readily understand there would be
resistance and a fundamental disagreement that any such legal obligation exists!
Potential Remedies for Neighbors:
In the event that any neighboring property owner believes
himself/herself/themselves to be damaged by reason of the use of the property owned by
the School Corporation or the act of partial or complete vacation of a plat by the Carmel
Plan Commission, the Courts of Hamilton County are open to seek redress. The means
by which the "use" issue can be tested is the filing of a complaint against the School
Corporation for inverse condemnation. The Court will consider the question of whether
or not the actions of the School Corporation provide a legal basis for damages. The
decision of the Court in such an event would resolve the question. The Carmel Clay Plan
Commission is not the place to address this significant legal issue.
Conclusion:
We have intentionally omitted legal citations from this letter but they are available
to you if required. We are familiar with the case known as the "Daniel's" case and
believe that it is distinguishable by virtue of the fact that the vacation of the plat in that
case was to facilitate a non-governmental use. We are also familiar with the case known
as the "Scott" case and it is also distinguishable because it deals with a private or non-
governmental use. With regard to the underlying legal citations as well as the case law,
arguments or discussions regarding their application are better suited for a courtroom.
For all ofthe foregoing reasons, we believe that it would be inappropriate for the
School Corporation to agree to participate in a scheme that might result in unlawful
payments being made to neighboring owners of real property.
City of Carmel
CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
JANUARY 7, 2003 MINUTES
4. Docket No. 165-02 PV; Carmel High School Campus (Plat Vacation)
The applicant seeks to vacate a portion Carmelwood Subdivision in order to modify the
Carmel High School Campus. The site is zoned R-2 (Residential).
Filed by Allen J. Cradler, AIA of Fanning/Howey Associates for Carmel Clay Schools.
Present for Petitioner: Chuck Taylor of Fanning/Howey Associates; Mark Hartman and Dr.
Underwood, Carmel Clay Schools; Roger McMichael, School Administration.
Pedestrians and vehicles can be moved along the corridor at the same time by controlling the
intersection and remove the conflict points and provide access for cars in another direction. The
proposal is a good, workable system. The biggest point, though, is separating the traffic between
the school use and neighborhood use so there is no through traffic.
Mark Hartman appeared on behalf of the school and explained that the community had been
canvassed and four plans with two or three options were submitted. Plans were to be finalized by
the 65-member committee and the Superintendent and a recommendation given to the School
Board. That process started in 2001 ending in early 2002. The process was open to the public,
well-publicized, there were 5 meetings, and the final analysis came down to the need to build a
freshman center on Carmel High School proper, somewhere. Also, the recommendation was to
build another middle school and determine its location. Property owners were invited to attend
the meetings and offer public comment.
Dr. Underwood appeared before the Committee also on behalf of the school. The big concern
was the educational programs for the students. Initially, there was the thought that having a
freshman center with separation from the rest of the school was preferable. Also, having the
freshman center close to the High School had some merit and provided for an easier transition
from middle school to high school
Roger McMichael, Assistant Superintendent, said the school was in the process of advertising the
Averill home for sale. There were some right-of-way issues that were not addressed and a
number of issues that the plat vacation will allow the school to clarify, consolidate the property
and allow them to move forward.
Jon Dobosiewicz said that based on a number of comments delivered at public hearing in
December, the Department met with the applicant and suggested that they produce for the Plan
Commission and the BZA the exhibits presented this evening. To their credit, they have done a
good job with the document for review in determining the setbacks and buffers, and have made it
easier to determine. The development standard requirements will be a matter for the BZA to
S: \PlanCommission \Minutes \SubdivisionCommitteeMinutes \2003jan
I
explore. However, it was apparent at the Plan Commission meeting that a better understanding
of the process was wanted. At the end ofthis process, it would be good to have the Plan
Commission make some kind of representation to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
The Department's position in regard to the plat vacation was to recommend approval to the
Commission, knowing that the BZA would have an opportunity to review the development
standards and setbacks and design requirements with the school when they came through with the
Special Use Amendment. At this time the Department is recommending that this item be
forwarded to the full Plan Commission with a favorable recommendation.
What was not specifically addressed was the provision in the requirements through this plan.
The Department is not asking that the Plan Commission approve the plat vacation subject to what
is shown, but the petitioner has made representations that the Plan Commission can rely upon.
Part ofthe plan being proposed to the BZA includes the installation of a privacy fence, and the
landscaping plan. It is not suggested that the Plan Commission approve the plat vacation subject
to the landscape plan shown or the tree replacement and mitigation efforts because the Plan
Commission could be stepping on the BZA's toes. We can rely upon this representation that the
petitioner will move forward with this plan to the BZA. These representations, to the
Department's mind, are adequate and meet the intent and spirit of plat vacation. The Department
will reserve additional comments for preview by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Remonstrance:
Marshall and Sandy Andish, 120 Sylvan Lane, Carmelwood, 32 years in the community and 14
years in his current home, states his house has become unmarketable because of the school's
plan. If they cannot sell their home, they may be forced to rent it. If this proposal is approved, it
is a true inequity because of the false representations by the school to Mr. & Mrs. Andish.
????, 135 Audubon Drive, has monitored this process and states that it has been open and
informative. Believes the proposal is a good plan and eliminates a number of current problems.
Mr. ???? agreed with Mr. Andish that his property is now becoming a buffer and that is a definite
issue. Perhaps some consideration should be given to Mr. & Mrs. Andish. Having the high
school as a neighbor is different than any other situation-having 3800 persons uniformly come
into that locality sandwiched between two neighborhoods is different, but it also has some nice
things-this is a wonderful neighborhood. The school is trying to do a number of things above
and beyond the norm to retain a number of the wonderful things about the neighborhood.
Bryan Borlick, 145 Audubon Drive, Carmelwood, said it was difficult to feel sorry for Mr. &
Mrs. Andish because when they purchased their home, there was a vacant corn field next door
and the likelihood is that it would be developed. Mr. Borlick said he had a problem with the
school board's proposal. Mr. Borlick said he purchased his home because of the land, 212 acres,
and trees. Mr. Borlick did not expect the high school to further expand and he is now dealing
with traffic, noise, (rap music) and football games and noise until 11 at night. Mr. Borlick
believes the traffic situation has now been addressed but still has three concerns: Light, Noise,
and Trees. It is unique to have residential properties with such old trees. It looks as if some
trees will be saved and that is good. Mr. Borlick said he was not notified by the school of their
plans and only learned of the proposal from his neighbors. Mr. Borlick finally received a
S: \PlanCommission \Minutes \SubdivisionCommitteeMinutes \2003jan
2
registered letter from the school on January 3,2003. One tree is worth one parking space, and
for every tree we can save by getting rid of a parking space, it is a good thing. Currently there is
a big open field that is not used for anything-let's put 20 parking spaces back there and take 20
away from the current proposal, thereby providing a larger buffer. A high school is an
"incompatible use." I have kids running through my yard all of the time. Another item is nature/
wildlife. There are two-foot tall homed owls, deer, etc. There will be an ecological impact in
terms ofthe number of trees removed.
Wayne Haney asked about the berming and its location.
Jeff Bolinger, Landscape Architect, said there is berming occurring in some of the separation
between the garage and the residential properties. Mr. Bolinger pointed out those places where
berms will be located.
The parking in question replaces only the existing parking because it will be lost by the addition.
One of the designs ofthe freshman center is to have an identity and a front door that is separate
from the main high school. The school has tried to balance parking and re-location of existing
trees as well as saving as many as possible.
Dave Cremeans said it looked like the school was taking out about 50 trees.
Ron Houck commented it would have been more logical to acquire property along Sylvan Lane
and structure development around that road rather than crossing the road. Audubon Lane could
have been left as is and separated from the proposed development.
Chuck Taylor? Said the proposal takes advantage ofthe natural drainage and grading. Part ofthe
property is very low and the natural drainage goes right through it.
Jon Dobosiewicz reported the Department had talked with the school approximately 6 months
regarding this proposal and made sure that the school would be sensitive to the landscaping-the
minimum would not work! This particular plan could be implemented without the two parcels.
Two of the parcels the school has incorporated into the design. The two parcels enhance the
buffer from what is existing today, (130 to 170 feet) to over 300 feet between the structure and
the nearest homesite. Jon Dobosiewicz disagreed with the premise that the Andish home
becomes the transition-it is the adjacent lot and the adjacent area of a portion of the lot
purchased by the school. There are no buffers that exist within the community that are superior
to the buffering and transitioning provided by the school. It is vastly superior to the minimum
required under the Ordinance.
An unidentified member of the public said he supports the proposal and feels it is probably the
best alternative. When asked, he did not feel that his property would be devalued by this
proposal.
Jon Dobosiewicz commented that the school has expressed their responsibility with regard to the
expansion ofthe facility, to mitigate negative impacts. The school has not used eminent domain
in proceeding with this because that is not their style and they do not want to force the issue. The
s: \PlanCommission \Minutes \SubdivisionCommitteeMinutes \2003jan
3
school will make it right with the property owners to the extent that their obligation is the
difference between the appraisal pre-change and an appraisal post-change. If the school were
willing to prepare a condition that Plan Commission attorney John Molitor could review and
approve, it would address the issue. The school attorney could interface with the Plan
Commission attorney and come up with language appropriate to satisfy the condition under
which the Commission would adopt the proposal.
Ron Houck moved to recommend approval of Docket No. 165-02 PV, Carmel High School
Campus Plat Vacation, subject to the condition that prior to the full Plan Commission meeting,
the attorney for the school and John Molitor work together to provide a written commitment that
mitigates any property value damage to the two remaining parcels on the south side of Sylvan
Lane. The motion was seconded by Stephanie Blackman and approved 5-0.
