Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Sub 05-01-01 t.. I CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MAY 1, 2001 Members present: Chairman Ron Houck; Kent Broach; Wayne Haney; Dianna Knoll; Norma Meighen; and John Sharpe. Marilyn Anderson, ex-officio, was also in attendance, also Pat Rice. The Department of Community Services was represented by Jon Dobosiewicz John Myers of Parsons Brinckerotraddressed both Committees of the Commission regarding traffic. Mr. Myers referred to the traffic study of 96th and Westfield Boulevard that was done in 1997 and the 1999 96th Street Corridor Study, Michigan Road to Keystone Avenue. Mr. Myers touched on the findings, recommendations, and implementation of those studies. Some of the main points: A right turn lane on the northbound approach to the 96th Street & Westfield Boulevard intersection would significantly reduce congestion. A corridor should be preserved for an extension of 96th Street west of Westfield Boulevard on a slightly skewed alignment over 1-465 for future connection. 96th Street should be upgraded to an improved, two- lane roadway between Shelborne and Spring Mill, College and Real Street, and between Westfield Boulevard and Haverstick. I There were questions and comments from Commission members and general discussion. John Myers read excerpts from the 96th Street Corridor study that were tagged by Pat Rice. Mr Myers said adjacent jurisdictions should be given the opportunity to review proposals at the appropriate time and provide direct input to the Technical Advisory Committee. This process should be formalized and routinely implemented. As development and land use changes occur, right-of-way should be dedicated and consistent with functional classification, depending on location. Item 1. Docket No. 163-00 PP Amend; Orin Jessup Land Co.'s 1st Addition to the Town of Home Place, Lot 175 The petitioner seeks approval to replat a 2-10t subdivision on 0.47:3::. acre. The site is located southwest of East lOSth Street and McPherson Street. The site is zoned , R-3/residence. The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 163-00a SW sea 8.8 curbs and gutters 163-00b SW sea 8.9.1 sidewalks Filed by Jim Vires of Benchmark Surveying for James A. Shelley. I Presenter: Don Scotten with Benchmark Surveying, representing owners of property at 10gth and McPherson Streets. Committees\Subdiv\200 1 may 1 --1 The proposal will split the existing lot into two residential lots; two doubles will then be I constructed on each lot; the number of units has been a concern. It its present state, the property is distressed. The owner is committed to improving the real estate by upgrading. An easement is provided on the eastern most lot. Parking is in front of each unit, the drive is 35 feet long. The proposal includes one single car garage per unit. The units are brick veneer and brick face. The proposal meets the minimum side yard setback and requirements. Jon Dobosiewicz said no further comments have been received from the public since the initial public hearing. There are no outstanding issues. The Primary Plat meets the technical requirements of the ordinance. The Department is asking for a commitment regarding installation of Curb and gutters and sidewalks at such time as they are brought to the area. Off-street parking is provided. Don Scotten of Benchmark is agreeable to submitting a commitment regarding the installation of curb, gutters and sidewalks. John Sharpe had several comments regarding the parking situation--deemed extremely inadequate for the residents as well as any guests or invitees. There were adjoining property owners in attendance, in particular MaryBelle Leisure and Virginia Kinsbury. Mr. Shelley was also in attendance. To the east of the property is the abandoned railroad right-of-way. The units are two bedroom, 1300 square feet. The side of the road serves as a drainage swale. No two car garages are contemplated. The off street parking cannot accommodate two car widths. I Mr. Scotten said the garages are interior to the units. Driveways could be widened to accommodate another car. Ron Houck said it is reasonable for the driveway to accommodate a two car width. The common driveway is 15 feet wide and serves both units for common ingress/egress. The drive has been moved farther east, and the unit moved southerly to allow for greater side yard; this also allows for greater pad--the lot line moved. Ron Houck said this proposal represents a health, safety and welfare issue. In short, there is too much on too small a space--4 families on .47 acre. The current proposal is unacceptable as far as parking; there is also no play area for children, except the street. The major issue is in terms of the way this is structured. Don Scotten requested a tabling at this time. Members of public were given an opportunity to speak at this time. Jack Edwards, 10475 Cornell, said the configuration of the lot is not suitable for two doubles. Parking is an issue, play space for children is an issue, ingress/egress is an issue. I Virginia Kingsbury, adjoining property owner, agreed with comments made by Jack Edwards. The current proposal forces the children into the street to play and this is dangerous. Committees\Subdiv\200 1 may 2 ,.. I I I John Sharpe moved to TABLE Docket 163-00 PP Amend, to allow the petitioner an opportunity to reconfigure the property. APPROVED 7-0. This item will be heard at the June 5, 2001 Committee meeting. Item 3. Docket No. 22-01 ADLS; Mayflower Park Subdivision Petitioner seeks approval to establish a Subdivision sign. The site is zoned I- I/Industrial within the U.S. 421 Overlay Zone. Filed by James W. Browning of Browning Investments . Presenter: Jamie Browning representing Mayflower Park Subdivision. A rendering of the sign was distributed to Committee members. The sign is off-white, baked enamel; the blue tones are stainless steel. The monument sign is located within the landscaped island. There are no line-of-sight issues regarding left turns. The signage will complement the office park as well as the office buildings. Department Report: Jon Dobosiewicz said Laurence Lillig has no outstanding issues with the signage. Scott Brewer has not yet reviewed the landscape proposal. The size of the sign is within the guidelines of the ordinance. According to Jamie Browning, the shape of the sign is not a logo. Ron Houck asked if the character of the specifications change with an irregular shape of sign. Jon said he did not believe