April 3, 1991 letter to PC Members from Wes Bucher CityofCarmel
Wesley 0. Bucher
DIRECTOR•DEPT.Of OOMMUNn7 DCVEIA1MENT
Dorothy J.Hancock
W.Y
April 3, 1991
Dear Plan Commission members,
The following are the items I outlined at the last Plan Commission meeting involving
what, hopefully, will be the last of the sessions and discussion on the Comprehensive Plan
Update:
I) Future roads: The enclosed map shows several roads, in yellow highlight,
that were designated as future roads on the 1985 plan. These were not included
by the consultants on the 1991 Update. There was, as far as minutes and the
memory serves,never a discussion by the Comp Plan Committee to either keep
them or delete them from the map. If the Commission believes they should be
maintained, the Commission should move tonight to add them to the 1991
Update map for presentation to the Council and before final printing.
If you would please draw your attention to the intersection of Guilford and 116th
Street, you will notice there is a proposed extension of Guilford south to 111th
Street. Staff has been working with the County Commissioners and Developers
of Woodpark Subdivision to extend this street southward in a more direct
manner. Due to that fact, and also to the relative uncertainty of the Monon
Corridor, Staff would recommend the red dotted alignment.
Compliance with the county Comprehensive Plan: The 116th Street Task Force
• recommended that the County Comp Plan designation for River Road south of
116th Street be a Primary Arterial rather than a Secondary Arterial as shown on
the proposed Carmel/Clay '91 Comp Plan Update. This would mean that the
designated right-of-way for this road would increase from 90' to 100'. In
• addition, HazelDell Road should be designated in the text to extend as a
PrimaryArterial north from 116th to 146th Street (currently the text says 136th
• Street). If the Commission agrees with these two changes, a motion to correct
the document and map should be made.
•
l CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL,INDIANA 46032 3171571.2400 FAX 317/044.3498
•
•
Page 2
•
4/3/91
3) The"Blackwell Letter,Part II": Mr.Blackwell will separate his recommendation
and propose that the following be Included as part of the Comprehensive Plan
Update:
'This traffic/thoroughfare plan was based on 1989 studies. The Plan
Commission will request that an updated traffic data be provided when
traffic analysis plans are submitted with Development proposals."
In addition, Mr. Blackwell is proposing that the attached resolution be sent to
the Cannel City Council.
4) 116th Street recommendation. Alan Potasnik has requested that Mr.John Myers
of HNTB work out wording to accommodate the recommendations of the 116th
Street Task Force in the proposed Thoroughfare Plan. Mr. Myers is meeting
with Staff on Thursday,April 4th,and if his recommendations are forthcoming
prior to the Tuesday, April 9th meeting,we will forward them to you.
Hopefully, the above will give a clearer picture of the several issues that remain
outstanding. Staff believes that the Commission can vote to make or deny these changes on
• Tuesday night,April 9th, and then vote at your regular Commission meeting on April 16th to
recommend the document to the City Council.
inc rely,
•
Wes Bucher
enc.
•
•M . k'y{� 1 (i;) �,it :�• . .� L Ii"
5 ` tY�j,,�, tip. , , t; ill,. , 3. Minimize the volume of traffic growth ' on
Spring Mill Road .
POLICIES 1 . Development shall maintain and protect the
• residential nature of Spring Mill Road from
the western boundary of, the 31 corridor to
Spring Mill Road ;
2. Recognize the existing unique and extensive
tree cover in this residential corridor and
the need to preserve a generous amount -of 'this
existing tree cover in conjunction with new
replacement plantings as an integral part of
a required development plan .
•
3 . Maintain the natural beauty of the roadway by
• replacing lost trees and incorporating
landscaping into road improvement plans ;
4 . Limit the number of driveway or access road
" cuts on Spring Mill Road ; and
5. • Provide for dedication of open space for any
development occurring in the. Spring Mill Road
'.: . rt . corridor area.
' Passed by the Common Council for the City of Carmel , Indiana , .
on the r1 day of --1�-J . 1988.
COMMON COUNCIL FOR THE CITY
OF CARMEL, INDIANA
By
,CO _ : • d41-60(4-1
D1R' THY ! 'y N eCK ,
PRESIDING OFFICER
ATTEST:
c-.�
);11-WI W. JONES
Clerk-Treasurer
APPROVED :
• �� ` $ ' , ' ayor
ATTEST:
L L J ' • 't-TL
AN W. J ' N S
/Clerk-Treasurer
THE CITY OF CARMEL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ORDINANCE
WHEREAS , the Common Council of the City of Carmel , Indiana , passed
a comprehensive plan update to the Carmel -Clay Township Comprehensive
Plan , by Ordinance D-454 , as amended ; and
WHEREAS , the needs of the Carmel -Clay Community have changed
requiring an amendment to the aforementioned Carmel -ClayComprehensive omprehensive
Plan; and
WHEREAS , it is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of
Carmel and Clay Township that the comprehensive plan , Ordinance D-454 ,
be amended;
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT ORDAINED by the Common Council of the City
of Carmel , Indiana , pursuant to Indiana Code 36-7-4-500 , et ,seq . ,
and all acts amendatory or supplementary thereto , that Ordinance
D-454 is amended as to the goals , objectives , and policies regarding
•
. Spring Mill Road and real property adjacent
thereto , as follows :
- GOAL 6 -
GOALS 1 . To
osupport the Carmel Comprehensive Plan and
goals , objectives and policies as they
relate to the Spring Mill Road corridor area ;.