S: \PlanCommission \ Minute s \SubdivisionCommitteeMinutes \2003jan
4
CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
Carmel, Indiana
PLAT VACATION
FINDINGS OF FACT
Docket No.: 14.02 PV
Petitioner: Metro Acquisitions, LLC
Part of Plat to be Vacated: Tract "A" and Tract "B" of Walters Plaza Replat, Plat Book 2,
Pg. 267 in the Hamilton County Recorders Office.
Under Indiana Code 36-7-3-11, the Plan Commission shall approve the Application to Vacate
Plat, Covenants and Public Utilities only upon a fmding that:
. Conditions in the platted Tracts have changed so as to defeat the original
purpose of the Tracts in the plat which the Petitioner seeks to vacate.
It is in the public interest to vacate the Tracts within the plat.
The value of that part of the land in the plat not owned by the Petitioner ~ill not
Based on all the evidence presented by the Petitioner, we fmd the above facts to
be true and approve of the requested plat vacation, including vacation of the plat
covenants and public utilities for Tract" A" and Tract "B" of Walters Plaza
Replat, Plat Book 2, Pg. 267 in the Hamilton County Recorders Office.
We hereby disapprove of the plat vacation request for the following reasons:
1.
2.
3.
Carmel Plan Commission
Carmel, Indiana-
Petition for Vacation of Plat
1. The Petitioner is the owner of Lots 3, 4,8, 17 and18 in Carmelwood Subdivision, along with
the property at 420 2nd Street. The addresses and parcel numbers for these properties are
listed in the cover letter of this information packet. - -
2. The Petitioner has acquired the Lots in this area in order to provide additional space for the
construction of the Freshman Center addition to Carmel High School. The additional
property will provide space to maintain a proper separation from adjacent residential
properties, replace parking removed by the location of the proposed Clddition, and provide a
means to disconnect drives from the high school campus and the adjacent neighborhood.
3. The Petitioner will submit a vacation of the existing right-of-way along the roads surrounding
the vacated lots to the Carmel City Council for review and approval.
4. The Petitioner will also dedicate new public right-of-way and construct a portion of new public
road to reconnect Sylvan Land and Audubon Drive through the Board of Public Works. The
area to be dedicated is shown on the attached drawings.
5. It is in the public interest to vacate these parcels in order to allow the expansion of the
Carmel High School campus to accommodate the growing school-age population of the City
of Carmel. The proposed Fre;shman Center Project will keep all students in grades 9 through
12 on the High School Campus at one location as desired by the community who assisted
Carmel Clay Schools in developing the educational guidelines for this Project. The vacation
of these lots will also stop the vehicular traffic from the High School Campus from passing
through the adjacent neighborhood. This has been a constant concern and objection from
the remaining property owners in the neighborhood.
6. The granting of this Petition will not substantially diminish the value of the Lots in the plat not
owned by the Petitioner. The vacation of the plats will allow more buffer space to the
majority of remaining properties than currently exists or would have existed without the
property acquisition. The elimination of traffic from the High School Campus will also
removal a nuisance from the area that could have negatively affected property value.
,,,.,,,1':
..y '?orJt;)~
~mGSOFFACTFORMFOR
PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION.
. CarmeJlClay})1anCommission
Carmel, Tnn;~na
DOCKET NO.. 165...02 PV
Plat Vacation
NAME OF SUBDMSION: ('~7'mpl'<11nl"\ti.
PETITIONER: Carmel Clay Sr.hoolR
_ Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the representations and
certifications of the staff of the Department ofCommnmty Services, I determine that the
plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. .
_ I hereby approve oftbe primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as
agreed to by the petitioner:
Condition 1. Existing public right-of-wav will be submitted to the Carmel City
Council for review and approval.
Condition 2. New public rhzht-of-wav and public street will be dedicated through
the Board of Public Works to connect Sylvan Lane and Audubon Drive.
Condition 3.
It is in the public interest to vacate these parcels for expansion of
the public School. creation of buffer Rpar.p., ann p.1im ins:ltion of
traffic concerns in adjacent neighborhood.
_ I hereby disaonrove of the primary plat as submitted for the fbllowing reasons:
1.
2.
3.
DATED THIS
DAY OF
.199
Commi~sion Member
s:\plancomm\app\pcfindfact
Revised May 1998
u
u
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community SerVices
,
One Civic Square
Carmel. IN 4e032
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
Fax
To: ~a.~~
M /tJi:!3
Fax:
From' ~
Pages:
Phone:
Date: /- /7- ?\j
Re: /k)t4(lk.t'71!.eA.,/ ~ cc:
I
o Urgent 0 Far Review 0 P.lease Comment 0 Please Reply
CJ Please Recycle
i~~.c~ ~ . /~.5-00</-PJ/
c-~h~ )c.i/~ ~4~
o
u
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community SelVices
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 4E032
(317) 571.2417
Fax: (317) 571.2426
Fax
To: ~~
. gf/c! --of/&
Phone:
Re~ ~ (l
.
From~~
t> .
Pages: ~
Date: /-/3- tX..3
Fax:
o Urgent
{t)4P-il.~
~
o For" Review
cc:
o P.lease Comment
o Pfease Reply
o Please Recycle
r ~~L~~RC~ ~~Gt?;P'/
111
ffl
1il \-\1&1 $&t100L. ~ ~
,iiJ \. CA-f&le<<. -rV~
,Ill t. '
iil
m
~j
IiI
ill
:1 ;11 C-H VC+t T"rc- ~ :
ii,)'
!I;I: . s,)(
:1'
I
I
J
(1:\
~ ',.1
I'
fl,
!,!,I LI
ii,' I
il:
~lfl.5.
11'1+ ~_ 6r.S"'TEf\"\ or- ALe ~.ss
1116. ~~ ~~::~ -r:'h::;; 17/lE
LH
ii,11 -; Co - os e s
I
I
~~._~
J /7/ c 3
--
"2-.
3.
4.
loJeott
\....os
'"30- 170'
,
1M.L tt1t Ar;J
-W~.. - SiE\IL F.
fW:..,(
i
i'
: ~ I
ill
111
:1
il
Ii
:;
! I:
1 Ii
I' '
;il
ili
.
.
~E."^O
~HoPf$h ]1) Au- 1t1l~
~"
, w J 2::>>.., l.-Or.~
,
:ry C>W',.J ~ S
EcT3
~ I ':J'E ~_J$ vE
vM.::"':'
I ~
I I /7/(;)~
i / HI~
! ~t.+f c>oL. .
I s. .
~-a.....
I a~J:~~ . ,
.
i -- --
I _c.~i:~~~_~llIGS- """" --
I ~ .~J_n~ o-E-'Elk.H/h~lJ
-
I
~a OJ~~r\ltJ 'J:'t' t:b&.. G-O ""'''' "Na r .... ---
.-------
B. ~6ai!LJt).c.J"\~ J _ JflS"~S5b
~$/~
- G::\tl.::-'l~y ~~c::::. "'Tb ~ElL I.~~~~.s.s-__
-
..------.......,..
I -
----
, -
I 9. CI--t \)lA.i' -r-v. ~ - --_._-
I
- :Ll.E.:: UP frL.\... '~~vB
- ~"J1> ,...~~ ~A~
i
I
I -
I D" ~_<>-J.' .. ~~~, ~-E$s"
- -
. ..--...
\\. ~\~'. o~_.s~.C>.~__t""~J:: ..~ , _
/ ~~~~~ ' 32--~-I-l!fJ'L7Ji,ML.
- ~\~-e:.-l.ss_LL~ . ,
-~\::.tbr -
..
- WU,...'--M o~ 1\'vV!!!tf.. ~&.(I~~ ~~
--
- ~~vJ..._S~~ '- ~~ --..._---.~,
- L.\. 'l-l,... '.~.sve:.5
.-
-:-__1l1..E.x-l::f~ '0 ... 'I
r -
'~ MR. a
Lo..L~&o~ "DL. . iII__ --.-
-
- J~VO~"~ ~ S~_tl. ""!S:m.V-lM..~ A"tb~
- M~_~~I!e::~IIl....~~~$..
. - Il~ ~~, J'lt.~l_-r.: CI:f IS~w ali,_1M --
- SUp l>~ '-6. C>~~ A 0__
"'''''-
II
7&___
--- --I
-.-1'
--_.
-1
-]
iP
'1'1
II
I,
AH
i
'I
I ~~
11 \. WHp,-r"]:x>
:1 ~.
j-s.
t1ltk
541 0"6 <- "
)
V7/03
~
A-,
<<.
ff\<-
1-1_H,
Nb ,"E
c.
t-orlhJh ~~,~
JolE
t)
I I
.
I Co~ fW'
I
I
.
.
" \IVW~ "h.'De.s. g~ ~~ ~
I t...,-v"s..,-,.AT]IJE; '- ~~ OF ~.s
2., tto ~ .. - l.:II'J ".$tn..- ~Io) f'Jbi ~
- JbB PA-iL\(/~~~
- N1' ec>... I CC> ~14S
3~ p
-
. ; ..
~,
b~
,J:;,t1!1FfLW!:r8urN;r-~
7bN: VE
-
".
-
-
4,
,~
-
y ~
I~r#'
1~.ItC:. I#V~V&
-
, ,
.7 -
/~ 117/o~
\1 , t\1 SclloDc- .
. .
,..
.ll.