so; no variances are being required. The size of the sign, 21.7X8 feet, meets the requirements of the Ordinance. Laurence has no problem with requirements. Marilyn Anderson requested a review of the landscape plan for species and amounts around the slgn. Jamie Browning said that in relationship to the sign, the lettering is to be one foot tall at the capital letter . Houck, requests Laurence review list of outstanding questions, height, sign, etc. John Sharpe moved to recommend approval of the monument sign, contingent upon Laurence Lillig's determination that the size is allowable, and that the landscape plan is review by Scott Brewer and found to be acceptable to the Department. APPROVED 6-0. Items 2. and 4. (PUD's) were allotted 30 minutes each for discussion. Item 2. Docket No. 14-01 Z; USTA pun Petitioner seeks favorable recommendation of a rezone from the R-I/residence district to a PUD/planned unit development district on 1.920::1: acres. The site is located on the northwest corner of East 96th Street and the Carmel/Clay Monon Greenway. The site is zoned R-I/residence. Filed by John K. Smeltzer of Bose McKinney & Evans for the Midwest Youth Tennis Foundation. COlnmittees\Subdiv\200 1 may 3 Presenter: John Smeltzer of Bose McKinney & Evans. Mr. Smeltzer distributed copies of letters I from various utilities stating that capacity will allow service to this site. Ron Houck directed the Committee as to the first issue, i.e. to determine the suitability of the PUD for the area where it is planned. Pat Rice referred to prior minutes at the time the 5 Seasons Sports Club was approved. There were 5 properties at that time; these properties were combined and then split into two tracts by recorded document dated April 18, 1995. Pat commented that representations made to the community at the time of the original request of the 5 Seasons' application and subsequent split of the property have caused her to question the integrity of the 5 Seasons. Ron Houck responded that the Plan Commission is sensitive of the community and of each proposed development. The question is: "Should this parcel be allowed to be developed as proposed?" The committee is to look at traffic concerns, design of the building, compatible use, entrance into the area, also the impact on the Monon is to be considered. In reading through information submitted, USTA is simply a tenant in the proposed building. This is an office "building not unlike any other, except that USTA is a tenant. Written comments from the Committee were given to John Smeltzer to utilize in drafting the PUD language in the Ordinance. John Sharpe asked what issues would be discussed at the next meeting. Ron Houck said the issue, first and foremost, is whether or not the use will be allowed and the impacts to deal with. The language for the PUD Ordinance is to be determined after compatibility, building design, use, etc. After further discussion, it was decided to meet at 7:00 PM Thursday, May 3rd to review this particular PUD with the architect and traffic engineer being available to answer any questions. Item 4. Docket No. 25-01 Z; College Hills PUD Petitioner seeks favorable recommendation of a rezone from the R-l/residence district to a PUD/planned unit development district on 20.5::1: acres. The site is located northwest of East 96th Street and North College Avenue. The site is zoned R- l/residence. Filed by Charles D. Frankenberger of Nelson & Frankenberger for Gershman Brown & Associates. Presenter: Charlie Frankenberger, attorney, for Gershman Brown & Assoc. I Ron Houck said the same issues as were discussed in the previous PUD also apply to this project. Those issues are compatibility, design, traffic impact, etc. The compatibility of land use is to be I dealt with first, then the language in the PUD Ordinance. One of the major issues is obviously the traffic impact and how it will be mitigated. Committees\Subdiv\200 1 may 4 I I I Clint (last name??) traffic engineer, reviewed the traffic study that was originally prepared by Steve F ehribach of A&F Engineering. A right turn is being added in all directions at the intersection of 96th and College; a through lane is to be extended and a two-way, left turn lane down the middle. With the additional lanes, the capacity and level of service will be increased. A traffic signal at the main entrance will align with the existing apartments (Carlyle Court). The proposal of a right turn lane from Real Street onto Westfield Boulevard has not yet been cleared by INDOT. The plans were forwarded to Mike Peoni and Klaus, but as yet, there has been no dialogue. Ron Houck would like some feedback. Tom Crowley of Gershman Brown & Assoc. confirmed that Steve Fehribach had done the initial traffic study. Clint surveyed the tenants in the Parkwood development area for number of trips. Ron Houck requested that the traffic study be submitted to the Department and reviewed by John Myers of Parsons, Brinckerhoff (comments in writing, please.) The proposed development will create more traffic than the current 38 homes in the subdivision. At this point, nothing is known regarding an automatic signal at 93rd and Meridian. Issues to be covered at the next meeting include: compatibility of use, traffic, and design of the buildings (phased.) This development will return to the Plan Commission for ADLS review. No Community representation at.this point. The Department asked the petitioner to address landscape issues. The traffic impact is thought to be mitigated with improvements. The language of the Ordinance will be reviewed at the next meeting. The next review date will either be May 10th or May 17th at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms, based on availability. 5. Docket No. 32-01 PP; Woods of Williams Creek Subdivision The petitioner seeks approval to plat a 73-10t subdivision on 74.78:f: acres. The site is located on the northwest comer of West 136th Street and Spring Mill Road. The site is zoned S-l/residence. The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 32-01a SW sea 6.2.1 Suitability of Land Filed by David Barnes of Weihe Engineering for Williams Creek Woods LLC. Presenter: Dave Barnes of Weihe Engineering. Comments made by the public were distributed this evening. The Commission members were provided information regarding the applicant's request for Subdivision Waiver. Jon Dobosiewicz reported that Suitability of Land is an issue -- the applicant is to demonstrate how it is suitable. Conunittees\Subdiv\200 1 may 5