HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Sub 04-22-03 Special Meeting
City of Carmel
CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2003
(Special Meeting)
The Subdivision Committee of the Carmel/Clay Plan Commission met in a Special Meeting on Tuesday, April
22, 2003 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.
Members present: Marilyn Anderson; Stephanie Blackman; Dave Cremeans, Chairperson; Wayne Haney; Pat
Rice; and Pam Williams; thereby establishing a quorum.
Jon Dobosiewicz attended the meeting on behalf of the Department of Community Services.
The following items were considered:
. Docket No. 29-03 Z; Clarian North Hospital Campus PUD
1
The applicant seeks to rezone a 107.367 acre property from B-3, B-6, and S-2 subject to the US
31 Overlay Zone to a Planned Unit Development District. The site is located at the northwest
th
corner of US 31 and 116 Street.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker and Daniels for Clarian Health Partners, Inc.
2. Docket No. 30-03 DP/ADLS; Clarian North Hospital
The applicant seeks Final Development Plan and Architectural Design, Lighting, Landscaping &
Signage approval for a hospital and medical office building. The 68.164 acre site is located at the
th
northwest corner of US 31 and 116 Street. There is a proposal filed to rezone the site to a
Planned Unit Development District.
Filed by Joseph M. Scimia of Baker and Daniels for Clarian Health Partners, Inc.
Note:
Items 1 and 2 were heard together.
Joe Scimia of Baker & Daniels was present representing Clarian Health Partners.
The Committee began its review of the PUD on page 14.
Public input was invited at the conclusion of the Committee’s review this evening.
Kathy Page, 2510 Coventry Way, Indianapolis—currently building a home in Spring Lake Estates. Ms.
Page said her family had looked at the guidelines for the 31 Overlay, and the City 20/20 Vision
Comprehensive Plan prior to deciding to build in Spring Lake Estates. The current proposal for a full
1
S:\\PlanCommission\\Minutes\\SubdivisionCommitteeMinutes\\2003apr22
service hospital with 24-hour service will have a definite negative impact on their new home. The
standards for development include 1) A landscape buffer along Springmill Road and adjacent to residential
development. 2) A well-conceived planned, single family residential community probably situated along
the west side of the site (Springmill Road). 3) Access from a new parallel road rather than Springmill
Road. Ms. Page asked that these three standards remain intact. The citizens of Carmel clearly understand
the need to expand the commercial/industrial tax base to business growth. It is also clear that citizens
support this growth, only if negative impacts of that growth can be mitigated and contained and not
impede the quality of the neighborhood. If the current proposal for development proceeds, the entire
character of Springmill Road will change.
Theron Nesbit, 363 Mallard Court, Spring Lake Estates. The residents in this area have a real
problem—they are residents of Clay Township but unable to vote for any members of Carmel City Council
or the mayor. If this current proposal is approved, it could negatively affect the property values and
quality of life. In some respects, the residents feel that they have been enticed by the City to build their
homes in this Subdivision. If the intent is to change the zoning, 100 feet of woods is not a sufficient buffer
between Spring Lake Estates and the noise and lights of a full service hospital. This subdivision will not
stand by quietly and watch as trees are removed and a heliport built.
At this point, Dave Cremeans gave a history lesson in government and the Joinder Agreement between
Clay Township and the City of Carmel and representation from the Township and City elected officials.
Mr. Cremeans also explained the process for rezoning and that any official change in zoning must be
approved by the legislative body, the City Council; the Plan Commission is an Advisory Body only.
Jon Dobosiewicz reported for the Department. If there is completion as to the discussion of the PUD, it
would be appropriate for the petitioner to make the revisions as noted and re-submit a red-line copy for
review by the Department and the Committee members. After final review, a recommendation should be
forwarded to the full Plan Commission for ultimate forwarding to the City Council with a
recommendation.
Jon further stated that the DP/ADLS for the hospital site should be reviewed/discussed further so that
public comments can be addressed. If there is something specific the Committee would like to see
changed and the petitioner has the ability to address those concerns, it can be done at Committee on May
13, 2003. The DP/ADLS and the PUD do not necessarily have to be dealt with at the same time. There
is still the public hearing process at City Council level once the PUD is forwarded to the Plan Commission
ndth
with a recommendation. The PUD could be heard by Council either June 2 or the 19, if the Plan
th
Commission forwards this on to Council at its May 20 meeting.
th
Pat Rice asked that actual material samples be brought to the Committee meeting on May 13.
There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 PM.
______________________________
_______________________________ Dave Cremeans, Chairperson
Ramona Hancock, Secretary
2
S:\\PlanCommission\\Minutes\\SubdivisionCommitteeMinutes\\2003apr22