Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWrit of Certiorari Real Estate are highlighted in yellow on the aerial photograph that is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked Exhibit nB". 3. BONBAR CORPORATION ("Bonbar") is the fee simple owner of the Real Estate, and Jacob Acquisitions, LLC ("Jacob") is the contract purchaser of the Real Estate. 4. The Real Estate is zoned R~l (Single Family Residential -1) under the Zoning Ordinance of Carmel, Indiana (the "Zoning Ordinance") . 5. After proceedings not material, Jacob filed an Application and also filed a revised preliminary plat ("Preliminary Plat") of the "Bonbar Place Subdivisionn with the Commission with respect to the Real Estate on December 18, 2000. The Application is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked "Exhibit ca. Petitioners requested Commission approval of the Preliminary Plat. 6. Jacob requested such approval by the Commission of the Preliminary Plat in order to develop the Real Estate in accordance with the Subdivision Control Ordinance, Ordinance No. Z-160, as amended (the "RCO") of the Zoning Ordinance, a copy of which is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked Exhibit "D", as well as the Residential Open Space Ordinance, Ordinance No. Z-346, as amended ("ROSO"), a copy of which is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked Exhibit "E". 2 Trials Drive, and the Department's sudden claim that the same was not a "through street", the Reo nowhere defines the term "through street" or provides concrete standards for what constitutes a "through street". In fact, Marwood Trails Drive is a through street as such term is commonly understood, i.e., a street upon which traffic can travel from one point to another. Equally important, in order to serve as ingress to and egress from an eventual subdivision development on the Real E~tate, Marwood Trails Drive was required to be laid out and constructed as a through street pursuant to the requirements of Sections 6.3.3, 6.3.4 and 6.3.5 of the RCO. 32. Consistent with the constitutional and common law precept that zoning ordinances must contain concrete standards and promote predictability, the RCO does not grant to the Commission an unlimited license to pursue a hidden agenda behind vague standards. 33. At the conclusion of the Second Commission Hearing, the members of the Commission members were "asked to write out their findings of fact upon which they based their denial. A copy of such written findings are attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked as Exhibit "H". Essentially, approval of the Preliminary Plat was denied solely on the basis of the claimed application of Sections 6.3.21 and 6.5.2 of the Reo. The Minutes of the said Second Commission Meeting are not available as of the filing of this Petition. 11 34. Certain of the aforementioned reasons. for denial were ever urged by the Department, (i) during the First Commission Hearing, (ii) during the First Committee Meeting, or (iii) during the Second Committee Meeting. 35. Thereafter, on May 15, 2001, some twenty eight (28) days after the Second Commission Meeting, the Commission rendered a purported written "Decision" backdated to April 17, 2001 (the "Decision") I which claims to be based in material part on new, additional and erroneous "findings" and Sections of the RCO that raise issues never before revealed to Petitioners. The Decision is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked as Exhibit "J". 36. As stated above, the Preliminary Plat was accepted and scheduled for Public Hearing and, therefore, it had already been determined that the Preliminary Plat complied with all requirements of both the Reo and ROSO. 37. None of the aforementioned reasons have anything to do with the reasons the Commission denied the Preliminary Plat but, instead, evidence that the Commission acted arbitrarily in an effort to further its hidden agenda to deny the Preliminary Plat. 38. The aforementioned reasons of the Department and the eommission for denying the Preliminary Plat constitute the selective imposition on Petitioners of special rules, a new and erroneous definition of a "through street", the attempted 12 abrogation of Sections 6.3.3, 6.3.4 and 6.3.5 of the RCO, and unwritten requirements or desires concerning open space, density, lot sizes and wildlife and pond preservation, all in a thinly- veiled effort to deny Petitioners the benefits of ordinances with which Petitioners complied and upon which Petitioners relied. 39. The Commission went beyond its statutory authority in denying the Preliminary Plat and, in denying the Preliminary Plat, the Commission ~elied upon matters and considerations extrinsic to the requirements of the Reo and ROSO, and the Commission could not both properly apply the Reo and ROSO and still deny the Preliminary Plat. 40. I.C. 36-7-4-1003(a) provides in material part that "Each person aggrieved by a decision of the board of zoning appeals or the legislative ,body may present, to the circuit or superior court of the county in which the premises affected are located, a verified petition setting forth 'that the decision is illegal in whole or in part and specifying the grounds of the illegality". I.C. 36-7-4-1016 provides in material part that "A final decision [of the plan commission] under the 700 Series of this chapter (subdivision control)" *** ~may be reviewed by certiorari procedure in the same manner as that provided for. the appeal of a decision of the board of zoning appeals". The statutory provisions regarding primary plat approval are found in I.C. 36-7-4-700 through I.C. 36-7-4-710. 13 ~ubdl. v J..u ic ftt; ';j t;;... 3.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS. 3.1 Violations and Pen~ties 3.1.1 A failure to comply with any of the requirements of this ordinance, including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with the granting of variances, special uses, rezonings and development plan approvals shall constitute a violation of this Ordinance. . 3.i.2 The Commission, the Board, the Building Commissioner or any designated enforcement official or any person or persons, firm or corporation jointly or severally aggrieved may institute a suit for injunction in any court of competent jurisdiction to restrain an individual or a governmental unit from violating the provisions oftrus Ordinance. 3.1.3 The Commission, the Board or the Building Commissioner may also institute a suit for mandatory injunctic;m directing any individual, firm, corporation or governmental unit to remove a stru.cture erected in violation of the provisions oftrus Ordinance. 3.1.4 Any building erected, raised or converted, or land or premises used in violation of any provisions of this Ordinance or of the requirements thereof, is hereby declared to be a common nuisance and as such may be abated in such manner as nuisances are now or may hereafter be abated under existing law. , 3.1.5 Any person, persons or corporations, whether as principal, agent, empl~yee or otherWise, who violates any part of this Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor upon. ( convictio~ shall be tined not less than twenty..five dollars ($25..00) and not more than .five hundred dollars (S500.00) for each offense. .For purposes oftbis:Ordinance, each day of violation of the term's of this Ordinance shall constitute a sep'arate offense.t 3.1.6 The owner or tenant of any building, structure, premises or part thereof: and any architect, builder, contr~ctor, realtOr, agent or other person who commits, participates in, assists in or maintains such violation may each be found guUty of a separate offense and suffer the penalties herein provided._ 3 ~2 Severability Should any.section or any provision of this Ordinance be de~lared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any part thereot: other than the part so held to be unconstitutional or invalid. 3.3 Conflicti.ng Ordinances Whenever any.provision of this Ordinance imposes a greater requirement or a higher standard than is required in any State or Federal code or regulation or other City ordinance or regulation, specifically the Unifonn Building Code, One and Two-Family Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code and the National Electrical Code, the provision of this Ordinance shall 5 S.ubdivision Regulations gov~m. Wheneyer any provision.afany State or.~edera1 statute or other City ordinance or re~ation imposes a Steater requirement or a higher standard than is required by this Ordinance, the provision of such State or Federal statute or other City ordinance' shall govern. 3.4 Non-Interference It is not the'intent of this Ordinance to interfere wit~ abrogate or annul any easements, ,cQvenants, or other agreements between parties or to interfere wit~ abrogate or annul any ordinances, rules, regulations, or pennits previously adopted or issued, and not in conflict with any of the provisions of this Ordinance, or which shall be adopted or issued; however, where this Ordinance imposes a greater restriction upon the use ofbuildirigs or land, or upon the height of 'buildings, 'or requires larger 9pen spaces or greater lot. area per dwelling ~nit th~n are imposed or required by other easements, covenants or agreements between parties or by such ordinan,ces, rules, 'regulations, or permits, the provisions of this Ordinance shall govern. 3.5 Effective Date The Subdivision Control Ordinance of the City of Carmel and Clay Township, Hamilton County, Indiana, as -herein presented~ shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage by the City Council of the City of Carmel, Indiana on Dec~mber 18, 1 ?79. ~ On this date, Ordinance No. Z-14 passed by the Town Board of TruStees of the Town of Cannel, Indiana., on'December 21, 195.7 and:May 2, 1961, and the Subdivision Control Ordinance No. Z...160 passed by the City Council of the City of Cannel, Indiana, on December 18, 1979, respectively, and all amendments thereto, are hereby repealed and all other ordrJmnces ot parts thereof which are hi conflict with the terms and conditions of this Ordinances -are: hereby repealed. 3.6 Amendments to the' Subdivision Ordinance 3.6.1 Any perSOn, group of pet sons or organization may'seek to an1end the .Subdivision Control Ordinance. All amendments shall be subject to State StatUtes and to the procedures cited herein. 3.6.2 Whenever an amendment to the Subdivislon -Control Otdinance is propose'd:f;the applicant or his duly authorized representative shaU meet with the Building Commissioner in order that the IJuilding Commissioner may undertake a preliminaiy review of the amendment proposal. The Building Commissioner shall aid and advise the applicant in preparing his application and 'supporting materials as necessarY. The applicant shall then submit two (2) copies of the written application f<;lrn1 together with such necessary supporting documents and materials and the application fee, as indicated in Section 29.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, to the Building Commissioner. . 