Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Correspondence Draft A
• JEFFREY & LINDA KIMBELL • ~~ '' ~ 3940 W. 121 sr Street • Zionsville, IN 46077 ~~iY , . ~ 317-997-4530 • kimbelljw@aol.com ~~ ~~G~~o~~~~~~ July 26, 2006 Ms. Adrienne Keeling Dept. of Community Services City of Carmel One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Dear Ms. Keeling: pOGS We have been residents of West Clay since 1994 and are writing to express our opposition to the proposed Comprehensive Plan. Our specific concern is the Suburban Residential land classification that provides a density guideline of 1.0 to 4.9 DU/Acre. This land classification is being applied to many properties that are currently classified as S 1 which has a density limit of I.0 DU/Acre. We are not in favor of such a dramatic increase in density that is deemed acceptable by the Carmel Plan Commission and by extension the City of Carmel. It is our understanding that Density Limits were part of the annexation agreement for the area of West Clay in which we live. The proposed Comprehensive Plan would violate this agreement. Please consider our position during your review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan. Regards, Jeffrey & Linda Kimbell Page 1 of 3 Keeling, Adrienne M From: BruceBrad2@aol.com Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 8:15 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: Letter for public record/count as oral presentation Adrienne, Angie Molt suggested that I send you my letter as printed in the July 27 Carmel Topics so that it can be a matter of public record and count as an oral presentation. Please advise if any problems with doing so. I apologise. This is second copy sent for my computer records. Sincerely, Bruce Braden 915 Oswego Rd. Carmel, IN 46032 (317) 573-9508 Posted 9:35 AM July 25, 2006 Letter to the editor: City's C3 plan more than residential July 27, 2006 Just when I thought I somewhat Customer service understood Carmel's 2020 • Write a letter to the Development Plan and Gramercy's editor proposed development, I find out there's a new kid on the block .. , or could be, if approved by Carmel's powers that be. The new kid is called C3, for short. Or, you can call it the C3 Plan 2006. Or you can call it the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan (CCCP). To view the plan, visit http://www.ci.carmel.in.us/services/DOGS/DOCSCPU.htm Meetings on C3 were apparently announced on Carmel's city Web site, as I recall around May 16, and, I am told, some small mention was given in local papers. Meetings were held at 7 a.m. or 4:30 p.m., not very easy times for public attendance. From what I hear, quorums were slow or hard to come by at some of those times. In fact, when I attended the meeting of July 18, no quorum could be had until 40 minutes or so after the 4:30 p.m. start time. Meetings of such magnitude should have been announced more prominently in newspapers, radio and television. Not everyone has computers to go to the city Web site. The meeting times should have been more accommodating to working people. What disturbed me most about C3 was a Land Classification Plan Map on Page 39. On the map, my Newark/Human neighborhood is 7/28/2006 • • Page 2 of 3 colored in as urban residential (orange), a change from suburban residential. That is not such a surprise, since my neighborhood is now considered part of Carmel's core. After all, we are sandwiched just east of the emerging City Center and just west of the proposed, and now before City Council, Gramercy development (Purple). What surprised me most was the core support (light purple?) area that is situated between our neighborhood and Gramercy. What concerns me is that through six months of planning committee meetings with Gramercy developers and the public, agreements had been met that Gramercy could go forward with the stipulation that only residential units stood on Gramercy's western (East Auman Drive) and northern (126th Street) borders, except for the corner of 126th and Keystone, which was to have something of special significance for the city. Commercial buildings were to be in the center or southern apects of Gramercy. Office buildings could be on the first floor, residential only above. But, the C3 core support designation, if approved by City Council as is on Page 35 of the CCCP, would allow the following land uses, residential and otherwise on the Auman and 126th borders: 1. "Residential and offices are allowed on all floors." 2. "Retail, service, office, entertainment, restaurant, and institutional uses are allowed on ground floors." At least the plan does also stipulate that "commercial intensity should be sensitive to adjacent classifications." Already, the speculators are circling. A few more houses than usual went up for sale recently. Development companies already own several properties in the Newark/Auman neighborhood. At least two parties have bought homes, not apparently with any immediate intent to live in them, but rather to operate business within them, contrary to current city ordinances. One of these parties has reportedly, when apprised of the current ordinance and variance filing procedures decided to cease its business practice in the home and rent out their property to a family who will reside therein. The other party, the Bussell &Bussell law firm, has reportedly decided to argue for a change of variance at a date yet to be determined for a public hearing. I hope my neighbors will attend. C3? I wish they could have come up with a name not so akin to C4, the explosive! Yet it is a close enough allusion to Carmel's explosion in development. Now, if we could only get out of and into Carmel faster via South Range Line/Westfield Boulevard, we would really have progress. Though everyone south of 116th Street would lose their yards in the process, we all have to give up something for progress, don't we? 7/28/2006 • ~ Page 3 of 3 Bruce Braden Carmel 0 Email, this. ~ Print. his a Send letter to editor ~» Repnnt_nfo. 7/28/2006 • • Page 1 of 1 S Keeling, Adrienne M From: Bill Millholland [WMillholland@indy.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 12:22 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: Comprehensive Plan Adrienne, I wish to weigh in on the proposed comprehensive plan. I am a current resident of West Clay, and live at 13550 Ditch Road. At issue is the proposed density and land use for the area. I am opposed to increasing densities of developments in this area. I have seen what the impact of high densities can be; to wit some Fishers developments which radically increased population and therefore school loading and vastly increased traffic. Although our Mayor has stated that our city taxes remain relatively constant, the school component of the tax rate will be affected, as well as other components. In terms of other land use, I am opposed to allowing commercial "nodes" to pop up in the area. I have easy access to Michigan, Highway 31, and 86th street for any purchasing I may need to do. Gasoline, clothing and groceries are close at hand. I do not want to see small strip commercial keeping that have trouble tenants in Clay West! While many road improvements have been made, we still have much to do to handle the traffic created when the developments to the west of Ditch were approved. The roundabouts do handle traffic better, but the signage is very poor -even dangerous in some areas -and Carmel continues to, seemingly, haphazardly, make improvements. In short, allowing land uses for densities higher that the current 1.0 is, I feel, poor use of a resource that is not expanding. Bill Millholland 13550 Ditch Road Carmel 7/19/2006 • • G Keeling, Adrienne M From: mhenrycpa@indy.rr.com Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 10:13 AM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: Density on Comp Plan xi, We reside at 13650 Shelborne Rd. (West Clay) and are not in favor of increasing the current zoning and we are not in favor of the community vitality nodes. Sincerely, Marcia and Jim Henry • Keeling, Adrienne M From: Mike Harris [mph7772002@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 8:26 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: C3 Plan -Comments, Corrections, and Suggestions Hi Adrienne, • Page 1 of 3 I was quite impressed with the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan (C3 Plan). The level of detail planning and how all the pieces fit together was especially apparent for instance in how the use of pipeline easements would be used in regards to further additions of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan similar to the Monon Trail. It was also nice to see the effort made to involve so much of the residents of the community. I myself do not live in Carmel, but I was reviewing the plan, especially the Transportation Plan, at the request of my sister-in-law who lives in West Carmel. I have been blessed (or cursed depending on one's perspective) with a strong attention to details. As such, I would like to pass on the following minor corrections and suggestions to be made so that they do not detract from an already very impressive plan: . Pages 26-28 under the heading of Structure Features: change wider/deeper "then they are" to "than they are" deep/wide . Page number references: o Add plus two to each of the page references in the gray boxes on the following pages: ^ 42 ^ 43 ^ 57 ^ 67 o On page 64, there is a reference to page 63 for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Map. May I suggest that the s ecific page reference "(on page 63)" be changed to either of the following to avoid future problems as page numbers change with updates: ^ "(on the next page)" -used on page 54 in regards to Thoroughfare Plan Map on page 55 ^ "(on the following page)" -used on page 70 in regards to Transit Facility Plan Map on page 71 . Update Thoroughfare Plan Map on page 55 to show which Residential Parkways are expected to be 2-lane and which are expected to be 4-lane over the course of 20 years since there is already a separate page for each within the body of this section for its classification and description. . For clarity, it might be beneficial to have a separate page for each of the three levels (lane, minor, major) of Residential Streets that Carmel recognizes. . Perhaps some information or details could be added in regards to Buffer Planting especially in regards to Residential Parkways. With a 120' right of way requirement, a substantial amount of space is essentially left for this buffer planting. . Inconsistent dimensions in ~ical Cross Section from text description of Street Features: o Collector Street (page 45) -Cross Section shows "18 feet Min. Pavement Width" from Center Line to Curb, but text has "Minimum Lane Width: 11 feet" with 7 feet o tional for on-street parking. Suggestion: Change "18 feet Min. Pavement Width" to "Pavement 7/18/2006 • . Page 2 of 3 .. Width: 18 feet Min. with parking; 11 feet Min. without parking". o Urban Collector Street (page 46) -Cross Section shows " 24 feet Min. Pavement Width" from Center Line to Curb, but text has "Minimum Lane Width: 11 feet" with 8 feet o to Tonal for on-street parking and a "Maximum Pavement Width: 48 feet". Suggestion: Change from " 24 feet Min. Pavement Width" to " 24 feet Max. Pavement Width". o Residential Parkway (2-lane) on page 47 -Cross Section shows "16 feet Min. Pavement Width" from Curb to Curb on one side of the median, but text has "Minimum Lane Width: 11 feet" with 8 feet o tional for on-street parking and a "Maximum Aggregate Pavement Width: 24 feet". Note: The maximum aggregate pavement width of 24 feet eliminates the passibility of parking on both sides and essentially eliminates parking on even one side (24 feet aggregate - 8 feet for parking on one side = 16 feet which is insufficient for 2 lanes (one on each side of median) of traffic with a minimum lane width of 11 feet. It appears that the intent is not to have any on-street parking on residential parkways which is good, but ifparking is to be allowed the maximum aggregate pavement width should be increased to at least 30 feet [(2 lanes * 11' min. lane width) + 8' parking] to allow for parking on one side and 38 feet [(2 lanes * 11' min. lane width) + (2 * 8' parking)] for parking on both sides. Note: Two times the 16' minimum pavement length from curb to curb shown on one side of the median equals 32' minimum aggregate pavement width which would be greater than the 24' in the existing text as a maximum aggregate. o Residential Parkway (4-lane) on page 48 -Cross Section shows " 24 feet Max. Pavement Width" from Curb to Curb on one side of the median, but text has "Minimum Lane Width: 11 feet" with 8 feet optional for on-street parking and a "Maximum Aggregate Pavement Width: 48 feet". It appears that the intent is not to have any on-street parking on residential parkways which is good, but if parking is to be allowed then: ^ either one of the two lanes on each side doubles for the optional parking . or the maximum aggregate payment width should be increased to at least 52 feet [(4 lanes * 11' min. lane width) + 8' parking] to allow for parking on one side and 60 feet [(4 lanes * 11' min. lane width) + (2 * 8' parking)] for parking on both sides. In this case, the " 24 feet Max. Pavement Width" shown also needs to be changed to "Pavement Width: 30 feet Min. with parking; 22 feet Min. without parking". o Urban Arterial (page 51) -Cross Section shows "16 feet Min. Turn Lane", but text has "Maximum Number of Lanes: 4 lanes" with a "Minimum Lane Width: 12 feet" and a "Maximum Pavement Width: 48 feet". Note: The maximum pavement width of 48 feet with 16 feet minimum for a turn lane would only leave 32 feet which is insufficient for 4 lanes with a minimum lane width of 12 feet. Perhaps maximum pavement width should be at least 64 feet. o Primary Arterial (page 53) -Cross Section shows "16 feet Min. Turn Lane", but text has "Maximum Number of Lanes: 4 lanes" with a "Minimum Lane Width: 12 feet" and a "Maximum Pavement Width: 48 feet". Note: The maximum pavement width of 48 feet with 16 feet minimum for a turn lane would only leave 32 feet which is insufficient for 4 lanes with a minimum lane width of 12 feet. Perhaps maximum pavement width should be at least 64 feet. I will be interested to see how well Cannel does in following the plan especially when finalized, but also in the interim, by ensuring that developers of currently unplatted lots take the full plan into consideration and are not allowed to simply make their maximum profit. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to ask. Sincerely, 7/18/2006 • Page 3 of 3 :. Mike P. Hams 480-540-5416 How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. 7/18/2006 • • Page 1 of 1 4 Keeling, Adrienne M From: Hancock, Ramona B Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 3:43 PM To: 'jgileno@aol.com' Cc: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: RE: Proposed Updated Comprehensive Plan Thank you for your comments. I do hope you took advantage of the meetings held on the Comprehensive Plan and offered your input in a public forum. I have forwarded your comments to Adrienne Keeling, Long Range Planner for the City. Ramona Hancock Admin. Assistant Carmel Plan Commission -----Original Message----- From: jgileno@aol.com [mailto:jgileno@aol.com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:05 PM To: Hancock, Ramona B Subject: Proposed Updated Comprehensive Plan Dear Ms. Hancock, I'm writing to express my concern with the Proposed Updated Comprehensive Plan which shows my Newark Village neighborhood as an urban part of City Center. I own an almost 1-acre lot with asingle-family home in a residential neighborhood. I have a beautiful large back yard and my property has 10 large mature trees. Our neighborhood provides a mature tree canopy and safe quiet streets where I walk my dog every day. There is nothing urban about this neighborhood and I am shocked to see this bucolic area called urban. I hope you will represent the people who live in and own property in Newark Village by insisting on changes to the Comprehensive Plan which will more accurately reflect the nature of Newark Village and protect the quality of life in our quiet residential neighborhood. Sincerely, Jean Gileno 25 Napanee Drive Check out_AOL.com_today.. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free. 7/17/2006 • • Page 1 of 2 0 Keeling, Adrienne M From: Tom.Jones@indystar.com Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 2:42 AM To: Hancock, Ramona B Cc: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: Transportation Plan Comments My name is Tom Jones and I live at 12210 Shelborne Rd. I drove a truck for the Indianapolis Star/News for twenty four years. Currently I am a foreman with Penske Logistics. With over thirty years experience in local delivery within Marion County and the surrounding counties. I have a few comments and questions concerning the transportation plan. To plan for and add on-street bike lanes is very important. The current roads do not have a paved shoulder and are very dangerous for bike riders. Concerning the side paths 1 can finally run from my home on Shelborne to Clay Center Road and only travel on a street for an eighth of a mile. I won't consider the Township complete until I can take a bike safely into Carmel. The current gravel shoulders that Hamilton County requires do not provide a suitable surface for walking and are seldom adequate to support a vehicle fire if it accidentally or by necessity ventures off the paved surface. There needs to be good east-west routes across the township. All roads need to be upgraded to support the amount of traffic that currently exists and an accurate assessment made for future needs. The roundabouts need to be sized adequately for all possible traffic. I saw a tractor trailer drive over the roundabout at 116th and Ditch. He was hurrying too much and I was not close enough to see if he even tried to negotiate the turn entirely on the pavement. The area between curbs looks very tight, even for some straight trucks. It is understood that trucks should not be using many of these streets. When deliveries need to go to schools on Shelborne and Township Line then trucks will go whatever way is most direct. Legal of not it is going to happen. Large fire trucks and school buses also must be considered. All intersections need to be properly sized and constructed. The draft seems to address my concerns well. Itjust seemed appropriate to provide some positive support. Thank You Tom Jones 7/14/2006 J~~ rRrAr.nTroRnEYS -" RECEIVED P. R O Y D F-t D U D E FR GDERICK R. HOVDE 'w ~1 t ', 1'~:^. RO RER"C T. DASSOW Yd 6 N]Cn OLAti C. DEF:TS DDC~ July 13, 2006 Ms. Adrienne Keeling DOCS Carmel City Hall One Civic Square Cannel, IN 46032 RE: Revision of the Comprehensive Plan Dear Ms. Keeling: My wife and 1 are residents of Clay West'and have followed the various proposals for changing the density limit for residential building. Please record this as being strongly opposed to revision of the Comprehensive Plan which allows more than one unit per acre in Clay West. To allow a density greater than this would, in the long run, drastically change the character and composition of Clay West to the detriment of those of us who have chosen to live there. Additionally, we have some concern about the language which will be adopted to permit a "Neighborhood Service Node." Some language should be included that prohibits this from being iocat~d anywhere in a residential area. if L.ere is uq specific limitaiion as to wiicie and 11G ~h" commercial construction can go; this will, of course, drastically,impact the N~hole Clay West. Thanking you for the opportunity to communicate our views, I am, Yours Very Truly, 'F. Boyd Hovde .. .: FBH:em HOVDE DASSOWf~DEETS LLC One Meridian Plaza ~ 10585 North Meridian StrlleeJJt, Suite 205 • Indianapolis, Indiana 46290 phone 317.8163100 • fax 317.81831 I I • toll free 888.404.6833 • www.hovdelaw.com ~~v ~ Q ~ RECENED 1 ~ , ~ ~u~ ~ 22oos ~ridl¢bournst l DOCS #lom¢own¢r~ g9~~ociation s „ Ms. Adrienne Keeling City Of Carmel Department of Community Services One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 RE: PROPOSED BII{E PATH BRIDLEBOURNE SUBDIVISION Dear Ms. Keeling: I just received a copy of Chapter 4 of the proposed transportation plan for the City of Carmel. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Map on page 65 of the preliminary plan reflects a bike path through the middle of Bridlebourne, an exclusive neighborhood located at approximately 106`h street and Shelbourne Road. In addition, we have received several complaints today from the residents of Bridlebourne and as Managing Agent for the neighborhood, wanted to go on record to express those resident's concerns and opposition to the construction of such path through the neighborhood. Bridlebourne is a private, gated community with common areas owned by the lot owners within the community. The residents have funded the installation of privacy gates, the installation of security cameras and support the long term plan to completely fence in the remaining common areas to further increase the security of the neighborhood. We asked that you and the commission consider rerouting the bike path around the neighborhood, so that Bridlbourne can remain the private community it wishes to be. I would like to thank you for your time and consideration. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at 344- 7344. Sincerely, Matthew W. Urbanski Asset Manager Bridlebourne Homeowners Association • • Keeling, Adrienne M From: Walter W Jolly [wjollyl3@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:25 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: Land Classification, proposed in reviewing the proposal for land classification on the city website, I found that most of West Clay is listed as Suburban Residential. The proposal allows density of up to 4.9 units per acre. Z really think this is much too high a density. Even upping the density to 2 units per acre would double the density. Doubling the density would decrease the attractive character of the area. Walt Jolly 0 1 ~~ . . 9 10 ~ 0 ;, 1 BAKER & DANIELS ~>~ '~, Ic;~ ~ ~;~Cr, ` EST. IB63 600 E. 9fith Street, Sulte 600 • Indianapolis, Indana 48240 ~ .1~~`~~ ~ Tel. 317.569.9600 • Fax 317.569,4800 ~~,~,~. ~r W w W.bekerdaniel9.~m N, D.C. CHINA June 29, 2006 Carmel Plan Commission c/o Ms. Adrienne Keeling, Planning Administrator Dept. of Community Services Carmel City Hall One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Re: C3 Plan 2006 -Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan -Part 5 Dear Plan Commission Members: On behalf of Clarian Health Partners, Inc., I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on Par[ 5: Critical Corridors and Subazeas of the C3 Plan 2006 - Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan. As you know, in 2003, Clarian Health Partners, Inc. obtained a PUD Zoning on approximately 94 acres of real estate located in the area designated for the U.S. 31 Corridor. We previously provided you with a number of detailed written comments in a letter dated June 13, 2006 and would ask that you to incorporate those earlier written comments into this letter. At this time, we would like to focus your attenfion on the land classification recommendation of "Residential Transition" for the area north of 116°i Street between Illinois Street and Spring Mill Road. This term is undefined in the draft C3 Plan. We request that the term "Residential Transition" as used in Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas be defined to apply to those uses which are currently authorized by the approved PUD zoning for the real estate. Those approved land uses include anumber ofmixed-use, office or residential developments that can provide an appropriate transition between the intense development of the Employment Nodes recommended along the U.S. 31 frontage and the neazby single family development areas recommended for the area west of Spring Mill Road. This would allow for case by case determinations to be made as to the appropriateness of a "transitional development" or a particulaz land use in light of a specific use and development plan and how well the proposed development accomplishes the required transition and protects the opportunity for future single family residential development west of Spring Mill Road. BDDBOI 4349854v1 w Carmel Plan Commission -2- June 29, 2006 As supplemental information for your review, please see the attached table which identifies the approved land uses, by PUD Area, for the real estate in question and then identifies the Land Classification proposed under the C3 Plan which most closely fits to those approved land uses. Again, thank you for allowing us the opportunity to present these concerns and comments for your review and consideration. We would appreciate the opportunity to have discussions regarding these concerns. Sincerely DANIELS LLP ~. cimia ~. e for Clarian Health Partners, Inc. eooeot .ua9ssa~t ~. . ~ C-3: Carmel Comprehensive Plan Clarion PUD Approved Land Uses /Land Classification 1. Area 2-A: Approved Land Use Comprehensive Plan Designation Single Family Dwellings Urban Residential (Approved density does not fit other residential land classifications) Two Family Dwellings Multifamily Residential (Suburban Residential contains greater limitations than approved.) Multifamily Townhouse Dwellings Multifunily Residential (Suburban Residential contains greater limitations than approved.) Assisted Livurg Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node 2. Area 2-B: Approved Land Use Comprehensive Plan Designation Single Family Dwellings Urban Residential (Approved density does not fit other residential land classifications) Two Family Dwellings Multifamily Residential (Suburban Residential contains greater ]imitations than approved.) Multifamily Townhouse Multifamily Residential Dwellings (Suburban Residential contains greater limitations than approved.) Assisted Living Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node Child Care Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node Day Nursery Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node Medical Office Building Employment Node /Community Vitality Node Offices Employment Node /Community Vitality Node General Services - limited to Best Fit: Employment Node ground floor and basement of Good Fit: Community V itality Node a primary use building. Retail -limited to ground Best Fit: Employment Node floor and basement of a Good Fit: Community Vitality Node primary use building. Food Service -limited to Best Fit: Employment Node ground floor and basement of Good Fit: Community Vitality Node a primary use building. BDDBOI 4338i35a~1 BAKER & DANIELS LLP -" - '- EST. 1863 - "' - 600 E. 96th Street, Suite 600 • Indianapolis, Indiana 46240 Tel. 317.569.9600 • Fax 317.569.4800 www. bakerdan ie Is. com June 29, 2006 Carmel Plan Commission c/o Ms. Adrienne Keeling, Planning Administrator Dept. of Community Services Carmel City Hall One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 RECEiv~D JUN 2 9 206 DQCS Re: C3 Plan 2006 -Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan -Part 5 Dear Plan Commission Members: INDIANA WASHINGTON, D.C. CHINA On behalf of Clarion Health Partners, Inc., I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas of the C3 Plan 2006 - Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan. As you know, in 2003, Clarion Health Partners, Inc. obtained a PUD Zoning on approximately 94 acres of real estate located in the area designated for the U.S. 31 Corridor. We previously provided you with a number of detailed written comments in a letter dated June 13, 2006 and would ask that you to incorporate those earlier written comments into this letter. At this time, we would like to focus your attention on the land classification recommendation of "Residential Transition" for the area north of 116`h Street between Illinois Street and Spring Mill Road. This term is undefined in the draft C3 Plan. We request that the term "Residential Transition" as used in Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas be defined to apply to those uses which are currently authorized by the approved PUD zoning for the real estate. Those approved land uses include anumber ofmixed-use, office or residential developments that can provide an appropriate transition between the intense development of the Employment Nodes recommended along the U.S. 31 frontage and the nearby single family development areas recommended for the area west of Spring Mill Road. This would allow for case by case determinations to be made as to the appropriateness of a "transitional development" or a particular land use in light of a specific use and development plan and how well the proposed development accomplishes the required transition and protects the opportunity for future single family residential development west of Spring Mill Road. I3DDH61 4449854v I Carmel Plan Commission -2- June 29, 2006 As supplemental information for your review, please see the attached table which identifies the approved land uses, by PUD Area, for the real estate in question and then identifies the Land Classification proposed under the C3 Plan which most closely fits to those approved land uses. Again, thank you for allowing us the opportunity to present these concerns and comments for your review and consideration. We would appreciate the opportunity to have discussions regarding these concerns. Sincerely & DANIELS LL ~~ Clarian Health Partners, Inc. BDDBOI 4449854v1 C-3: Carmel Comprehensive Plan Clarian PUD Approved Land Uses /Land Classification 1. Area 2-A: Approved Land Use Comprehensive Plan Designation Single Family Dwellings Urban Residential (Approved density does not fit other residential land classifications) Two Family Dwellings Multifamily Residential (Suburban Residential contains greater limitations than approved.) Multifamily Townhouse Dwellings Multifamily Residential (Suburban Residential contains greater limitations than approved.) Assisted Living Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node 2. Area 2-B: Approved Land Use Comprehensive Plan Designation Single Family Dwellings Urban Residential (Approved density does not fit other residential land classifications) Two Family Dwellings Multifamily Residential (Suburban Residential contains greater limitations than approved.) Multifamily Townhouse Multifamily Residential Dwellings (Suburban Residential contains greater limitations than approved.) Assisted Living Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node Child Care Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node Day Nursery Neighborhood Service Note /Community Vitality Node Medical Office Building Employment Node /Community Vitality Node Offices Employment Node /Community Vitality Node General Services -limited to Best Fit: Emp]oyment Node ground floor and basement of Good Fit: Community Vitality Node a primary use building. Retail -limited to ground Best Fit: Employment Node floor and basement of a Good Fit: Community Vitality Node primary use building. Food Service -limited to Best Fit: Employment Node ground floor and basement of Good Fit; Community Vitality Node a primary use building. BDDB01 444873Sv1 IJ I ,. _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ C om w, ~»+s o r, SLC-ht~ oZ o'er Co..-, P% Q ~ • 6~ b ~ sc.uss; ®,-, a,,.,~. (~~- ~, c~ RECEIVED ~ Go ~a ~~ • i ~ ~ I L ~_/~l`_'I~c2r__C ho.n~ +n r»... a s~. ;oo_ , ~~ 0. r s ~, ~ d ~ ~~ ~ v ' ~. ~, " i-H b _ ,~ , ~ , _ _ _ • i .~ ,~ .. . e ~~ - .. V w i • • Ca,~$. P 10.;, , ?~.~. FQx ;; ~ &, -a-9 ro(~~ ~ : ;2. '~ ., - _ti~~ ~_~. ~. I KEYSTONE AVENUE CORRIDOR Description Keystone Avenue has been identified as a critical corridor because it: • Serves as major north/south arterial; • Establishes a division between the urbanizing central part of Carmel and stable residential neighborhoods; and • Is buffered by long stretches of mature trees providing aesthetic benefit. The volume of traffic on Keystone Avenue has increased; additionally, many intersecting streets have experienced increasing volumes of traffic. The addition of traffic has increased the time it takes to traverse the township. During certain parts of the day, the corridor has backed-up traffic and is noted by residents as being a transportation concern. Critical Area Boundaries The Keystone Avenue Corridor boundaries are depicted on the Orientation Map on the following page. Strategy Cain Cetrtrol of the Right-of-WaT: The City of Carmel will continue its efforts to gain full control over Keystone Avenue, reverting it to a City controlled street instead of a Stale Road. Install Grade-Separated Reundahouts: Once the City has control ofthenght-of--way, it will achieve grade separation at key intersections. The most logical design for grade separation ,.ri--~ is a roundabout configuration. This design will require much ~~I'~"" less rig t-o -way acquisition, [hereby minimizing disturbance to adjacent properties. The result will be significant reductions in traffic congestion, travel times, and vehicular accidents. Assure EastlWest Connectivity: As a major arterial, Keystone Avenue acts as a barrier for bicycle and pedestrian traffic. The City will install grade-separated pedestrian crossings for residents ofeast Carmel to key destinations in central Carmel. Preserve and Install Tree Canopy: Carmel will maintain the overlay language in its zoning regulations to protect the existing tree canopy. It will also require installation ofnew canopy trees when appropriate to maintain [he "green corridor" aesthetic. #I Ca,u` t-o~.t~+~ab~r.+~s t,~,.t,alE. -~i,~ Install Side Paths: There is an ever-increasing demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Carmel. The Keystone Avenue Corridor +vill provide a tremendous opportunity for side paths to be added within the existing right-of--way. With the Monon Trail functioning at capacity at times, the Keystone Avenue Corridor +vould provide another north- south route for pedestrians. With a connection between the Monon Trail at the north (see Keystone Avenue Corridor Plan) and south, a highly desirable circuit would be created. Require Connection between Carmel Drive and Mohawk Drive: As areas between Carmel Drive and Mohawk Drive develop and redevelop, the City will require a strong street connection to relieve use of Keystone Avenue. This requirement reflects the existing and highly used connection (AAA Way) from 116th Street to Cannel Drive. Design Guidelines • Protect and enhance the green corridor aesthetic. • Assure safe means for pedestrians to cross Keystone Avenue. q,v,~ wt5't' • Protect residential neighborhoods on the east side of,~a- Keystone Avenue from conflicting land use encroachment. • Use Keystone Avenue to soften the effects of commercial ~3 develoQmen[ for residential neighborhoods east of Keystone Avenue. • Add aesthetic character to grade-separated roundabouts ~~W? so they maintain a Oleasant and context-sensitive corridor. • Minimize and discourage unplanned expansion of commercial uses m [ e corridor. Commercial character should be buffered from nearby and adjacent neip~hborhoods with appropr~andscapmg, m mgldd` placement, etc. • Plan for mass transit by encouraging mixed-use hubs with $~t'} appropriate residential densities. -H-o2 `>1.:c,e- ~4-t~a.SrF- ~re.r~c~P.~.<:tI'~~Q{ he.~es5 d~o -t-L~¢.~ nLnnP-cQ '~ P~S-p ~-C°.UI- ctY<~.- 1~~.<.~~5'L'r' r~'S%- Gt•P~.V1'1 c\X n2i ~G.bor1~.0-o cQS -S~i'b+x Cti<+~f', c\f+~7 Grn.-, m P rc~r <.R I wv.~ tws~ • w 1~ , I e. \ rte- Y-l.e-V1 S~+w.z d=r r..¢.- . •t- Gcr++i ., ~.+ r S 'I-o ~n cv w-ec qp_, \ Pw•W-ino w. o+-e.- ~~..el~ is-y.ee~ i-c5e5 next "/U es+wblisl+edZ reSicQ~,.<sl-ice ne-i9L+bo.rl,nocPS- CAdcEcbcui'i¢. b;,+~r~~>vt i5 a'vf-Siu.a.it -lv cQo~. y - Ia.:-.e- r-o~ ytz~'~c Vol«,m eS c+v+ Kec'si-o~~.ar Cca.+„d1 G(.S, 3i~f L+J;II i~.a. non-C.Qom%nc~n-F- ~c~+~4;c d2',+-ec~E-io,1~ 2sw i I y c.1.5 e-~ ba.t v i 5 i dvtS cu~LC2 n-6vt - Co+v.~R. I~e~S i c~tv<7roU) ra-{:-o w.R-Q. !w Co)~ ~~ )B Clrl' VF C:\R\1rL, IVDI,+SA J-I.P.t^-mot iikzl~ IeauQ.i+vq to w<-ore. rzceirQe~lS. ~~-I' /TQ can 2~v~Ge..+-c`a~c~i~ /.s-~-O ~r-:n i-F5~ a U AC~-e o2e,~+s i ~-i e5 i h ores-er '~O J •~S ~Fi ~+- n,aSS ~~Ccsv+-sit, ~.o c.a.~er y-~~5 p Y~o,..rI Kaystona Eivanua Corridor flan ~~~-o cv~.a.0., i s n.wf s 1, o~+ cw Corse~vct~..,av. 12es;Re-.,~ir~ an -1-ry, ~-a-r„dP C,Iass•i-~; cwl-tv,-.7 W h ~ ah o wl- ~.,ti. w ~St- s ~ ~ O-~ Kin 5~{-o-r~¢., t-~e5 i ~P~.~JI~ c~.2 u-r Aoundahoutlnterchange tC New Aoundahaut ~~ Separated Multi~Use Path ~ Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossing Preservellnstall ireeCanopy -~~ Conservation Residential - Esisting Street ----• PmpesedStreet --~- Stream GRMEL CU.ASOLIUA fEU CO,~IPft GHGA51A"P PLAY ~ )] .. U.S. 31 CORRIDOR Description The U.S. 31 Corridor has been identified as a critical corridor because it • Serves as major regional north/south arterial; • Provides an abrupt transition between the urbanizing central part of Carmel and sensitive low density residential neighborhoods and estates; • Creates an undesirable barrier for easUwest vehicular and pedestrian transit; and • Isamajoremploymentcorridorandeconomicengine. U.S. 31 is slated to be upgraded to freeway status, requiring interchanges as the only access points. This is a positive improvement to reduce traffic congestion, yet wi II result in numerouschaNengesaswell. For instance, Carmel will likely lose some access points along the corridor. It will be important for Cannel to maintain sufficient access to U.S. 31 and to ensure the City's character is not compromised. Further, it will be important to provide numerous means for eastlwest access for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. Critical Area Boundaries The U.S. 31 Corridor boundaries are depicted on the Orientation Map on the following page. Strategy Utilise Roundabout Interchanges: The City ofCarmel will work with the State of Indiana to ensure the use of roundabout- . style interchanges.. These interchange designs are expected [o save cost, reduce acquisition of land, disturb less of [he built environment, and best match [he character goals of the City. Another expected advantage is efficiency of vehicular traffic, reducing emissions and fuel consumption. Eriend Illinois Street from Spring Mill Road to 136th Street:.4s U.S. 31 is upgraded, Illinois Street will be necessary to provide north/south access to the employment corridor on the west side of U.S. 31. Illinois Street also establishes the ' transition from intense office corridor to estate residential areas to the west. Maintain Strang EastlWest Connectivity: As a major arterial, U.S. 31 acts as a barrier for bicycle and pedestrian traffic. R'hen the highway is upgraded to freeway status, it may also reduee east/west comtectivity for vehicles. The City will work with the State of Indiana to establish six interchanges and three overpasses for adequate vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access. Two additional bicycle and pedestrian grade-separated crossings are necessary. JB ~ (OTY OF rAN.11 R., IADI,A,CA Require 6• to 8•Stery Buildings: Require all buildings between Illinois Street and Pennsylvania S[ree[ to be 6 to 8 stories in height. This office and medical corridor provides essential employment opportunity and portrays a positive community charxter. Parking areas should be de-emphasized and limited opportunity for business-serving and employee- -~ servinE commercial should be allowed (e.g. restaurants and print shops). Design Guidelines • Protect and enhance the green corridor aesthetic created by large lawns and consistent landscaping. • Ensure safe means for bicyclists and pedestrians to cross U.S.31. • Transition the scale and mass of structures between U.S. 31.~ an Spring Mill Road to minimize impact to residential development to the west. • Require "corporate" style architecture and campus design between Illinois Street and Pennsylvania Street. Office buildings should be required to be 6 to 8 stories in height. • Prohibit corporate "branding" architecture. • Employ "green" architecture for all new buildings. • Locate amenity nodes for convenience and enjoyment of corridor employees and nearb}' residents. ~'t r.-t i '{' I ~~ ca,l.'F+ n-q t -I-o 1-to`F' i wi i1 rz c `~ hvor~y (-e51~ d~~a+r;~ r~a~ea.n_. sv~ Q. 7Lot ~~. jd'tr_a $'q e-c-e- t-•-o-~t' cv~Ce.~wa~~x., r~'fY2c.vt5i-1'I Or+S ~ ~S DQ,Cn c.,11H ~r'a~m. Sk~l~ t a Vo.S~i-Iv cQ.i~~e~rp.,.,~ u.5 ~5. ''7~ Ido>-.r I i rn ~ q-e~Q ? yp uSf- 7'~. P~ ~a., Ih G.r~(~o-r-o.~,L~ ih'I-p ~~y_, (y-g 5~-pr~ i 6u.i Id.;,vt ? =5i- t'• o} •~cl<z,i it•e s ¢w-z d t Cl t,ezh.'~~ d,p ~-rv~l-euF ca~Q.;gc~...,,i- ~ I`e5i dte~-at~<aQ are n.d. F} u~y Swtc>.ILQ nns-.o~ ice. w~,ic-Q. `Fo -i-t'~t,t~s%a-1(Jo,. ~•+ Co -$ S~J~ori e5 -I-o 1 - a -.. 5 foci e-$ , .. U.S. 31 Corridor flan 5._ - goy- Siccr/~ oar 5~s'Y1"`•9r~~~11 ~. ~ ~ ti ~. w s ~• s w6 00;,1-~a.A... ~~ ctSSi ~-i c~~k~'v,~ ~'lo.~. /7a`e_- Y'I~ V-l~~ Q/v~c.~ p l.ln CC. ~1 i h e.s V/VF 11 '~ ~' \' (L e5 i ~ e~w~(-r a;l? Tra.vr s', ~; ~~ -w sbm floundaboutlnterchange ~ Oreryass ;?~ Newfloundahout ~~ Separated Multi~Use Path q Crade Separated Pedestrian Crossing ~~ Preservepnstall Tree Canepy t Conservation flesidential flesidential Transition ® fi to 8 Stery Employment Cnrridnr -G Existing StreeVflaundabout ----• Proposed Street CANM1IlL CO\SOLI U.\fEU COYIPME HE\51\'! 1'L:\.\ ~ ]9 96Th STREET CORRIDOR Description The 96th Street Corridor has been identified as a critical corridor because it Serves as a major eas[/west arterial; Establishes a division between stable residential neighborhoods and commercial areas; and Traverses in and out of sensitive neighborhoods. Through the early 1960's, 96th Street was an uninterzupted cross-county connector between [he Boone County line and the While River. In the mid-sixties, Interstate 465 was constructed resulting in the current disrupted configuration near Westfield Boulevard. As northern Marion County and southern Hamilton County urbanized, 96th Street's importance as amajor east/west corridor was rekindled. Today, 96th Street continues to evolve into a major arterial, especially east of Keystone Avenue. In the study area of [he 96th Street Corzidor Plan, [here are three segments [ha[ reflect commercial character and corzespondingly carry higher volumes of traffic: • Between Michigan Road and Shelboume Road; • Between Spring Mill Road and College Avenue; and • Between Westfield Boulevard and Keystone Avenue. There are also two segments that maintain residential character and tarty lower volumes of traffic: • Between Shelboume Road and Spring Mill Road; and • Between CollegeAvenue and Westfield Boulevard: Critical Area Boundaries The Keystone Avenue Corridor boundaries are depicted on [he Orientation Map on the following page. Strategy Encourage Redevelopmem Along Michigan Road: The City of Carmel should encourage the redevelopment of property on the northeast corner of Michigan Road and 96th Street. A high quality development at this location would enhance this gateway into Carmel. It is hoped that a quality development in this strategic location will act as a catalyst for similar quality to [he south, north and east where several "tired" and under-utilized buildings are located. RuRer Residemial Areas from Commercial: As commercial areas near Michigan Road evolve or are redeveloped, special .z attention should be given to transitions or softening o„1 potential negative effects to adjacent residential areas. Enhance EasUWest Connectivity: Where 96th Street (Real Street) connects with Westfield Boulevard south of I-465, the City of Carmel should look for ways to improve connectivity to the new roundabout north of 1-465 on Westfield Boulevard. The best solution may' be another roundabout at Real Street (Marion County's jurisdiction) at Westfield Boulevard to allow for more fluid, uninterrupted vehicle flow. Install Side Paths: There is an ever-increasing demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Carmel. The 96th Street Corridor provides an opportunity for Side Paths [o be added „t, between the Morton Trail and Keystone Avenue. With the T Monon Trail functioning at capacity at times, the 96th Street Corzidor would provide (once Side Paths are installed on Keystone Avenue) a highly desirable circuit. Maimain Residemial Character: In the residential areas noted -~(~' on [he 96th Street Corridor Plan, [ e Ity s ou maintain a_2- lane con~igarahon with residential sensitivity (e.g. minimize rig t~Ti of-way impacts, and add street trees and Side Paths) for as long as possible. Based on the 96th Street Corridor Study (1999), [he 2-lane configuration would result in congestion during some periods, but would be manageable up to the year 2020. Connect Pennsylvania Parkway to Westfield Boulevard: The City's Thoroughfare Plan has indicated for years that a connection between Pennsylvania Parkway and Westfield Boulevard, north of I-465 is necessary. The right-of--way for this street extension exists in some locations. This linkage would likely help relieve traffic on 96th Street between College Avenue and Westfield Boulevard. Design Guidelines • Protect and enhance residential character in the street sections between Shelboume Road and Spring Mill Road, and between College Avenue and Westfield Boulevard. • Add Side Paths, especially along the north side of96th Street. • Sensitively transition between commercial and residential uses with vegetation, distance, screening and buffering land uses. ga.cQ-i~ c2o,.e, ~cr }~sl-.bt-~oKe. ~C S;~- PwHRs o.r-e sl.ew~. a,ll 0.i 9!o"e /v'~ ZB `~!o'~ S'F, i5 d-'o E7~ %`ti4nv'Fatr.edZ A* 01 ~ u,vve5 era m~q~. i~-e5 i cQe~-~i c:.~ ar~aA. 1 a [~ l .Jn~-t I'~.O`f' '1'~ $ctN~A- '3'I~Ead-m P~..~k- 'tip(" :~.Q- r`2s',~Q E(..5{riaQ T[n,•MQ_ M1,oc,rR 4.r-..(~ ~11L~ fir.? 80 ~ (IIT\ OF C.A RAI F. L, IFDIANA .. 96th StrQ¢t Corridor Plan 4~lane Arterial 2Jane Arterial Comme¢ial Context with Residential Sensitivity 4-lane Arterial 2-lane Arterial 3-lane Anedal Commercial Context vdth Resitlernial Sensitiviy Commercial Context floundahoutlnterchange Ys_'7 New Usundabom ~~ Separated Multi•Use Path ~ Grade~Sepaated Pedestrian Crossing PreservepnstallTreeCanop~ Senstitire iransitionlUuger Uedevelopmentgppertunity ~ flesitlential Conservation -0 foisting StreeURoundabout ----• PmposedStreet CAH.41~L C0950LIUT'I-EU CO.A1PR['HE~SIYE PL>?' 81 ., or l.-a,~ Gloss;-~c~,.~-~o,-.'YS1a.e. Ola MEf~IDIHN SUBEiRE(i Description The Old Meridian Subarea has been identified as a critical district because it: • Is experiencing increased development pressure; • Has a wide ntix of land uses coming together in a small area; • Has a significant portion of [he land left undeveloped or underdeveloped; • Is made up of a few permanent uses (e.g. St. Vincent's Cannel Hospital and Carmel Middle School) which require some sensitivity; • Has a significant demand for businesses to serve the corporate corridor along U.S. 31; and • Lacks a cohesive theme and unifying features. O h \ No ~ The City of Carmel conducted a thorough market study of the Old Meridian Subarea followed by a detailed physical study (Old Meridian Task Force Report). The result of both efforts was a vision, physical development plan, and land use concept for the district. The City already has funding for improving Old Meridian Street, and is in the process of upgrading it to four lanes with roundabouts at critical locations. The street improvement plan includes a new landscaped median, curbs and sidewalks. Critical Area Boundaries The Old Meridian Subarea boundaries are depicted on the Orientation Map on page 86~ g8 Strategy Old Meridian Street Boulevard: The City ofCarmel will rebuild and re-configure Old Meridian Street into a boulevard with roundabouts at Pennsylvania Street, Grand Boulevard ([o be built) and Main Street. This project will se[ the character for the district, enhance pedestrian access, and mitigate traffic. Grand Boulevard and other Radial Boulevards: The City will build Grand Boulevard and other secondary boulevards in the locations depicted on the Old Meridian Subarea Plan. These radial boulevards will offer park-like medians to support bicycling and walking access to the Village area. They will also provide cross-circulation for vehicles and high quality settings for new development. Secondary Streel Network: As development occurs, secondary streets will need to be installed as depicted on the Old Meridian Subarea Plan. These streets are intended to provide additional connectivity instead of dead-end driveways serving a single development. They also provide an opportunity for buildings to face public streets with parking in the rear of the property. Townhouse and Multifamity Uses: The Old Meridian Subarea Plan envisions upscale and more moderate units within townhouses and multifamily developments. These residential developments are intended to be located along the new boulevards and generally be owner occupied. Office Development: Outside the central retail and residential areas, new office development is anticipated on the north and south ends of the subarea. This office development is intended to be 2 to 5 stories, mostly fronting on Old Meridian Street. ~~ S~~~le-.-~o>.,o~ly re5idew~h e~Q.n Milled Use Pillage: The Old Meridian Village is intended to be a concentrated mixed-use development with upper-floor residential units. The Village will be a walkable place to shop, and will offer cafes and entertainment for residents and employees of nearby developments. Establishing a critical mass of retail uses is essential. Oistriel Character: The City of Carmel will encourage an urban character similar to anold-fashioned village or Main Street. Buildings will primarily be designed to fronton boulevards or secondary streets with vehicles de-emphasized by requiring parking in [he rearofproperties. Ground floor elevations will generally be transparent glass, and buildings will have distinct elevations with cornice lines with three-dimensional details. e~-~y ? Q• r'e 5 u-,I ~F i n G\-\n o u-v-rn.1..Q. ~lre~'F a,:1C q ~ u~-• 86 ~ CITY OP URSIEL, I]'OIA V,\ ~-X Single-Family Attached Design Guidelines • Residential units should provide a minimum ofone parking space off-street. • Off-street parking should be on a paved driveway or in an attached or detached enclosed garage. • All parking should be accessed from the rear of the unit. • All buildings should face a public street. • Developments exceeding 10 units should provide IS% of the land area as passive open space, landscaped for enjoyment y the residents. • All local streets should accommodate on-street parking and sidewalks according [o Old Meridian Subarea Plan. • All units should be vertically separated, between 25 to 35 fee[ in width, and 2 '/: stories tall. 3 5'+o+i e5 P %cd-w~ • Front facades should bead in brick with three-dimensional details.6usl+-'rr~ r•^o•~odonr~? • Front doors should face the street and be 2 to 5 feet above sidewalk level. hj~,.s•Q,; ~y,~ f~ccesS ? • An articulated cornice should be provided where the top of the facade meets the roof. • If desired, a "transparent" fence (e.g. wrought iron) should be allowed in the front yard. Large single fnmilr homes with brick fronts, small yards and stoops are a goodfrtjor the Sing/e-Frrnrily attached suhdrslricl Muhifamily Attached Design Guidelines • All units should provide a minimum of one parking space off-stree . • Surface parking or parking garages should not be adjacent to or face a public street. • At (east 75°0 ofall buildings in a development should face a public street. • Developments exceeding IO units should provide IS% of.~~ the Ian area as passive open space, landscaped for enjoyment by the residents. • Buildings facing public streets should have abuild-to requirement, with facades being varied between 4 and 9 fee[ from the right-of-wav. Off-street parking or driveways should not be permitted in the front setback. Too GI oSa. z • All local streets should accommodate on-street parking and sidewalks according to the Old Meridian Subarea Plan. • Buildings shouldbeaminimumof28feet[allandamaximum of 55 feet tall, except parkin¢ garages which cannot exceed 35 feet in height,Ccbr,,ivc~le.,...