,
--',-""",--~~-- ~
t "'hi: .N ~ 4-t t30~..s HA-~_ ..,.. ~ . ,_.------~-
i
I
I -
. (l.o~~m~'~CJ!1~-.
- ~L-bi.~CN.Ifs~I:~ _ .sOL..VE__~4~
..... ~~ ~.~ . ~
. ~\1. - .~&."L__ ~
-
""'-~_.-""--~.-..--.-.-
~~ -
,,^'D~'\ ..
.- -_. . -
~-
.AJf~~~_~~~':E_1b-_ft: '"" ~,.~."_Ilo'\.
i ~~k-=.:t~ t=:~-~c..._~ "",..,~ c:c.~~
t'\.OJ ~~S_:l...-_8-~~\C~ ~(;>J..).-.s~Q ~-SI_l:J1E
-.
I ~- rL
~ --
I
L~'"""",--~___.______~
" ~
~ - .
--
-- ~
......
-
-"lIO
.
'''.
-
J
EXHIBIT 1, E-MAIL FROM MARSHALL
ANDICH TO MR. MCMICHAEL(CARMEL
HIGH SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION)
EXHIBIT 11, ARTICLE, "LOCAL FAMILY
STRUGGLES WITH PROPERTY DISPUTE"
WRITTEN BY GARY TREMBLA~ CARMEL
HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT
I~
6J///d)i; '1
..
.-
Page 1 of 1
Marshall Andich
From:
To:
Cc:
,
"Marshall Andich" <mandich@mlbor.net>
<rmcmlcl;la@ccs.k12.in;us> .
<bunderWo@ccs:k12.ln,us>; <bbreed8f1@ccs;k12.ln.us>; <acorley@pcs:k12.in.us>;
<mhartrpar;l@ccs:k12.in.us>; <Banker@NetDirect.Net>;. <jerr:y _charoanczuk@canseca.com>;
<DavidG@WlndowsAndSiding.Com>; <ld~rckman@aol.com>; <Whaney1393@aol.com>;
<RFHouck@lilly.com>; <icacep@in-motion.net>; <dkk49@hotmailicom>; <pearsonm@tce.com>;
<patr@ki~~.net>; <WAWilson24@aol.com>; <rhancock@Ci.carmel,in.us>;
<jmolitol7@indy..itcom>; <michaelmohr@indy.it.com>; <cwweinkauf@aol;com>;
<ctingley.@CLearmel.in.us> .
SaturdaY, January 04, 20039:09 AM
60 Participants of Study Group for High School Expansion
Sent:
Subject:
Mr. McMicha'el,
I am AGAIN.requesting.the above list which when last asked for several months ago, YOl:J offered no
response. As you are quite aware, my wife and I reside at 120 Sylvan lane which the school is trying to turn into
a buffer and hence devaluate our residence making us a victim of inverse condemnation.
We need this list no later than noon January 7. 2003 in preparationfortheCarmelPlanning.Commission
meeting. . .
It is ourunderstandingthat this information is a matter of PUBLIC RECORD and also is subject to the
"FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT." I am looking forward to your prompt response. Thank you for your
attention.
Mar,s!:1'all Andich
.
,
j
,
1)-
1/4/2003
"
Jan 04 03 02:2211'
Ga~~ u. Trembl.~
..
317-581-9194
11'. 1
Gill/) / IX
Local family strnggles with property dispute
On. a sunny Saturday aftem~on. Marshall and Sandy Andich enjoy the view from
their kitchen window. In their backtard, their dog plays in the leaves that have fallen
from the trees. However, in less than two ~onths, the Andich family may have to leave
their house at 120 Sylvan Laue due to construction of a parking lot for the new freshman
center at this school.
t
Marshall and Sandy have lived in Carmel for 32 years, and they have lived in
their house on Sylvan for 14 years. "(Marshall and I) thought this was going to be our
retirement home," Sandy said "We wouldn't have built next to a parking lot ifwe would
have known (this situation was going to arise)."
However, the current conflict that the Andich family is facing is not the first
complication they have had with the school system. Twelve years ago, the administration
,
acquired a large farm on Smokey Row Road by declaring imminent domain, a legal term
that involves taking property from owners if it is neoessary to faoilitate the students. This
property was used to construct the football stadium and student parking lot. The school
sy~em iOUght more property on A-udobon Drive, a meet near Sylvan Lane located
directly east of this bllilding, but the Andiches and a neighborhood alliance were able to
stop the administratio;a from seizing houses in the looal neighborhood.
Now, this time around, the Andich family does not have s neighborhood alliance
behind them for support. "We don't have any support like we did 12 years ago Men we
went through this," Marshall said.
. .
Jan 04 03 02,:,221D
Garl:l III.. Tremtllal:l
317-'5'91-'9194
1D.2
In,addition, acoordingtoMarshall,. the lack ofmpportfromsthe school system
upsets him. "lhavenewr seen amore~rhancledadministration'thinC.armorClay
Schools." Marshall said. Aocording to Marshall, the administration has nOt been honest
with him and'his wife because they never + them about the construction of aparkmg
lot when it wa.first developing. "This does not represent what a good school system
. .
should be. (The administration) didn~ even include (Sandy and Iinthe~velopment
..
process) this tUne," Marsh8ll said.
Marshall and Saa:dy also laok support from.oommWlity members. However,
Marshall said that this situation has an effect on everybody, including students at this
school. "'Fhis is not evOI1 good:for the students' because someday they are going to be
.
working aad ha~ing families (and they are going to think that seizing p.roperty from
residentsis OK)."
,
"We thought (the situatiOn from 12 years ago) was the end of(mur confucts with
the schoolsystem," S'aI)dy'said. Now, they are facing a similar conflict with the system
this year,. only it is direotly affecting their home environment. "'Fhis,time' (the
construction)'is very close, too close," Sandy said. "(The school system really is)
demoyinga,neighborhood. ...1fthe adminimat10n approves the curi"entplan for the
parking lot, the Andich,homeand only one other house will remain on Sylv8n Lane. The
school system; has' purchased ,every other home on the street for ccmstI:uCtion purposes,
and there is noJonger a buffer between the Andiches house and this scliool The'patking
lot will be less'than 40 feet from the fence in their backyard.
",
"CThis 'situation) 'is'a tough thing," Marshall said "This[s~not,a,fair way of doing
~,
things to people because (the system)is taking our quality oflifea'Way." S'andy said that
. ...
Jen 04 03 02:23f)
Gel"';:j 1.1. TI"'eml::lle~
317-581-9184
10.3
she would have a rough time getting through the construction process because she is
allergic to dust and develops severe.~graine headaohes fl.'om the loud noises. "Even if
.
the district doesn't buy our house, we' can't stay here," Marshall said.
In addition, the Andiches are concerned that the construction of the parking lot
will affect Pocko, the family dog. According to Marshall, Pocko's veterinarian informed
him that the dog might also suffer from headaches due to ~e high-pitched sounds, which
could come from the construction site.
When oonstruotion begins in early spring, Marshall and Sandy have deoided to
move into a different neighbOll1ood, permanently. "(Our new residence) is not near as
nice as this house," Sandy said. "If (we were not facing this situation) we would not be
leaving. ,.
According to :Marshall, the ideal situation at this point would be for the district to
t purchase their home at appraised value because they are unhappy with the construction of
the parking lot. In the beginning of the process, the district originally had the Andich
home appraised, and Marshall thought that they system would purchase the house for
additional parking spaces.
However, that wa~ not the caQe. The district used tax dollars to have the land
appraised, but it was pointless, Marshall said, because the system never intended on
buying their home for oonstruotion.
Acoordin.g to Roger McMichael, assistant superintendent for business affairs, the
district does not need the Andich home for constmction of the parking lot. In addition,
McMichael said that the district is not interested in purchasing any additional property,
"
t-
Jan 04 03 02f24p
Garl:f lli.rl"'embla~
317- 5'91 - 9194
p.4
inoludins,the Andiches' property because the parking lot plansaie.,noittlJlegotiahi..at thiI
point.
Because, of-the parking lot beingoonstruoted SO dIose to th'eir home, Marshallud
Sandy said'thatthey are constantly worned about their upcoming fulancial, situation. ''We
don'tknowH'andwhen this house will sell," Marshall said. "We'te'probably gOing to
lose a 10tofcmo1'ley!' If MarShall and Sandy are unable to seU their home, they will be
paying taxes, insurance, and..utilities' at both, residences.
lhetiouble with the district is not the only souroe of pain, for 'MarShall and
Sandy. AcdordingtoMarsh.a11, there has been persOnal trauma:inNolvedas well.
,
According'.toSandy, Marshall lies awake doring,the night becauso'of aU the stress from
.
this situation. In'addition, Marshall said that he has lost many busmess,dealsand taken
too much time away from his work in order to d'eal'with this siti18tiOn. "We've never had
!'.~
, this kind of trauma before," Marshall said.
MafShaU also ~dthat students have wandered onto his property after iQhool to
smoke with,their friends and.he has had to ohasethese kidsaway'On seVeral ocoasions. In
addition, student drivers drive ~o to 60 miles per hour dO'WJlthestreet after sohool and
often do l1otabideby1he Itop'iignsin the area.
Furthermore, Marshal1 and Sandy said that although theyhaye heenin the
. . '
oomnnuiilyc longer than mostmembers.ofthe administration have, Marshall and Sandy's
. .
~eeling9 are.'notJimportaD.t. Marshall was bom and raised in Kokomo, au:dboth he and
I. . :., .
Sandy graduatO'dfrom st8t1universities."I was taughtto,have.respeotforyour elders,"
Sandy said "Some students thought (that us being in this situation and having to move
out) was OK because we were just old people."