3.6.3 Following the receipt of the written application, necessary supporting documents and materials and the application fee by the Building C~mmissioner, he shall then reView the materials solely for the purpose of determining wheth.er the application is complete, in technical compliance with all applicable ordinances, laws and regulations and is to be forwarded to the 6 Subdiviaion Re(J': lations Commission. If the materials su~mitted by the applicant are not complete Of do not comply with the necessary legal requirements, the Building Commissioner.shall infonn the applicant, in . wrItkg, within 10 days ofJhe r.eceipt of the materials,. of the deficiencies in said materials. Unless and until the Buiiding Commissioner formally accepts the application as complete and in legal compliance, it shall not be considered as formally filed for the purpose of proceeding to succeeding steps necessary to amend the Subdivision Control Ordinance as hereinafter set forth. Within 30 days ofthe fonnal acceptan(;e of the application by the Building Commissioner, he shall formally file the application by placing it on the agenda of the CoITlinission according to the Commission's Rules of Procedure. 3.6.4 Once the Building Commissioner has accepted and filed the applicationwith the Commission. the Commissio~ or its delegate shall assign a docket number and set a date and tim.e for a public hearing. The ~ui1ding Commissioner shall notify the applicant in writing of the public hearing. the applicant shall be responsible for the cost and publication of the published legal notification of the public hearing which shall appear at least 10 days prior to the'date of the public hearing. As necessary. the applicant shall also notify all adjoining and abutting property owners. The Commission shall hold the public hearing according to its rules of procedure. 3.6.5 Following the public hearing on the Subdivision Ordin~ce amendment application. the Commissio~ within 45 days of the public hearing. shall review the proposed amendment outlined in the application and shall notifY the applicant In writing of any further changes which are required or should have consideration before a reconunendationon the amendment application can be given. Within 45 days. of the receipt of materials incorporating the req~jred changes into the applicatio~ the Commission shall make a .recommendation to the City Council for approval or denial of.the ameildnient application. :Th~ Commission shall for.rti.ulate a report: to the 'City :Council outl~ the pertint;mt factors.involved'in .its decision, its. ( recommendation and the vote in regard to said recomn:tendation. The Coniniission report shall be certified to the Commission Secretary and shall be forwarded to the City Council by its next regtilarlyscheduled .meeting. 3.6.6 At its next meeting followipg the receipt of the Co~ssion report, the City Council shall take action on the Commission .rep9rt. If the Commission reco~~ndation is positive. the City Council may approve the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance if an affirmative vote is obtained. If the Commission recommendation is negativeJ the City Council may approve the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance'if an affirmative vote of at least seventy-five per cent (75%) of the members of the City Council is obtained Failure .ofthe City Co~ncil to pass the proposed amendqlent ~o the. S.ubdivision Ordinance by the necessary affirmative vote wi~hin90 days aft.er the negative reco~endation ~.s made by the Commissio.n shall const~tute rej~ction o:fthe proposed amendment. Should. the City Council reject the pr.o.posed amendment to th~ Subdivision 'Ordinance, .by,vote or by defaul~ said proposed . am.endm.ent shall not be r~consid'ered by the Co.mmission or th"e City Council until the expiration of one (1) year after the original re.commendation of the 'Commission. 3. 7 Variance The Plan Commissio'n may authorize in specific cases such varianc.e from the terms. of the Subdivision Control Ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest, where, owing to 7 .,; DWELLING, TWQ-F AMlL Y. A residential building containing two dwelling units and not occupied by more than two families. DWELLING UNIT. One or more rooms in a residential building, or residential portion of a building, which are arranged, designed, used or intended for use as a- complete, independent living facility for ~ne {amily and which includes pennanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. EASEMENT. A grant by the property owner of the use of a strip of land - by the public, a corporation, or persons,. for specified purposes. EROSION. The removal of surface materials by the action of natural elements. EXCAVATION. Any act by which earth, sand, grave~ rock or any other similar material is dug into, cut, quarried, uncovered, removed, displaced, relocated or bulldozed and shall include the conditions resulting therefrom. FILL. Any act by which earth, san9., gravel, rock or any other material is placed, pushed, dumped, pulled, transported or moved to a new location above the natural surface of the ground or on top of the stripped surface and shall include all conditions resulting therefrom. The difference if.!. elevation between a point on the original ground and a designated point of higher elevat~on on the ~~ grad~. FLOOD PL~. The area along a natural watercourse which is periodically overflowed by water therefrom. ( FLOOD PLAIN DISTRICT. All land lying within the floodplain of the IOO-year frequency flood of any water course and their tributary streams is within the floodplain and subject to these regulations,. in addition to the regulations otherwise established by the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Carmel. The boundaries of the floodplain are hereby estab~shed as shown on the zoning district map. GROSS DENSITY. The number of dwelling units per acre for the total subdivision, including all land, roads, parking, services and nonresidential uses. GROUND FLOOR. The first level of a building that provides outside access by a door. HORIZONTAL VISIBaITY. A direct line of sight forty-eight inches high across a plane parallel to the plane of the horizon.. HOUSE PAD ELEV AIION. The lowest outside finished ground elevation necessary to meet the minimu.m drainage requirements for the ground floor of a structure. IlVfPROVENJENT LOCATION PERMIT. A permit signed by the Building Commissioner, stating that.a proposed improvement complies with the provisions of this ordinance and such other ordinances as may be applicable. 11 Subdivision Regulations JUR1SDICTION OF THE COMMISSION. The City at Cannel, 'Indiana and the - contiguous unincOrporated territory of Clay Township, Hamilton County, Indiana LIMlTEn ACCESS IDGHW A Y. An arterial street designed, planned and intended for through -vehicular traffic, with full and partial Control of access in conformance with the-Master Plan, to which entrances and exists are provided only at controlled intersections and access is denied to abutting properties. LOT. A portion of a subdivision or other parcel ofland intended as a unit for transfer of ownership or development and furthe( defined in the Zoning Ordinance. - . - . . LOT, CORNER A lot at the junction at: and having frontage on, two or more intersecting streets. ~OT, DEPlH OF. The mean horizontal distance between the front lot line and the rear lot line, measured in the general direction of the side lot lines. LOT LINE, FRONT. In the case of an interior lot, a line separating the lot from the right-o:f-way of the street or place; and in the case ofa corner lot, a line separating the narrowest frontage of the lot from the street, except in cases where deed restrictions in effect specify . another street right-of..way line as the front lot line. LOT, lNTERIOR A lot other than a corner lot or through lot. LOT LINE, REAR.. A lot line which is opposite and most distant from the front lot. line and, in the case of an irregular or triangular-shaped lot, a line ten (10) feet in length within the lot, Parallel to and at the inaximum distance from the front lot line. LOT LINE, SIDE. Any lot boundary line not a front lot line or a rear lot line. stre'ets. LOT ll.IR.OUGH. A lot having frontage on two Pa.ra11el or approx4nately parallel . . LOT Wlbm. The dimension of a lot, measured between: side lot lines on the building line (or in the case of a curved building line, it is measured tangent to the center point of the ~~. - MARGINAL ACCESS HIGHWAY OR FRONTAGE ROAD. A minor street, generally p~a11el and adjacent to a limited access highway, prOviding acce$s to land abutting upon saidinarginal access street. . _ NET DENSITY. The number of dwelling units per acre in any segment of a subdivision. OPEN SPACE. Land surface, not used for buildings, structures, lots, or streets, which is available for active or passive recreational use. 12 -"'. ~u..,guJ.V "'O.,J..~I& "'a~u."'G.",.""ua . STREET.; ARTERIAL. A street designated for larg.e volumes of traffic movement. Certain Arterial Streets may be classified as Limited Access Highways~ STREET, FEEDER. A street planned to facilitate the collection oftraflic from Residential Streets, and to provide circulation within neighborhood areas and convenient ways for traffic to reach Arterial Streets. STREET, P~WAY. A street intended to be used. primarily for passenger vehicles and developed with a parklike or scenic character. STREET, RESIDENTIAL. A street designated primarily to provide access to abutting properties; usually. residential. Certain Residential Streets may be Marginal Access Streets or Frontage Roads parallel to Arterial Streets, which provi'de access to~ abutting property and ways for traffic to reach access points o.n Arterial Streets. S~DIVIDER. Any person or persons, firm or corporation engaged in d.eveloping or improving a tract of land which complies with the definition of a subdivision. as defined iIi this Ordinance: .. . SUBDIVISION. The division of any-parcel of land into two or more parcels, sites .or lots, anyone of which is less than five acres in area for the purpose of transfer of ownership, or building-development, excluding cemeteries. The improvement of on~ or more parcels of land for resid~ntia1,. commercial or industrial structures or groups of structures involving the subdivision and allocation of land as streets or other open space.s for conunon use by owners, occupants or lease holders or as easements for the extension and maintenance of public sewer, water, storm drainage, or other public facilities and utilities. . SUBSURFACE DRA.ThTAGE. The flow of water in man-made structures including storm drains7 drain tile, culverts and tunnels, and the flow of water underground through natural passage to geologic formations. SURF ACE DRAINAGE. In gen.eral, the flow of surface water over a given area to a natural or man-made waterway. SW ALE. A low..lying stretch of land which gathers or carries surface water runoff: THOROUGHFARE PLAN. A part of the Comprehensive Plan of Carmel which sets forth the location, alignment, 4imensions, identification and classification of existing and proposed streets, highways and other thoroughfares. TOPSOIL... Surface soils and subsurface soils which presumably are fertile soils and soil material, ordinary rich in organic matter or humus deqris. Topsoil is usually found:,in the uppermost s~i11ayer called the "a Horizon". TYPE OF OWNERSmP. Refers to meth.ods .of ownership of any type of dwelling unit, including individual, corporate, cooperative or condominium form of ownership or rental. 