# 5-1ror%es? 7k'~(JF • All units should be accessible from both the front and back 5 i ze. o~ -irZL$`t0.1'~<Q~ r.q 5 ~ r{ h s , of the building. • Front setbacks and courtyards should be finished with sidewalks and extensive landscaping. • Courtyards may be fenced with wrought iron or metal fences that are w more than 5 fee[ tall. • Freestanding signs should be prohibited. All identification, directional, or informational signs should be small and located on the building or integrated onto a fence. ~•~ ~~ ova- v%si+a+-5 -I-o Si;r`dl. Btvdcr- dv ~ Ow"r (;~+- 6~'~-ore.. ~ow c.o u..Vt v;s;~toc-s. 'nc o-~-K 5$n..cr.- r~.~..:.-zip- -gym- less ~tl~~... 1 O u-n i i5 ? subdistrict. rQi'ctd'* iJi tl~. '•.~¢~yt-r~ of r`5'I•'v-rl F-5. GA N.AfEL COR SOLI D.A'rEU COAIPNFHGR51A't PLAY 86 Raw homee~ are a suitable f l for Jre Single-Fnnrifv Anached hhdtifrmrilvdnaclred dereloprneru.rlurulrfface (he street curd have we-s0~eet parkurg to areommodnle risrlors. Mixed Use ~Ilage Design Guidelines • All ground floors should be retail, restaurant, or entertainment uses except for lobby or transitional areas to upper-floor residential units. • Upper Floors may be residential, office or commercial uses. • Drive-through facilities should be prohibited. • Parking should be provided at a 1 Per 800 square feet ratio of ~~ gross area in the building. • Par mg sh~7c' ould be on-site or within 200 feet of the site and shared parking will be considered; excluding on-street parking. • All buildings should face the public street and at least one main entrance to each ground Floor use shall be on the street side of the building. • Curb cuts or parking lots should not be allowed on Old Meridian Street. • The buildings should sit on the front property line, except for minorrecessed areas (e.g. entrances). • Pedestrian access [o rear parking areas is encouraged and should be a[ least 8 feet wide. • No single retail business should have more than 45 feet of frontage on Old Meridian Street. • Buildings mustbeaminimumof25fee[tallandamaximum of 55 feet tall, excelparking garages which should not exceed 35 fee[ in height. ~"`b"'v~.,f vJv.~ Sto o-+es ? • Ground floor elevations should be a minimum of 80% transparent glass. See....-r+s ~-+~+~ h. • Buildings should have a distinct corrYice line at the top of the wall and have intermediate horizontal elements. • The general proportion of the building should be vertical. • The primary articulation of the building should be three- dimensionaldetails rather than massing. • In general, roofs should be flat or slightly sloped. • Ground floor tenants should be allowed 1 %: s uare feet of L/p stgn area per linea oot of buildin frontage with a maximum `;~'-r' of 32 square feet o s+gn area. f{a+-R -1-o v )Sw~;l) z-e . ~~ • Building signs should fit within the horizontal and vertical ,~,~"r'h elements of the building and should not obscure the building's architectural details. • Signs should be mounted perpendicular to the facade or Flat-mounted on the facade. • Signs should not extend above the height of the building, but they can be on awnings or painted in storefront windows or upper-floor windows. Retractable fabric awnings may be used, but cannot exceed the width of the windows or cover architectural details of the building. Individual tenants should strive fora unique graphic identity rather than be required to conform to a single standard. ~~71ve,\I w-e.-ems ~t,LJfow-a~! oh- a-k~~ V:lla~/- -0 Q o rY-oy- 5 k'i m P B n P ~.r-kin (. Carn\.+~ re5idte~+~5 hn.v-e~ -Flcdl, u.l-6a<ati 5cw-~e_a~- ~-•Ic,ll., Prable,V..S. n•,iSiu..i+ ~~--k.i~^ P 88 I CITY~UF CA0.\IrL, i\U1,1NA ~'.4-in 4 LLA Gk I ~ k 1 11 Q G(.31'y nl (=1'G 0.Q. 0.t+°.0.-. c~Y ~a.-x-~.bi ~ ~ ass off- Pe-o,Pl~ d-o each. oaf-lit- • • s Iluildings at prominent locations shall hove strong architectural quality and frame the intersection. to nccomnrodare street trees and pedestrimr flolr Sd-c~+e. 0. m i n ~ nl lt,iv~ W ~ ~ ~ „ C.I cr„y `l~ee~r-ite,es- 5'r eQF.wezf k5 ~-e. d-o-o i'~e>r, Vd"tJ'oW' Village OUice Design Guidelines • Primary uses should be office related. • A small percentage of Floor area may be dedicated to small retail or restaurant uses. • Drive-throueh facilities should be prohibited. • Parking should be provided at a 1 per600 square feet ratio of leasable area. • All buildings should face the public street and at least one main entrance to each ground Floor use should be on the street side of the building. Re.P~-R gelo+.r-. • Curb cuts or parking lots should not be allowed on Old Meridian Street. • Al~ui~gs s ule tublic tr~nd a east qne m m e ranc o e gr d r u sho be the s reet {de o the rldin • Buildings should be at least two stories, but no more than 5 sto__ies in height. Nu-..,bcr a~ ~e~~? (3z tm~s;: • The maximum footprint of any single building should be 15,000 square feet and a minimum of 8,000 square feet. Buildings facing public streets shall have abuild-to requirement, with facades being varied between 20 feet and 30 feet from [he right-of--way. Nooff-street parking or driveways are permitted in [he front setback. ' Buildings should be faced in brick, trimmed in metal, stone, precast concrete, woo , or stucco. Large expanses of glass should be permitted, but the structure should not be predominantly glass and metal (e.g. curtain wall construction). Concrete block should not be permitted. A single freestanding monument sign should be permitted in the front setback and be thoroughly landscaped around the base. An additional, appropriately scaled, wall sign should also be permitted. Special Use Design Guidelines Primary uses should be public institutions (e.g. places of worship or civic buildings). Commercial or office uses would also be fitting if the architecture is iconic and portrays an important profile. Parking should be in line with other subdistricts, but will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Buildings should be oriented to face the roundabout and be set back 150 feet from the right-of--way. Buildings should have at least a 10.000 square foot building footprint. Buildings should be at leas[ 35 fee[ in height, but no more than 55 feet tall. ,E~,-~,vu,le,..x- S-1-oa+es ~ Buildings should be constructed of substantial materials consistent with an important and iconic structure. Substantial and attractive landscaping should be installed in the setback facing the roundabout. (ocnrions. G1 N.\1!L CU.\SOLIUd TEU CO\~I'NEI{EVSI\'E I'L:\5 i 8) 6illage office architecture shouldfit (de scale chnrncler of the Old aleridinn a9ised-Use hilinge. Home i fleundahout Imerchange wlSidewalk ~ Uverpass wl Sidewalk 's, Hew Aoundabom ~~ Separated Multi-0sePath I G=~ Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossing -• ProposedSfreelwilhSidewalk ~ Mised Use Center ® 6 to A Story Employment Corridor ANice lransition Park and Recreation -O Existing StreeUAeundabaut CAH.l1FL COS90 LI U.YrE1J CO.U PH EH EV51Vt' PL.A.A ~ 91 : _,, i.. ~ • Cc1v.,~,-,~~ o,~, Cc~'~'~Pln,~. Q.!-~.'~-t- RECL;V~D I°o.w- ~-i o Ti-cx..l~ s p oi-~3-~+~~~ ~ JUN 2 6 206 ~ ~~~ -- ~ N '?-i}o.~ ~{- Q-sk._ FrT)L S-ZI 3c~~-~o_y~Ci,.~. aV- Cor-.i. 4 -r-n ~ t _~-_ .._ I ~ '~ TL U ~' Ca p p ~~ yG.LCO mc.cL.~?~L aY_l_v'h9:~~c . _ -- (7-. _ ~-~ !Ul U / ^ ~7 x`1_."'4'-Q I~C]xtb~.Cey~'S ' o IZS.~J l..o .Q `,.D l_~+k-/mar r ~-s~ /-o~zci~ s ,t e g l-~n _ ,- , Y= t ~11>zi u.l~~ c?I" Y.-~^ni n'+.Iw.la~_~~ ~'~'~2.H~K i cvi~ D-I-' _~~ ~lJ_Af~CeQti~'5.99'^-'~-"C=r:trSb:~Yk? rt :4~~Gl.~.a.t>>i- ~."'v L!`+"S ~- -H1_'YL~7.32vv~4 U e f ,c~~~ 1 Q2~S i n o •4~. ar as-e-n.n._(~t1.~.,o~F- Cn_ ~ Q ro P ,n t~ 1-. .. ,I~„~-F ~,~~ fi•o r_LC3-C1'C7ti.L c~GL 4'~t-e?~ v~ ~m~al- `No l ~ o r _ ~ 5_ ~ _ . - .~ 4L~r~_~-~an_N,.,. ~' P ( ~ _~^ LF\ ~J_F' Lid tY_[] ~~y 6OS ~ T-- ~ ~a ~~ .. ~~ ~' , ~ ~~LY.4'.Ir~_.t-\ ' {f.~C.A~~ l.1CLiY_~a.H.d.$-.k_Z ~ / ~~c~SCi~H•.~ l~Q a-. a,-,~..~~_ °~ d-t', 0.9.,_ c-o0O a.£o !.. 1 „.~ ,i. L' Q ~= f~ - - AA _ r -_-_- '~ ~~~ {-YA~ I~ 11~"~ ~R. ' P ~ ~ ~ ~ -- . _ .~ _ . Mti . n. j-A,37,a_ tF C~.Zi P= es.-_ ".t . 1 . n-I~ --9-+-- ~-`~ c~ ~>Z L ~ H; o ~ ~ ' u~- ( ~ y~ i "°-`StL~~?'4~M _60. lCl~~c~ 'i-C1~ SC~b'O~ / c?i.TVi- ~~_P ~.{~~LS 1~ _i-ltilnt•fF-1 2v5 S C n~V: G o. ~~~~~~CLLLQIG3[__/_'/Ui- h-e~l~~ n.e~~~,l~r~b.on~ ~a~ ~_6;_~y~_e~ ~_ _ ,M 1 n ppp ~~n ~ `' ` ~' '!' A ~'l~.SGT/~Y.CI_LLi.Ll.c~L~C./.-C_GLC>_.Cp._._y - C U 1 !!*~~_ ctkY~_1L~ i i . V _•(~c_ /~f~:CClLST ~ Q y'lna_,p,Q.m.,~. v~.a Nos~~~~~. -~.Ez tv~ lilLa~ S'F.~_J-kc~_'~ ~ Y r``u Y 4~¢z...r.~.:,Q -l-Itit- 5~1-ia.¢:k _..~~F ~,nv,~1~~t~~_ttic'~i/ ? / / t t d I~e<~e~:Jr ire ~~c c r t ss: L . Q~ ~ i l Q _ . ~ .~~ _ c _ ~ .k~ isz~~ < S___ _ s_,x n---~ s ~i ~-~~~:c.l+. - ~ (-~~~I_~ 2c?~:Jt<l E~..~1C.l.It...7_CN_~' ._[~Jiti~J`S*.XCy____. _ Yl: \:_Y_`L-t3-~ _ ' /1 `p o ~~ . J 12th. ~ a.t:~ ~ ~ ~_ Fc~c (l, -~21~ -O (fl) c2 . ~»'1n.~_/ni2x.._~coac~Yna~..~t rn., cL¢,x~~2c'i-~_~~5_i_cQ.e~'Ftl 2~ w ~ o &g-5~ ~- ~r~ ~~~_~a-~~~~e~~1~ 4 ~~ 1 Q o ~ n o ~q~- ~1 0 Q a..Y ~VP.J ~•~'/.5 t'.d 'lf'iY4-lam !i'H pTe._ ~[~ _r~_C - ~ - l !_L1"~'e..~~ e}S' 'N P.~e +r~--~ o~.l~ L1..~~ ~- i 5 Y7~c, tR.~ ~~2re_NUt be'~'W-ayn,., -l" _ _ l Part a: Ti~ansportntimv Plan is inclusive of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and mass transportation. The City of Carmel recognizes that improving and establishing multiple modes of transportation is essential [o further its evolution to a world class city. The CJ Plan is the first of its kind to be inclusive of al! mainstream transportation modes. The City is making the conscious decision to emphasize alternative modes of transportation to complement traditional vehicular transportation. Alternative transportation is increasingly desirable because residents want bicycle and pedestrian connectivity (e.g. side paths) [o local amenities, commuters want alternatives (e.g. light rail) for travel to work, and life- stylechanges are demanding more recreational facilities (e.g. Monon Trail). To address each mode of transportation, this Part is divided into the following three sections: 1. Thorough/a/e Plan ... pg 41 2. Bicycle and Pedeslnan Facility Plan ... pg 55 3:: Transit Plan.. ..[... .:..:: - :.. pg 65 Thoroughfare Plan Generally, the Thoroughfare Plan identifies and describes the recognized street classifications. It also includes the 20-Year Thoroughfaze Plan Map which applies those street classifications toevery street in Carmel's planning jurisdiction. The application of street classifications is designed to result in the effective connectivity and efficient flow of traffic. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan Generally, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan identifies and describes the facilities designed for bicycle and pedestrian use. II also includes the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan Map which denotes where each type of facility is intended to be installed or maintained to achieve effective connectivity. Transit Plan Generally, the Transit Plan identifies and describes the transit system and facilities desired by Carmel. The transit system is currently in the planning stages, so [he content of this Plan is meant to support [he ongoing desire to establish a commuter line to downtown Indianapolis and intracity transportation. kQ "}">; eer Cn~t-$, mci5}' "~'~cvs5 i'} c°lo.vv r~3't" Ynrla:l; ~~ ~~'i-ate (fin VC<~~{} SC-~yecQw~e_ "~'"'LX~ ~,', d'(i r~rcfL Co-w,~o+-yI •~~~cvE GoNa_ p.F.Fnr, ~U~~J ~/ ~/osi, r+~u.5'f e+~ ,t Gi ~ es ) ~ kz 1-eS ~ elcs cw~:-t w.a,~,LZ``~'~'°' J'~IS' i'~ ! t-~~ ~I ~}`o 'J^1'ov~'~S~d~ ,F (~~`{'~er, ¢., ~~i-a,n 5~'~- rr, W5.1- ~P. Ccrn VF.t~tt ~°.+vf' , ~~~ ci.P.v..* Ci.v~GQ o» -'}irrn2.~ , I ~ ax ',,, r~ri~ ur c:^asYi: ~, i~oi.l.~nl y r' Z"}' r~i-1.S~4- rJC' ."7-r~L.5'T 0.4..ICQ LISy~'iY-t~ W 1~/'~^~ r~ W0.~~'Iv~p LQI S~10.A"~C1L O'T ~t Oi.t[' c~~S"fl11 Gi*t-Q~l ~ ~'~.~ In9 Z[LY7wvt-) TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTt~ODUCTiON ~ THOROUGHFARE PLAN The City's ?0-Year Thoroughfare Plan focuses on facilities for motor vehicles, streets, and alternative transportation systems. The Thoroughfare Plan first identifies and describes recognized street classifications. It then applies those street classifications to every street in [he City's planningjurisdic[ion on the Thoroughfare Plan Map. Street Classifications and Descriptions The following street classifications are used on [he Thoroughfare Plan Map: 1. Residential. Street.......:, ...: :.....:.:.... ....::..:: pg 42 2. Collector, Street .....' .::.: . ..::.: pg,43 3. Urban Collector'Street :::. .:...:.:....:.. ..:..::::. pg44' 4. Residential Parkway (2-lane) I ...... : ...:.: pg 45 5. Residential Parkway (4-lane) . .:..... ......:. pg 46 6. Secondary.Parkway ...........:..::........ .:..:..... pg 47 7. Primary Parkway .............::.::.. ..::..::. ....~.... pg.48 8. Urban Arterial ..............:. .:..;. ...::: pg 49 9. Secondary Arterial .:i..... ::.:.... . '...:. pg 50 }0. Primary AReriaF ...................:..:..::..... .......:: pg 51. Each of the street classifications listed above has a page dedicated [o describing how it can be used to convey vehicular traffic and how it fits into the fabric of the City. Further, the following headings are used, as described below, [o convey the essence of each street classification: General Description: This section gives a brief description of why [he street classification has been established. Street Features: This section conveys [he primary design standards that make each street classification unique. The standards include: right-of--way, maximum numberoflanes, minimum lane width, curbs, sidewalks and paths, on-street parking, street trees, and uffer plantings. Typical Cross Section: This section references a typical cross section illustration of the street classification. The illustration is intended to portray the purest applied version ofthe street. When applied in the real world, variations in the design maybe necessary. Design Priorkies: During the design phase of all street improvement projects, decisions have to be made to best meet budgetary constraints, timelines, funding cycles, physical constraints, and political constraints. This section contntunicates [he primary and secondary priorities for each street classification. Primary priorities are [hose [ha[ should not be foregone in design eclslons. econdary priorities are those that maybe considered for compromise, non-inclusion, or later phases of the project. Traffic Managemetrt Dptions: This section describes vehicular traffic management options to consider when improving a street. The options listed are intended to identify the most appropriate means to intersect streets, slow traffic (if appropriate), increase traffic efficiency (when appropriate), and improve safety. ' P Y C.\H\i[L CO\SULIU>T!D CO\IIBl11EU1\'l I'L.\\ 43 RESIDENTIAL STREET General Description A Residential Street is designed primarily to provide access to platted residential lots and remote properties. These streets generally connect with Collector Streets and other Residential Streets. Residential Streets may include non- [hrough streets. Carmel recognizes three levels ofResidential Streets (Residential Street Lane Residential Street Minor, and Residenha treet Major). Each type is described below. Street Features W NERF ? • RigM•ol-Way: 40 to 50 feet depending on Residential Street type s • Maximum Numher of lanes: 2 lanes ..~ Minimum lane Widths: 10 to 15 feet depending on Residential Street type • Maximum Pavement Width: 22 to 30 fee[ depending on Rest entialStree[type -~~{ • Curbs: Required, except on Residential Street Lanes • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Platt • On•Sireet Parking: Optional on one side, except on Residential Street Lanes; 7 feet each • Street Trees: Required • RuRer Plaiting: Not Required W h aA- i 5 -! i, %5 ,7 typical Cross Section See illustration below Design Priorities • Primary Priorities: - - Access to residential properties -~~ - Reinforcing neighborhood character ~ Z ~+.o- - Properly installed and designed pedestrian facilities Secondary Priorities: - Width of travel lanes - On-street parking, except on Residential Street Lanes Local StrQat Typical Cross Section TraKic Management Options • Roundabouts • On-street parking • Nartower lane widths Ca,~...~1- 6.¢' a~v...l h.-.o-re. d-~n,~..- / S '~ze,'hr cu.~4 lam. wiv-f,%r a- So -400+ R;~l.~-o~~- W n.y ~ av F ~ ~d-ur-e<2 . wL,ev-Par cwr~~ 51.owIdL 6~ r~.<;Ire<Q cm t`++.r-a.l ~ revLlcfe. 5•iTC.~-its, 50 `eel of Right-of~Way - 15 feet.64it( "Yr~GtY Pa ~Width~ Curb: 2 feet Tree Plot: 3 `eel Min. Sidewalk: S lest Min. 44 ~ CITY OF C.\R\ILL, IVDIA\.\ 30 ~ezt 7n~, f av~rr\e<.~ w~~e~,-1, and sidewniks on both sides oft/re street. COLLECTOR STREET General Description A Collector Street is designed to allow direct residential driveway access and allow on-street parking when deemed safe. These streets primarily connect Residential Streets with Residential Parkways, Secondary Parkways, and Secondary Arterials. Street Features • Right-of•WaT:90 fee[ W~ S~cr,,)cQ-~e • Maximum Number of lanes: 4 lanes ~ ? • Minimum lane Width: 11 feet ~+~- ~ ~ i ",r~c~ • Maximum Pavemem Width: 48 feet • Curbs: Required • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per [he Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan • On-Street Parking: Optional on one or two sides; 7 feet each Street Trees: Required BuNer Plaming: Required Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right-of•Way • Neighborhood character • Pedestrian facilities • Street trees Secondary Priorities Within Right•af-Way Width of travel lanes On-street parking 'YI P.~f'}Yi 21' ~ •f <.~-carp cQ P/Ka.t..f~.Q~, i 5 S ~ 8w~~\ 0.5 a Co 11 r:c:T-o-r- 5~~a~F- rn, ~f-~.ar ~.+>rv L~,h~re. Pi<~. ~. Collector StreQt Typical Cross SQCtion iraNic Management Features • Roundabouts • On-street parking • Narrower lane widths • Curb extensions at traditional intersections (bump-outs) 90 feet of Right-of-Way _ 19 P~ Curb: 2 feet Tree Plot 6 feel Min. Side Pass: 10 feet Min. 9'. C_\H\IEL CU.\SULI Ud'rEU CO\IPN F.HlUIVL I'L:U' 46 • General Description An Urban Collector Street is designed to allow direct residential driveway access and allow on-street parking when deemed safe in urban areas. These streets primarily Residential Streets with Residential Parkways, Secot Parkways, Urban Arterials, Secondary Arterials and Urban Collector Streets. Street Features • AigM-ot-Way: 65 feet • Maximum Numker of lanes: 4 lanes • Minimum lane Width: 1 I feet • Maximum Paremem Width: 48 feet • Curk3: Required ~~ • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bich Pedestrian Facility Plan • On•Street Parking: Optional on one or two sides; 8 1 ~(• Stre t Trees: Re cored Au0er Plaming: Tree grates' ~ Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right-ot•Way • Pedestrian Facilities • Wid[hoftravellanes • Sensitive to context Secondary Priorities WkhinRight-of-Way ~IC '7~ Street trees Z~ t~~ r~ecST_ t I,,T L, y ore, • On-street parking 1)si-z.Q ~~ r~s.~fP~a. t..1,R~- P:~,.~ Pte,. `F la.r,a,o .~ ll' eacP. w-a.,..P_e_ re~~.;,r • On-street parking • Narrower lane widths • Curb extensions at traditional intersections (bump-outs) V / ~ Urban Coll¢ctor Typical Cross S¢ctlon A3 p~~~~t ~wla r-e<bt~re.. ~a ~ ~ a~ -'1~1:t -~~- ~~ . 65 `eet of Right-of-Way ~~ Curb:2leet ,t,~~ 1~~'_ /!-~ Side Path: 70 feel Min. j.-/6N~ OB i CITY VF C.\R\IFI-, IVOI,\V.\ UL~BANCOLLECTORSTREET j TraRicManagementFeatures • Roundabouts I RESIDENTIAL PARKWAY 2-LANE i1~a.'7h.o,-~w~r~~.~. m~q ~Lo-ee ~o't-~e.:s~t~t„-u:rs ~,~.,~.w a-la,.~ a.wa ~-I~n;. R~s;,Qe Generalf)escription Pte."'<~s. =-t- s{.Qr.,1~P, A Residential Parkway (2-lane is designed to maintain I residential character and to efficiently convey residential ii traffic to more motor roads. Driveway access should be I reduced when possible and on-street parking can be ermitted when deemed safe. Residential Parkways (2-lane) primarily connect Residential Streets with Collector Streets, Secondary Parkways, Primary Parkways, Secondary Arterials ~I and other Residential Parkways. I Street Features • Right-of•WaT: 120 feet • Maximum Number of lanes: 2 lanes • Minimum lane Width: ] 1 feet • Maximum Aggregate Pavement Width: 24 feet • Curbs: Required -'- • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and I Pedestrian Facility Plan • On-Street Parkin : O tional on one or two sides; 8 feet each • SlreetTrees:Required Na,H Su:r~~la o,~ ~ • BuNer Plaming: Required r.,q,,,,~ n~ t4,r~ t"o~~-~ Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right•of-Way • Neighborhood character • Sensitive to context ~ ~~Q' "^"s 0 t.l~ 5~ • Pedestrian facilities '~o u,~rRe,S'ires...L, w,~[tew • Width of tree plots ~'x ~s {'t'\-.~$ttc~ rzpl • Median planting ---~ ~ • Street trees f O2o~ Sa. ~\.t-.r}L $P;tir\~ rv:,11 Secondary Priorities Within Right•of-Way . Q ~OC4~ • Width oftraveilanes ~e.-5e. \('a-{zw • On-street parking nt•e.- `..orke<.9- vwsy-l~ ~~ • Bike lanes Wes~E L'p-y,~Q, wh~~ w~rc2e.- reacts cre. woW wr~,~ Traffic Management Features • Roundabouts • On-street parking • Narrower lane widths • Curb extensions at traditional intersections (bump-outs) design. r cLnr~ rAv r1Q•t- 5.~.~-~c~.~- `1-K..-uk cA~~~-~~~zr.'r R¢sid¢ntial Parkway (2-Lana) typical Cross S¢etlon ~~+ ctn-,sis~le..:k- w~y-~ ~y 120 feet orR'SM~of-Way Tree Plot: Side Palh::; I Curb2 feet ~; ~ % 8 feet Mln. 10 feel Mind p / 16 feet Min \ ~=.. -~ : . ~ { ~d ('.\a)IEL CUSSOLI U.\'r!U COI I'Rk HE]SIPt I'LA\ ~ 4) a(rrac(ive and snfe conneerion (0 99(G Su'ee(. RESIDENTIAL PARKWAY 4-LANE 1Q„ ~-r-•a.-o~.~t1~t~-w.~.p I „3-~~~1. Rte. ~-~~A ova- p ln,r.r~e<(L .yo b.n-. H' - l at^Q-' General Description A Residential Parkway (4-lane) is designed to reflect residential character and to efficiently convey residential traffic to more major roads. Driveway access should be minimized and on-street parking can be permitted when deemed safe. Residential Parkways (4-lane) primarily connect Residential Streets with Collector Streets, Secondary Parkways, Primary Parkways, Secondary Arterials and other Residential Parkways. Street Features • RigM•of•WaT: 120 feet • Maximum Numher of lanes: 4 lanes • Minimum lane Width: I 1 feet • Maximum Aggregate Pavement Width: 48 feet • Curhs: Required • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan • On-Street Parking: Optional on one or two sides; 8 feet each • SUeet Trees: Required • Buffer Planting; Required Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right-of-Way • Sensitive to Content • Width of travel lanes • Pedestrian facilities • Median planting - A<~Lp S u.ne_ceSS~ty W) <Q'{'~., • rSf eeCTrees CJ Secondary Priorities Wfthin Right•o(•War -~ • Neighborhood character • Bicycle lanes • Width of tree plots • On-street parking iraKc Management Features • Roundabouts • On-street parking • Defined turn lanes at intersections or roundabouts Narrower lane widths • Curb extensions at traditional intersections (bump-outs) ~~. ~~ ~ <L P~~.~ Prx-kw.~. Reside:ntiai Parkway (4-Lane) Typical Cross Section Curb: 2 !eet 24 feet Side Palh: ~: 10 feet Min. /a• { - 99 ~ ^TY OP C AR,A11[L, ly'DI A,VA north to south. - - ~ -- f-~a-uA 1~2Q-4. i5 S~.a~oti. o,. d-Qa. ~'~`•v~~i- SECONDARY PARKWAY Na.mo,~,-4.- R ~yht -od -W ny General Description ~ ~ / Qo I~ d A Secondary Parkway is equivalent to a Secondary Arterial, but is configured with a median and more aest etTic characteristics. Secondary Parkways primarily connect CollectorSlreets,Residential Parkways,~Secondary Parkways, and Secondary Arterials with Primary Parkways and Primary Arterials. Street Features • Rfght•af•Way: !30 feet • Maximum Numher of lanes: 4 lanes • Minimum lane Width: 12 feet • Maximum Aggregate Pavemem Width: 48 feet • Curhs: Required • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan • On-Street Parking: Not Permitted • Street Trees: Required • Buffer Planting: Required Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right•of•WaT • Sensitive to context • Width of travel lanes • Pedestrian facilities 5~,\„p, `'' • Median planting ~.,,,r..~ "_ • Street trees Pt'~~ d' Secondary Priorities Within Right-of•Way w°-' Qr,~' I • Bicycle lanes • Tree plot widths Traffic Management Features • Roundabouts • Defined turn lanes at intersections or roundabouts • Acceleration and deceleration lanes • Limited me tanmterruption v ~ .t,~re~,~r,P A recently consnvcred segment of/lfinais Slreel begins to establish the charncler ofOris S'ecandary Parlnvav. CM\aQ. Prmn54fV•cvs.i i:~ `•~+V'J o Secondary parkway Typical Cross Section ~~^K°- ~ PM~~ ~«-~~~, ~~-~t- ~-.aa 10' n~-n-~pw.n.~.. ~~~1~.'~_~.~_W~y t30 feet of~iintof-Wav '/ • Tree Pbt: Side Path: 6 feet Mtn.. ,tU feet Min. feet 1 t3 C:\a>I!L CUSSULIU{r'rU COlIIBkHESSIYE 1'L A] ' 09 Pf~IMRRY PRRKW ,. O ~J-DOK rTr Y}ta~eauGt+fRPE Mflf') L~ ~ Genera! Description ~ C~,q`r'~ A Primary Parkway is equivalent to a Primary Arterial but is configured with a median and more aesthetic characteristics. Primary Parkways pnmarily connect Collector Streets, Residential Parkways, Secondary Parkways, and Secondary Arterials with Primary Parkways, Primary Arterials and Highways. Street Features • Right-ot•Way: 140 feet • Maximum Numher sf lanes: 4 lanes • Minimum lane Width: 12 feet • Maximum Aggregme Pavement Width: 48 feet • Curtis: Required • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan • On•Street Parking: Not Permitted • Street Trees: Required • gufler Plaming: Required Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right-of-Way • Sensitive to context ~ • Width of travel lanes C ~ ~ .,r•A J J"'- t • Pedestrian facilities • Median planting 5 • Street trees Qom` Secondary Priorities Within Right•of-Way • Bicycle lanes • Tree plot widths ,'J~r- ~e~. roc, ~ ~< C~-~u.,ti~i~...~- ,~ ii +p ~Tcvti~ ~~,~ Gt,,~cR SPtil,q n..AlL /ZcQ. (c iratfic Management features • Roundabouts • Defined turn lanes at intersections or roundabouts • Acceleration and deceleration lanes • Limited median interruption • Grade separation at~High~wa~s • Exit ramps at tg tway~ and Intersta[es ~Tc7wv.a. loo ncQ.. ~ ~ i n e cQ w ~ v-I. 5 ~4.bc..r6 a-~~. d- e sic.,`le.. I`+=SicQ.p~„~L,p~s- ~ey n-,~ be.+..q J~-e.a--F-ed>, ~+~ s~,t..s. ~t.o IZ/N~.Si-m.o• ~ 1 d P~ C~u;..o~s ~- Pen..rtiS~tvc~,wica. ~) ~F.~,a~.clt shc,~~oY-,.v ~Q, ce~«,~rai~,...'(' n J~.Iw.,..~!- -~o Tf,..1yW •~.) Qii 4z3- ~@55'C'.(- (Primary Darkway Typical Cross Section sam` °-°_ ~~ ha.v 10 ~ w i ceer 1d0 feat ofaRtthof-Wav _ 0 - w`~"J Curb: 2 feet j Tree Plot: 6 feet Min. Side Patter ID'eet Min. feet 18r,_ 00 ~ UTV OF CAR VEL, Iti DL~N.A ~fhr; r"m.sq~'~•.ry ~Yt lob 5 i. ow S I'~v ~ 5 c~5 t~ UR3AN ARTERIAL ill R-`e~~~/w General Description ~ An Urban Arterial is equivalent to a Secondary Arterial but is configured to fit within a developed corncorn o~rterials I primarily connect Residential Streets, Collector Streets, ~,' Urban Collectors, Residential Parkways, and Secondary ~', Arterials with Primary Parkways, Primary Arterials and Highways. An Urban Arterial is designed to allow limited driveway access and allow on-street Parking when deemed i safe in urban areas. i Street Features • AigM-al-Way: 90 feet • MaximumNumherotlanes:4lanes • Minimum lane Width: 12 feet • Maximum Pavemem Width: 48 feet -~n~(kc~ r~q T"'''`' • Curbs: Required a a'°"vII'' • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan • On•Street Parking: Optional on one or two sides; 8.5 feet each • Street Trees: Required • gu0er Plaming; Tree grates Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right-ot•Way • Width of travel lanes • Sensitive to context • Pedestrian facilities Secondary Priorities Within Right-ot-Way • Street trees in grates • On-street parking • Bike lanes Urban Arterial 'typical Cross Section Traffic Management Features Roundabouts Defined turn lanes at intersections or roundabouts On-street parking Narrower lane widths Curb extensions at traditional intersections (bump-outs) _ . ., S•. .4ilS;n x^+-ir SouUr Rnnge line Road Iran reasserted itsel(as a significant cnmmercia! corridor providing the main porn( ofenb7~ into the Old Town.rits and Design District from lire e'outh. 90 `eet of Right-0b Way _76 feet Min, 24 feet ~, Tum Lane '- Pyvamen 1-cin~ i Curb: 2 feet Side Path: 10 feet Min. C.\aVEL CU950LIUd fEU CU\IPaEHE\SI\'E PLA\! 81 General Description A Secondary Arterial is designed to carry heavy volumes of traffic [o major destinations in the Ci[v. Generally, Secondary Arterials are focused on miti sting traffic in narrow ri hts-of- ~. Secondary Arterialspnmariyconnect ollectorStreets, Residential Parkways, Secondary Parkways, and Secondary Arterials with Primary Parkways, Primary Arterials and Highways. Streetfeatures '-~°~^^ P^~"~ • RigM•of-War: 100 feet ~'~"" • Maximum Number of lanes: 4 lanes • Minimum Lane Width: 12 feet • Maximum Aggregate Pavement Width: 48 feet • Curbs: Required • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan • On•Street Parking: Not Permitted • Street Trees: Required • Buffer Plaming: Required Typical Cross Section See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right-of-War • Width of travel lanes • Pedestrian facilities Secondary Priorities Within Aight-of•War Sensitive to context Street trees • Bicycle lanes • Tree plot widths S¢condary Arterial Typical Cross Section SECONDARY ARTERIAL too TraAic Management features • Roundabouts • Defined turn lanes at intersections or roundabouts • Acceleration and deceleration lanes • Grade separation al Highways • Esit ramps at Highways and Interstates 5~cc•..cR. /mt /~r•1-c,rti~.-~(.v A~..c~..+-.,/~a~» d-~.c- IYS~f~ R~-~Tv2Q +~1.~ ~-O f~e~i¢ /Tr'e-r 2L. s:Q 5L.~~loo-nv~ t~C14, 0 5y1ve16or-rr~.a_. ~~.9. is y_~ cZ.tS~SCpZ.•~,~t- yQa,,,,. l~C~'t.•.c~ r31_, t ~~ GI0.5Sr ~•L'cQ -f'haJ So_h~-Z. 24 fee ~p~ F-a"~ ~rr'1lnX . L~ arb: z reef Tree Plat 8 feet Min. Side Path: 10 feet Min, az err or c,~auer, i~mn~~,~ (aJacililies/orpedesn•ians andon-saeeiJncililiesfar c~~clisls and \rnnlorislr. Pr_~ F.'~w^-~. PRIMARY ARTERIAL General Description A Primary Arterial is designed to carry' very heavv volumes of traffic to major destinations in or out ofthe City. Generally, Primary Arterials are focused on mitigating heavy traffic in narrow rights-of-wav. Primary Arterials pnman y connect Residential Parkways, Secondary Parkways, and Secondary Arterials with Primary Parkways, Primary Arterials and Highways. Street Features (yro' wr•4e,r ~..,,_ 5e~4o.,.1 • RigM•sf-Way: 150 feet Ar'I+,..R) • Masimum Number of Lanes: 4 lanes ~ScN^nQ" c/a • Minimum Lane Width: 12 feet • Masimum Aggregate Pavement Width: 48 feet S~"`•~•~{~F2~'"' • Curbs: Required ~~'~" • Sidewalks and Paths: Required as per the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan • On-Street Parking: Not Permitted Street frees: Required BuNer Pluming: Required Typical Cross Semian See illustration below Primary Priorities Within Right•of•War • Widthoftravellanes • Pedestrian facilities Secondary Priorities Within Right•of•Way • Sensitive to context • Street trees • Bicycle lanes • Tree plot widths Primary ArtQrial Typical Cross Section 150 feet of Right-ot-Way Traffic Management Features • Roundabouts • Defined turn lanes at intersections or roundabouts • Acceleration and deceleration lanes _~a.5 • Grade separation at Highways ~c°'"`dr~•l • Exit ramps at Highways and Interstates `~.;r..R. n .t photo \vns emurniluble ut the time of publishing the first f:rU draft !o the CJ Plan. Insert Photo of I a67h Sn•eet in Oruf! B, I/{~a~' Ste. a-r\cR `~Lo'~ 5\(z Lrser( photo oJ'yd6th Street east a) U. S. 3/ _ - Curb: 2 feet r r~~x -Tree Plot: 8'eef Min ~„~ / '!q Side Path; 10 feet Min 16 feet Min _. 24 feet ~ 1~~{ Tum Lane P~ventent Width; ;;x ' J.-"""" ~ ! ~ I lc- ~3 t --~ CANNEL CU\SOLIU.\I'EU CO>II'NEIIES 51 Vk 1'LiS ~ 93 r:} !'t I fi(,"-°' IOL ~~ ~~• Asaan u.5sao yhm M1waSAn~W M1b[~ INni Mx Amnd ••~...~~..~~.~ Idx 4wnd RwlwAl kmip Anehl •••••••••••••• knJgAmnA Owl.wp k[uiul hkn5 •............ knhex hAwq lhry.aAl -- 61x [.kqw ^--~~ klx [dbnx lh.lr[ell Mdned hAmS Mvlr[ylhAgSRnpw9 ----'-- [.kmi5hn _._. _.. [rlr[a lmri prW kslntd Smel btMgr k[ren Q Iwpra hoGe O kdelyd bbro[be Qp[yl O A.xlrkwhbronu A•wlraq Aiwr General Description A >ide Path is designed to accommodate the following type of bicycle and pedestrian activities along col lector, parkwa}' and arterial streets: • walking • jogging • pushing strollers • children recreation • skating/blading • slow to moderate speed cycling • riding Segways Generally, Side Paths provide connectivity from neighborhood to neighborhood and linkages to community amenities (e.g. Parks and Neighborhood Service Nodes). Facility Features • Right-ol-Way: Fully within a public right-of--way • Minimum Facility Width: 10 feet • Construction Material: Asphalt or saw-cut concrete • Joims: Not applicable for asphalt, but concrete must havc 'saw-cut joints • 06struetions: None allowed • Street Separation: Minimum of 8 feet iti11.y So ~ ~r-fin-? Typical Crass Section d' See images in right column. . Design Priorities • Primary Priorities: • Unobstructed - Use slight curves to avoid obstructions - Positive drainage away from Side Path - ADA compliance at intersections Secondary Priorities: - Reinforcing local character - Avoid steep slopes Safety Enhancements • Striped crossings at streets and major curb cut intersections • .Signs for pedestrians and automobiles at intersections I~:e+~r' ~- 2ocui~ici,~p ~~-5 ? • Smoot transitions from Off-Street Trail to street surface at intersections • Bollards or chicane gates at pedestrian approaches to major streets ormid-block crossings. • Lighting SIDE PATH C.AH VEL CU]YULIUd TLD COAIPNNIIA4:f 1'L{~ 61 r..••-••--^•yr -9.~-• T' 'M,~w, "' '" LAS ~:. 4 ,r1~,-wL .•r~^-~'+5» e,•.,: usli •.j~:C •[~ y~.."~'~'~L"3 `Xt i~ lCtv`r&:+c:a may,, ~~'~ r`~~Jr!~~..SS~r si tt~ ~ +. Recem trpgrnde.r (o lOhJi S7rrer in llonre Plucc inchnk rr.Cidr lSrUr link to Nre dlnnon Troil. n Re.aidcnrinl Purkmup. ~--~1'~'~-Poke. n I,tw~ b e-~-s o~ P cam,--kS ~ ea- a.,~c~ ~ 81~Sem IoJ Lmluwtlm BrpMnhYwiy LYq 4R4 A.m nhairy r~ il.llLynl.l [nm.l SJ. htl ~,: Sdalbn6. he..ul SMu.tl f MLuw. Stl..JI In<~ COMMUTER LINE i General Description A Commwer Line would be designed to carry a large number of people from key locations in Carmel to one or more destinations in downtown Indianapolis. 4dditional stops en route to downtown Indiannpolis m~ • ~Iso be necessary. Most likely, this system would be astreet-separated system. An interim express bus system should be implemented to mitigate traffic and to begin building familiarity with commuter systems. Co-rently the type ofcommuter line (e.g. raised monorail or light rail) has not been conceptualized, nor has any engineering or comprehensive study been conducted to choose a route. Extensive study should be conducted to determine an exact route, station locations, scheduling, ridership, cost, phasing, ties to other alternative transportation, and type of automated "vehicle" to use. For that reason this section is primarily a placeholder for revisions and additions as further study is conducted. Everything contained in this section should be considered conceptual and prel im inary. Design Priorities • Commuter stops should take the form of"stations". • Stations in Carmel should be located in areas with intense employment and large parking capacity, or dense populations living within walkr s anc . • Destinations for commuters to include Keystone at the Crossing and downtown Indianapolis. COSV-Ind-arr Z • :PExpress"commutetimetodowntownlndianapolis. • Automated operation. I'I'o,,.r ~I .fr rv+rnSrY w.a,lca.. t }~ W r~ ? ,lletrnLink in Sl. Lnui.a is an e.ranrple of li,~lu rail !la' e/rcvir pmrererl st'a tem rises overhead pmrer lines lbr .•nerlr. the Clnrian Yeople ,1Aovenras recently ine'lollec(in lndianupulis tr. Geuer link huspiail cnurpuses to uric another Phis o,evrm rrprettnr.e nn arnonrared oriel ra iseJ ruil.rnsa•nr. irnnr;r /o Ja.n•ribe au at-,grade nutmn~rmd r,ril n avenr. 7h/ loruliun o(drr sr:veur i.r rorknmm~. PART 5: CRITICAL CORRID~RS AND SUBAREAS ~ Page 1 of 1 Keeling, Adrienne M From: patrice4632@sbcglobal.net Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 7:52 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: PART S.doc PART 5: CRITICAL CORRIDORS AND SUBAREAS 96TH STREET CORRIDOR Description Please note inconsistencies re: • Between Westfield Boulevard and Keystone Avenue • Between College Avenue and Westfield Boulevard The first segment is characterized as "reflect commercial character" and is so identified on the map on p.81. The second segment characterized as "residential character" and is noted as such on map. When Brad was asked about this, he stated that the Comp Plan had to consider Marion County side of 9601 Street, Since this is the Carmel-Clay Comp Plan, I believe it should reflect that the segment between College and Westfield has become entirely commercial except for the Monon Trail Head. Between Westfield and Keystone it is a mix. From Westfield to Haverstick it is residential and from Haverstick to Keystone it is commercial, although the commercial line was drawn at Day Drive by the 96th Street Corridor Study on the north side. Presently, the map does not reflect what is, and again, until a study is complete, this area should continue to be listed as "Special Study Area. This segment of 96th Street needs a plan in place. Connect Pennsylvania Parkway to Westfield Boulevard: "The C.ity's Thoroughfare Plan has indicated for years that a connection between Pennsylvania Parkway and Wes feld Boulevard, north of I-465 is necessary. " (This is shown on the map on p. 90) However, that is not the case. It is not on the thoroughfare plan and has yet to be decided. A feasibility study, traffic study and land use designations need to be made.. The Marion County Com Plan update has a new designation of low intensity commercial on the south side between Westfield Blvd. and Haverstick, gradating from medium to high intensity from Haverstick to Keystone. The City plans a round-about at 96th and Haverstick which will affect the entire area. At present, there seems to be a fragmented approach to 96th Sheet between College and Keystone and although the map on P.81 is labeled "96th Street Corridor Plan", there is no data in terms as to how this was amved at It may only be a "draft" but is not so noted. Pat Rice 9659 Wild Cherry Lane 6/28/2006 RECEIVED ~~~ 1 Boas CARMEL-CLAY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE ROCS PART 3: LAND CLASSIFICTION PLAN (pp. 23-40) P.24 "The term `land classification' is used instead of `land use"' .... however, throughout the document, both terms aze used interchangeably and it is impossible to get the real "essence." Part 3: Land Classification Plan describes and establishes different land classifications to be applied....and under Geographic Location: it states that "This section conveys where each classification is best utilized within Carmel's planning jurisdiction." However p.32 states that "It should not be construed as representing the precise location of land classifications, but used as a foundation for support and influence with land "use" and development form decisions and zoning map changes.,..' The next pazagraph uses the term "broad-brush" and that in "essence" is to be interpreted every time a development comes forth. This seems to keep everything up-for-grabs in terms of any kind of stabilization for the entire Township and City. Once the Comp Plan is adopted, it is usually followed by ordinances etc. which reflect the Comp Plan. It's like saying, "Maybe yes or maybe no today but who knows about tomorrow." Why even have ordinances!? This plan has the same issues as the Civic Design -just more convoluted details. Appropriate Adjacent Classifications: Who interprets, "most suited, "Best Fit" and "Good Fit" and "Not Appropriate" and what is the criteria? P.28 URBAN RESIDENTIAL This is a re-write of Civic Design without explanation. "Traditional neighborhood design" is one of the terms which attempts to bring the past into the future without consideration for the present. We need to begin where we are today and see how to move forwazd without trying to reinvent the past -which did not have all of the present complicating factors such as two or three automobiles per household, the Internet, and on and on. We can't go back! Let the past go and look at what the future could look like without trying to attempt social engineering through a comprehensive plan! Let's look at what is working for us rather than a "broad brush" change. Attached aze some definitions of "Essence ". Looking at just a few definitions, one idea stands out as to how I think it relates to this document. Pat Rice A,lsa m~P ~, 39 ~.~.co,.is; s,,-t~c~ ~s ~R ( • • Essence.... • The general sense of basic element of anything • An extract or concentrate obtained from a plan or other substance and used for flavoring ("I dolt know if the essence is musk or skunk.) • The basic or most important idea or quality of something. ("The essence of his argument was that education should continue through life. Yet change is the very essence of life.") • The most important ingredient; the crucial element. Looking at all these definitions, it seems the essence of this document is change and that is the essence of Civic Design! So my question is, "Is it musk or skunk?" ,- - ' Comprehensive Plan -Part 3 Comments Page 24. REGEIVE~ Anderson, Page 1JUN t . ?006 Dacs Appropriate Adjacent Classifications. Does this mean these "Best Fit" uses could be inserted into areas they are "appropriate" with even those these "Best Fit" uses are pat showing on the Land Classification Map? Is this "guiding" the judgment calls Plan Commission and City Council sometimes make? I'm not sure why we are identifying uses other than the one classified. My concern is that developers will cite these as justification for why their proposal should be approved when their proposal is different from the Land Classification map. Describing as "Good Fit" or "Good Fit with Attention to Transitions" seems to m e to lend credence to these uses belonging in places other than where they are identified on the map. If we think they are appropriate, let's plan them from the start and decide now where they go. Let's not help promote arguments by leaving a "back door" to developing other than what people expect. Perhaps this can be handled simply by changing the titles and clearly explaining it is not meant to encourage these uses other than where identified. Development Features. The following pages allocate 15% open space for Conservation Residential, 20% for Suburban Residential, 10% for Urban Residential (Densities up to 6.9) and 15% for Multifamily Residential. This seems a departure from previous thinking, in that densities of 6.9 and above will have little open space-but I don't see any requirement for neighborhood or "pocket" parks. Are we deciding people who like/choose cities just don't care or need outdoor space? ReQUlation Implementation. I still would like to hear precisely what form-based zoning and hybrid zoning means. I'd like examples and I think this needs defined in the document. Page 26 & 27 Conservation Residential & Suburban Residential: Intensity/Density. There are a significant number of subdivisions in Clay West that average 1 acre or less in density. Almost all subdivisions in Clay West have a density of 1.5 or less. A density of 4.9 is a huge increase over existing subdivisions and violates the expectations current zoning gave people before they invested their money in their homes in West Clay. Stating that 23 residential zoning districts should be implemented in regulations later will not prevent developers from citing the density of up to 4.9 as justification for approving their project. Unless we are aiming for battle after battle, this needs addressed now. Good planning puts the highest intensity uses nearest the major thoroughfares, but the map reserves the area closest to the State Highway, Michigan Road, as the Conservation area. The best answer is to "flip the map" in West Clay. This would address the expectations people had for low-density residential when they bought their house and would place higher intensity uses closest to the State Highway. ~' Page 2 Page 31. Institutional Node. Will these uses now be permitted only in those spots where they are shown on the map or will they still be uses permitted with a variance in any residential area? I don't see any additional land allocated for schools, but the schools in Clay West are already overfull. Where are they going? If churches are permitted anywhere in any residential area, we absolutely need to address the megachurch issue. A megachurch could draw as much traffic and people and offer the same things as a YMCA, plus a traditional church. These should be planned, not inserted, into residential communities. Page 36. Secondary Core. What uses will this permit at the Village of WestClay that its current ordinances and approvals do not permit it? Page 38. Given that Objective 3.2 is to "Encourage mixed-use developments" and Objective 3.3 is to "Retrofit existing single-use centers into mixed-use centers," does this page just open the door wide for developers to state that this Comprehensive Plan encourages them to place mixed-use developments anywhere in Carmel? Do we really want them anywhere without any regard to the thoroughfare or transit support available? Do we really want them anywhere without any regard to the character of the existing neighborhoods? Both Neighborhood Service Nodes and Community Vitality Nodes consider both of these a "Best Fit" with any residential use except for Conservation Residential. Leaving aside the issue of whether the area residents support this, Suburban Notion does not support this. See my other notes regarding this. Marilyn Anderson 3884 Shelborne Ct. 873-6022 Mazk & Becky Herbison 2621 W. 131x` Street Cazmel, IN 46032 To: City of Carmel Re: Comprehensive Plan -Density Considerations Date: -June 13, 2006 By: Otto W. Krohn, CPA O. W. Krohn & Associates, LLP On behalf of Mark & Becky Herbison The Herbison's respectfully recommend that the Plan Commission consider increasing the minimum density to 2.5 homes (equivalent dwelling units) per acre. In the past year or so, annexation remonstrators from Clay Township protested against higher property taxes. Current development density (1 home /acre) is too low which may very well result in higher tax rates and higher utility bills. Higher density will create better economies of scale for Carmel's existing and future taxpayers, as well as the City's utility ratepayers. 2.5 homes (acre would be a much better density threshold. The difference between 1 home and 2.5 homes per acre could cost the City tens of millions of dollazs in future assessed valuation over the remaining undeveloped acreage in Clay Township. According to real estate market reseazch, without additional allowable development density, the cost of new homes will likely be prohibitive for over 95% of the new housing market. Without additional densities, new development will do more than simply slow down, it may come to a screeching halt. That scenario will certainly add costs onto the backs of Carmel's property owners, taxpayers and utility ratepayers. In summary, please consider increasing the development density from the current 1 home per acre threshold to a minimum threshold of 2.5 homes per acre. Thank youl Mazk & Becky Herbison ~. • :; June l3, 2006 To: Carmel Plan Commission and City Council Re: Comprehensive Plan Update -Land Use Classification ~- REGEEVEI~ ~._ aura ~ ~~ ~~E DOGS In 1987, when we bought 20 acres of land just east of Towne Road and on the north side of 136x' street, there were no subdivisions in ow area. In fact, there were no subdivisions north and west of 13151 and Springmill Road. We bought ow property assuming the Comprehensive Plan direction for Carmel Clay Township would be followed; that one unit to the acre was the density set to begin introducing development in the township. It was our desire to be in the country, with the anticipation that low density development would eventually occw over time. This did not happen. Developers aggressively sought land in the northwest section of Clay Township for two major reasons: - Land prices were much less expensive than those along 106`h and 116`h - Lazger tracts of farmland could be bought Saddle Creek Subdivision was the first major development to be approved in ow azea. It was anything but low density. The City Counsel approved this development over the remonstration of most homeowners in the area, including us. Rapid development ensured, with the ultimate high density project, the Village of Clay West being approved by the city. We remonstrated against the density and quality of the developments subsequently approved west of Towne Road between 1315` and 1415` street. The city approved these developments, thus solidifying that in the city's eyes, this azea was destined for higher density development. Ow azea has been surrounded by higher density development. The point is that the actions of the city council turned this azea into a subwban section of the city. It is not the low density estate type area we wanted, and thought would occw. The consequence of this development has impacted many property owners like us. Some owners aze "landlocked" or nearly landlocked by higher density development. Infrastructwe requirements, including the placement of a very unattractive substation on ow northwest property corner has compromised the potential estate value of the remaining property in ow azea. The comprehensive plan update draft land use designation reflects the reality of what has happened in our azea. It is a higher density subwban azea, not a low density estate section of the city or township. We need to have a designation that reflects the reality of what the city has approved in the past in our azea. We need to have this designation to clarify expectations and gain alignment with city council members. I do believe that the range of 1.0 to 4.9 units per acre is too wide for the suburban residential classification. The current density of development in the northwest section of `~ • • Clay Township averages 1.5 units per acre. I recommend that the suburban densities be split to ranges of: - 1.0 to 2.0 units per acre (suburban low density) - 2.1 to 3.0 units per acre (suburban high density) - 3.1 to 4.0 units per acre (suburban high density) Any density above 4.0 should not be allowed in the suburban residential land use classification. Suburban low density should be allowed next to existing subdivisions. Minimum requirements for home size and building materials should be set, but with these minimums, no PUD process would be required. For densities above the suburban low density, areas for this land use designation should meet the requirement of some level of compromise that has occurred from existing development, infrastructure placement, road development or planned thoroughfare development, and circle intersections. Buffer requirements should also be put in place to reduce the impact on surrounding lower density developments. The comprehensive plan should delineate these azeas now, so any debate can take place, rather than the current system of approval. i close with the following key points for all plan commissioners and city council members: 1. Our area of the Clay Township is now different than that of the un-incorporated part of southwest Clay Township. 2. Our area is different than the eazlier development that occurred south of 131 s` street. 3. Our azea is not the homogenized low density development area that some try to project. 4. We need a land use designation that reflects the reality of what has occurred in our area. Andy and Rhonna Crook 2288 West 136' Street Carmel, IN 46032 ~r~ ~ ? F~ r " ~J 4 ~ s 1 y "`t'F t ~ 4 fr . 4 5 Y.- 9 k x,#. ? Y~ ~~ ~fY '-~ P' AFZ y 1 w 1F r ~ #'u k'7x~ ~ ~~ ~ "~ 0 x s ~ ~- ` ~ ~ a +s p~ P + ri t' ' y ~ ,a '~ :, n t 'a,, r~ s r l1ie,~ °t rv~d,~ a ~ Y~ f*t v ~t Y # S iS 1 1 fi ' 3 E - ~' v. ~5~ 9.1 1 L T'. .,Y `bj n z ~ ~ t-d '~ L~ 4', o. t # Y Y "`. ~Q*' ~6"A ~ ( h t! F 9 1 ~ ~ }` 4'0 "r ~~n t' _ _ ~ tq r. ~ ~ 9~ ~) i T Y .' c u 1 a ~ ~ u ~ r .,_ ~ t s t ", ~. 4 r,.,*' a, iw y ~ x %'" # . . ~ r ~ ~. .z.. Y `Y `.''~ T'4 Yr '~ " Hr zY.,.. ',S -~ f Y ~ s e¢ s ..~ +I .P • ~ r Y r, ".ax p ~ , s r, . ~ f, n o ! d+. ~~.qt~f~ 'r a ~ ~i 3 s4 9 '~ ~~ ~I 1 5 - ~{~~ ~~Laff' Ab ~.r Ate, t. An Y ~~: .! Y. 4.u M1 }'~ ~~~~'! ~ {~~~ tea{ ~ Y ~~~~. ~ I r. ~ ~ ~K . ~ ~. .. - ~ .