HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments Packet 06, October 21-271
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: brieq@earthlink.net
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 9:26 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: JoeHile@SpecialtiesCompany.com; Houck_Ron_F@Lilly.com
Subject: Fw: Letter to Carmel Planning Commission
------Original Message------
From: Bill Williams
To: Brie Quinn Williams
Subject: Letter to Carmel Planning Commission
Sent: Oct 18, 2008 3:06 PM
Adrienne,
Please forward these comments to Leo Dierckman.
As a resident of the Spring Mill Place subdivision, I am opposed to the creation of a
special study area for the land on the east side of Spring Mill Road north of 111th
Street to the southern border of Spring Lakes Estates. We put our home up for sale last
summer and several prospective buyers asked specifically about the potential development
of the aforementioned land parcel. The uncertainty about the future development of that
property negatively impacted our ability to sell our home. Most buyers voiced the same
concerns that we ourselves have about the negative impact such development would have on
our property value in the future.
The meeting on September 23rd was solely devoted to discussing the Land Use map. The area
now being considered for special study was discussed at length and the decision was made
to leave it designated as residential. At the conclusion of that meeting the process was
to move on to subsequent sections. However, at the October 14th meeting this same ground
was plowed again by those wishing to take a second bite at the apple. This is a disservice
to your process and to those who attend and expect resolution at each meeting, rather than
revisiting issues when they are not on the agenda and all people are not in attendance.
This is certainly unfair to those people who did not attend thinking these issues were
finalized at the previous meeting.
The correct process is to leave the area designated as residential, as agreed to at the
September 23rd meeting. As some Plan Commission members indicated at the October 14th
meeting, a project for the land between 111th and 116th Streets should be presented to the
Plan Commission and it's merits considered at that time. Creating a special study area
merely prolongs the process and needlessly involves the residents in our subdivision in
yet more meetings, a strategy merely designed to wear down residents.
Bill and Brie Williams
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Rhonda Marsh [rmarsh@healthyindy.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 4:10 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: rfhouck@lilly.com
Subject: Spring Mill Place neighborhood
Page 1 of 1
10/22/2008
Dear Adrienne,
I am in complete consensus with my neighbors who've written previously to express their opinion
that the area on the east side of Spring Mill Road north of 111th Street to the southern border of Spring
Lakes Estates should be left as residential as agreed to in the September 23rd meeting.
Developing this land for commercial use would not only adversely affect the value of our homes in
Spring Mill Place, but it would also increase the traffic through our subdivision as well as throughout
the surrounding thoroughfares in the area. Additionally, bringing another commercial development so
close to our neighborhood increases the safety risks to our children because of the amount of both
automotive and foot traffic that a commercial development would bring.
Spring Mill Place is a quiet, friendly neighborhood with very little cut through traffic, which is one of
the primary reasons we bought our home, having 2 small children. A commercial development at 111th
and Spring Mill changes the entire make up of the area. We do not appreciate the potential for
more commercial so close to our homes any more than the $1MM+ homes that line Spring Mill would.
Our land backs up to the land that will be developed for Illinois Street, so we are also VERY concerned
with the potential height o f the buildings that will line Illinois Street. The reason we bought this home
was because it is on a 2 acre wooded lot and we love the wildlife that inhabits the area behind our
house. We (our children) will be losing the opportunity to see deer, ducks, rabbits, squirrels, etc... out of
our back windows when this project is complete. Please don't ask us to look out our windows at 6-10
story buildings instead!!
Please forward these comments to Leo Dierckman, President of the Carmel Plan Commission, so that he
and the rest of the commission will do the right thing for both our neighborhood and the greater Spring
Mill area.
Please forward this message to Leo Dierckman and anyone else who needs to hear how the residents of
Spring Mill Place really feel.
Thank you,
Rhonda and Andy Marsh
317 Spring Ridge Court
317-580-0908
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Mike and Michele Sharp [mmsharp@ameritech.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 9:51 AM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: Joe.Hile@specialtiescompany.com; Ron F Houck
Subject: Fw: neighborhood issues.....
Page 1 of 3
10/22/2008
Adrienne,
I concur with the many e-mails you have received on this topic. Please forward this to Mr. Dierckman.