and
• 2. To define specific objectives and policies to
secure the continuation of Spring Mill Road
as a residential corridor.
OBJECTIVES 1 . To maintain the residential nature and
integrity of Spring Mill Road from 96th Street
to 146th Street ;
•2. Assure that when and as residential develop -
ment occurs along Spring Mill Road , the
quality of the existing natural environment
will be preserved ; and
that Spring Mill should develop with a predominantly residential
character, higher densities to the east and lower densities to the west.
•
Introducing higher intensity non-residential uses and higher intensity
residential uses along the Meridian/Spring Mill Corridor is not a
problem per se, however, few development proposals in the years
between 1985 and 1989 have been successful in achieving approval.
Some of the effects of the development, beyond representing a
fundamental change in the character of these areas in the minds of
existing residents, include a shift in development from the center and
eastern portions of Carmel/Clay Township to the western edge, away
from population concentrations; as a result, more cross city/ township
east/west traffic would exist. Competition also would be created
between the eastern and western portions of the township, and the
downtown would have yet another commercial district to compete with.
The nature of development that has occurred and is planned for the
Meridian Corridor will also spin off other types of development. These
office developments will require hotel accommodations, which will
likely require consideration for more mixed-use development where
limited retail and dining facilities are incorporated into some of the
office development.
2. 1-465 Interchanges
The interchange at I-465 and Meridian Street would be a prime location
for this type of development. The interchange represents a prime
opportunity for quality development, which could provide a strong
image for the Carmel/Clay Township area as a quality community.
Pressure to develop at this interchange, particularly with uses that are
dependent upon major highway visibility and access, is becoming
significantly greater. This opportunity should not be preempted by
typical commercial uses present at interchanges such as fast food
restaurants and service stations. These types of services are readily
available at the Keystone/I-465 interchange. Rather, development
similar to that of Keystone at the Crossings should be incorporated to
reinforce Carmel's image. In addition to possible commercial develop-
ment pressure, development of the Timber Lane and Northridge Village
subdivisions could be realized well within the planning period.
Development within these two subdivisions would likely increase the
traffic volume on College Avenue.
The interchange at U.S. Route 421 (Michigan Road) and I-465,
particularly north of 96th Street is another area of significance.
Recently, this area has been undergoing pressure to be rezoned from an
S-1 District to a B-7 District. Although the impacts of this area are not
anticipated to be quite as dramatic as the Meridian Street/I-465
- 68 -
The possibility of double loading these service roads is viable and
should be considered because this would provide a means for stepping
down land uses; a better transition from the high-rise office towers of
Meridian Street to the largely single-family residential structures of the
city and township could be created by locating higher density housing
and/or cluster developments in the immediate vicinity. A buffer
between these two diverse building types would also be created.
Development along those streets that feed into Meridian Street, such as
106th Street, 111th Street, 116th Street and 131st Street has been fairly
significant since the 1985 Update. If improved, these streets could
provide convenient east/west access while at the same time encouraging
development to move off of Route 31 (Meridian Street). This, too,
would create additional opportunities for stepping down land uses from
Meridian Street.
The area in the vicinity of 131st and Meridian is experiencing
significant pressures for development. Evidence of this pressure exists
in the form of the St. Vincent's Hospital, the Summer Trace Retirement
Center, office development proposed south of 131st Street and east of
Meridian Street, the extension of Cannel Drive, and the recurrent but
informal proposal for major commercial/residential development west
of Meridian Street near 131st Street.
With the extension of sewers on Spring Mill Road west of Meridian
Street, increased development could be realized in this corridor. All of
these developments represent opportunities to increase the tax base of
the area. These are also contingent upon the ability of Meridian Street
to carry additional traffic.
Many of the problems anticipated in the 1985 Update for Main Street
have not occurred, due primarily to the closing of the 131st Street
median at U. S. 31. Main Street is one of the few Cannel
thoroughfares with less traffic in 1989 than that reported in the 1985
Update.
A policy question is introduced as well by the prospect of commercial
development west of Meridian Street in the vicinity of 131st Street.
Since the preparation of the 1985 Update a consensus opinion has
emerged in the community that non-residential development occurring
along Meridian Street should not have direct access to Spring Mill and
- 67 -