HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 02-04-03
CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
DEPARTMENT REPORT
February 4, 2003
1. Docket No. 164-02 Z; Riverview Medical Park (PUD)
The applicant seeks to rezone a 11.09 acres form S-l Residential to a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) District. The site is zoned S-l (Residential).
Filed by Charles D. Frankenberger of Nelson and Frankenberger for Plum Creek Partners,
LLC.
The applicant is requesting a favorable recommendation from the Plan Commission on their
petition to rezone 11.09 acres from S-l Residential to a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
District. The Public Hearing for the item was opened at the December Plan Commission meeting
and the applicant requested the item be tabled at the January Committee meeting.
The Department feels that the following items need to be addressed as part of the review for this
request and prior to the Plan Commission forwarding this petition to the City Council:
1. Question One: Is the subject location, based on the Comprehensive Plan, an
appropriate location for "Neighborhood Commercial"?
If yes, then one could proceed to question number two. Ifno, then while question two
becomes less critical to review it is still important for the Plan Commission to consider as
the final decision will be made by the City Council. The Department recommends that
the Plan Commission review the PUD to ensure it is appropriate for neighborhood
commercial even ifthey determine neighborhood commercial is not appropriate for this
location. Items to note:
a. The location is at the comer of 146th Street and Hazel Dell Parkway. Is there
concern that the design and construction ofthese roads may not support the
traffic generated by the proposed use?
b. Is there an appropriate distribution of neighborhood commercial areas within
the community and would this location compliment the others? Are there
other comparable office uses in the area?
c. The Land Use Map does not identify this area for commercial use. Likewise,
the Land Use Map does not identify the other existing neighborhood
commercial areas (i.e. 131 st/Hazel Dell and 126th/Gray). It is only in the text
of the Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance that one will find reference to the
implementation of neighborhood commercial areas.
d. Is the site naturally buffered from low-intensity residential areas through the
existence of at least one of the following: main roads, institutional buildings,
open space, landscaping and screening?
e. Is pedestrian and bicycle access to the area available?
Committee Report 2003-0204.rtf
2. Question Two: Do the permitted uses and development standards (setbacks,
building heights, landscape standards, architectural design requirements, signage
limitations) reflect a character appropriate for "Neighborhood Commercial"?
If yes, then one could proceed to question number three. Items to note:
a. Do the proposed standards protect and maintain the character of neighboring
residential areas? Chapter 18 of the Ordinance addresses standards that were
adopted by the Plan Commission and City Council to achieve this goal. The
intent of the district is to allow for commercial development near areas zoned or
utilized for residential purposes. This should be used as a benchmark.
b. Do the proposed development standards reflect those required for the two other
areas in Carmel characterized as neighborhood commercial areas (131 st/Hazel
Dell, 126th/Gray Road).
c. Permitted uses are significantly restricted as compared to other commercial areas
adjacent to residential areas. Is this appropriate or should the PUD permit retail
uses as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan? What are neighborhood serving
uses? Do the uses in the PUD match these or are the proposed uses of a
community or regional serving nature?
d. Should an allowance for convenience shopping be provided?
e. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that neighborhood commercial areas should
have no more than 10 acres and 100,000 square feet of retail. Is this proposal
compatible?
f. Is the intensity and scale ofthe proposed plan compatible with the surrounding
residential uses?
3. Question Three: If the Plan Commission has answered questions one and two
affirmatively they must then decide if now is the appropriate time to rezone the
parcel to allow "Neighborhood Commercial"? Items to note:
a. What are the potential impacts on other neighborhood commercial areas?
(131 st/Hazel Dell, 1 26th/Gray Road).
b. Are the surrounding low-intensity neighborhoods adequately served by and
accessible to existing neighborhood commercial centers?
c. Does the Plan Commission want to establish appropriate locations for future
neighborhood commercial uses on the Land Use Map and establish timing
criteria?
The Department recommends that this item be forwarded back to the full Plan
Commission after all comments and questions have been addressed.
Committee Report 2003-0204.rtf