,
Jen 04 03 02:25jD
Ge"':::J lJ. T"'l!!mble~
317-S91-9194
jD.s
"(The situation) has oaused us a lot of grief all year long," Marshall said. "It has
just caused undue stress."
.I\lthough the situation discourages the whole family, :Marshall and Sandy said
they plan to fight until the end "So far, I have made a little bit of progress, but not
enough at this time," Marshall said.
According to Charles Tyler, the architect from Fanning/Howey Associates who is
in oharge of the freshman oenter, the residents who will. remain on Audobon and Sylvan
after the oonstruotion will reoeive several aooommodations after oonstrnction of the
parking lot. First, the entrance to Audobon Drive from the school will be blocked and
become only a sidewalk for emergency vehicles. In. addition. Tyler said that the architects
are attempting to maintain a sizeable buffer between the properties that ..",ill remain on
Audobon and Sylvan after construction is complete.
t After the family attends a planning commission meeting at City Hall later this
month to find out the l~est information on the construction of the parking lot, they will
deoide the next step in their .fight with the district. Marshall said that if not everything
goes well at the meeting, he and his wife could take their argument to the legal system.
Although Marshall !;aid he is disappointed about giving up hilil hou&e becau&e he
likes being close to the downtown area so much, he still has some hope that the district
could purohase their home at appraised value so they do not have to pay taxes on two
houses.
"(This situation) is the last thing that we wanted to enter our lives." Marshall said.
"We really learned our lesson (about living near a big school) the hard way'" Functions
Jan 04 03 02:2S~
Gal"":I IJ. Tl""embla:l
317-591-91S4
~.G
that take place at the school during the night and on weekends have also caused
disturbanoes for the Andioh family.
"r am not through (fighting for my property)." Marshall said. "Somebody is
literally taking a bulldozer to my backyard."
~
Page 2 ur ~
Carmel High School
..,J
..'
,
,
.
.~..
;u..t .~
. ' .:';1
..J
(:"
", ,.
c....
., ,)
\..t.
....
,
.........'
" \
I'
n i: ",
..J
I.
,
, I
! J . I..
~ I~
...
.'.
I . .. ' .,.' ,,,..' 0
I ,.(1:'.111 t11:"I'III"I~I8- -: OHI!:IiHI~i!Hl!iO
~ ; . "1"'1 t' -~.. . ,
. ~ .-:.0 ':- .."l",~ I ,11'11' 9 (\llI:lWlLiH mlm,~
... .' . . , -
I
,.j
-1
.-......
N
..
, ;
.
II'
"
r- _ _ t_ ._... _...
_ __4__/.J ...,.~.......
,.10..,41
n..............tlrlrI h .
_f' ~_~It
1117?i?nOi
u U
Carmel Clay~~~!!ools - Continuing Excellence in
Educatiol1:\SS;jJ.r.,.)>,
/(;J., \/ A '''. ':.,
/~:;::.; ~ ' c~)'.
December 20, 2002 ("/ ~ECr~\JE~ \:~~\
F: J~\\ 'c:"'" r~i
Members \>, \)0 ..) /~:i
Carmel Clay Plan CommisSi<:m /(:1
City of Carmel '<Z~'j>'-r-'-rc-:\</
Carmel, Indiana '-z.i_LJ~~>
RE: Plat Vacation
Carmel High School
At the December 16, 2002 meeting of the Carmel Clay Plan Commission, Carmel Clay
Schools presented a request to vacate several parcels of property in the Carmelwood
Subdivision (Docket No. 165-02 PV). During the public hearing portion of the docket
presentation, several issues were raised by persons speaking against the request. In
particular, reference was made to secret meetings of a 60 person committee, and lack of
meetings with the school neighbors. The following information is being provided to clear up
any inaccuracies of some of those statements and to demonstrate the extent that the school
corporation went to in an effort to involve the committee and the high school neighbors.
In 2001, the Carmel Clay Schools Facilities Planning Committee was formed. The committee
was composed of students, parents, community leaders, educators and interested community
members. There were 64 members on this committee who were either invited to participate or
who expressed an interest in participating. All individuals who expressed an interest in
participating were appointed to the committee. The committee's formation and activities were
well publicized by the local media. All meetings of the committee were open to the public.
The Facilities Planning Committee met on five occasions during the spring of 2001 to study
the school district's future facility needs based on current enrollment and facility capacity,
projected enrollment growth and facility needs, and current programming interests and
concerns. The four areas of focus for facility implications were the early childhood program,
pay-far-service all day kindergarten, and enrollment capacities at the junior high schools and
high school. The recommendations of this committee did not include design alternatives.
Based on the recommendations of the Facilities Planning Committee, the Board of School
Trustees for Carmel Clay Schools subsequently approved a project to construct a Freshman
Center at the high school. During the development of the design for this project, the school
corporation and their design consultants have held five meetings to which the adjacent
neighbors of the high school were invited. The first meeting was held November 20, 2001 and
the most recent meeting was September 17, 2002. All meeting invitations were sent by mail to
all property owners immediately adjacent to the school and any others requesting inclusion.
Additionally, various members of the school administration and the architects have met or
spoken with neighbors who have called with questions.
Facilities & Transportation Department - 5185 East 13151 Street, Cannel, IN 46033
317/844-8207 -Fax 317/571-9659
u
'.:~
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
. .'
One Civic Square
Cannel, IN 4E032
(317) 571 ~2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
Fax
1b'~
It;! /vtff3
Fax:
Phone:
.~
",,,,/. '. . ,
Re: ..~.4!'i)
.~
From' ~
Pages: ~
/-02 - 03
Date:
. 'l27'V,ht<~ cc:
o Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply
u
o Please Recycle
o!t~k~~. /b5-o~;4/
L~}ii.L?~~
y
o
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 4Em2
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
Fax
Phone:
From: VOry
Pages: c?
Date: /~ - O? '/ - 0 c:3l,
To: A/~ atZd~r-
Fax: j?f!f ~ (JIb
Re:~'d0;';"A-~~dq cc:
o Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply
o Please Recycle
Zbc/e/ ~. /~5-0d ~t/
C~~/b~~
\
EROS AND SEDIMENT CONTR LAN
TECHNICAL REVIEW AND COMMENT
Hamilton County Soil and Water Conservation District
1108 South 9th Street, Noblesville IN 46060
Ph- 317-773-1432 or Email at john-south@iaswcd.org
PROJECT NAME: Freshman Center for Carmel/Clay Schools
SUBMITTED BY: Mr. Allen Cradler Carmel/ Clay School Corporation
Fanning/Howey Associates Inc
9025 North River Road, Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46240
REVIEWED BY:
John B. South P.E.
Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control
PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURE: Plan Review Date: 12/17/02
Acreage: 4 ac
LOCATION: North side of existing Carmel HS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Sec. 25
TOWNSHIP: 18N RANGE: 4E
CIVIL TOWNSHIP: Clay
SOIL SURVEY MAP SHEET: 51
The technical review and comments are intended to evaluate the completeness of the erosion and sediment control plan for the
project. The erosion and sediment control plan submitted was not reviewed for the adequacy of the engineering design. All
practices included in the plan, as well as those recommended in the comments should be evaluated as to their feasibility by a
qualified individual with structural practices designed by a qualified engineer. The plan has not been reviewed for local, state,
or federal permits that may be required to proceed with this project. Additional information, including design calculations may
be requested to further evaluate the erosion and sediment control plan.
The erosion and sediment control plan has been reviewed and it has been determined that the plan:
Satisfies the minimum requirements and intent of 327IAC 15-5 (Rule 5). Notification will be forwarded to the
Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
X Does not satisfy the minimum requirements and intent of 327IAC 15-5 (Rule 5); deficiencies are noted in the
checklist and in the comments section. Deficiencies constitute potential violations of the rule and must be
adequately addressed for compliance. The information necessary to satisfy the deficiencies must be submitted:
Note: Erosion and sediment control plan needs to be submitted prior to demolitin work.
Proper implementation of the erosion and sediment control plan and inspections of the construction site by the developer or a
representative are necessary to minimize off-site sedimentation. The developer should be aware that unforeseen construction
activities and weather conditions might affect the performance of a practice or the erosion and sediment control plan. The plan
must be aflexible document, with provisions to modify or substitute practices as necessary.
Revised 4 / 97
cc: Carmel DOCS, Surveyor, File
u
Q
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
One Civic Squate
Carmel, IN 46032
(317) 571.2417
Fax: (317) 571.2426
Fax
To:
!liluv &Ii~
!1~ '0013
F~m' ~
Pages:~~. ~
Date: /:J. ./;2. -0 ~
Fax:
::~~
cc:
o Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply
o Please Recycle
~ 1Jjh AU
/&5 -1):( ?V
~q~anningIHowey
U "lJl:J Associates, me.
Architects Engineers Consultants
T
R A
N
s
M
T
T
A
L
To:
Ramona Hancock
Department of Community Services
City of Carmel
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032 n.. \ll/
Allen J. Cradler, AlA If-(J ;y.
Project Manager/Senior Associate
Datf}:
December 6, 2002
Project:
Carmel High School Freshman Center
Carmel Clay Schools
Carmel, IN
Project No. 201105.00
From:
NO. OF COPIES DESCRIPTION OF ITEMS
20 Plan Commission Information Packets
-
/
Sent via: D Mail
D Fax
D Overnight .
D UPS
~ Hand Deliver
D Pickup
COMMENTS:
ajc/sal
~
~ Nt\)
Q~\f\ ~(\;.\.f)
".\.... ~ . f\~\'l!""