14 . subdi~ision Requlatich8 Commission as to what terms and conditions will apply b:efore secondary plat approval is granted, if any, it being the purpose of such preliminary data and drawings to advise b.oth the Commission and the irtterested public as to what the applicant or subdivider is proposing in order to appropriately hold a public hearing on the proposed subdivision. 5.1.6 Public Hearing. Once the Building Commissioner has accepted and filed an application and preliminary plat, the Commission or its delegate shall assign a docket number and set a date and time for a .public hearing as required by th~ Rule.s of Procedure of the Co.mmissioo. The applicant Shall be responsible for providing legal notice to all interested parties and property owners as required by the R1Jles of Procedure of the Commission. The minimum time period for the giving of the notice shall be at leastthirty.(30)'days prior to the ., ii1itialheari~g'date. The cond~ct of the Publi~ Hearing sh.all be in accor~ance with the Commission's Rules of Procedure. Following the pu~lic hearingJ the plat is to be reviewed by the Commission. 5.1. 7 t\.pprovalofDisapQro~at of the Preti~nar:y Plat . Following the public hearing of the preliminary plat the Commissio~ within 45 days of the date of the public hearing, shall notify the applicant in writing, otany further changes in the preliminary plant which are required or should have consideration before approval of the preliminary plat may be given. This may include a review of the proposed plat by the Building Commi.ssioner's Technical Advisory Committee. When the required changes and considerations are incorporated into the preliminary plat, the CoII)Inissio;Il shall then approve or disapprove the preliminary plat. If th~ Commission disapproves the preliminary plat, it shall set forth the reasons for such disapproval in its own records and shall provide the appliGant with a copy of such reasons. In determining whether an application for approval shall be grantedt the Commission shall consider generally if the plat provides for:l : (1) co~rdination of subdivision streets with existing and planne4 streets or .' . .!',. · . ( highways; (2) coordinatioll: wi~ and extensipn of: facilities inCluded in the master plan; ,~) establislun~nt pfminimum wi.dt~ depth, and area:oflots within the proposed su~division; (4) . distribution of population arid traffic in a manner tending to .create conditions favorable to health, safety, convenieJ:;lce"and the harmonious development of the city or county; (5) fair allocations of areas. for street~, parks, schools, public and $~-public buildings, homes, utilities, business and industrY; and (6) other relevant factors. The Building Commissioner .shall notify the applicant in writfug of the apPfoval.or disapproval of the preliminary plat, and ifapp:roved, inform the applicant that he may ~ro.ceed with the final plat an~ the construction pl~s. 5.1.8 The Meaning of AI!pro~al. Appr~val of a preliminary plat shall not. constitute approval of the final plat. It shall be deemed as an expression of approval of the layout submitted on the ~re1iminary plat as a guide tp the. preparation .of the final plat. 5.1.9 The ~in~ Pl~t ~ Ge~eral1y~ the final plat shall confonn to the p.reliminary plat as approved and may include ail, or only a part, of the preliminary plat which has received . approval and shall conform to all of the requirements for final plat as h.ereinafter set forth. 5.1.10 Application for Final Plat. Five (5), or more ifnecessa.ry, of the final plat and of the construction plans, together with supporting documents, shall be submitted to the Building Commissioner with a written application and the applicatio'n tee as indicated in S.ection 29.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. 17 ~UbU~V~d~on Re9u~~t~on8 5.0 PROCEDURE FOR SUBDIVISIONS 5.1 Procedure G~nera1Iy { 5.1.1 The Preliminary Plat ~ Confonn~nce. Whenever a subdivision is proposed to be made on any land lying within the jurisdiction of the Commission, and before any construction work is started., the owner or proprietor of the proposed subdivision or his duly authorized representative shall cause a preliminary plat to be prepared as required herein.' The preliminary plat shall comply fully with the health, zoning, and other applicable ordinances in effect at the time the plat is submitted. Whenever the platting of any residential ground within the jurisdiction of this ordinance is proposed, the procedure and requirements herein shall apply. where the platting of commercial or industrial ground within the jurisdiCtion of this. ordinance is proposed, the procedure and requirements shall be adjusted as necessary in order to allow the platting of streets and easements without platting lots. The supporting data, construction plans . and so forth shall follow' the requirements herein. The procedures for p.reli~nary and secondary final plat approval may be followed concurrently, if the applicant desires and so files, although no final plat approval shall be granted by the Commission until it has granted preliminary plat approval. 5.1.2 Review with Build'ing Commissioner. Applicants shall meet with the Building Commissioner to review the zoning classification of their site, obtain copies of all regulatory . ordiilances if necessary, review the plattirtg pr6ced~re and the proposed development ~d use of their propertY. The Building Comniissioner shall aid and adviSe the applicant in preparing., his application and supporting documents, ,if necessary. - ( \. 5.1.3 Appl~c~tio~ fo~"Preli~naty~l~t.. Five (5) copies~ or more ifnecessary, of the preliminary plat, together with supporting documents, shall be submitted to the J3uilding Commis'sioner with a 'Written application and the application fee as indicated in Section 29. 6 of the Zoning Ordin~ce~ . . " 5..1.4 lnit~al ReView of the Preli~naIy Plat by th.e B~ilding C.ommi~siQper. Following the receipt of the preliininai:y. plat,. other required materials and the written application, and the application fee by the Building Commissioner, the applicant shall have thirty (30) days to complete the requirements listed herein, if necessary. When the applicant states in writing tbat . he h~ fulfilled the requirements, the Building Commissioner shall, within thirty (30) 'days, review the prelimin"ary plat and related materials solely tor the purpose of determining whether to allow the preliminary pl~t to be fonnaJly filed with the Commission. 1ft-he materials submitted. by the applic~t d.o not co.mply with the ordinance, the "Building Cornn1is~ioner shall inform the applicant>> in writing; of ~he deficiencies in hi-so materials and shall extend the time period allowed for submission. UnI~ss and until the B'uilding Commissioner formally accepts a preliminary plat for filing, it shall not be considered as actually tiled far the purposes of proceeding to the succeeding steps"toward final plat approval as hereinafter set forth. The application is formally filed whe.n it is placed upon the Commission agenda by the Building Commissioner, according to th'e Commission Rules of ProcedUre curre"ntly in effect. 5.1.5 The Meaning ~fFilin.-g. The. filing of a primary plat approval request grants no proprietary rights to the applicant in the proposed subdivision and in no way is binding upon the 16 , subdivision Regulations 5.1.11 Initial ~eview, of the Final :plat bv the Buildi~g Commissioner. Following the receipt of the final plat, the construction plans, other required materials, the written application Artd th~ A~pli~AtiOrt fM by th~ Building Commissioner, the applicant shall have thirty (30) days to complete the requirements listed herein,. if necessary. When ~he applicant states in writing that he has fulfilled his. requirements, t~e Building Commissioner shall, within thirty (30) days, review the final plat, construction plans, and related materials' solely for the purpose of determining whether the application is complete and whether it fulfills the requirements listed herein. If the materials submitted by the applicant are not complete or do p.ot comply with the.,ordinance, the Building Commissioner shall inform the applicant, in writing, of the deficiencies in his materials and shall extend the time period allowed for" submission. When the Buildi,ng Coriunission~r verifies completion and conformance with the technical terms of the ordinance, he shall place the final plat application on the Commission agenda according to the Commission Rules of Procedure currently in effect. ' ; - . 5. 1.12 Approval or Disapproval of the Final Plat. After submission ,of the final plat by the Building Commis~ioner to the Commission, the Commission. shall review the final plat, co.nstruction plans and other materials. If any changes or other considerations in the final plat,. construction pla~sJ or other,materials are required or requested by the Commission they shall so inform the applicarit in. writing. When the required changes and considerations are incorporated into the final plat, construction plans and other materials, the Commission shall then approve or disapprove the final plat and construction plans within 45 days of the receipt" of alilended . materiaL If the Commission approves the final plat, it shall affix the Commission's seal upon the final plat, together with certifYing signatures of the President and Secretary, following the receipt by the proper authorities offinancial guarantee of aU improvements and installations ' requ~ed. If the Commission disapproves the final plat, it shall set forth the reasons for such . diSapproval in its oWn records and shall provid-e the applicant with a copy of such reasons: The Building Commissioner shall notify the applicant in wiring Q.fthe approval or disapproval of the final plat, and ifapprovedJ inform the applicant that he may proceed with the construction" of the subdivision following the recording of the final plat. S .1.13 Recordin-g the Final flat. After the Commission has approved the final plat the , subdivider shall file such plat for recordatio.n in the office of the Recorder of Hamilton County, Indiana. The application and submission of the plat for approval shall, in and of itself: constitute an agreement on the part of the applicant that if the final plat is approved by the C.ommission, the applicant shall proceed to record the approved final plat within one year after the Commission grants such approval. Failure to record the final plat within this period shall result in the approval being declared void by the Commission unless an extension is applied for and granted by the Commission. ~ allowing approval by the Commission and the recording of the final plat, the applicant shall provide fhe Cpmmission with a reproducible copy of the final plat and accompanying covenants and including certification and signatures of the Commission and o.fthe Recorder of Hamilton CountY, Indiana.' , 5.1.14 Commencing Con~truction of the Final Plat. Any perso~ to whom approval is granted final plat approval for a subdivision, who fails to commence construction within eighteen (18) months after.such approv,al has been granted, shall, within thirty (30) days after said eighteen (18) month period, be required to show good cause to the Commission through th.e Building Commissioner why said approval should not be revoked by the Commission. A 18 '--.. failure to show good cau.se as herein required shall result in the automatic revocation' of such approval at the termination of the thirty (30) day period se.t forth above. The application and gubmigmon .of n pInt for approval shall, in and of itseI( constitute an agreement on the part of the applicant that should construction not begin with said eighteen (18) months period and upon notice to the person granted plat approval, the Building Commissioner may be empowered by the Commission to revert and record the tract given plat approval, as it was recorded prior to the revoked plat application. 