Thanks,
Mike Sharp
10958 Springmill Lane
--- On Mon, 10/20/08, suzanne glesing <suzanneg@indy.rr.com> wrote:
From: suzanne glesing <suzanneg@indy.rr.com>
Subject: neighborhood issues.....
To: "jcl" <jliebe@ameritech.net>
Cc: "'Joe Hile'" <joe.hile@SpecialtiesCompany.com>, "'Belcher D'"
<dwbelcher@sbcglobal.net>, "'Byrne J'" <JSByrne57@aol.com>, "'Clark George'"
<GCCarmel@aol.com>, "'Clark Shirley'" <orangac@aol.com>, "'Corken M'"
<corkens@in.net>, "'Diehr M'" <mpdiehr@sbcglobal.net>, "'Diehr M'"
<mhd10966@sbcglobal.net>, "'Gardiner D'" <jdgardiner@yahoo.com>, "'Golden B'"
<bmg@deltafaucet.com>, "'Golden G'" <GGolden@goldenv.com>, "'Hagen R'"
<RL72JF@sbcglobal.net>, "'Harry W'" <wkharry@yahoo.com>, "'Hart G'"
<gary.hart@us.ibm.com>, "'Hart K'" <khart@boselaw.com>, "'Healey P'"
<panddhealey@indy.rr.com>, "'Hile Karen L. (Fka Petranek)'" <klhile@iupui.edu>, "'Houck P'"
<paminkdgn@hotmail.com>, "'Houck R'" <rfhouck@lilly.com>, "'Jehs D'"
<dawn@goldenv.com>, "'Jenkins L'" <Lou_R_Jenkins@ML.com>, "'Kirsh J'"
<Jacque@Kirsh.com>, "'Kirsh S'" <SKirsh@Kirsh.com>, "'Lewis G'" <glewis@indy.rr.com>,
"'Lieberman J'" <Jliebe@ameritech.net>, "'Marsh A'" <amarsh@ppgllc.us>, "'Marsh R'"
<rmarsh@healthyindy.com>, "'Mason A'" <amason317@hotmail.com>, "'McKenna J'"
<jam4105@aol.com>, "'McKenna R'" <Rm0425@aol.com>, "'Murray R'"
<murrayrhonda@aol.com>, "'Oldiges D'" <DanOldiges@sbcglobal.net>, "'Oldiges L'"
<LinOldiges@sbcglobal.net>, "'Pearson L'" <lesleywetzel@yahoo.com>, "'Pearson R'"
<pwpearson@gmail.com>, "'Perry K'" <kperry@earthlink.net>, "'Perry M'"
<mperry@citysecurities.com>, "'Roach D'" <dave.roach@SpecialtiesCompany.com>, "'Roach
S'" <roachhomes@aol.com>, "'Schnitz M'" <schnitzm@stlukesumc.com>, "'Sharp M'"
<MMSharp@ameritech.net>, "'Sharp M'" <Michael.Sharp@fssa.in.gov>, "'Sergi J'"
<sergino@att.net>, "'Thompson L'" <lanithompson@hotmail.com>, "'Sergi J'"
<jmsbeautysupply@sbcglobal.net>, "'Sharp M'" <Sharp_Michele@lilly.com>, "'Williams B'"
<brieq@earthlink.net>, "'Skarbeck E'" <ed@aldebarancapital.com>, "'Wagner G'"
<gvwagner@aol.com>, "'Williams K'" <rkevwill@mac.com>, "'Schwartz C'"
<Schwartz@kaufman.uits.indiana.edu>, "'Schwartz A'" <alexis_schwartz@timeinc.com>,
"'Zimmerman B'" <Bzimmerman@cgglawfirm.com>, "'Scott C'" <chadscott@aim.com>,
"'Zimmerman J'" <jpzimmerman@lilly.com>
Date: Monday, October 20, 2008, 3:32 PM
Just wanted to copy you guys on the letter I sent this weekend....
From: suzanne glesing
Date: 10/19/2008 11:29:07 AM
To: AKeeling@carmel.in.gov
Cc: HOUCK_RON_f@lilly.com; Joe Hile
Subject: Spring Mill Place Subdivision
Dear Adrienne,
Please forward these comments to Leo Dierckman.
My name is Suzanne Glesing, and I am a resident in the Spring Mill Place subdivision.
As a resident, I am opposed to the creation of a special study area to study the area on the east side of Spring
Mill Road north of 111th Street to the southern border of Spring Lakes Estates.