~ _ .# F ~_~ ._? a _ ... .. $Qt ~ ~ s i i a ~' G ~ n~ ~~ ~ MYTH AND FACT z 1~~ 4 ~ w,X ~,. 5 a b r h ~ ,< ,~ " ~ ..r t o s+o-r* - Y i ~. m ~~ n 4 '~. C ~- 1 ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~~ # ~ r 4 anus ,r+xe~.Y~ yy 9, R~ " q ~ ~ ~~y x ~ ~ u ~- ~ ~ i.~x ~t.~'S`` 4f" t t dP r }[5!+J y~~ ~ a N.~ ~ jy~{j~ ~4 I{4. _ 0. sg tp ~ q.. t.~ t A i ,-,~ ~ ~y ~ iii ~ a .x~CI~ ~'~ '1 "' ~ } ti } ~ } +. R ~ ~ ~A ~ M , 3a+atl lr _ av y t a.. ""~ F ,~},. Y, ro 3 F ~ ~ 4 ~ t av s-' i,"~q "eF. A ~° n! a _ r fi' a d`p~pnf c Y 4 d v't " '. i S, t ~' frF k '' ~', ' r" ^'c, , # ,y~'8"t Y Y ~ `~ x ~~ u P>7 (a~~~ spy 5 -'t /r `ti" ~€~ 7~ s <`~ ~,k .5." p ~~ dk a a~ 4 ~+~ Y "}" ~, 'Y e~~~ a M ~ P 75' y a'`^ t r ~ ~ ;,,, i -, " 4 -f r # 4 "" # ~ s Y ~ t x #~ ~t 0 Yy ,~ M. F ~ S & x' ~ ~ "+.a +`6" yy,'~tF ~Y m atp ~ ti '~ ~~ w v e n ,,° ~ b~ 1°ayp' 1 u,g r y~rv .. ~~ 'j+rv, s~ Yy~$i~ /~ ~~ ~~ `S s~ 'r~Y c ~ ~ W` f'M"i~h 1M ~'~°e ~~l lb~dk4~nY~~ s~ 's! ' ~ ~ >4 s"" '? ar ~ a ! r~ ~ rr, t ~ ,; - a + ;. r ~ r s ,~ u f ~ `~ h~ r* n H u ~ 4 ~ '~5 e 4 ~ ~' x , w Qe pat, X'„vu s ~ ,,y, x .i tf`}Y '~ '' f 5 p d5 g *, U C i . le ¢ ~ . ~ L ~ E hs 'F TF 9°"'t'~ ryN ~' i`h'`. y. n° ,.'.y'i ?r #~ t~+b }A rf SF xG +`~ rya y t, lWrv t+~g z„ j~ b tlf ~ o° ~ 4~~ n 1 ~ i - d t 1_ r '~ ~ 4 5 L i b ~F !p ~+ t ~ 1 ~ ro r 6 „P a 4 d>N ~ r 'y "Plt ~ ~ ,# ~ ! r q.hl ~ i. ~ #~ we ~'`'4 s~ ~ ~ ,. T ~S ° M 4 i ~' ,T 4r ~; r 8 '' x i~,rJ S v< ,~ s~ a! f ~,*d a 4 aW` b k e w' J ,A ~u p~'k' a. G ~n ~ I((L~~ '~°~ (1 ~ ' ~ ' rrt `"a. N ~ 7C ~ ' x s fi a a k' w 'f>7 Y i t ~` i P ti '~~ `~ a ^ 4~o-~~ ~ ~ ~N M Hl! National Multi « 4~ '~ >~" ,' ~ , z~. *. ~ ~ ~ '~ 4 ``# ~HOUSI^ COUfICII" .+, a ~F P b x .~ 3 a. a ~,'ee - 6 * m xt~ .u '~'y 'v i SE N "~ F 4 V d ac 4% ~pR.r ky ~ ~?,x.~y ~, : 7'- e+ n n fb ~ P.~ r .~~ d 4 ~ w 91 ~h 4 ~9. ~ ~ ~~~ aJff" b ~,:~, °~ A L ~` a. z~ '' ~ 1 ,r ~ ~ b '-. as ~ e a Sa L t ~~ ~#`A J t t r ~3'a~ ,~ ~ `m. ,' t ~-s ~ ' /, 7 [ t e f 4v,,. ~; S I E F~lvF1 . w .~, ~ p ~, 7 _~ , ~ ~ ,;, tY ~ s ^ ~ ` ~~~L\~U, 2~ ~~~~~~~slsfx ^y 4 c.h ~~, ~~n~~ b t s~ { ~v '- y Y °s u~t'l .S,*. t t uN #i"' - 9 "Mk A # ~ :.a j9'$ 9 ~ rr 'r 3°~ ?'~{,t {.S ,~ 2 f 6 ,~~- ~x $, - ~ ~[~<~ p a se, 4 9 ~ ate. ~ L5 ~~~ ,Y• #Y r ,.. rwn 4 y "~ k Rt ~ ~. ~M ~ ~zn~'4 a ~x ~ • "k~ ~ r.. .! m Ir<PP"' y'd7a rK '9 Y N , is 4 Jy ~, !' Y v $ ~ s'r. ~ z 3% -n '"" x "~ # Y6r *~`.~ f `~ >~.P v }>jr 5Si t~q. Y~ ~' ~< K. rt3'S ~k`l zL ~^"r+t ~* ~'~ a t t ~ s i +., k .,° 33e'.,, .q s, n ^ # s g'~ # ~ q~° ,iy""v w s +~ - ~ v s E '~ +~r-..ry ~e,.~ , +e 1 ~ k ~ ,y s a .,~~ t ,~ yx .,vn .. x~ ,; zr s F '~ < y o4s ~ i ~ a an. w d7 ~ t s- C P i k w_ Y [ o r Y p. x ~fi S i -x9 ~ } 4F # -x r z~ ~ Y ~#~..;. '.. -0 k` } ~ s t i dt `~ -S F "-v~, k ~ n.^.. x ~ .~ a5 ,A, r ~{ ¢~'. R a rS `S t ~ 4 ~ ~' ~ t y P T 1 `, ~~~~~ ~~1J~lJ!!J t~ ; # ~, J ~ ~ 4 ~~ ~~ ,. VM1 .. .. ~~~~.~.~...r .. .... ~ _. L _. ... .r. .~~. ..: .,.~ ._..... __.. .-vim. r..~._..4~.e .. ..' ' ... .. .--, v. ~ e a n ~ ~. -a i r 3 t ~ 11 ~ Jh 1 A ~ ~ e/ s+iA 9 $ r~} `t''s 3f t ~ 4 ~~ ~~ e Y-~Y ~ 5 '~4 a til_F.]h 4 ~ ~° h x "a n v r °r ,, r - ~ r °. ., rc ~ p , ~x~. r x;~ .. r ~ ~,, jy ~ x ~ > u ~~i f f a. ^ x ~ . r ' '~ +` b of t .b,f :. -,.,.{ ,Y'°. ,0.o .y k,. ra. ,~ x ~ ~~~ v, ~~ 6 ~Y\ ~ } ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ fi {~~ n ~ i ~ F ~ - s~. P e ~~ v,~ ~~~~ <:: x ~ ., ' ..: „ .+ R.. ,.. 4~ -~ ~~ 4 ~~ ~ .~MYTH~AND;FACT~:.~`~~'~ ` ~µ ~ 4 i~ e l I A ~. ~ -n ~ ¢ b vgl F~ 8 T 'k" ~ f r .. 5n f A W F ~ jv S '~ A ~!a- ~ A. o n 1 i7 -f I ~ yG L,3.. 2 ry N 4 f .. 'A ! - ~ ~"ip r w .xx .- f• 'a~- i' vb tt ~ -d' ~4 ~ 3 '~. ~y.~.. ~~ x n y S~ s3 ~~ ~; 3 ~ ~ y "~'~ 11ra q 1 p~ r p m ~ °~-- ~ ~Y d ~R~Y 'H6 .4 e1 9.~ P.. r t v,i~` t F dr7 $, m` er ~ ; ap, ,q=ra r, r' x `xi Fri' yr r ~ 'i^ e ,.x °'s: ~ e ~ sua, ~ ~ / ohm ~' '}. pT ~.~ ~ ~ F ~a ~".~pdZ~~".. ~f~ ,~.T rs~ ~ r a .. rz .. `. I tl r ~, a N' 4 d~¢ ¢i.4 ~ ~ "r &r v .~ S. ~, x n ~ F a' .N ~j k d ~ 1 ~,,~, i~ 9 ~ E ~ d xa ~n - r .. r s d s ~ r° r a , a Sa y.. P '6 ~~ k ~ i .. ~ t~ k y v. i~~ i~ s r ~ 3 - ~ ~ ~a ~. # t '° ° ,A p 8. ~ V ~ = L~ r y y x y v _ ~ x ~" ,ab e C r ~ y & ~~r u ~. e1~ t ~ > ~ d rna ~ ~ ri~$m ~ ~ ~, w -[ k U "°k, i ,:? td L .p tx k x s~ x ,(„ 9 s ~ s', rt~''°+' c W 4 i`r r' o r~K:ra P a d'~~ " x { . a' t ~ ~ a r rp dt w ~ a ry! * ,. '. ~x ~" d ' ~ j 'urn 1 ~ a t i ~~.'4 d ~ b4.~ ~ i~ a xilb 3 ~ r4 •& s ~ rr ° e e y ~ y a r _, m 9 ~' ..x ~tf o d }de ~ 3 ~ 5 ~ A by"~ t~ ~ ie rS' st c°'~m 4 ~ a $~ r Y n r,. `y~ ~ ms~p ~,~~.'^'~ $ Y r a t , +i ' a. r yw d° v*~L` m r . h br z ~ ~. '~ 5rY + >~ a3 P ¢b _ 'A `n ~ + ~ r"s a 3+n d~n2 n .~,a@ ~.,. ~q r n r a a tv ;. a ~.». vb rw ~ G n ~~° r K~ r `~ fh~ ~,~8 ~ i w ir" , Y '~ ~d"S x'k a a` e *f''' w^ r '# . r d , -' L a .~ ~, v ~ ~ a~~ ~' p p ~ 4 ~ - ff ~} J m' 1 x'° m ° ('i`~~ y~, Mw» a - d P P CSC' ~ ~ J°.¢ '. ~ va .g x ~, e ~n a ~1' c ;e ~ .c qd ~r ~, u n r e x . ~ a x '~ S= '~ p 'H C 5 . K. Y .' ~ ~ / ~S't i ~` a db `~ ~~ 2 i k~-n` M _~ Yr1P+ S Y i 22 o- 4 L. R i ~ 7-tr 'r+ hs. y,,.l p. x 4 x ~~ ~ ~° Y ~r x s z i p ra x ~- i ~1 ~ ~ H a. ds t r r a x.~ Rffi i K' T ,pf ~ g X~ 4 y r a _ 4i~ ~ ~, ,.. r ~p4 a i ~,~ ?•. ~ „K r ~ c t a~ e'. "$ 8 .P F ~`/ ~xn k ~` ~ ,~ t •* ~ : a ~ ~ y ~ ~, ~ ~ > t 3 x ~ e kY ~ ,r >a t 7 .f r ~ x., c y 'n ~ r q w y_ viq x t r at~ m, P w n° '- .. ~ s s p.vF. s r m t t x T x 5j ~ `~` $ "~+.a "~' ~ r ~ 'y o- f ~ k - y n r ~ *-k, a x ~ ~S d ~, ~"%' ~ r° k.,~,~ ~.1 ~; F r ~. .' i ".~ "~~, v~~ -- r ° it's J+ s .+e. "'v 1 ~~ `l '; 'a' 4 P ~ r 5p t.° m o-w a{ x - t s ~. ~ 'r " e r i ~~ ° '~a~t t °' k t s + t ~ ~, x Y ~ ~ ~ -- i N }}4 ]~, ~, ~R s.iu' r 1 A'.~r ~c4. x~~a 1S~A~~H 4 W ..p1 ~a ~s. dr ~ ^ 4 r ~ a ~~ e r p~i~ f t v r~ 1+%' fi T, n~~ r' x5vff+{. ~p i(' z t. 7 Hro ' :.' ,~ ~ v 5 nr r ".7 Ys ,; ' ~ s ~ ]r+1F s,vJ 4" }s ~a~`xc` n;,- r r<.' ~'~ =n '~ srk r g ,ftt ''a? !v ba t'~ ~+lt ~ ~' 9 ...c". a r ~ !~ 3 ~- 2 ~ ~`a 1 ~ ~ J~ o A .ip2 t r ~,Y _ ~~ r ,, k. ~ ._. -, ~ fir: f ti + ,. { . _____.___. _ _, _ ~ I ._,. ___ .._ ___ ..._ _ _ ~~ ______. ___- - ...-._ _.. _ x ~ .~. About NMHC-tile !Nath~ Mufti t#ousir~ Counc~ NMI-IC is a national association representing the interests of the nation's 1'argcr and most prominent aparnnent firms. NMFIC advocates on behalf of rental hous- ing, conducts aparnnent-related rese:uch, encourages the exchange ofsna[egic business information, and promotes the desirability of apartment living. One third ofAmeticans rent their housing, and 15 percent of all U.S. households live iu mi apartment home. Doug Bibby, PresiAent About Sierra aub The Sierra Ch~b's members arc 70Q000 of your friends and neighbors. lnspircd by nature, ec mork together to protect our communities and thr, planet. The Clttb is America's oldest, largest, and most inducnti,t] giasriants em•ironmenral orguriration. Lanv Nsdur, Presadcmt About AlArthe American Institute of Architects Since 1557, the AIA has represented the professional interests ofAme~ici's archi- teus. As AIA me~ubers, more thmt 75,000 licensed ard~itecls, emerging protessiou- als, and allied panne~s express their comtnitrnent to excellence in design and livabil- in~ in our nation's buildings and conununitics. Members adhere to a code of ethics and professional conduct that assures die client, the public, and colleagues of an AIA-member architect's dedication to the highest standards in professional pixctice. Douglavs L. Seidl, N-eridenl About ULI-the Urban Land Institute ULI-the Urb~m Land Institute is a nonprofit educational and research institute supported hp its members. hs mission is m provide responsible leadership iu the ttse of land to enhance die rotal em~roument. UI,I sponsors educational programs and forums to encourage an open exchange of ideas and sharing of experiences; initiates researdi that anticipams emerging land use trends and issues and propos- es creative solutions based on that research; provides advisory services; and pub- lishes a wide variety of materials m disseminate informa[on on land use and devel- opment. Established in 1936, the Institute has more titan 24,000 members and :usociates from more than 80 counuies representing the enure specu2nn of fire land use and development disciplines. Richeud M. Ronan, Rresudvrat 2 HignerUenei[p Derelapnen'•. ULI Project Staff " ~ Nancy H. Stewart Rachelle L. Levitt ~" Director, 13ook Yrogrmn Senior;ViceHvaulent,"Pakc~ and Prudue Manitgi~ng.GAzlor _ - , P~iblt;+her _. • ~ Barbara M.Pishcl/Editech' Gayle Berens ~ .Manusrri~6h:rlilm-- Vacnwsidrn~ Real hstate:Dvoehr~iriietxl .. - ~ _ , . ~ and Pntctire ~ ~ _ Betsy Vtin Buskirk - .. - - (Irt Dirulor ~ .. . ~- ,Richard NL Haughey . ,' _.. , - ... Director, Mvtllifatnilj~ Deoelo~menl Aritie Morgan -' NawdDirector _ (n'aphic Uesign ~ ~ , ..Prince~ialAulhor ~ '. :- .,- . - "" - .. ' DtanirStatdev-Austin " .Slant Thomas Sprenkle. Diredur, PuhliShing~O~~eruhvne ,.. " `' Alexa~Bacti'~ " . " w , ~~ ~ ,: ~Ybniri6iiting:Aufhars. ." . r _ , ~ , • ' ~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ' " j ~, :, , . ~.. .. ._. s :_. Recommended bibliographic listing: Haughey, Richard M. Higher-Dertsily Drmelohment: Mylh utzd hart. Washington, 0.C.: ULI-the Urban Land Instiwte, 2003. ULI Catalog Number: N27 hitcrnationa Standard Book Number: 0-874`20-941$ ©`1005 by ULI-the Urhau Land Institute 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W. Suite 500 West \Vashingtoq D.C. 20007-5?Ol Printed in the United States of America. All rights reserved. No pert of this book may be reproduced in any form or in any nreaos, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by an information storage and retrieval system without written permission of [he publisher. and Fact ~ 3 Elinor R. Bacon Edward T McMafion President ~ _ Sen%ar Resident he'ru, 'E2 Rardra Deuelaprne~tt, LLC Stldai~rzrzh7v DeaeGrpment ,_ ~ ~'Wnshinglon,"n.C ~ ULI-the'Urbd~n Land7nstitlue .. •Washenglon, D.C.° . . Maureerr'Mctlvev Senior Resirlerzt Fellaeu, ~" ~ ~, -Debra Stein ~' -(h`banDeuelo/~ment Preszdent ", UL7-.the Urban La~ad hustitute _ . - GCA .Sti~ate,~>2es "' Waslcinglon, U.C. - " _ ~ .. ~ San Francisco, California Representatives of the partners who directed this work: NMHC Doug Bibby, ('resident Kimberly D. Duly, Yice President of C,anamunacaltoizs Michael H. Tucker, Dnretor of ConFna¢nications Sicna Chtb Neha Bhatt, Associate GYas7eiraglon /ie~irrscra(rttzve Challenge to Srirawl Canr~aigre Epic Olson, Associate. Wrashingime Rehrvsentativn Challenge to S]~raad Cavrpaign AIA David T. Downey, A4rtnrzging Director A/A Crialvrfor Conavnunities by Dzsi~vra ULI Richard M. Haughey, Director; Muhifamilp Deoelopnaenl 4 ~ NiaherUensit} Oev€lopmea? -; ~., ` 4 ~~ s dris counu~° continues to grow and change, communities are left to i~~i`_i r`~, figure otrt where all these new people will live, work, and shop. New w~ ~ .?~ markets are emerging for real estate that offers a more conccnicnt lifestyle than is offered by many low-density sprawling communities. New compact developments with a mix of uses and housing types throughout the counuti~ arc being embraced as a popular alternative to sprawl. At the core of die success o{ dresc developments is density, which is the key to making these communidcs walkable and vibrant. Untbruurately, iu too many comnumities higher-darsity~ mixed-use development is difficult to cousu2rct because of zoning and building codes that favor lowileusity developtuent with segregated uses and because of opposition Gom the commu- nity. 'I'bis publication looks a[scvrral myths surrounding higher density d«~clop- ment and attempts to dispel them with facts to help dismantle dre many barriers such developments face. ULI is proud to have partnered with NV1 FIGihc National bfuld Housing Council, Sierra Club, and AIA-dre American Instinue oP Architects on this publication. This convergence of imerests highlights the impon;ance each orgauizadon has placed un finding a new development pattern that better fits the needs oC a growing:md changing country. ULI wdll couduue w provide Conuns in which all suakeholders eau explore and debare issues about grotrth and development putems and how properly designed and incorporated density can he used to accommodaa: new growth. ULI will conduct res<'arch, produce well-balanced infavmatioq and identify best prtcdcets on issues relernnt m growth and density. Tiurough dresc r,(irn-ts, ULI xnd its partnms hope to play a role iu plautung a better development pattern for dre liamre. Harq~ H. Frampton III C{u+ir niyt6 and Fact I 5 -, a,,~ #~~~'- merira's changing population is creating demand fonrew types oChomes, t'j "'°~ ~ ot}ices, and retstil outlets. IDeuer solutions are needed w the challenges ~::.~ created by changing demographics, dwfirdliug uatmal areas, smog anti public healUr issues, shriuldug~ municipal budgets, and traffic congestion. Commu- nities that answer dress challenges will develop iuu~ great places to live. Anu:rica wdll xdd roughly 43 million new residentsthat's 2.7 million new residents per pear-between now and ?02U.' America is not only growing but also under- goingdramatic demographic changes. The traditional nvo-parent household with children is now Icss than a quarter of the population and getting proportionally smaller. Single-parent households, single-person households, cmpty~ nesters, and couples without children make up the new majority of American households, and Umv have quite different real estate ncedsr' These groups arc more likely to choose higher-deusiu~ housing in mixedKleusity communities Urat olPer vibrant neighbor- hoods over single-family houses far from the couununin° core. 'fhc fact. is chat continuing the sprawling, low-dcnsit~~ haphuard devclopmcnt pay tern of die past 40 years is unsustainable, financially and other~rdse. It will exacer- batc many of die problems sprawl has already crcatx~d-dwindling natural areas and wm-king fanny, inu'easingly longer commutes, debilitating n-alhc congestion, :md harmful smog and eater pollution. Local officials now realize that paying for basic infr;unuaure-roadways and schools, libraries, foe, police, :md sewer sa~~ices -spread over large and sprawling distances is inefficient and expensive. Most public leaders want to u-eute vibrant, economically su'ong communities where citizars can enjoy a high qualiu~ of life iu a fiscally and envi ronmeutalh~ responsible manner, but many are not sure how to achicce it. Planning for growth is a compre- hensive and complicated process that requires leaders to employ a variety oC tools to balance diverse corumunity interests. elrguably, no tool is more important Ulan increasing die densin~ of existing and nets communities, which includes support (or inlill development, the rehabilitation and reuse of existing smrcnrres, and denser new developmmu. Indeed, well-designed and well-integrated highcrdcnsiy~ decel- opment makes successlirl planning for growth possible. llensity refers ^ot only to high-rise buildings. The definition of density depends on the context in which it is used. Iu this publication, higher density simply means new residential and commercial development at a density that is higher thmr what is typically found iu Ure existing cornmuuity. Thus, in a sprawling area with single-family detached houses on one-acre lots, single farnilpbouses on one-fourth or one-sigh U~ acre are considered higher density. In more denscla populated areas with single-family houses on small lots, townhouses and apartments arc con- sidered higher=density devclopmcnt. ('or many suburban communities, the popu- lar mixed-use town centers being developed around the country ore considered higher=density development. 6 ~ Higher-Density Dev=lopm=.ni Most land use professionals and community leaders now agree that a-cating unu- munities with a mix oC densities, housing tlgxs, and uses could be the tuuidote to sprawl when impleureuted regionally. And across tirc counn~~, the general public is becoming more informed and engaged in making the tough land use choices that need to be made while understanding die consequences of continuing to grow as we have in the past. Marry have also come to appreciate the "place-making" beno- fits of density and the relationship between highervdcosin~ development and land preservation. Media coverage of [he topic of growth and development has also evolved. Past media coverage of growth and development issues was otten limited to the heated conflicts beuveen developers and community residents. Many in dlc media are now presenting more droughdirl and balanced coverage, and several editorial boards support higher=density developments in their anunnmitics as an antidote to regional sprawl. Yet despite dre growing atMmeuess of the complexity of the issue and grorrnug salt pon for 6igherKieusity development as au answer to sprawl, many cull have quer [ions and fears related to higher-densin° development. 1-low will it change the neigh- bodrood? Nrill ii. make u~flic worse? ~l9ra[ will happen to propeny ~ulucs? And irhat about rime? Ample evidence-doarmented d~mughout this publication-su~ests drat ~acll-designed highcrvdensit~~ development, properly integrated into an existing community, can become a significant community asset that adds to the quality of life and property cahics Ibr cxisWrg residenu while addressing the needs of a growing and changing population. Many people's perception of higher-density devclupment dues nor. mesh with Lhe reality. Studies show dtat when surveyed about higherKlensity development, those iumrvieraed hold a negative ~~ew. But when shown images of higher-density versus lowrrdensity development, people often change heir perceptions and prefer higher densityc 6t a recent. study by dre National Association of Rcalwrs® and Smart Growth America, six in ten prospective hmnebuyers, when asked to choose benercn nvo armnntnitics, chose the neighborhood drat offered a shormr com- mute, sidewalks, and amenities like shops, restaurants, libr:u-ies, schools, and pulr lie transportation widri^ walking disrmrce. They preferred this option over the one with longer commutes and lau'ger lots but limited opuons Ira' walking.' The Y001 American Housing Survey further reveals that respondenes cited proximity to work more often than trait q~pc a, the leading facwr in housing chuice.' Such contra- dictions point to widespread mismuceptions about dre nature of highcrvdnrsih° development and sprawl. Several of these misconceptions are so prevalem as to be considered myths. To sonic drgree, dresc myths are dte resuh of memories people have of the very- high-density urban public housing projects of dre 196Us and 1970s that have been subsequently deemed a failw e. Somehow, die concept oCdensity became associared with the negative imagery and social problems of depressed urban areas. The re:dity 2nri Fjcl 7 is that complex interrelated (actors such es the high comceutradon of poverq~ and poor educational and employment oppottuniiie_s combined m doom lbe public housing projects. Even very-high-densin~ housing can be practical, safe, and desir- able. For example, the mired-income aparm~ents and condominiums or luxiu-y high rises in Ncw York and Chicago-some of rhr safest and most expensive housing in the countn•-prove that density does nol equal an unsafe environment. 'Fhe purpose of this publication is to dispel the many myths surrounding higher density development and to create a ^etv understanding of density that goes beyond simplistic negative connouuions that averesfimate its impact and under- estimate its value. Elected ofLicials, concerned cinzens, and community leaders can use this publicadou to support welldesigued and well-planned density that creates great places and great communities drat people lave. AA'ith the anticipated popula- tion growdr and continuing demographic and lifistvle changes, consensus is build- ingthat a-cating convuunities with a mis of densities, housing types, and uses will he both necessary and desirable. Higher-Densitt~ Drrrr7opnwru: MyUa arul h~rul is the sixth in a scrics of Ud~au Land Insdmte myth and fact booklets. The scrics is intended to clarify misumcepuons surrounding growth and devcloputent. Other topics covered have included n;tus- portatiam, smart growth, utirtn loll(( hotcsiug, environment and development, and mixed-income huusing. Higher-Densi6~~ Deneluwaen6: M~~lh and Frui examines n~despread miscanceptious relamd to higher-densin~ development and seeks to dispel them ~~~di reles ant (acts and information. Although the benefits of higher dcnsi a~ development arc often undetsutted, so are die den-imenral effects of loto-density development The advan- tages and drawbacks ofhigher-density development arc compared throughout dais publication with the alternative of low-density development In the process, mis- conceptions regarding low-dcnsia° development arc also addressed. 8 Righer-Density DeveloPr~te:ti /A~ 5 ~ ~ V _~~ ~ ~ t..--~.J ~ ~' 3 . I ,. t 'l '. ~ .- ice..: ' . t Higher-density development overburdens public schools and other public services and requires more infrastructure support systems. J ~ %i~1 ~ The nature of who lives in higher-density housing-fewer familieswith children-puts less demand on schools and other public servicesthah low-density housing. Moreover, the compact nature ofhigher-density development requires less extensive infrastructure to support it. ublic officials aanss die moon}'stnrggle co afford die in8~asmrcmrc nccd- `~. ed [o stppmY sprawling development iA recent sandy analysing the ants of sprawl estimated that more than $100 billion in inlhuuztemre costs could be saved over 25 years by pursuing better planned wed more coon pact forms of decelopment° The issue has u~~mscended political parlice and ideolo- gies and has become an issue of basic fiscal responsibility. California's Republicnm Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has criticized "fiscally unsustainable sprawl,°' while Michigan's Democratic GoeernorJeuuifer Grauholm has noted that sprae•I "is hampering the ability of arts state and i~ local governments to finance public facilities and service improvenuans."a PER 100 UNITS OF NEW HOUSING -" s }i" ~ r°v ! • a . " E ~ ~ ~ u be 1 ~„ G f !~ t k _ ..;: j y y '~, e - i ~ '" F. i .4y z b0 ~ ~ F I .:,, ,r ~, m x '~ , a # 50 ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~~ ' ~` ~ LL 0 Mrd to ...,.-_~ ..Garden '.-.._. Owner .... ~, 4 ~ `. s w?: Hrgh Rtse Apartments j Dccupred ~ ~ fi ~, ~ 30 -~Apartmentsy~= - Smgle Family" ~~ N ' ~, ~ l Homes t `" z ~ "max ~..,. , ~ , < J<. ~„ T E . r 9 N: 1 ~" to '19 ;f, 21 °~ 64 ~" .~ r r :. ~~i ~ ~ ~ s~ r t xa -+~ t.".-~ TVPEOF'HOUSING,_ ;° ?' -~"- ~ l ~' -~~ 4 . - Smnce ]999 A ur nn Housng Sumry (P ~I i igton D L.-L l R rwu of die Cenms anA U 4 ^~paumem nt t' H9i~si~ FT ~A Urban Dc 1 rprtcnt 199J)' ~ . - ~7~fi d4d +d(1 ~ 9 M Y F F1 O N, E ~F A C T O N E s ['rogressive and conservative groups have identified sprawl as a real problem. Charter of ate New Urbanism stares that "placeless spra~~°l" is an "interrelated com- nnmin~ building challenge"' Conservative groups have concluded that "sprawl is in fact a conservative issue" with "conservative solutions" and that "sprawl was in large par[ crcatx;d through governnien[ intervention in the economy.""' htdeed, numerous government policies Deer the last half ecnmry have led w and supported sprawl. Historically, federal spending for transportation has subsidized large-scale highway construction over otha~ modes of transportation. Financing pulicics from the Federal Housing Adminisu~auon have prumuted suburban sulr divisions across ate nation. Large lot exclusionary zoning has forced the artificial separation of land uses, leading at large distances benveeu employment ceutei5, housing, and retail. Rat many govenunent agencies now realize they cannot afford in con dune prot~ding the infiastnrcatre and public services that spne~l demands. Not only do local governments absorb much oC ate cos[ of more and more road- rvavs, profoundly longer twater and elecu'ical lines, and much larger sewer ,rysnims to suppa't. sprawling development, they nmst also land public serrices to the Here resi- dents who live farther and farther Gom ate core community. These new residents need police and fire protection, schools, libraries, wash removal, and other services. Stretching all duce basic sert~ces over ever-growing geographic areas places a great burden ou local govei'nme~its. Par example, the Minneapolis/St. f hul rebriuu built 72i new schools in ate suburbs beuveen 7970 and 1990 while siruultaueously closing IGY schools in goad condition located within cih° limits." Albu~uer-que, New Mexico, Cates a school budget crisis as a resuh. of the need to build expensive uety schools in oudt~og airu while enrollment in existing close-in schools declines. P R O F I L E ,_....____ _ ____.. __.__ .. .-___..._~__._.__ ___,_.__ The Market Common Clarendon Lpc ated on the site of a farmer parking lot andbccupying_roughly ten .~ .acres of land, the Market Common in Clarendon, Virginia, just outside - WashingtogD:C., provides 300 Class A apartments, 87 townhouses, 100,000-square feet of offcespace,.and 240,OW square feet of, prime retaifspace. Located within walking distarice of the Orange Line of Washington's extensive subway system,.residents can leave their cars ~. parked while they take public transit to work. They can also walk to a Whole Foods grocery store.adjacent to the highly successful develop-. .ment. Prominent national retailers occupy the ground Jevel of the s' huilding, and structured parking is provided. Thecompact develop- 's ment form of the Market Common promotes walking, hiking,.and using public transit over autos. The apartments are attractivedo young pro-, .. : fessionals without children, lessening the impact on the county's school system. The project is the result of a successful cellahoration of McCaffery Interests, Arlington County officials, and citizens of the Clarendonneighborhoed; it has spurred new retail, office, and residential construction on neighboring sites. 10 ~ kigher0ensity Oevajepmeet ' Located within walking distance of a Washingtmr; D.C., Metro stop. the Market t.omntmt pmrides hotrsirtg, alfices, retail, amt restattratrts on a terr- atxe site tlrat was formerly a parkir~ lot. • M Y T H O tld ~ F A C T Uuforumately (br local governments, a growfitg body of evidence shows that sprawling development often does not pay enough property tax Lo cover dfe sen~ ices it requires. A curdy conducted fbr a suburban conununity outside Mihvaukee frrund shat public smvices for an avcinge-puce single-family house in that commu- nity cost more dean uvice .ts mach as the propa~ty ttu:es paid by die homeowner.'Y One croon Ibr the disparity benseen pmpcrty tas revenue affd the cost of public sclvices is expenditures for public schools. Low-density suburbs and exuf~an areas generally attract families with more school-age children. In Tact, single-family developments average 64 children for evefv 100 units, compared with only 2l chil- dren for evefv 100 units of garden apartments .urd 79 children for evefv 100 units of mid- to high-rise aparmfeuze.^° The reason is that ^uddfamily housing atu~acts predominantly childless couples, singles, mfd empty nesters, Aud aldroug~h xparunent ren[els do not. pay prtipeln° tax directly, apartment owners do. Apalvnencs arc also usually taxed at a higher commercial real csunte tax rate," so a typical mixed-use dcvelopmennvith retail, office, and apartments may subsidize dx schools and other public services re<luired by residents oflow-density housing in the same communize°. This phenomenon is further exacerbated because many nntlti- family developments and retail and office establishmcnu pay for their own trash dis- posal, shuttle buses, and seauiu~. Reducing the distance benveeu homes, shops, and offices also reduces dfe cost of public iufractnfcuu-e. According u, one uC many studies, `The public capital and operating costs for close-in, compact development [are] much lower than they dare] for fringe, scattered, linear, mld satellite dcvclopmem.""' And many of these studies do not take into account the advantages created by making public transit ... a - ,."~ ~ ~ ,. - PROJECTED HOUSEHOLD GROWTH: 2000-20'10 '^m "5. J i' " 20 ^ ~ -': s tk~t r f 1 '~ v t` +,~', nta~ m t~e ~ 9 v Famthes--` 15 1 ~:.~ ' ~ r: s wrth '° ,, ° ° s r 3 "` No Childred .:~ r ~3. ~ ~ 1Q •~~ n • ~ o ``: U ~ ~J ~ d ,Q 5 .~ U 0 s n.. ~ ~i' br _ W~a "J Nontamily , Households' ~_ ~" .f 14.0% ~.,~ ~ , D N E t :x 1 a 4 J~: .+ i ,' ~~ ~ ~„ ~. ~ ,`~ ' NPE OF~HOUSEHOLD + a ~ ~ ~ ~_~ ~," a-, '- 1 r _, °, ~. f n~ u :r I & urte Prgr Ywnt of NenM f Hruvhofd, and Fa Mees rn the f7+eGd Stotv:,f995 2(-0 t n + + °, ." (wvnhinln ny I).G: O:S'Barcm of the Gunsue, 199fiJ.' °~ .; + - ~~'i „~ - r . -." _ . ,: , + .. ~ .. .. .._ ._.._. ... __.. _.. .._ . _. _.. ._ .. .. ... 5 ..., .. biitl f?rt ~ li NII Y T H O N. E ~F A C T O Po E • more feasible as well as making delivery of basic sen~ices like mail deliver}5 trash collection, and police and fn-c protcc P R O F 1 L E tion more ellicient. Mother emerging body of research suggests that higher- density development is an important component oC eco- numic development initiatives and helps atu'act new employers `hdonnauon economy" is a term used to define the grouvrg iudusuies based ou the economics of the Internet, information goods, and intellectual property. \\'orkers in this field are known as °knowledge workers,° and many believe, they are dre foal re of die ,\merican econ- omy. Thcsc erorkcis arc comfortable with die latest technol- ogf° and, because dreir skills ate u~uisfe~able, choose their jobs based tut the atu~ibutcs of the town or city where they arc located. They seek out vibr:mt, diverse utbmn centers that offer access to techuologry, outer knowledge workers, and lifestyle.'° ~ The economic development game has changed. Employers now follow the workers rather than the other way around. Therefore, communities that locus on providing a high quality of life with the energi• and vitality created by urban centers will he much more likely to attract these highly prized, talented, xnd productive workers than cummuni- ucs of tactless sprawl Companies drat understand the appeal of these communities are making re~ocauou deci- sions with these workers in mind. Sntdies have shown dtat ina~casing cmplofnnent density increases Tabor productivity, generally by reducing commuting times." Thus, inn~oducing highcr~lcnsity projects into a ann uurnia will actually increase that community's revenue without signitieandy increasing the infi~asnateture and public service burdens. Blending apartments into lowdensiry comm~mities can help pay for schools without drastic increases in the nunr ber of students. Diversifi~iug housing options ;uad adding ameruues like shops and oCGces close by will improve dre quality oClife and attract businesses anti people that will strr;ng~hen the conuuunity's economic stability. Increasing density provides a real economic boost u> dre community and helps pay for the infrvltntcwre and public services that everybody needs. Highlands' Garden Village , Built on the site of the Elitch Gardens amusement parkin Denver, Highlands' Garden Village is a walk- able,transit-linked community andafinaricially '~ viable model for environmentally responsible.infill development. New York-based developer Jonathan ' Rase & Companies developed single-family homes, ; ' townhouses, seniors' and multifamily apartments, cohousing, offices, and retail space on the site: i At the center, a historic theater and carousel from ' the originalamusement park are being transformed ' .. ~-, Higtrlarrds' Garden Yllage'reuses some sWctmes from the amusement park previously located on the site. The compact development, combined wiHr a variety of uses arrd housing types, uses public infrastructure more efficiently than low•, ' ' density sprawling developmerrt. •. .. into a community performing arts centerand~a . walking labyrinth. Berkeley, California-based ~~ Calthorpe Associates designed a plan that put (-new homes on three sides of asquare-shaped. village and a commercial "maiq street" on the ~, ~ fourth. Restaurants; studios, and shops line the I street with live/work townhouses and offices above, giving residents the opportunity to live;' ' work, and shop ih the same community. The -.. proximity of amenities, location near downtown, _ and convenience of public bus lines encourage people to walk and reduce travel costs. 12 ~ Ri¢,he; 6ensity Develapntenl ,~ --~i ~--.-,~ ~~ _ ~ ~ r ~ - I 1 ~ 1 ~. - j ~ . ''+. i~ // i 1:. 1{ 3 Higher-density developments lower property values in surrounding areas. No discernible difference exists in the appreciation rate of properties. located near higher-density development and those that are not. Some research even shows that higher-density development can increase property values. he precise value of real estate is determined by many factors, and isolating the impact of one factor can be difficult. ~lldiough location and school disa"ict are the nvo most obvious determining factors of value, locatio^ within a comnumity and size and condition of die house also allect ~°ahte. Sn°a"al studies ha~•c examined whether multifamily huusing h:u any impact on the value of nearby single-Family detached houses. These stdrdies have shown either no impact or even a slightly positive impact on appreciation rates. F I L E Haile. Plantation' `" Haile Plantation is a Gainesville, Florida, icon. Although it is denser than surrounding" ` communities, the values of homes in Haile Plantation are often higher{hah the values of houses in neighboring lowerdensirycammbnities; because the traditional neighborhood' design employed there makes Haile Plantation more desirable and valuable. Beginning" withthe master,plan in 1979, Haile Plantation Ras Reen called one of the first new urban- ' ist communities in the oountiy: QevelopersBob Rowe and Bob Kramer in conjunction withthe Haile Plantation Corporation developed the 1,7o0-acre site to include more than 2,700 units, ranging.from single-family homes to townhouses and garden apartments. The sense of community has onlygrd'wn with the expansion of [he development td include a"' town center; a village green, trails, civic uses, and offices. Indeed,it is density and diver-. ' sity that together add value to this popular Florida community. Herres in Haile~Plarrtation sell for more than nei~boring homes 6erause prospective buyers view the traditional ., rreigirbmhood design as a valuable and desirable amenity. `, 3Il fdG: ~ 1.~ r -.._. _ _ ~ -. .. _. . I ., _ -. _ ..._ ~.. P R O IVD Y T tl T 1ftiR O A C T T W O Pot instance, one surdv by the National Associatimt of I-tome Builders looked at data from the American blousing Surtiey, which is [anduclx:d every ueo }'cars by dte U.S. (.Cn5lL5 Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Dcvclopment. It found that between 1997 and 1999, the value of single-family houses within 300 Icct of an aparanent or condo- minium building went up 2.9 percent a yetu; slightly highs- thtm the ,.7 pcrecm talc for single-Camily homes w~dxmt multifamily properties nearby.'° Another smd~°, commissioned by the Family blousing kuud iu Minnesout, studied affordable aparmteuts iu 1? Twin Cities neighborhoods and found `9iule or no c~~dcncc to support the claim drat lax~rcdit family rental developments in ~theJ study eroded surrounding home vahres.""' And along-term lardy by Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies published iu 2003 also confirms that apartnacnts pose no threat to nearby single-family house values, based on U.S. Census data from 1970 to 2000."' Nol. only is there compelling cridencc that ina-cased density does not hurt. property values oC nearby neighbors: researchers at Virginia'fedr University have concluded cleat over the long rmr, well-placed market-late xparmaents with attractive design and landscaping actually increases the overall value of detached houses nearby." They cite three possible tea-sons. hirst, the new apartments cmdd th rmsclvcs he an indicator that an area's econ- omy is vibrant and growing. Second, multifamily housing may increase the pool of potential future homebnyers, creating more possible buyers Cor exist- ing owners when they decide to sell their houses. Third, new multifamily housing, particularly a, part of mixed-trse development, often makes an area more atu~acnve than nearby cmmnuuitics that have fewer hotvsing and retail choices."' P R O F I L E Echelon at Lakeside Echelon at Lakeside.is the only multifamily development; - in an upscale, master-.planned single-family suburban ' ,neighborhood of Lakeside on Preston in Plano; Texas a ~ ' suburb of Dallas. Florida-based developersEcfielbn Communities, LLC, overcame initial community opposi-. tionfromarearesidentsthroughhigh-quality innovative ' design: The award-winning architecture blends seam- ~ , '~lessly with the suriounding,neighhoihood's tr@ditional - ' style. Larger-than-normal flootplans, individual entries,, and attachedgaragescombinetpmirrorthegrand , i i ~ The award-winning apartmerds at Echelon atLakeside _ were designed to blend with theneighboring luxury homes. ~ .. - ?. ~ estates in the surrouriding~communities. Although street { elevations make the buildings appear to be one single- ' family home; they actually house severafmultifamilyunits, ~~ Memphis-based aichi[ects Looney Ricks Kiss used five building Types andthree building styles. All units include high-quality interiorfinishes; community amenities include a resort-style pool, fitness facility, clubroom, business and conference center, and full-time concierge. 14 ~ Niyher-Densiky gevslnpit~eni • M Y T H T W O~ P A C T T 7N O +r ~ " i ,4VER,AGE AMPJU.AL APPREGi.~.TiCSnt ~C3F' SfR4GLE-pAv11E_Y DETRCtlED HC3tL~5E5 BY RIEAFitVESS TC7 MUd_T4FAN11LY 53UlL.D3N~a5 d '.Y r}..' -}~. we t m i {{ ~ 25% ~ ~„. ~ ,^f . ~ , t E . i. W pry; i ~ ry ~ z ~~ ~ E v a ' ~ + +, ~ 15°k ' ~ .n~ ' III ~ ° ~~ ~ z ' -~ ~ NotNear ~ Q a i W 10% Multrfamlly . . ~ ~, ~ ~ j ~, a ~ ' 4 0 5% 2.66% ' ~ ~ a ~ r i 7 ~ .n..: a z 0°/u ~ a ~ ^+' `PRI ~ +, .. ,y _ ~, r~ ° - '., f + ~ Som cc: hAH6 con ~ utaUOn by cd on d: fw ~U S. Emu 1~ (cna ss~d U517epa ... .. .. ,. i ~ a ~ .~ ° ~, ~'. '~ ~ ~ .. a ..._. ux,._ .. ~ i ~ : ' s ! 4 y'~ r x `. ~ o III 3 4 ~ ~ P , t' 1 ~ q 1 µ I ~ x ~ ' 3 i ' } Y '' 1 ~ } r ~. e ~ ~ ~ " ' , s } a ~.., . '~ >~'. r .a ~ ~ ~ t w ~~ k f }.. ~ ~ Rs.;. " J h k .~ ? j % tt 1 ~ ~. :t ~ ~ $F ~ i . ~ ~ ~ ~ "; N Near NearMld +p~ ~~ ' , ear , v ~ mwmamuy.,a ~ ~ mwn5amny» € a„ , ~ ~ ,,. N f e p 4 ~,_,: 2.90% } 2.91%'' ~ 11Ii '2.79%` i iXIMITY.TO~~MULTIPAMILY ''. } n'~ ~ - l Y ~mtheA mH glurva~,199i and 1999 (w avh ngi ,UC ~'~r °ne u L H un. y and Ui ban'n° elopmenr1997 id 1999) u~., Concerned citizens should use the entidetneut process to demand high-quality development in their conunwtities while understanding that density and adjacent property values arc not inversely related. Higher-density real estate developers and investors in higher-density real estate need to appreciate the Cact that must ;lmericaus' wealth is held in their home equity. Therefore, changes in property values can have veto real consequences to existing property owners. Likewise, homeowners would benefit from knowing that developers make a subsmndal financial commitment w°hen investing in new higher-density projects. Thie i~rvest ment is an incentive [n make the project. suaccsfi~l, which can wive the annmu- nin~ leverage in working with the developer. Such interrelated and overlapping economic interests among these stakeholders make it all the more likely [ha[ a mutually beneficial agreement eau be reached. Such an agreement can result in a project that enhances the existing comunmity, ensues the appreciauou of resi- dents', developers', and the local governments financial interests, and addresses the needs of current and future residents oC the community and region. '~;t~ z;='ac~ ~ 15 ~ P, tv fi ~ ~ t ''I ', 1 , ~ ; '~'' _ I l t' _ ~' ~ I ' ~ '_F __.'' Higher-density development creates more regional traffic congestion and parking problems than low-density development. `.\ ~. _; '_ - Higher-density development generates less traffic than low-density development ~~ per uriit; it makes vvalkiiig and public transit more feasible and creates opportunities for shared parking. I- c he P R O F I L E j i i ~ ~Mockingbird' Station ' _ ~ The residents of Mockingbird Ststion in Dallas, Texas, are far „ less dependent on theiresrs;6ecausetheyhaveawholehost ' 'of amenities at their doorstep. Dallas developer~KenHughes partnered with Denver-baspdSimpsonHousing Group to , ~ ~ create the ten-acre pedestrian-oriented urban village, which - , includes 2161oft bpprtrnepts, aneight-screen film center and ~ ,.cafe, more than 9g shops andrestaurants, offices, an enclosed . { ,:public plaia,.and parking, all directly linked to the Dallas Area ~~ ,~ Rapid Transit lDARTl light-railsystem: Mockingbird Station '. provides direct platform access to DART trains, mMich affer~~ residents an eight-minute commute to Obllas's central - ~~ business district pntla single train connection to the-0allas • CdnventionCenter,ReunionArena,andotherdpwntownentertainmentThenewvillageisalsoimmediatelyadjacent. . _ : fo the campus of Southern Methodist University and within walking distance of the univers¢y's new stadium and ' sportscentecRTKLcreatedarchi4ecturereminiscentofhistodctrainstbtionsbutv~ithamoderntwisttothematerials and detailing. Although only limiteddrivingisnecessary,aparkinggarageisprovidedbutplacedoutofsightand underground. The myriad materials, architectural styles, and amenities create a vibranttransiaoriented community ost people assume rh;tt highertlensity development gener etes more rrxliic [hero lot~z density development and that regional u~c wiLl get worse with more compact dove opment. In fact, dre opposite is tnre. Although residents of low-deusim single-family conununities rend to have u~°o or more cars per household, residents of high<lensi[} apurunents and condominiums tend to have only one car per household.=" And according to on study using dam Crom the National Personal Trans'poitation Survey, doubling density decreases t vehicle miles u-avelcd by 38 percent."' Residents, of Mockingbird Stationwn leave their cars in the garage and take an ei~d-minute train ride to dow~rtown:DalWs; they can also walk to shops, offices„ and a movie theater. 16 Hio,yergersity pevelaprrert T St R E E~ A C T The reason is that higher=density rtevelopments make for more walkable ueig7~bor hoods and bring urgedter the concentration of population required to support pulr lit ^ansponalion. The result is that. residents in higherdcnsit~~ housing make fewer and shorter auto nips than [host living in low-density housing.'' Cunduminimn and townhouse residents average 5.6 nips per day and apartment dwellers fi.3 car nips per dap, compared with dac con trips a day ava~ged by residents of lowtlensity rom- manitics. (~~ trip is defined as any time a c.u' leaves or returns w a home.) Increasing density can significantly reduce dependency ou cars, but those benefits are even bn-eater when jobs and retail arc incorporated with the housing. Such mixed-use neighborhoods make it easier for people to park their car iu one place and accomplish several tasks, which not Duly reduces dte cumber of car trips required but also reduces overall parking needs for the community. }3ut if retail uses arc to su rv~ive, d~e~~ must be near households with disposable income. lia~~ug those households within walking disianrc of the shops builds is a market for the stores. One study indicates Char in some markets, ~Fi to 3~ percent of retail sales must come liom housing close to shops for the shops w be successful."' P R O F I L E Southwest Station The ScuthwestMetro TransitCommission is a small suburbahbus systemnear Minneapolis that serves .downtown Minheapolis and numerous other ~, employment add recreation centers, including , - ~;: Minnesota Twins baseball games. The American Public.Transportation Association calls it the "hest small system in the country."In an effdrtto capital- iieandexpand on the success of the system, the commission has encouraged transit-orienteddbvel- opment at its bus, stops. In Eden Prairie, Minnesota, .the commission completed ahus depot and five-. story parking garage on 22 acres of excess right-of- '. way. In 2001, it started selling land around the tran-~- sit complexfor retail and residential development, Restaurants, shops, and more than 250 apartments, ' condominiums, and townhouses soon followed. The new development generated revenuefor the pom- mission, new public transit riders, affordable con- venient housing, and a suburban lifesty{e with the - amenities usually afforded only to city dwellers. M Y T H T H R E E zrd Eat[ 17 The Soutbwesf.Metro Transk Commission in suburban , Minneapolis runs an award-winning bussystem and has encouraged higher-density developmerd arourrd~ transH stops, like this orre al Soulhwesi station in. , EdenPrairie, Minnesota. ~ , f>fl Y T H T H R E• '~ A C T T H R E E • lV'ith a n~pical family now making more car trips for family, personal, social, and recreational retisons than for commuting to work," reducing the number oC noncommuting nips takes on grcaicr importance in d,e haute u, reduce traffic congestion and parking problems. A case study in tV~tshingtoq D.C., found that workers in dcosc do~~°ntrnvo Washington made 8U percent of their mid-day trips by foot while suburban workers made 67 percent OC their mid-dav trips by car." Ahhough a suburban otlice park would never reach d~c density levels oC a down- town area, planners can still reduce the auto dependency of suburbut ollice work- ers by traiug some of the sane design techniques. Concentrating density around AVERAGE DAISY CAR TRIPS ~_ ' 'a r ~ 2 10 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a { Q i ' 1 r + ' `b .,.: Single-Family --~ r -`- ~ ~ LL l Detached q Apartment ~ A , - ~' , W ~ .. ^~~ ~ 2 . 10.0 ~ + 6.3 ~ z ~ r- - ~ , ~ ., ~. Q ~' _.&.. S. . n. 'TVPEOPHOUSING _ . . _ ,. _ e Snr Ianiue ol'T dL F,g,vvrs Pn(r(mnt'an; N, Edm,q col.l (N,hngmn,D(Amho-1997)' suburban offices, allowing and encouraging reuul and restaurants in .md near dte oClices, and planning Cor pedestrian and bike access can all reduce the number of lunchtime car nips required by uIDcc workers. Highmdeusin~ mixed-used developments also create efficiencies through shared parking. 1' or example, o(iice and residential uses require parking at almost exact opposite times. As residents leave for work, otTice workers return, and vice versa. [n addition, stn¢tured parking becomes feasible only with highertlensin° developments. Highcrdcnsi[y dcvclnpmcnt also makes public transit mote feasible. l~'hen a com- munity that includes residences, shops, and offices reaches a certain th reshold of density, public uznsit-shuttles, bus service, trams, or light rail becomes un option for residntts. It is estimated that a minimum dcnsih~ of seven dwelling units per ao'e is needed w make local bus service fesible wish an internsdiate Icvcl of service." Light rail needs a minimum density oC nine dwelling units per acre to be feasible.'" When a community can take advantage of dense options and increase the uansportatiou choices Cor residents, relief is greater as total car dependency is further broken. Such choices are impossible for low-density developments. 18 ~ ~igFer6aasity Oeve(rcrrer:+ I ~-. -~ , ,'"~ r~~. ,,,.~ t J a ~ i ra ~ ~ t _. ~_z ~ .. ~' Higher-density development leads to higher crime rates. _.. The crime rates athigher-density developments are not significantly different from those atlower-density developments. eople sometimes associate densin• with oimc, even though numerous ~~. { P R O F I L E ~, Westminster .Place Although today Westminster Place is a thriving, safe community in +- midtown $t. lovis,it was not always the case. The area, approxi- i.. mately 90 acres, waswelhknown by the St. Louis police department ' ~ for its high'rate of violent crime, whicfi,led to the area's becoming ' ".hlighted. McCormack Baron Salazar, a St.Louis-haled developer, -brought the community hack through the addition ofhigher-density mined-income,housipgcomprising affordahle and market-rate units. t Themaster plan included for-sale and rental housing, garden apart- menu,townhouses,single-familyhemes, antleven an assisted liv-- 3 ing facility for seniors. A new community pool, a bustling retail,ceri- ~. . ter, and~a magnet school are includedas well. The newplan slowed '. tratfc through the community, added landscaping and street and ,parking lot lighting; and new "eyes on the street;" making it more difficult for criminals to go unnoticed. The area blossomed into a place where people once again feel safe walking. The success of the community spurred the revitalization of surroundingareas. _ snrdien shav that no relationship exists beuveen the avo. A s[ad~° in Irving, Texas, using geographicinlbrmation systems and crime statlstirs, fowtd no link bcuvicen crime and density. In fact, i[ lound that single-family neigh- bodioods arc "uot all associated with lower crime rates °" .Snodicr study conducted by doe Univetaity of ~lla~ka Rnnul no relationship between housing density and oimc in Anchorage" ant! Fad ~ 19 ' Increasing the (musing density, adding some'matket-rote hoasirtg, and developing a desigt that sowed traffic and added additional ligtrting changed Westminster Place from a aimeiiddenneidrbor-. hoodto a tltdving, safe community. ~ .. M Y T H F O U R• A C T F O U R • P R O F I L E Ease village ', .East Ullage is a small urban revitalization project onthe edge of downtown Minneapolis. Before the project was built, the neglected 2.9-acre site contained~several deteriorating rental'homes, old commer- cibl buildings, aridabandoned surface parking lots. The r!eighborhood wanted to improve the area and ' ' theimage of oneof the citys oldest neighborhoods, Elliot Park. The developers of the project, Central '.. CommunityHousingTrustandEastVillageHousingCarporation,developedahe~newmixed-income _ hopsidgandcommercial community to encourage a sense of community andownership: East Ullage ~. now features community green space, pedestrian paths, and neighborhood businesses: Builtlings sur-. round the gFeehway that leads to Elliot Park, a city park with year-round activities and a community center: Brick, hay windows, and Frenckhalconieseomplement historic buildings in the area. In adtliUOn, all buildings have multiple entrances to encourage interaction among neighbors. An underground.35g- ' space parking garage frees up space for landscaped areas. This once neglected area has worvtwo '~ ~' awards for ihnovation and design and become an exceedingly successful vibrant and safe community. 20 ~ Nigher-Density Devslagmewi ~. The additional "eyes oo fhe streeR" created hY tlcedeveloprreent of _ I East Ylhrgein Minrreapotis has kd to a safer rihraat rnrrurrmutlt - ~ - . " .. • Ala Y T F~ S O U ii~ F A C T F {2 i9 ~t Arizona researchers Cound drat when police data are analyzed per utut, aparuueuts actually create, less demand for police settiices than a comparable number of single- family houses. In 'Cempe, Arizona, a random sample of 1,000 calls for sen~ice showed that 85 percent originated fi~om single-funny house_r and just 21 percent came tirom apatnnents. Similarly, a random sample of tiUO calls for service in Phoenix, Arizona, Ibund drat an apatvnent unit's demand for police services wtu less them half of du demand orated by a single-Pzm~ily boost:"` One reason for the misperception that crime and density arc related could be that mime reports tend to characterize muldfamily properties as a single "house° and may record every visit to an apartntcut commm~ih~ as happening u a siuglc house. IDut a multifamily property widt 250 writs is more accurately defined as Y50 houses. To truly aunpare crime rates beuveen multfamily properties and siuglc-family houses, the officer would have to count each household in the nndtifamily commu- nity as die equivalent of a separate single-family household. 