5.1.1 S Simultaneous Filings. The subdivider may file both preliminary plat and final plat simultaneously as long as p!,"oper plans and documents are also filed. 5.2 Requir~plents for ~reliminary Plat The intent of the preliminary plat and accompanying data is not to provide final design infonnation on the various items required herein, but to provide general infonnation of a conceptual nature. No land shall be subdivided unless adequate access to the land over improved streets or thoroughfares exists or shall be provided by the subdivider. Subdivision of land shall be such that it will not cause harm to the health, safety or welfare of present and/or potential residents and the community as a whole due to poor drainage or flooding, soil conditions, topography or any other feature .deemed harmful. The owner or subdivider shall submit five (5) copies, or more as needed, of the prel.kninary plat. The preliminary plat shall be drawn at a scale of 50 feet to one inch or 100 feet to one inch; provided, however, that if the resulting drawings would be over 36 inches in the shortest dimension, a scale as .reco~ended by the Building Commissioner may be used. the preliminary plat shall show. . \ 5.2.1 The proposed n~e of the ~ubdivision followed by the words "Preliminary Plar'7~ the date of submission or latest revision, the name Qf the subdivision designer, the present zo1;1ing classification and the total acreage of the pl~t.' 5.2.2 Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, subdivider and Registered LanQ Surveyor, in accordance with Stat.e Statutes and licensed to do business in the State of Indiana, who prepared .the plat. 5.2.3 The approximate location of existing and proposer! streets and rights.-of-way, on and adjoiriing the proposed subdivision, showing the names (which shall not duplicate other names of streets in the cpmmunity), roadway widths artd right-of-way widths. . 5.2.4 Th~ approximat.e lo.cation and widths ofall existing and proposed easements, indicating their use for d.rainage .or utilities (w.ater, s.anitary sewer, storm sewer, electric, telephone, gas, street lig.hts, ca~le television,. and/or legal drains). 5.2.5 The approximate location, size and capacity of utilities to be installed including . water, sa:Q.itary sewage and stoqn drainage facilities. The general location of septic tanks and wells, ifused, shall be shown on the preliminary.plat. The minimum information on the plat shall include: . (1) Location of proposed sanitary sewers with connection to the main sewer 19 subdiviaiqn Regulations system, lift stations, if any, and other appurtenances if any. If private sewage systems1 locate the systemjn retation to well, house and adjacent lot systems. Private sewage systems shall be installed according to the requirements of the Hamilton County Board of Health and the Indiana State Board of Health. (2) Location of water mains, hydrants, and other appurtenances. (3) Location of proposed methods of drainage. If a storm S,~wer or similar type of system is used, show connection into stream, retention reservoir, etc.; distance to stream outlet; lift stations, if any; approximate size; approximate location; manholes, if any; in1et~; junction boxes and other necessary app~enances. If surface drainage is planned -- ro'ad-side ditches, swales; grassed wateIWlys=, water courses, open ditches, roll curb and gutter sections -- show location of said type; location and approximate siZe of toad culverts; and location and e typical cross-section of grades, swales, waterways7 road.side ditches~and open ditches, if applicable. If subsurface drain tile is planned, show location, connection to stann sewer, outlet in open drain or retention reservoir7 or other adequate outlet. Subsurface. drains shall not outlet into curbs or shallow swales. The direction of the flow of the stonnwater in swalesJ curbs, open ~tche.sJ tiles and the like shall be shown. 5.2.6 "The ~ayout oflots, showing the dimensions and lot nunibers, and the appro;sunate square footage area on non-rectangular lo:ts.. ' , 5.2.7 Parcels of land p~oposed to be dedicate~ or reserved for public schools, parks, playgrounds or other public use, private recreational facilities for use of the people within the subdivision, and other are.as to be used for community purposes. ' 5.2:8 Contours at vertical intervals of one (1) foot if the general slope of the proposed subdivision is less than three percent (3%), of two (2) feet if the general slope of the proposed subdivision is three percent (3.%) or more and less than ten percent (10%) or aCtive (5) feet if 'the general slope is ten perc'ent (10%) or more; All benchmark references s.ball bOe based on National Geodetic Vertical D.atum of 1929. 5.2.9 Appr,oximate tract b'oundary lines showin~ dimensions, angles bearings~ existing monuments, existing markers, reference comers and benchmarks. All shall be described " according to recognized p.ractice based on approximate distances and directions with reference to sectioD; township and range. 5.2.10 Indicate the location of flood plains as established by the FP, FF and FW flood plain districts,cited in the Zoning' Ordinance. 5~2.11 Building setback lines. 5.2.12 Where appropriate or required by the Zoning Ordinance, an indication of the general location of existing and proposed trees, shrubbery and screenin"g materials. . ;;'.,-:-1 :. :." 20 Subdivi~ian Re9u~ation8 collection system should be reviewed, tQtal estimat.ed effluent determined, and any special problems identified. If septic systems are proposed, the results' of a percolation test muSt be lncluded. General approval of the use of septic systems should be granted by the Hamilton County Board of Health and incorporated into the report. The report should cover the flooding . potential of the proposed subdivision and should include th.e'design of the storm water system that would accommodate a 10 year stann, the pad elevations necessary to keep all buildinS.s' above the 100 year flood level, the expected impact of the proposed subdivision's sto.nn water runo#f on any receiving. stream or downstream property and the approximate location, size and capacity of any retention basins to be located in or dire~tly affect41g the proposed subdivision. Where legal drains are involved, comments from the Hanillton County Drainage Board shall be included. If a flood plain of a water shed in excess of one square mile is involved, reports, recommendations, and approvals, where necessary, from the Indiana Natural Resou~ces Commission shall be included. 5.3.5 A statement from the State Highway Department, or City Street Department concerning rights-of-way, road improvements, roadside improvements, roadside drainage, entrances, culvert pipes and other specifications deemed necessary by the Conunission or State Highway, County Highway or: City Street Depat1ment. The condition of the existing roa'dway and its suitability to handle its proposed traffic must be specified. 5.3.6 A soils map, and its accompanying report from the Hamilton County Soil and . Water Conservation' District office, showing the soillimitatioqs based upon the intended usage of the land for the proposed subdivision. . . . 5.3.7 A description of the protective covenants or private restrictions to be incorporated in the .plat 9fthe subdivision shall be provided. 5.3.8 An application shall be prepared, the form to be supplied by the Building Commissioner and shall be accompanie.d by a certified check or money order in the amount of fee specified in Section 26.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. . 5.3.9 An erosion control plan and s~atemen~ .setting forth the method of controlling erosion and sedimentation before, during and following development and constructio~ i.e., temporary .seedings sediment d~tention basins, erosion prevention devices and other similar means that meet the Hartrilton County Soil and Water Conservation District guidelines for urban development.. . .5.3..10 Submit a letter to the Carmel Board of Public Works or other appropriate authorities stating the number of proposed water hookups, sanitary sewer hookups, etc., requested for the proposed subdivision. 5.4 Requirements for Final Plat The final plat may include all or only a part of the preliminary plat which has received Commis;sion approval. If the final plat is presented in sections for approval, then the applicant shall provide a drawing of the .plat of said section with all items included that are required fqr final plat approval. The original mylar drawing of the final plat and five (5) copies, or more as ..t....'f' .~ 22 subdivision Regulations 5.4.15 Certificate for 'approval by the Commission, which shall be on each and every p~e~iliefu~p~. . \ 5.4.16 Certificate of acceptance by the Carmel Board of Public Works or the Hamilton County Board of Commissioners. 5.4.17 Restrictions of all types which will run With the land and become covenants in the deeds for the lots in the proposed subdivision. 5.4.18 The Subdivider Agreement Forms, as shown in ApP'endix, shall be completed and submitted with the final plat. 5.5 Requirements for Final Supporting Data 5.5.1 An application shall be prepared, the form to be supplied by the Building _ Commissioner, and shall be accompanied by a certifi~d check or money order in the amount of fee specified in Section 29.