I realize that there was recently a meeting which took place on September 23rd that was solely devoted to
discussing the Land Use map. The area now being considered for special study was discussed at length and
the decision was made to leave it designated as residential. At the conclusion of that meeting the process was
to move on to subsequent sections.
It is also my understanding that on October 14th another meeting was held and the previous conclusion from the
September meeting was reversed. This is a disservice to your process and especially a disservice to those who
took the time to attend the FIRST meeting. Why take the time, if simply another meeting will be held less that
one month later and have all of previous discussions revisited and CHANGED? Especially when it was not even
on the agenda and all of the same people are not in attendance.
Having been made aware of the results of the September meeting, I felt no need to attend the October
meeting because a decision had already been made. Apparently I was wrong. Even though these issues were
finalized at the previous meeting - they were revisited without the same people who had previously taken the
time to be present. This is absolutely unfair and seemingly unethical. The correct process is to leave the area
designated as residential, as agreed to at the September 23rd meeting.
As some Plan Commission members indicated at the October 14th meeting, a project for the land between
111th and 116th Streets is ONCE AGAIN going to be presented to the Plan Commission and it's merits
considered at that time. WHY?! This has already been addressed, and finalized in September.
Creating a special study area merely prolongs the process and needlessly involves the residents of
my subdivision in yet MORE MEETINGS, a strategy merely designed to wear down my neighbors and myself.
We all have busy lives involving our children, our families, our jobs and whatever else. Taking the time to attend
YET ANOTHER meeting - feel as if our presence is worthwhile - only to find out that it will once again be
a WASTE OF TIME leaves all of us more than disappointed in the system that we are expected to count on.
I WILL be at the next meeting - as will many other members of my neighborhood. Hopefully the effort will result
in an improvement of communication and resolve.
Suzanne Glesing
11057 Spring Mill Lane
Carmel, IN 46032
Page 2 of 3
10/22/2008
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Jill Meisenheimer [jmeisenheimer@indy.rr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 9:40 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Subject: Concerns E of Springmill between 111th to 116th to
Page 1 of 1
10/22/2008
Adrienne,
Please forward these comments to Leo Dierckman. I have attended several Carmel Comp plan meetings in the
past and I thought the following issue had been decided months ago. As a resident of Williams Mills subdivision, I
am opposed to the creation of a special study area to study the area on the east side of Spring Mill Road from
South of 116th Street to the southern border of Spring Lakes Estates. I have heard that the meeting on
September 23rd was solely devoted to discussing the Land Use map. The area now being considered for special
study was discussed at length and the decision was left designated as residential. At the conclusion of that
meeting the process was to move on to subsequent sections. I was dismayed to hear that at the October 14th
meeting this same area was revisited though it was not on the agenda and interested parties were not in
attendance. This is not fair to those people who thought these issues were finalized at the previous meeting.
The area should be still designated as residential (orange), as agreed to at the September 23rd meeting.
I am also terrible concerned that the Comp Plan is suggesting a requirement of 6-10 story buildings in this area.
Already the traffic in our area is so clogged that I often have a tough time getting to and from our Williams Mills
home from 116th and Meridian and that doesn't even include the impossiblity of actually waiting for the many
traffic lights it can take to actually cross Meridian at 116th Street. I plan to be at the meeting on next Tuesday.