\\'tt ~-
\)\J\;S
9025 North River Road, Suite 200 "l Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
(317) 848-0966 "I Fax (317) 848-0843 "l http://www.thai.com
o
o
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Cannel, IN 40032
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
Fax
To. ~1:JJ~
F;oo . L/f -/ ?7~
From:
~
tL.
Pages:
Phone: Date: /C? - ~ - 0<:3\
Ro. ~ a-~~x':-.) ~ =
'e.ce/IVtLuv /'7.. .~O\
~~;L);;::4./ /6.F'-Od /V
u
o
J\fJ~
I
One CI\.
Carmel ~
(317) 5
Fax: (3~
~~.~"
~ ... O~~)
. fJ \.\to
~.
Fax
To: 4. ~L--6A.-J .
Fax: cf # -- t/~t<3
Fn2m: 9 ~
Pages: / /
Phone:
Date: /02. -..3-o~
.
Re: ~.,L / ~/ ~ cc:
'TiirhCi./ t/dCa'//~ c./ ~/4f
u
(.,)
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
,
,
Jvf~
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46J32
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
Fax
To: d C~~~
/ fl-- tJJ'{6
Fax:
From: ~
f/
Pages: :7'
Phone:
Date: /0"2 -...3 - O,d;(
,
Re: ~ r: eX 6'-/~ CC:
rt::1"/ I/#'led:. :fiP/1 /=;)~&" ~ ~(..;r
Fax
0---
I
Y'^ '91ft RAnlN ow I ~
~63q- 6~Lflf_
- ~ ,~~
#-6f<'" .
One Civic Sl
Carmel, IN ~
(317) 571-2~
Fax: (317) 5
"-
TO:~ x!~u~&c~LJ
Fax: ~39-~f/
Phone:
From. S}-J.
Pages: //
Date: / c;2. -..3 - Oq
o~
/ ./
y' \P ~~
Re:~~~ ~OS. ~ ~
#'-;ha/ I/d Cd .,1 o/} 1-7Zz r
cc=
Fax
u
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 4aJ32
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2425
(,;)
T~..-' ~~~~k.0 From:
Fax: 6 3? - b9! (LfL Pages:
,
~
,z
,
/0<. 3 -- o~.
Phone:
Date:
i /
J~~
Re:
06) ~ cc:
/ZCdr';/1 ;k/i~7 r>~,C'r
-J
-0
o
i\
CARMEUCLA Y PLAN COMMISSION
Carmel, Indiana
PLAT VACATION
FINDINGS OF FACT
Docket No.: 14 -02 PV
Petitioner: Hamilton County
Part of Plat to be Vacated: Lots 24.25.26.27.28.29.30.31.32 (''the Lots") - of the Danbury Estates
Subdivision
Under Indiana Code 36-7-3-11, the Plan Commission shall approve the Petition for Vacation of part of
the plat only upon a fmding that:
. Conditions in the platted Lots have changed so as to defeat the original purpose of the
Lots in the plat which the Petitioner seeks to vacate.
. It is in the public interest to vacate the Lots within the plat.
. The value of that part of the land in the plat not owned by the Petitioner will not be
diminished by vacation.
K Based on all the evidence presented by the Petitioner, we find the above facts to be true
and approve of the requested plat vacation, including vacation of covenants for the Lots,
in Danbury Estates Subdivision as recorded in Instrument No. 9429324 in plat cabinet
No.1, slide 435, in the Office of the Hamilton County Recorder
We hereby disapprove of the plat vacation request for the following reasons:
1.
2.
3.
wi,
u
o
~~
Dated this J!L day of fll&e~
,2002.
STATE OF INDIANA )
)SS:
COUNTY OF HAMILTON )
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, thisR day of O~ ,2002,
personally appeared the within named Marilyn Anderson, as President and Ramona Hancock, as Secretary
of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission of the City of Carmel, and acknowledged the execution of the
foregoing document.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
~d~
c'nn i e S. Ti ~(ev , tary ublic
Residing in Hamil n czOunty, Indiana
My Commission Expires:
/~~ ;{, ,107lt{
This instrument prepared by Michael A. Howard, Attorney at Law, 694 Logan Street, NoblesviIle, Indiana, 46060, 773-4212.
-JJ
,
'"
;)
1-
n
n
.,
"
"
'"
n
n
.,
'"
"
"
,.
::;
;;
=
~
~
::>
RES "C" = 4609.9 m2( 49620 ft. 2)
"
'-
'-
'- -<<16'
" <1<1'
"-
'-
'-
'-
'-
'-
t.D
..-
-i
m
o
m
r--:
I") .
n
t.D
-i
,.......
o
L1i
,.......
Q,
0;
28
150.33'
CENTER LINE STATION
IS IN METRIC SCALE.
R/W
PAR. NO. 48
29
ES "8"=419.3 m2(4513 m2)
R/W
PAR. NO.4A
SCALE: 1" = 60'
RESIDUE
PAR. NO. 4E
103.27'
27
~
'tr.
CP.
l?
o
'tr.
CP.
7.03'
135.77'
-----------
23
26
R/W
PAR. NO. 4C
97.45'
135.77'
o Right of Way to Carmel
o Wall Parcel to Owner of South Development
o Right of Way to INDOT
o Land to Kite as included in PUD Ordinance 2-344
;.
"Q
Q
BEFORE THE CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
PETITION FOR PARTIAL VACATION OF PLAT
The undersigned, Board of Commissioners of Hamilton County ("the Petitioners") allege
as follows:
1. The Petitioners are the owners of Lots 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32 ("the
Lots") in Danbury Estates, a subdivision located within the City of Cannel,
Indiana, as per the plat thereof which was duly recorded in the Office of the
Hamilton County Recorder on the 30th day of June, 1994, as Instrument No.
9429324 in Plat Cabinet No.1, Slide 435, as evidenced by the Deeds to Petitioner
which are attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked Exhibit A.
2. The Petitioner is the duly elected and acting executive and legislative branch of
Hamilton County, and has acquired the Lots along with other real estate in order
to construct a ramp from north bound Keystone Avenue to 146th Street at the
intersection of 146th Street and Greyhound Pass ("the Project").
3. The Petitioners need to vacate part of the plat of Danbury Estates which includes
the Lots. The portions of Durham Drive and Dublin Drive, contiguous with the
Lots, have been previously vacated by action of the Cannel City Council in
Ordinance No. D-1529-01.
4. The portion of the plat to be vacated is described in Exhibit B and is shown in
Exhibit C.
5. The plat needs to be partially vacated in order to allow the construction of the
Project and to convey the excess land located west of the Project to the owner of
land west of the commercial development west of the Project. The commercial
land west of the Project is being constructed pursuant to Ordinance No. 2-344, for
the 146th Street and Keystone Avenue Planned Unit Development ("the
.'
(.)
(,,)
6.
Ordinance"), which was duly passed by the Common Council of the City of
Carmel on the 17th day of April, 2000, a copy of which is attached hereto and
marked Exhibit D.
The Ordinance includes a development plan for portions of Lots 26, 27, 28, and
29 which are located west of the right of way line of the Project.
Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a complete list of the owners of all of the
remaining lots in Danbury Estates pursuant to Indiana Code 36-7-3-11.
There are no single family residences on the lots.
The Petitioners will be dedicating right of way to the City of Carmel for
additional right of way south of Dublin Drive in order to permit a turn-a-round for
Dublin Drive and to permit access to the property owner located south of the Lots.
The area to be dedicated is shown and described as parcels 4C and 4D on the
attached ExhibitF.
The Petitioners also seek to vacate the covenants, conditions, and restrictions of
Danbury Estates recorded on the 30th day of June, 1994, as Instrument No.
9429325 only as to the lots described above.
The conditions concerning the Lots contained in the plat of Danbury Estates have
changed since the date of the filing ofthe Plat because the Petitioners have
acquired the Lots for public right of way, and because ofthe construction of the
Project, portions of Lots 26,27,28, and 29 are no longer contiguous to the
balance of Danbury Estates.
It is in the public interest to vacate the portion of the Plat, including the Lots and
the public right of way, described in Exhibit B in order to allow the construction
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
u
o
..
of the Project and to allow the portion ofthe Lots located west of the Project to be
utilized to create a tax base to pay the costs of the Project through Tax Increment
Financing.
13. The value of the Lots in the plat not owned by the Petitioner will not be
substantially diminished by the granting of this Petition for the reason that the
commercial project which is located west of the Project is already being
constructed and the construction of the Project have all been considered and made
part of Ordinance No. 2-344.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner requests that the Cannel Plan Commission partially vacate
the plat of Danbury Estates, as said plat applies to Lot Nos. 24 through 32, including the portion
of the right of way of Durham Drive and Dublin Drive which are described in Exhibit B, as well
as the covenants, conditions, and restrictions of Danbury Estates as they apply to the real estate
described in Exhibit B.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
HAMILTON COUNTY
~~/~
Sharon R. Clark
stevt:;ilIinger
7AOtW
Steven A. Holt
ATTEST:
~ii &-t/Vt_ ~u1l0 .
Ro in M. Mi Is, AudItor
u
Q
STATE OF INDIANA )
)SS:
COUNTY OF HAMILTON )
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, this -1L- day of January, 2002,
personally appeared the within named Steven C. Dillinger, Steven A. Holt, and Sharon R. Clark
as the Board of Commissioners of Hamilton County and Robin M. Mills as the Auditor of
Hamilton County and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing document.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
UllL'\fI (). C-utx.claLt
1 h .. Notary Public
Residing in ttlm It bn County, Indiana
My Commission Expires:
~-Dlo.og
This instrument prepared by Michael A. Howard, Attorney for Hamilton County, Indiana, 694 Logan
Street, Noblesville, Indiana 46060 (317) 773-4212.