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5.5.2 The following statements or reports shall be provided, however, if there is no substantial change in-the final plat from the preliminary plat, then the rep~rts submitted with the _preliminary plat is acceptable: (1) (2) Service reports- or statements, as neces~ary~ may include b~t not be limited to the following sources: police or sheriff department; fire department; water and sanitary sewer-utilities; electric, gas and telephone utilities; city, county or state highway departments; Carmel-Clay Schools; Hamilton County Health Department. Survey()r~ Drainage Board and Board of Commissioners; Hamilton County Soil and Water Conservation District office; Indiana Natural Resources Commission; Cannel Bo.ard ofP~blic Works and Buildmg Commissioner. A brief report des.cribing the water system, sanitary sewer system and stO.tm dr~ge syste~ This report should state the source of water. the expected water consumption, method ofdistributio.n within the subdivision and any special problems'. The pro'posed sanit~ collection system should b.e reviewed, total estimated effluent determined and any special problems determined.. If ' septic systems.are,prQposed, the result ofa percolation test must be included. General approval.ofthe use of septic systems should be granted by the 1familton County Board of Health and incorp,orated into the rep,ort. The report should cover the flooding potential of the proposed sub'division and should include the design of the sto.nn water system that would accomm'odate a 10 year stonn, the pad elevatio~ n.ec'essary to keep all buildings above the 100 year flood leveL the expected impact of the prop<;>sed subdivision's stonn water runoff on any receiving stre,am or downstream p.roperty and the approximate' location, size and capacity of any retention basins to be located in or d~rectly affecting the proposed su.bdivision, Where legal drams are involved, comments., reports, recommendations and approvals, where necessary, from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources shall be included. 24 (3) A statement from the State; Highway Department, the County Highway Department or the City Street Department concerning rights-of-way, road improvements, roadside improvements, roadside drainage, entrances, culvert pipes and other specifications deemed necessary by the Commission or State Highway, County Highway or City Street Department. The condition of the existing roadway and its suitability to handle its proposed traffic must be specifie.d. (4) A soils map, and its accompanying report from the Hamilton County Soil and Water Conservation District:J showing the soil limitations bas.ed upon the intended usage of the land for the proposed subdivision. (5) An erosion control plan and statement setting forth the method of controlling erosion and sedimentation before, during and following development and constmction, Le., temporary seeding, sediment detention basins, erosion prevention devices and other sirhilar llleans that meet the Hamilton County Soil and Water Conservation Oistrict guidelines for urban development. (6) A letter or other written statement from the Cannel Board of Public Works or other appropriate authorities stating that said appropriate authority has capacity for the number of sanitary sewer and water hookups necessary to service the . '. proposed ~ubdivision. 5.6 ~equire.tn~nts for,Const~c~ion Plan Following approval of the preliminary plat approval by the Commission,. the subdivider ( sh~ ifhe has not previously done so, submit five (5) copies, or more as needed, of the construqtion plans for the improvements to be installed in the subdivision in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. The construction plans shall be prepared by a Prof~ssional Engineer or Registered Land Surveyor. in accordance with State Statutes and licensed to do business in the State of Indiana. Construction plans to be submitted shall include: 5.6.1 The propos.ed method of sewage disposal, with d~taiIed plans and profiles of proposed"sanitaxy sewers, with connections to the main sewer system. If such a central system is used, a statement from the appropriate sewage treatment authority that the plans, as proposed, are satisfactory. If septic tanks are used., plans shall show the proposed private sewage disposal tests -with results shown at each test location and that the water table at the proposed location is more than 3'.0 inches below the ground surface. ' This shall be accompariied by a statement from the Hamilton County Health Board that the septic tanks should work ~s proposed. 5.6.2 The pr9po~ed water supply and detwled plans and specifications of the water distribution syStem, providing a drawing indicating thereon the connectio.ns proposed to the public water supply and, ifnot available, the type of well sy.stem contemplated for each lot and the proposed location of the well. . . 5.6.3 A drawing and construction platl indicating thereon the propos.ed method of drainage. ( 25 Subdivision Regulations (1) If a storm sewer or similar type of system is used~ provide details showing connection to the mai~ system or method of disposition into stream;- retention raservoir, ete., distance to stream outlet, locations and sizes of lift stationsJ manholes, inlets, junction-boxes and other necessary appurtenances. (2) Ifsurface drainage is used, show roadside ditches, -swales, grassed waterways, water courses, open ditches, roll curb .and gutter sections and road culverts. Details to be shown should include, as necessary, type~ IQcation, size, typical cross-sections, depths, grades, profiles and other infonnation as to the adequacy of the outlet drain or detention reserVoir. Show off-site drainage swales) . ditches and any other facilities that discharge" onto the site of the prop~sed subdivision. (3) The elevations at e.ach comer of every lot and a minimum house. pad elevation. 5.6.4 Detailed plans, profiles, cross-sections and specifications of streets within the adjoining and proposed subdivi.sion, including roadway width~J pavement widths, rights-of-way, construction gradients, types and widthsofpavemeilt). curbs;. gutters, sidewalks, crosswalks, entrance detail and othet pertinent data., Street ~arnes shall be cited .on th'e. various plans. 5.6.5 Detailed plans.o'fthe proposed street lighting system showing locations, type, wattage, height, easements; wiring location if the. lights are -not to be installed at the time of construction of the subdivision, etc. Final decision on street lighting ins~a1lation shall be made by the Carmel Bo.ard ofPubUc Works or other appropriate authorities. 5.6.6 Detailed plan of the, fire hydrant system and their easements. 5.6.7 Oetailed plan of the proposed landscap.e-plan, where required, showing location, size, kind, etc., of existing and proposed tre.es, shrubbery and screening materials. . 5.7 Provisions for Fin~ncial Performance and Maintenance Guarantees for Subdivisions As a prerequisite to final plat approval, the subdivider shall agree to provide financial perfoIlI1ance and mainten~ce ,guarantees for public facility improvements and installations. to be constructed in and, as necessary for proper connection and system coordination, adjoining the ' proposed subdivision. The public facility improvements and installations shall include streets (base and pavirig, -individually), curbs and gutterslI sidewalks, storm water drain and storm sewer systems~ sanitary sewer systems, water su-pply systems, street name signs, monuments and markers and the various appurtenances (elated thereto. All constru-ction shall'be according to plans submitted as portion of final "plat and .acco"mpanyin.g data, subject to standards and specifications cited herein. Non-public facility'iinprovements"and insta11ation~ shan be subject to fu:1ancial gu.arantees established by their ownership. 5.7.1 Perfonnance Guarantee. Prior to or at the time of fin"a} plat approval, the sub,divid~r shall be required to provide financial performance gQaiantee, by certified check, performanc~ bond, or any.irrevo.cable, unconditional, ac~eptable letter of credit issued by.a . financial institution acceptable" to the Plan Commission, that all public facility improvements and . . 26 " installations, required under the provisions of this ordinance shall be completed. Bonds, checks, and letters are to run to: .... A B. . City of Carm~l jurisdiction: City of Carmel Hamilton County jurisdiction: Board of Commissioners of Hamilton County t" I Said financial performance guarantee shall be conditioned upon the following: . . (1) The completion of public facility improvements and.installations shall be within two (2) years from the recording of the final plat; (2) A penal sum shall be fixed and approved by the Commission equal to 100 percent of the total estimated CUITent cost to the city or county of all public facility improvements and installations provided in the final plat and accompanying data according to specifications cited herein; (3) Each public facility improvement. or installation provided in the final.plat or accompanying data shall be bonded individually, or shall have an individual certified check or letter of credit to cover the penal sum, and shall not have the , performance guarantee provided in combination with any of the other public facility improvements and installations. (4) The performance bon~ certified check. or letter -of credit shall be issued in the name of the owner, developer, contractor or other reSponsible party as determined by the Plan. Commissioner.: ( 5.7.2 Extension of Completion rime and Non:-Performance. . (1) Should the subdivider not complete the public facility improvements and installations ~ herein required within the stated two. (2) year period, the Building Commissioner may approve an. extension of time of up to two (2) additional years, granted at six (6) month intervals, for completion of the req~ired public facility .improvements .and installati.ons. . (2) Should the subdivider not complete the. public facility improvements and installations as h~rein requited Within the two (2) year period or within any time extension ~pprQved by the Building Commissioner, the proper authorities may take the necessary steps to proceed with the completion of the publi~ facility improvemen~s and .installations, making use of the .certified check, perfOm1ance . bond. or l~tter of credit. 5.7.3 Release 9fPerformance Guarantee. Upon the completion of the required public facility improvements and installations according to the recorded secondary plat, approved development plans, accompanying data and the standards cited herein,.the subdivider shall provide the Department of Community Development with two (2) sets of as-built drawings showing all site improvements, including but not limited to drainage and sewerage systems, ( 27 '.... ~UDQ~v.a.on Kequ4a~4DnB water distribution systems, signs~ and monume'nts as they Were coristructed and installed, and including certificates by a Professional Engineer or Land Surveyor that all improvements were install~d 4~ shown and in. 'eonfOm1Mee with this ordinance and all applicable standards and requirements of the appropriate governmental jurisdictions. The subdivider may then request the release of the performance guarantee posted with the proper authority.., Upon the receipt of a maintenance guarantee, as specified herein" the proper authority shall release the performance guarant~e.within sixty (60) days.. The performance guarantee for each individual public fac~ity improvement or installation may be handled separately and' shall in no way be contingent on the completion of any of the other individual public facility improvements and installations or their performance guarantees. 