Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors press commissioners over Hampstead PUD; petition sent to committee for more study
Summary
The commission sent the Hampstead PUD—proposing 36 homes on about 9 acres at West Main Street—to committee after extensive public opposition over density, traffic, drainage and loss of mature trees; staff and commissioners requested a traffic study, drainage analysis and design clarifications.
The Carmel Plan Commission voted July 21 to forward the Hampstead Planned Unit Development to its committee on Sept. 1 for additional study and revisions after extended public comment and internal discussion raised multiple unresolved issues.
John Davosheywitz, representing Christopher Scott Homes, presented the Hampstead concept for roughly 36 detached single‑family homes on about 9 acres at 1850 West Main Street, describing pedestrian‑oriented streets, alleys for rear garage access, internal roundabouts and open space. He said home prices were anticipated between $1.5 million and $2 million and that the applicant would return to committee to respond to comments.
Residents from the adjacent Village of West Clay and Dumbarton area offered repeated objections. Priya Gangwani said the proposal "places 36 homes in just 9 acres while removing mature trees that provide privacy" and urged the commission to uphold the comprehensive plan. Multiple speakers detailed expected traffic increases, potential new U‑turns on Main Street, insufficient buffering and concerns that a centrally placed detention pond is at a high elevation and "not big enough," citing the city engineering department's concerns in the record.
Jeremy Denick, a neighbor, urged the commission to require a stamped drainage report from a licensed Indiana engineer showing current flows and post‑construction release rates, and to analyze downstream impacts to Elliott Creek and Hamilton County regulated drains. He told commissioners, "Answer the water questions before approval or the city argues about who pays for it decades later."
Staff (Alexia Lopez) explained that engineering and detailed drainage calculations typically come at the subdivision/primary plat stage, not the zoning (rezoning/PUD) stage, but recommended forwarding Hampstead to committee to allow time for the applicant to address the many outstanding engineering, open‑space and architectural text issues. Several commissioners asked specifically for a traffic study, detailed streetscape plans, clarification of tree impacts, and explicit PUD text to lock in architectural standards and buffers.
After discussion the commission adopted a motion to send the petition to committee on Sept. 1 rather than taking a recommendation to council tonight. Commissioners emphasized that any favorable recommendation should be contingent on stricter open‑space percentages, resolved stormwater design and clearer edge buffering to adjacent neighborhoods.