4Vhrn they do so, many find what the previous emdirs prove that crone ~ ~ttcs bcnvccn dilTcrent housing tvpes are comparable. Higher-density developments eau actually help reduce ^~ime by ina~e.vsing pedestrian activity and fostering a 24-hour conununity that puts more `eyes on the sweet"" at all times. D1any residents say they chose highctKlensity housing specifically because dtev felt more secure there; Ihev feel safer because there arc more pwple coming and going, making it more difficult for criminals w act without being discovered. This laclor could explain tube a ULI scaly of dif(~erent boating types iu Creenw~ch, Connecticut, shows Otai. higLcrKlcnsity Lousing is signif cand}'lcss likely tit be bur- glarized than singlo-tamily houses."' The relationships among design, management, and security became better under-stood in the pact. few decades with the publication ofseveial seminal works, including De(erzcihle.Spnca: Ctzrne !'reuerLLima tlumtgh Urhran Design by Oscar Newman"" acrd Fixinor Brroken Winrlmus: Restoring Order and Hedeecing Crime in our Conunmaities by Gcorgc Kclling and Cadicrine Coles" Manv new highe~~- density devebpmenls include better lighting plans and careful placement of buildings and landscaping to reduce opportunities for crime, anmibuting to a safer community. \Nith the emergence of bettervqualiq~ designs, highervdensiry mixed-use develop- ment is au attractive turd safe addition to a community, one that is increasingly attracting a professional constiwenry seeking safety Ceauves. [n fact, the luxury segment is one, of the fastosC$rowing components of the multi Pamily indusu'~~.`" and Faoi ~ 21 s s ,~ ,~r ,.. ~ ..i _._9 ~ :._, Higher-density development is environmentally more .destructive than lower-density development. ,\ Low-density developm areas by paving and ui ~ ~- increases air and water pollution and destroys natural nizing greater swaths of land. otuclcnsity sprawl rakes an enormous utll on our air, tvatcr, and land. The United Stales is now bring a staggering 2 million noes of land a year to haph:uard, sprawling development."° D~fore diau 50 percent oCAmedcuns lice in places where the tut is mnhealdi~~ ut breathe,"' and childhood zuthma and other respiratory diseases are on the rise." Almost half the damage to our suetm~s, lakes, and rivers is the result of polluted runofrfrum paved surfaces.^Q llis iuefficiem land use, not economic growtt, that accounts Cor dre rapid loss of open space and Carvrs. Since 7999, housing lobs larger than ten acres have account- ed for 7~ percent of [he land developed.1° This loss oC land often causes uuexpeel ed economic challenges Cor nual commnniiies, where farmland, fores[s, ranchland, and open space tend to be the economic drivers that aUract businesses, residents, and tourists. Low-density spraw•I compromises the resources drat are the core of the community's economy and character. The majority of Ameriem homeowners think it is imporuv~t to stop Lhese trends. In fact, 76 percent of local ballot initiatives related m land concerti°ation passed iu November 2009, making $2A billion in htnd- ing available Cur protection of parks ,wd open space." But pw~eh;uing land is only ptut of the solution and not ahvays an option for Luaurcially strapped governments. [-lighertlensity development offers dre best solution ro managing growth and pro- testing clean air and clean water Placing new development into already urbanized areas that are equipped w~dr all die basic infrasuztcuve like utility lines, police xnd fire protection, schools, and shops eliminates die financial and environmental costs of stretching those services farther and farther our from the rare community. Com- pacntrban design reduces driving and smog and preserves die natural areas that. are assets of die community: watersheds, wetlands, working farms, open space, and wildlife con~idors, It further minimizes impervious surface area, which causes ero- sion and polluted stormwatcr runoff. Two swdies completed for the sate of Ncw Jersey confirm that compact development can achieve a 30 percent reduction in nmolf and an 83 pereeut reduction in water cotuumption compared with eonveu- nonal saburbau development ° 22 ~ Ni;6r?r-t3en»lY ~exeinpment • M Y T H F t V• F A C T IF i Y E P R O P 1 L E Prairie Crossing -The developers of Prairie Crossing, George and Vicky Ranney, saved $1 million in infrastructure costs through environmentally - ~. - sensitivedesign. The 677-acre conservation community is - ~ located in Grayslake; Illinois, 40 miles northwest of Chicago ~ "' ~ and onehour south of Milwaukee. Thecommunity features - • 350 acres of open space, including 160 acres of restored _ - - ,prairie, 158 acres of active farmland, 73 acres of wetlands, a ~ - ~ - ~ ~~ ,.,. ~ 22-acre lake, a village green, and several neighborhood parks., ' ~ - Houses are sited to protect natural features such as hedge- - rows,native habitat, and wetlands. Designed with colors and - architectureinspiredhy the landscape, every home has a view of open space and direct access toten miles of on-site walk- _ ing and biking trails. Wide sidewalks, deep front porches, ~ ~ - antlrbar garages enpourageneighbors to.meet. TBe homes - were built with U.S. Department of Energy-approved green ~ ' ~ `. ~. building techniques: As a result, they are 50 percent more - - - ' . ~. ~ energy efficient tfian other homes in the Chicago a}ea, and More than haH ~ - they sell fora 33 percent sales premium. Station Village is the ~ boat ~ ~~ ~S S ~ .fast phase of Prairie Crossing. When complete, it will include - ~~ was .. rved ~ Prese oPe+r residential, retail and office space,.all within walking distance ~ space, aml homes - ~ ~ of twocommutertrain stations. Residents can rideMetra's were'buiR with . . ~ ~ North Line to Chicago"s Union Station or the Central Line to approved tTeer~ ~ ~ ~ , -. - E ~ -~ downtdwn Chicago and O'Hare Airport.~~ ~ i. ~ - building technques. - - .v' Gtyth end Fact 23 M Y T H F I V E •A C T F I V E • P R O F I L E The Preserve 1155 Real Estateongmally held a 550-acre tract of land in Hoover, ~- - . Alabama, but sold 250acres to4he city; intending to.create the Moss Rock Nature Preserve. The 680 single-family homes, 50,000 _ ' square feet of retail, and 50,000 square feeUOf office space are ~ - " concentrated on the remaining 371-acre site. Before development . .' of the Preserve, Hoover was characterizetl by sprawling conven- ~ - ' tional development and lacked a town center. The Preserve's future town center is planned tii include 341ive/work units, 14' - 'retail units and two restaurants: at the hear[ of the community is - - - ~ the village green, an impressive eight-acre park with atewn hall, ~. atitness center,.a juniorolympic swimming pool, and a kiddie ~~ p ur Ibowr pool. Residents have access to 15 acres of parks and seven miles p~par~, enaMeJ ~ ~. of trails that connect to award-winning Hoover schools and the aeatioa d0ce 250-acre . ~ Newly created Moss Ruck preserve. ~ ~ Moss Rode Nafive 24 8+rder 'J ecii;k g:e:' ~z ne, Itt4 Y T N F E V~ ~ f A C T F a N E Many communities employ techniques such as iufill and brotailield development to transform unused, abandone[t loss into vibrant, revenue-generating' components of the community. Some create direct incentives for highcr<lcnsity developnicnt. The city of Austin, 1cx;w, for example, created a program that rer~~ards developers for locating projects in the city's existing neighborhoods and downtown. Others award points lbr a varier}' of auribwes, such as uausit access, the redevelopment of empty low, and an increase in pedestrian Caeilitics. By employing standards for fac- tors IiL:e open space, dense development, and impact on water quality, conumuni- des eau faciliutte good urban design that preseiti°es natural resotu ces. Although a well<lesigued higherK{eusity convuuuity olfers residents a higher- quality curd roumeut, poorly planned sprawl does dre opposite. Because low-density sprawl gobbles up so much land through large-lot zoning, it ends up desu caving the very driug moss. people moved there for in the first placethr. natval areas and farmland. It forces people to diire longer distances, ina~casing re6donal air quality problems. The average: American man spends Hl minutes behind the wheel every day, while women average 63 minutes. And smvcys show that. dre time spent driving htu been consistently increasing every year.'" The national road network, currently at 4 million miles according to dac U.S. Department of'Ilausportation, is still grow- ing at an alarming rate, m;unly for the purpose oC comiccting new low-density sub- urbs back to cure cummunitics. rVung with the water and air pollution, amsu2ic- tiou of these highways perpewates dre cycle of sprawl, fragmarw wildlife habitats, and dries up a community's financial coffers. Increasing density not only improves air and water quality and pmieas open space but also redirects invesunems to our existing towns and cities. I[ can revitalize, existing convnunities and create more walkable neighborhoods with access to public transit and hiking anti biking wails. Pedestrian-f iicndly higher darsity developments offer general health benefits as well. n4ixcd land uses give people the option to walk and bike to work, shops, restauranw, and enter~lin- mact. The tom°enience of compact coummuities may help tight diseases related to obesity." Higher-density cumm[mi[ies are vital [o preserving a hcal[hy environ- mentand fostering healdry lifestyles. htafli and frr,+., 25 a ~ i. jj f ` ~ ~. ,~ idJ ,_._.J~ -~ ,:..1 -_. _ _~. _..- Higher-density development is unattractive and does not fit in aloes-density community. 1 ~_ . `r ,, , Attractive;~well-designed, and well-maintained higher-density :. development attracts good residents and tenants and fits into ___ - _. existing communities. - ip ~cr<lcnsity development. [omen in mane tones. Some of the ux)sl. aurac- lire Nell-planned modern development is built at a high density. Across '.. r\mrrica, appealing higher-densit}' mixed-nsr, town cen[et's have been ~` Nildly popal;u~ with the public Lashl}° landscaped boulevards, fountains, and showcase architecnve have created a sense oC place in areas previously known only for lacclcss, uuiutarsting IoN~lcnsity development. The enduring appeal ~ :- ~_ . ..-.. __._.____._ .. - - ---..-__ ___._v. _. __ -.. __ ~ _ P R O F I L E j ___._.~~._.____ - - ____.__---_--- --- -- ----t ~ ~ , , . Post,:Riverside ~ ~ - Atlanta is often called'the poster"child for su6urbap .sprawl:'However, it is also thehome of Post I!-'. .. ~~ Riverside;a'ievolutionary new mixed-use~pedestri- ~. .. , '-: an-oriented ;community developed6y Atlan[a-based ~ ~ Post Properties inc.; and Ihcated onthq banks of i the Chattahoochee fliver between Atlanta s bustling. Bbckheatl and Vinings communities. Asis the trend :nationally, 65 percent of.all'vehicle trips in Atlanta. ,• '.~ ". are torunerrands,notto-commute to work. With j '; offices, shops, and restaurants within walking dis- ' ranee.oftheapartments,PostRiJersideresidents ~~ dependbn autos.much less thari their neighbors ' .. inadwe~r-density areas. In addition, the community ~. ~, ^- , is connectbdto Atlanta's MARTA suhway'system 'andifieCobbCountytransitsystem.Thisaward- 'winning 85-acre mixed-use development includes ~~ ~ " ~ 25,OOOsquarefeet of retail space; 225,OOOsquare ,feet of officespace, and 535 apartments, all designed around a gracious town .. square: For many people, this amenity-rich, low-maintenance lifestyle better suits then needs than a traditional single-family home in aloes-density neighborhood. " "_... 26 ~ Ni;hprDeasitq uev=iograri Post N'irerside ht Ailarda demonstrates that higarer-density devebpncerd wn be altraclire and sirccessiulin a comm~- rdty Imam far loaer-0arsily derekpment. .~ • M Y T H S i X• F A C T S I X amt desirabiliU' of older anti more gracious higher-deusi tv ueigh- borhoods~eorgetown in b1'ashiugtou, D.C., I3eucon Hill and Rack Ray in Roston, and Lincoln Park in Chicago-a¢est to the fact that some of tits more desirable neighborhoods in America hismrically have been o(higher density than that found in typical owcr subm-bs. This return to the design principles oC die past is az the cm~c of the new urbanist movement that took hold in the 1990s. The movc- mcntgrew as many people came to miss the sense of community dtat was created by ties mixedKleusity anti mixed-use wmntmtities of the past. Thee realized chat lotwdeusity subdivisions isolated their otruers not only Crom pedestrian access to shops anti offices but also from dreir neighbors. The growing sense of social alie~- ation, highlighted in books like Robert ftrurxm's Bnrulirag AG~ue;" has Ird many back to the comfort of commuoidcs that arc a reminder of the places where many of us grew up. These nett cummunities combine the best design ideas of the past with the modern conveniences of today to provide residents frith what has been missing lTom many sprawling areas-a sense of conununity. Today's dcvclopcrs, archiu:cts, anti planners know thu to aurtd customers and to secure zoning approvals anti cownmttiy~ acceptance, they must produce attractive and innovative properties that complement their surroundings. Design profession- als arc driven to produce projects that meet users' demands, understand and respond to the context of a sire, enhance its neighborhood, and arc built. to last.'yln tact, aaaadanee at a recent Atnerican Institute ofArehitects-sponsored conference on density far surpassed cspcctatimu, speaking to the iutemst among laud use professionals in addressing the design issues associated with density."' It is plausible chat the high level of citizens' opposition to density may be based on are outdated notion of what higherdcnsity development looks like. A University of North Carofinasntdy revealed that when given a choice beuveen two awacdvely designed communities, one higher density and die other low density; die majority prelen-ed [he higherdensiry opdm~:' Ocher casual pre[crence sure°eys con- firm that there is an almost universal negative reaction to ties casual appearance of commercial snip sprawl tmtl an almost univctsal posi- tive reaction to traditional form-like commutudes oC the past, com- muuitie_s that almost im~ariably included a mix of densities anti uses:" P R O F I L E The Plaza at the Arboretum This award-winning mixed-use project in "Santa Monica, California, developedhy' ' California-hosed Legacy Partners, achieves ~adensiry of 97.5 dwelling unitsper acre. The attractive seven-story building includes -10,000 'square feet of retail space aritl 350 ' apartment units~ranging-from fi12 to 1,555 squarefeet. The architecture firm Meeks ~ and Partners used strong geometric forms ~ to create a playful architectural character [hit fits nicely in the avant-garde Hollywood ' studio section of SantaMonica. The devel- apment includes a swimming pool;'spa, fit- riesscenter, and cluhhouse:. and Fart ~ 27 ' HigM1er-density deveioP~~ like - - i i .the Ram at the Arborehtm preserrt opportunities to create otRstanding . ` award~whmitg architechire. la _ ; No one in suburban areas wants higher-density development. ,. ` . ~ -, f ..Our population is changing and becoming increasingly diverse. Many of these :households now prefer higher-density housing, even in suburban locations. hen many of us Uiink of the Amc~ican Dream, we envision married 'T'his counnv's pupuladuu is changing, and so are ies real estate preferences. These lifestyle changes have significant implications for suburban development. For die first time, there are more single-person households (26.4 per ceuQ than married- couples with children living in single: family detached houses in the suburbs. The notion is dru die onle people who want to line. in higher-density areas are those echo cannot .d~lbrd a hadidonal house with a back yard or ~+'ho want to live in the middle of the city. l3o~h percep- tions are flawed. HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE: 2003 (PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL) ~ f~ 15.2' ~~llk2` ~, w ~.ia r - $ 164 x 4 __. _..._ ..~.5;4 _.:.. ~~,.~ f ~~( Married c`ouplei Marned coupie, -~- .,': 0 Other~family hoi Men hving~a,lon ,Women livuig a ~] r i ~ P J x F ,,_.. (' *, ( k -~ S 'rr US R ~ al oCdr( s (iimhi March aid Annuuf Sucudaid hnnimnv Sup 'r "~ t at ~5_. i t ~ _~~~ 28 ~ Nt;6ar~Deasitp Jerelapnremi • P/1 Y T H S E V E N• A C T S E V E N couple-witty-children households (23.3 percent).'' The groups grove°iug the fastest, people in their mid-20s and empty nesters in their COs, are the groups most likely io look for an alternative to low-density, singlrfamily housing.-" ~ growing number of Americans arc redefining their American Dream. They are seeking a more convenient and vibr:mt lifestyle. And while some seek this lifcshdc in cities, many others seek the same lifestyle in the suburbs. According to a 200 study by the National Association of Home L3uilders, more than half the rentrrs questioned said they wanted to lice in the suburbs." Moreover, a national sm1°cy~ of homebuyets' community preferences firuud that nearly three-quarters of all .- .~ P R O F I L E ' Ring.. Farm This 430-acre community is characterized by the historic architecture of the region but offers an assortment of modern conveniences as well.. ~, Developed by Kirig Farm Associates, LLC, King ' :Farm is located im.Rockville, Maryland, five miles, i. from theWashingtari, D.C., tieltway, 15 miles from _ i ~ downthwn D.C., and walking distance from the ~• Shady Grove Metro station. The neighborhood ~~ wasdesigned,forpedestrians,~buttheKingFarm - shuttle makes getting aroundeven easier.7he ! ' shuttleruns a complimentary route between the ' KingFarm.Village Center, the Metr6 station, and ' 14+ the_Irvington Center, •a<90-acre commercial cam- . ~ ,, plex'neuttotheMetro. lniddition, two types of public bus service are available at King.Farm. At s theVillage Center, 120;000 squarefeet of retail space is within walking-0istance from both rhsi- '.dential and commerciaFdevelopment. The center ~ ~ also includesA7 loft apartments and a•ode-acre village green. Watkins'Pond and Baileys Common • are Klgg..farm's two residentialyillages. They offer single-family homes, townhouses, condominiums, '~ ~ and luxury apartments intertwined with natural ' - areas. The center of Watkins Pond is a 12-acre ! city park with tennis and tiesketball courts, a soc-• cerand softtiallfield, two playgrounds,several ',. - ~ picnic areas, benches, and paths. and fait 29 King Farm is a successful h~herdensily suburban ~.. community thatirrtegrates housing, retail shops, - . ~ - ~ •, offices, and public IransiL . iVi Y T H S E V E~ F A C T S E V E Ai • P R O F i L E Victoria Gardens The city of RancheCucamonga,located roughly 6o miles east of Las Angeles in California's Inland Empire has arighagricultural 'history and, more recently, a history of low-density spiawl with no real city center. This situation is changing, However, with the, opening of the first~phases of a huge new.mixed-use development known as Victoria Gardens. The development; designed by LA.-..based architects, Altobn + Porter, and being developed jointly by California-based developers Forest City Californiaabtl the ' Lewis InGestmedt Company, wil6create a vibianthigher-density downtowmwhere none previously existed. Rapidly growing Rancho ~~Cucamdnga has keen traditionally underserved by restaurants and entertainment options. Thelong-awaited addition ofa "place" in the cityhas been welbreceiyed by residents. The 147-'acre development will eventually contain 1.3 million square feet of commer- •cial and•bdmmunity space, including retail, entertainment; office, and civic uses with acultural center and a library. Twenty acres - of housing on sitewill allow people to live within walking distance of all the amenities of Rancho Cucamonga"snew downtown. 30 ~ H~gber~Censih Oeveiey;^rer~t • M Y T t-1 S E V E N ~F A C T S E V E N buyers prefer co live iu a communhy where thev can walk or bike to some desti- nations.'`' The 2001 American Housing Survey further reveals that. rrspoudenis cited proximity to work more often than unit tyre as the leading factor in housing choice:' These surveys contirm drat many people, prefer the suburbs bw want die amenities traditionally associated tcid~ cities, including living dose Ur work. 4Vth the continuing decentralization oC citi es anti die rise of suburban conununi- tics with urban-like amenities, many people thud drat they eau live and work iu the suburbs with all the attributes oC suburbia they desire without giving up walkability and convenience. to recent study cunCunu that in many regions, more office space is located in suburban locations than downtowns,'" providing an opportunity for people to live near Ltreirjobs. Compumities anti developers that have recognized anti responded to the dual u~euds of decentralized oflices and a growing desire for a more convenirnt lifestyle have been rewarded. M'ell-placed mixed-use, higher density developments in the sububs arc incrc.vsingly popular, a-cating a nca• sense of place. Comnuuiities arc being developed using d~c best concepts oC traditional couuuu- pities-smaller lots, a variety of housing types, Goat porches and sidewalks, shops and oflices within walking distance, ~uul public Uansiutearby. Couuuunitics like Odcbration in Florida and King Farm in Ylaryland have been so popular widt the homebuying public that pasuvonies over whether dye de~naral exists Cur titem hive been replaced by coucems about their rapid price appreciation, putting dtetn out of dte reach of all but die highest income households. Today's real demographic and lifestyle changes are inspiring a return to traditional decclopmrm. styles that ofTer walkable, bikcable, acrd more dynamic conununiiie_s That put residenvs doscr to shops, ofiiccs, and parks. L4 and Earl ~ 31 - t 't ~~' 1 ?'~, _. ~i~ i ~~1 ~ ~ ` Fr ! _1 ~ l~' .! n ~ ' A ~+~ rl ~ ~ ,f S, j ~ .'r .a Higher-density housing is only for lower-income households. People of all income g'roups~choose higher-density housing. .' n- _ - ~ --.. - ~ ~ ultifamily housing is not thr, housing of lact resort for households un- Highcr<teneity development can be a viable housing choice for all income groups and people in all phases of dheir lives. Many linanci:ilh~ secure bub}' boomers, who have seen their children leave the nest, have chosen to ]cave behind the yard maintenance and repairs required of asingle-family house titer the more carcltcc and convenient lifestyle multifamily huusing provides. Interestingly, their children, the echo buonhers, are entering the abn; where many will likely live in multifamily housing. fuse starting carters, many are Looking fm' tkre flexibility oC aparuneut liv- ing to follow job opportmrites. Their grandparents, likely mr a fixed iumnre, may also prefer or need to live in multfamih~ housing as physical limitations may have made living in asingle-family house too challenging. able to afford asingle-family house Condominiums, Irn- mstancr, a~ e often die most sought after and highh~ appreciating real estate in man}' '" urban markets. The htsmy segment of the aparnncnt market is also rapidly expanding. Most people are surprised to Learu that 91 percent of rcntas sav they rent by choice and not our of necessity, and households making more than $50,000 a year hate been the fastest-growiug~ segment of the rental market for the past three yetu~s "' Multfanhily housing du-oughout dw world has historically been the housing o(choice by the wealthiest iuditiduals because oC the access and con- venience it provides. From Manhattan tp Miami w San Francisco, higher=density housing has been prized for the amenity-rich lifestyle it can provide. Providing balanced housing options w pcoplr, of all income groups is important to a region's economic vitality. The av'eilability of affordable multifamily housing helps attract and retain the workers needed to keep ~,hy economy thriving. hh many rinherican towns and cities, rapidly rising house prices are forcing working families to lice farther away from dteirjobs. In Tact, the lack of aClordable housing is mentioned as the number one problem facing working families today.'"' 32 ki>:erDensity DevelaQmeni • iNl Y T H E 1. G- t# T ~F A C T E I G li 7 P R O F I L E Rollins Sgaare Rollins Square, amixed-use development in Boston's South End, is a truly mixed-income community thatprovldes Rousing far a wide spectrum of peoplein all income brackets: Twenty percent pf the ovpralfunits are reserved far people whose i income is 30do 60 percent of the6ostonarea median income (AM1~, 40 percent are for-sale condominiums reserved for k working households with incomes 80 to 120 percent pfShp ~~~~AMI, and the, remaining 40 percent are thatket-rate units sell- ing far up to $750,000. The residences occupy two city blacks and integrateseamlessly into the~existing neighborhood. The varying heights and diverse-exterior materials givethe appearance that the development was constructed over time. Rollins Square was developed by the Planning Office for Urban Affairs, Inc., a nonprofit developer associated. .. with the Archdiaceseof Boston srA iac± 33 M Y T H E I G H 7 • E t: G H~ F A C T P R O F I L E POn sne for wading buds. In addiUOn, the public andpnvate ', schools in MountPleasant are same of the best in the area. I'On is a 244-acre master-planned community along the deep-water marshesofHbbcraw Creek in Mount Pleasant, South Carblina. Just six miles east of. Charleston, the com-• " munityfeaturesJ00sirigle-family homes,~communityfagili- .ties, and asmall-scale commercial area: Vince Graham; ' -principal with the I'Gri Company, is developing siz residential neighborhoods connected by narrow streets, pedestrian corridors and community spaces. An I'Gn Guild member; "one of 16 builders selected for experience, talent, and finan- cial strength, builds each individual home. The~architdcture is inspirbd6y classiaLowcountry style with large balconies, ' deep front porches, and tall windows on~even taller homes. Hdmes.now self for Sfi85,000tq$1.7milliod,Gommbniryfacil- ities include I'Gn Square, I'On Club, theCreek Cluh,and the ~~ home pricesm We aep.piymred Mount PlbasantAmphitheatec.Residehts also enjoy easy higher-0ensilyrlr of l'On are ' ~' access to the Cooper and Wandorivers, the Charleston bar- approachm8 $Z rm~ien. The hadH-anal 6or, and the Atlantic Ocean. One neighborhood boat ramp ~ ~10°d desk oomhmed rrrth ~ andfour community docks are available for crabbing and . commurriq~ amenities made possible by hirer densities bare made tla . fishing. Two miles of walkingtrails are available for resi- community ane of the most desirable dents; alive-acre podtl, the Rookery, is.a protected nesting ~ in the Chadestoq area. As the problem of affoalabilit~~ worscus, workers ou the lower eud of'the salarl° scale ^ray move to more atFordable cities, lea~~ng a labor shortage iu t}reir wake. Such shortages make a region less desirable as an emplo}nnent center. According to PricewateiliouseCoopers, access to a large and diverse labor pool is the most important. factor in making corporate decisions on locations.`'' Communities that do not provide housing for all income, groups become less desirable corporate locations. 34 ~ Hi3her-0en;ity Oevelopareat ~ae,~-~s 1. http-//www.census_gov/ipcM~ww/usinterimproj/natprollabOlapdL 2. httpl/factfindercensus.gov/servleUOTTahIe7Jsm=y&geoJd=D&t1r_name=DEC_2000_SF7 _U_DP1& ds_name=D& -tang=en. 3. Emil Malizia and Jack Goodman, Mixed Picture' Are Higher-Density Developments Being Shortchanged by Opinion SurveVS?IWashington, D.C.'. ULkfie Urban Land Institute, July 217001, p. 72. 4. Smart Growth America and National Association of Realtors®, 2004 American Cemmuniry Survey: National Survey on Communities IWashington, D.C'. Author, October 20041- 5- Robert W. Burchell et al, The Costs of Sprawl, 20001Weshington, DA: National Academy Press, 20021. 6. Sam Newberg end Tom O'Neil, "Making the Case." Multifamily Trends, vcl. Q no. 3, Summer 2003, p. 47. 7. "Gchwarzenegger Emb2ces 'Smart Growth' Ideas to Curh Sprawl," CNN.cem, Inside Politics, November 21, 2003. 6. Mark Muro and Rob Puentes, Investing in a Better Future. A Review of the Fiscal and Cempeutive Advantages o/Smarter Growth Development Patiems IWashington, D.C. Brookings InstiNtion Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy 20041. 9. I:zthleen McCormick and Mlchael Lexese. eds., Charter of the New Urbanism INew York McGraw-Hill, 19991. p. v. 10. Mlchael E Lewyn. "Why Sprawl Is e Conservative Issue. Part 1," The Green Elephant, Summer 2002, p. 1. 11. Bratt Hulsey, Sprawl Costs Us AIIIMedisan, Wisconsin'. Sierra Club Midwast Office, 19961. 12. Ibid., p. 8. 13. U.G. Bureau of the Census and U.S. Deparcment of Housing and Urban Development, 1993American Housing Survey IWashington, D.C.: U.S. Department o1 Cornmerce and 115. Department of Housing and UNan Development, 20001. t4. httpJ/wwwnmhaerg/con[ant/servecontentetmlisPnnterFnendly=l&ISSUe1D=215&contentlD=827. 16. Muro and Puentes. Investing in e Better Future, p. 15. 16. Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class INew Vork: Basic Books, 20021. 17. Tmothy E Harris and Vannis M. loannides, Productivity and MeirepoliMn Density lBoston: Tufts University Department of Economics. 20001, p. fi. 18. National Association of Home Builders, "Market Outlook. Confronting the Myths about Apartments with Faces" IWashington, DC.'. Author, 20011, p. 4. 19. Maxfield Research, A Study in ffie Relationship between Affordable Family Rental Housing and Home Values m the iWin Cities (Minneapolis: Author, November 20001. 20. Alexander Hoffman, The l/rrality ofAmeriw's Nror,Nng Communltias (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studies, 20031. 21. Ashur C. Nelsen and Mitch Moody. "Price Efforts of Apartments on Nearby Single-Family Detached Residential Homes," Working Dra4 (Blacksburg, Vrginia'. Virginia Tech University, 20031. 22. Arthur C. Nelson, "Tap Ten State and Local Strategies to Increase Affordable Housing Supply," Housing Facts & Findings, vol. 6, nc. 1. 23. National Multi Housing Council, "Tahulatiens of 1999 American Housing Survey" IWashington, D.G'. U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,19991. 24. Robert Dunphy and Kmberly Fisher, "Transportation. Congestion, and Density: New Insights." Transportation Research Record, 1996. 25. Institute of Traffic Engineers, Trip Generation, 6th ed., vol. 1 IWashington, D.C.'. Author, 19971- 28. "Haw to Calculate Demand far Retail," New Urban News, March 2004, pp.16-11. 27. U.S. Department of Transportation, Ow Nation"s Travel'1995, NPTS Early Results Report IWashington, D.G: Fedeal Highway Administration, 19971, p. 11. 28. G. Bruca Douglas III, et al., Urban Design, Urban Forms, and Employee Trauel Behavior TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Papers IWashington, D.C.. Transportation Research Boerd,19971. 29-Robert Dunphy, Deborah Myerson, and Michael Pewlultiewicz, Ten Prine~ples for Successful Development Around Trensit(Washington, D.C.'. ULDthe Urban Land InstiMe, 20031. 30. Ibid. 31. Jlanling Li end Jack Rainwater, "The Real Picture of Land-Use Density and Crime: A GIB Application," httpalgis.esri.comAibrary/userconf/prorAO/professional/papers/PAP508/p508htm. 32 University of Alaska Justice Center, "The Strength of Association: Housing Density and Delinquency," Anchorage Community Indicators, series 3A, no. 1, http://ustice-uaa.alaska.edu/ndicators/series03/ aci03a 7. housing. pdf. 33 Elliott D. Pollack and Company, Econornlc and Fscal Impact of Multi-Family Housing (Phoenix: Arizona Multihousing Association, 19961. and Fac, 35 i • ~sa~-~s 34.1000 Friends of Oregon, Do Four-Plexes Cause Cannibalism7Winter 1999, pp. 2-3. 35. Marcus Felson and Richard B. Peiser, Reducing Crime through Resl Estate Development end Management IWashington, D. C- ULI-the Urban Lend Institute, 19971. 36. Oscar Newman, Defensible Space: Crime Prevention through Urban Design Wew York'. Macmillan, 19721. 37. George Kelling and Catherine Cofes, Fixing Broken Wrncbovs: Restoring Orderarrd AeduciruJ Glmerh our Communities Wew York: Touchstone, 19971. 38. Gary Kachaduriao, Debunking the Homeownership Myth (Washington, D_C.: National Multi Housing Council, 19981. 39. American Farmland Trust, Farmland Information Center, National Statistics Sheet, http:/Iwww.farmlandintoorg/ agdcultural_statisGcs/. 40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "EPA Issues Designations on Ozone Health Standards," News Release. April 15, 2004. 41. American Lung Association, "State of the Air'. 2004," April 29. 2004, http:/4ungactionorg/reports/sota04_fulLhunl. 42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "National Water Quality Inventory: 1996 Report to Congress," htmy/www_apa.gov/3056/. 43. Smart Growth America, httpd/smartgmwthamerica-org/openspace.htmlNend. 40._ National Association of Realtorsm, "On Common Ground: Realtors and Smart Growth, Winter 2005', and Trust for Public Land, "Voters Approve $2 4 Bllllon In Open Space Funding," press release IWashington, D.G'. Author, 2004). 45-Robert W. 8urchell et el, Impact Assessment of the New Jersey Interim Sere Development and Redevelopment Plan, Report II: Research Findings INew Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Center for Urban Policy Research, 19921; and Center for Urban Policy Research, The Costs and Bene/i(s of Aliernabve Growth Patterns: The Impact Assessment o7 the New Jersey State Plan INew Brunswick New Jersey: Author, 20001. 46. U.S. Department of Hansportation, Our Nation's Travel IWashington, D. C.: Author, t995L pp.13, 22. 47. H. Frumkin, "Urban Sprawl and Public Health," Public Health Reports, vol. 117, May/June 2002, pp. 201-217. 48. Robert Putnam. Qowling Alone: The Collapse end Revival otAmerican Community INew Vork: Simon & Schuster, 2000). 49. www designadvisor org. 60. David Dlxon, personal interview, American Institute of Amhi[ec[s, Decemher 9, 2004. 51. http://wwwnmhaorg/Content/ServeFlacfmtFileID=162. 52. http://wwwnelessen.org/NAR_web_files/frame.htm. 53. http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p20-553.pd(. 54. htW://www.nmhcorg/contenUservecontentcfm 7issuelD=215&contentitemlD=1828. 55. National Association of Home Builders, "What Remers Want" IWashington, D.C.: Author, 20021- 56. http://www.nelessen.org/NAR_web_files/framehtmNSlide1263.htm. 57. Newberg and O'Neil, "Making the Case," p. 47. 58. Robert E Lang and Jennifer LeFurgy, "Edgeless Cities: Examining the Noncentered Metropolis," Housing Policy Debe[e, val. 14, no. 3. 59. http://www.nmhc.org/contont/servecontentcfmiissuelD=10&coNentitem1O=1007. 60. Fannie Mae Foundation, Results of the Fannie Mae Foundation Affordable Housing SurveylWashington, D.C. Autho[ 20021, p. 2. fit. PricewaterhauseCoapers, Trendsetter Rarorneier INew York. Author, 20011. 36 ~ Ni;herDensitg C~evelep.~eni ~HlgFlel'•D21151ty Development f• Higher density development is enviion ~ e ~` ~ ,~~ -Myth andFact __ ~'"' • ~ mentally more destructive than lower ~" { ° ~ '~ ~, density development ~.^' r .~ s e?. , ~. °REChard Haughey ~ ~• Higher density development is unattractive ~ ~ ° r 1~ ' , v and does~not ht m a low density ~ ~ ,~ , t{" ~ ~' No one IEkes sprawl and the traffidconges community ' ~~ " ~ „' , ' • ~''• . '•.:tion rt creates, yet.proposals for increasing..: _...~Nd one:irrsuburban areas wants `! '~ ~,' ~~ r i ` z 'y:,:~den•srty'in new and'exisLng neighborhoods, ., .~ alit her~iiensit 'develp ment . "often are `squashed bycommunity'fears of g "` y p ~~• .. Higher d~erisity housing•is only for .`,. - .~ 'public housing, c'rimeand`ugly high rises ~+~~ lower income households ~ ~ ' ~ + -~ as. t •,'t ... o,~ ~'H~gher-Density,DeveloPment: Myth and Fac[=< • ~ . ~" x ;';,•,. „~ ', `~~'~• , . `. ~ I ., ~ ": ~° ,.+ " ' " dispels these negatlye_connotatwns, by° ~ .;«• ':'~ ~ ~ ~'' e ~ .nd a --~.companng the advantages+and drawbacks. ~'~`~ ~ ~~ x.:of higher and low density development ,The r r r 14 '~ , «°udefi Hilton of higher density development is ~ ' ~'relaiive to the community the development - ` r ~.' « ~!. IdeaPto'present-td planning officials and civic and neigh- K a Y .~ 'is it it could be single,family homes on I borhood~groups, this presentation will. provide^a better ~ . ~`e~^n~R. '~~ k ~smallerlots} or townhpu'ses and apartments -. - a ( ^k'ti., ~"",.;a : t r ~ - understanding of density and the value it provides -k•~*,e«rr~ 's. °in more populated areas. Bght widespread ~~ - ~ '"'^- n s „ ; ° misconceptions about higher density Bevel `Download. free from www.uli.org/policypapers, '~ .4 ~` ~, -opment are~exammed and dispelled with www.nmhc:org, or wwwsierraclub.org, or _ ^^"" ~' f ~ ' 'Vwell researched factsand~exampleSof high request a CD-ROM- - ~ -% r '. 4 "qualdy compact developments +: -• - '' - . - •~ ,°" « ,; ~; ~.. .. GEVe a~copy of this publication to.others. ~ =sqr N _ , ~' ''Bu a acket of teri booklets for ~ust $19.95! - ~'~'~`~ "~~~~ - t ,Debunk these common'myths~about density y p 1 =h x T CALL 800-321-5011"OR ORDER ONLINE AT ° ~ s•. ~! ~+ "`. t ~,. Higherdensity,development overburdens ,. ,: ,~ .z public schools and other publidse"rvices „ WWW.BOOKSTORE.ULLORG: ~. ,' ~ . ~ ~ T , i and requires more infrastructure support ~' More Mylh. and Fact .Titles from the "° 1 ' '"~ ~° o w tt ~ systems. - ~ •`4 ' F ~ `Urban Land Institute - _ - ~ « ~ ~ z ~ , .. Higher density developments lower Environmen[and Development '• ~ xU `u•.. ~:< - ,> property values in surrounding areas '. My[hand Fact - '.- ~ ~" ' Higher density development creates more 2002/Order #E14 •, i - . ( F regional traffic congespon an"d paiking ~ ~ ~]` ` '~ r~f~ ~ J y .u problemslthan low density development ,~Mlxed-Income HOUSEng:' -"~ T~~~~1 *',~~`~~~~ ` Higher derisitydevelopment leads to ~ i Myth and Fact v~ ~ ' ~~ hEgher came rates ° ' , ~.; 2003/Order #M60 <„ '« mr,~, ~"~F ~~ ~ ~`~ ~-~ ~ "~ '- Urban Infill Housing: - ~^r` ~,~,`S ~a vS ~ ' "ftp "" , p d ` # s •..: ~ Myfh and Fact' - +•- ,•. n u~~. ~~, c < sd~, rc y - r "•;2001/Order #U22 y' ¢ ~"`~;~'.. ' k i k r a a + r a ~: Y ; k ~t b~ tllf d , '' f 2 ^ 5 Y '1° lR. k bYd ~ ~. c ~ ~ p~ j` ti a v n"i ~~ y ~ m «n -~+ xM ~ rMl $*,~ U Y a t r r^'£r, pr E ~ _.~ a-P ~~' i / e ~" d ~ tl in ~Y ~ i 6 r .y x F -~ E ~ ~' r, a A u y n ~ -r « E - '~`~ ~ F%I' ~ "~$ f, S a ,£ ir' § s- _ 's E $ '~ sP Z ? q m l - P'/'~ , ~. r n.., ~' ~e +n ~;` Z c~., ri 1 : ~ ~ vj y ~ ~ n ;, , .1° ro J i .~ .~ t* r v s ~_ rcc 7 tr dr « n, w}t x' r5 { bw "k f , G a ~•x , /5-~ ¢ s ~ t B.{ pd. 9 x 3 ,Ak ~' lb ~ - £ ~ f a ; i' ° F H Porn 4 a. f ay. ,* (" w~', $, ,S. ° a ~ C '°" 4 `C, 4' E '^ ~ ~ ~ n ~1 ~ a i + ,£~ « i ~ ~[v E e f + - £ u 'v ~ 3 at'' .' P 'J•~'Y v r. r ~~..t~ y ~nYR ~. ~~ ~ .. ~°E 1F 'A59~fi '~s+ ",w ~ rtf ~rry J. ° Ott, ~ Sr .~ ( "-, f S~'v ~~k. S Y ~ m q ks °~'~ ~* 5 ~ 1 ~ b , %. «t «q;,~ ri u 9 '~ ~ ax£'~' -. ~~ta d ++* ~ Pt ] '~ ~~~,^,' ~ ixrk-~ ~ ,~ rt. `- a1 d m n ~xy, ~ ' ttYW 'x. ~ ~ rR ~ ~P. ~ a~~ ~ -Order #N27 (Packet of~10 Booklets)' w _ N' ~ ~ ' ~ y , f r fs' - `°~ f ~ i, ~~, , ~' ~ «, ,. "F `Order #N28.~single COPY t ~ ~r ,.r ~ ~n z. .o- ~„'°s "`-< a p ytro a t' ~'~». °" i° ,z '' ~ ~ a.,.,.,~,","~ ~ r s- %`~~. .`';;,,, I ~, r '~.A £ •. t M '~c~y a ~ tti r.` e Y. ~ `x«y lids ~ ,s,. v~'7 ~,$,.pz '^~ r x~„3• x 3ISBN 0-87420 9412 • ~ r , a ,~ s ,~ r. « ~' e a„"v.. e~ a xx -"t}„F~`"+ #". ..~` q , k ~~s r r - ^+, _ r tt a x~ /: url ar •wL ~ ~. tx ~~ w w E ~~ ~~ F r ~., T w}~k Y#x xam e'~ *£ K 4YW Y Y~f '`' }~ - ~ ~„, Y t > F 3.N N-~ iS v a~: xd£tt a .'k F' ,~ ~- c 'S _ a. a 'k d p~ ay r w rfl w6 '"~ ~ x ~r N ' e t w »;'~~ m, wf:k.r,tf x .. L< y.-r ' :. ~ f^r-° -r'«..$`dx Y, ..~•~: erue ~ah « ~ ~ 4f «,' a L ~. 5 D ~ 4 `~. ~tt ;OLI-the Urban Land InstiWle - ~ '~« - ~ . ',~ ~ ~~~ ' x,1025 Thomas Jefferson Street N W ,~ _ 1 r ~Smte 500:West ~ , ' , ~ =S?, Washington,: D C. 200075201 ~ ~ r. _,{ y http://ww'w,uli org ~ y' ,. ~i s -. .,. ~° ~ - , ~ -- • w ~ . 't ~ ~ ,~F d ;~ i RECEN'E~ ON202~06 -- s ~ C`rw` f'-- ~= -- ~ - ---- f_'a.~k_3-=1~-~ C:,I.c~ss'i_£_c~~r., PIS ~ ' - -- -- 6 --~ea~_ o'X,~_1_.I_38~ 2o~~v.Q_C~E:j C.i~,v.n.2__17-u-'-flnQ3:i~ ---- --~4+2.Ld-_~rncs~_C.m_n-r!~_en.~_or~ ~g- 3~i~.Y.o_ L3r~-Ca-~_~b.~i_c ___._ r_,.e.v4,l_,~_on_P~,c~t__3 - 1~ '~~ "~'`~~1_fim.._~~~„~s;~~c,L,e~~.~2a._i_s-~ r-k~e.dL._L~Q,r_8,,,.. _ _v,~e.-h~.,.q_ik'-f+-P ~ c4 n ~' <.u.~ex~~s~ ~1_l~d_a~r~ e~Q - d _ U~ ~'7 1..._ a.L~~'k~edt_ ~-_i-er~___ s' ~3.Ld_-~ine~~_~a.~_~~ _o t ~~C tticw-.a.l ~ ~ D Qe~~. ar~ meC~i q~-.Y]L~ o O,,n n~ fLe1~~n_ J ~1 ---- tlenc~0~].C.-.-_~~.s~~~ C 1~ S~1~.LP~Qe~~Q~a.'*<i ~a~~t2Ei~ V - LS d-Res.. 1~irrr..- ~ro-~ra~IL2~~1,¢_r-~- ,~_iniiil~e.v_.._ C.cr_v_nrher_.%~~_~fa d --- ~~y~ ~ ~~ . G~N4LL, ~~- t-Q,a.c~_~~$+?..~_QQ_~.S_c:~s~ F'/_~ L'.az~m-~ssi ~+en ? ---- ~.~--S~-ajkaa J~.ask_~t1~~,m.~_'rw~ ~.__T n : ^-y': ~:;r-_~-sn '~F-c, I~ _ ii - ,Q,k~csul.5u~_ +~~ C ern..~ 1 to -~ -~ ^ ~ ~ P.~r~}.m~.~ ~ SSSC.., P < 1 1 ~Pdr~q~5~~~es_ Ja~t r~atir u o_~!- ~r ~ .Q cn:. Q ~~-~ : s a Q ~ -~~ ~ ~ ~ COU,,~d3. -e.a~~ G-~aa~~ i_D` 7~nir~q_.~--- - _.- n 1 ~ A.v.+ u_!1~-9~~~'4n.Q~Q~. wi`I-~i +-~..a_ /-~aQ `,Elr'Pd~ L.tASS1_~Ca Y-im~S~- ` _ ~~~~ _s~~.~ ,-~~,~-tom ~ v-R~=~-1_.Q 5-~-- LtS~dL - ~..e~n,1 a3L_Y_4to-Y_~ _.~i`~-i_re..~.y-P~i-'~'."-- _ - Caa3i~p--~~~s-c~ ~ d --- c^ ~~_ ~ ce~nr~l_~ 4~'~"_'~Q-~3~Stin~~ M-P..c.~k-~ ~c`-~ -~-°ttd! _ - -- - sx~q-`{-eS`~~~.~0.5_~i.Cc+~~i_Brt ~ ~cA~_~~2.~±1.~_~~._¢.a.~Y-¢]'+'_~'~s4'is~lL O ~- _ il7 V ~c~.-. . Y l _ ---- ~ ~-&a.~ ~~.-~.r.~t Fev~-a-~.s " _;~~-~e-x;.s~ C_~~. - ~ ~ ~ --- .-_ c \ I1 c~c,-ve.~t-~m.2..~-1--~.r~vi.t~r m.e.,...X-~~I-Y_cc~.~L:..~'=~5 i.5-~-i.5#-~cSL-~.d-k_c-+~y~ % 0 .---_ n ,.;^, 1~'_~ A_l W_a~9-i..?_-¢~c'~~~ CF~~.Sc~..W~?-~~_~ Ps3_t~a~/~.P C.~:_'_4, ~'vn'~...u,~->~,~°SirR_ei..~iaQ S,.s~w_~in..~_/es..s. 2'rl.u~~~.-Fetw".ly-ll-~a-e. - i ~ ~ } -- n.~,.dL_~~y;i-ar~c:SL 1/_i ~x~(,-~_NocQa..--C~r>~Y A.~i.c,..a' ~ c~ -- i • • ~~~~~~ ~.. -- _-.5~~ _Ce?r_rec~i~io~~-~_J_?=e<~?~--c:<on.Ge~i~.._q d_[~ V,1L -~ l.`ieS_tG o ~a. s ~_ _ ~. _ --- e ~ u l - _ _ _ _ci~z~,.o-.~ er. rocs-[ ~_ s}_tn_a._I_o__v,-L a~c~,.. - Cam-~~- ,LC m~ ~~ ~..1, h ~ erC ~z~SI=S~,_.~ ~ _ _ _ _- /v n ,. _ S./.-~.Gr +±1-._r+~03_pC~tsiX_` 1^~¢?f'_rd..._ ~ `V».Ln u.~:.._~ V.ifc3.~~_~N'lo~.o~a- ~~ /_T~SO_t M'~a~_ _ ~ ~Ut.',$_Y.~-C~_.4-~.a.,6,G~.G~ ~_._~ v-~a.. ._ -- I I ." ~2a~<=w2cr /.Gig=n., , ~.~F_i aR c<~~~ _ , , .__ -- --L < ' a . A ~ tQ 2 1_Sb Q Qi. ~-- mot ~ -p r .*+-~'~r JY _ - - ,~~n __ __ nn /l1~ ~' ~ n ~ S!.!~Q-O~-S-'"R~.~. ~3-I.~a ~'_P{c~A_s_.._L3F~~ PA. ~F _J-l~~ I~ Q - 5~~-51 w~2.-t~-5~-a--~.rrttc~Lta~.._»-....~/_5_r_~t 0._V-r~lo1~ .~ 2.cQ,~ss$~livv - -[~c.~.-Y-LO~_~.~ nq._y.~.- R ~_ 1.--~ _. d-R.a_ `1~__~t~-s~tR_oy ~ ~m~.q~.~~R _ 6~-~'n 7~'~_t~-~.~-tea..-o6I~.....,,o w_~~--Ra~J_._l1_A.at ~-_- ` ~~1ri.ut.c~.~..Q_~o.Q .,~ IN-c~a_ _ ~¢r .~ V Ia.¢lt~..<i ..e.a~~_-P. ^~- ~_ n ,- ms`s - Q ~~-+~,?O~' _~i.~ ridgy e~~_ ~ ~ - - - --- q~+~3..icy.~~'+tend~_hA,~_~~e~~.~rn~ta.dZ o~ -~ ~' S- j - T'O-4.ZJ~M_LI1_i.~ip.~C6:000.~~2._~J.f ~.1~ . W_~_9'h Q n ~ y ~ 41e.~ Ci.~ C~.~ N~ =S L) A~C1? =f~µ,i~~- .1.1 1L~'$ -E+-K.'~ Y T __ ~ /~ ~ p n _^ 1 ~ „_ ((f'Y-Yi-a~+U=LG-- ~a~y-~~~$~ __p...4~1t-rLC'._CI.A..~LY _LlP$Y.L 1 ~1 (~ ~ 4_ ~^' (f VTl na gae g ~ LS w . __. _ . -- - i • P la,,ti - P~..~x- s • ~- ~o x 3 - - --- v f~ecw.-~.aum-P~+~±3 V-2_~c,.+_O [~_1 ~-e~ d =~s,_r_n. c~~,~-? V'-'i r Ltl.a.czk-.Q.i}r.r`c~~v.S~- -r-S/~.g~e.-_TC~mi.~y-~_a.~..c.oO--A.a~ ~- ~ V cc~nU.~~ d-~. ..Q~.SLh.:WE6rS_~~f ^ G11~]-~fdll~-~^P/N'~-~ Ch4 NIXrlP.11 Q.~S Fc~._ ~ ALL /2~ _ -- -c+- hct,~.~So_rr_,n.~_~sa___wr~~ ~ tti~z°'='°-r.q ~~ pp--liuozf w.a..~t_ntc~r~n-< 1- - U ~ I~~.E'sa~'_~c~~~~,(~Si~3.4'-e~.v__~/es~G~-1E-0-Y?~'~E1.~~.~.Qi.~T' ~4ib_fi~G^ su tty°~i_q ~i6.o~iQac~.S~_~oa.., ~~ ~ a-..~.i ~ n d! `f ~- =n~y - 1 s ~ y- Co~`~ s~,_Q 1~1 a r~~ i S ~O t~f] e 4'4'G3 ~1~. ~ ~`~LS-~- - UC2L rlq _Gl]~B1R.Q_ZcicII._~L~/Larye. ~ LAND CLASSIFICATION PLAN INTRODUCTION Pnrr 3: Land Classircarion Plait describes and establishes different land classifications to be applied appropriately across Camtel's planningjurisdiction, similar to a future land use plan. The tent "land classification" is used instead of "land use" because each classification integrates both land use and development form This hybrid approach for _~ classafymg land will result in a better system for managing land development.( /v ~ ~„~ +n.r~ Pr'° v~rL , The following land classifications are used on the Land Classification Map: 1. Parks and Recreation ................... ........... pg 25 2. Conservation Residential ............... ........... pg 26 3. Suburban Residential .................... ........... pg 27 4. Urban Residential ........................ ........... pg 28 5. Multifamily Residential ................... ........... pg 29 6. Neighborhood Service Node ........... .......... pg 30 7. Institutional Node ........................... .......... pg 31 8. Community Vitality Node ................ .......... pg 32 9. Employment Node .......................... .......... pg 33 f0. Regional Vitality Node .................... .......... pg 34 11. Cora Support .................................... ......... pg 35 12 Secondary Core ............................... ......... pg 36 13. Primary Core .................................... ......... pg 37 Land Classification Map The Land Classification Map is described on page 38, followed by the map on page 39. Land Classifications and Descriptions Each of [he land classifications listed above have a page dedicated to describing how it can be used to manage growth and development. Further, the following headings are used, as described below, to convey the essence of each classification. These descriptions are intended to be conceptual. Purpose: This section gives the reader a brief description of why the land use classification has been established. Geographic Location: This section conveys where each classification is best uuhzed within Carmel's tannin Lend Uses: This section describes the general land uses tha~ would be permitted in the classification. The zoninK ordinance would indicate specific land uses permitted. hrtens' Dens :This section describes the intended intensity ~of commercial uses and density of residential uses that would be fining ofthe classifica[ion. The zoning ordinance may utilize more than one zoning district to regulate each classification. Esemples: This section strives to convey one or more developments in Carmel to represent the classification. All examples may not be exact matches, but represent the most similar in intensity and density. Appropriate Adjacetrt Classifications: This section describes the land use classtfications that are best used adjacent [o the subjec[classification. Three categories of compatibility exist. "Best Fit" are classifications that are most suited for adjacency. "Good Fit with Attention [o Transitions" are ~#'3 classifications [ha[ can be adjacent to the subject classification, but must be carefully regulated to ensure [he transitions work. The third category are those land use classifications not listed, which represent classifications that are not appropriate adjacent to the subject classification. Structure Features: This section identifies critical structural features [hat help achieve the purpose of the classification. Most statements are in regard to height, mass, or form of the structure. I Structure Orietdation On Site; This section addresses where the footprint of [he structure is located. Options typically include centralized (setbacks on all four sides), zero lot-line j (front, rear, and one-side setback), build-to (specific front ~ setback), or no setbacks (the structure can cover the entire ~ site). I DeselopmeM Features: This section denotes requirements of subdivisions, planned unit developments, or development ~_ plan projects. Typically, whole-development standards are~^ I described.(7^#C-~5'Pact~;G,~,lty a.~re~ pip ;iA $V'1'T1 C'[1~-1 bTSj G1.NCQ11 L41~!'.~L'-N~Fy$~ Regulation Implementation: This section escribes how the I City's development regulations will implement the land use j classification's intent. #) v juns action. Some descriptions are vague because they can ~G, ~1~..e~ ~~osc~ i•v-w'IL ~Q~,~-~-Q~ ~,~R ~,. ~_ be widely applied, while others are very specific to ^, ' 1 geographic locations., ~~ ~~ ll'' n~.p, p Mo'JGtrhwwr ~~~5~,~ allow-e.~(1, H-e~.r t+-"t-^~ W l~ !~ y{p~ ~ Or-2~L~-C~M9..- el'f1.t:0 ? t.~t'N.5 i ~ I r vt~ a''r5 Ll ~ r Y~o.~ ~ y~ LG !'~-$ . clCwn7~'r cc.Q #3 71 s.::o .ae.c~..cr i n ~, ~1-e s bwNHes. `l~ee2„ N-z- r.,o-~F :m J-tw L_C~IYI r ttr. cC L.%~r~o cQr,U c.QRa whwd' ~.wr~~,-ti..•l.zs "eocz~~lly rz.;~L~a,~~.~"? za r~nrurr~aw;i.,noi~~~ d 0 ~C' MFGi •`~'~-za.2i CT.,~, '~z_ Zvn', r~Qy ` r"Lgp cQ~srnu.~D- Lr~-.-L P~.s~~W~~ r~l ~~o-'=a-~. FS'Iw.m.lO ez Se?ern-Y,Q.~r~ C',oy,a~ F1Np -ak-e~~ ~'Vv'- /l.o cvr~mer-c.;~ ;„~y„ds,vi c.~u+ cvE wQSC,~irea~w ~` Purpose • To identify consen'ation areas and to establish areas for private and public parks and recreation. Geographic location • Distributed throughout Carmel, especially in proximity to high and medium density residential areas. 7.~ Land Uses • - ~y/L. • Parks, greenways, golf courses, and [he like. Intensity/Density • No[applicable. Examples • West Park, Central Park, and Hazel Landing Park. Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Any land use classification. Structure Features • Not applicable. Structure Orientation On Site • No[ applicable. Development Features • Protect existing(pre-developmen[)environmentalfeatures. • Enhance the natural environment. Regulation Implementation • Utilize traditionalzonint;toregulate[hisclassification. W~a.w aQ eJl~_r-++a i n, >.~¢-~ Pry Va~sj y -owvr `~ ~ ~ ~ U C°"-''°°° ,°.Y.,g3^'CX- v~tr~l- coot bZc•L laJ n~NS- C«S.,a.A ~o ~ S'r Zen-t,-eA. P ~+-~-~. cr-Qs~v~ic ov-e~1.~,N~~>..e~,,.~-. O,u, i s c~ C.o r F a.-(' , cu-. dL b o d-'•\ c>_r~e~ 50 .a~-~ - C~,rti,~.¢s~f-~tztA l y ~ ~ o c~z~_ . ~` r~L~Q-i J~'r c+~.wQ R~ac,~r~., I_-' „"°•^,.ocd r~ur- 'c4,~ d-o b-~ Aa~l- a.c.t.~.iz, ~-q-Q-~ .;,,...i-k-e.. Rw,aR-t-~ d ~~,-,~c c~ w row t~,,,,_,Q tN>ti:k:Z. t ~~ ~.~ ~ .~~e ~~ jam , prnper4' thar it c lassifred ns Pru'ks and Rerrealiori. nadrraljeatures are b/ended with a plavgmrrnd .rhe6ers, and other parkJbcilities. C.i MpIkL CO]50LI U,UtU f pyl'Nlll6 UIPL PLA\ 38 PARKS AND RECREATION _.... __....,r,... ~ ~„• , rt,,, <v~n rtecreanon cl.cssrpralion it die splash prvk lLmrrence II:' Mlosv pord-i an l3 /sl SYrz.•r ensr o1 //ncel Dell ParAvgr. CONSERVATION RESIDENTipI Purpose • To establish housing opportunities for people who desire estate residential, rural living, or living in close proximity to natural features. Geographic location • Dominantly utilized in west Carmel. Land Uses • Single-family detached residential only. IntensirylOensiry • Residential development will be less than I.0 dwelling unit per acre. Examples • Bridlebourne (northwest of 106th St. and Shelbourne Rd.) • Laurelwood (southeast of 106th St. and Ditch Rd.) Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation, Conservation Residential, Suburban Residential, an nshtuhonal Node. • Good Fit with Attention to ransi[tons: i~~~l o6d fie. Structure Features Sxa- P, 3l • Maximum three stories. • Gabled roofs. • Structures are generally wider then they are deep. • Front facade generally facing public right-of--way. Structure Orientation On Site • Centralized building envelope. Oevelopmetrt Features • Minimum of IS%open space in subdivisions. ~ • Protect existing{pre-developmen[)environmentalfeatures. • Guest houses and detached facilities are permissible on estate-sized lots. Regulation Implememation • Utilize traditional zoning to regulate this classification. ' ~' on P ~-- a - ~ o b~ ems-; ~ i, a s~ .aR-e,..JI-B- r-e~l- la o_ ,r;.., ~t-ox~ r+~; d-y d-o Cew,se~v-~-'~-e,~ (Lesi~Q~Q,d (:~ww.c_ ~Si-+id-~.:F~~ov,.a.Q IJe~-~.zY .~-ev,ti ~;(3c-dt-F,,;,k.„ Z6 ('iTY OF C:A0.VLL, I,ADIA4.A Carmel. F'.u F t ~~ o; G -~ ~'~ lots [hat mqr he locnlyd milhi~[ ~a uolnleAOn (urge es[a(es. SUIiURBpN RESIDENTIAL - ~~. /V,i.~,,.bet-ems Ca,,, ,,,~,,,,~ on A~-QOR-Q.~. P2~. ~a Purpose • To establish housing opportunities for people who desire traditional subdivision living. Geographic Location • Dominantly appropriate in west and east Carmel. a,r-,cQ, Land Uses Soul{,-ce"`'F''nk C-c+~r•.zQ,t • Single-family detached residential only. ~ ~0'' ~' ~~~% Intensity/Density • Density in platted subdivisions will be bet 1.0 a X4.9 dwelling units per acre. 2cun`~'~'_ ~-+o-o broadt„ Examples Dc:r~i~t+~ ~'"i' ~aq ti~, • Claridge Fauns (between Clay Center Rd. and Hoover Rd.) /„ r • Bentley Oaks (136th St. and Oak Ridge Rd.) a 103 w) ~~!- Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fi[: Parks and Recreation, Conservation Suburban Residential- lirhan Recidnnri~l 1 Structure Features Good Fit withAttention to Transitions: Community Vitality Node and Employment Node. rj ~+' ~ • Maximum two stories. • Gabled roofs. • Structures are generally wider then they are deep. Structure Orierrtation Dn Site • Centralized building envelope. • Front facade generally facing public right-of--way. Develepmem Features • Minimum of20%open space in subdivisions. • Predominant use of curvilinear street layout. • Integrate with existing (pre-development) environmental eatures-. I ~'li5 5l,awldl- Spy "(sre {-ec~F," Regulationlmplemetrtation v • Utilize traditional zoning [o regulate this classification. • Establish two or three residential zoning districts to provide hierarchy within this classification. o~r:~~. within the Suhurhnn Residential classification. er-°- I.~j ice' ~, 59_ -~ CANNEL CO>50 LII)~YrLU t'0 )IPFIII[?51Pt I'L.-AA 4) wr mrger tots, representing the loezr end gldrnsit}~ allowed in the Saburhnn Residentiol classification. npiccrllr b~ii(7 nn ate-Urirrl~rrre lntr, represent mid-ranpre,/en.rOr: e ulloo-ed rn the Suhurhnn RmsidnrtlrJ tdnssiJicntimr. Swb~b~. 2es'~ ~.e,,,.~ti a.Q - p, a~ 1 Vl „ S i ~ ~~ - - "T t • lYl ' ' _ - eN l I S - ll ~~ ' 1 ~ J- !J `~ i. V l~ it URBAN RESIDEnTIpL Purpose • To establish housing opportunities for people who desire historic neighborhoods or new subdivisions modeled after traditional neighborhood design. Geographic Location • Utilized primarily near Old Town and in developments modeled after traditional neighborhood design. Land Uses • Single-family detached residential. • Townhouses or similar residences (up to 15%). • Two-unit residences (up to 5%). Intensity/Densiry • Density in platted subdivisions will be between 5.0 and 6.9 dwelling units per acre. peyvs;~s, 51wu.1rA 5'#~o.r~Cw Examples I ~-, o t,i,~ c~r,,e,., • Old Town Carmel • Portions of Village of Wes[ Clay (13 ] st St. and Towne Rd.) Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation, Suburban Residential, Urban Residential, Multifamily Residential Nei hborhood Service Node, Institutional Node, an ore Su art • Good Fit withAttention to Transitions: Community Vitality Node. Structure Features • Maximum two stories. • Gabled roofs. • Structures are generally deeper then they are w • Front facade must face public right-of--way. Structure Orientation Dn Site • Centralized, or zero lot-line building envelope. DevelopmetrtFeatures ~~~~ • Minimum o 10%open space n subdivisions. • Grid ormodifie gn street ayout. • Predominant use of alleys for garage access. • Two-unitstruc[ures,ifused, will only be permitted and must have asymmetrical designs fitting the i ~~ • 1gQOks Regulation Implemetttatian • Utilize hybrid (traditional and form-based) zoning this classification. ®Clou=t~ tN`-latw~- r aca-e-. ~ p ,gyp v r /l~ n ~~5~ ro'bnn residential cnnrec :Vote tlrru (he sn'ucture is designzd to fit vv..aX ram NUC ~ 1 S 7lre jorm of ;r smRle fmnilr neiglrborhoud The photo i.~~ from r)r. t\ ~+~~ owl SiZ+c,,a~ ~~'t5r11-rs fs l7eridiun-A~esder a~eixhhm~hoad in /ndimrarrnlir. ~''~ ~ ~p~ d~?~~rn~~,t,r,6a,,,. ~? S 0. Go-~ Fes-'' .$-w- 5~..6u.r-b~ (2es;~e~,-,x-;1,S2.t b..ut ze _ ~ iri r,re c~usi ei., ismwn ~~ ~`1-a~-fl.n~•2n~-7<;' •` ~ I-o ~-ec~ P,gLi SJ~ r~q ~ ~- c~.PN¢.~o-w+-r en.a7l•~ P-nv?rpy, m e-~JkwQ ~ec~woe5 '' w c~S 5 ~.cRdt-~,,,-1 ~ QO m % dfe~4- ~ e-re„ r ne msronc resJrtennn! nrens in clw~e prorimirn to Old down nceurotefw'eJ]ect theJorm of Urban Residential. Snme reridenfinl nrens in Nre !'i(inge of Nes7C/ ojnex~l}~ consJrJrcted Lirban Residemial jorm. MULTIFAMILY RESIDEtIT1Al Purpose • To diversify housingopportuni[iesforyoungprofessionals, transitional families, empty nesters and workforce housing (e.g. teachers, fire fighters, police officers). Geographic Location P Nedl.o.n ~ ~ r n • Utilized throughout Carmel, nor~l-Iv-Ca~:i~C.oc-.~-2. • Most appropriate near highways, urban centers, parks, vitality centers, and schools. Land Uses • Town houses. • Condominiums. • Apartments. Itrtensity/Density • Density in developments may be 7.0 dwelling units per acre or greater. _ - ~ ¢.edC, (,t,~asr I.. r rn , i- Examples North Haven (96th Street and Gray Road) I ~J, i,L$' ~~~ q,c, • Providence at Old Meridian (pu.D) 2a• Loy w/ a,ca-~ • Townhomes at City Center (City Center Drive) Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation uburban Residential rban Residential, MultifamilyResidenta, etg orhoodService Node, Institutional Node, Community Vitality Node, and Core Support. • Good Fit with Attention [o Transitions: Employment Node, Regional Vitality Mode, Secondary, and Primary Core. Structure Features • Maximum two stories, or three stories ifcontext reflects the same scale. , Structure Orientation On Site • Centralized, zero lot line, or build-to front line building ~ envelope. DevelopmentFeatyre~ a. ~~~- N ~,Yi 7 ; • Minimum of~{{5% pen space in subdivisions, a d si lax percentage in unplatted development (e.g. condominium). • Protect on-site quality environmental feat res. wl, jg Regulation Implemetrtation "'' °`~-'1.q ~' ~• r~ow-7 i~ ca»~s~s•i~e-w~. • Utilize hybrid(traditionalandform-based)zoningtoregulate this classifcation. l /~ / ~" i q~u5d- P/IC i5'l~i r.c? cQ,P~...S~ ~ m~+ d-~.._. DoCS li5~t- i5 I.B~cQ. C-I vd'~'(.e~ KoSev~e., a~F- Ge-t..~'v- Co,.sdLaS CAxNFI CO]SOLIO,ATE~ COAOB[Ht?SIPt I'L.U 39 aeuuJamilr Kesidenrinl. rs n good example oJ'haw :4hdtrjamily Residentlal can he used in close proximity to Core Suppor! and Serondmp Core clnssifrcn(ions. darn/opmrnt.;7ldrouKl+i/dorrsn iTt the nvdilionnlla'nr oj~ lhrGifmnih Residentia/. it a Quid he appropriate in seleet /a atiorr.v. ~~ ~~ ?• A ~• ~C Sl ~-n. ~, • rv.nx~mumcwostones. ? • Gabled roofs, unless incorporated into a traditional 7 a- 'l~rn-ha-o6Z Service, vioc~e5.' 'r1-~4- VIn3C, Ga»~mzt-~ neighborhood development. Ciao rzrc=o- J-Rc~t~ h-eS;~Qe ,~5 ~~e~ -{-o%d2, wn5 • Context sensitive materials. .• n hPa ~~~o+-Il (Yt)K-SP~Ni 75 SI-~trW~'+ m~'!'r~ Structure Orientation On Site • Centralized building envelope unless incorporated into a LC7h o,.o ~."(-0,,.,,,,,,,~„~yy~j,-+a,f:~ No~.:~ /9d- , d traditional neighborhood development. cu.~ Bv<r~fL `Qe^"5' ~ ~ .3+ ~ u.n7'•'S ~ au~e-t • Buffering adjacent residential uses as sary. .{-Q-o_ ~/t-u G is ~ rv c~c~t.~ e,l Sy~~~,,, o,,, ~-j~, i]evelopmemFeatures 5'7~>J~~tc+gN'n-.y. ~ n~c.~ n.o `~(,t,.~{,Q,,,`.' ~,,,~ (Zes;~F,.ak;~~.C' • Strip development is discouraged. i I' • Great sensitivity [o traffic circulation, lighting, signs, and' 5 ,5 4z<Q wo ~ e~~5 t ~' e,5 ~ p~"`'`~'t-PR` .T. 6 ~..~~-~k connectivitycwdL.how-s n~opeh..,{-:o~., jt•9 ~~+-~..ac.'Yle„~hb.~~-1-,ooiQ S'r~m+-tco.N~~eo , • Excellent pedestrian connectivity to and through the site. PRPrEGT Ek+ST'iNC, E~tlv~Ron~HEnrr~L FE/+TicRES z~-l'Cc,,~- ~ ,}~ (,, L, k.1 ac~.¢- , /U2f V~{vr 7 5 , Regulationlmplemetrtation • Utilize hybrid (traditional and form-based) zoning to regulate ~ra~+r-+~a. ~ We.sw ~~ ' this classification. ._ , _. - ~ ~ - - ,,,_,;. __« 1 ` ao ,~inur t~~a~aa., nm.~c~ '~~., \Jou ~'l a.i/~2- h2 ~, -greS~m °_. ~ ~-. .__ -_. t~-eS~Re^..,-'t-s ~o.~e'F w~+~ ' -db ~~v-e-j- -Iv Gev.,.,-~c;~;~,Q uses, Pa~LO11 ~ 05jec~l~ve. /,oZ = Nsrv s SFxa+aJd? r~o~F hc~ in ~roxin;,~ rb C~Set~d4-i'tn Pees- NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE NODE C NSN~ t ;.. Purpose t.lsl To establish areas for school and other institutional ~T campuses, and municipal facilities. ~~ Geographic Location • Spot-utilized throughout Carmel. Land Uses ~ ~ 5'h'-~ u^"&"r l~ EmProyy Me•wt NarRc.. Church, school, library, and hospital campu3. ~~ Federal, State and local government facilities.: • Emergency services. Intensity/Density j • Context sensitive. J Examples • Carmel High School • Our Lady of Mt. Carmel ApprapriateAdjacen[Classifications S~.b~c~,,.~ res. a,..dL • Best Fit All classifications except Conservation Residential ~ • Good Fit with Attention to Transitions: Conservation Residential.r nw+dt S:..,biwr8e,..... ReSi~Cr~...*1•.k. Structure Features • Contextsensitive. Needl. 1~e•i~l.*- I~.~-rii-. ~ i Structure Orietrtation On Site • Contextsensitive. j Development Features • Context sensitive. Mixes in use are generally allowed but should be related to I ~'a'• the pnmary use. For instance, a church could have a j parsonage, book store, or day-care center integrated into the campus. • Pedestrian connectivity from surzounding uses. ® Regulationlmplemernation ~ • Utilize hybrid(tradi[ionalandform-bazed)zoningtoregulate this classification. S wb ~..:-Qsa.,,. res ; •a<,,..~ r.~z.~2 d -o be.. ~ ecw;1 ~"'v0" ~ ~r~~ ~1-F.'~ r.~,o I i kz e l ec>f-~i ca,C S+nlo s'~w~.-aws ~cQ J-~, I ~ kes o-~ `F-Q a. wry-~-~- W-ow~- / r,-,u n; P a,Q eamQ l eiu %n W esd% Co~c-m_c-Q . YYI 0. ^ c,~w-r-cR. e5 ~i-~a,•k- ~-e wr.o•cv I i /ta, C-or.~ rvr wn ~ tl-~ CC.v~i~4W- . ~ #3 A6i~ •` frodd-e,c-* exs sd-;.~ C,n.v,,•.o~me...xrR '~ecvl-~u -s .r f AR,VFL lpASOLIU:AT!U CO?1PNtHL~91A6 YLA]' 01 INtTITUTIONAL NODE and represen(s n/orm Iha( could be incorporofed info nearly mry rota in (he Ci(}~. cnurt~nes are the norm and nre aced jnr (ong dura(ions ererr do}'. The Caps(am C~ j' and Books(ore ie n food rsomple oja.rva uses incorpora(ed into ~r chm'c-h, COMMUNITY VITALITY NODE D o n o^i- tni x w i ~i. re.~- p iv~nc:.e : d-o Pur ose Fden~IJ6c~r(-V.oocfL S~rvicx. Na•Qe,~, P ~, • To establish areas forcommunih~-serving apd~r~igh~ rho'gd~' ~)~~ commercial development with opportunity to integrate mixed uses. Geographic Location • Most appropriate near major~r(~horoughfares. land Uses • Dominantly retail, service, office, entertainment, restaurant, and institutional. • Residential is allowed, but only on upper floors. ~ Intensity/Density Ne-e`~s ~+°dc''t' Si zs-I~..~t t~ ;sr 9.ot..Q ,ki 6¢, a-II owedi neix-I- a-o t-eS;~C' el • Commercial intensity is limited by the maximum buildit envelope, maximum impervious surface, and on-site parkit requirements. • Residential density in developments should not exceed 10 units per acre and must be in upper floors. °` Examples • Merchants' Square ~, g ) s w~so I7ste<A a • West Carmel Center - ~ R ) on ~ V ?#-wl i • Brookshire Village Shoppes Q Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation, Multifamily Residential Neighborhood Service Node, Institutional Node, Communiq Vitality Node, EmploymentNode, and Regional Vitality Node • Good Fit with Attention to Transitions: Suburban Residential. and Urban Residential. Gore, S...Ppor+t-Z- listl~e~4 Structure Features as ~~GooR~y,., -~, ntsN..amdl • Maximum two stories, or three stories if context reflects the same scale. Structure Drientation On Site • Context sensitive with the following options: centralized or build-to front line building envelope. Development features • Strip development is discouraged. • Facilitate automobile and pedestrian accessibility. Regulation Implemerrtation • Utilize hybrid(tradiiionalandform-based)zoningroregulate this classification. ® W~,tk, lo.o u./act-e-. resirl~e~.~i•.R <4.z„s~+t-y Q.w~t-r~-O IInu~CM Cpv+me.rT-l nP. y,icnsr~,~}' v-Ra.ax_ .aY.o..~CR ~a.~ I;,.;! `~zcQ in woaw Corn.aSL do a~.or.~ u..s. Y-~-1. ® /-re~oQ dP'.^-o~c'f zn~.l5't'i r•q Ewv(~(`tr,~mv-.~oF~(,Q ~P1Jk'1.4C¢q rr~ 31 ~ ('ITS OP C.\R4rl_ I\DL\\.\ nranri',tndes. /Arr ore too lnrge to he inttyrared inm neighborhoods, hn1 dre !aa snml/ to c rmr p(o~op e rorn n /urge r~~ion W 4 ~~~ /~A. ~c+-RtA . ~-I-o~s ~o c:5 '1"jl i s te,,,~1v--- !Q-i TTES" T1~vn ~f'{.y 5V-f; `1 Ge.N.hCr- SIION3Y'1 Oil ~. ~~ 0.S CiV Yie^~l,b~rl.e,7,dl, Serv;c~. Noa21_~ ~. EMPLOYMENT NODE Purpose • To establish areas for large i regional employment with employment-serving mired use GeographicLacation • Predominantly in central Carmel • Most appropriate near highwa; excellent accessibility. land Uses ~: Professional and business office Hos rtal and medical office. • Office-supporting commercial( coffee houses, print shops, ant directly support office uses). • Residential is allowed, but only Intensity/Densiry • Commercial intensity is limited envelope, maximum impervious s requirements. • Residential density in developme units per acre. Examples • U.S.31 Corridor • Parkwood Crossing East Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation, Ne. Institutional Node, Community Vi Node, and Regional Vitality Node. • Good Fit with Attention to Transitic Multifamily Residential, and Core Structure Features • Maximum eight stories. • Minimum fourstories along U.S. 3 Structure Orientation On Site • Centralized withsi nificantsetback DevelopmemFeatures~"' he$ • Parking should be located where ii aesthetics. Strong pedestrian connectivity ro ornce-supporting commercial uses, parks, plazas and side path system. Secure and sheltered bicycle parking, and shower and changing facilities for bicycle commuters. Regulation Implemetttation ~ • Utilize traditional zoning to regulate this classification. ~l F~oSp;~.Q rs 0.1So Iisdecif t.un/Rxr' Sns`}~'}..~1+UV.~ Where rS-o hoi~e_Js -}-1-F? N BcQ2•. areas. CiR~ItL COA1OLIUAItU CO?IIB[IIG'p11Pt YL 1T ]3 teaurm-xcale oJJire nerves regiorralenrpln}~nrent needs irhile providingaronlerFS'ensiliretruns'ition to neighboring residemiol REGIDNAL VITALIT1r NODE F1lr-e~6~ c.ov¢redl- t.~.~cQ~ Purpose Co*^••,'~tt{y Vi+41i+.~ N•x¢.e., d y,/ • To establish areas for regional-serving 9ua~C~~~iyit}f Set~yx~g•commercial development with opportuniq~ to integrate mixed uses, including residential. • To accommodate outdoor life-style centers and similar development trends. Geographic location • Most appropriate near highways and major thoroughfares with excellent accessibility. Land Uses • Retail, service, office, entertainment, and restaurant. • Residential is appropriate when master planned into the development. Intensity/Density • Commercial intensity is limited by the minimum land area, maximum building envelope, maximum impervious surface, and on-site parking requirements. • Residential density is limited to 16.0 units per acre. Examples Hottia d.o row 0.,.y,.;,,,,_ ~. y~ieyy • ClayTerrace(146thSt.andU.S.31) na-t+.bvss ? West Carmel Ce~neter Michigan Rd. and 106th St.) SAS°olist~. G ~mu.nr ~/~ta.1i Node pp prate latent lassr rcattens ~ {`/ • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation, Institutional Node, Community Vitality Node, Employment Node, and Regional Vitality Node. • Good Fit with Attention to Transitions: Multifamily Residential, Neighborhood Service Node, and Core Support. $[NCtUre Features • Maximum three stories, or eight stories if within the U.S. 31 corridor overlay. • Front facade generally facing public right-of--way. Structure Orientation On Site • Centralized or build-to front line building envelope. Development Features • Strip commercial is discouraged. • Facilitate automobile and pedestrian accessibility. • Protect on-site quality environmental features. - No~- Regulatien Implementation r+'s~ni-i°n ~ u.,~,~y,Q,-• G`omn~w.~t~y V:~ia.li Norte... • Utilize hybrid (traditional and form-based) zoning to rbgulate this classification. 36 CIT1 OY C ~RVIf L, LApl.AC.A . r.r~ rerruce rv a regmnat aesnnahon becnure i! has numemux nnlional, regional, and loci) c/rain retail shops. Predominatel~q people reach thisdestinatlon b}~ vehic/e, wlrich is (epicnl nja Negiautl 6~InlrN Node. designedJor pedestrian comjor! outside the parking areas. t ne (.r4'rs conmri(led In a higlrer.cmndard jor architectural de.~i~nr and r•cjerq'rtpical corporate hrrmdLrq architecture. r Purpose • To establish areas for urban mixed-use development transitioning away from the Primary and Secondary Core land classifications. The predominant uses are residential or commercial uses withlowerimpact. ~e~l~~• Geographic Location • Exclusively utilized in central Carmel. Land Uses • Residential and office uses are allowed on all floors. • Retail, service, office, entertainment, restaurant, and institutional uses are allowed on ground floors. • Live-work units. • Public surface parking lots are allowed behind buildings. Intensity~Densiry v~`([ Residential density is limited by the maximum building envelope. Jp~' G Commercial intensity should be sensitive to adjacent classifications. Examples • Townhomes at City Center (City Center Drive) J (o,H wjar • AMLI at City Center (City Center Drive) 1 7 97 K. ~ ciu Appropriate Adjacent Classification • Best Fit: Parks andRecreatio UrbanResidentia Multifamily Residential, Institutional Node, Cores Support, Secondary Core and Primary Core. • Good Fit with Attention to Transitions: Nei hborhood ? Service ode, Employment Node, and Regional Vita tty o e. / Structure Features ~ • Maximum three stories. • All facades facing a public right-of--way must have at least '~, two windows per floor. , Structure Oriemation On Site I • Front facade built [aright-of--way. i DevelopmemFeatures Minimum of 10%usableopen space in developments. • Off-street parking is partially supplemented by on-street pparking. CC^^ ~DD 1"r~}ec# t?irc3^t+ ewv it`o n rn evv.JzaJl '7-teed-e.~rES, Regulation ImplemeMati~ • Utilize form-based zoning to regulate thisclassification. ~J - ~ C~IEi~~~~F ~! /.ivehvork units are an excel/ent form ojdevelopment (o help hnnsi(ian away from A'imn!V ar 5'econdarv Care classifica(ions. ® r@~. d-o /S°7o - oCe.v,se. dL~ve,(e.~sm~s%F; .. u-50..b j~ rr ' ~-R.', 5 i 5 H'I'.s.. -~+'WSn- ~ rw>-. S to-e. SAP tn. ~l-~iaJl-~ .,-, P~,.,'d-~ em e°Q . r'tM.ePs a-B r-v4.c.~1- i 5 c.a ~w.-`1ecQ a.o o.eeu S Pages- i S ; n~Caec>2- r..oW itsn.~,le, 5 ~cR a,o ~e_d-~.>(-; a., o-n cQ 5 ~Q r S s 5 dpi s 5 ac-w't-i P ~ ~ak„~~r~,~o~P,~rE~~o~,,,`~e,>~,~E,•~a> ~a r"oack- 1 can es , CORE SUPPORT to transitiat mray~Jrom mare urban derelnpmen(. cteretupnmrus. such us Ver/civ nt Cin-Crn(er, ore o good erantple aJ" Cm~e .S~yrpm'l. SECONDARY CORE Purpose • To establish areas for an urban downtown with intense commercial and dense residential uses. • Secondary Core can serve as a transition away from Primary Core, or can be its own urban area without Primary Core. Geographic Location • Exclusively utilized in central Carmel and limited use at [he Village ofWestClay. (VWc~. Land Uses Retail, service, offices, entertainment, restaurants, and ~ institutional are allowed on ground floors. • Residential, retail, service, office, entertainment, restaurant, e.; •" ~. and institutional uses are allowed on upper floors. t~ • Public parking garages are allowed behind buildings. Intensity~Density _ S~a..~ ~,,~ Pri M~ Co+~ • Residential density is limited by the minimum land area and maximum building envelope standards. • Commercial intensity is limited by the minimum land area and maximum building envelope standards. Ettamples • Village ofWestClay'scommercialcore (FORM ONLY, • Old Town Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation, rban Residential Institutional Node, Core Support, Secondary ore and Primary Core. • Good Fit with Attention to Transitions: Multifamily Residential. Structure Features • Minimum two stories and maximum four stories. • Ground floor facades must be pedestrian friendly and utilize significant glass. ®• Wide facades must have architectural relief. Structure Orietttatian On Site • Front facade built to right-of--way. DerelopmentFeatures - Sa,,a, ao Pr;t~~c~ C~r~ • Outdoor seating for restaurants is encouraged.d • Outdoor storage is prohibited. • Parking is generally provided off-site in parking facilities AAD ~ ~ro~r*eePixISV+11,,~~ BegulationlmplemeMatfofF ~~~~G"~ ~"`~`"`e$, ~., < "~~ A,NLI o! Old Toum is a represenls.Secandarv Hismric huilding.r inppO&7 Torre rn~e gooAe((x``nnrples n~~/Secondorc Core. ~ /~-~-%l i.U i [~y. '~ACd.7:~$ P.v-P-n-f - • litilppizefonn-basedzoningrtor~egulatethisclassification. ~ wl.ar2. ,~~e-...,Q.~{L ba- rc1,~,_.,,,Alh H-R~ VW Y.~ .4.p..u-+.c,Q ~Q rtio-•(- lo-e.. c~Qs Qi 38 CITY OF ('{µ111l_, I?DIANA i ~- n.l re_c~ty h n.s. d-o ~c~x- 0.rch~ ~-ecJf-rv-aQ, t~e~.._ajl• U u U w : rRa. +, • ! PRIMARY CORE Purpose • To establish areas for an urban downtown with intense commercial and dense residential uses. Generally, Primary Core will only be allowed in [he single area deemed downtown Carmel. Geographic Location • Exclusively utilized in central Carmel, specifically at City Center and Old Town. j ,,~,p, Land Uses !)ten Retail, service, offices, entertainment, restaurants, and institutional are allowed on ground floors. • Residential, retail, service, office, entertainment, restaurant, l~A ~• and institutional uses are allowed on upper floors. (f~~ Public parking garages are allowed behind buildings or in upper floors if fronting on a streetscape. Intensity/Density - 5<,.h.a. a.o S eco>•.rS~r y Corte, • Residential density is limited by the minimum land area and maximum building envelope standards. • Commercial intensity is limited by the minimum land area and maximum building envelope standards. Examples • Pedcorat City Center • Old Town Shops Appropriate Adjacent Classifications • Best Fit: Parks and Recreation, Institutional ]Node, Core Support, Secondary Core and Primary Core. • Good Fit with Attention to Transitions: Multifamily Residential. Structure Features • Minimum four stories and maximum eight stories. • Ground floor facades must be pedestrian friendly and utilize ' significant glass. ' • Wide facades must have architectural relief - 5.,.. ~, ~'~, Structure Orientation On Site • Front facade built to right-of--way. DevelopmemFeatures- ~,,,,,, ~ 5 ~~ • Outdoor seating for restaurants is encouraged. • Outdoor storage is prohibited. • Parking is generall}~ provided off-site in parking facilities RDD , and on-street. (~ P Pixi Sd: f-o.v~t~smewk'c,R Y-e.n,'4rw-reg. Regu7'atton mplemetrtation~ • Utilize form-based zoning to regulate this classification. ...,..., h,..i:...,..~......._,.., c~.,>r~,,.,,t- tea. lAN>iLL COP_vOL1U.AItJ ('ppIPNGtltUICl PLA] 9) r ne vra (own Jnops, cun'enlly under cons(ruc(io2 is a good exmnple ajPrinrarv Care. tens u(us7ra(ion Aeprc(s a proposed developmen( in City Cen&r, /j constructed, this building would aecura(ely reflec(the characteris(ics of Primary Care. -il' LANDCLASSIfICATIClNMAP The Land Classification btap on the following page designates the general distribution of land classifications that will help manage land use, community form, and connectivity; and improve quality of life. Specifically, the map depicts the communi[v's land use and development form goals (land classifications) in aconceptual manner. t s ou no[ be construed as reoresentine the ® precise location of land classifications but used as a foundation for support and inFluence with land use and development form decisions and zoning map changes. The Land Classification Mao does not establish the right to a certain density or mtensiri. The CJ Plan is a broad-brush approach to future land planning. Each development proposal should be reviewed with consideration ofall sections of the C3 Plan in addition to site features, context, design standards, and development standards. /~ t gt-acQ San dL V-rva_ ~ iS o"~ ~ic~5di v.q Zor+fnq r'c~V-~+u' V-enn.. cr~ wh~,x~ tsct butr.q S+~~eS~cQ, C1,R21FY. ® 5.~1- w:JLlZ ~.e~ c~o» s^FNU.e.cR v-R«:t- wny. i= ~-z:-~,tti.r~• Esc ~ ec:;Fo 'd-KF~ C.er,...~+ _ r°I ~.-.. r// ttv.r~ unir.q `ho mesh, De.~le.E,~rs W.1~ ~IaM v-k~.~~«- I'~ cQOPS, RMdL ^Jwbct.r-eon r"larj,p Yla.a-e~- ~O t'*'~ a~c~.. ~~ Adrienne, RRC~IVEp JUN 16 206 I'll just list my comments (some were talked about at the meeting already} 4 pOC~ Comments first Spreadsheet: Judy Hagan asked for 1 sentence regarding residential corridor on 96~h st. Also she asked for a White River greenway overlay. Angie Molt commented that the camp plan now states that residential uses take precedent over other uses Forward: More Survey information about why Carmel attracts and retains its population: so that we know what to keep and what need changing. Lots of this was done last time. What have we done this time? (Irvington Survey & Great Indy Neighborhoods Surveys are good examples) Modify three districts. Central core below 116~h is more like east and west Carmel Central Carmel east of Rangeline is also very different from west of Rangeline Part 1: Community Profile Newer numbers. Developers tell me it's available.... Is this a place for analysis of what types of buildings we have? Eg. 10,000 dwelling units of which 20% is Retail, etc. Part 2: Essence Do we need clearer definition of transitions between different classifications....maybe this is another guideline? Or, could be defined in zoning ???? Objective 2.1 replace municipal with all in the first sentence. Objective 2.3: I think a survey would give direction here. Don't know if we need this sentence. Objective. 2.4: remove last sentence Objective 3.2 & 3.3 I am concerned about "nightlife" and late night noise near residential areas. Objective 6.6 How can we do this? It's wonderful! I think of daylighting, but then I think of stress induction caused by higher density housing....more guidelines I suspect...good stuff! I know we can do both! Objective 7.1 remove Pedcore -could talk about them generically 100 year buildings -yes! Objective 7.3 Could we say "encourage" vs "requiring" Objective 7.5: Go LEED & "healthful inside environments'! East Carmel: Mixed-use -probably not here....depends on the development. I think the commission should decide these case by case. Objective 2.2 Don't mention specific developments or properties. Objective 3.3: too site specific. Central Carmel: This applies to the "Core" which is east of Rangeline, north of 116~h, south of the character area, (also north of smokey row) east of Meridian (31) in my mind. I know there will be discussions about this.... Objective 1.1: compact urban form and mixed use ok east of Rangeline, north of 116~h, south and north of the character area, east of Meridian (31). Objective 1.2: building heights = 1-2 stories.....commission to decide on a case by case basis for higher projects. Objective 1.3: Good in the "core" listed above. Objective 5.3: remove until the transportation plan for Indy has been established. I would like to see some firm numbers on required densities to support bus routes, and light rail routes, and where the lines will be. Timing is everything. There seems to be disagreement on this one presently... West Carmel No more commercial, neighborhood service notes, mixed-use in this area. : . Objective 1.4: Why is this in here? Is there some history behind this? To a greater degree than what? Objective 2.2: How do we do this? At a certain point all the remaining developable land will be in this situation. We are starting to see the more difficult properties,in this situation now.....help! If we don't approve the projects, will we rack up huge ~~ .{ .., attorney costs as we get sued? Objective 3.1 remove "pockets"....it's an urban infill term. Objective 3.2 remove "along W. 96~h street between Spring Mill Rd and Shelbourne Rd." too specific. Objective 4.2: remove Objective 5.1 rewrite -sounds like a lecture. Objective 5.2: could we just say tc encourage linear trails, and make reference to utility easements. Briddlebourne will NOT want the public going through their neighborhood just because there is a utility easement there. Same in Windemere & Coppergate & The Simon's golf course. Policies in general: Do we need to say "World Class City'? envy of the area... It's kind of a slogan. I think we already are the PART 3: Do we have too many classifications? Especially commercial. Could some of them be defined in overlays and zoning instead? Good Fit changed to Possible Fit with accommodations? Or something to that affect. Conservation Residential: No more neighborhood service nodes...special cases only per commission. "Hipped and" gabled roofs Do we need a neighborhood services node plan? Commercial plan? It seems rather random now and petitioners are trying to do this all over. Suburban Residential: Limit density to 1.5 or 2.0. West Clay should be 1.5. If South and East Carmel need to be 2.0, maybe West Clay should be split out ???? Adjacent Classes: remove multi-family & neighborhood service node for W. Clay. Good Fit (?): remove community vitality node and employment node for west clay. Gabled AND hipped roofs Maybe west clay should be split out, based on the above..... Transition: what is it? How can we do it? Needs clarification or guidelines. This area probably needs heartier buffering than we currently have. Front facing public right-of-way...only in developments with public streets. Urban Residential: Should this be called Old Carmel Residential or something like that? Pull out townhomes and include them in multi-family, or something similar. Density to match existing neighborhoods. Adjacencies: no multifamily homes. No additional commercial uses adjacent to the character areas, except Old Town on Main street, the Rangline Road overlay extension (north of the historic area) and on rangeline in the historic area within the existing buildings, or in new buildings of the same mass, detail, style and character as the existing historic buildings I think some of this will be in the guidelines to give more clarification No subdivisions here. Multi-Family Residential Density = 5-7 du/acre l Three stories -per commission approval only. Build to the front line - be careful here. Kids will end up playing in the street !!! Should there be more scrutiny here per the commission a case at a time ????? Open space to 25% or more. The denser, the more it's needed. Build to the front line -needs to not create monotony in building mass, style, & design. Neighborhood Service Node: Do we need this? Most of them need to be Community nodes to survive traffic-wise. (Chicago example) Not near Conservation Residential or current S-1 areas. 6 units per acre seems high for 2-story buildings. Community Vitality Node: Do we have a plan for these. Maybe this discussion should happen now to get community buy-in. 2-stories unless commission so desires. "reflects the same scale" is too vague...a loophole. Define, or the commission should decide. 10 units per acre residential component- tco high. Regional Vitality Node: Can we combine this with Community Vitality Node, and use zoning to differentiate? Do we need 8 stories? Only the south tip of Clay Terrace is in the US 31 overlay. 106'h and Michigan is mostly 1 story. Core Suoort: Do we need this? Aren't they multifamily? Secondary Core: 2-story height limit with 50% allowed at 3-story...even distribution for roof height variation overall. Primary Core: Old Towne only in secondary core. 8-stories is TALL. I know the city center plans are tall, how tall are they? I would only put city center in the category, no old town shops (or is that the name of the retail part of city center?) ???? Could we have both Primary and Secondary Core in one classification? It seems like we could combine them, and differentiate them via PUD or variance. Not sure on this. I know that we had lots of classifications in Indy, but there was more to classify there. Land Classification Plan Mao' Change character and historic areas to orange In general, pending projects should not be changed. Change Auman Drive and other neighborhood to orange. Westfield and 116'" should be orange Monon and Smokey Row (south) -orange Is the Monon & 116'h (SE corner) multifamily or duplexes? Mohawk Hills should be orange, at this point. Side notes: Spreadsheet comparing comp plan with C3 plan? Minutes from HOA & Schools meetings Adrienne) love your comments spreadsheet !!! of each use listed on each classification (when we get there} and how that compares to other cities our size in the Midwest? More residential classifications -duplicate Isolate historic/character areas in its own category (no townhomes). Other Questions: How are we supplying workforce housing (live-work units) at $200,000 pricing? Can we ask Highland Park for their ordinance and policies to see how exactly they do it? Their affordable program sounded interesting. I've asked some developers about it, and they would like to know also. Townhomes: How many do we have or have been approved? What percent of the total residential inventory is that? How can we zone such that we keep homeownership up in this building type? Commercial: (we are expanding this drastically, and I see lots of redevelopement opportunities as well as vacant retail spaces) What percent and how many do we have? What is the usual amount for a town our size? How do we know we need more? How do we encourage businesses to be here when parking is cheap downtown...a million dollar question. • I.e~' nom' " ~~ Education: Carmel has a higher high school graduation rate than the State of Indiana (97.0%compared to 82.1%) and Hamilton County (94.2%ib"-°'°-°--^°• --•° ^+~~~R?*s-- ~tdiana'f18:946~. The number of adults withBache]or's degrees or higher in Carmel is 58.4% compared to the Stale of Indiana's rate of 19.4%. The rate for both categories exceeds the rates for Indianapolis, Westfield, Noblesville, and Hamilton County. Median Home Value: The median home value divides the total data into two equal parts: one-half of [he home values fall below the median and one-half of the values exceed the median. Carmel's median home value was $205,400 for2000. Zionsville was the only surrounding community with a higher value in 2000 ($246,300). Carmel'smedianhomevalue exceeded [he State's median value by $112,900. When comparing the percent increase in median home values, the Ci[y of Carmel falls behind all of the surrounding areas. Catmel's median home value increase from 1990 to 2000 was 44.1%. During that same time period, Noblesville increased 52.7%a, Fishers increased 51.6%, Westfield increased 95.7%, Zionsville increased 73.3%, Hamilton County increased 56.2% and the State of Indiana increased 72.9%. -- - . ,,,o . ,,,~ i Income: The median income divides the income distribution into two equal groups, one having incomes above the median, and other having incomes below the median. Carmel's median household income has increased by 50% from 1990 [0 2000, an increase of $27,078. The state's median household income increased by 44% during the same period, while Hamilton County's median household income increased by 55%. (om o4aa oNOa ~~ -- -~ I ii (6 \ ~~C`~~ 32~p6 I; SUN' D~~S f \ ~ . \_»~ -'/ _ t .,M~~..~~~, n« .~~. u,~. Poverty Rafe: The poverty rate for Carmel in 2000 was 2.5%o compared [0 2.9%a for Hamilton County and 9.5%a for the State of Indiana. to ~~~ CA RAfEL CONSOLIDATED COFIPREHENSIVE PL.4A ~ H se iw wo ~,m,ao „w.eea ,zaa.aao s.ea.we r _. D,.w e,.m e,~ ; Schools: Within the Carmel Clay school district, there are 15 public schools: Carmel High School, Clay Middle School, Carmel Middle School, Creekside Middle School, and eleven elementary schools. There are also two private schools in the City'sjurisdiction:Ovr Lady of Mount Carmel Elementary School and University High School. Parkland: Public parkland sites in the City of Carmel have increased significantly in recent years. The following parks are maintained by the Carmel/Clay Department of Parks and Recreation: Carey Grove Park, Flowing Well Park, Lenape Trace Park, Hazel Landing Park, Lawrence W. In1ow Park, Meadowlark Park, Monon Greenway, Pleasant Grove Park, Prairie Meadow Park, River Heritage Park, River Road Greenway, and West Park. Central Park, Cherry Tree Pazk, and Founders Park are in various stages of planning and constmction and will soon be added to the list of available parks for residents to enjoy. In addition to the local parks, there are three parks maintained by the Hamilton County Department of Parks and Recreation: Coxhall Park and Gardens, RiverRoad Park, and Carmel-Clay Park. / Golf Courses: There are numerous public and private golf courses within [he City of Carmet. They include Plum Creek Golf Club, Prairie mew Golf Club, Mohawk Hills Golf Club, Crooked Stick Golf Club, Brookshire Golf Club, Twin Lakes Golf Club, Sunrise Golf Club and Woodland Country Club. Civic Facilities: The City of Carmel government is made up of City Hall located in Carmel Civic Square, the Police Deparimen[, the Fire Department with 6 Fire Stations, the Carmel Water and Sewage Utilities Department, [he Carmel Clay Communications Center, the Department of Engineering, the Deparnment of Community Services, and the Carmel/Clay Parks and Recreation Department. l I ~ C~ ( ' ' (, ~ L l./~ ~~~ 12 ~ CITY nF CAR UGL, INDIANA Community Facility Inventory. The following is a summary of the community facilities within [he City of Carmel. s tITY WIDE POLICIES fiNO 013JECTIVES Policy t: Manage Community Farm Introduction: Managing community form is [heart and science of influencing development in a manner that results in an enviable built and naturalenvironment in which people reside, work and recreate; and creates [he opportunity for businesses to thrive. Managing community form is the culmination of land use planning, transportation planning, urban design, influencing transitions, and place-making. The toots used to manage community form take shape as development guidelines, zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, studies, small area plans, negotiations, commitments, conditions, covenants, redevelopment initiatives, policies, education and [he like. No single tool can effectively manage community form. Managing community form is a departure from purely land use based regulations [hat encourage segregation and challenge [he community's ability to establish essential connectivity. This model is more permissive of mixed use nodes and requires greater sensitivity to transitions between differing land classifications. Objective 1.1: Merge form-based regulatory tools into [he traditional zoning and subdivision control ordinances based on Part 3: Land Classification Plan. 06jective 1.2: Recognize the uniqueness in each planning district and establish regulations, subarea plans, and/or pattern books to secure and encourage the desired features. Objective 1.3: Utilize and follow the intent of the C3 Plan by applying [he Plan's content to development proposals to leverage the desired outcomes and prevent deviations from the City's policies and objectives. Objective 1.4: Be very sensitive to connectivity and transitions between adjacent areas. -Avoid harsh contrast in height, building orientation, character, land use, and density. If [here exists contrast, utilize multiple design principles to soften transitions. Policy 2: Be a Warld Class City Intreducliao: The expression "world class ity" is applied to communities that have broad name r ~tion, notable culture, a positive image, iversity in housing, orporate vitality, strong architectural presence and character, sense of place, public transportation, and most importantly a desirable quality of life. Objective 2.1: Commit to high architectural standards for all municipal buildings and facilities. The intent is to set a precedent for quality and [o establish character goals. Developers will take cues from municipal improvements and be more likely to follow the City's lead. This commitment will also further build community pride. 06jective 2.2: Further enhance the amenities, development opportunities, office-supporting commerce and technology necessary [o attract additional corporations [o Carmel. Concurrently, enhance quality of life to provide an enviable place for people in all socioeconomic classes [o live by encouraging high quality public spaces, interesting parks, and public gardens. There is significant evidence that high quality of life is a major a[tractor for corporations, thus making [his a primary component of this objective. Ohjeetive 2.3: Encourage more diversity in housing types [o appeal to a more diverse clientele of employees working in Carmel. As Cannel continues to attract world class corporations, the housing desired by people relocating from other parts of the country and world is not consistent with Indiana's traditional residential form ofsingle-family detached homes. The City needs to commission a study on housing choices. Ohjective 1.4: Support an intracity and commuter transit system as described in Part 4: 7Yansportation Plan. Carmel's City Core is in the process of achieving the necessary commercial intensity and residential density to supportsuchasystem. The City will likely experience more peak-time congestion on major roadways as an inconvenient but positive indicator that a transit system would be successful. The City will need to ask For patience during the years leading up to an operable transit system. Ohjectiue 1.5: Enhance apedestrian-connected community through expanded installation of side paths, sidewalks, bike lanes, and off-street trails. It is well established [hat many of the moderate-sized world class cities in our nation are bicycle and pedestrian friendly communities. Carmel believes that the establishmentof bicycle and pedestrian facilities will further enhance quality of life and be greatly appreciated by citizens. CA0.MEL CONSOL[DATED LOMPR£HENSIVE PLAN 1 f5 • ! IMreduction The following sections convey the policies and objectives for the East Carmel District. It is important [o note that these sections share some of the same policy headings as the City- Wide section, but the content is specific to Eas[ Carmel. Policy 1: Manage Community farm Objective 1.1: Protect [he integrity of the suburban form and land uses. East Carmel is an area where redevelopment of residential districts is discouraged, and where investment in single-family homes is strongly encouraged. The City will identify projects, policies, and programs [hat will maintain the existing stability and encourage investment by homeowners. Objective 1.2: Allow neighborhood service nodes in context appropriate areas. The objective of these nodes is [o allow limited neighborhood-serving commercial, mixed-use, and public amenities within walking distance [o residents living in surrounding suburban neighborhoods. Lighting, parking, architecture, landscaping, size of buildings, and pedestrian facilities will be strictly regulated to ensure compatibility with existing residential uses. Policy 2: Be a World Class City Objective 2.1: Embrace the White River greenway and off- street trail to provide another notable linear park which connects parks as well as acting as the foundation for a larger, regional greenway. More off-street [rails are expected to contribute, especially in the riparian conidor of the White River. Objective 2.2: Promote a world class development on the Earlham College property, achieving the same recognition as the Village of WestClay. Unique uses or combination of uses would be welcome if designed into the context of the natural environment and surrounding suburban development. Policy 3: Inspire Commun-Ity Character Objective 3.1: Reinforce suburban character including [rec- lined curvilinear streets, sidewalks separated by tree lawns, and neighborhood parks. Also, maintain the dominant presence of high quality single-family residential form. OhjeMive 3.2: Allow density transitions from single-family residential form along East 96th Street and 146th Street, but encourage context sensitive buffer development along [he corridors to help soften the lower density residential neighborhoods. '~,_ ~ective 3.3: Consider expanding the neighborhood co mial node at East 131° Street and Hazel Dell Parkway m the so est corner by encouraging the church to develop a port[ f the property with mixed use and a i variety of h ing types. ~he area would act as an east side Secon Core, with the potential for a community transit st p ~C,st~ Policy 4: Be Environmentally Sensitive Ohjectiva 4.1: Aggressively protect the riparian corridor and floodplain along the While River from encroachment. Objective 4.2: Continually monitor mining practices to ensure they do not devalue property or negatively affect quality of life. Also, encourage reclamation planning for quarry sites to better coordinate public facilities and infrastructure improvements, and public recreation opportunities. Objective 4.3: Expand East Carmel bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, especially in areas adjacent [o institutional nodes such as schools and churches, and neighborhood- serving commercial. Objective 4.4: Establish an East Cannel recycling and hazardous materials drop-off station in conjunction with [he City's sewage treatmem facility. ~l(~% Objective 4.5: Locate an East Cannel satellite facility for Cannel Street Maintenance and other public services. This will help conserve fuel and distribute manpower more a ua over the community. ---T L~~ I Si~~~~~J~r~~ /~~~ v ~~ , ~ ~ ~ ~~~,~5 ~ `,u5 ~_ A t./ ~ ~ ~, c~~ ~~ ~. ~~ LARMEL CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSIVE AN ii /9 EfiST CfiRP1EL DOLICIES EiNa OBJECTIVES • Introduction The following sections convey the policies and objectives for West Carmel. It is important to note that these sections share some of the same policy headings as the City-Wide section, but the content under each heading is specific Co West Carmel and adds [o other city-wide objectives. Policy 1: Manage Community Form Objective 1.1: Conserve [he rural character of Wes[ Carmel by protecting estate residential areas and by requiring new subdivisions to have large setbacks from perimeter roads. Further, require extensive revegetation along perimeter roads and within each new development. A larger open space requirement should also be considered. Objective 1.2: Allow limited neighborhood service nodes in context with or adjacent to appropriate areas. The objective of neighborhood service nodes is to allow limited neighborhood-serving commercial, mixed-use, and public amenities within a short distance to residents living in surrounding suburban neighborhoods, no[ in proximity to Conservation Residential. Lighting, parking, architecture, landscaping, size of buildings, orientation of buildings, and pedestrian facilities will be strictly regulated to assure compatibility. Objective 1.3: Conservation subdivisions and innovative residential community designs that protect vegetation, slopes and are non-monotonous are preferred. Objective 1.4: Connectivity and transitions between proposed developments and existing subdivisions should be scrutinized to a greater degree in West Cammel. Policy 2: Be a World Class City Objective 2.1: Maintain and protect areas for estate housing and other housing styles that cater to the wealthiest families living in the City. These areas are essential to attracting world class corporations, providing the desired quality-oF-life for CEOs and other senior employees. Objective 2.2: Encourage more custom-home developments to provide housing opportunities for upper income families. Custom home neighborhoods will also add character [o West Cannel by reducing monotony. Policy 3: Inspire Community Character Objective 3.1: Reinforce rural character including tree lines, fence rows, barns, pockets of open space, and preservation of wood lots. Residential intensity can exist, but generally should not be obviously portrayed from perimeter roads. Objective 3.2: Protect single-family residential character along West 96th Street between Spring Mill Road and Shelbourne Road. Objective 3.3: Require commercial buildings along Michigan Road to be constructed of durable materials and designed to reflect "village" character. Policy4: Be EnvironmentallySensitive Objective 4.1: Strive to protect wood lots, wetlands, and other valuable natural features in West Carmel. These features contribute to the district's mra] character, but they also provide habitat for plants, birds, and other animals. Objective 4.2: Establish neighborhood-serving commercial nodes to conserve fuel, reduce emissions, and promote healthy life styles. Policy 5: Stimulate Connectivity Objective 5.1: West Carmel has many non-connecting subdivisions. The proliferation of this pattern of development is more tolerable in this district; however, critical connections shown on [he Thoroughfare Plan will be adamantly required. Although there is less emphasis on , vehicular connectivity, pedestrian connectivity will be strictly required. For instance, where road connectivity between a proposed development and an existing development is no[ required, a pedestrian path will be required. ~~ Objective 5.2; With the success of the Monon Trail, other off- streetfacilities are in demand. West Carmel has an opportunity to utilize portions of several pipeline corridors for such a trail. These corridors are shown as off-street trails in the 2020 Ysion Plan and in the Alternative Transportation Plan initially adopted in 2001, and are being supported in the C3 Plan as well-. Integrating this type of facility in some areas will be relatively easy, but in built environments may prove to be more difficult. Objective 5.3: Carmel should partner with neighboring communities [o plan and implement a significant greenway along Little Eagle Creek. Objective 5.4: Con[idue expansion of bicycle and pedestr' n infrastructure to connect neighborhoods with schoo ,parks, West Clay Secondary Core, and other destinatio 4 ~ / I ~o :rJ S / ~~~~~ ~~~ c~ -I~ s tai ~ ~N CARMEL CONSOLIDATED COMPREHEASfVE PLAN 2t WEST C('iZMEL POLICIES HH17 OBJECTIVES :~. • • BAKER & DANIFiI,S zLP EST. 1663 600 E. 96th Street, Suite 600 • Indianapolis, Indiana 46240 Tel. 317.569.9600 • Fax 317.569.4800 www.bake rdani els.co m INDIANA WASHINGTON, D.C. CHINA June 13, 2006 j ~ ~' ~ R~~E~VEd ~V~;_A Carmel Plan Commission ~ ~ ~~tJ13~~p6 ~ t I c/o Ms. Adrienne Keeling, Planning Administrator GS ~ 'I Dept. of Community Services ~.~ QQ = j~ Carmel City Hall ~~ T. One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Re: C3 Plan 2006 -Carmel Consolidated Comnrehensive Plan Dear Plan Commission Members: On behalf of Clarian Health Partners, Inc, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on the C3 Plan 2006 -Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan. As you know, in 2003, Clarian Health Partners, Inc. obtained a PUD Zoning on approximately 94 acres of real estate for the "Clarian North Hospital Campus Planned Unit Development". The PUD is bounded by US 31 on the east, 116`h Street on the south, Spring Mill Road on the west and the existing tree line on the north. The PUD provided for amixed-use development that features afull-service hospital, medical office buildings, retail uses, restaurant, conference center, child care center, day nursery, fitness center, assisted living, multifamily townhouse dwellings, two family dwellings and single family dwellings. The PUD was divided into four general areas, with specific development standard, height, landscape, lighting, sign and design guideline requirements for each area. Upon review of the C3 Plan 2006 -Carmel Consolidated Comnrehensive Plan, we note several areas of concern. Some concerns relate to internal inconsistencies in the C3 Plan 2006, while other concerns relate to conflicts between the C3 Plan 2006 and the uses and development standards that were approved as part of the Clarian North Hospital Campus Planned Unit Development. Our concerns are summarized as follows: Map Conflicts. The Part 3: Land Classification Plan Man and the Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas plan map for the US 31 Corridor do not agree. a BDDBOI 4-119984v1 Carmel Plan Commission -2- June 13, 2006 a. The Part 3: Land Classification Plan Man recommends "Suburban Residential" for the land west of Illinois Street and north of 116'h Street. The "Suburban Residential" recommendations includes "single-family detached residential only" as the applicable land use with a density range of 1.0 to 4.9 dwelling units per acre. The Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas plan map for the US 31 Corridor recommends "Residential Transition" for the same area west of Illinois Street and north of 116~h Street. b. For the land west of Spring Mill Lane, the land use recommendation on the Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas is for "Conservation Residential" at less that 1.0 dwelling units per acre while in the Part 3: Land Classification Plan Mao the same area is recommended for "Suburban Residential" at 1.0 to 4.9 dwelling units per acre. Explanation of Land Use Classifications. a. "Residential Transition" as recommended in Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas is not defined in any of the C3 Plan 2006 text. It may be appropriate to define this term to apply to any form ofmixed-use, office or residential development what can provide an appropriate transition between the intense development of the Employment Nodes and those nearby areas recommended for single family development. This would allow for case by case determinations to be made as to the appropriateness of a "transitional development" in light of a specific use and development plan. "Amenity Nodes" as recommended in Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas for the US 31 Corridor are not defined or described anywhere in the Plan. At a minimum, this term should be changed to "office supporting commercial" consistent with the recommendations contained in Part 3. 