5.7.4 Maintenance Guarantee. Prior to the release of the performance guarantee, the subdivider shall be required to provide financial maintenance guarantee, by certified check or maintenance bond, that all public facility improvements and installations required under the provisions of this ordinance shall be maintained according to specifications cited herein. Bonds . and checks are to run to: A. City of Carmel jurisdiction: City of Carmel B. Hamilton County jurisdiction: Board of Commissioners of Hamil top County. Said financial maintenance guarantee shall be conditioned upon the following: (1) The maintenance guarantee shall run and be in force for a period of three (3) years from the date of release of the performance guarantee. (2) A penal sum shall be fixed and approved by the Commission but in no case shall the penal sum be less than 15% of the total performance guarantee for streets and 10% of the performance guarantee for all other public facility improvements and installations. The minimwn maintenance guarantee to be posted for streets shall be no less than $5,000.00. (3) Each p~blic facility improvement or installation shall be bonded individually, or shall have no individual certified check to cover the penal sum, and shall not . have the maintenance guarantee provided in combination with any of the other pubiic f8;Cility improvements and installations. ' (4) The maintenance bond shall be issued in the subdivider's. name alone or in the name of the subdivider and his subcontractor as co-signers. All certified checks provided for financial malntenance guarantee shall be signed by the subdivider alone. 5.7.5 Release of Maintenance Guarantee. All maintenance bonds shall expire at the end of the three (3) year period for which they were established. Within 60 days of the expiration date, the prop~r authority shall return s~d expired maintenance bonds to the subdivider. ,In the case where a certified check has been posted as a maintenance guarantee, the subdivider shall, at the end 9f the three (3) year maintenance period, contact the proper authority 28 subdivision Regulations be unnecessary for the coordination of development between the subdivision and such adjacent tract. 6.3.5 Wherever there exists a dedicated or platted portion of a street or alley adjacent to the proposed subdivision, the remainder of the street Or alley to the prescribed width shall be platted within the proposed subdivision. 6.3.6 Minimum rights-of-way and roadway widths for streets shall conform to the Thoroughfare Plan, as shown below: . . Functional Right-of-Way Pavement Classification Width (Feet) Width (Feet)" Primary Thoroughfare 100 44 'Secondary Thoroughfare 80 44 Collector Street 60 36 -:: - Lo'cat Access Street-- 60 40 Comtitercial 30 Local Access Street-- ( Residential SO . 30 ..... * C<:,unty Streets. 50 26 Cul-de-sac SO 26 ** Street subject to annexation within a reasonable period of time (determin~d by the CO~TJssion) shall "be subject to Ci~J requirements. 6.3.7 Cul-de-sac streets shall not exceed 600 feet in length. All cul-de-sacs shall terminate in a ~ircular right...of-way with a minimum di~eter of 100 feet and a minimum pavement diameter of76 feet, or other approved arrangement for the turning of aU vehicles conveniently within .the right-of-way. Where cul..de.,sac streets extend from another cul-de-sac or d.ead-end street, the tota11ength of both streets shall not exce~.d 600 feet. . 6.3.8 Alleys shall be discouraged in residential districts but should be included in commercial and industrial areas where needed for loading and unloading or access purposes, and where platted shall be at least 20 feet in width. Where alleys are provided, they shall temllnate at .streets or in an area with sufficient space for turning around of velricles. Alleys shall be developed as fully p~ved surfaces, built in. accordance with the standards of the City of Cannel. (~ ~ t \ \ \ \ .> '\ 31 .-. . . ..... ... Subdivision Requla~ion8 convenient access to schools, playgrounds, shopping centers and other community facilities. 6.4.2 Bldcks shall be of sufficient width to permit two tiers of lots of appropriate depth, except where an interior street parallels a Limited Access Highway, an Arterial Street or a Railroad Right-of-Way. 6.5 'Lots 6.5.1 All lots shall abut and have access to a street; said lots each having a minimum frontage at the street right-of-way of 50 feet. The required lot width cited in the ZoniIJ.g Ordinance shall be at the building setback line. . 6.5.2 Sidelines of lots shall be at approximately right angles to straight streets and. on radial lines on curved streets. Some variation from this rule is permissible, but pointed or very irregular lots should be .avoided. 6.5.3 Double frontage lots should not be platted, except that where desired along Arterial Streets, lots may face on an interior street and back on such thorou~ares. In that event a planting strip easement, at least 20 feet in widt~ shall be provided along the back of the l~. . 6.5.4 Widths .and areas of lots shall be not less than that provided in the Zoning Ordinance for single-family dwellings for the district in which the sub.division is located, except that when a watermain supply system or a sanitary sewer or stann' sewer are not available the lot area necessary to install a private water supply or private sewage disposal on the lot in accordance with the Zo.ning Ordinance regulations' shall become the required minimuni lot area. <. 6.5.5 Comer residential lots shall be wider and larger than interior lots in order to pennit appropriate building setbac~ from b.oth streets. . 6.5.6 Wherever possible, planne'd and coordinate.d commercial and ind~stria1 complexes, based upon sound development standards, such as those contained in the planned district (B-4 and"I-2) regulations in the Zoning Ordinance, should be designed in contrast to the platting of lots for individual commercial and industrial uses. 6.6 Easements 6.6.1 Where alleys are not provid.ed, easements for utilities shall be provided. Such easements ,shaII have minimum widtbs of 20 feet and where located along lot lines, one-half of the width shan be taken from ea.ch lot. Lots on the outside perimeter of a subdivision, where lots do not abut another subdivision, shall provide an easement 15 feet in width. Before . determining the location of easements the plan shall be discussed with the .local public utility companies ~o assure their proper placing for the installation of such services. 6.6.2 Where a proposed subdivision is trav.ersed by any stream, water course, or drainageway, the subdivider ~hall make adequate provision for.the proper drainage of surface water, including the provision of easements along such streams, water courses, and 35 '.. Subdivision Re~lationa 8.0 5T ANDARDS OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS 8.1 Required Improvements by Subdivider The subdivider shall be required to p.tovide and- install ~ertain .minimum improvements in the subdivision as a condition for approval of the Final-Plat.by the Commission. All such required improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the minimum requirement's of these regulations and the construction standards and specifications adopted by the jurisdiction over a particular improvement. Nothing" contained herein, however, shall be construed as prohibiting the subdivider from installing improvements meeting higher standards than the minimum requirements. 8.2 Monument.s and'Markers Monuments and markers shall be set by the subdivider as herein re-quired. Said monuments and markers shall be placed so that the c'enter of the pipe or marked point shall coincide exactly with the intersection oflines to be marked, and shall be set so that the top of the monument or marker is level with the finished grade. 8.2.1 Monuments shall be of stone, pre-cast concrete or concrete poured in place with minimum dimensions of four inches by four inches by 36 in~hes, s'et vertically in place. They shall be marked on top .with -an iron or copper dowel set flus.h with the top of the monument, scored 'on top with a cr~ss. Said monuments shall be set: . (1) . At the intersections of all lines forming angles in the boundat}' of the subdivision. . ,.. (2) At the intersections of all lines forming angles in the boundary of the section, if the subdivision is platted by sections. 8.2.2 lvfonuments to be placed in streets shall be of brass, iron or steel pin, 24 inches in length, 1/2 "inch minimum diameter with 1-1/2 inch minimum diameter head~ set vertically in place. Said monuments- shall be set: (1) At the intersection of all street centerline-s. (2) At the beginning 'and ending of aU curves along street centerlines. 8.2.3 Any section, half section or quarter section monument located ,in -a street shall be re-established by the Hamilton County Surveyor and shall be provided with art Indiana State Highway Department standard monument box. 8.2.4 Mark-ers shall consist of iron pipes or steel bars with minimum dimensions of36 inches in length and 5/8 inch in diameter. Said markers shall be set: . (1) At all points where lot lines intersect curves, either front or rear. 42 subdivision Requlationa of the builder and not of the subdivider. 8.4.2 The plans for the installation of a sanitary sewer system shall.be provided by the subdivider and approved by the appropriate authority with control over sanitary sewage. This . shall require Indiana State Board of Health approval, including a SPC-15 Construction Permit. Upon completion of the sanitary sewer installation, two (2) copies of the plans for said system as built shall be filed with the Building Commissioner. 8.5 Water 8.5.1 The subdivider shall provide the subdivision with a complete watermain supply system, which shall be connected to a municipal or a.community water supply approved by the Indiana State Board of Health except that, when such municipal or coIilmunity water supply is not available, the subdivider shall provide an individual water supply on each lot in the subdivision in accordance with the current standards of the City of Carmel and the standards and specifications of the Indiana State Board of Health and the Hamilton County Board of Health. 8.5.2 Plans for the installation of a watermain supply system shall be submitted by the subdivider and these plans and systems shall be built in accordance with the current standards of the City of Cannel or the standards and sp~cifications of the appropriate public or private utility service. Upon completion of the water supply installation,.two sets of plans for such system as built shall be filed with the Building Commissioner. 8.6 I~tetp~etat~on Copceming Utility Systems Installation 8.6.1 In reference to standards for sewers and water, the phrase lithe subdivider..shall provide" shall be interpreted to mean that the subdivider shall install the facility referred to, or, whenever a private sewage disposal system or an individual water supply is to be provided, that the subdivider shall require, as a condition of the sale of each lot or parcel in the subdivision, that the facilities referred to in these sections shall be installed by the' builder of the structure on the lots in accordance with these regulations. 