Sincerely,
Jill H. Meisenheimer
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Schwartz, Chris [cschwartz@Brickyard.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 12:11 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: alexis_schwartz@timeinc.com; jbaques@sbcglobal.net; veickmei@iupui.edu;
joe.hile@specialtiescompany.com; dwbelcher@sbcglobal.net; jsbyrne57@aol.com; gccarmel@aol.com;
orangac@aol.com; corkens@in.net; mpdiehr@sbcglobal.net; mhd10966@sbcglobal.net;
jdgardiner@yahoo.com; suzanneg@indy.rr.com; bmg@deltafaucet.com; ggolden@goldenv.com;
rl72jf@sbcglobal.net; wkharry@yahoo.com; gary.hart@us.ibm.com; khart@boselaw.com;
panddhealey@indy.rr.com; klhile@iupui.edu; paminkdgn@hotmail.com; rfhouck@lilly.com;
dawn@goldenv.com; lou_r_jenkins@ml.com; jacque@kirsh.com; skirsh@kirsh.com; glewis@indy.rr.com;
jliebe@ameritech.net; amarsh@ppgllc.us; rmarsh@healthyindy.com; amason317@hotmail.com;
dmason317@indy.rr.com; jam4105@aol.com; rm0425@aol.com; murrayrhonda@aol.com;
danoldiges@sbcglobal.net; linoldiges@sbcglobal.net; lesleywetzel@yahoo.com; pwpearson@gmail.com;
kperry@earthlink.net; mperry@citysecurities.com; dave.roach@specialtiescompany.com;
roachhomes@aol.com; schnitzm@stlukesumc.com; mmsharp@ameritech.net; michael.sharp@fssa.in.gov;
sergino@att.net; jmsbeautysupply@sbcglobal.net; sharp_michele@lilly.com; brieq@earthlink.net;
ed@aldebarancapital.com; gvwagner@aol.com; rkevwill@mac.com; schwartz@kaufman.uits.indiana.edu;
bzimmerman@cgglawfirm.com; chadscott@aim.com; jpzimmerman@lilly.com; lanithompson@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Springmill Place neighborhood
Page 1 of 1
10/22/2008
Dear Adrienne,
We are aware that the Pittman property (east side of Spring Mill Road north of 111th
Street) is being considered as a
potential special study area under the far reaching Comprehensive Plan for Carmel. Consistent with the vote at the
September 23rd
meeting, we strongly believe that the property should remain residential, and therefore strongly oppose
changing its classification to a Special Study Area.
The fact that those supporting commercial development decided to bring this matter up at a subsequent meeting following
a decision to classify residential further clouds our belief in a fair and appropriate process. This approach was unfair to us
that believed this issue was decided at a previous meeting.
Developing this land for commercial use will:
1. Adversely affect the value of our homes in Spring Mill Place as well as the $1MM+ homes that line Spring Mill
Road
2. Increase traffic through our subdivision as well as those surrounding thoroughfares in our area
3. Increase the safety risks to the many children that call Spring Mill Place home with added foot and automotive
traffic
4. Potentially increase crime in our area
Please forward our comments to the President of the Carmel Plan Commission Leo Dierckman and anyone else you
believe appropriate. Our position and consensus on this topic is unwavering.
Regards,
Chris & Alexis Schwartz
10926 Spring Mill Place
317.571.8587
********************
********************
This E-mail (and attachments) may contain confidential/privileged information intended only for the named addressee(s). If you are not an intended recipient, do
not read, copy, disseminate or take any action based on the content of this E-mail. Please notify the sender by reply E-mail and erase this E-mail from your
system. Your assistance is appreciated. E-mail transmission may not be secure or error-free. The company is not responsible for any loss/damage arising from
any virus transmitted.
********************
********************
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Richard Clement [rclement101@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 10:52 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Subject: Zoning
Page 1 of 1
10/22/2008
We are very concerned about the plan to revise zoning for the Pittman property north of 111th. We
definitely will attend the October 28th meeting.
Richard Clement
11151 Valeside Crescent
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: DAVID ROACH [roachproperty@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 7:49 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: HOUCK_RON_f@lilly.com; joe.hile@SpecialtiesCompany.com
Subject: Spring Mill Place subdivision
Page 1 of 1
10/23/2008
1. Dear Adrienne,
My name is David Roach, and I am a resident in the Spring Mill Place subdivision.
I am in complete consensus with the entire neighborhood that does not want the land to the north
of 111th Street to become a commercial property and does not want this property to be a special
study area. Development of this land commercially would negatively impact our neighborhood
(traffic,theft,values,etc.).Please leave the area as residential as agreed.We do not feel that 6-10
story buildings to the east of our neighborhood would be in our best interest.
We do not need any prolonging meetings wearing down the residents of this neighborhood.The
Carmel Planning Commission should
make this decision as if they were living here with no agenda.
Please forward this to Leo Dierckman!!!
Thanks!
David Roach
314 W.107th Street
Carmel,IN 46032
McCain or Obama? Stay updated on coverage of the Presidential race while you browse - Download Now!