3. US 31 Corridor Design Guidelines. The area east of Illinois to US 31 are in general agreement on both plans with the area identified as either an "Employment Node" or "6 to 8 Story Employment Center". While there is not text conflict, there may be a practical development conflict. Specifically, there needs to be clarification of whether "amenity node" or "office supporting commercial" must also be in buildings which are 6 to 8 stories in height. If so, all such uses would need to be in large office buildings. That would conflict with the statement in the design guidelines that these uses should be "convenient" for the "enjoyment of ... nearby residents". If such uses must be in 6 to 8 story buildings, they will undoubtedly utilize a combined building lobby entrance which would conflict with office building security and not provide an environment which is friendly to nearby residents. BDDBOI i-f19984v1 Cannel Plan Commission -3- June 13, 2006 4. Conflicts with Approved Land Uses. As currently drafted, both Part 3: Land Classification Plan Man and Part 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas contain either use or development recommendations that are in conflict with the permitted uses, development standards or development requirements approved for the Clarian North Hospital Campus Planned Unit Development. We would recommend that language be added to plan to indicate that: a. In multi-building, planned developments, secondary use buildings maybe approved that are designed to be compatible with the primary use buildings, but that such secondazy use buildings need not comply with all recommendations when such compliance would not be practical for the proposed secondary use building. Examples of such a secondary use building would be aone-story day care center or a one-story retail building near aseries ofmulti-story medical office buildings. b. The recommendations of the C3 Plan 2006 do not supercede those land use authorizations, development standards or development requirements which were previously approved by a valid Ordinance of ADLS Plan approval by the City of Carmol. 5. Land Classification. As noted above, the plan maps recommend "Suburban Residential" and "Residential Transition" for the area west of Illinois Street and north of 116"' Street. "Residential Transition" is not defined. We question the propriety of a residential designation for this area in light of (i) the office and commercial uses permitted west of Illinois Street by the Clarian North Campus Planned Unit Development, (ii) the proximity of this area to the major thoroughfares of U.S. 31 and 116`h Street, (iii) the need for services and businesses to support the present and emerging businesses in this corridor, and (iv) the unique opportunity to provide support services and businesses in this area given the undeveloped land to the south and west of Clarian's campus which can provide appropriate transitioning to existing residential development. Amore appropriate designation would appear to be "Community Vitality Node" for the area west of Illinois, east of Spring Mill, north of 116`", and south of Spring Lake Estates. As an alternative, "Residential Transition" should be defined to allow support services and businesses with appropriate attention to scale and mass of structures to minimize impact to surrounding residential development. BDDBOI 43 i 99B4v1 Carmel Plan Conunission -4- June 13, 2006 Again, thank you for allowing us the opportunity to present these concerns and comments for your review and consideration. We would appreciate the opportunity to have discussions regarding these concerns. Sincerely AKER & DANIELS LLP o e h M, Scimi P Attorney for Clarian Health Partners, Inc. BDDBOI ~1419984v1 V.S. 31 Corridor Plan ~~~y ~,,~ `"9 gas of ~flictint ~?- floundafroutlnterckange CmcswealianRosidential .ems Uverpasa ResidenfialTrenshion v tdevrRuundahoet to ry mpuy~ I meMCom~ ~~ SeparatedPYtuhi-0sePaih -{~• EsistingStraeoflau~ahant ~> Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossing ----• Proposed Street ~ ~~ PreseruellastallTree Canopy Parks and fleerearian ~ CsTniti(ancilrflesidantial ~ Seighharhood5nntic2t~de institati©nai Aada CorasounityYilaiityP:adc Emp}aymoat taaan ~ Regional trsaEity Nnde ~~ Care Suppose Sacnndacy Cwa - PrimaryCnra ,. Arno tar Special Siady L,fi~ND USE / GLASSIFICATIC~N CC311~PARISCJN raajar Scree? E9iner5~resl '= Aerer 6ianan ?rail ;, _.. ,-e The State of Indiana, through Indiana Statutes, Title 36, Article 7, as amended, empowers communities to plan with the purpose of improving the health, safeh', convenience, and welfare of the citizens and to plan for the future development of their communities to [he end: 1. That highway systems [and street systems] be carefully planned; 2. That new communities grow only with adequate public way, utility, health, educational, and recreational facilities; 3. That the needs of agriculture, industry, and business be recognized in future growth; 4. That residential areas provide healthful surroundings for family life; and 5. That the growth of the community is commensurate with and promotive ofthe efficient and economical use ofpublic funds (IC 36-7-4-201). Indiana statutes state that communities may establish planning and zoning entities to fulfill this purpose (IC 36-7-4- 201). APlan Commission is the body responsible for maintaining the Comprehensive Plan, which is required by State law to be developed and maintained (IC 36-7-4-501). Indiana Code 36-7-4-502 and 503 state the required and permissible contents of the Plan. The required Plan elements are listed below: 1. A statement ofobjectives for [he future development ofthe jurisdiction. 2. A statement of policy for the land use development of the jurisdiction. 3. A statement of policy for [he development of public ways, public places, public lands, public structures, and public utilities. Throughout the planning process and within the Carure/ Consolidated Conrprchensire P/an, all of the State of htdiana minimum requirements have been met or exceeded. Some of the highlights include: • The Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan reFlects analysis ofthecommunity, existing land uses, development trends, land use suitability, economic feasibility, and natural land features. .*' • Public involvement provided guidance for this update. The input exceeded the criteria required by the State by providing I several opportunities for people to share their thoughts. • Part 2: Comprehensive Plan Essence in the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan fulfills the requirement for establishing objectives for future development and a policy for the development of public places, public land, public stmetures and public utilities. I Part 3: Land Classification Plan in the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan fulfills the requirement for a land use development policy. ~~ Part -0: Transportation Plan in [he Carme! Consolidated Comprehensive Plan fulfills the requirement for developing a public ways policy. q~'~dT ate.-' /y[~~ur~t b.,~# G'1-i L.rw-. .-t...._ d~i>~m//~.~~-ti,_„~~ ~~}7f,c~ r'~~1 % S ~ r7rt S , Q~I.V'l'KI Stlll~ilret.t ~ ~.-..4~ <z~ ~w-.,I-rI 6-z+z,/.1.~ 0. r.. C,.o-,-r v-Y~(~rv,- 4". n W~-~( c~~ QCC F3t'2f-•rl'rli rl.tr~ i^>"I~P~t f`QS •rYZA.+'p-O Wui.+~ Y.(11 d-7~h.~1 t~ G2~'lt-GL-o, ~e.. r r, c.ct~ e^tu-tz.d' rl~ t-r J--~c.. )s I r~,ti ? G1RVIkL CO,UOLIU.CRU COAIYNCI~f UTLI'L{V g COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MANDATE FULFILLMENT OF TFIE MANDATE s'® PL(iN OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY Comprehensive Plan Update 06jectives The primary objectives forrevising Camtel's 2020 Vision Plan are to: • Remove outdated and irrelevant information; • Remove objectives that have been achieved; • Update information and demographics; • Incorporate current policies and objectives; • Consolidate studies and plans that have been prepared since the 2020 Vision Plan was adopted; • Distill the existing binderofplanningdocumentsintoamore succinct and simple document; • Introduce language [o address the trend towards redevelopment; and • Freshen the content to more accurately reflect the City's ~) planning vision. The revised plan has been given the name Carme! Consolidated Comprehensive Plan (C3 Plan) because it assembles the essence from each of the existing, ' independent plans and studies relating to comprehensive planning. Specifically, [he C3 Plan utilizes information and plan elements from [he following documents: ~ • Cannel's 2020 Vision Plan • DevelopmentPlan and Strategies, U.S. 31 Corridor • 96th Street Cortidor Study i • O1dMeridianTaskForceReport • Integrated Economic Development Plan ~ • Amended Redevelopment Plan ~ • Interim ReportforlNDOTU.S.31lmprovemen[s • Civic Design, Guiding Design Principals i Because the City is interested in utilizing a form-based ~ regulatory system in the future, this plan also establishes [he foundation for such a tool. The C3 Plan identifies where ~ form-based regulations, hybrid regulations (balanced j traditional and form-based regulation), and traditional ~ regulations are appropriate. I i ~~' As the City develops, urbanizes, and redevelops, more and more detailed planning is expected to be necessary. This ' plan establishes a framework for subsequent, more focused ' planning efforts. Instead of incorporating those plans as ~~ addenda, the C'3 Plan has a part for easih~ ~ddine those ' plan s essence. ,4ddihonall}', a standard format is established to dictate consistency as the ('3 P/nn evolves. Methodolog-' Inhial Public Inpm; The process for this update began in October of?005 with multiple opportunities for public engagement. The planning team held meetings Keith the following groups: • Camtel,'C1ay School Board; • Neighborhood association presidents; • Business leaders; • East Carmel general public; • Central Carmel general public; • West Carmel general public (2 meetings); '~ High school students; and • Chamber of Commerce leadership. Community Stud: Once the first round of public input was complete, the consulting team focused on intensive study of [he built environment and research into the existing planning documents. This step in the process included several meetings with Carmel's planning staffand leadership. Dowmetrt Drafting: Concurrent with studying the community, the planning team began drafting [he Carme! Consolidated Comprehensive Plan. Immediately followine [he first full draft completion [he Q scheduled apublic o-pen house for ~3 the public and mteres[ groups to provide feedback about the plan. Public Commetrt; "I'o be w ritten. (Jlvi.e. ? $k~j- Implementation The Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan contains generalpolicies intended to influence growth, development, #S and vitality of the City as it evolves. The C3 P/an will be implemented by subsequent specific ordinances, programs, zoning decisions, Redevelopment Commission actions, and Common Council actions. ~.fFn.-~ ..moo !`eia:.cl? e~..a1o ' ~~P.~.~~- ~~~~i~r~, •f'~a_ ~.l,l; ~ ~o u~ arc c ~ ~ ~~ r~~ , N.cv d-~r.. ce.t~,~. O~ e v~ l~.rr-~-..Sa.. ua-n.o ci ~o-w- •~-ciJ~r~ . Cf #'t t~ I.os-4_ cam... ~.>~ max.- .a-j::a ? J 1 i n ~ ff 8 ('I rl' OY (:AH\llll., 1AUTAV.~ 5 C1d ~UQQ ~. l~ ~,C~CLw~L~ `Y'r~o~ "' wL ~..r t..vtL'~ Mi ;~, p~QG_0. 4/4'~NO.I~y„'J I„4?~v.."~ THREE CITY DISTRICTS Planning for Three Unique Districts Historically, the Cit}' ofCarmel and Clay Township was a homogeneous area consisting of farms, rural residential, estate homes, small town residential and small town dowmown commercial development. The construction of I-d65 (1960's) and S.R. 431rKeystone (1960's), and significant upgrades to U.S. 31 (1970's) in Clay Township all led to the evolution to many types of development in the City and Township. Today the City has an urbanizing core, an employment corridor, significant redevelopment sites, many styles of residential development and multiple commercial districts. The evolution of the City has also resulted in distinguishable districts. For the purposes of planning, the City of Carmel is recognizing the uniqueness ofthree districts; East Carmel, Central Cannel and West Carmel (see illustration below). The district boundaries were determined by evaluating development form, physical boundaries, and personal values. Although there technically are boundaries drawn on the map between planning districts, it is not intended to be a "hard° division. Rather, [he reader should view the divisions as conceptual. Therefore, an area on the edge of one district would be evaluated independently to determine which j policies best fit that area. ,, l~ ~( '~edt- ~}o .~'-~%-.~<:e~...Q.(y ~i-e.:;F d~a_ S~~v-t-tl-a.JI~ s~.~e~._ ~a,-:,I~ itir,,..~s 1, {-1vv,^ caw,..,e,-c~...~ +A~ i Na~.SI DVS 0.K ~ 16i%~ Trt ~%i r~ P!-t VCi cy '•<O nP mkl~i -5+os.9 6rirk welts e.S- 1-cwk~.vw.e/ s/1 ~ >. East Carmel Characteristics East Carmel is unique compared to the other hvo districts because it typifies suburbia with curvilinear streets. dominantly single-family residential uses, and a small number ofemploymentorcommercialdet'elopments. More specifically, the district contains a large number of neiehborhoods with custom-built homes and has very' little integrated commercial development. Aside from the commercial corridor along East 96th Street (the south boundary), there are only two integrated commercial areas within this district: Brookshire Village Shoppes and Hazel Dell Comer. Two centers along 16th Street arejust outside of Carmel, Bridgewater Shoppes and Noble West. East Carmel has a variety ofrecreational amenities including ten parks and an evolving river greenway. It also has three golf courses. Again, [he mix ofamenities is very consistent with suburban development. Central Carmel Characteristics Central Carmel is clearly unique in comparison to the other districts, in that it is an urbanizing core. Although [here are areas of suburban development the district has tilted toward an urban environment with significant mixed-use vitality. No longer are the tallest structures two stories and suburban in character. Numerous four-story or higher buildings have been built or are in [he process of being built in this district. Many new buildings are also being built to the front property line, further evolving the character of the area. Central Carmel has five parks, the Monon Trail, and three golf coupes; albeit, two are under pressure to be developed. It also has two dominant street corridors, U.S. 3 ]and Keystone Avenue, which contribute to and support the urbanizing environment. .' c+k~ir~consouue iturm~ruruess~i: r~,~~ r The Central Carmel district contains multiple commercial :~3 „ '~ ~ •'~a.- h.e..~a' t,~$ci.nin.A' v ~! 1a~~.. are;uincluding:OldTownlArtsandDesignDistrict).City ~Vwe.~ w~, .C<„-~_<{;_ rte., ~~,.~ ~ Q}~G< ~ Lr Center, Merchants' Square, Old Sieridian Street Home Place ~ , , and the 96th Street Corridor. The district also includes a wide '~ ~ `vm,e.,C «n « ~~ ~`'"`~`'$~`^-0-' Fes` `°~ri w. " ~•~h mix of residential developments including historic residential. p ~ , ~' ~Msia-y cU..<£ t'~m~+n•~'~~^°~~ ''<"~~ ~~`' Q""'~"`~ suburban residential, estate residential, townhouses, flats, d ~ ~ apartments, and condominiums. ~'-P~~^~w'~ j`~~ 'f" ~'°- `~~~''-~~" " The district is inclusive of significant employment areas. The ~~~~°3 4 0.1so S ~ q li nq~, Cle ~a1~- lo:,.x•Ft U.S. 3I Corridor and the Carmel Science and Technology Park -.. Q~~M dm ~ `OQ~OO ~oTM` ,CaL~i n~Q~y are the main focus ofemployment-type development, but , many other small office buildings are distributed throughout °""~ ~""~ "`""~-~-- ~"`"""" ly 1, "^ I R; ~~~ t Sti-+--v`~ ~-'•to o- Central Cannel. ' ,oa.Q'L. tillyR ~,,-•s.,_..,zc~ n., ~rr.dto d-o PI~ .~•~ West Carmel Characteristics cD._i Idivc,,,_ m.ti,r ],.~ s:y,c:..v;~..,2 <.~t- '~P~-~s'~ West Carmel remains unique even after the development of many suburban neighborhoods. Historically, West Carmel _~~` ~w ~ =n o,r~~J ,~ S ~.. ~~ , ~~; "~"-""`J was dominantly horse farms, agricultural land, estate reside ti l d ; ~~ `~ Pe.2a5d-rin..._ - s,-riw.a21 C.rm,+r,~-~--u°-R- ~ n a an open space. The district is still distinguished f ~ ~a_ ~~~~ ^~~`~ i ~~~ Lsa ~ ~ raw-v:_ ~ r rom the East Carmel district by si niftcantly lower densi 1 residential and substantial estate homes t ats t at a~rving ~ I o c~a£-~c,.~ ~!o y.a~F- Rai .'.- - d-Rat-..~~ s . ~9.~.h- open space. ~ 5 ~~ ~ "On ~ ~ ~ 60-.- I-o-o-dL - 5 c:Fr+..q '' The West Carmel district contains the most substantial number of undeveloped acres and has t e IeaiT st developed ~~ ~-t `~ t`<~ t tlW ~A~µ ,~ya,_(.oC)~ ,~ b- road network resulting from [he development ofexclusive ' ~ n.o a. f~-.~,_Q p~..Q 1 o-y ~~ ae~.-.~~', I neighborhoods in [he 1980 s through today. Unlike East Cannel, where many neighborhoods were built with ~,~ v~~ ~~ n,, _ ~,~p,~,,~~ ' ~ ~ i - "`""' 1""~ ~ `i'' ^"` connecting streets to adjacent developments or stubbed ~ <Sl.e,v-ee,Q~,,,,_R ne ,.- hbo.i P-r'v~~-tit-+ es wl. „~ ~ streets [o undeveloped areas. ) ' ~ #~ Although it is a larger geographic area, it only contains three ~p I S v-h_(`-F1J~' p-~~~.~ ~ ('~i~Z.e~a, tL ~~ l~t-an+.5 r'/'I C'i~" ublic arks and two golf courses. It also is the home to one + c~sr„ i v.o .r~Z~de~t- e-r. .~.x,..r .-v'-e,.,-oJ(c~.•,.e, .moo , ofthe most well known tra rttonal neighborhood " develo t [h i Mid ~ u.' _ p , ,- ~~; ~ , o_ P,-T, ~IF~„~ ;., i ~~ 1 ~: ~~,,,~ ^r`~""' ~ j pmen s n e west, the Village of WeslClay. ,I t ~~'~ ~ lozco+.~a~o .~..,~ eixc v:a- ~r ca~(Li..q rte.-c-r`a- d r~-5irSZe....~.9 ~ Col,nme/T.i ~.Q ca-~~-ep,o, (i.~..~-0.1- (,~.rr....~ # 1 ~es.d'ew~k5 vv~ •J-o Items i`~- t1-~v1- t,a ~ a~ n~eR r.~ re - ~Q.e.w~~ av i ~QC vw•t wn.., ~, - ~ I 'G~i+',M P.1T~r~ Cc4..na,Q p~ai,'~Qn.+~.~. '~"'.~ i~V-,..T ~'O-v`.t.O. ~ Q - rr.,.e ~t;r-ee,...~C„ a6`{-a.,~.vc-cSL o2 C.lTh--c~~ rv.~ H-6-o.-JF c,-~ti~r,-lyM-t~'.a-p.,.,¢-~-~t-. -~~:.a, ~ .~`f bJ Zvi- ~.*r-»..:~ ,;,~ ,Q.o.+-v-c..~2 a,v,~Q_ ,~. .-:-re_ w-1.Q.J~ l~ rLC_e.Re-cf1 t~f- L~.~ , ~ / Q Gov~v,-•~..z.«~~ Gt~z eta ~""e'°'t- `''' l-1.5. `/ a-) i . c -n.~~ ~' 5 -«.Q ~,, ~' Py d-(. c, n.QZ.t6, e~,..d1 , 'Yj„z ii...c, -P,e~.a%t~ cM LC. 5 . 3 ! i rtc-t.i~ ci-, / i`le '~i ~i,-. t Q ~ d4 '~ v b'{-ci; n fl rv~-k Icu.~~ i s n t - 5or.~t , c°~. ~(o . a ,S,E, t a.<-:CC c_e,..~T~zQ.~ o ~y oz, ~F ,,,,_~Q_4 ~~ I~ ~ .e.~.~e-. y-~.. v ~.ee<,~., ~ ~~~~ q ~) ~) ~p C .1 ~ t~ 4: .ao 7 9 C1T1 OF GViNtiL 11011A,A Ot3JECTIVE PROFILE ~1 ~~ ~~ ~~ Environmental Conditions The following em~ironmental features exist in the City of Cannel. Rirer, Floadplains and Ripadan Areas: The most significant environmental feature in the City is the White River and its associated floodplain and riparian areas. Situated on the eastern boundary of the City, this river landscape relates significant natural and historical legacies ofthe City. The floodplain area of White River is fairly extensive along its western bank. In certain segments [his floodplain reaches nearly one-half mile from the centerline of the river and provides for the most extensive expanse of undeveloped and .natural landscape in the township. Other streams and creeks traverse the City eventually draining into the White River. While Cool Creek has been predominantly urbanized, its most basic floodway has been preserved as a natural amenity. Williams Creek, west of Meridian Street, is another environmental corzidorthat has large segments still undeveloped. Wetlands: Another environmental feature associated with waterways that exists in the City is wetlands. Several wetlands designated on the National Wetland Inventory Maps exist within the City. Woodlots: A study conducted by the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) For U.S. 31 indicates that less than ]0%ofHamilton County remains as woodlands Verv few original woodland areas have survived in Carmel. Most of these woodland concentrations occur along the White River or other streams and tributaries such as Cool Creek or Williams Creek. Groundwater: Groundwater is a significantly important feature in Carmel as the water supply system for residents comes from this source. The groundwater sources are found in the sand and gravel aquifer system of the West Fork of the White River valley. Groundwater is available at depths of 50 - 400 feet in the glacial drift with wells yielding several hundred gallons per minute. The City of Carmel has designated areas around these wells as "wellhead protection areas" to help protect the quality of the available drinking water. lA,,...c.C~-v-.z.lo~~n_e~L ~ ~e-c-ca,tio_~. ..~1- Jc.o c4~~U"`p"-w~~-,t .t"'.. ~.1.Q~>.-cY h-u~,.r ^1-0 ,.o~-c~.ca,Cf~ ~-oJ.e-~>(' ..~~. µ. m <,rr or c.~x~ni., i.ni.~.,, rf oZ. ln7l~-TP..- 7 ~'r-e_ 'd~~a.,..t ~,te-c.,~t~Q ? ~fC+.ry~ '~~' cam. [+v1 07{'~ I n.i-.dZ CIaSS r 4; a~i ~'. mW'• - - Demographic Information The following demographic infomtation relates to the Cih~ of Carmel and the surrounding communities and State. Population Crowth: The City of Carmel has undereone tremendous growth in the last ncenty-five-year period. The population has increased from 18,272 residents in 1980 to 37,733 in 2000. Recent population estimates for 2004 place the City at 58,198 residents. (See Table below) Boa. ;c,ooo fiC,Wf SG,000 a0.000 ao,oo6 a6,oc6 ia,o90 0 - Carmel wxslbNa NaEasvdle -.••~ Fi5F2ry La^svllle ' The population distribution for the City of Carmel for the year 2000 is shown below. The largest segment of the City's population is the 35 to 44 year old range. The 5 [0 14 year old range (school age) ranks second with 45-54 year olds ranking third. Son)'. v~q `~'leaa d' 1 6'`ti* cQa t-.~ Sa-~-~. mn,v~ ~5 „ .P r, 5~; ~A row ac:~l.-.c>,IIr t^'~,C"^ri..,..q ~ fl(q-~~a4-inq r~ciRS; c£o~ m~fL: «,.w d Q 1 f a..--cL ce-...fza,.p_ ~ r-ou...~~c.lo h~-~'trS w;4k~ w ~ 1d' ~i o fi.~-e.ri tk S° n-r-e ~ n., crz. c1.c~-+~t-wl- 'n' (~u ,,..pb ors , C~ r-,,.z Z a360~a-mac CM~~~O~Li_~•~iI1`P_S~.//~''Ji mr~ C-f~~,IcQc~2.w L^.n--'C,n,,,,u~y~ 1.6. Qdn w-6a.,.~ c..'1•-h r-, 6o: ~-rP < o'~~c-~ 3 do 19BC 1990 P000 2061 astnab Community Facility Inventory The fol lowing is a summary of the community facilities within the C ity of Carmel. _~ ~ Schools: R'ithin the Carmel Clay school district, there are I5 public schools: Carmel High School, Clay Middle School, Carmel diddle School, Creekside Ibtiddle School, and eleven elementary schools. There are also avo private schools in the City'sjurisdiction: Our Lady of Mount Carmel Elementary School and University High School. ~~ Parkland: Public parkland sites in the City of Carmel have increased significantly in recent years. The following parks are maintained by the CatmehClay Department ofParks and Recreation: Carey Grove Park, Flowing Well Park, Lenape Trace Park, Hazel Landing Pazk, Lawrence W. Inlow Park, Meadowlark Park, Monon Greenway, Pleasant Grove Park, Prairie Meadow Park, River Heritage Park, River Road Greenway, and West Park. Central Park, Cherry Tree Park, and Founders Park are in various stages of planning and construction and will soon be added to the list of available parks for residents to enjoy. In addition to the local parks, there are three parks maintained by the Hamilton County Department of Parks and Recreation: Coxhall Park and Gardens, River Road Park, and Cannel-Clay Park. Colf Courses: There are numerous public and private golf courses within the City ofCarmel. They include Plum Creek .yr- ~ ~ QMY .~nrw-D'~-C~ eVVL alX~t2<+~~ at~' CG~A-"^~~y L... ~.-v-~. ~U rv~j y%~.w~-iY.zc~. -ilu ^r_cur-a7_ c~' [-•/F ~i~-¢.- c.<.<-.-I~e.`~ W-Q.a~+.~y-~.,l- '}o i n G(-.z,•uaa- cfLv_~~S r Iu..A- 6.~..~1~'. n.¢..,,r cQ.z V.v~-2o-~ r...e..~7~0 'a-R ~.~i- n:~ .,-. J-c <~ixclvLdL~ c~'.: I dL~.~ i 5 no~F d-~ ~uvsw~r Q s~ GL+ti /-\~¢-L~ V-G~~+~f' 1 ~ ~~W~S~c^~ ~rn 'Y'la.w.; ~i P_a5~ I# a 'TI-e, S t i.~ o-6 a" P <u-k " i s i ...~ ~ c+~n.,---~, 'TUB sY-,Ctilf ;$ Y\O ~' LL$Y'Y«I• GolfClub,PmirieYewGolfClub,DM~hecrk~fifls-6o1fE1vb, ~-- ~ 3 Rew~ov-~. r-~i~S Qr~ - #'3 Crooked Stick Golf Club, Brookshire Golf Club, Twin Lakes Golf Club, Sunrise GolfClub and Woodland Country Club. I t ~" t 5 a-bo wF i-~o E,c.._ n.v-v.~Si Civic Facilities: The City of Carmel government is made up of City Hall located in Carmel Civic Square, the Police Department, the Fire Department with 6 Fire Stations, the Carmel Water and Sewage Utilities Department, the Carmel Clay Communications Center, the Department of Engineering, the Department of Community Services, and the Canne)/Clay Parks and Recreation Department. ~ owe- b7 nom,.., w~-t,a.v.ts.,.. i u cn'r ..m caaw.;.. noi.~<e Par? ?: Conrpre/rensire f'/mr Esseru•e establishes the City's planning policies and objectives categorized by geographic area. Although there are many similarities in each district there are also significant differences. This approach will clearly communicate and guide the public and its leaders in future decision making and share with the development community the City's policies and objectives. Further, the public can base their expectations on the content of this Part. To address each geographic area, [his Part is divided into the following four sections: 1. City-lade Policies and Objectives .......... pg 15 2. East Cermel Policies and Objectives...... pg 18 3. Central Camre! Policies and Objectives.. pg 19 4. West Carmel Policies and Objectives..... pg 20 v-c~.c~^^~L ~I-`^ti.eQ-a.i r n..o ~re~v ; o..:~ I y rQ-Pa-~_so..,.X~_a2 y-o Q~-k~ ~/(~6ll cll. S.)t- win cn2r,f-e_Cf--~.: ~..i, wL...~i-is V r ^]•-o hz. ~~pp .c'.~.~.:,oc~ //w~z-~ta....J d-•o n~~'~t.zc~f- ~-'F~-~ WL]~c.o N'L ,iL'a'C-/L ~'[~i CUtic~toi ~t'c E'/)Ci S~Fiev{ elLe'-e~c.~e-~•~r~.,~.o. 10 ('i'I'T Of CARV rL, IT DLAiAA COMPREHENSNE PLAN ESSENCE INTROD(1CT1ON CI'ry-WIDE POLICIES AMD OBJECTIVES ~e Nu.Yvr~azre~- Cornmev:~~a n..-c. cv~ ca7k'd'-c~t.{~.n~_ Policy 1: Mane0e Cammeniry Form Imrodemian: Managing community form is the art and science ofinfluencing development in a manner that results in an ? yQnviab~ built and natural em ironment in which people reside, work and recreate; and creates the opportunity for businesses to thrive. Managing community form is the culmination of land use planning, transportation planning, urban design, influencing transitions, and place-making. The tools used [o manage community form take shape as development guidelines, zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, studies, small area plans, negotiations, commitments, conditions, covenants, redevelopment initiatives, policies, education and the like. No single tool can effectively manage community form. Managing commtinjty form tsa de'pnrture .from purely.lant~ ~ use,based regulations that enciiitag„ asegiegatiat challenge the commumtys ability to'e~_ s~tablish essenti8,~ connectytry This model is more'permtastve gfmtxed'usB nodes and rcquirs5 greater sensitivity toaianstttons.lietw_ een~ differing land clessification~ Objettdn 1.1: Merge form-based regulatory tools into the traditional zoning and subdivision control ordinances based + on Parr J: Land Classification Pfan. Opettlre 1.2 Recognize the iiniquenesa tn;each plannin~ ~.... ~la distriq~and establish regulations, subarea plans and/or „~Q~ pattem';boo to secure and encourage the desired features. W, 06jaetire 1.~: Utilize and follow the intent of the C9 Plan by applying the Plan's content to development proposals to leverege~he deaifeA%otitwmes atid,prevettYdeviattons?iro~ [he~City'spoti'-ci s'aztd"obieciive~~'~~` Oyeethe 1.4 Be verysensrtiveao-.cdnnedt'viryµar~P transtuons~behveen a"d'acent areas: AvoidA ~atsh con erg __ tn,_ mg oneptatton character lan fuse an 'di:nsity~" Ifthere exists contrast, utiliu multiple design principles to soften transitions. .Tjc.. Ci,L,,~ v~zck J..o Na.~.Qu~t j -~*'o ,-e-sida....~+o' obJtr~l-7v-e.o, (%w-~c-,,.~k-ly 5 u.l d~'Fca,t~ i y `~t~nn5 ~ }i' W~ ~"Nrv-..~ acfLJ acn..,x-~ c-rn.dt-as~w; la.~..se u..~~ 1,e~.cz- e-R-~- ~"-°~~ ~-~a.~.,.yd2 usaa, Iocw~Q regklwFi o»5. `y7~o.. V,'llq~ -b t,laScdo,, w~tiodo-llowe ~iornp. ~c~.~v`r-cat `!o ~'IS nP.i c/t+6o-c3 ~~n a1,..os~ e~-e-„~ aspex~ lisv~e. ~+ •,s Cct,kS%>ur Pru61G,..3. Polity 2: 8e a IYoiill Cuu Ci(IN Imrodaetion: a expT~ression"world class city" is applied to communities that have broad name recognition, notable culture, a:posthve;im`ag, diversity in housing, corporate vitality, strong arc ttectural presence and character, sense of place, public transportation, and most importantly a desiratil~ quality of~i~ ~ - 06jeetire2,1 Commit;tohigh:architecturalstandardsforat~ municipa6buildings;andfaciliti~. The intent is to seta precedent for quality and to establish character goals. Developers will take cues from mumcipa6improvemen~ and be more bkely~oliow tfic rty s ea is commitment will also further build community pride. Objective 1.2: Further enhance the amenities, development opportunities, office-supporting commerce and technology necessary to attract additional corporations to Cannel. ~ Concurrently, enhance quality of life to provide an ~ place for people m a14'sbctoecontimic cam, I_~ses~;pp live by encouraging htgh qua testy public spaces, mteiesttng parks, and public gardens. There is significant evidence that high t~ualityoflifetsama'dr'attrectocfocrn ratio thus ma mgthisaprimarycomponenfofthisobjectiLe. 06jectlre L3: Eneourege inorcifivoisij~ in housing types to ~..~,.~. appeal to a more diverse clientele of employees working in Carmel. As Carmel continues to attract world class corporations, th_e:housing.;desired,byepeoplwteloeatina:frma Obpeore 1.4:sGppofian~uifiao. systeirt+,as described in Parr J: su~ertstich asystert~ The City will likely experience more peak-time congestion on major roadways as an inconvenient but positive indicator that a transit system would be successful, TheCttywilfneed toaskforpahen`cgduringtljis years learJirigup to"+'"~an opeiable transit syste~i. Objective 2.5: Enhance apedestrian-connected community through expanded installation of side paths, sidewalks, bike lanes, and off-street trails. It is well established that many of the moderate-sized world class cities in our nation are ticycl~ ~a-n_d'pe~eshienfriendl~communities. Carmel believes that the establishment ofbtcycle and pedestrian facilities will further enhance quality of life and be greatly appreciated by citizens. _" - - ------ --._ - P =s ~~ ~3 ~~ ~~ ~~ P° i5 # i : ^KM.K atv¢, bc~~u-k ,~„tiic~~+~.n l.~n.e. ~.-QQ rn..~-~-c~ .~.,,_e..,~-~~.~4.0 ,_. <~ c.r-l.wt- w-o,.._e.d~- ~ eri r~.N~r }~ .i.Q.Q.a,,,,-d-<4- J-v ~ 6..wr~ cua c c,,,,,LQ d~e.,..t. C,o» n e ~ v ~ ~ ..~.n ru.-~F~ 2 ~-c~'i-Qe,,.. ~w. d-~- H-~e~La..~. w-eY--e~2 H..~-~ca.dZ-L~.az Y~¢o ~as~L dv 6:., c:_c*r~~k~ cu.~~ ,a~p~-..~-<~_.~Q.Q~ oc-<.a~a~ cM J-~~ ~,.~cQ ~c~SSp~i~~ ~.~fc.~ ~Y~ 5o Y-Qc~F w1~s.. ~n~-<-a.<-mti .oo ~~'°'t -Rc.~'~E ~v cQe-~-~Ra~r-a. _ ~`°'°'`-'~.c^-Xo YLZ~ csL 'd•o k+. o..s w-~.eaSt ~l o r%.~ ~a cat big ~-,•~- ~-V ~.~ b :..~ - ~-~; „~ ~-~,;,<.~-,~..~-.tip <~ ^R~~- <~",-~~ •-,~„-~~ ~ ~_A `~-o ~aa. ;n,c~e,<..~.z.dL cL,,.<SL J-o ;tic.lu~ ~+'~e.~,~~ (c~.•,aLs~o~~;.~y . /~ u f IV~C~w~-~r~q l~Si~c'-uJ1AC<.Q. /~c~`~.a~ ~ `~wk~~ C.1.<2~ Yi'Ll+-. mwn'~c_i Oc~ ir~;cv Q..n'~ev<~5 d 1 ~}~.. ~ ~eQ•4 "Fv ~.vv-e~ ~,~y,c-~ c~ i /isst v-$' 6~ev.« c<c~~'i-~--f+-2~.- ~~,,,~~ Sd~cu~~c~~a. -f: Ihci7l.A/' y'ha.v. .2m~'-C'u-l~ caXx /J.C.-c.t..OC.c•~C.~vWYwt.ci <%c-cwa2-0 ~-C~a~L S~}'n v-o.A ,gip ~yT~.~c-~ I, O 1 1 1 ,f.O <~, I (1pp //11~~ „ ~..{i</OY- •` I`~-G'~P.~,FJ``IIO--P WI~p. -.p.Q.,7\- C~2~-r<~zq.6-ems C~~'1 CIS CSk~.R ~i.0 O h t~w/~ ^, ~~5 /gyp 6!-~{•!+'~ P~nJ~'$ O-i^e~[ /~ 1 ~ 4.e6b ) . V w~ ~ a~ ~ •5 ihei. ~ ~ C'~r 1 eQB~ln $ <'? ~wr¢, t'p7~c ~ E~[•``K 5 ~ v~ -~k/-- ~ orn e 5 n. ~n cQ '{-~.`h~~parti e5 ~ 5 rao ~t <~t~i v~+5 . A 5i V ~ }n.v, ..~y cQ2~ncAacQ hev..n- iS tl-M- `~~++P~y tc+n.~ uI`Pa...~~A.K6~ ~ SP~~ V V1 ~~ ,, C~s2 ~ ~t.vx- «,a v-R ey ~<.,.,. ~ b ~ke~ . W ~, <. (~'- i s y <; <,~,-• ~ <~ «.-~ H-v.~.x- 5 / (~o-(~-D [-~n. P.y..t_~-1 ~ c yR¢a p~~-„~ t-~101.~EaJ~-I..~i Y~i~ow. C~t't.~,,.,-c1~...z.c~. c<.tl+-.c...~ 9 CR.ov~.rc wa.w¢~ d-~a„` ? S~p~y 0. f-iY~- AC~~ri d-~ C~T'~cQ L<c~l- v-~.ca~f' ~O~~S; ray s~KCQy. ~ ~.~~~ -~``''. , ~`^^-~- Gh.c„~kcQ yw'F' irv~,~~~,~ r-o~ac~.o Pt: 'd'y.<i~(' U S~ria~y` ~'< ~vY-i-d wti.QR r1 dZc_ V-Qy~ `~l~ns,~1-. ~aw-. :,.a.w- <4.a-~-e-ls~•~,..~ c~4 ~<e~e,ue do old ~>~ . 6~ ~,,..,~.,~ .~..... M 0. Ct-f-E~ KYl W 1 ~ ~ 1 h q ~~ "`<~ ~.t,~k_,_ V1 n*' ~u,ca.lo I~ d o re~..<~4;1, e 1 y w« I k% 6 i /cz d-o =r.c~~p.,,,<~PU ~.. $ GA..uvf S~t~c~ +~ez~.~,.s ~, ct-~c.~.es+~ 1 n e1 .r~.er C<r,.._ ec~e-rv..-e . Ccu~.QA i w.c.sjy- 15 s:.o 6 b i S h ee.r+dL ~:net_ -~+2«6.Q~ ~., <~Fi u:-c~lc~i .vj ~u~-{~~.e{f~~; .adrt-i :-vim <,~ 5;,,.bw-l~ca„ OOcx.t~e_c.,c, t-cu n 5 -1'lv- ~-~n,~..0~. ~~c,~l ~ ~-<, o $ 1 ~ ~ Qv ~vFO rh-av-a-~ ~"- '~ ~~ Policy 3: Perpetuate Economic Vitality InUOduttion: `.'itality is defined in many ways, including quantity ofjobs, quality ofjobs, proliferation ofcommerce, entrepreneurship, im~estment in propert}, redevelopment, lengthofcommitment.anddegreeofriskbeingtaken. Carmel has strong economic vitality, and furthering that trend is of great interest. This section addresses the objectives that Carmel will utilize to perpetuate economic vitality. Ohjective 3.1: Carmel will strive to further brand the community. The City has already established a notable degree of branding; branding being positive name recognition and impression. Branding ofa community is important when trying to attract quality employers and businesses. For instance, well-respected retail businesses want to be located inwell-known communities. 06jective 3.2: Encourage mixed-use developments. Singl(:-u~ developments [end to lack vitality during off-peak times. ;t-~ Mixed-use developments often combine commercial and, - - 9T residential uses into a single node. This type of development encourages daytime vitality from employment and commerce activity and nighttime vitality when people come home from work. Also, this development pattern better utilizes land by allowing compact urban form. Ohjective 3.3: Retrofit existing single-use centers into mixed- use centers. This encourages both daytime and nighttime vitality and creates a compact urban form. 06jective 3.4: Utilize technology to efficiently communicate ~3 City projects and initiatives. Expand existing lines of communication to reach more households and gain more public input. Ohjettive 3.5: Clarify and streamline development procedures ,yy~ and processes. Simplify the develoomentLrocess without ~r ~ lessoning standards or expectations. Ohjeetive 3.5: Plan for transit by encouraging transit opportunities in new developments where it would benefit the community. Analyze how the City would form with improved transit options. 18 CITY OI' C:AQV~r~, 1Ab1,1 C1 Policy 4: Be a City o(Neighborhoods Imroduction: ~'eighborhoods are an essential component in a community. The} create [he fabric ofa cit}'. Traditionally, ~ ~? neighborhoods were not recognized by each individual development's name as they are now. Rather, they were determined by physical boundaries and included a mix of housing, neighborhood-serving commercial, schools, and parks within walking distance of each other. ~ /rv.c~,- w-o,-len- . 0 ~ Ohjettive 4.1: Camtel is desirous of achieving the quality of ~z~ ~ life benefits of traditional neighborhoods within the contest ~~~~yy of exurban, suburban, and urban development. -rr.~ 06jective 4.2: The City believes it necessary to conduct planning at a finer detail in critical subareas and corridors. For this reason Pmt 5: Critical Corridors and Subareas was created to house those planning exercises within the C3 Plan. These small area plans are important in communities with redevelopment pressures and in rapidly growing areas. Oftentimes, critical corridor and subarea plans can better address transitions, connectivity, and development form. They can also address character goals and emphasize to developers a more exact idea of what the City expects. Ohjective 4.3: Establish neighborhood identity based on physical boundaries rather than by each development's name. As mentioned in Civic Design, neighborhoods are 1 more than each development project. A concerted effort ~iO should be established to determine neighborhood boundaries throughout the City and [hen promote their identity and boundaries. Ohjepive 4.4: Consider and encourage "third places" and neighborhood-serving commercial. Every trio to the store ~'~ should not be a major expedition. Residents and employees ~~-- j should be able to access nearby shopping by car or walking. ~l~w:~ Sr.o66 ~.~-a,+-a.J «,~.. d2 L'ct,~l~n~~,.~ b+~,~!<a-~ " Uv-z:~d2.~ti.a-C.~;.~.,~.' ,~ 1 i kR. e~.i-..,a.~~ ciP~ - r2 5; c4e-~.~4Tc.1L c..t-ems ~ p~_~ w U dZa ~C' c ..r..,, to a~..-,,cal 1'~C-~~,.~J~, ~ p I U ^_" " 'a-K.,- E nc<~,-~..~ ~ ~-.,~.~'+-R - c~.o.A I Imo wt~l 5 n.w f.va ~.~,~.~Vo... ` , ~ ct*~ m ¢.+'cw~"c..Q ' 0 6 J c.c~6.; v-ao p w~ P'~^-i., ~_, ~_ ,y~ ~ c-uk, i r..vti l ,rot(L -c-,.. c:tr>7 s dn..-.~ 6 ~a;~rk.a.o ovt.- .o.~.~.~-ems P-~r~ U sn.¢o, 2~ s~; eL a~„~c l~.a.-R. t~n...¢.~ Pu..y~,G~ -$-C-atiQ- -~-tw. a~f/7 Wt-~rcx.~ ~" ~,+n.(;v~,~ a.~dz e~-r-~ •+-Q-w~vu~ (t .,~-~-u~a~L ~ .oa.~..-nc ~ ~w.~,ti.q cAm.r.~.r „Q Ma<,,a v-R,~.~t- c~ n-o-* 4 O' i l.a- ^`^ X'-~- - c,.ot J-~-~.~- J-ka~ ~j-o rzc~I-e~,7ta., d-Q~ e-CdL "s+~wRC. ~Fo~wn " '~o-'ti`^n* , e.~-a..,~ °~o cyn.V.~.~;, r.a... .S ~rcLQ.R J-a-..on.o ~ d-ncc~~ y.o s:t.~v ~ vim. 'Yri.w~•~. Q^-~'t ` y-Q..e~~ Ger.-,Me-fe-InR Y~.~X*l tl•o f2Siek~x-,-.~i~ciSt Wzt~ea ~'~4~vi d-O I P„RL~I.dC,L • i ut~.t•v-V C'~q-,-e~ ci I I V i ~ W cagy-~ CQ.er4~.r~ty~ CL~ S; 60 P~ m ~ LLY~cQ Gm S\J/LL~.d~ta..~e. ~ e~~.dZ u uhee R 1l-~ ~~ C°,a.r,ti,O B~1-i(1~1-i av~ . d" W-~~~ ~~ J2-t,;t ~ Gik.SZ ri: ~IV~ \ Gpz„ _pal n„ y ~a..e~7 ~ /rLC / 5y S~wu.~- 'd-h.~c.Da-oe CU+'S ~ cw.~ 5dk_c~-a-os~ w-~-~_ ~ lr`e~~ t ~Q.l ~ ~ owl- cfLriv-c., -CT~~~S. T° .12.a,2~ -e,o v-Q~F r+^-a-~-~F hes'~d~e-~. `~ .~.-. H r.zlXe~ - ~ws._ n-Lxa I,.r-o,..RdZ c~r.~F7r...~.~_ ~ ~~ d-c: ~~~c-r~Pc e./s.vw-~a_~ c.~k- len~a.~, P"'y i'~y ~-e~i-a ~ a ~.6z w o-~d2 ,,~p-~c~ `~-~-~:~ w.~sac-L 5 t..o•~i. ~,~ rn-, y-k~ w-ct<,- -f7Mn_ n,.~ ~ ~ S'~ra-o "UV'..-~~ w~a-~'x0 -°~Qe.cJ~...cn ci~F' ..Qo-,~y_,.~- d c1rA, 7~ C['r..~° ~~a.r- qqa ~ ,a pA~~-„~ v+..~ d^o i~S'~a.+-%f Et'~`~Q c-c~.5'lccr~k' ciY~sw.w.ur~Ocn~ci~ ~/ ~ I _ /7 ,.~"`~ ova ~ I h0.JfS w {~.~ P e-o~Qa_ ~..-~ ~corrn' C ~- ~ n.t..~L o`a'e- P ~a c i ,.y l~ c~P~c S~ i~r. V~c~.~/v~+~ ~v~ ~~~ ~- P ri v~~ ~dZ vLCaX.+-ham, d a ' ~'1 ~m+-~cecQ -+~,.da- cQe„re.Qc~w.F....~~ 6~12~ ,.I.,,~ d-~ yx-vax ~~rtia.,,,. ~~r al.tA. ")d=~~~r Wit. ~yt,~..:, ,~-o-'~i.c •..ell d-k.-~ ~ ,,•F-.~. C`_o.-ri.i.Q..a eo-r¢- a.~.~e~ `~-o ~,,~ ,~ - ~ ~Si ply c.n,~-~ ~'-c'^'~w~-Gr-ci F..~C ~~-o :•v~-'F d-a es~k~.b I i s~. e~ `~ ' "~~- - , I ~ t~SI oQ Ce-r..f7} ..R oLC~cc.~o ? 6d- qi:Q C~-tr.,~~ C~OCY~.¢ty b.-Pifti,~... V ~ 5 ~ fm . .~ ~,.,.Z„c.~ ( ~ .~-~ `~'] B..s tub P..aD{- .E.c,.~.. As.~~ c-..~.oR~ .x.~lk r~,~e ~.~~i~~.,~. r-e,~#~ c*v-~- d1 rw~..zrsL, ~~' i^^- ci.,..-c~ su.~.p~-~ d-Q.~n.. cP.a.u.a..Qt~n..e~.~' ~--rres,o.~ _~`~O~ Zm~.c-cS1-eQ.awo.~-~~,eo et~..eCL•~V ~Psb ~)~dCw~ wri'!+{-t..-. rr'i n~~..+wllry~e ~,~~~~. S~Fcx~..~-c~zRo ~-D-r 4.-~.~>I~ •~ 0..wc~ c'~W~.n-S Pcr-cc.. ~ri5~~-c. ~~^~FC} ~++mi•}~f.ca - ~-zR C~atiVgy~ o-cc,.u- ~ .+-~ ..(~,.e ...a-e.,~-; q~,,,cA ~; ,.~,.~,E o u e~,..~,.,,..~, 6..~.->.~- w.~.,.,.~ d-~ ,...a.~ ~ ~.w.g o sn-e cam.... 6~. -~e..c,,. e„ w h~..~ P c ~~ 's ~~,~,~.~ r;,,ti v-R.~.~ ~.;'"6 * z w ~ ~.I.-~ Ge:.-~ n ~l ~. c .U~ n~-G ~}'G .dR?F c~-e.wo...tiy clµ~ ~ ~ r/r~0 I T PnnL:~ ~ O :~ [r.~ Cwt t"c~u-vti V r..a~..~5 d-f,e.~..,~ lo,., s.c.z~x' .~.~ c~ VJr-zQZara_ J-o .a IP~w ? 7'I.;~.o ,n<7~o K„~ a. 4~.~:E~- D-v-er ..a~ad ,¢. rte. whw~ c~v..~,-n-Iz. ~Ot~ cL P~,w .n~,~ c~:,,.a~ +~-c~..,, w'~-,.~ c~ r-w..dZ c~-~-a.v.-S~c~-cwt ~.c-..p-o ~dv~a_G~o~rtiU C1k`!c A-N~-- ~ cv-L /~.o ~y~t~.~. t.c,p.bv~ ~ P~'~W"tft.o.-Q~,s_, NMCt~.~ S'i-o.v.d~c>r.~1.o e~ vRer ? o i U ~5.: ~ xu.c-bw~. c+..KdZ s ~..~ol..,.-6 ~w. c~.re~,.a ~ yn ~ ~ n /~ i n 5`Fc*`It-i'v~p.~.~Fb t~-fr u.i`-~z~,~ A b' ec~Fi v-e ~' J ~ ~sPe~,a_¢Q.., v~g,,,~ ~P~.,~ 5Jcv4~-y'.a-~+.tc. cF V #Lo : I.W and CormalL E~*-o-~t Cc~r~,.,¢R ~.~,~~ ~+ ~ ~+-^~-a-~laX ~-M...a~ h.ca,v-¢., cR-i s~'i v~c~- •i dLe.~a~c~ d-i e5 . Y~va+E ~~ cQP~,~V +., e Policy 5: Be an Adaptable City httroduttion: Being an adaptable city is critical in the evolution ofa communih•. Too many communities do not adapt to bcal, regional, and national influences and suffer from theiacicoftlexibility. For instance, many communities are still trying [o revitalize their downtowns based on the models that were successful 50 or more years ago. They have not recognized the evidence that downtowns can still be vital places, but have not adjusted to current influences and circumstances. Objective 5.1: Carmel,vill regularly reevaluate the local, regional, and national influences that affect development '~ success and vitality. The City will also strive to predict the next evolutions in development to better recognize whether they would have a positive or negative effect on the City. -~i~06jective 5.2: Periodically review and revice the Land ~3 Classification Plan Mao to adapt to changes in [he built environment, evolutions in community values, and changes in community policies. Objective 5.3: Continue to recognize, plan and update critical corzidors and subareas. N.a.\.,r k..c-'trw..,;vs,,~ i s b~.,o~.a ci,~ ,.,~o~Qo ,Aa.u'.ccn.O~Q .S~ OY Y•~.a-ram (r'~~~~ GG cLq,c, SLR ~. l (o CGN, MP~v~)k # eZ 'Tp•c- L.~ 1'f cQC~ vv.o't' rw-c<-fit J-o~ Fr..~si d2~. o~ t ~-r6u,k•.. ..Q-o.ar~d-wav~ wre~..,o, . ~ ~ ~ woa~y a r t.u, P ro v ems. "~reanc~5 cu.<Q 6¢.. 5 u-c¢. c~ 1 er5 av-e~ bCnl~q coy„ na,v-dL '1'O Policy 5: Inspire Community Character Imroduction: Community character is the aesthetic of a neighborhood, district, or the entire community. Positive community character is desired and often helps build local pride, encourages im~estment, and improves quality of life. Objective 6.1: Reject homogeneous development and corporate branding architecture. In residential areas ~° °' ~~ architectural guidelines should be instituted to preve monotonous development, Commercial areas should be subjected to architectural standards that inspire unique and appropriate designs fitting Carmel's character goals. Objective 6.2: Promote a unique community with unique neighborhoods and subareas. Already the City is investing in the Old Town Arts and Design District, which is a fantastic example ofestablishingauniquesubdistrict. The community' will identify appropriate character>;oals forthe ast, entra , and West Carmel Districts and critical subareas. 06jepive 5.3: Encourage high quality and significant landscaping to help beautif}r:he City and promote healthful environments. ~ 06jet[ive 6.4: Promote the planting and care of canopy trees throughout Cannel. Canopy trees are desired because they add a great deal of character and comfort to the built environment. They also provide relief from heat, soften noise and light, and help purify the air we breathe. This is a particularly important objective because so many mature trees are lost through development. 0bjective 6.5: Promote the use of public art in both public spaces and within private developments. Also, encourage .~7 designers to include public art in their buildings and surrounds. Objective 5.5: Promote healthy life styles through the use of ~~ innovative design and planning. ~leS, I #S wzaF- Cor,..nd- :.~ ciP~Lr.a..~y w•i~ ~~wo y „ / w 1 y~ tA~11.o k S d-1'~a- Cv+n M~+.r~k ~ ~"° #3 p.Po-p'O"W' o-~~i'n...? wl'\n>•- ; 5~, p t-f-U;S ~ri +-a-~= '••-a dz; S•Ir~ .`~(- 1~¢S; sear..,x-S , O,- v-a 'Y~-~'- 1 ~~~'~ ? ~ Ph-o- L-aMCQ G/ctSSl ~i Cd~~-C,t ~ " V i Si cv. ~ ~ Y~ GCL.., ~ 1~.fw ~.~" ""~.i`e""~{:~Q`( ~'~t° I't"P`~-(2'``Qa" Icu..cQscc.~ri lot,~~'~s i'P-4ra.-+r-e_nkc.HXs t'evvi s..=dL w L. Oc.~F i s ~.,_ y.~ µ.f~ <T v ~1re~U-o, S ~:\ p o , ~ u,,.a ~t~,~w~-mot ~~ s~; k~ $..~~ I ~ p ~. P 1~? 7~v;5 len-v~LS a'-v-o.~ o-,.,,_. 1 ~'k-s~(L.f~ fc.~w,.rf S~.CR inset-K,~e~ cihfivt wt?.~y- w-LQ.Q -a-c,.c~ 6w11BuZp~Q- rv.~.~1..~-rte ~l'ts.~. ##'~ ha-a-;..~Ca.,.~:,:.~..Sl ~y,,~-Ra. .aR-o...Rcj! ~a.Q~ .5 `r'0..k,CQOt2Q.O , #7 Cm•w~-c2.e,~ r,ac~P~v:;,kt.q t-oa.c~ :.~e~.ica~,s ~dt ~,laa..q r>~fi ~.,~d a..o ;N-~,f, o~-Q,.a.t ''Lativ,-DS v-£~ cw/sl ~', ck..~C£.. t~ 3 g ~' S~f-, ^R-°--., I l ~l e~ii'I~~f`~e,'Q,~,',. M1 oa~~~.y~'~1~-{,'\ s i..rc,~~Q{efL Imo' cQn.a.ea- ,.Q~LLGrb (f ('.\~rNe l~,lPL~/~~fJLI U~AyI'k_U IfM .O~"w 1. ~I Ck ,•L:\4M~~l~ " , 1 U'QCS M 19.A; JICOLJ' ~ 1 L) I ~ CJf' ,.~T r Policy 7: Be Environmentally Sensitive Introduction: Being environmentally sensitive is the act of protecting natural areas, introducing plant material into the urban environment, reducing energy consumption, encouraging energy and natural resource conservation, and utilizing "green" building materials. Objective 1.1: Encourage the use of durable materials and construction methods that prolong the life of buildings. A paradigm shift is necessary to change the current 30-year life expectancy ofcommercial buildings and some production homes to a more substantial life expectancy. Carmel has already had some success in encouraging 100-year buildings. ' For instance, Pedcor is currently applying that standard to several buildings in the City Center and the Old Town Arts ~~~ and Design District. /~. Ohjective 7.2: Replace the fleet of City vehicles with energy "--I' efficient and low emission cars and trucks. With the `~--~ introduction ofhybrid vehicles, the City now has viable ~ I means for improving [he environment through energy I conservation. Objective 1.3: Develop a network to allow non-vehicular trips to be made by requiring employment nodes to install covered and secure bicycle parking, and shower and changing ~~ ~'t,,,c,~ ~-cQpA„ t 6,~,~ p~ P~~ ~~ ~ facilities for cycling commuters. Concurrently, ensure that adequate bicycling facilities exist to allow safe and efficient i j' je~~ j ~- n u....6i ° ~v' r`y c'°'"'"'c'`'~''d-' bicycle commuting. Objestive 1.4: The City should encourage use ofwater-saving devices, and implore citizens to reduce water consumption by minimizing lawn sprinkling and exploring alternative landscaping ideas. Objective 7.5: Strongly encourage developers to build environmentally sensitive buildings, following guidelines similar to those in the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) program. These "green" buildings conserve energy resources, provide more healthful inside environments, last longer, utilize products made from recycled material, and use products that can be safely disposed ofor recycled when the building is eventually dismantled. Green buildings also strive to use local material to reduce the transportation impact. For instance, importing marble from overseas has an enormous environmental impact compared to delivering Indiana limestone from southern counties. - t7o C~-.r~..eR ~,~.G-f.~~ bu:; Id~..~,~, ~.,,.d~ bins~e5.,a_S cc5~- tYj, ems.., d2w7v o 7 /~+-~ 6.,,.. IAc,.Q, A-~-c~-~ ~-v 7 S~j Ouw~ !`t5~r~~,~ crv~~ SPrtve w-etlla.~ I.:~ov~ i`e-~w..a.c~1-'> f}Pa- Ino+~15 g~i v~y~ ~Tv.e~t3 't~~- opd-+w. O~F -~ori~o~r~y ~O,,:I y d5 h~-~t- 0 /.a.~. d-'1-ET..ae~2. Wo 3L.i~ cLr-~..0 ,~d mwlii~ J(~le-- h'~~~ S+-a,.~s'? ~~ sfr-+nkll~is2 h„t wr:.>C-c= WASk Ph-o WI ¢~..... V-~'..aJ(- n¢cl?.~ +'....ur~-0' 14v~'SCp-p inch IcQ Cst,~, Gerd-~. . ~ rya.- ~..K~,,,. ~.~~.-.~~,~&-~,_ . 06jeetive 1.6: Set the precedent for environmental protection orrevegetation when developing municipal facilities like parks, fire stations, and maintenance facilities. Ohjective 7.7: Protect the City's drinking water supply and other surface water that becomes drinking water for others. Institute regulations that protect the delineated wellhead protection areas from contaminants and land uses that hav a higher risk of contaminating water resources. Ik,~ 'd-F.i- 5~ rZ,c~2s~cke,o w~N'~ {~.er-6', of cfL.a-o '. S~ So~ nc~L c..l d-~-+~'v~+~'i v-ea.... dLwC-ct~a.. t`2.5 ~ cQ.a V~o ~~,C++M ~}'U rr~ i h ~,-.' ~ 2~ IQ..ur C,k, EYn -,~5. Co+'+5i~ P14.~`~'11~ ,.,, e.~;c.~4,s Ci.t-a~ CP.YC.~2h-G" C7 1'D t5."~cQc:.b o..:~$ ~v i 3VV-~~, w i I dL ~I erw~cc-a D`4-o rc~.,,,~p ~.•.~ow ; ~ cwd2_. W cV~eCi r~.a~„~6Z bv-en~L.'n~. IB CI9'10F f.,0.VIYL, IADLAA,A EAST CARMEL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES Introduction The following sections convey the policies and objectives for the East Carmel District. It is important to note that these sections share some of the same policy headings as the City- Widesection, but the content is specific to East Carmel. Policy t: Manage Community Form 06jective 1.1: Protect the integrity of the suburban form and land uses. East Carmel is an area where redevelopment of residential districts is discouraged, and where investment in single-family homes is strongly encouraged. The City will identify projects, policies, and programs [hat wit I maintain the existing stability and encourage investment by homeowners. 06jeetire 1.2: Allow neighborhood service nodes- in context ~+ appropriate areas. The objective of these nodes is to allow limited neighborhood-serving commercial, mixed-use, and public amenities within walking distance to residents living in surrounding suburban neighborhoods. Lighting, parking, architecture, landscaping, size of buildings, and pedestrian foci lilies will be strictly regulated to ensure compatibility with existing residential uses. Policy 2: Be a World Class City P~~yE. 06jeetive 2.1: Et ce [he White River greenway and off- street trail to provide another notable linear park which connects parks as well as acting as the foundation for a larger, regional greenway. More off-street trails are expected to contribute, especially in the riparian corridor of the White River. 7 Objective 2.2: Promote a world class development on the ~oZ' Earlham College property, achieving the same recognition as the Village of WestClay. Unique uses or combination of uses would be welcome if designed into the context of the natural environment and surzounding suburban development. Policy 3: Inspire Community Character 06jective 3.1: Reinforce suburban character including tree- linedburvilinearstreets, sidewalks separated by tree lawns, and neighborhood parks. Also, maintain the dominant presence ofhigh quality single-family residential forth. 06jeetive 3.2: Allow density transitions from single-family ~~j residential form along Eas[ 96th Street and 146th Street ,but encourage contest sensitive buffer development along [he corzidors to help soften the lower density residential neighborhoods. 06jective 7.7: Consider expanding the neighborhood commercial node at East 131" Street and Hazel Dell Parkway to the southwest corner by encouraging the church to develop a portion of the property with mired use and a variety of housing types. The area would act as an east side Secondary Core, with the potential for a community transit stop. Ao v~+.- c.~u~.t-c-R~ n.t..~- ca-c-e_c.. ro_5~,~iv....~. wn.~~-k d-4~- ? Polity 4: Be Environmentally Sensitive 06jectire 4.1: Aggressively protect the riparian corridor and floodplain along the N'hite River from encroachment. Objective 4.2: Continually monitor mining practices to ensure they do not devalue property or negatively affect quality of life. Also, encourage reclamation planning for quarry sites to better coordinate public facilities and infrastructure improvements, and public recreation opportunities. Ohjective 4.J: Expand Eas[ Carmel bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, especially in areas adjacent to institutional nodes such as schools and churches, and neighborhood- servingcommercial. Objective 4.4: Establish an East Carmel recycling and hazardous materials drop-off station in conjunction with the City's sewage treatment facility. Objective 4.5: Locate an East Carmel satellite facility for Carmel Street Maintenance and other public services. This will help conserve fuel and distribute manpower more equally over the community. -/r' j yu.xxn-rwy~G.. l.