HomeMy WebLinkAboutJill's email re: PUD dated 08-05-13
Motz, Lisa
From:Keeling, Adrienne M
Sent:Monday, August 05, 2013 10:25 AM
To:Motz, Lisa
Subject:FW: Why I care about the PUD Amendment...PC Executive meeting 8 6 2013
Attachments:Jill's Timeline for PUD Requirements Ordinance Amendment.docx
Importance:High
Lisa,
Please forward to the PC, scan/file (13010013 OA) and print a few copies for the Exec Committee.
Thanks
Adrienne
From: Jill Meisenheimer \[mailto:jmeisenheimer@indy.rr.com\]
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2013 11:40 PM
To: ;
Subject: Why I care about the PUD Amendment...PC Executive meeting 8 6 2013
Importance: High
Adrienne,
Could you please forward my email to Plan Commissioners before the August 6 Plan Commission Executive
Meeting?
Thanks so much.
Jill H. Meisenheimer
Date: August 3, 2013
To: Adrienne M. Keeling, Mike Hollibaugh,Plan Commissioners
From: Jill H. Meisenheimer 844-3920 jmeisenheimer@indy.rr.com
RE: Why I care about the PUD Requirement Ordinance Amendment
Plan Commission Executive Committee voted August 6, 2013
Attachment: Jill’s timeline of the PUD Requirement’s Ordinance Amendment
Why I care about the PUD Requirements Ordinance Amendment
th
I have been dramatically affected by PUDs! I live at Williams Mill on the south side of 116 and Spring Mill
Road where 3 PUDs and the Mormon Temple have approved. I have attended Plan Commission and Council
meetings for several years observing, speaking and writing letters related to PUD proposals for The Bridges,
Silvara, Highpointe and Spring Mill Court. I have attended many Plan Commission and Council meetings
discussing the PUD Amendment. After voicing my concerns about traffic and asking when the often promised
“high priority” Illinois Street will be completed I have heard rumors and excuses from all sides, but have not
yet seen the “The Illinois Street Plan.” These challenges from PUDs led to the creation of CCRZ, Carmel
Citizens for Responsible Zoning, to help share information with neighbors and neighborhoods impacted by
PUDs.
The PUD process is complicated, compounded by a current lack of consistent guidelines,
which make it time consuming to review and a lot of work for Commissioners and
Councilors. And it is difficult for the DOCS and the public to track the changes in commitments
1
and amendments after the PUD has been approved. The Plan Commission is to be commended
for working to improve the PUD Requirements Ordinance. A clearer process and structure
would also help developers to be able to better prepare for presenting a PUD proposal.
The PUD process would be easier to understand and follow for all parties if there were a predictable
structure, transparency and clear safeguards for the nearby neighbors. Neighbors expect that land zoned
near them will stay mostly the same as when they purchased their home. If you have an empty lot beside or
near you or a neighbor who might sell their land to a developer, that land could be rezoned into a PUD with
uses, structures, and density that you probably cannot imagine at this time. If you wish to comprehend and
have any say in proposed developments in your area it is essential to be informed about the PUD process and
to share your concerns with the developer, Plan Commission and City Council during the PUD process.
In the PUD process public input is important, especially with neighbors adjacent to the PUD. A PUD is a
rezone, but differs greatly from a standard rezone, in that a standard rezone has standard and consistent rules
in place so that all parties already know what is required and what to expect. For example a resident should
be able to protest a 5 story office building being proposed next to his 1 story house where people can look
down into his back yard.
It is reasonable and responsible for the PUD developer to provide reasons for a PUD and a development
plan for a rezone before he can be awarded it. When a developer proposes a PUD he asks the city to toss out
the current set of zoning rules so that the developer can make his own special set of rules. The PUD is the
framework for everything that will happen in that space. It is not reasonable for the developer to be able to
change his framework because he wants to change his concept. After the PUD has been passed each building
should be reviewed for ADLS within the parameters of the PUD.
In order for the Plan Commission to effectively review a PUD proposal and issue a reasonable
recommendation they need to be able to look at the entire PUD development plan.
To simplify and
streamline a thorough review of complex PUD proposals it is reasonable to require:
A.A standard format with an outline indicating the order of development standards, accepted uses,
required exhibits, with standard language regarding how and when PUD ordinances may be modified.
B.A summary document exhibit identifying how the proposed project falls below, meets or exceeds both
existing and comparable zoning districts. This should include a spreadsheet and the standards proposed
in the PUD.
C. Visual/graphical depictions of not only the “concepts” represented by the PUD ordinance, but also visual
renderings of the most intense development possible under the PUD ordinance.
I believe that PUDS can be made easier to review and manage and that the staff, Plan Commission and Council
should be able to measure a proposal to determine how it compares and exceeds existing districts to warrant
favorable consideration for all parties. It is not unreasonable to expect developers to document how the
change from the existing zoning to a PUD is in the best interest of the full community.
But the July 26 Memorandum PUD revision, which has totally gutted the PUD ordinance, is not helpful in any
way and should not be passed in its current revision. Unless items that provide predictability, structure,
transparency and safeguards to the PUD Ordinance are reclaimed I do not support the passing of this
amendment.
Jill H. Meisenheimer
471 Burlington Lane
2
Carmel, IN 45032
3