-. . ..:
II
"
o
WARRANTY DEEO
o
19990996n47
Filed for Record in
HAMILTON COUNTY, INDIANA
MARY L CLARK
On 11-19-1999 At 02:59 pI.
W DEED Nt . 00
"
"
~~." . .
THIS INDENTURE WITNESSE'm, that Langston Development Company,
Inc., of Hamil ton County, in the state of Indiana, Convey and
Warrant to the Board of Commissioners of Haailton County, state of
Indiana, for and in c~nsideration of One Dollar ($1.00) and all
other valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the fo~lowing described Real Estate in Hamilton
County in the state of Indiana, to-wit:
Lots Numbered 24, 25, 26, 27, 28. 29, 31, and
32 in Danbury Estates Section One, a
subdivision in Hamilton County, Iridiana, as
per plat thereof, recorded June 30, 1994, as
Instrument No. 9429324 in the Office of the
Recorder of Haailton County, Indiana.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said grantor, Langston Development
Company, Inc., has set their hand and seal, this {1 "3 day of
J;}~
; 1997.
By:
COMPANY, IHe.
Printed:
~((Me~ t'2. l.t;,,-S~
V u..e ?\"(1f,.1 dl'.4A~
Title:
Title:
DULY ENTEiED FOR TAXAnON
s~tofiaa1 ~(oruw(cr
....l:4-da1of~ 19~
/..?'/ ~ ~~
Parct1t - - Q-
OJ.5.~
O~O. 000
01 '1. C()O
O~~ .()Ci:j
())q . 0lXJ
Q3i.OOO
03:l.ld'l
EXHTRTT A Pl....
Requested By: mah 01\16\2002
..,
'0
o
..
STATE OF INDIANA )
)SS:
COUNTY OF HAlULTON )
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public this ~3d
day of SLll Lf ' 1997, personally appeared the within named
:r A'M~s ~. hAlUj-stOrtJ - as V Ie.e. p,ees i (JC/n. f and .JDhl-ll( ed w,q,e.QS
as ( ) ; Q 0( P R ~..s; n C" A, l' of Langston Development
company, Inc., and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
document.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My Commission Expires:
9. .J- ~-11
- i....~
~ . r..,~'.: :
Notary Public. 3>-\:.n.\~'\.n.T"'\ L... rnc..\. . ",., i \~
Residing in fMnJ,')k count"{!):..\ ..' / ":'r~ '
.;jJ.f!, . /" ~~
. ~~ J~ ~.' { :,.c, ~. I
'~;j~~~;;~ <..,
t\.. ......... \
..
This instrument prepared by Michael A. Boward, Attorney at Law, 694
Logan Street, P.O. Box 309, Noblesville, Indiana 46060, 773-4212.
E,XHTRTT A P? .'
...
....~
.U
(.,;)
DULY ENTERED FOR TAXATION
Subject to final acceptance for transfer
. II day of~, 20.QL
~~ ~ Audftar of Hamilton Counll
Parcel #. 1/; -In- It;. Q'- ()~ --(l-;c\.l-W
2001000421'12
Filed for Record in
HmtfI L TON COUNTY, 1 ND HlNn
tilARY L CLAR~~
07-11-2001 11:30 am.
W DEED NC . 00
Tins transaction exempt from
disclosure Reason No.3
,p@
WARRANTY DEED
Hamilton County Parcel No. 16-10-19-00-08-030.00
Document Cross Reference No. 9609620442
THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH, that George and Benita Loperena, (hereinafter referred
to as "Grantors"), Convey and Warrant to Ule Board of Com missioners of Hamilton County, Indiana,
(hereinafter referred to as "Grantee', for and in consideration of One Dollar ($1.00) and all other
valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the following described Real
Estate in Hamilton County in the State of Indiana, to-wit:
Lot Number 30 in Danbury Estates Section One, a subdivision in
Hamilton County, Indiana, as per plat thereof, recorded June 30,1994
as Instrument No. 9429324 in the Office ofthe Recorder of Hamilton
County, Indiana. (hereinafter referred to as uthe Real Estate").
Subject to real estate taxes payable in November of2001 and.thereafter.
Subjectt9 Ule Grantors' right to possession through August 1,2001.
Subject to a mortgage in the original amount of One Hundred Forty-
eight Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($148,500) in fav()r of
Provident Funding Associates, L.P., which has been assigned to
Norwest Mortgage, Inc., a California Corporation.
EXHIBIT A P. 3
".
-u
.0
"
IN WffNESS WHEREOF. the undersigneds have hereunto affixed their names and seals,
this . fOlk day of July, 2001.
,~~.
~eorgetfoperen .
>~6~~ ~
Benita Loperena
execution of the foregoing docwnent.
WITNESS my hand andofficial seaL ..
. r".
mf!:b1/{)~' ~
Residing in 7no.,.t,{.l;;' Connty. IN
My Conunjssion Expires:
. - MICHEi.LE B PEPER. .
NorAKYI'UBUCSTATEOF.INDIANA
. .... MAlUUN ,-OUI4'n
. MY.CoMM~eNE"*"'. ~fi\f\ \2009.
lllis instrument preparedby Michael A. Howard, Attorney at Law, 694 Logan Street, Noblesvillc, Indiana 46060, 773-4212.
EXHIBIT A P. 4
-~,-
u
.0
DESCRIPTION FOR VACATION OF A PORTION OF
DANBURY ESTATES, SECTION 1
A partoe Lots 24 Ihrough 3'Z. tmd a. part of D\Il'hnm. Drive, all in Danbuly Estates. Section 1. an addition
located in the North Half of1hc Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 18 north. range 4 east. Clay
Township, Hamilton County, Indiana. tho plat of which. is IeCotded as Iustru:tnent No. .9429324 in tbe
Office of the Recorder ofuid countyt and being more par1i.cula1'ly deacn"'bcd as follows:
BEGINN!'NG at the southwest comer ofaaid Lot 26; thence No.rth 00 degrees 56 minutes 44 seconds West
381.10 teet along ~ west lines of Lois 26. 27. 28p and 29 ofsl1id addition to the northwest cornet of said
Lot 2.9; thence North 89 degrees 03 minutes 16 seconds Bast 312.53 feet 1l1ong north lines of Lots 29. 30,
:n. owl 32 to the no:rtheast comer of said Lot 32; thence South 18 degJees 58 minutes 17 seconds East
195.61 feet along the eB5tErly 1iDe of said 'Lot 32 to the soUtheast comer of &aid Lot 32: thence along tho
south line of ~ Lot 32 SouthWesterly 75.34 reet along an ere to the right haviDg a radius of 275.00 feet
and sub tended by a long chord having a bearing of South 81 degrees 12 minutes 34 seconds West and i1
length of75.10 feet; thence South 89 degrees 03 minutes 16 seconds West \8.94 feet along said south line;
thence South 02 degreCll26 minutes 47 ,eccmds East 50,02 feet to the J1OI1h line of Lot 24; thence North 89
degree9 03 minu:1l3S J 6 sooonds Bast 17.64 feet along said north line; t'hence along said north line
No~rly 17.34 .feet aloDS 8Il arc to the ]eft having a radius of 325.00 feet and subtended by a long
chon! having a beilling of North 87 degrees 32 minutes 02 seconds East 1UI.Ci a length of 17..34 feet to the
ntu'thea.'1t comer of said Lot 24; thence South 00 degreas 56 minutes 44 seconds Easl 135.90 feet along the
eet line of said Lot 24 to the southeast comer of said lot 24; thence South ll9 degrees 03 minutes J 6
seconds Weat 316..00 feel along the south lines of Lots 24. 2.S and 26 to the Pomt of Beginning and
containing 2.730 acre!. more or less.
~ ~.r1.Z4t?~
#29300014, Stale of1l1diana Date' .
/lJJ~
G.~~GOFl" ~
1~~o:~G\.S;:~;.{~f~,\'
~ J q:'... "(:) ". ~ ;12
s ~ : II~O.. ~ 'Ci) ~
i ~ l La 29300014 ! ~1!
'a ..A.... STATE OF !*~
~-"CIl . J::
...Xi.... .Ik ~.. ~
<"'1, ..... OIA~..'.O~~~
ifla .S"l";~.~\y.~ ~~
I'b.... · ... .,~,\~~
-lIIullUllllll~"
EXHIBIT B
~.
'(j
'0
=
9378.0 m2 (100944 ft2) (PLAT)
-O~
9378.0 m2 " (100944 ft2) (PLAT)
THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION
OST AINED FROM THE RECORDER'S OFFICE AND
OTHER SOURCES WHICH WERE NOT NECESSARILY
CHECKED BY A FIELD SURVEY.
TOTAL AREA
EXISTING R/W
NET TOTAL AREA =
=
26
ES .8" =532.3 m2(5730 m2)
R/W
PAR.NO,4A
"-3'
en
150.33'
CENTER LINE STATION
IS IN METRIC SCALE.
R/W
PAR.NO.4B
29
CD
.-
o
0>
l"'-
I"")
.-
28
103.27'
---
,.,.,
<.0
..q-
r-
27
~
'0'
<:1>.
:Ii'" "
o
'0'
c;S>.
135.77'- __ __
---. .
.-
o
o
tri
r-
135.77'
97.45'
~\\\\\\\\11I11I11I1/JIIIIIJ.