~ ~"1~ c~ au-~c(Z ~X ,.ems d-C, e'er c~,~. J-~- j-~+^^~ e:.i a.ss; S;`.w~-+o.. •yV,cae , G ..~i- Pe-S ~ tQ-e-v~' i h P,.t:~t , n4J testa-~- I C~ o..,,.a.. I O cou~.~e~c+~to-.<~t s!4-P2' I.C,~ Y-° ?t.~,..a.~.~r••~ SPs •" C(~ ..a, tt` jim~ ~~4 neiy~l~.~bp~Qti-~E~..av,d ~ V CaM m P-r'L.i ca.Q- , ~C.(`CL~a-°- '.^"'p'6.'~ i ~ t~.ca.t.r=~ re.. w12~,~-S. M-~ U ~~1.' ~J-O7~C/- Cam, IICS.l~t~~ l~X 1T ,E x I-1cvJ s i a,-• 08 Cov, n ¢,- P ha..; ,-:, ~ ? To~V ~.~c~...~ ' iAhjCN[r1..7y~Y ~ 't.v ew 7N C..1 ... cr.n-. ~is. i5u .tici'lc' ~.~vl- V-~a- m', ~ cM,lcc' : c sr d-e-c~ U ; l l t+n~e.- d~ (-Jest-Glw~• ~xcv c~/-ly ht,-w cCc .~3k Oi n~Fea-.~R d-o ewS+.~s-e.- `I-~.n:k' I d-t} ~Gi'15 i .vd-o ~T~- 5 ~I-r-c-o t.ca.~R; y.q s :ti.b....r-frcw.. a+~e-c. ? #~3 ~ .a ~-utia..~.ok 6ti.:~~e ei~.q i 5 e~ e P e ss i 61a} Cor,~.ak,b 6~44e.ri•.q rec~rUarcw.e,.,z~~ o.ro G^.rne-1..'tCy I n .S ti ~4-itlc:i o--NV~k. i~~' hPgc~'~'~~-"^~Cyt i1+~PACJ~" S.tn'~i17/<.~lnsfl.-~ reS~i rA B~r1J-1.Jt7caX ~+-t`~e~,t~. ~l'm"-2er'+yyv~.~~ oC~,,.at ,I C:Vt?IfL CU\SpLIUd!!U (OVI'Hkllt?>I\t i'~L.-\~ 19 W Q-,-~ •-O ) 0-0Y~c cT~+.~' Ov~L' ~- l i r~E'S a']- w n%r~ y r5w.a-t- r_cm.~tte,y. . n W a.oy- ~~ • s Introduction The following sections convey the policies and objectives for the Central Camtel District. It is important to note that these sections share some of the same policy headings as the City-Wide section, but the content is specific to Central Carmel. Policy 1: Manage Community Form 06jet[ive 1.1: Encourage compact urban form and mixed-use ~` developmentlhroughoutCentralCarmel. Objective 1.2: Allow the tallest structures in Carmel to be in the City Center, Old Town district, and along U. S. 3 I . The building height will be limited [0 10 stories in these subdistricts. sp~.c~~y he:1~I..t resari~l-tons e.15vw1,o+~rc}py- ,~,Ohjective 1.3: Strongly encourage neighborhood and community-serving commercial nodes in strategic locations ' ~E.a7`j [o allow people to walk from [heirjobs and homes to those amenities. The objective is to ensure the entire Central PJ ~ Carmel district has neighborhood-serving orcommunity- serving commercial development within a short walking distance of al I employment and residential development. Objective 1.4: Protect single-family residential neighborhoods in Central Carmel as much as possible through strong code ? enforcement, targeted infrastructure investments, and landscaping beautification projects. Theses coo rtidk Pr°t~• 06jeetive 1.5: Strive for additional street connectivity in Central Carmel. The City should strive to connect streets when new development or redevelopment occurs, especially those linkages shown on the Thoroughfare Plan Map. 06jective 1.5: Encourage connectivity to and through Central Carmel by establishing bicycle and pedestrian facilities ? across Meridian Street and Keystone Avenue. ~S Policy 2: Be a World Class City ,~, 06jeetive 2.1: Establish swell-designed, pedestrian-friendly JP and vital downtown. To ensure vitality, significant ~~pr' incorporation of residential and office uses should be required in upper floors. All ground floors should be designed for pedestrian comfort and interaction. Objective 2.2: Promote a world class employment corridor and technology park along U.S. 31, east of Pennsylvania Street and north of East 116th Street. Integrate employment- servingcommercial uses to allow workers to walk to restaurants and other businesses suitable for such a subdistrict, by requiring new buildings along Carmel Drive and City Center Drive to be a minimum ofrivo stories in height, and by allowing for a mix of uses, including additional residential and service retail. Policy 3: Be a City of Neighborhoods Objective 3.1: As outlined in Cirir Uosign. Central Carmel ' should be planned as a collection of neighborhoods applying traditional neighborhood design principles to connectivity, transitions, location ofneighborhood-serving commercial, pedestrian-friendly features and the like. Objective 3.2: Endeavor to plan neighborhoods, gateways, boundaries, and service areas through more detailed subarea plans. Policy 4: Inspire Community Character 06jeetive 4.1: Reinforce urban character in Central Carmel, especially north ofEast 116th Street. Objective 4.2: Encourage signature buildings on prominent sites [o enhance the district's character. Signature buildings can be private or public buildings, but must have architectural flair and be built from durable materials. Objective 4.3: Establish a Public Art Master Plan. Include artists in the design process of public spaces. Policy 5: Be Environmentally Sensitive 06jeetive 5.1: Aggressively protect the Monon Trail's tree- ~ lined corridor and environmental features on [he Central Park ~°D' site. Where possible, locate new public parks on land adjacent to or within a short walk from the Monon Trail. 06jeetive 5.2: Tree areas should be conserved and should be evaluated as part of an overall network of smal I parks and squares. Objective S.J: mote pact urb fi5rm wi di:nsif at ~.J support ass tra t #1 Ge_t o{'p~t~R "r11p1.'~ cusl;QCewts es+ubl~she Q res : cC e~.sl;<,lL. ., e; ~ h ho-rl,e:-adts, ~.~ #o~ 1 ~+-1t' c4-e--.ak.Q6~p snP~a ~'-tbti.-~ PMG.t~wc%~.'..~q ov, +~a_ 'Yv1 v.~.YYCI'~ 1 t-es.~ f Gt..-.cll- Pnc.-lclcw, ~.. ~-e.~ cwdZ r-e - 1 -~k., ~ ~.rz~ii. `Q°'"`..Rct'"`.~^,:'E- J-p L.o.-v t. j ~s mss-. c..R~ ~..,....~C, # 3 '=d- 'i s vtod- ri ~).~t- ~r- Cocti,,o~' dz, ~,,~, ~ i rC1`Qa-~a-d2 cQE-~~5 ~~Fi e.S Cn1 i {S t`e-S,cRe~,:~o 1 h O f-~f tLt'- `i-p `` KS -~ ~ wt oISS ~-f'4~n.$ I `}-. Z `f1.°v"F 6e-l'1 J°^'~ d-Q.~a,f '+'~.~ -~ w', II bc._ I1rvL ~ ~inklnO, 2e w,~v.~, CENTRAL CARMEL POLICIES AND OB ECTIVES Objective 2.3: Promote the Arts and Design District and the Carmel Performing Arts Centerby hosting world class musical artists and visual artists. WEST CARMEL POLICIES AND OB)ECTIYES *' N u.w+ L~FSe~I. Cor„ r..a.-.yFS ~-1re_ eY. Introduction ~1 ~~ oJFd'cacQ. e~ ~, Road. ~Q, ev e r~-t ~J h e,.ra.. ~ ~ Se-. . Objective 3.1: Protect single-family residential character along \Vest 96th Street beween Spring Mill Road and Shelbourne Objective 3.3: Require commercial /buildings along \lichigan Road to be constructed of Bumble nmterials and desiened to The following sections convey the policies and objectives for West Carmel. It is important to note that these sections share some of the same policy headings as the City-Wide section, but the content under each heading is specific [o West Camrel and adds to other city-wide objectives. «flect "tillage" character. Policy 1: Manage Cemmunity Form Objective 1.1: Conserve the coral character of West Carmel by protecting estate residential areas and by requiring new subdivisions to have large setbacks from perimeter roads. Further, require extensive revegetation along perimeter roads and within each new development. A larger open space requirement should also be considered. Objective 1.1: Allow limited neighborhood service nodes in context with or adjacent to appropriate areas. The objective of neighborhood service nodes is to allow limited neighborhood-serving commercial, mixed-use, and public amenities within a short distance to residents living in surrounding suburban neighborhoods, not in proximity to Conservation Residential. Lighting, parking, architecture, landscaping, size of buildings, orientation of buildings, and pedestrian facilities will be strictly regulated to assure compatibility. Objective 1.3: Conservation subdivisions and innovative ~~j residential community designs that protect vegetation, slopes and are non-monotonous are preferred. Objective 1.4: Connectivity and transitions between proposed developments and existing subdivisions should be scmtinized to a greater degree in West Carmel. Policy 1: Be a World Class City Ohjeaive 2.1: Maintain and protect areas for estate housing and other housing styles that cater to the wealthiest families living in the City. These areas are essential to attracting world class corporations, providing the desired quality-of--life for CEOs and other senior employees. 04jective 2.1: Encourage more custom-home developments to provide housing opportunities for upper income families. Custom home neighborhoods will also add character to West Carmel by reducing monotony. Policy 3: Inspire Community Character Objective 3.1: Reinforce rural character including tree lines, fence rows, barns, pockets of open space, and preservation of wood lots. Re ide~ ial int nsit ~ an tst,rM-'t g era shgd7d~Tbe viodsly rtray d fr peyrfne ro s. Policy 4: Be Environmentally Sensitive Ohjemive 4.1: Strive [o protect wood lots, wetlands, and other valuable natural features in West Carmel. These features ~, contribute to the district's rural character, but they also provide habitat for plants, birds, and other animals. '~ Obje ve 4.b'Esta Gsh n ghborfiood-servi co erc no s to onse e fu , red e~io , an ~ ro to I alth -life s yles. Policy 5: Stimulate Connectivity Objective 5.1: West Carmel has many non-connecting subdivisions. The proliferation of this pattern of development is more tolerable in this district; however, critical connections shown on the Thoroughfare Plan will be ~'~ adamantly required. Although there is less emphasis on vehicular connectivity, pedestrian connectivity will be strictly required. For instance, where road connectivity between a proposed development and an existing development is not required, a pedestrian path will be required. Objective 5.1: With the success of the Monon Trail, other off- street facilities are in demand. West Carmel has an opportunity [o utilize portions of several pipeline corridors for such a trail. These corridors are shown as off-street trails in the 2020 Vision Plan and in the Alternative i Transportation Plan initially adopted in 2001, and are being supported in the C3 Plan as well. Integrating this type of facility in some areas will be relatively easy, but in built environments may prove to be more difficult. i 06jeetive 5.3: Carmel should partner with neighboring communi[iestoplanandimplementasignificantgreenway along Little Eagle Creek. Objective 5.4: Continue expansion of bicycle and pedestrian infrastmcture to connect neighborhoods with schools, parks, West Clay Secondary Core, and other destinations. LAkVItL CU?tiO LIUd TkD (U.UP0.LIIUiIA'L 1'L.A? ZI .. p. a- #-: C.z,,,~~w,:,..~ ru.ti-~..4i+.- ~~~~e.~. ~A n.~c- ,...Q.~.R, w~~-I:.rK,.._ .~t/e,..,.p~r ,~-o ..I,v..G,~¢-a.~.. cQ_¢~v.a ~ Cl,,..a~ A.c~cQ- LG,-..,. ~uC ; c.A a,~a-c.,.i.. s.t,~.c.. L',/~c~.wq.fiA i.>-o-.,.AA c P.,.u~ ~zA~.~. ow,-.w-~ ~--o rvw„-~ `'~~~ A -Q.~r~~- ~-p-P-• -0 s pP `°- n~es~.w~~..e....c.,..,~ ~. n1i.oc v~e.v-~4_edZ, l~.~z.eo~,..~.as+. r,u,wsca..blc: ctn~a,o ~C'.~~, rye-tx.~=~t-cr ~oK~2~o p,~.-d- ~~-rcc7.n s~-~r~ !>v~n.~<.c.,... r-=:--a.~Lo~ c(~a~- cc-.+~-~*G-dZ ft oZ. L.l.),A~A'~ C~c`mm~ YIOaQ.~/1 OYl P..Q-~ -~+'u-~" ..C]1.c>Qa_[) [I-~ ~ ci.~t!?-Gt, ca-.y.c1[_ ~..:i y-~ UU V 1 ,. D r I f - oQ e.:{-i n e-cQ.. ~~ ~ r m, ~e~~ v~2w_q.~bat -~acrz~ - 5 p~^+-q Comm ca-~t,o~- ;~ o'~ v->Qo-- V ~ lln~ ,.~ I.JtSY'Clcty ~c.V`~-1+-~L I r~~o i'~.¢_ m~~dLdL-~Jr_.~ n.o w~v~~a- •1• /n-~; q h b v r'{. o-c-dL 5 fir., i cs>-.vJ'r~ ~R.cq '' a,r~ n.e~.aR..a~_ oK- w a.~.Jte~Q. ~3: ~101~.~-c.QQ/~. +'~9"!' 9-2~!' Censc?,~v e,~~-m-~n S~~bd2.+vn~5~emS ~ I~ea_r 5in~ eRr~.ti5~~ m ~ ?S . /~ e 5 ~ oe tlP ~v~~~ a~Q- t~ e5 ~r q !w `d-v~caJ~ ~-p~a~c~- ~~a~.-av~ 4_.~~Q <ir~ r~r~ - m m-~ o'tav~ ®-~S ~..,-.1L~ OrvuR~ ~-u ~~ a.~. #+} Pro+ecvl-inq a.~e.aa. ~ esanxa. Iw..~s;l-.y w,ea...,o eo-re_se.cv`~r.q ~-0.:-0 5-1 Za,,.~- dan-e-c~. l~o2cL P- P°q{'" /~-~'"'~ dv-~w._ / ~l~ '~' 5+~, oo~¢.-d a ~Za~- o -y > .F-V~-a~k -w •~+~ o~r-~zn-eSL- d-O .A.~-c~-J' 2 xa ~ w-~f..x~ ..w -Q..¢..~- v-~.o.~t ~.7-0,..~.~ #~S: (~zi~..~~,-w r,.~.t-~-~ r~.ora.c~a~. 1a.~ lee~pi,.q d-4..~..~ a~e~_ ~ lo-w--~e~.~s,d-y r25 i 6Le..al; c+A ~ 5 o J-P.P.~ ~ a.~.dt o,.~,.a,_a dc(.6„~k ,_p-eve c-c-r.~P`! I e dL d~-o w..av -'~~'R{ ~ a..~oa~~ Pr25e~(-~v irk WorocfZ~ctS. 2EG5~IC~~-`1'{a~ ~i r~+P.n Si ~c. ~n5~ t~2 5c_W~1o e~rec~t ~ W he~u- aq.c~~ ~-a,„_ 1"00.0 oz. >ti-o-`•f. Re.~.~.aYe/ d-~i / ~ ) S (?~..Tf Ei1n.C0 ~ Q.v~~- 1 1'~C~f'Q-P-F].O_ ~o.t~( ~. O~.OJ~Mn,C1L.C p LLfc~ ~yXil~Q~c~C'~m3.~~o ~~o: Jaa_ $k a.. ~.o a.v n.~i~p v~.e#' Ge~...~.pa~-fs~ w+#,~ rca,t-aQ C~PS~a.c~a.~. =~t br-i h.q,O .~.... -argy.. ~-~C1A.c~-moo U. S. 3I cw~L 1,1.5. `F a-I / 0 d~.c>.~ o~a-{~. et-v.rvaz, ~•.,-m...f.~ r~-o-~F Lin... 6L.~-i v i .. 9 b~.<- n el ~1~.1~ o-c-h croc4a . _* c~v-e~ wo~1' ~e.~-e~.~~ c4-ri ~J; n. q ~.-.:r vCo~e.oCi' P_cQcQ ec>r-d ~i clZl ~ ,~.q ~.a.~ . # 7; ~ o a.c1L ccn n e roc- i v T~ v-,D..c..~.('.d~ loa.. a. re c~-,~.~,.,e-dL. P a_Nd- o~ c~.Q~ tie.-~Y .-~ »ta..,.~o . ~ ,~,~ YLO't ~-o rz.~c.a,~ `1-~e. cn.n._ - h~-~.RR_ rvc;dZ ~ ~ d-P. PiF- :~ 5 0 ~~. v D I l Lo "~' ~. ~ ~ r-o a ~ c.F.w . ~° ~ .P.e.n.n cue i s xz' nn' or' c~x~ie~, isoin~n ~ n1+~.~~ c*-Qi~-O h-2-a-~ `j-o ~¢,r --1" ~ np w~a~ a~ls.2. ~-~' .-w.. C~ P.ro. c~K w ~ V-~ ~,J E s-r c ~,2 M E"~. Message ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 _t_~ _~~ f; Keeling, Adrienne M ~ _ `'~4 From: Kevin Heber [kevin@indianatrails.org] G~~~ 1" i Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 1:05 PM j ~~,~~yo2~~~6 To: Keeling, Adrienne M .~~C,S Subject: comments on the C3 ~~ ~ , , ~~ Below are my additional comments on the C3 draft as of June 2006: - Page 18 explicit mention of a Conservation Plan to identify and strategize to preserve significant natural parcels (0.25 square mile resolution or less) 19 add Stimulate Connectivity as Policy 5; with mention of the following * connect Conner Prairie near 146th Street and Fishers Heritage Park at 106th Street with new or historic bridges * refurbish old concrete sidewalks along collector streets with new 10' asphalt paths * transform 131st sidewalk/bbardwalkinto amajor east-west trail named thoroughfare (Prairie-Town Trail?) connecting Conner Prairie with Old Town; there are few curb cuts and the boardwalk is in need of replacement finish the White River Greenway up to 146th Street " identify 106th Street as the south side major east-west bike path thoroughfare 21 "Rural Character" needs more definition: suggest reduction of lawn, mulch and evergreens, and promotion of low-maintenance, native vegetation (desirable wildflower, shrub and tree species) along rights-of-way, common areas, landscaped areas 32, 34 Facilitate auto, BICYCLE, and pedestrian access (add word bicycle) PART 4 Add "Urban Trail" to facility classification; this is a split ped & bike urban trail/walk like the CICF's proposed Cultural Trail; note that Main Street between Keystone and Rangeline; Rangeline between Main St and Carmel Dr are candidates (photo attached) Add "Multi-use sidewalk" to facility classifcation; this is a widened sidewalk w/scaled signage in urban areas with intent to serve bike&ped but not split (photo attached) 62 Street sweep sand, stones, SNOW and debris... 63 Not in MOTORIZED right of way 65-BIKE&PED MAP * add bike lane layer, split left & right sides of street where treatment is different or where there is a transition * show designated thru-routes: e.g., Conner Prairie to Zionsville * show potential major trail loops PART 5: add Westfield Blvd as critical corridor, gateway, esp area near Central Park: what should this look like? 79 show multi-use path connection between Monon & Clay Terrace, northward (Westfield will need a MuP on all of US31 -Carmel may not) 6/ 12/2006 Message . ~ Page 2 of 2 83 show proposed Urban Greenway from Keystone &Rangeline on Main Street; Main Street to Carmel Drive on Rangeline Thanks! Kevin Heber Carmel Plan Commission khebert7o carmel.in.oov 6/12/2006 ,. a. fn, ~~~ ~ =, Message • Keeling, Adrienne M Page 1 of 2 From:. Dutcher, Dan [ddutcher@ncaa.org] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 3:43 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M; jerry_chomanczuk@conseco.com; Forwarding Email Heber, Kevin; Leo Dierckman; Forwarding Email, Torres, Madeleine; Rattermann, Mark; rripma@usavingsbank.com; schleif@indy.rr.com; sstromquist@wbmi.com; suewestermeier@aol.com; whaney1393@aol.com Cc: bjohnson@groundrulesinc.com; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Griffin, Matt L; Griffin, Matt L; Conn, Angelina V; Holmes, Christine B Subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan Review Parts 1 and 2 Adrienne (and others): I will be there tomorrow night, at least for the first hour until parks board starts. Sorry again to miss last week. Here were my edited comments on Parts 1 and 2 (some of which I shared previously): • Enhance demographics in Part 1 to reflect all of Clay Township • Enhance references to technology in Part 2, especially as it affects land use, and especially in Central Carmel. Consider establishment of a Technology Plan for the city, similar to the transportation and ATP plans. • Include more direct references to parks related quality of life and environmental sensitivity. • Consider calling for the establishment of branch campus or other type of higher education institution in Carmel. Colleges are a wonderful addition to the quality of life and economic vitality of a city. Demographic trends make it inevitable that sooner or later, at least one local four-year school will open a branch in Hamilton County. There will simply be too many bodies to ignore. Let's get it done in Carmel, as opposed to Fishers, Noblesville, etc. • Is it time to "de-link" road and trail improvements? Most folks seem to favor and value trails, but have a different attitude regarding road improvements. Yet in Carmel they typically go hand in hand. We should be ready to reaffirm this policy and say so, or be ready to approve another viable approach. I see this as a major issue when we discuss roads and trails, esp in West Carmel. • The document designates West Carmel as "rufal," but does not define that phrase. It is subject to varied interpretation, at best. Some may interpret it to mean "in the county," some to mean "the way things used to be" and others to refer to agricultural uses. "Rural" seems to be used here in different ways and collectively as a short-hand for low density, estate home development. If that is the case, we should call it that and drop the term "rural." I certainly would argue that West Carmel no longer is "in the country," nor it it agricultural. And let's take an honest look at the amount, location and density subdivisions that have been approved in "West Carmel" before we stipulate that estate development exists throughout the area. Looking forward to tomorrow night's discussion. Thanks. Dan Dutcher Vice-President for Div. III NCAA ddutcher@ncaa.org www,ncaa.org 6/12/2006 ~~G TFiSLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Acknowledgments ....:................. Comprehensive Plan Mandate .... Fulfillment of the Mandate ........... Plan Objectives and Methodology Three Districts ............................. Part 1: Community Profile Objective Profile ..................................................................... 10 -Environmental Conditions ........................................................ 10 -Demographic Information ........................................................ 10 -Community Facility Inventory ................................................... 12 Part 2: Comprehensive Plan Essence Comprehensive Plan Essence Introduction .............. ............... 14 City-Wide Policies and Objectives ........................... ............... 15 East Carmel Policies and Objectives ........................ ............... 19 Central Carmel Policies and Objectives ................... ............... 20 West Carmel Policies and Objectives ...................... ............... 21 Part 3: Land Classfication Plan Land Classdication Plan Introduction ................... .................... 24 Parks and Recreation ........................................... ................... 25 Conservation Residential .................................... .................... Z6 Suburban flesidential ........................................... ................... 27 Urban Residential ................................................ ................... 28 Multifamily Residential ........................................ ................... 29 Neighborhood Service Node ................................. ................... 30 Institutional Node ................................................ ................... 31 Community Vitality Node ..................................... ................... 32 Employment Node ................................................ ................... 33 Regional Vitality Node .......................................... ................... 34 Core Support ........................................................ ................... 35 Secondary Core .................................................... ................... 36 Primary Core ........................................................ ................... 37 Future Land Classif cation Map ............................ ................... 38 Part 4: Transportation Plan Transportation Plan Introduction ...................... ....................... 42 Thoroughfare Plan .:.......................................... ....................... 43 - Residential Street ...:...................................... ........................ 44 -Collector Street .............................................. ........................ 45 -Urban Collector Street ..................................... ....................... 46 - Residential Parkway 2-Lane ............................ ....................... 47 - Residential Parkway 4-Lane ............................ ....................... 48 -Secondary Parkway ......................................... ....................... 49 -Primary Parkway .............................................. ....................... 50 -Urban Arterial .................................................. ....................... 51 -Secondary Arterial ........................................... ....................... 52 - Pdmary Arterial ................................................ ....................... 53 - Thoroughfare Plan Map ................................... ....................... 54 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Plan ......................... ............... 57 - Residential Sidewalk .............................................. ................ 58 -Urban Residential Sidewalk .................................... ................ 59 -Urban Commercial Sidewalk ................................... ................ 60 - Side Path ............................................................... ................ 61 - On-Street Bicycle Lane .................:......................... ................ 62 -Off-Street Trail ........................................................ ................ 63 -Bicycle and Pedestdan Facility Plan Map ................. ................ 64 Transit Plan .............................................................. ...............67 -Commuter Line ...................................................... ................ 68 - Intracity Transportation System .............:................ ................ 69 -Transit Plan Map .................................................... ................ 70 Part 5: Critical Corridors and Suhareas Critical Corridors and Subareas Introduction .............. ............. 74 Keystone Avenue Corridor ......................................... ............. 76 Keystone Avenue Corridor Plan .................................. ............. 77 U.S. 31/Illinois Street Corridor ................................... ............. 78 U.S. 31/Aiinois Street CorridorPlan ............................ ............. 79 96th Street Cortidor ............................................:...... ............. 80 96th Street Corridor Plan ............................................ ............. 61 City Center/Old Town Subarea .................................... ............. 82 City Center/Old Town Subarea Plan ............................ ............. 83 Old Meridian Subarea ................................................ ............. 84 Old Meridian Plan ..............................:....................... ............. 88 Old Meridian Subarea Detail Plan ............................... ............. 89 Home Place Subarea ...............:....:............................. ...:......... ~ Home Place Subarea Plan .......................................... ............. 91 2~CITY OF CARMEL, INDIANA CARMEL CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3 fiCKMCIWLEDGMENTS City of Carmel Mayor • James Brainard City of Carmel Commen Council • Rick Sharp • Kevin Kirby • Brian Mayo • Joseph Griffiths • Fred Glaser •Mazk Rattermann • Ron Carter City of Carmel Plan Commission • Jerry Chomanczuk • Leo Dierckman • Dan Dutcher • Wayne Haney • Kevin Heber •Mazk Rattermann • Rick Ripma • Cazol Schleif • Steven Stromquist • Madeleine Torres • Susan Westermeier Depardnent of Community Services • Michael Hollibaugh, AICP, RLA • Adrienne Keeling, AICP Project CansultaM • Ground Rules, Inc. 4 CITY OF CARMEL, INDIANA CCIM~RENENSIVE PL(~N MAN~HTE The State of Indiana, through Indiana Statutes, Title 36, Article 7, as amended, empowers communities to plan with the purpose of improving the health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the citizens and to plan for the future development of their communities to the end: I. That highway systems [and street systems] be carefully planned; 2. That new communities grow only with adequate public wad 3. That the needs of agriculture, industry, and business be recognized in future growth; 4. That residential areas provide healthful surroundings for family life; and 5. That the growth of the community is commensurate with and promotive of the efficient and economical use ofpublic funds (IC 36-7~-201). Indiana statutes state that communities may establish planning and zoning entities to fulfill this purpose (IC 36-7-4- 201). APlan Commission is the body responsible fot maintaining the Comprehensive Plan, which is required by State law to be developed and maintained (IC 36-7~-501). Indiana Code 36-7~-502 and 503 state the required and permissible contents of the Plan. The required Plan elements are listed below: 1. A statement of objectives for the future development of the jurisdiction. 2. A statement of policy for the land use development of the jurisdiction. 3. A statement of policy for the development of public ways, public places, public lands, public structures, and public utilities. FULFILLMENT OF THE MfiN7fiTE Throughout the planning process and within the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan, all of the State of Indiana minimum requirements have been met or exceeded. Some of the highlights include: • The Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan reflects analysis ofthe community, existing land uses, development trends, land use suitability, economic feasibility, and natural land features. • Public involvement provided guidance for this update. The input exceeded the criteria required by the State by providing several opportunities for people to share their thoughts. • Part 2: Comprehensive Plan Essencein the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan fulfills the requirement for establishing objectives for future development and a policy for the development of public places, public land, public structures and public utilities. • Part 3: Land Classification Plan in the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan fulfills the requirement for a land use development policy. • Part 4: Transportation Plan in the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan fulfills the requirement for developing a public ways policy. ~~ CARMBL CONSOLIlIATEU COMPR61iENSIVF PLAN b ~LpN OBJECTIVES pND METHODOLOGY Comprehensive Plan Update Objectives The primary objectives for revising Carmel's 2020 Vision Plan aze to: • Remove outdated and irrelevant information; • Remove objectives that have been achieved; • Update information and demographics; • Incorporate cunent policies and objectives; • Consolidate studies and plans that have been prepazed since the 2020 Vision Plan was adopted; • Distill the existing binder ofplanning documents into a more succinct and simple document; • Introduce language to address the trend towards redevelopment; and • Freshen the content to more accurately reflect the City's planning vision. The revised plan has been given the name Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive PJan (C3 Plan) because it assembles the essence from each of the existing, independent plans and studies relating to wmprehensive planning. Specifically, the C3 Plan utilizes informafion and plan elements from the following documents: • Carmel's 2020 Vision Plan • Development Plan and Strategies, U.S. 31 Corridor • 96th Street Corridor Study • Old Meridian Task Force Report • Integrated Economic Development Plan • Amended Redevelopment Plan • Interim Report for INDOT U.S. 31 Improvements , • Civic Design, Guiding Design Principals ~~-„~ Because the City is interested in utilizing aform-based regulatory system in the future, this plan also establishes the foundation for such a tool. The C3 Plan identifies where form-based regulations, hybrid regulations (balanced traditional and form-based regulation), and traditional regulations aze appropriate. As the City develops, urbanizes, acid redevelops, more and more detailed planning is expectedto be necessazy. This plan establishes a framework for subsequent, more focused planning efforts. Instead of incorporating those plans as addenda, the C3 Plan has a par[ for easily adding those plan's essence. Additionally, a standard format is established to dictate consistency as the C3 Plan evolves. Methodology Initial Public Inpm: The process for this update began in October of 2005 with multiple opportunities for public engagement. The planning team held meetings with the following groups: • CarmeVClay School Board; • Neighborhood association presidents; • Business leaders; • East Cannel general public; • Central Cannel general public; • West Cannel general public (2 meetings); • High school students; and • Chamber of Commerce leadership. Community Study: Once the first round of public input was complete, the consulting team focused on intensive study of the built environment and reseazch into the existing planning documents. This step in the process included several meetings with Camrel's planning staffand leadership. Documem Draftier: Concurrent with studying the community, the planning team began drafting the Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan. Immediately following the first full draft completion, the City scheduled a public open house for the public and interest groups to provide feedback about the plan. L Public Cemmem: To be written. - `/or/ w~ 'f-~-~ _ 0_ ImplemeMalion '~ ~~ ~ f"`- The Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive Plan contains general policies intended to influence growth, development, and vitality of the City as it evolves. The C3 Plan will be implemented by subsequent specific ordinances, programs, zoning decisions, Redevelopment Commission actions, and Common Council actions. 6I CITY OF CARMEL. INDIANA TFIREE CITY DI1Tt~ICTI Planning (or Three Unique Districts Historically; the City of Carmel and Clay Township was a homogeneous area consisting of farms, rural residential, estate homes, small town residential and small town downtown commercial development. The construction of 1-465 (1960's) and S.R. 43]/Keystone (1960's), and significant upgrades to U.S. 31 (1970's) in Clay Township all led to the evolution to many types of development in the City and Township. Today the City has an urbanizing core, an employment corridor, significant redevelopment sites, many styles of residential development and multiple commercial districts. The evolution of the City has also resulted in distinguishable districts: For the purposes of planning, the City of Carmel is recognizing the uniqueness of three districts; East Carmel, Central Carmel and West Carmel (see illustration below). The district boundaries were determined by evaluating development form, physical boundaries, and personal values. Although there technically aze boundaries drawn on the map between planning districts, it is not intended to be a "hard" division. Rather, the reader should view the divisions as conceptual. Therefore, an area on the edge of one district would be evaluated independently to determine which policies best fit that azea. East Carmel Cfiaraeteristics East Carmel is unique compared to the other two districts because i[ typifies suburbia with curvilinear streets, dominantly single-family residential uses, and a small Dumber ofemploymentorcommercialdevelopments. More specifically, the district contains a lazge number of neighborhoods with custom-built homes and has very little integrated commercial development. Aside from the commercial corridor along East 96th Street (the south boundary), there are only two integrated commercial areas within this district: Brookshire Village Shoppes and Hazel ~ Dell Comer. Two centers along 146th Street arejust outside of Carmel, Bridgewater Shoppes and Noble West. East Carmel has a variety ofrecreational amenities including ten pazks and an evolving river greenway. It also has three golf courses. Again, the mix of amenities is very consistent with suburban development. Central Cannel Characteristics Central Cannel is clearly unique in comparison to the other ,{'_ districts, in that it is an urbanizing core. Although there are -~/' areas of suburban development, the district has tilted toward an urban environment with significant mixed-use vitality. No longer aze the tallest structures two stories and subur~an ~. ~ in chazacter. Numerous four-story or higher buildings have ~ been built or aze in the process of being built in this district.lJ' Many new buildings are also being built to the front property line, further evolving the chazacter of the azea. Central Cannel has five pazks, the Monon Trail, and three golf courses; albeit, two aze under pressure to be developed. It also has two dominant street corridors, U.S. 31 and Keystone Avenue, which contribute to and support the urbanizing environment. CARMEL CONSOLIOATEO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ] The Central Carmel district contains multiple commercial areas including: Old Town (Arts and Design District), City Center, Merchants' Square, Old Meridian Street, Home Place, and the 96th Street Corridor The district also includes a wide mix of residential developments including historic residential, suburban residential, estate residential, townhouses, flats, apartments, and condominiums. The district is inclusive of significant employment areas. The U.S. 31 Corridor and the Carmel Science and Technology Pazk aze the main focus of employment-type development, but many other small office buildings are distributed throughout Central Carmel. West Carmel Characteristics West Carmel remains unique even after the development of many suburban neighborhoods. Historically, West Carmel was dominantly horse farms, agricultural land, estate residential and open space. The district is still distinguished from the East Carmel district by significantly lower density. residential and substantiai estate homes that are preserving open space. The West Carmel district contains the most substantial number of undeveloped acres and has the least developed road network resulting from the development of exclusive neighborhoods in the 1980's through today. Unlike East Carmel, where many neighborhoods were built with connecting streets to adjacent developments or stubbed streets to undeveloped areas. Although it is a lazger geographic azea, it only contains three public pazks and two golf courses. It also is the home to one of the most well known traditional neighborhood developments in the Midwest, the Village of WestClay. /rte ~~ 8 CtrY OF CARMEL. INDIANA • . • ~ ~ 03JECTIVE PROFILE Environmental Conditions The following environmental features exist in the City of Cannel River, Eloodplains and Riparian areas: The most significant environmental feature in the City is the White River and its associated floodplain and riparian areas. Situated on the eastern boundary of the City, this river landscape relates significant natural and historical legacies of the City. The floodplain area of White Rivet is fairly extensive along its western bank. In certain segments this floodplain reaches nearly one-half mile from the centerline of the river and provides for the most extensive expanse of undeveloped and natural landscape in the township. Other Breams and seeks traverse the City eventually draining into the White River. While Cool Creek has been predominantly urbanized, its most basic floodway has been preserved as a natural amenity. Williams Creek, west of Meridian Street, is another environmental comdor that has large segments still undeveloped. Wetlands: Another environmental feature associated with waterways that exists in the City is wetlands. Several wetlands designated on the National Wetland Inventory Maps exist within the City. Woodlots: A study conducted by the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) for U.S. 31 indicates that less than 10% of Hamilton County remains as woodlands. Very few original woodland azeas have survived in Cannel. Most of these woodland concentrations occur along the White River or other streams and tributaries such as Cool Creek or Williams Creek. Groundwater: Ground 's.asig ificantly important feature in Carmel as th water supply system for res9dents comes from this source. a groan water sources aze oun m~TiAl sand and gravel aquifer system of the West Fork of the White River valley. Groundwaterisavailableatdepths of 50 - 400 feet in the glacial drift with wells yielding several hundred gallons per minute. The City of Carmel has designated areas azound these wells as "wellhead protection areas" to help protect the quality of the available drinking water. ~~ ~ r0 CITY OF CA RMEL. INDLANA Demographic Information The following demographic information relates to the City of Cannel and the surrounding communities and State. Population Growth: The City of Carmel has undergone fremendous growth in the last twenty-five-year period. The population has increased from 18,272 residents in 1980 to 37,733 in 2000. Recent population estimates for 2004 place the Cityat58,198residents. (See Table below) ro ao9 , w a9o , so,oao w,ooo an m9 cmmel - ~a~a NaWesviYe , m 9o9 i Fhhes - z~ 9h , io,a9o sY 7900 1990 2000 auo mimam The population distribution for the City of Carmel for the yeaz 2000 is shown below. The largest segment of the City's population is the 35 to 44 yeaz old range. The 5 to 14 year old range (school age) ranks second with 45-54 yeaz olds ranking third. L ~~ ~~~~ ~r~ ~~ Education: Camtel has a higher high school graduation rate than the State of Indiana (97.0% compared to 82.1 %) and Hamilton County (94.2%) but a lower rate than Fishers, Indiana (98.2%). The number of adults with Bachelor's degrees or higher in Carmel is 58.4%compazed to the State of Indiana's mte of 19.4%. The rate for both categories exceeds the rates for Indianapolis, Westfield, Noblesville, and Hamilton County. Income: The median income divides the income distribution into two equal groups, one having incomes above the median, and other having incomes below the median. Carmel's median household income has increased by 50% from 1990 to 2000, an increase of $27,078. The state's median household income increased by 44% during thesgme period, while Hamilton County's median household income increased by, 55%. - i - - - - -- =~.f Q~~ _{.. L Median Hame Value: The median home value divides the total data into two equal parts: one-half ofthe home values fall below the median and one-half of the values exceed the median. Cannel's median home value was $205,400 for 2000. Zionsville was the only surrounding community with a bighervalue in 2000 ($246,300). Carmel's median home value exceeded the State's median value by $112,900. When comparing the percent increase in median home values, the City of Cannel falls behind all of the surrounding azeas. Carmel's median home value increase from 1990 to 2000 was 44.1%. Duringdlatsametimeperiod,Noblesville increased 52.7%, Fishers increased 51.6%, Westfield increased 95.7%, Zionsville increased 73.3%, Hamilton County increased 56.2% and the State of Indiana increased 72.9%. _. _1 - - __- Poverty Rate: The poverty rate for Carmel in 2000 was 2.5% compared to 2.9% for Hamilton County and 9.5% for the State of Indiana. In comparison to the surrounding communities, Carme] has the second lowest poverty rate behind Fishers (1.8%). a,.a a+am omm a o ~\ ~ ~ ~ry ~ ~o ~w ~~c0 CP ~m° ~~ F ,~f ~ F~ Ss CARMEL CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN III ,, , ti - 1 ~ a- s ~ ' Schools: Within the Carmel Clay school district, there are 15 public schools: Cammel High School, Clay Middle School, Carmel Middle School, Creekside Middle School, and eleven elementary schools. There are also two private schools in the City's jurisdiction: Our Lady of Mount Cannel Elementary School and University High School. Parkland: Public parkland sites in the City of Carmel have increased significantly in recent yeazs. The following pazks are maintained by the Cannel/Clay Department of Parks and Recreation: Cazey Grove Park, Flowing Well Pazk, Lenape Trace Park, Hazel Landing Pazk, Lawrence W Inlow Patk, Meadowlazk Pazk, Monon Greenway, Pleasant Grove Pazk,. Prairie Meadow Park, River Heritage Pazk, River Road Greenway, and West Park. Central Park, Cheny Tree Pazk, and Founders Pazk aze in various stages of planning and construction and will soon be added to the list of available parks for residents to enjoy. [n addition to the local pazks, there aze three pazks maintained by the Hamilton County Department of Parks and Recreation: Coxhall Pazk and Gardens, River Road Pazk, and Carmel-Clay Pazk. . Golf Courses: There aze numerous public and private golf courses within the City of Carmel. They include Plum Creek GolfClub, Prairie Yew GolfClub, Mohawk Hills GolfClub, Crooked Stick Golf Club, Brookshire GolfClub, Twin Lakes Golf Club, Sunrise Golf Club and Woodland Country Club. Civic facilities: The City of Carmel govennnent is made up of City Hall located in Cannel Civic Square, the Police Department, the Fire Department with 6 Fire Stations, the Cannel Water and Sewage Utilities Department, the Carmel Clay Communications Centey the Department ofEngineering, the Department ofCommunity Services, and the Cannel/Clay Pazks and Recreation Department. ~}' p~~ .U` " ~® ~~ ~~~/ i`L.,."~~ ~ , ~~ ~~ Fps r~'1"'V"''~ 12 CITY OF CARMEL, INDIANA Community Facility Inventory The following is a summary of the community facilities within the City ofCarmel. - • a • Part 1: Comprehensive Plan Essence establishes the City's planning policies and objectives categorized by geographic azea: Although there are many similarities in each district there are also significant differences. This approach will clearly communicate and guide the public and its leaders in future decision making and share with the development community the City's policies and objectives. Furthey the public can base their expectations on the content of this Part. To address each geographic azea, this Pazt is divided into the following four sections: 1. City-ode Policies and Objectives .......... pg 15 2. East Carmel Policies and Objectives...... pg 18 3. Central Carmel Policies and Objectives.. pg 19 . 4. West Carmel Policies and Objectives..... pg 20 19 CITY OF CA2MFL, INDIANA COM~i EHENSIVE ~LHn ESSEnCE IN1Z0~7(IC110N CI?'Y WIDE POLICIES FIND 03JECTIVES Policy 1: Manage Community Form L Introduction: Managing community form is the art and science \ of influencing development in a manner thatresults in an ~ J't enviable built and natural environment in which people 11 ~l~' ,/~ reside, work and recreate; and creates the opporhmity for J Q~' businesses to thrive. Managing community form is the J p' culmination of land use planning, transportation planning, urban design, influencing transitions, and place-making. The tools used to manage community form take shape as - development guidelines, zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, studies, small azea plans, negotiations, commitments, conditions, covenants, redevelopment initiatives, policies, education and the like. No single tool can effectively manage community form. Managing community form is a departure from purely land use based regulations that encourage segregation and challenge the community's ability to establish essential connectivity. This model is more permissiveofmixeduse nodes and requires greater sensitivity to transitions between differing land classifications. Objective 1.1: Merge form-based regulatory tools into the traditional zoning and subdivision control ordinances based on Part 3: Land Classification Plan. Objective 1.2: Recognize the uniqueness in each planning district and establish regulations, subazea plans, and/or '~ pattern= ooks t~secure and encourage the desired features. ~Ohjective 1.3: Utilize and follow the intent of the C3 Plan by applying the Plan's content to development proposals to leverage the desired outcomes and prevent deviations from the City's policies and objectives. 06jective 1.4: Be very sensitive to connectivity and transitions between adjacent areas. Avoid harsh contrast in height, building orientation, chazacter, land use, and density. Ifthere exists contrast, utilize multiple design principles to sofl8n transitions. Policy 2: Be a World Class City ' Introduction: The expression "world class city" is applied to communities that have broad name recognition, notable culture, a positive image, diversity in housing corporate vitality, strong architectural presence and character, sense of place, public transportation, and most importantly a desirable quality oflife. ~- ~ ,,~ Ohjentive 2.1: Commit to high architectural standards for a~,.,,,J _~ municipal buildings and facilities. The intent is to seta ;~+'r" ~ precedent for quality and to establish character goals. a,,~ Developers will take cues frommunicipal improvements and )'~e't~ be more likely to follow the City's lead. Thrs commitment will DI alsofurtherbuildcommunitypride. ar'~P Ohjective 2.2: Further enhance [he amenities, development opportunities, office-supporting commerce and technology necessary to attract additional corporations to Carmel. Concurrently, enhance quality of life to provide an enviable place for people in all socioeconomic classes to live by encouraging high quality public spaces, interesting parks, and public gardens. There is significant evidence that high quality of life is a major at[ractor for corporations, thus making this a primary component of this objective. Ohjentive 2.3: Encourage more diversity in housing types to // appeal to a more diverse clientele of employees working in Carmel. As Carmel continues to attract world class corporations, the housing,desired by people relocating from other parts of the country and world is not consistent with Indiana's traditional residential form ofsingle-family ! _ y detached homes. The City needs to commission a study on A®N" housing,_ choices. ~~y„U.,,-„~ /_'./ = _ ~~...'» 06jective 2.4: Support an intracity and commuter trnns~t ~ '"°"'k`~ system as described in Part 4: Transportation Plan. Camtel's City Core is in the ptocess of achieving the necessary commercial intensity and residential density m support such a system. The City will likely experience more peak-time congestion on major roadways as an inconvenient but positive indicator that a transit system would be successful. The City will need to ask for patience during the L}./ years leading up to an operable transit system._.~°'°~ Objective 2.5: Enhance apedestrian-connected community yf through expanded installation of side paths, sidewalks, bike lanes, and off-street trails. It is well established that many of the moderate-sized world class cities in our nation are bicycle andpedestrian friendly communities. Carmel believes that the establishment of bicycle and pedestrian facilities will further enhance quality of life and be greatly appreciated by citizens. CARMpL CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSNE PLAN 15 Policy 3: Perpetuate Economic Vitality Introduction: Vtality is defined in many ways, including quantity of jobs, quality of jobs, proliferation of commerce, entrepreneurship, investment in property, redevelopment, length of commitment, and degree of risk being taken, Carmel ~/y has strong economic vitality, and furthering that trend is e~ ~y.°'° /~eeet~teres~ This section addresses the objectives that Carmel will utilize to perpetuate econbmic vitality. Objective 3.1: Carmel will strive m further brandtke lfYi lr1AGe 2 cerrlwruwitj. The City has already established a notable degree of branding; branding being positive name recognition and impression. Branding of a community is important when trying to attract quality employers and businesses. For instance, well-respected retail businesses want to belocated inwell-known communities. Ohjective 31: Encourage mixed-use developments. Single-use developments tend to lack vitality during off-peak times. Mixed-use developments often combine commercial and residential uses into a single node. This type of development encourages daytime vitality from employment and commerce activity and nighttime vitality when people come home from work. Also, this development pattern better utilizes land by allowing compact urban form. Ohjective 3.3: Retrofit existing single-use centers into mixed- use centers. This encourages both daytime and nighttime vitality and creates a compact urban form. Ohjective 3.4: Utilize technology to efficiently communicate City projectsandinitiatives. Expand existing lines of communication to reach more households and gain more public input. Objective 3.5: Clarify and streamline development procedures and processes. Simplify the development process without ~ lessoning standazds or expectations. ~~ Ohjective 3.6: Plan for transit by encouraging transit opportunities in new developments where it would benefit the community. Analyze how the City would form with improved transit options. ~~ r ~~ ~ .. ~ ~~ Policy 4: Be a City o(Neighhorhoods Imroduction: Neighborhoods are an essential component in a community. They create the fabric of a city. Traditionally, neighborhoods were not recognized by each individual development's name as they aze now. Rather, they were determined by physical boundaries and included a mix of housing, neighborhood-serving commercial, schools, and parks within walking distance of each other. Objective 4.1: Carmel is desirous of achieving the quality of life benefits of traditional neighborhoods within the context , ' y ofrurban, suburban, and urban development. V~'j~^ Objective 41: The City believes it necessary to conduct planning at a finer detail in critical subareas and corridors. For this reason Pan S: Critical Corridors and Subareas was created to house those planning exercises within the C3 Plan. These small azea plans aze important in communities with redevelopment pressures and in rapidly growing azeas. Oftentimes, critical corridor and subaze plans can better address transitions, connectivity, and development form. They can also address character goals and emphasize to developers a more exact idea of what the City expects. Ohjective 4.3: Establish neighborhood identity based on physical boundaries rather thanby each development's name. As mentioned in Civic Design, neighborhoods are more than each development project. A concerted effort should be established to determine neighborhood boundaries throughout the City and then promote their identity and boundaries. Ohjective 4.4: Covsider and encouraoe:`third alaces" and neighborhood-serving commercial. Every trip to the store should not be a major expedifion. Residents and employees should be able to access neazby shopping by caz or wallcing. 