8.7 Storm Dr~nage The subdivider shall provide the subdivision with an adequate storm water sewer system in accordance with the current standards ofthe City of Carmel whenever curl;> and gutter is installed and whenever the evidence available to the Commission indicates that the natural surface drainage is inadequate. When the surface drainage is adequate, easements for such surface drainage .shall be provided in accordance with the current standards of the City of Carmel. Deep open ditches for drainage are not permitted in the right-of-way, but where curb and gutter are not provided, a shallow swale with its low point at least' three inches below the elevation of the subgrade of the pavement may be permitted. All open drainage ditches and swales shall be constructed in exact CQnformance with the submitted plans and specifications and the entire ditch or swale seeded or sodded in accordan~e with the guidelines of the Hamilton County Soil and Water Conservation District and grass maintained before any improvement location permits shall be issued. This shall apply from April 15 to September 15. At other times of the year the requirement will be waived until the following June 30th, at which time the 44 ! . Subdivi8i~n Regulations 9.6 Subdivider Agreement Forms 9.6.1 r'he following agreement shall be included as a submittal with the final plat approval application: AGREE~NT The developer shall be responsible for any drainage problems; including standing wate~J :f1ooding and erosion control, .which aris.e or b.ecome evident at any time during :the 3 year mainte~ance period after the release of the sub.di~sion bond, and which is attributable to a defi~iency,.in' subdivision drainage design' or co~stIUction of drainage improvements. Thi~', shall include all pipesi istfUctures, swales, ditches and ,ponds which ar~ pertinent features to the' proper drain~ge oIthe suBdivision. . . " This.responsibility' of the developer shall not, however, include problems which are create.d subsequent to the completion of the subdivision improvements by the improper grading b.y individual builders or structures and improper grading installed or accomplished by individual homeowners. It is the intent of this agreement t~t the: developer shall specifically provide such sub-surface drains, or storm sewers or ditc~es~':as ate requir~d to properly rectify ~y drainage problem or h sub-surf8;ce water problem which was' 1iot:~contemplate'd in the original approved subdivision .: / design, including, but not 'restricted to,' disposal of sub-surface water from footing drains of '\~ individual1ots. ROAP Th1PltOVE1V$NTS: The typical agreement for existing contiguous Hamilton County Roads which are substandard, with Hamilton County is: The developer will put in 12 inch stone base to the required wi4th of the road, and grade the s to a minimum of 6 feet width and construct proper side-ditches, or, provide storm sewer and ~rbs. This will be the black top grad.e during construction of subdiyision.. Then the' c'ounty will cottle in and cut. out 3" in~he$ ,and' .put In 3 inches binder asphalt atter which the developer will' be' . . responsibleffor 1 ,inch of ~pbaJt topping. This is being done as joint projeCts between COQnty and. developer.. Anr~gteet:nent .shall be executed~ in writing, between the develQper and Hamilton county specifieaUy de~i1:1n8, the exact work to' be 'accompIishe.d by the developer and tbat to be accomp1ished'~1the County, and shall also state the road or roads or portions thereofwhieh are included. -If.the sliJ;diVjsiQn is' 'contemplated to be annexed to the City ~f Cannel~ then the agreement .shall..:inol1J.4e,the'City ofC:armel Board of Public Works as a signatory~'which shaU'be" fOf the purpo:se of tho City of'Cannel agreeirig to accept the maintenance' and -operation, the improved ,road':faciliw'upon. completi.on of said improvements and completion of annexation_ "'\ '\ ...... "..", _ > .' -;. . '~-". - ~:~;~~~&j!?~~~;!~3,/~~;:~;;~;.;-.:;'~i:C'-"":,,,. _ . .. ,,::.... .~~~""_. '". / . I f . .-/' . (';:' ... ,.. . . . , .. ..t:Y6f :.l ~".... . -. . . . ~ ;. .' . ~.-". :",:<':,~:"~t X"'~:. .,,,,. . ," . It:. ...... : ' " . . ,: l . . :... .~ ; t' ... .~'., . i- .:~. .,;'., :. '.:. ":~:::i>.;l~=;"..;: ..: :~{i:~:~ ..<.~ ': ,: :.:.:.:~ :. ~:::... ,:.:i t ...~. " ::~. . ~:-.~;t:\.~.~... ~~\.~ ( 7,4 GENERAL STANDARDS FOR OPEN SPACE. All subdivision open space that is set aside for common use, shall be designed using the standards set forth within each open space category, and per the general requirements below. A. Any lot within a subdivision shall be located within a 1000' radius of Open Space to help ensure safe and convenient access to the greatest number of lots within the subdivision. B. Open space must also be accessible for land management and emergency purposes. C. Open space must be easily and pennanently identifiable as open space through one or more of the following: maintenance practices. permanent signage, permanent monuments, paths or walks. walls, or low fencing. . D. Open space intended for active recreational use must be suitable for such use without posing interCerenc~ with adjacent dwelling units, parking, driyeways, and roads. B. Open space shall be undivided by streets or alleys, except where necessary for proper traffic c1rculation. . .' F. Open. spaCe must be free of all structures, and buildings except for st;mctures directly related to the purpose of the open space provided, such as swimming pools, clubhouses, gazebos. picnic shelters, band shelters, decks and bridges. However, the Commission may grant approval of structures and improvements required for storm drainage, sewage treatment and water supply within open. space, provided that such facilities would not be detrimental to the usabiIity.of open space. . " ,. , . .:,' ..;.,.. . ",\!.;, . i.. ." G. There shall be submitted an ~$p.~ Conservation Plan as part ot& Primary N'l!>'.. :~ ~ applica.tiolt~;Abe Open Space:..COnse~on Plan shall address thejllt~de4 use,ofptQjeCt ':::. ::'. open space;.~ 'S.h~ ~omply ;'Wi~'1he: COItlJllissioD Open Space CoDsei;va:tio~T~P~./' :~,:. ~ :.:~' \o~~ :.\ ." GUl.de':":'''s' ~{Bi...:L.':b.,tBt\ ..'J'!..". . ., .~"" ,. 'J,.. ., : . ".-' ':..' :.,..:...: .....1 ..~::.::. '. ,: ," WI", i~"', '.l'''~ \.'. . .' 'i'.\,;,.. h:' '.. ": ..... .' ""~ :." ..' ~.., '.:"-. '.;.....~...;:\I . . .: " .'~"!.. .~ '~:.:.:~ ~"~~I :~~~: ..::~ ;. ...:' ~. ~ '.i; t.. ':....i... ..,~ 'L:", . F~. :. :.,:. ..:: ';:; ..~ ~. .' . .: .~.. : . ~. . r. . . . " '7.5 . OPEN .SPACE PRIORITY AREAS. Open space Priori~ Areas iihall be prOteCteirto the extent indicated below> and may be utilized as project open space: A. Public Wen-bead ProteCtion Areas representing a 200-foot radius control area around the wel1.h~ shall be protected in their entirety. 1. The complete sealing ~f 8111akes, ponds, or other water impoundment of any kind . located within the one-year time of travel for any existing public wel1--bead. No lakes, ponds or other water impoundment of any kind shall be allowed within the 200..foot radius of a public well-head. 2. The proposed subdivision of any tract shall be designed to cause the least practicable disturbance to natural infiltration and percolation of precipitation to the groundwater table, through careful planning ofvegctation and land disturbance activities:. and the placement of streets, buildings and impervious surfaces. B. All FBMA and IDNR 100 Year Ftoodway and FloodwayFringe Areas shall bepreserved. in their entirety, however; 1. Alterations to floodway and floodway frinqe areas may occur pursuant to a. Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) pursuant to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Commission approval; 2. Excavation, filling of earth or removal of native vegetation within 100 yearfloodway fringe areas sha.ll be prohibited, except as may be required by the Hamilton County Drainage Board, or Cannel Board of Public Works and Safety~ 39 ( j. . . , '; '.\:' .~ . ' , . .. 10 . _. 'r- : 10. . . ,::;:'. J ';,..~; ,:'\: ,: . : '('::: ~'~ l~! ~:r~' . .. .._ . ~ 10 :' . .' ',. . . ;.' . ,. 10.. "..'. .. '. .'.. : ~. ;:~}.~.. ': ~~i.:: ' ~.~:.:.~ .: .... .... -,- .,. -. ,:: .:.. . -~:. ((:~:~: <.. ";.; '-.... .. C. F~eral Jurisdictional Wet1anM of % acre or greater shall be preserved in their entirety~ including a 50-foot wide perimeter buffer area to insure their protection. Wetland alterations may occur, however, pursuant to a mitigation plan approved by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the Commission. D. The White River GreeJIWa,,'X. The White River is this community's most significant natural and cu1tu.ral resource. An Open Space Priority Area in. the form of a one hundred--foot wide bufrer strip, measured from the water's edge at normal pool elevation (as verified by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources) alongthe Clay Township side, shall be established adjacent to the White River. This buf'fi=r strip SCIVCS to help maintain or improve water and habitat quality along the River's length through Clay Township. E. WOQdlands. Woodland areas thai occur throughout CarmeJ/Clay, arc primarily associated with streams, ditches, wetlands, poor and erod1'bIe agricaltura1 soils, and moderate to steep slopes. Because'oftheir resource values, aU ~ Woodlands. Young Wopdlands. and Scru'f1 Woo<tlands on any tract proposed for subdivision shall be evaluated by the applicant and the Commission to determine the extent to which they shall be designated, partly or entirely, as Open Space as determined below. Evaluation criteria and protection for woodlands are found in Section 1.7: 1. No more than 15% ofIands occupied, as of December I, 1998, by Mature Woodlands sl1alI be cleared. 2. No more than 30% ofJands occupied, as ofDccember 1~ 1998, by Young Woodlands shall be cleared. 3. No more than 50% ofJands occupied, as of December I, 1998, by Scrnb Woodlands shalt be cleared. ":V~ ::;;~.~;..' . . .t..: ~ ;-t. ,.i '. r;.; "~. . . F. ~pecial ()pnortunity .Catridors ~ UJ,t~, urib1Jildablc areas subject to ~gps.by major. : ., . : :'. ' pipeline companies o;.jnlblic utilitip$/fJ1esc;~rxj~1'$ extend for long distan~'~ugh.~.; i>::::.; ;'.:., Carmel/Clay, and.:llrOvidc a tr.c=m~PPP9~.for low-impact imprOv~etitS;s~'as"" . .'.,.i.i.L;) '!:,!:' ". multi-pmpose~: ~'~C4pinB.....NI Pipt:~~,~~ents, and hi~~lta:ge:~e~.. ~.:<' .,:. ~. ;,:;; :;;'." transmission lines within casements and delineated as Special Opportunity Corridors on . the.AltCmative Transportation PIan of the CamielICIa.y ComprehenSive Pfanshall be sd:- aside, and integrated into the overall subdivision design. as project open space. As an Open Space Priority Area, the development of a linear 1rai1 system shall be a requirement for all new subdivisions directly impacted/encumbered by Special Opportunity Corridors. '::~:;~~i:., .r: G. Historic Structures and Sites shall be preserved as provided below. Many of the cominutrlty's historic structures and sites (resources) have been extensively researched and retnain intact. For purposes of this ordinanec, The Hamilton County Interim Report, as amended, published March 1992 by the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, shall be the official inventory ofbistoric stmc1ures and sites in Cannell Clay Township. 