HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #009 Jackie PhillipsDear Planning Commission Members,
While I always anticipated that someone would one day develop the Stout Farm, I
believed it would be similar to the surrounding neighborhoods and in line with the
Comprehension Plan. While I firmly believe that a property owner should be able to do
what he or she wishes with his or her land, I also believe the city is responsible for
upholding the regulations that protect surrounding property owners. Allowing drastic
changes in zoning diminishes the rights of adjacent property owners.
The developer of Stout Farm is suggesting a PUD equivalent to the R4 District, jumping
four zoning districts. R4, as shown below, allows for "multiple-family development on
small lots in distinctly urbanized areas. This district intends to protect and conserve
existing residential development, particularly in locations featuring marginally standard
housing and facing potential change from original uses, and to preserve natural
features, and encourage open space residential land-use patterns”
The R4 District does not comply with the intent for this area in the Comprehension
Plan. West Carmel is not an urbanized area, nor does the current development
preserve natural features or protect, conserve, or reflect the surrounding
neighborhoods—especially the Village of West Clay, Laurel Lakes, or Claridge Farms.
We can’t negate the original use and intent of the land. Rezoning should pay
reasonable regard to the surrounding developments. This is precisely why developers
request PUDs, which allow the rewriting of the rules to their benefit. This often renders
the rules and UDO irrelevant to their development.
If this development were approved as proposed, it would set an unfortunate precedent
for all vacant land–especially the large tracts still in West Carmel.
I am not anti-development; I am for responsible development. I understand the need
for affordable housing, particularly housing for empty-nesters and first-time home
buyers. Under Planned Unit Development in the UDO, it states that the Decision
Criteria: In considering the proposal, both the Plan Commission and the Common
Council shall pay reasonable regards to:
Section A. 3. Subsections D, F, G
d. “Current conditions and the character of current structures and uses in each
district and it’s surrounding.
f. The conservation of property values throughout the City and the Township, and
g. Responsible development and growth.
I’d also like to list the objectives below that are referenced in the
Comprehension Plan:
Objective 1.5.1
Encourage different housing types and sizes within a neighborhood to support
different household types and economic resiliency. This allows options for new
residents and allows current residents to age in Carmel as they move through
different life stages. This will add to the character and adaptability of
neighborhoods as they mature. New developments should seek to
strengthen the character established by the Development Patterns in this
plan”
Objective 1.3.3
Build upon existing neighborhood facilities and services, such as parks, schools,
and fire stations to help define and maintain neighborhood identity and vitality.
Objective 1.1.8
As Carmel continues to infill and develop, new developments should strive to
incorporate natural areas, as well as to create unique public spaces and private
common areas throughout a development.
Currently, Clay Cottages does not meet these objectives. With minimal green space and
amenities, high density, and lack of community character, it is a direct juxtaposition to
the surrounding neighborhoods.
Lastly, at “Talk of the Town,” during the revision of the Comprehension Plan, a resident
asked if Carmel would maintain and respect the cohesiveness and integrity of existing
residential neighborhoods. The response was, “This Comprehensive Plan's
Development Pattern Areas seek to maintain and enhance the character of different
parts of Carmel, both in the urbanizing core and the rest of the City outside the core.”
I ask that we keep with the community character that has attracted many of the current
Carmel residents which was the very thing Mayor Sue Finkham championed during her
campaign. We need to have reasonable regard to the zoning that the City set forth via
the UDO and the Comprehension Plan.
For the reasons stated above, I hope that if this proposed project comes before the City
Council, you will vote against it.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Jackie Phillips
VOWC Resident