Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemorandum of meeting 9-20-06 Rebuttal: Mr. Wilson said that when Windsor Grove I was constructed, they were required to provide reet into the vacant 1 . that it would be developed. The covenants and restrictions via a stub sting lake was installed by the previous landowner. The 1. is satisfied with the proposed site plan. Mr. Wilson stated that there is a Lake-Clay West Distric is trying an addition the mo a, Mr. Annally Downs and should no utility easementlsewe two lots that go to Towne onal Waste-and would e Lake. The petitioner for construction purposes on install the sewer. Regarding ould be glad to look at that. This site is the opposite end of ere with the water table. Department Report, Matt Griffin. The Department is not in s relief from the Points of Access waivers. Both Hami Highway and the De that it makes more sense to make the connection on om Kings Mill if at e with the lake there; it makes more sense from a traffic circ dpoint as as safety. t. has said they can fires effectively with the 'on as , but the nce is obviously another of access into this site. ner does not make the c y would need to request another waiver from gth and that would be before the Plan Commission next . The Department is see additional details t iewed at the Committee. e Department is recommen s item be sent to the Octob division Committee for additional comments and discussion. Dan Dutcher said he expected to borders for the benefit of the anytime there is a stub street, asked that the etitioner any tie the two sections Steve said the lake is off-set in the brick wall to the pa and connect to the walks around Committee. gnificant landscape and s is appropriate to note est that addition roposed use of gre pace seems to have along the west and southern of the neighbors, that t will likely occur. Dan . no walking path seen or recreational benefit. be a walking path Street. The w ivision. Mr. Wilson common area and an one side of the show the path in Jerry Chomanczuk asked that the water table situation be looked into by the Department. Docket No. 05080016 PP, an 'sion Waivers Nos. 0508001 and 05080018 SW, Windsor Grove 2 were forwarded to the Subdivision Committee for further review at 6:00 PM on October 4, 2005 in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall 5H. Docket No The appli WaIvers: Docket No. 05 To seek reli PP Amend: Kendall Wood lat 15 lots on 12.045 acres with the following subdivision : 6.03.19 - Access to Arterials, Parkways, and Collectors ouses fronting collector streets/200 foot required separation from S:/PlanCommission/MemorandumofJ'v1tg/2005/2005sept20 ONE CIVIC RE 5 CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2417 ittee accepted and supported this project, but questioned the access point. with Mike e, City Engineer, the petitioner will be granted full access; then m n ution to the City for their share of improvements on Guilford are necessary as a r lt of all ofthe new development, approximately $100,000. How ys out has been analyzed by the Engineer's office. The west end of the site contains a secondary access point that will re . re an easement across the property to the west; the access wi e right inlright out only onto 122 Street and is supported by the Carmel Engineer. The las is for full access onto Carmel Drive. A memorandum from the supporting this curb cut. request to go forward wi taking into account input r and some ofthe other tenants Engineer was distributed e northwest will util is not one taken blic hearing and the er Health Care really fe described why they are cut if so approved. The it has been thought through meeting. The primary tenant necessary to have a full cut. Again, the petitioner is wor particularly the acco some point in the future, may be limited to right inlri that. The City Engineer's Office forward based on traffic CoUll cut and Guilford Road and this m garding the other curb cuts, . understands that at e, the full access rom now, we will abide by e petitioner is moving between the proposed g recommendations. Again, the petitioner understands occurs, the petitioner will not conte may be a median i d no suit would be filed if the future and ifthat ian were installed. Special Studies Co y the Co ent there. The crux of the points proposed. The Committ however, the Committee voted cross over and make a left turn. statement of dation as Guilford or 1 curb cut Department has a foot in both c in the future and then possibly res eport, Jerry Chomanczuk: Ma as pretty much summed up ed building is a and good design-no this project was access to the site. There are three access problem with the access on 122nd Street or 0 . ision. The conc ess where mittee reques neer co address the access e are no pro , with Carmel Drive, it would seem that t other words, allow it but wait and see how th Department Report, Matt Griffin. As stated several times, the 0 this one access point. A letter w . ed this afternoon from . eering Dept and the situation was discussed thoro the Dept Director. The Department is defaulting to the Engineering Dept. The states that allowing fu ss will not do any substantial damage or danger to t . however, as the parcel d s in the future, Engineering would certainly consider installing a edian at this location and res ncting full access when the situation warrants S:/PlanCommission/MemorandumofJ'v1tg/2005/2005sept20 13 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2417 and the intersection south to Ditch road and three points. The other items ngth at Committee were the frontage road requirement and setback