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: rjvitales@sbcglobal.net
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 9:36 AM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Subject: Land Use
Page 1 of 1
10/22/2008
Dear Adrienne,
As a resident of the Williams Mill subdivision, I am opposed to the creation of a special study of the area on the east side of
Spring Mill Road north of 111th Street to the southern border of Spring Lakes Estates. The meeting on September 23rd was
solely devoted to discussing the Land Use map. The area now being considered for special study was discussed at length and
the decision was made to leave it designated as residential. At the conclusion of that meeting, the process was to move on to
subsequent items of business. However, at the October 14th meeting, this subject was once again revisited by those who want
to reverse the decision already made. This is a disservice to your process and to those who attend and expect resolution at
each meeting, rather than revisiting issues when they are not on the agenda and all people are not in attendance. This is
certainly unfair to those people who did not attend thinking these issues were finalized at the previous meeting.
The correct process is to leave the area designated as residential, as agreed to at the September 23rd meeting. As some Plan
Commission members indicated at the October 14th meeting, a project for the land between 111th and 116th Streets should
be presented to the Plan Commission and it's merits considered at that time. Creating a special study area merely prolongs
the process and needlessly involves the residents in our subdivision in yet more meetings; a strategy merely designed to wear
down residents.
Sincerely,
Richard Vitales
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Barbara Layton [b-layton@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 2:35 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: Brainard, James C
Subject: Re: Comprehensive Plan - Revised Draft Available
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Red
Page 1 of 2
10/27/2008
Adrienne, we were at the meeting wherein Steve Pittman requested that his pig farm be reclassified, and such
request was denied. The revised comp plan indicates his request was honored.
We OBJECT to his land being reclassified.
Further, the land north along Spring Mill Road owned by Clarian was zoned residential. This was a compromise
intended to satisfy the surrounding residential property owners. This too has been reclassified.
Please DO NOT reclassify either of these two properties. No commercial west of Illinois MUST remain in effect.
Thanks much. :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Keeling, Adrienne M
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 2:17 PM
Subject: Comprehensive Plan - Revised Draft Available
Good Afternoon:
The Comprehensive Plan Review Committee completed its review of the proposed plan (July
24 Draft) at its October 14 meeting. A revised draft of the proposed Comprehensive Plan is
now available for review in the following locations:
z City’s Website:
http://www.ci.carmel.in.us/services/DOCS/DOCScccpp08/DOCScccpp08.html
z DOCS Office, Carmel City Hall, Third Floor
{ Black & White w/color maps may be purchased for $5.00
The Committee is scheduled to meet again on Tuesday, October 28 in the City Hall
Council Chambers at 6pm. The purpose of this meeting will be to review the revisions and
to cover a few public comments that have not been previously addressed by the Committee.
If you have additional questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Adrienne Keeling
Planning Administrator
Carmel Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
317-571-2417
317-571-2426 fax
akeeling@carmel.in.gov
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: John Tintera [tintjoh@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 2:22 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: tintjoh@hotmail.com
Subject: C3 - LEED Reference
Page 1 of 1
10/27/2008
Adrienne,
There are 3 references in C3 to LEED as follows; page 20, Objective 7.5, page 21, Objective 7.8 and page 21,
Objective 7.14. Please add Energy Star and Green Globes for alternative certification. Shown below is a link to a
recent article in Scientific American covering some of the common objections to LEED Certification.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=leed-compliance-not-required&print=true
Sincerely,
John B. Tintera
773-368-6276
Want to read Hotmail messages in Outlook? The Wordsmiths show you how. Learn Now
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Bobbie Mattasits [bmattasits@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 1:56 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Subject: Pittman Pig Farm zoning
Page 1 of 1
10/27/2008
Dear Adriene,
As homeowners and residents of the Williams Mill subdivision, located at 111th & Sprindmill Rd., we
are opposed to the creation of a special study area for the parcel of land east of Springmill and north of
111th (commonly referred to as the Pittman Pig Farm).
We support the current residential designation.
Yours truly,
Michael & Roberta Mattasits
451 McLaren Lane
Carmel, IN 46032
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: carmellmh@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2008 3:20 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Subject: Oct 28 Plan Commission Meeting
Page 1 of 1
10/27/2008
To Adrienne Keeling and Leo Dierchman
Adrienne, please forward copy to Leo Dierchman and the Plan Commission members.
My wife Marian and I live in Williams Mill and have lived in Carmel or Clay Twp since 1972.
The Plan Commission indicated at the Sept 23rd meeting that the east side of Spring Mill North of 111th
street would remain residential. However, the Oct 14th meeting indicated an intent to revisit this
decision and create a special study area. This issue appears on the agenda for Oct 28.
