Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 03-01-11 CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION SPECIAL. STUDIES COMMITTEE DEPARTMENT REPORT March 1, 2011 1. Docket No. 10120008 Z: The Bridges PUD The applicant seeks approval to rezone 63.7 acres from S -2 /Residence to PUD /Planned Unit Development. The site is located at 11405 Spring Mill Rd., at the southeast corner of 116` St. and Spring Mill Rd. Filed by Charlie Frankenberger of Nelson Frankenberger, on behalf of G. B. Developers II, LLC. The applicant seeks approval to rezone 63.7 acres from S -2 /Residence to PUD /Planned Unit Development. North of the site is the Clarian North hospital development, east of the site are office buildings, south/ southwest of the site are single family dwellings, and west of the site will be a church. The US 31 Corridor Overlay Zone's west boundary is that of future Illinois St. The proposed development is broken into three blocks: the commercial amenity use block, the office and residential use block, and the corporate office use block. Please view the petitioner's information packet for further detail on the .PUD text, conceptual site plan, and conceptual character imagery. Feb. 15 Public hearing recap: Many people from the public voiced both positive and negative comments about the project. Positive comments included that it would fulfill a need for amenities and convent shopping dining in this area, support the corridor, be good quality architecture and design, and more. Negative comments included the current office vacancy rate, traffic issues in the area, property values, residential feel of area being taken away, and more. The Commission sent this item to the Mar. 1 Special Studies Committee and recommended that this first meeting be devoted entirely to the topic of Traffic. The Carmel Clay Comprehensive Plan "the C3 Plan adopted in May 2009, marks this site as an area for special study. To this date, no official C3 Plan special study of this specific site has been conducted or adopted; however, there are several studies of the US 31 Corridor and the Illinois Street Corridor that lend themselves to helping guide development on this site, and these can be discussed t the committee level. The C3 Plan provides for a number of policy objectives which, in this instance, do not offer concrete guidance, but they do help: 1. The C3 Plan does provide a matrix showing land classification compatibility, showing Best Fit and Conditional Fit (see below). 2. The C3Plan also provides an objective to be sensitive to connectivity and transition between adjacent areas. 3. While another objective is to promote mixed use, compact development in areas suitable for commercial development, the C3 Plan objectives also stress that we must protect residential areas from unsuitable commercial development. 4. Another objective is to encourage diversity in housing types. 5. The C3 Plan also suggests that we must continue to build upon the economic benefits of the US 31 corridor by further maximizing its development potential by encouraging new buildings to be constructed at maximum building heights and encourage parking areas to be structured. 6. The C3 Plan also suggests that every trip to the store should not be a mandatory drive in the car. Residents should be able to access daily goods by walking or bicycling. 7. The C3Plan lists high quality and well designed landscaping as an objective, along with requiring parking to be on the rear and side of a property, and to utilize `green' building and low impact development. All of these aspects should be considered when reviewing this rezone petition. Staff's outstanding comments: Currently, the petitioner meets with the Forestry Dept., Engineering Dept, and Planning Dept. staff weekly, to address review comments, the PUD text, and the conceptual site plan. Topics discussed are land uses, traffic flow, road improvements, pedestrian and bicycle accessibility, site plan layout, screening of parking, landscaping and buffering, building architecture, lighting, signage, and much more. The Dept. is still working through these comments and waiting to receive the revisions of the PUD Ordinance at the committee level, after the petitioner collects comments from the public during the public hearing and from the Plan Commission members. Recommendation: The Dept of Community Services (DOCS) recommends that the Committee reviews this item and then continues it to the Thursday, March 31 Special Studies Committee meeting for further review and discussion. 8 Z 1 o a b a s Z I v 1 71; 14 t8 sD Parks and Recreation Mg `a a8 r8 §8 3�taz 'Mx; 2.80 4 B PqM 3410 TI VS' e':_ iNB Estate Residential '`a arm 8'x low Intensity Suburban Residential hike NE aim leo Suburban Residential 0. s ,iZ 10r4 VI 8 1 C ABI4 0,c,;;;; Urban Residential 8' ma c rx 8 d a 8 e .8: C s. G a G uc, C c Attached Residential OCR k*,'S AFC 8 1' 8 1:: ii*Ye WW1 P4814 Neighborhood Support Center e C, .4 e z a at 8 s Neighborhood Service Node try g ;i cs x C 8 a8 i 8 .P4,1 C C C Institutional Node `8 c 8.• i 8 c !IOW 8 s t- 8 s V i0` g s 8 8 g,* Community Vitality Node g c r 46 ow a X8.._ 0 8, NO 8r'' *Al Employment Node KR C., C 0 ill R401 Regional Vitality Node g C ax C RA V.? ow svi Core Support 4"';8.x;., ;4* 5i 411. RW-1 :8 Secondary Core =8 C 8 2. 8 8 8 I 8, its. p. Primary Core AlifY vott liN011 Best Fit c Conditional fit "Best Fit" are classifications that are most suited for adjacency. "Conditional Fit" indicates land classifications that are suitable for adjacency if the building orientation, transitions, and architecture are implemented with sensitivity to the context. The third category are those land classifications not listed, which represent classifications that are not typically appropriate adjacent to the subject classification. Note: the entire C3 Plan can be viewed online at: www.ci.carmel.in.us /services /DOGS /DOCSCompPlan.htm 2