requirements. etitioner's vision is for a heavily landscaped area along the perimeter; there is also a wall s of landscaping and very nice, exclusive homes in the background that are set int where it would avoid the concerns previously voiced regarding the possibility of exposed vinyl. The petitioner has agreed to brick or stone or masonry wrap on any of the exterior lots as well as additional landscaping in th or side yards. Building pad locations were also shown on the plat; these indicate that none of ings will be in the floodway or floodplain area. The drainage has been discussed and concerns have been addressed at the intersection of Ditch Road and 106th Street. The drainage is bei rnally on the site to the south lake and into the existing storm infrastructure. The pe 1 lOner will actually be reducing the amount of flow from the west side of Ditch Road. Mr. Calderon reported that ittee approved all ofthe waivers and split-vote on the private streets. The private streets to public standards and specifications. The gate is not a prominent feature of the subdi e gate is set back s om the road, well over 100 feet, and it will be landscaped so that passers-by . e the gate as a prominent feature, rather it is a subtle fea T e petitioner has incorp full turn-around before arriving at the gate. Any traffic can safely re-enter onto Ditch Road. Accel and decellanes have also been added for both approaching and departing traffic from the Subdivision. The adjoining subdivision to the east, Laurelwood, is also a gated community. There is no barrier between the lots at Laurel Ridge and Laurelwood. Letters of support were submitted to the Plan Commission from the Laurelwood Homeowners Association. Subdivision Report, Rick Ripma. Regarding the connectivity, the . e did not feel that there was any good area to have the property connect because of the e Creek and because there is no connectivity to Laurelwood. It just did not make a lot of sense to require this community to connect to anything else. Regarding access to arterials, parkways and collectors-the Committee felt comfortable with what was being done. The deceleration lanes have been provided. The cul-de-sac length was agreeable to the Committee based on the size of the lots. None of the homes will be in the Floodway/Plain. There is actually a 30 or 40 foot cliff down to the Creek and the Committee was comfortable with that. The alternative transpo pedestrian paths-everything south of the entryway falls from the road. The rest of the . the path, as required. The Committee was okay with he petitioner making a path a little more narrow, perhaps 6 feet. The petitioner agreed to do the path, S:/PlanCommission/MemorandumofJ'v1tg/2005/2005sept20 15 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDL'\NA 46032 317/571-2417 baugh then addressed the Commission. The traffic light was discussed when the Pittman is location was approved by the Council. Originally, it wanted to occur at where the existing street and Church are today. The developers in the area could layers to agree to that location, so there was a connectivity plan developed with REI, Browning, Pittman, Christal DeHaan's ground to the south of Pittman's property. INDOT was consulted and worked with, and the consensus was that this is the one place that a signal would occur between 1 16th Street 106th Street. That was all part of the discussion at the public level, Plan Commission and Cou ximately 3 years ago. It was all a part of the discussion at the time of the Pittman rezone where the townhomes are located. said he was still concerned about the number of traffic lights on Michigan Road. Mr. Sh also not be this. Mark Rattermann asked for a commitment from the Department that additional traffic li on US 421 would no Mr. Rattermann was willing to bend on this one because it sounds like this is THE raffic light. But, Mr. Rattermann said he would b pset if there were a proposal for another light 500 feet north of this one. Perhaps we should it an Ordinance rather than a Resolution regarding no more traffic lights on US 421. Mike Hollibaugh said there was never intent to have more than one signal-that why this plan was developed. The Thoroughfare ws one point of connectivity between 116th and 106th Streets and that is what we are working . People also have to have a way to get out onto Michigan Road and there must be a way to control some of the traffic flow. Mark Rattermann moved for approval of Docket No. 05060053 DP, Weston Pointe Retail Center, conditioned upon recordation of two commitments aforesaid and final ADLS review and approval at the October 4, 2005 Committee meeting, seconded by Dan Dutcher, APPROVED 8-0. J. New Rusiness: 1J. Docket No. 05090008 ADLS: Allen Office Building @ Weston Point Retail Center The applicant seeks ADLS approval for a 4 tenant office buil g. The site is located at 11055 N. Michigan Rd. and is zoned B-2/Business withi U.S. 421 Overlay. Filed by Nicolas Quintana of Sebree Architects for Williams Reality Group. Ken Sebree, Sebree Architects, Avon, fudiana appeared before the applicant. Gordon Allen, Prudential-Allen Real Estate Group was als . . on representing the ttendance. The Prudential-Allen Of ding sits on a diagonal on the site. The site will be integrated and engineered within the Wi s Realty Group Center. The 4-tenant building on the corner is thought to be appropriate or offices and complies with the intent of the US 421 Overlay Zone. At this time, the applicant is requesting approval. S:/PlanCommission/MemorandumofJ'v1tg/2005/2005sept20 19 ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2417