The process of revisiting agenda items that were previously agreed to creates confusion and is unfair to
those who attend meetings and leave believing that issues have been finalized. The process needlessly
involves residents in more meetings and is a waste of time and money. The Plan Commission may want
to consider a process where areas like this would be reviewed on a routine schedule of perhaps every
five (5) years. Such a process would permit all parties to be appropriately notified and to be able to
attend meetings when issues are being considered that have an impact on their immediate
neighborhoods.
Please allow the prior decision to stand and leave this area zoned residential.
Regards,
Lyle Hartman
465 Burlington Lane
Carmel, IN 46032
Phone 846-0168
McCain or Obama? Stay updated on coverage of the Presidential race while you browse - Download Now!
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Ed Skarbeck [ed@aldebarancapital.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 5:00 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: 'Ron F Houck'; 'Hile, J'
Subject: Spring Mill Place Subdivision - Resident Comments
Page 1 of 2
10/27/2008
Adrienne Keeling
Planning Administrator
Carmel Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
October 27, 2008
Dear Adrienne:
Please forward these comments to Leo Dierckman.
My name is Ed Skarbeck, I am a resident of Spring Mill Place Subdivision…In addition to the email that I
submitted below (on September 9, 2008), please accept this email as my input in regards to the issues described
below. As a resident of the Spring Mill Place subdivision, I am opposed to the creation of a special study area on
the east side of Spring Mill Road north of 111th Street to the southern border of Spring Lakes Estates. From
previous meetings and communications, I was under the impression that this area would remain properly zoned
as residential. However, it has come to our attention that the area is being “revisited” at the meeting tomorrow,
10/28/08. How many times are we going to have to go through this? I will attend tomorrow’s meeting and,
again, support the unanimous position of our neighborhood to strongly oppose the re‐zoning of this area.
Please note, that I am in full support of the detailed emails and communications that Ron Houck has provided
you in regards to the many issues we are dealing with in the changes proposed to our surrounding neighbors
and areas.
Sincerely,
Ed Skarbeck
Edward Skarbeck
364 Spring Mill Ct.
Carmel, IN 46032
317-844-8485
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Adrienne Keeling
Planning Administrator
Carmel Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
September 9, 2008
Dear Adrienne:
Your name and email was provided for comments to the Plan Commission in regards to the City of Carmel’s
Comprehensive Plan. Please accept the following as comments from a concerned resident.
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Cremens, Chuck [Chuck_Cremens@Conseco.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 9:13 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: CPulley@rbelaw.com; Rudolph, RJ; steve@pittmanpartners.com
Subject: Special Study Request
Special Study Request Page 1 of 1
10/28/2008
Ms. Keeling
I was advised that you were the appropriate person to whom I should address the following:
Dear Committee Members:
I am the authorized representative of Conseco Inc, dealing with the 48 acres at the southwest corner of 116th and
Springmill Rd. I have been following the C3 Plan meetings through our real estate agents, Resource Commercial Real Estate
and our legal counsel, Riley Bennett & Egloff, who have attended all of the Special Committee's meetings. I have also had
dicussions with other owners in the area, in particular Steve Pittman. It is our understanding that the Committee has
recommended that there be a "Special Study" to address the Springmill Corridor. We couldn't agree more with the proposed
approach. We also think it is essential that Conseco's 48 acres be included in the "Special Study" process. It is important for
its inclusion due to its location and size. We also hope that we can bring value to the Committee through our active
paricipation in the Study process. Conseco and the Committee believably share the same objective of maximizing the
opportunity along the Springmill Corridor.
Thank you for your work on this important project and your consideration to include our property in the "Special Study".
Sincerely,
Chuck Cremens
Keeling, Adrienne M
From: Hart, Kathleen [khart@boselaw.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 2:19 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Cc: Hile, J; Ron F Houck; Gary Hart
Subject: To Leo Dierckman, please
Page 1 of 3
10/27/2008
Adrienne,
Will you kindly forward this message to Mr. Dierckman? Thank you.
