HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail from CWIC2 to Council 05-22-13
Motz, Lisa
From:Keeling, Adrienne M
Sent:Tuesday, October 08, 2013 3:39 PM
To:Motz, Lisa
Subject:FW: Ordinance Z-574-13: PUD Requirements Ordinance Amendment.
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Please add to Laserfiche and file: 13010013 OA
Email from CWIC2 to Council 05-24-13
From: CWIC2 \[mailto:cwic2@yahoo.com\]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 3:26 PM
To: Keeling, Adrienne M
Subject: Re: Ordinance Z-574-13: PUD Requirements Ordinance Amendment.
Thank you, Adrienne, for the scrivener changes, the clear responses, and the timely reply.
I hope your holiday weekend is/was great!
Marilyn
From:
"Keeling, Adrienne M" <AKeeling@carmel.in.gov>
To:
'CWIC2' <cwic2@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Thursday, May 23, 2013 4:43 PM
Subject:
RE: Ordinance Z-574-13: PUD Requirements Ordinance Amendment.
Ladies,
I don’t plan to release a new draft prior to the Committee meeting on Tuesday evening, but can fix a couple of your
requests as scriveners errors. See my responses in red below.
Have a great long weekend!
Thanks
Adrienne
From:
CWIC2 \[mailto:cwic2@yahoo.com\]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 22, 2013 4:24 PM
To:
Keeling, Adrienne M
Subject:
Ordinance Z-574-13: PUD Requirements Ordinance Amendment.
Adrienne,
We assume you/DOCS can make “technical” changes, such as correcting typos, for the Land Use
Committee meeting. Below we have listed what we consider to be “technical” changes. If none
of these, or only some can be changed for the Land Use Committee, please let us know no later
than the end of this week or we will email these to the Committee members.
-#5.b.iv. Please add “percent of open space, and minimum acres of each area.” I
would suggest you email the Committee with this request. The Department doesn’t
object to adding it, but it is more than a technical/scriveners error.
1
-#5.b.vii. Remove “Parking Requirements”? Parking is listed in xi. I can fix this, and
will point it out at the meeting.
nd
-#13. Correct a typo: the 2 “c” should be a “d.” I can fix this, and will point it out
at the meeting.
Exhibit X: PUD Comparison Chart. Under “District Standards,” please add “minimum” &
“maximum” at the front of each item in the list where appropriate. The chart doesn’t specify
which number is desired. This Chart is not formally part of the Ordinance, so we can (and
probably will) make changes as needed over time. I will work something in that requires
minimum or maximum to be noted. Setbacks could be either minimum or maximum, depending
on the district or overlay zone.
Then some questions:
-8.d: We favor changing the Ordinance text to match a Commitment when possible,
but would the changed text be identified as a change per Commitment? Would that
Commitment then still be included in a separate list of Commitments? Despite text
changes within the document, it is still very helpful to have a complete list of
Commitments and amendments attached for easy reference. It also seems particularly
important for everyone to know what changes were necessary in order for the PUD to
gain Council approval.
I think I understand your point as a valuable way to track the changes made during the approval
process. Staff intended this section to address long term administration of a PUD after it’s
adopted. It is fairly common for Commitments to come about relating to issues not specifically
listed or addressed in the District Ordinance. However, we also have instances where there is a
figure listed in the ordinance (e.g. number of dwellings) but then a completely different figure
identified in the commitment document attached 75 pages later. Additionally, we’ve seen
commitments state that section XYZ is to be invalid.
Obviously, commitments are important and needed, and all parties involved should review &
abide by them; however, when doing quick research or answering phone calls about a particular
project it is frustrating to look up and find a seemingly simple answer in the ordinance, then to
find later that there is a “contradictory” answer to the same question later in the document. We
would rather the ordinance be adjusted in those instances rather than have contradictions in a
separate attachment.
- 14.c.ii.: Does “adjoining streetscapes and neighborhoods” refer to only within the
PUD, to abutting properties, to abutting neighborhoods, or some combination of these 3?
Any combination.
Thank you. Marilyn Anderson, President MaryEllen Bormett, Vice-President
Dee Fox, Secretary
2