~ " R Ie ~0;
~~ ~ \.. ,.,....." 1-t-<1 ~
~ ,,0 ....~\.~\STE:.\'l'ii",,~O~
~~. .::::;
~ Q:': ."- \fl ~
'::::0: :o~
! 0~No. 50489 ~z!
-::;::. :. : ~
~ "'" STATE OF..... ~
~ ./', .' ~
~ ''''l "'../l'iDIt.""..'" ~ ~
~ 'VD 's"'''--:':c,a #
~11i" UR"l'- ~~
'1111111111I11nl\I\\\\\\~
3-05-01 RfV. PAR. NO.4 & 4A.
[-)
,
Given under my hand o~d seo,-.MA~C\\ 5, 1.OCH .
jl~J G2r~~VM
>
:;-
)
:;
)
Gordon L. Richardson, LS.
Registered Land Surveyor, No. S0489
J
EXHIBIT C
,"
"-,
..
.
'.
/;;' --:-f-'i~';~~
/\ "- ,- " (.'~
l~'" ~<~~
Carmel Plan Commission/12/17/02-Vacation Of Properties L~I: RECFIVED ,-,~
i --i DEe 2 2002 ',;; !
We are Marshall & Sandra ~dich residing ~t 120 Syl~an Lane where we\1?uilt' DOCS .~,'
our 3 bedroom ranch home on a heavIly wooded lot In the Spnng of 1989. A few\.> , - /
months after we moved in , we received notice that the Carmel High School was goin~to
have a $90,000,000 expansion and wanted several homes in our area. As a result, we '<.
organized and established a neighborhood association and proceeded to deal with the
school. Although this was not an easy task, the administration and the school board met
with us on several occasions and worked out solutions providing us with a quality of life
and allowing us to live peaceful lives.
In November of2001, I was told that the high school would be expanding again.
I was advised to contact Roger McMichael, Assistant Superintendent of Business. Upon
questioning Mr. McMichael, he indicated that the high school would not be interested in
acquiring any more property in the Carmel wood area since the parcels were too small
and the school had other options.
In March of this year, Mr. McMichael sent out letters inviting our neighborhood
to a meeting stating that the school would be interested in buying properties and anyone
interested should contact him. Shortly after that, letters went out to 5 homeowners from
the school stating that there was an interest in their property and the school would like to
have them appraised. We were in a state of shock since we were told that there would not
be any more taking or acquiring property in our neighborhood. Since we believed Mr.
McMichael, we went ahead and adopted a beautiful little Chihuahua from the Hamilton
County Humane Society and installed a $3500 shadowbox fence for him.
Unknown to us, a committee of 60 people, not including our neighborhood, had
been meeting for two years to discuss options for the high school expansion. Now the
quality of our lives will be disrupted again with lots of stress, noise from jackhammers,
dust, movement of gas lines resulting in gas leaks and possible explosions.
Our south property line is currently 264 feet from 2nd street NE and the new plan
calls for bringing a road within 50-60 feet of our property line and a parking lot with 125
parking spaces just south ofthat. In addition to lots of exhaust and noise of automobiles,
there will be bright lights shining into our bedroom. The school has many functions at
night which will make our situation far worse than it is now because it will be closer to
us. Our home will now be the buffer between the school and our neighborhood.
Our adjoining neighbor to the east was so upset, he went to Mr. McMichael and
asked that the school buy his property. At a recent school board meeting, some ofthe
members voted to approve the purchase without even knowing where the property was
located. When one of the members, Mark Hartman questioned Mr. McMichael where the
property was, Mr. McMichael said he had sent the information but none of the members
received anything.
After finding out that the school was purchasing the property next door to the east,
I went to the school and asked them to buy our property and they agreed to have it
appraised. Prior to the appraisals being completed, Mr. McMichael informed me that the
school would not be interested in purchasing our property.
During the September 23,2002 meeting of the neighborhood in the high school
cafeteria the plans' of the new road and parking lot were revealed to us and I asked Mr.
"!..
McMichael if we could have the south line go back further and he stated "that there
would be no way to do so and even if there were a consideration then there would be
parking in the other lot they were acquiring next door."
Over the past several months, when I asked questions to the school, I either
received no reply or "we can't answer that question at this time."
At a very difficult time in all of our lives where many fatalities occurred over 9-
11, not knowing where the next terrorist might strike, having much of our retirement
funds diminish to the point of keeping older folks working 40 plus hours a week, does it
make sense to allow a school system to destroy "the American dream" of grossly
devaluating the value of someone's home and destroying their quality of life?
Our plea and prayer would either have the school go back an additional 100 feet to
the south and not develop the lot to the east or purchase our home from us at a fair and
equitable price so we may go on with our lives.
Since the school has been insensitive to our feelings, our only salvation is for the
planning commission to help us in this matter. If not, then there is no purpose for this
meeting.
'"
" CaFII\eIMigh:SGfl(l)Ci)l;
... '''. ..
Page 20f2
~
~ - ^-
'..;"""""...N '.','. ....~...",...,. .
h' " .,,: \,.,!--...,.,.'r~:.;,....,...."_...~
. .' "'~'~:""""" .' . -;;.:;;..~
,..
.
II
(
I
I
I
http:/ /www;fba(.~.~tnlPI\oj.ec,t~t~~^~IXchs,. fres~an_ <!enter/design-deyelCi)pm~nt1dg"(3J1S,:sit... 11/22/2002
November 19,2002
U u
City of Carmel
/--\ 0'\ I f~
'.' \ \ i;J ~_ 1.7""~
-'"', \~ '~:/
Y;/!._..y- ""'<v
, ' . v:'/?\
,,~ ''''P\
.t\.j ~ ~s\) . \;-\
C} ~\ <')~~\ t::;.\
(~\ ~~ \~ ~ f~'
\..-\ ~ (\\)\; ;--.
\~ v /A':-$
(J /~
Mr. ~llen J. Cradler, A.IA ~/ -:::-....."
Fanmng/Howey AssocIates, Inc. / f; / ,\,\'~9
9025 North River Road, Suite 200 -! 7;-;~ \ \ .
Indianapolis, IN 46240
pV
l&y02-
RE: Carmel High School Freshman Center Vacation - Project Review #1
Dear Mr. Cradler:
We have reviewed the plans submitted for this project. We offer the following comments:
1. Vacation of dedicated right of way requires Carmel City Council approval. Dedication of right of
way requires Board of Public Works and Safety approval.
2. I am enclosing an example of a dedication of right of way form. This form may be electronically
transmitted to you if you so desire.
3. Why isn't that portion of Audubon Drive between the two vacated streets being vacated? Isn't this
currently a dedicated street?
4. It would be helpful if an additional sheet could be provided that would show the existing with the
vacated overlaid in dashed or lighter lines or vice versa and without the detail presently shown.
5. It would also be helpful ifthe location of existing streets could be indicated beyond the extent of
the areas proposed to be vacated. Perhaps this could be combined with the request in item 4
above.
6. Please provide existing and proposed street names in a more prominent manner. They are very
hard to read, particularly on sheets 1,2,3 and 4.
7. Will the right of way and plat vacations be submitted together or separately?
This is the extent of our comments at the present time.
Sincerely,
Dick Hill, Assistant Director
Department of Engineering
Cc: M. Kate Weese, City Engineer
Mike McBride, Assistant City Engineer
Jon Dobosiewicz, DOCS
Laurence Lillig, DOCS
John Duffy, Carmel Utilities
Jim Haag, Carmel Utilities
Paul Pace, Carmel Utilities
S:\PROJREV02\CHSFROSHROWY AC
ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 4.6032 317/571-2400
u
Q
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: November 14, 2002
TO: Allen J. Cradler
Fanning/Howey Associates
FAX: 848-0843
FROM: Connie
Attached hereto are 2 pages, including this cover letter, for facsimile transmission.
Should you experience any problem in the receipt of these pages, please call 317/571/2419
and ask for Connie.
NOTES:
Attached is the Docket number and Filing information for the Carmel High School Campus
(Plat Vacation).
Please call if you have any questions.
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 ofthis te/ecopied
information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile transmission in error, please immediately notify
us by telephone to anange for retum of the forwarded documents to us.
u
"
u
CITY OF CARMEL
Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 4€032
(317) 571-2417
Fax: (317) 571-2426
Fax
Phone:
From: ~
Pages: 02 ~ (?~~
Date: / / -/;2 -tfJ ?
To: ~~
Fax: fi~-O~'I3
Re:
cc:
o Urgent
D For Review D Please Comment 0 Please Reply
o Please Recycle
J/li!- ~
eanhandie Pipelinf" Co.
lIas no ccxnpany Facilities{..,)
involved lJ:r.:.eC!1i=tJ -Q.J-. Rtl'itr-
CARMEUCLAY TECIINICAttVISORY C'OMMrITEE AGENbA
DOer"
0" ,-1
o
Date: November 20, 2002
Place: Department of Community Services Conference Room
3rd Floor - Carmel City Hall
q'OOam
q'20am
q'~Oa m
10"0 a m
10'40 a m
11 '00 a m
11 '20 a m
11 .~o p m
Proposed Wireless Communication Towers -
Crooked Stick Golf Course Special Exception Application I
The applicant seeks approval to construct three wireless communication towers. ,u c-
The site is located between Ditch Road and Towne Road, north of I06th Street.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker & Daniels for AT & T.
Riverview Medical Park PUD (Rezone)
The applicant seeks to rezone 11.09 acres to a Planned Unit Development district. 1:
The site is zoned S-1 (Residential). C-
Filed by Charles D. Frankenberger for Plum Creek Partners, LLC.