Mr. Dierckman:
I attended the Sept 30 and Oct 14 meetings which addressed, among other items, the Land
Use Map for the Illinois Street expansion along our neighborhood, Spring Mill Place. I
appreciate all the hard work that your Commission is putting in on this project. However, I
write to ask that you reconsider the vote on October 14 to create a special study (pink) area for
the east side of Spring Mill Road between 111 and 116th Streets (the Pittman parcel). I may not
be able to attend the Oct 28 meeting and hope you will consider this email in lieu of my
attendance. The reasons, some of which I tried to raise during the Oct 14 meeting, are as
follows:
1. Our neighborhood appeared at the Sept 23, 30 and Oct 14 meetings for areas that
affect the perimeter of our neighborhood. As stated previously, our neighborhood has
approximately 48 homes on 1+ acres each.
2. On Sept 23, we were told to return on Sept 30 because the agenda was too full to reach
our area of interest. At the Sept 30 meeting, a vote was taken after discussion that our
neighborhood (east side of Spring Mill Road between 106 and 111th Streets) should be changed
to "yellow" on the land use and planning map because it qualifies for low density classification
and not likely to change any time in the foreseeable future. We thank you for this discussion
and vote.
Also at the Sept 30 meeting, Mr. Pittman attended and advocated that his entire parcel be
changed to employment node (blue) color, making arguments about helicopters and residential
development that were not accepted. A discussion was held and vote taken, which resulted in
no color change to his parcel (which is presently residential/orange east of Spring Mill Road
and blue east of Illinois Street).
3. At the Oct 14 meeting, many reps of our neighborhood as well as Mr. Pittman
appeared once more. It was confirmed on the record that even though the map colors had not
changed, our neighborhood segment was indeed now to be yellow. Mr. Pittman then took the
opportunity to ask that blue be extended to his entire parcel -- and many of his written
comments repeated a suggestion that the commercial zone be extended to the west side of
Illinois all the way to Spring Mill Road; after discussion, this was declined (I recall one basis was
that a vote previously taken and would not be revisited) and the orange color was to remain
between Spring Mill Road and Illinois Street.
At a later point in the Oct 14 meeting, discussion was had about the Clarian segment (north
of 116th Street). It was suggested that a special study (pink) area be created. A discussion (with
many people talking over each other) was held -- in the midst of which Mr. Pittman added his
property -- and the vote taken to create a special study (pink) area -- apparently for both Clarian
and Pittman parcels.
4. The Clarian and Pittman parcels are very different as to what borders them and why
Clarian may qualify for amendments as to future use that Pittman should not. As I was briefly
able to raise at the Oct 14 meeting, the first vote and second discussion on the Pittman parcel
should hold firm, i.e., it stay orange. Further, that changing it now to a special study area will
require our low density neighborhood to attend countless more meetings so in the future we
cannot be foreclosed from protesting any amended use or zoning sought for the Pittman parcel.
5. Government works because we have good leaders who make decisions after hearing
the voices of its citizens. The Commission heard discussion on the Pittman parcel on
September 30 and voted to keep it orange. Our neighborhood attendance paid off. This
decision was even used as the basis to keep the parcel as orange when Mr. Pittman asked a
second time for a change early into the October 14 meeting. By then, Mr. Pittman had
authored more comments on the subject (many long ones) and obtained comments from new
supporters who didn't appear at the meeting yet generically favored westside development --
although not specifying it required Pittman's particular parcel to do so. If Mr. Pittman (or
others) are allowed to show up eternally and refine their arguments and support for a vote they
repeatedly seek (and to the eventual attrition of foes who relied on the prior vote when they
timely gave their arguments and showed support), the process breaks down and is entirely
unreliable for all of its citizens.
6. Therefore, I ask that you reinstate the Sept 30 vote on the Pittman parcel upon which
many of my neighbors relied and do not allow the Pittman parcel to become part of the special
study area that is appropriate for its differently situated neighbor, Clarian.
SUMMARY:
Spring Mill Place (between 106 & 111 Streets): YELLOW
Pittman parcel (between 111 & 116 Streets): ORANGE
Clarian parcel (north of 116 to Spring Lakes subdivision): PINK
Thank you.
Kathleen Hart
11009 Spring Mill Lane
Carmel, IN 46032
846-5960
This message is from the law firm Bose McKinney & Evans LLP. This message and any attachments may
contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified
above as the addressee.
If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to
read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and
attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at 317-684-5000. Delivery of
this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way
to waive confidentiality or a privilege.
Page 2 of 3
10/27/2008