Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Sub 10-16-07 ~~ CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2007 LOCATION: DOCS CONFERENCE ROOM 3RD Floor ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, IN 46032 TIME: 5:45 P.M. DOORS OPEN AT 5:30 P.M. Representing the Committee Riek Ripma, Chairperson Carol Sehlief Eric Seidensticker Sally Shapiro Representing the Department Adrielme Keeling Mike Hollibaugh Lisa Stewart Of Counsel: John Molitor Rick Ripma~ Chairman called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. The Subdivision Committee will meet to consider the following item: 1 Docket No. 07080028 OA: Carmel Dr-Range Line Road Overlay Sunset Amendment The applicant seeks to Amend the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 23F: Carmel Drive-Range Line Road Overlay Zone in order to extend the sunset clause. Filed by the Cannel Department of Community Services. Adrienne Keeling presented for the Department The Committee received in their packets a draft ordinance which simply changes the sunset provision from December 31, 2007 extending that until the end of 2008 . You also received maps of the boundaries for your infonnatlOn. Essentially it runs along Rangeline Rd. and parts of Carmel Drive from the south end of 116m street up to 1 ,[ street on the south end of 01dTown. In 2006 there was an amendment to expand the boundaries of the overlay to north of Old Town along Rangeline -1i'~' Road. It now encompasses the aparhnents, the old Nation's Rent, and the areas nOlth of Old Town. It was a year long process of adopting language ofthe overlay, one of the agreements that was made was to put an expiration date on the ordinance, we are coming upon that expiration date and we are proposing to extend that for one year. Next year we intend to embark on a study of the central business district, we are hoping to have that complete by the end of next year and have something more concrete. Now that we have more projects in the ground we have a better feel for what is appropriate along Rangeline Road. This overlay was adopted because of the large development interest along the corridor to try to get some standards in place. We intend to have a public process. AdrielUle further stated Eric Seidensticker has expressed concern that we need to hear fTOm property owners along the corridor. We intend to do that as part of the study, however, that would be separate from any comprehensive plan. Carol Schleif asked how is this study is done. Mike Hollibaugh stated that in the past we have used a task force of business owners, etc. and initially with the Rangeline Rd. we had a Task Force in place. However the Old Town Overlay was going on at the same time and we disbanded the Task Force to focus on Old Town. Mike outlined possible ideas for a task force that could possibly include member/members of the Plan Commission andlor Council members or a charette that would be more inclusive of everyone and not necessarily focusing on a task force, but would be a more compact process that would be open to the residents of the defined area. Carol Schleif reviewed the beginnings of the ordinance. Eric Seidensticker asked the reason for an expiration date. Adrienne responded that some business owners had expressed doubt that the Overlay would work and asked for, and the Department agreed to put an expiration date on the overlay and that would force us to look at and review to see if anything was unworkable. Eric stated it was impOliant for the other Committee members to know that three weeks ago he asked the DOCS Department to send a letter to be sent to the area residents and this was not done. This letter would have sufficed to satisfy the reasons why there is an expiration date which was to get feedback from these folks and keep them up-to-date and the decision was made not to do that. It is his district and these are the people if affects and he wants people to know he asked and it was not done. Carol Schleif asked why this was not done. Mike Hollibaugh responded that we are asking you for a decision on this and it is really a pretty simple issue.W e believe the results of the development that has occurred during the interim speak for themselves and we don't see it as a negative. Carol stated it appears development is pretty much at a halt except for CRC projects, and is this encouraging development or holding it up. Mike stated the intent was not to encourage development, but it was to insure that development that occurred along Rangeline Rd. was consistent with its location within the community. Patily what we .... were concerned about with the redevelopment along Rangeline and with the City Center project that the potential. Having strict development standards would not prohibit development in the area, but if it was to occur it would happen in a way that had the buildings up to the street and kept away from residential area. Eric again asked why the letter had not been sent out. Mike responded that the Department is asking the Subdivision Committee for an up/down vote. Eric asked, should not the up/down vote take into account the people that this is affecting. Isn't that what we are supposed to be doing? Rick Ripma stated that he was against this ordinance when it went through. He is still not really for the overlay zone, hov'lever, we put it in place and it was voted on and passed. Ifwe don't extend it then we have the risk of it going back into place in 6 months or a year we get other projects that we have denied. The idea behind this was if someone is coming in to rebuild you want things pulled out to the street and certain look. My issue was two-story buildings that had to be able to occupy. I hate to see us extend it, but I hate more not to extend it, because if we don't we can have other projects come in. There was a lot ofremonstrance, there were plenty of people there and we need to hear from them. Discussion was held on whether there was enough time to get feedback. It was discussed that this would go to City Council and there will be a public hearing at that time. It was a contentious and keeps going and going. Conversation was held on possible timelines. A back and forth conversation was held on whether there is enough time to ask for and receive feedback. Possible dates when this item could go to both Plan Commission and City Council. It was discussed that we do not want the process to appear secretive by not noticing the public. Mike stated that the process is wide open the agenda's are posted at City Hall and on the website. Carol Schleif made motion to recommend that tills item go to the full Plan Commission with a positive recommendation with the condition: That by Monday, October 22, 2007 a notification letter will be sent to the affected parcel owners. Sally Shapiro seconded the motion. Approve 4-0 Meetin .oumed at 6:15 .In. /' / ~C~RiP