Hamilton Crossing Building #6 (Development Plan)
The applicant seeks approval to construct an office building. The site is generally 4
located on the south side of 131" St. between U. S. 31 and Meridian Comers Blvd. CJ.
Filed by Blair D. Carmosino of Duke Realty Corporation.
Pennsylvania and 12200 Street - Northeast Comer (Rezone)
The applicant seeks to rezone 28.378 acres zoned R-l (Residential) and M-3 4
(Manufacturing) to B-6 (Business). .
The site is located at the northeast comer of 122M Street and Pennsylvania Road.
Filed by Blair D. Carmosino of Duke Realty Corporation.
Lakeside Park, Section TIm (Secondary Plat and Construction Plans)
The site is located on the southwest comer of West 141" Street and Towne Road. 4
The site is zoned S-I/Residence - Very Low Density. ' c...
Filed by Dennis Olmstead of Stoeppelwerth & Associates.
Village of Mount Carmel, Section 10 (primary Plat) ~/
The applicant is proposing a 5-10t subdivision. The site is located at the southwest "-
comer of 146th Street and Village Drive.
Filed by Chuck Wright of the Elliot Wright Group, LLC.
Clay Terrace (preliminary Development Plan)
The applicant seeks approval of a preliminary development plan. The site is located 1c
at the southwest comer of US Highway 31 and East 146th Street.
Filed by Jeff Clayton of American Consulting, Inc. for the Lauth Property Group.
Carmel High School Campus (Plat Vacation, r-o-w vacation and grant) 4-
The applicant seeks to vacate a portion Carmelwood Subdivision, vacate and
dedicate new right-of-way in order to modify the Carmel High School Campus.
Filed by Allen Cradler ofFanningIHowey Associates for Carmel Clay Schools.
00
ou
October 18. 2002
'3
f. ~
RECEIVED
OCT 18 2002
DOCS
!BeJ!-danningJH:owey
U'llItU[S Associates ~
,
Architects Engineers Consul
'J',f;
Department of Community Servic
City of Carmel
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
Re: Carmel High School Freshman Center
Carmel Clay Schools
Carmel, Indiana
Project No. 201105.00
Dear Sir or Madam:
The following application and information is submitted for the December 17, 2002, Plan Commission
hearing. The Owner, Carmel Clay Schools. is requesting a Plat Vacation. Right-of-Way Vacation
and Right-of-Way grant adjacent to the Carmel High School Campus. The following information is
being submitted with this letter:
1. Application for Primary Plat (or Replat)
2. Notice of Public Hearing
3. Primary Plat Checklist
4. Adjoiner List from the Hamilton County Auditor
5. Existing site plan indicating areas to be vacated
6. Proposed site plan showing planned improvements and new public right-of-way.
Since portions of the application information do not apply to a plat vacation. we felt it was important
to further outline the vacation request for this Project. Carmel Clay Schools has recently purchased
the following properties adjacent to the existing High School and requests the vacation of these
parcels.
115 Audubon Drive
111 Audubon Drive
116 Audubon Drive
118 Sylvan Lane
114 Sylvan Lane
420 2nd Street
We are also requesting a vacation of the existing 50'-0" public right-of-way for portions of Sylvan
Lane and Audubon Drive between these houses and the existing High School property boundary.
The survey information also identified a portion of existing public right-of-way for 2nd Street between
the existing High School property and the property at 420 2nd Street requiring vacation per the
9025 North River Road, Suite 200 ~ Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
(317) 848-0966 ~ Fax (317) 848-0843 ~ http://www.fhaLcom
-, 0
Department of Community ~ices
Project No. 201105.00
October 18, 2002
Page 2
wU
proposed site layout. This portion of public right-of-way is also included in the vacation request.
Please refer to the attached drawing of the existing conditions for the exact locations of these areas.
With the vacation of the listed parcels and public right-of-way, Sylvan Lane and Audubon Drive
become disconnected. Through several meetings with the Department of Community Services and
Carmel Clay Schools the attached proposed site layout plan has been developed. The plan
provides for a new section of road across a portion of the vacated property to reconnect Sylvan Lane
and Audubon Drive. A 50'-0" public right-of-way will be granted 'along this new roadway. The
attached drawing showing the proposed new site layout and identifies this new roadway and right-of-
way.
We would like to confirm the need for this Project to be presented and reviewed by the Technical
Advisory Committee at this point in the process. We are still in the process of the plan development
and the level of detailed information typically provided to the Technical Advisory Committee has not
been completed. The Project will be submitted at a later date to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the
required Special Use and variance approvals. At that time it will also be submitted to the Technical
Advisory Committee for review and comment.
We trust the included information is sufficient for this process and the Plan Commission Hearing.
Please advise if any additional information or specific requests for action is required for this
submittal.
Sincerely,
FANNINGlHO~S' INC.
~'AIA
Project Manager/Senior Associate
AJC/jm
enclosure
[F8~anning/Howey
Associates, Inc.
Architects Engineers Consultants
,f
U
rnO~anning/fIowey
~LJ~ Associates, me.
Architects Engineers Consultants
to
iI
II
;U{/.-t1. L;J-t~{)1 (!-:iJ6--
"
ARCHITECT/AGENCY MEETING
Carmel Clay Schools
Carmel, Indiana
,/~~;r~'7-!~~,
-<: . /'A
I.., . A.' . \
/";\ .~.\
R ./,
- ,r~d!;fD' \\~~)
D 1-.
Des ;/:J
\-
\. ~ :
," /\.
'\:/'>
......,<, -....... -': :. " /~/..,.
"<.J.~I=~l---
/,\ ~/
Date:
September 16,2002
Re:
Carmel High School Freshman Center
Carmel Clay Schools
Carmel, Indiana
Project No. 201105.00
To:
Rollin E. Farrand, Jr., RA, Director of Facilities and Transportation
The following is a report of our meeting on the above date. If you find anything with
which you disagree, please inform us, in writing, within ten calendar days of receipt.
Present:
Rollin E. Farrand, Jr., Roger McMichael, Carmel Clay Schools; Mike Hollibaugh,
Laurence Lillig, Jon Dobosiewicz, City of Carmel; Charles R. Tyler, Allen J. Cradler,
Jeff Bolinger, Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc.
Purpose:
Review of the site plan and vehicle circulation around the Freshman Center.
1. Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. reviewed the revised site plan layout and proposed drive
configuration at the northwest side of the campus. The following comments were made:
a.,. The drive has been reconfigured and pulled away from the adjacent residential
properties, where possible.
b. The proposed plan disconnects the High School drive from the adjacent
neighborhood. Sylvan Lane and Audubon Drive will be connected across one of the
residential properties purchased by Carmel Clay Schools.
c. An emergency only access drive is proposed between the High School drive and the
connected Sylvan Lane and Audubon Drive. The emergency access was reviewed,
and found to be acceptable to the Carmel Fire Department. The emergency access
was required in order for the Carmel Fire Department to support the Plan.
d. The emergency access lane could be upgraded to a temporary street, if required,
until the connection of Third Street and Sylvan Lane is completed. This option would
allow traffic to flow back into the neighborhood from the High School and not
eliminate the current concerns of the neighbors.
e. Additional green space may be considered adjacent to the main entrance for the
Freshman Center.
2. All parties felt the majority of the adjacent Property Owners would support this plan. Some
Property Owners on Sylvan Lane have voiced concerns about the disconnection of the
current street system to both the City of Carmel and Carmel Clay Schools.
9025 North River Road, Suite 200 ... Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
(317) 848-0966 ... Fax (317) 848-0843 ... http://www.fhai.com
"
,(
AlA Meeting (0916/02)
Carmel Freshman Center
Carmel Clay Schools
Carmel, Indiana
Project No. 201105.00
Page 2
o
Q
3. The current plan eliminates approximately 132 parking spaces and adds a total of
approximately 200 parking spaces.
4. The parking previously discussed, in the northeast area of the campus, will not be neededto
replace the lost parking. The parking in this area was not included in the original Project
budget.
5. The intersection of the High School Drive, with Second Street and Fourth Avenue, should be
reviewed further. There are a number of entrances occurring at this location. The new drive
cannot align with Second Street and remain on the property recently purchased by Carmel
Clay Schools.
6. Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. will review having the new drive align with one of the
existing entrances heading north out of the west parking lot. One of the entrances heading
west out ofthe west parking lot could be removed to help focus traffic toward one location.
7. Sidewalks should be shown on the upcoming plans. The emergency access point could be
an enlarged sidewalk area. One of the concerns of adjacent Property Owners was losing a
pedestrian walk connection to Main Street.
8. The pedestrian walk should extend along the north side of the new drive and connect to area
north of the High School building.
9. The configurations of Sylvan Lane and Audubon Road should anticipate future curbs and
sidewalks to match those being done elsewhere in the area. It may not be beneficial to ,
include those improvements for a short stretch of road at this point. Carmel Clay Schools
would provide these improvements at a later date, if required. These issues should also be
reviewed with the City of Carmel Department of Engineering.
10. The parking spaces that would have vehicles backing up into the main drive should be
reviewed and reconfigured, if possible.
11. Plat vacation, right-of-way, vacation and right-of-way grant will be required for this Project, as
the Project continues through the proper City of Carmel approvals processes.
12. An emergency access easement should be granted to the City of Carmel for the emergency
access point. This should be reviewed with the Carmel Fire Department.
Allen J. Cradler, AlA orfJ
Project Manager/se~~r\)..ssociate
AJC/jm
rnOlfanning/Howey
U'IIIIcJ[S Associates, Inc.
Architects Engineers Consultants