16 CITY OF CARMEL, INDIANA Policy 5: Be an Adaptable City Introduction: Being an adaptable city is critical in the evolution of a community. Too many communities do not / adapt to local, regional, and national influences and suffer „p~ from the lackofflexibility. For instance, many communities °`,vl' aze still trying to revitalize their downtowns based on the l e models that were successful 50 or more years ago. They (eY`}~ ~~~/// have not recognized the evidence that downtowns can still be vital places, but have not adjusted to current influences and circumstances. Objective 5.1: Carmel will regularly reevaluate the local, - regional, and national influences that affect development success and vitality. The City will also strive to predict the next evolutions in development to better recognize whether they would have a positive or negative effect on the City. hjective .:Periodically eview and revise the Land Classification an ap to adapt to changes in the built environment, evolutions in community values, and changes in community policies. Objective 5.3: Continue to recognize, plan and update critical corridors and subareas. Policy 6: Inspire Community Character Irrtroductivn: Community character is the aesthetic of a neighborhood, district, or the entire community. Positive community character is desired and often helps build local pride, encourages investment, and improves quality of life. Objective 6.1: Reject homogeneous development and P7i,+rr+Z° corporate branding architecture. In residential areas, architectural guidelines should be instituted to prevent monotonous development. Commercial areas should be subjected to architectural standazds that inspire unique and appropriate designs fitting Carmel's chazacter goals. ~r~~IJ~- Objective 6.2: Promote a unique community withluaielae ~l neighborhoods and subazeas. Already the City is investing in the Old Town Arts and Design District, which is a fantastic Fin+'L- example ofestablishing aunique subdistrict. The community will identify appropriate character goals for the East, Central, and West Carmel Districts and critical subareas. Objective 6.3: Encourage high quality and significant landscaping to help beautify the City and promote healthful environments. Objective 6.4: Promote the planting and caze of canopy trees throughout Carmel. Canopy trees are desired because they add a great deal of character and comfort to the built environment. They also provide relief from heat, soften noise and light, and help purify the air we breathe. This is a particularly important objective because so many mature trees are lost through development. Objective 6.5: Promote the use of public art in both public spaces and within private developments. Also, encourage designers to include public art in their buildings and surrounds. Objective 6.6: Promote healthy life styles through the use of innovative design and planning. /'/ ~.4- ~ _ QJ;~,~,, ~ ~ ? ~~~ ~ ~- .. ~ ~.~~~ ~~. CARMEL CO NSOIJUATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 17 Policy 7: Be Environmentally Sensitive Introduction: Being environmentally sensitive is the ac[ of protecting natural areas, introducing plant material into the urban environment, reducingenergy consumption, encouraging energy and natural resource conservation, and utilizing "green"building materials. Objective 7.1: Encourage the use of durable materials and construction methods that prolong the life of buildings. A paradigm shift is necessary to change the current 30-yeaz life expectancy of commetcial buildings and some production homes to a more substantial life expectancy. Carmel has already had some success in encouraging 100-yeaz buildings. For instance, Pedcor is currently applying that standard to several buildings in the City.Center and the Old Town Arts and Design District. Objective 1.2: Replace the fleet of City vehicles with energy efficient and low emission cars and trucks. With the introduction of hybrid vehicles, the City now has viable means for improving the environment through energy conservation. Objentive 7.3: Develop a network to allow non-vehiculaz trips to be made by requiring employment nodes to install covered and secure bicycle parking, and shower and changing facilities forcyctingcommuters. Concun•ently,ensurethat adequate bicycling facilities exist to allow safe and efficient bicycle commuting. 06jentive 7.4: The C' should enco devices, an implore ns to reduce water consumption by minimizing awn sprinkling and exploring alternative landscaping ideas. Objective 7.5: Strongly encourage developers to build environmentally sensitive buildings, following guidelines similar to those in the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) program. These "green" buildings conserve energy resources, provide more healthful inside environments; last longer, utilize products made from recycled material, and use products that can be safely disposed of or r cled the building is even dismantled een buildings also strive to use local material to reduce the transportation impact. For instance, importing marble from overseas has an enormous environmental impact compared to delivering Indiana limestone from southern counties. 06jentive 7.5: Set the precedent for environmental protection or revegetation when developing municipal facilities like parks, fire stations, and maintenance facilities. Objective 1.7: Protect the City's drinking water supply and other surface water that becomes drinking water for others. Institute regulations that protect the delineated wellhead protection areas from contaminants and land uses that have a higher risk of contaminating water resources. ~-,-~ ~' n ~-3`/~ n...~ /A . 18 CITY OF CARM6L, INDIANA ~ ,/t[~[~tN~ ~~ stop. IttVaduction The following sections convey the policies and objectives for the East Carmel District It is important to note that these sections share some ofthe same policy headings as the City- Wide section, but the content is specific to East Carmel. Policy 1: Manage Community form Objective 1.1: Protect the integrity ofthe suburban form and land uses. East Carmel is an area where redevelopment of residential districts is discouraged, and where investment in single-family homes is strongly encouraged. The City will identify projects, policies, and programs that will maintain the existing stability and encourage investment by homeowners. Objective 1.2: Allow neighborhood service nodes in context appropriate areas. The objective of these nodes is to allow limited neighborhood-serving commercial, mixed-use, and public amenities within walking distance to residents living in surrounding suburban neighborhoods. Lighting, pazking, architecture, landscaping, size of buildings, and pedestrian facilities will be strictly regulatedto ensure compatibility with existing residential uses. Policy 2: Be a Werld Class City Objective 2.1: Embrace the White River greenway and off- streettrail to provide another notable linear park which connects pazks as well as acting as the foundation for a larger, regional greenway. Mote off-streettrails aze expected to contribute, especially in the riparian corridor ofthe White River. Objective 2.2: Promote a world class development on the Earlham College property, achieving the same recognition as the Village of WestClay. Unique uses or combination of uses would be welcome if designed into the context ofthe natural environment and surrounding suburban development. Policy 3: Inspire Community Character Objective 3.1: Reinforce suburban character inc]uding tree- lined curvilineaz sfreets, sidewalks separated by tree lawns, and neighborhood parks. Also, maintain the dominant presence ofhigh quality single-family residential form. Objective 3.2: Allow density transitions from single-family residential form along East 96th Street and 146th Sheet ,but encourage context sensitive buffer development along the corridors to help soften the lower density residential neighborhoods. ~Tknwslvla.~ %° Objective 3.3: Consider expanding the neighborhood commercial node at East 131"Street and Hazel Dell Pazkway to the southwest comer by encouraging the church to °7 develop a portion ofthe property with mixed use and a JC(~ Policy 4: Be Environmentally Sensitive Bbjective 4.1: Aggressively protect the riparian corridor and floodplain along the White River from encroachment. Objective 4.2: Continually monitor mining practices to ensure they do not devalue property or negatively affect quality of life. Also, encourage reclamation planning for quarry sites tq, better coordinate public facilities and infrastructure ~,,,~_ ~ improvements, and public recreation opportunities. Objective 4.3: Expand East Cannel bicycle and pedestrian infrastmcture, especially in areas adjacent to institutional nodes such as schools and chumhes, and neighborhood- serving commercial. Objective 4.4: Establish an East Carmel recycling and hazardous materialsdrop-off station in conjunction with the City's sewage treatment facility. Objective 4.5: Locate an East Carmel satellite facility for ~~// Carmel Street Maintenance and other public services. This N/~*71', }~ will help conserve fuel and distribute manpower more equally ~/.{- overthecommunity. ~ A"") ~,,...~-'O~'"" 1i~~"~~t~~ z ~Z ~; W" D.~°'" L CARMEL CONSOCID ATED.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 119 variety of housing types. The azea would act as an east side EE1ST Cfi1~MEl POLICIES HNO OBJECTIVES Secondary Core, with the potential for a community transit CENI't~Fil CEtt~MEL POLICIES AND Ot~JECTIVES Introduction The following sections convey the policies and objectives for the Central Cannel District. It is important to note that thi;se sections share some of the same policy headings as the City-Wide section; but the content is specific to Cennal Carmel Polley 1: Manage Community form Objective 1.1: Encoumge compact urban form and mixed-use development throughout Central Carmel. Objective 1.2: Allow the tallest structures in Carmel to be in the City Center, 01d Town district, and along U.S. 31. The building height will be limited to 10 stories in these subdisMcts. S.'a. t.w~ W=~ f~- ~'~ Objective 1.3: Strongly encourage neighborhood and community-serving commercial nodes in strategic locations to allow people to walk from their jobs and homes to those amenities. The objective is to ensure the entire Central Carmel district has neighborhood-serving orcommunity- serving commercial development within a short walking distance of all employment and residential development. Objective 1.4: Protect single-fatuity residential neighborhoods in Central Carmel as much as possible through strong code enforcement, tazgeted infrastructure investments, and landscaping beautification projects. Objective 1.5: Strive for additional street connectivity in Central Carmel. The City should strive to connect streets when new development or redevelopment occurs, especially those linkages shown on the Thoroughfare Plan Map. Objective 1.0: Encourage connectivity to and through Central Carmel by establishing bicycle and pedestrian facilities across Meridian Street and Keystone Avenue. Policy 2: Be a World Class City Objective 2.1: Establish swell-designed, pedestrian-friendly . and vital downtown. To ensure vitality, significant incorporation of residential and office uses should be required in upper floors. All Bound floors should be 1 desigoed for pedestrian comfort and interaction. .S ,[ Objective 22: Promote a world class employment condor and v technology park along U.S. 31, east of Pennsylvania Street and north of East 116th Street. Integrate employment- servingcommercial uses to allow workers to walk to restaurants and other businesses suitable for such a subdistrict, by requiring new buildings along Carmel Drive and City Center Drive to be a minimum of two stories in height, and by allowing for a mix of uses, including additional residential and service retail. Objective 2.3: Promote the Arts and Design D' ct and the Cannel Performing Arts Center by hosrin world cla s musical artists and visual artists. ~t Bv-Pn Policy 3: Be a City of Neighhorhaods Objective 3.1: As outlined in Civic Design, Central Carmel should be planned as a collection of neighborhoods applying traditional neighborhood design principles to connectivity, transitions, location ofneighborhood-serving commercial, pedestrian-friendly features and the like. Objective 3.2: Endeavor to plan neighborhoods, gateways, boundaries, and service areas through more detailed subarea plans. Policy 4: Inspire Community Character Objective 4.1: Reinforce urban character in Central Carmel, especially north of East ] 16th Street. Ohjedive 4.2: Encourage signature buildings on prominent sites to enhance the district's character Signature buildings can be private or public buildings, but must have architectural flair and be built from durable materials. Objective 4.3: Establish a Public Art Master Plan. Include artists in the design process of public spaces. Polley 5: Be Environmentally Sensitive Objective 5.1: Aggressively protect the Monon Trail's tree- lined cotridorand environmental features on the Central Pazk site. Where possible, locate new public parks on land adjacent to or within a short walk from the Monon Trail. Objective 5.2: Tree areas should be conserved and should be evaluated as part of an overall network of all pazks and squares. ,.~'tEo.. ~ ' Y ~~"`. Ohjeclire 5.3: Promote compact urban form with densities that support mass transit. 20 CITY OF CARMEL. INDIANA Introduction The following sections convey the policies and objectives for West Carmel. It is important to note that these sections shaze some of the same policy headings as the City-Wide secfioq but the content under each heading is specific to West Carmel and adds to other city-wide objectives. Policy 1: Manage Community Farm Objective 1.1: Conserve the rnml character of West Carmel by protecting estate residential areas and by requiring new subdivisions to have large setbacks from perimeter roads. Further, require extensive revegetation along perimeter roads and within each new development. A lazger open space requirement should also be considered. Objective 1.2: Allow limited neighborhood service nodes in context with or adjacent to appropriate azeas. The objective of neighborhood service nodes is to allow limited neighborhood-serving commercial, mixed-use, and public amenities within a short distance to residents living in surrounding suburban neighborhoods, not in proximity to Conservation Residential. Lighting, pazking, architechue, landscaping, size of buildings, orientation of buildings, and pedestrian facilities will be strictly regulated to assure compatibility. Objective 1.3: Conservation subdivisions and innovative residential community designs that protect vegetation, slopes and are non-monotonous aze preferred. Objective 1.4: Connectivity and transitions between proposed developments and existing subdivisions should be ~o scrutinized to a e~ ater degree in West Carmel. ~~,~,y Policy 2: Be a World Class City ~ °` Objective 2.1: Maintain and protect areas for estate housing and other housing styles that cater to the wealthiest families living in the City. These areas aze essential to attrac6ng+Ke~ ~•^-'a ^'°°° corporations, providing the desired quality-of--life far EEGs~~~~~e~. H+6NLy( ,~..oHNWSAri.D I-KOFCLS+ONF L S Objective 2.2: Encourage more custom-home developments to provide housing opportunities for upper income families. Custom home neighborhoodswill also add character to West Carmel by reducing monotony. Policy 3: Inspire Community Character Objective 3.1: Reinforce rural character including tree lines, fence rows, barns, pockets of open space, and preservation of wood lots. Residential intensity can exist, but generally should not be obviously porhrayed from perimeter roads. Objective 3.3: Require commercial buildings along Michigan Road [o be constructed of durable materials and designed to reflect "village" character. `-~'- ~ O Policy 4: Be Envireamentalty Sensitive Objective 4.1: Strive to protect wood lots, wetlands, and other valuable natural features in West Carmel. These features contribute to the district's rural character, but they also provide habitat for plants, birds, and other animals. Objective 4.2: Establish neighborhood-serving commercial nodes to conserve fuel, reduce emissions, and promote healthy life styles. Policy 5: Stimulate Connectivity Objective 5.1: West Carmel has many non-connecting subdivisions. The proliferation of this pattern of development is more tolerable in this district; however, critical connections shown on the Thoroughfaze Plan will be adamantly required. Although there is less emphasis on vehicular connectivity, pedestrian connectivity will be strictly required. For instance, where road connectivity between a proposed development and an existing development is not required; a pedestrian path will be required. Objective 52: With the success of the Monon Trail, other off- streetfacilities are in demand. West Carmel has an opportunity to utilize portions of several pipeline comdors for such a trail. These corridors aze shown as off-street trails in the 2020 Vision Plan and in the Alternative Transportation Plan initially adopted in 2001, and are being supported in the C3 Plan as well. Integrating [his type of facility in some areas will be relatively easy, but in built environments may prove to be more difficult. Objective 5.3: Carmetshouldpartner with neighboring communities to plan and implement a significant greenway along Little Eagle Creek. - 06jective 5.4: Continue expansion of bicycle and pedesfian infrastructure to connect neighborhoods with schools, parks, West Clay Secondary Core, and other destinations. CARMEL CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 21 WEST Cfi~MEL POLICIES AN1~ OB ECTIVES Objective 3.2: Protect single-family residential character along West 96th Street between Spring Mill Road and Shelboume Road. 22 CITY OF CARMEL. INDIANA • • Page 1 of 2 ._ >~~ Keeling, Adrienne M From: Rattermann, Mark Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:12 AM To: Susan nelson; Brainard, James C; Sharp, Rick; Kirby, Kevin; Mayo, Brian D; Griffiths, Joe; Glaser, Fred J; Carter, Ronald E; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: RE: C3 Plan do think that the Dept of Community Services has done a very good job about getting the word out but most people including the press are not really interested in planning issues. They do care about Zoning issues when they are in their immediate area but seldom do they get involved when we talk about planning the future. Most of these type meeting are attended by 20-30 citizens that are interested in our future land use regulations unless there is a project in their immediate area of concern, then the attendance is much higher. I should also say that no matter what we propose, there are some people that say they love it and others say they hate it. If we get a consistent answer from everyone our task is usually quite easy but usually we get a "mixed read" from citizens and we are left without a clear direction. We have tried to get people to give us feedback but it seems that most people have other issues to focus on. As you so correctly interpreted, this is a complicated issue and casual reads and comment are not a good way to develop an opinion. I think the more complicated the issue, the more in-depth research and analysis is needed. Polling citizens in something like a referendum on this issue would probably still not give us conclusive answers and it would be expensive. I recommend if you are interested in this topic you should attend the plan commission meetings. Nearly all the documents and the agendas are on the web site under the dept of community services tab. The city has done an excellent job of making the data easy to retrieve and comprehensive. The project is complex but it is quite necessary. The city's decision makers are charged with both planning and reacting. Just sitting back and reacting to the problems is inadequate, we must also plan the future and that includes trying to anticipate where our society is going in the near future. If you look at Indianapolis, you can see what we built and the way we lived in the 1920;s, 1930's, 1950's and 1960's to 1980's. They are very much different and I anticipate another change in society preferences far habitation in the near future. I think the higher density and preserving open space will be much more popular in the future rather than the large lot developments that we have had in the era of 1960-1990's. Technology is also changing our society in significant ways which may even more change our life style. Welcome to the debate. I hope you have some new ideas and have the ability to look into the future to see which direction we should follow. Mark Rattermann City Council Plan Commission Realtor From: Susan nelson [mailto:snelson3@indy.rr.com] Sent: Mon 6/5/2006 9:54 PM To: Brainard, James C; Sharp, Rick; Kirby, Kevin; Mayo, Brian D; Griffiths, ]oe; Glaser, Fred J; Rattermann, Mark; Carter, Ronald E; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: C3 Plan My name is Susan Nelson and I have lived in Carmel for 30 years. I have just finished reviewing the C3 plan and I must say that my head is swimming. 1 will get straight to my thoughts. Do the citizens of Carmel really have any idea what this plan is all about? I had 6/6/2006 Page 2 of 2 .. _s. no idea until it was brought to my attention by a friend. I'm guessing that the majority of Carmel residents have no idea the enormity and complexity of this plan not to mention the ramifications it will have to all of us. I realize it is impossible to reach all in the community about meeting schedules but this is much too large an issue to not make extraordinary efforts to reach as many people as possible. Some of the changes being proposed are definitely needed and welcomed. Other changes such as the "New Urbanism" in central Carmel is absolutely awful. My family lives in Carmel because we want to live in the suburbs. However, because we live in central Carmel the "urban feel" is being forced upon us. When we want the "urban feel" we go to downtown Indianapolis. Having grown up in Carmel I feel sickened by all these changes happening so quickly. It is too much, too fast. I think this is an excellent time to take a survey of all Carmel residents about the future of our city. The citizens are the ones who should ultimately have the say in what happens here. I do not feel we have been given a real opportunity to be heard as a whole. Final thoughts, I am perfectly happy in Carmel without it being a "World Class City" and I have a feeling I'm not alone. Thank you. Susan Nelson 6/6/2006 June 6, 2006 Mike Hollibaugh .~ ~' _` ' - c+r__ _i Department of Community Services City of Carmel .l°i Third floor J ~,~ One Civic Square Cazmel, IN 46032 ~ -- RE: Comments to Preliminary Comprehensive Plan Update Deaz Mike: Indiana Land Development Corporation ("ILDC") and I, personally, own or have under contract a number of parcels within the City of Carmel and western Clay Township that will be affected significantly by the updated Comprehensive Plan ("Plan"), and as such, we have a number of comments to the Plan and request that our comments be incorporated into the final version of the updated Plan: ILDC is the owner of approximately 39 acres located on the northwest corner of Towne Road and 131x' Street (the "Guerrero Parcel"). The Guerrero Parcel is rectangulaz, and outlined on the enclosed aerial photograph. It is immediately across the street from a section of the Villages of West Clay that has been approved for high-density residential uses and commercial development, including a grocery story, gas station, and a free- standing fast food restaurant with adrive-thrn facility. In light of the high-density residential and commercial development to occur immediately across the street, we are asking that the Comprehensive Plan, along with the Land Use Map included with the Comprehensive Plan, recognize the Guerrero Parcel as a special and unique parcel, so that proper transitioning can occur. To provide proper transitioning, we believe that townhomes aze appropriate on the comer, immediately across from the commercial development, followed by detached single-family, providing internal transition. This concept of internal transitioning within the Guerrero Parcel is embodied in our request for a change of zoning which is now pending before the City of Carmel. The plan presently proposed allocates the Guerrero Parcel into townhomes on the corner, providing transition from the commercial development directly to the south. The townhomes then transition into 60-foot lots internal to the Guerrero Pazcel, which transition, in turn, to 80- 4 Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170 Zionsville Rd -Indianapolis, IN 46268 - (317) 415-0459 - (317) 415-0466 Fax foot lots along [he northern and western boundaries of the real estate. The overall density of 2.94 units per acre is, per the definitions in the existing Comprehensive Plan, "Low Intensity Residential". We believe that this is a very conservative response to what will exist on the other side of the road, immediately to our south. Transition is a cornerstone of established land planning principles, and the transitioning that we are proposing finds support in the existing Comprehensive Plan. We believe that it is only appropriate for the Comprehensive Plan and its Land Use Map to recognize the unique circumstance of the Guerrero pazcel, and that the plan proposed under the pending request for change in zoning is an appropriate and reasonable plan. ILDC is has under contract approximately 43 acres located on the southwest corner of Towne Road and 131x` Street (the "Fortune Pazcel"). The Fortune Parcel is rectangular, and outlined on the enclosed aerial photograph. It is immediately adjacent to a section of the Villages at West Clay that has been approved for high-density residential uses and commercial development, including a grocery story, gas station, and afree-standing fast food restaurant with adrive-thru facility. In light of the high-density residential and commercial development to occur immediately to the east of the Fortune Parcel, we aze asking that the Comprehensive Plan, along with the Land Use Map included with the Comprehensive Plan, recognize the Fortune Pazcel as a special and unique pazcel, so that proper transitioning can occur. To provide proper transitioning, we believe that townhomes are appropriate immediately adjacent to the commercial development, followed by detached single-family to the west of the townhomes, providing internal transition. This concept of internal transitioning within the Fortune Pazcel is embodied in our request for a change of zoning which is now pending before the City of Carmel. The plan presently proposed allocates the Fortune Pazcel into townhomes on western side of the property, providing transition from the commercial development directly to the east. The townhomes then transition into 50-foot and 61-foot lots internal to the Fortune Pazcel and along the western boundary of the real estate. The overall density of 2.99 units per acre is, per the definitions of the existing Comprehensive Plan, "Low Intensity Residential". We believe that this is a very conservative response to what will exist on the other side of the road, immediately to our south. Transition is a cornerstone of established land planning principles, and the transitioning that we are proposing finds support in the existing Comprehensive Plan. We believe that it is only appropriate for the Comprehensive Plan and its Land Use Map to recognize the unique circumstance of the Fortune Parcel, and that the plan proposed under the pending request for change in zoning is an appropriate and reasonable plan. CROOK & SHELBORNE: Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170 Zionsville Rd -Indianapolis, IN 46268 (317) 415-0459 - (317) 415-0466 Fax Indiana Land Development is also the contract purchaser of (i) approximately 20 acres of real estate located on the west side of Shelborne Road, just north of 12151 Street (the "Shelborne Parcel") and (ii) 20 acres located on the north side of 136`s Street, just east of Towne Road (the "Crook Parcel"). On the Shelborne Parcel, we are proposing 38 single- family residential lots for custom homes, and on the Crook Pazcel we aze proposing 40 single-family residential lots for high-end production homes. These proposed communities are upscale. They aze consistent with the manner in which western Clay Township has developed, and the homes proposed faz exceed the azchitectural requirements of the S-1 classification. We do not disagree with the manner in which the revised Comprehensive Plan designates and characterizes these two pazcels; however, we believe that a density of 2.5 units per acre is most appropriate for these two pazcels, based upon the surrounding uses and densities in this azea. HANIILTON PLACE: I and my wife, Shelley, own approximately 150 acres located at the southeastern intersection of 12151 Street and Michigan Road and have resided there for the last 17 years. We want to bring to your attention that the proposed classification for this property, as shown on the preliminazy Comprehensive Plan, is inconsistent with the current plan for this property. We have an approved primary plat for this property, with an approved density of 1.4 to 1.5 units per acre. As such, we suggest that the proposed Comprehensive Plan be corrected to reflect the current status of the property. We would much appreciate relaying this correspondence to the Plan Commission members and to the Common Council as well. As always, we appreciate you hazd work and assistance. Sincerely, Indiana Land Development Corporation Paul Shoopman President and CEO Indiana Land Development Corporation 8170 Zionsville Rd -Indianapolis, [N 46268 - (317) 415-0459 - (317) 415.0466 Fax . ~ Page 1 of 1 O Keeling, Adrienne M From: Susan nelson [snelson3@indy.rr.com] Sent: Monday, June O5, 2006 10:54 PM To: Brainard, James C; Sharp, Rick; Kirby, Kevin; Mayo, Brian D; Griffiths, Joe; Glaser, Fred J; Rattermann, Mark; Carter, Ronald E; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: C3 Plan My name is Susan Nelson and I have lived in Carmel for 30 years. I have just finished reviewing the C3 plan and I must say that my head is swimming. I will get straight to my thoughts. Do the citizens of Carmel really have any idea what this plan is all about? I had no idea until it was brought to my attention by a friend. I'm guessing that the majority of Carmel residents have no idea the enormity and complexity of this plan not to mention the ramifications it will have to all of us. I realize it is impossible to reach all in the community about meeting schedules but this is much too large an issue to not make extraordinary efforts to reach as many people as possible. Some of the changes being proposed are definitely needed and welcomed. Other changes such as the "New Urbanism" in central Carmel is absolutely awful. My family lives in Carmel because we want to live in the suburbs. However, because we live in central Carmel the "urban feel" is being forced upon us. When we want the "urban feel" we go to downtown Indianapolis. Having grown up in Carmel I feel sickened by all these changes happening so quickly. It is too much, tco fast. I think this is an excellent time to take a survey of all Carmel residents about the future of our city. The citizens are the ones who should ultimately have the say in what happens here. I do not feel we have been given a real opportunity to be heard as a whole. Final thoughts, I am perfectly happy in Carmel without it being a "World Class City" and I have a feeling I'm not alone. Thank you. Susan Nelson 6/6/2006 June 8, 2006 ,. - i" Re: Comments to add to Carmel's Comprehensive Plan ~ ~~c~l~~~ Adrienne Keeling, Planning Administrator J11R1_9?Otl6 Carmel Department of Community Services p0~,~ One Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Dear Adrienne: All of the suggestions I have for addition to the Carmel Comprehensive Plan deal with planning for storm drainage, runoff, wetland preservation and mitigation. I would appreciate if you could pass this along to the Plan Commission. Although, I am uncertain where best to insert these comments, I would suggest either in Part 2 or to have a separate section altogether. The comments I have are both the result of residence in Carmel for over 25 years along with articles from the E.P.A. and Stormwater Mitigation by Permaearth.org. In addition, I serve on the Carmel Urban Forestry Committee and topics such as this are discussed when planning our projects. During the past 25 years, not only have I noticed many large tree removals, additional impervious surfaces, and filling of wetlands, but I have also noticed that Cool Creek used to be a small meandering stream. While I think Cannel is correct in trying to have high density areas offset with natural condors, there is still a way to go to reduce the additional flooding and soil contamination while encouraging wetland preservation and natural habitats. Lastly, Carmel must work with Westfield and our neighbors to preserve the health of our watershed. Listed below are suggested issues for your perusal. Streamline the zoning process for smart growth projects. Use predictive models for decision making of growth and its consequences. Update the model annually and use "what-ifs." • Include flood potential in all local zoning ordinances and permitting procedures. • Consider inclusion of aggregate lots so that a large number of lots. are not discounted because their individual size do not reach a threshold. • Discourage the use of large channels of water since it promotes erosion, soil contamination and discourages groundwater regeneration. Detention basins tend to over hood and culverts tend to fill in. Conversely, promote vegetation (trees, etc.) and wetland preservation. • Work to encourage good development with our upstream neighboring communities. Develop incentives for homeowners to preserve natural corridors. This could include offering conservation easements and discouraging the removal of riparian vegetation. Discourage the overuse of impervious surfaces (primarily black top and concrete.) • Encourage the creative and good use of urban forests and park lands throughout the community to help mitigate stormwater runoff. 0 The comments and reflections of the city engineer could be more accurately targeted for Carmel; however, it is very important that this issue be more extensively covered in your comprehensive plan. Thank you for your consideration in these matters. Sincerely, Cheryl Gettelfinger 505 Lexington Blvd Cannel, IN 46032 • • Page 1 of 2 / Keeling, Adrienne M From: Mike and Michele Sharp [mmsharp@ameritech.net] Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 9:32 AM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Red Adrienne, I wanted to provide comments as related to the Illinois St. corridor. Please see the attachment provided. I think section 3 of the document is consistent with our neighborhoods current position. I am not sure whatever transpired with this resolution/recommendation. Also, The proposed roundabout at 111th and Illinois would accommodate our neighborhood better if it were moved a little to the north. The buffer as noted in the attachment, would complement this as well. Can you please incorporate my comments. Thanks, Mike Mike Sharp Springmill Place Homeowner Association President 10958 Springmill Lane Carmel, IN 46032 "Keeling, Adrienne M" 44Keelingta),carrael.in.gov> wrote Mike: The Carmel Plan Commission will hold a public hearing on the comprehensive plan at its regular meeting on Tuesday, May 16, 2006. The meeting begins at 6:OOpm; however, the comprehensive plan a ways down on the agenda. You may view Plan Commission agendas here: http://www.ci. ca rmel. in. us/services/DOGS/D OCS PCagendasful I. htm As for the timeline for review or adoption of the plan, we should have more of those details sorted out by the meeting on the 16~^. It will no doubt go to a committee; however, we are still unsure of which committee and a potential meeting time line. Plan Commission committees normally meet on the first Tuesday of the month, but we have been thinking about setting a timeline of special meetings (once a week or every two weeks, for example) so that the process does not drag on for months. As you may know, the Plan Commission's work load is already quite hefty considering some of the projects being proposed (Gramercy, Midtown Village, etc.), and we don't want this to get lost in the mix. Hope this helps. Let me know if you have any further questions or comments. Sincerely, Adrienne Keeling From: Mike and Michele Sharp [mailto:mmsharp@ameritech.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:32 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M 5/26/2006 • • Page 2 of 2 Subject: Comprehensive Plan Adrienne- Can you tell me the next public meeting where the comprehensive plan will be discussed. I attended the open house and seem to recall that there was a meeting on May 15th or 16th where this will be discussed. Can you give me the specifics? I think the presenter mentioned that this would probably go to committee for finalization of the details. Is this accurate? Thanks, Mike 5/26/2006 C~ • C@>~TIBIGTiO1V OF CA1~tiJCLAY PLAN COA'~086It7N8 >rtfiCOMM1rNAAZZQN t921 YHS ADO?TiOA(OF ti3.'~016 e'TlilY'ET T80ROUC1~A1tli PLAN LL t~t•t~ j CC,iI-OB~01-07 To: 17-e Hemcaable Connnon Council ortha atr otcaaaet xaaoilten cenmtr, iat~ans lxarlr~ambe:a: Atbaa oeaiaidaala~ the ditecdve oithe Ctnmmon Couxll triode Jnbr 16, ?A01 as Raolts4tom No. CC-07.16.01-08 andheasieg dtittm oanoeaaa, tho CatmellClp+Plaa Counaiwioa ~aooasmaflda tbat the iblloarEr~ ~u be made to tho D1(aaia $tteot ,Cost~dott aapoct of t1» Tlgzought~e Plea. 'The amended ltucgutcge (pto'vided below) hoc ban added is hallos and deJebd hm8uago mtod to r~tet>ava8b. I. 8ta~ag otRoadway 6s=tawts. t3iven flu psojetst'e ptlmaty ptaYpoae of aetroel m aosamaaeial devalopmetsb lathe thp~ thtou~- ttsrel, it Deed not bs toma~uetod ss a ~a ptoj«x Ia a similar ratam~ to Ycmaayivama Paricpsy. eooddatation abould be ~itren to im~taumtin~ project ttegcaeata as an as•ttaedad baaia to previde beoec:aty ttaetta. uxC~NOan E. eta,¢as otHoadway Csptldty Altlau~ the Hood 8n >hvr laua (puaa tum taoa} 4 uhianabe~y asstiGpatad, sense ateaa aan)d bo aervod by a twalane roadway aatU development latnorl9ea, Conaide:adon should be gives to iattlat~r rooeotneting two lama on saleatod aegmam4, with gtaviaioae fet ad4lag lasses l>sac with minimal diatupti~ sad ao additiossal dglst ofwsy acqu9aitiata. ilNCF1'Al~T[~? 3. Contdgvo . Oa portions of dieroadweyDeosfa8 tht+o~h aord/w~ a~aaat w swat bn~mit~g, ioo waU1, bo~me, tmd~or speolsl sbdl be wi~to m potential mood ~Saota. 4. Trs®a TM plan slmuldbe tavleared ead tsdined, ltpeo~sary, n ogdlLed isaffio S become mWbte sca racnlt otwramt INDOT ~aidtea mr U:S. 31 to a ~Y. The o>aodty and leyio~t of poie~ be d~eatait~d, ead $ oo~ob (bout vet~a trio ~*U ebould be ~-wthtaaae w aadne >l ~d e~lve eystam ate. '1t~o t~otJCt~grl~m ~isdoa'~ reoo~ on ffis lms~a of d ]l2inols 8t:+0et Cbaidor o~ithe Tbaero~se Aya 1. "BAYOBABL&" At ite te~letlsr iedmootiag oft7aaber 16, ZOOl, the Pltp CA~a+n3eeiaa voted 11 In 8vot, oae opposed wok 1Geetam'j m ltirvstd the above lengtut~ to tl-e Cbu'ooil du oans{dastiea a Ameeded ReDOlution Na ' .•0~- 16-01-0$. CAZIMBTJCLAY PLAN ON HY: y ~ i~w~d~c- RiCENlp ~ ~+ 2.6 ~u C81-1'~lt'A1tCA1 nean.ssra '~~ Keeling, Adrienne M .From: Kevin Heber [kevin@indianatrails.org] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 1:28 PM To: Keeling, Adrienne M Cc: Leo.Dierckman@opco.com; Schleif@indy.rr.com; jerry chomanczuk@conseco.com; _ ddutcher@NCAA.org Subject: Conservation Plan Adrienne - Here is basically what I think Carmel needs to do -- commission a Conservation Plan as a peripheral to the comprehensive plan. This will help guide us when we look at forest, wetland and habitat mitigation or removal. Right now all we have to go on is personal opinions and maybe a site-specific study if we're lucky. Here is a link describing one model: http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/nps/projects/ms96-la.pdf The Conservation Plan would identify watersheds, plant & animal species, habitats, the profile & ecological function of each square mile of land, etc. as well as recommended best practices. Please add this to your collection of input to the new Comp Plan and let me know what you think... Thanks - Kevin 1 Model Urban Natural Resources Conservation Plan Project Description: In 1996, the Model Urban Natural Resources Conservation Plan (UNRCP) was initiated forthe City of Madison and Madison County Mississippi. The plan originated when the Mayor and local officials of the City of Madison, through the Central Mississippi Resource Conservation & Development Council, first highlighted natural resource concerns. A steering committee was formed that categorized the concerns within four general headings: 1) nonpoint squrce pollution (water quality); 2) water management; 3) landscape (temporal and spatial); and 4) wildlife habitats (terrestrial and aquatic). The overall purpose of this project was to address the concerns of protecting the natural resources while maintaining a suitable quality of life for a rapidly developing urban area and addressing the changing environment of the local watershed areas. Specifically, the project was designed to develop and implement a holistic; comprehensive systems approach for watershed management activities for demonstration purposes in an urban area. The goal of the program was to provide for continued economic development, while at the same time maintain ecological integrity (health) of the watersheds. Local, state and federal agencies, developers, the Madison County School Board and local churches were participants in UNRCP. Planning, design and implementation carried out by representatives from the city and local agencies. While the plan required an understanding of the landscape and land use, resource harvesting and runoff, the common denominator throughout the process was water, therefore the watersheds were chosen as the study areas. Study areas included the drainage of four subwatersheds that encompass parts of the cities of Ridgeland and Madison, as well as Madison County, involving approximately 10,000 acres (15.6 sq. miles). The subwatersheds included Brashear Creek, Culley Creek, Culley Lake and Hearn Creek which provide drainage for 75 percent of the city of Madison. Fragmented landscaping within the watersheds has greatly impaired the movement of plants, animals and people both within and between ecosystems. Riparian corridors, vital to the structure and functioning of a landscape, play a crucial role in correcting the fragmentation. Wildlife habitats were destroyed or fragmented as large land areas were converted to urban development. Stream channels, altered to accommodate urban needs, continue to be widened through the years with increasing erosion of the creek beds and slopes. Forests are also severely depleted because of the growth of construction within the past 20 years, resulting in a loss of vegetative cover and soil erosion. Impervious surfaces such as paved roads, parking lots, sidewalks, rooftops, and other impermeable areas of the rural/urban landscape are also of concern. Installed Best Management Practices In order to correct some of the identified water quality concerns, specific best management practices (BMPs) were completed with more planned for future projects. BMPs installed include: 1) Vegetative Cover; 2) Grade Stabilization Structure; 3) City Detention Basin and Riparian Buffer; 4) Porous Paving, Cistern, and Rock-lined Channels; and 5) Stormwater Treatment System. vegetative cover Vegetative Cover. A hillside in Liberty Park used for fill material during site construction was not properly replanted and continued to erode over time. Loblolly pines and grasses were planted to stop erosion as well as provide cover for wildlife using 319(h) funds. Grade Stabilization Structure. A road and bridge that had been washed out during a flash flood were restored and protected with a grade stabilization structure. This added a shoulder to the road and protected access to the bridge. Hillside at Liberty Park before and after planting Before and after grade stabilization structure installed City Detention Basin and Riparian Buffer. fn a large City-operated detention basin, the riparian buffer had been destroyed during farming operations. The buffer zone was planted with a variety of native trees and shrubs to restore the natural riparian area. Porous Paving, Cistern and Rock-lined Channel. An area church installed several BMPs as part of its site plan. The site plan was developed based on topography, natural vegetation and land use. A porous pavement system (see photos above) was installed on the grounds to provide additional parking spaces. This area was planted with grass and can be used as a playground, or for overflow parking. The porous system allows water to penetrate into the soil, while filtering out automobile fluids. A cistern, with a collecting pipe system, was installed to hold runoff from the grounds and parking lots; the runoff is used to irrigate plants on the grounds. Excess water from the cistern drains into a rock lined channel that slows water flow allowing the water to cool and settling of sediment. Native trees and shrubs planted in the buffer zone Installation of porous Grass growing through the pavement system porous pavement system StormwaterTreatment System. At the City Airport, a water and oil separator (Vortechnics System) was installed to filter out pollutants from parking lot runoff. The treatment system prevents sediment, automobile fluids and trash from washing into nearby streams and waterways. In summary, UNRCP provided for installation of BMPs to protect natural resources in the City of Madison and Madison County, a rapidly growing urban area. Corrective measures included the widening of riparian buffers in direct proportion to the size of the runoff areas and the intensity of activities in uplands such as suburban or urban development. The buffer zone of the City detention basin was planted with native trees and grasses to restore the riparian area. Other steps included the slowing or halting of the degradation of forest systems and initiating measures to correct damage caused by past practices. This includes the establishment of high quality forests and protection of existing forests. Wildlife habitats have been improved by the halt of further stream deterioration and the reestablishmentofwildlife corridors providing free movement, improved water quality and food sources. Lead Agencies: MS Soil and Water Conservation Commission, Madison County Soil and Water Conservation District Funding: EPA: $257,188 Matching:$220,941 Project Dates: 8/21/96 to 12/31/01 Project Location: MS, City of Madison and Madison County, HUCs: 0318000, 103180002, 08060201.8060202 For More Information Contact: Madison County Soil and Water Conservation District 175-A Commercial Parkway Canton, MS 39046 Phone: (601) 859-4272 ext. 3 Installation of the Vortechnics StormwaterTreatment System ~.. Links: Model Urban Natural Resources Conservation Plan http://madisoncountyswcd.org/A Title g_ages.pdf The Conservation Journal: Special Edition http://madisoncountvswcd.org/Winter%202001.1.~df 05/10/2006 11:40 31725151 GROUND RULES IN~ PAGE 01 .05~ ,Zao2 ~ 70 Avt-~~+v~, kr i; nsc ti~i f=,~cn~ ~. /_,~rirr-zfCe, .Cis ~ S ,c'E.~ N~eur~~ y?c r C3 PLAN 2006 (Carmel Consolidated Comprehensive PI ww y frn II~r ~G ~+ RECOMMENDATIONS Rename to Carmel-Clay Consolidated Comprehensive Plan (Unlike most cities, Carmel has a distinct history with Ute township and should continue to identify itself with its history. Since small sections still aze outside the city, identification wording is important and is consistent with the term, "consolidated." Both city and township are reflected in a number of ways such as: Carmel-Clay Public Schools / Carmel-Clay Library /West Clay Village /Clay Terrace. This would provide defuution of consolidation and identity. • Wording throughout the plan should be consistent. Wording in each section should reflect wording throughout. One example is on page 8, fast paragraph. See definitions on pp. 26-29. • P.5 statement bullets under "k'ulfillment of the Mandate" is not presently accurate. The southern section of Central Carmel needs to be addressed in order for this statement to be reflecfive of the whole. (See recommendation below*) • P.6 first bullet under "Objecfive" needs to be clarified. (What is "outdated and irrelevant information"? • P.6 third bullet, "96ei Street Comdor Study" under second paragraph of "Objectives" is not accurately reflected throughout the body of the C3 Plan 2006. (See map on p.39 /wording and plan on pp.80-81) The "Special Study" has yet to be completed as shown in the amendment to the Vision 20/20 Comprehensive Plan. This study should be noted as incomplete and should be shown in pink as "Area for Special Study" designated in the legend on the Land Classification Plan Map (page 39). It is ctucial for the completion of the 96s' St/ Westfield Blvd. Study (which is different but inclusive of the 96"' St. Corridor Study) and should be included in the legend on the Land Classification Plan Map on page 39 as "Area for Special Study." ]t is also important for the "New Urbanization Initiative" to be dropped from the study since it does not reflect this southern section of Central Carmel and has only served to complicate and confuse the issues. This area should be included in the "Critical Corridors and Subareas'' of Part 5, specifically as Honte Place Subazea (p.90). (Also see p.16, Policy 4, Objective 4.3a Pages 80-81 describe and show what is being considered for this section of 96 Street but a study has yet to be done. Although the extension idea seerns like good planning, it is unclear at this point without a study whether there is adequate land to extend through the area shown. • P.6 under Metbodology/Initial Public Input bullets 2 and 5 do not reflect the southern section of the central district. Although an oversight, it is important to 0(~0~002/ Cf~ 05/10/2006 11:40 3172515124 GROUND RULES INC include this areas' input. A special public meeting is recomrended to be held at the Orchard Park School. PAGE 02 (*) P.7 Foreword describes the Central Core of Carmel Central but does not reflect the southem area. It is recommended that there be two designations within the Carmel Central District. Above 116`h St. be designated the "Central Core District" and below 116a' St, be designated "South Central Carmel-Clay" with separate sections describing the "characteristics." The southern section is not urban and does not fit under the Civic Design or New Urbanization hutiative. Also it includes areas outside the city limits (Home Place) and this designation would reflect that. (See p.16, Policy 4; Objective 4:3 and p.20, Policy 3, Objective 3.1 and Policy 4, Objective 4.1) Delete wording that reflects the whole of Carmel Central such as undez the Introduction, Policy 1, Objective 1.3 or reword using separate designations. "Central Carmel Characteristics" be reworded to include both the Central Core and South Central areas. • Page 14 #3 pg 19 should be page 20 • Page 20 (Central Carmel Policies and Objectives) should be rewritten to reflect the two different designations of Central Carmel. • Pages 26-28 (Part 3: Land Classification Plan) under "Geographic Location'' should each include South. Central Carmel-Clay. (Each of these classifications is located in this area.) • PART 3: LAND CLASSIFICATION PLAN (pp.36-39) o Core Support (Geographic Location) should read: Exclusively utilized in the Central Core District o Secondary Core (Geographic Location) should read: Exclusively utilized in the Central Core District and the Village of WestClay o Primary Core (Geographic Location) should read: Exclusively utilized in the Central Core District, specifically at City Center and Old Town. o Land Classification Map wording seems convoluted o Land Classification Plan Map is not consistent with other sections of Plan PART 5: CRITICAL CORRIDORS AND SUBAREAS o Both wording and map are not consistent with othez sections of Plan Submitted by: Pat Rice (846-7770) patrice4632~sbealobal.net (May 6, 2006)