1. Plans requiring subdivision approvalsbaII be designed to protect existing historic stmctures and sites of ail classes. This protection shall include the conservation of the landscape inunediately associated with and signifiCant to those structures and sites, to preserve their historic context. . ..... . _.. . . 2. Where, in the opinion of the Commission, a plan will have a detrimental impact upon a historic' resource, the developer shall mitigate that impact to the satisfaction of the Commission by modifying the design, relocating proposed lot lines, providing landscape buffers, or other approved means. 7. 6 . STANDARDS FOR NATURAL OPEN SPACE. The following represent mininunn standards to reduce adverse impacts on Natural Open Space. 40 ..-.....-......-....... - --. - ..... A. Natural Open Space consists ofany Open Space Priority Area (Section 7.5). Natural Open Space Areas are generalIy the preferred fom of project open'space, opportunities for Natural Open Space should be exhausted prior to implementation of other open space t)'pes. B. Natural Open Space areas may be altered, but only to the extent indicated in the Open Space Conservation Plan. Such alterations shall occor in accordance with the below standards, and consistent with the approved Open Space Conservation Plan. C. Unless otherwise approved by the Commission, each Natural Open Space area must: 1. Be a minimum area of one-half acre; 2. Have a minimum width of seventy-five (75) feet, and 3. Have at least two (2) points of access 7.7 WOODLAND EVALUATION. The cvaluationofthetract~s woodlands shall be undertaken by an arborist. landscape architect. horticulturist or another qualified professional. acceptable . to the Director. This evaluatioD shall be submitted as a written report, included with and supplemental to the Open Space Conservation Plan. A. Evaluation of Trees. The goal of woodland preservation is to ensure trees remain assets to the site fo~ years to come. Single trees and woodlands that are preserved within Project Open Space :I tberefote~ must meet the following minimum standards: 1. A life expectancy of greater than 10 years. , . 2. The tree must be in good or better condition. :.i.:~t} ~.:;~'f' ".~. . A re1:atively sound and s~lid trunk with.nR:~iyo decay. '..~. ,- ,. N ...t..__ · d-.:I.l- b -.~1' . '. d--.I,. b ':::1;i~~1~~:~:~~..4. 6 omoreumuone~.aJ~J; .,~ 11t1 .or~~.~y.~~~R~~ ~.un s. . -,.' '~~'.. , " );; ::: ~. :' "'; )~~:' ;,;::. ~~~;'~., ,'., No major ~ect or P~~;,~~ ~~l;:':.,;~i:: :;~~;;: ~; . .;, . . ' .'; ::':' ,:' ,. "" ,,.::: '.~' ;', ': . ,:>; ;-'" ;,',:.. ;.(lk'iW oo.dl~nd Protection Practices; Pjo~_b-,~,~!M.~tb.e, most entlcal (actPrJll:) ';'':~! ".;. i',~" :-.', "'. , ",', >. .',;' ':.. ;,;-;" >:; :: ..', i\tt~p.~JVation ~~~d~e~pmei,lt,~.~~~ within this ~~>!';: i.~ '<:...~: ~::,,:,; '<~:! ,:!' '. ' . " . direCtly affeCts tree survivat To PrOtect roOt'zones, the feltowlng standards apply: ' ' , 1. ., . When earthwork, grading, or ConStruction activities arc planned adjacent to Woodhmd open space, a limit of disturbance line shall be shown on the construction plans and the areaCs) protected through inStallation of temporary fencing or other measures approved bytbe Commission. Such fencing (or other approved measures) shall be installed and identified through signage as a '*Tree Preservation Zone" prior 10 commencing land disturbance, and remain throughout the period of construction. 2. The root zone of trees and woodlands shall include no less than the total area beneath the tree(s) canopy as defmed by the farthest canopy of the tree(s) plus a 5- foot wide protective buffer. 3. Construction. site activities such as parking, material storage, bury pits, concrete washout, etc., shall not be allowed within Woodland open space. 4. Grade chang~ adjacent to tree preservation zones shall not result in alteration to soil or drainage conditions that would adversely affect existing vegetation. . Woodlands must be evaluated for flood tolerance, and stonnwater routed around those areas deemed intolerant of an increase of additional flow from urbanization. s. Disturbed areas adjacent to tree preservation zones shall be mulched to provide additional protection to tree roots. 6. When digging trenches for utility lines or similar uses, disturbances to the root zones of woodland open space shall be prohibited. Underground tunneling or directional boring of utilities is required to protect woodland root zones. 7 a Woodland clearing shall not be permitted prior to Secondary Plat approval. 41 8. The detennination of sight distance clearances along roadways shall be made gmphica.l1y, not by clearing woodlands on~site prior to Secondary Plat approval. C. Afforestation and Reforestation. The replacement of trees in the Natural Open Space or tree preservation areas sfuill be determined on the Open Space Conservation PIan pursuant to the following: 1. The base planting unit for Afforestation within or adjacent to Natural Open Space shall be for each five hundred (S 00) square feet and include: a.' one (1) shade tree b. four (4) whips . c. twelve (12) inch seedlings spaced on three (3) foot centers. 2. Where specimen trees, stands of trees or woodlands within NatuIal Open. Space or designated tree preservation zones have been irreparably damaged or illegally removed, a reforestation area sba11 be set aside, double in size of the damaged or cleared area. to be planted pursuant to the above standards for Afforestation. 3. A landscape buffer of native 1rees and shrubs is reqtrired adjacent t,o Woodland open space areas that have been opened up due to land clearing activity. Planting shall occur per ExhibitC, Perimeter Buffering. 4. Tree species selected for replacement must be quality specimens and must be native to Northcentral Indiana. Standards for transplanting can be found in the Cannel Tree lDstallation Specifications Manual. 'A site specific tree list will be provided to the C~ Arborist. ~l . . 1.8, ST~~SFORAGRICULTURALPPENSPACE"::"~~~OpenSpacesballbe . . :'" ~~~. ~CWtural uses, including pastul$nd, or the ~~~j,lOps. and may include ". .;: . rCsi~ctlf6r~ties that are specificalIy~e.ded to suppdtt:~.viable agricultural ,.J::,,: ~ ',.. / oP.~~~:S~cally excluded. are commerci~Qiy~'P1l'~G~.1UVolvig.g swine, poultry. , ~',..;., . '. .' .. ~i. ~"and'~~ aninulls likely to produce o~~:odotsir..~ ,. :.;::1.1 :~'~i~:-. >.:'."..' ::., :.., :.~- ..' .... ;:::.~~: ;U:.~: ....~" ~'land area for AgriQ11itUijt :ppep::Sp~'sliaUb.c\fi~~;(Slacres. . B: Pastureland is land reserved fur horseS that am solely for recrea'tiorial purposes. C. Agricultural Open Space may not consume more than one balf (50%) of the SOSR , " .... ~ < ; ~.'(~~'. :", . .. ...... "i.. .~.: _; .: , : :(:::;:: ".~:;. :~. ',.: .- ..~;:~.r'~: .~:~"." 7.9 STANDARDS FOR DESIGNED OPEN SPACE. Designed Open Space shall assume any one or more ofthc following fonns; however, the Commission may consider and approve other forms not described ~ this section, pursuant to tho criteria in 7.9.J: A. Squ,res. Squares are areas designed as neighborhood foc8.1 points and/or minor destination points for sitting or strolling and located at the intersection of neighborhood streets. 1. Squares shall be no great.erthau 10,000 square feet, with a minimum width of7S1, 2. Streets shall bound squares on at least two sides. 3. Squares shall be improved with a combination of paved areas and landscaped areas,: . . and should be furnished. with benches, lighting, and other site details such as perennia1 gardens, shrub borders, pirei baths, and fountains. B. Parks, Parks are open space areas designed specifically for~ and equipped for, the play of small children. 1. Parks shall have a minimum area of 10,000 square feet, with a minimum average width of 90'. 2. One point 'of access is required for each 25,000 square feet, up to a maximum of three points ofaceess. 42 3. Park areas should be fenced and may include an open shelter. 4. Parks should be interspersed within neighborhoods, a short walking distance from dwellings. . i c. Greens. Greens are medium sized open space areas that are designed for unstructured recreational use. 1. Greens shall be no less than 40,000 square feet in area, with a minimum average width of ISO'. 2. Greens shall be bound on three sides by streets or house facades. D. Boulevards. Boulevards are linear open spaces located within a public or private street and consist of 1. a.1inear street median, at least ten (10) feet wide; 2. tree lawns along each side of the street, at least ten (10) feet wide,' and planted in a formal manner with street trees located on consistent spacing; 3. parallel multi-purpose pathways along each side, or, a multi-purpose pathway along one side, and a sidewalk along the other. The minimum width for multi.. ' purpose paths sball be 10 feet. B. Greenbelts~ Greenbelts are located along the perimeter of a neighborhood and adjacent to arterial streets or parkways. Greenbelts may be left natural or developed to provide for recreation opportunities. Minimum width 100'. F. Trails. When'a subdivision is traversed by or abutS a propos~d'or existing dedi~ed ~. o~ a ~pecia1 Opportunity Corridor..~e. applicant sha1l.~pr~~dc~for its develop~'h1-..~. continuation, consistent with.tAc. maps and po~i~t~ '9~the . ~"'~.: Comprehe-.ve'Plaii"and its A1tema.tivc'Ttanspo~~~ System map;"and:petthc .:....~.;~.:~ .', .t~~~Qn:8J.)d:'~S!P specifications of the City '~.(,~~el;.' :..::::i;~ '1'~:;4..\ :;~.~.. ::. ': : ~" ,',' J.,,_~:,;Jf)~~,~~idcr~~thestreetrigbt-of~~Y~ ~:PP.~~tMitc:,~~,~~,tril.ilsball ...,~ ,. ~I.~..' ..': ~..,~ ~. :';. '.~bc. laeed Within' a: conservation easetnd1fs~ a:::rilii1intllm ~O~t...~I' (SO) f~ in' width. ..~.:,. t .".t,_....~.,...:.f.f..:.~;...~. ','" ,. .:.": :....... -C1"r.s.\..;(~-t\:'::',",'r.\!.".....".I.;a::~",,, ,... The language of the conservation easement shalt be to the satiSfaction of the .. .. CommissioDuponreconunendationoftheCo~sion'attomey. 2. No trail shall be designed with the intent to accommodate motorized vehicles. " . ...:";~ :. ; t '. ..t...,.", . '.1 - \. 1...~ ~'l.' G. Patl,s. Paths shaD generally be located within the undivided (common) Open Space lands. In situations where paths must ClOSS- portions of house lots or conservancy lots, a pennanent conservation arid'common access easement shall protect them. 1. The minimum width for the easement shall be fifteen (IS), and shall have a length to width ratio of 10:1. 2. Paths shall be paved with an all weather surface,(e.g. compacted stone, or hardwood mulc~ or asphalt) not less than four (4) inches in depth, upon a compacted subgrade, and a minimum offive (S) feet in width. H. Golf Courses. Golf Courses, excluding associated driving ranges or miniature golf facilities, may comprise up to half (50%) of the SOSR. However, lands devoted to parking areast clubhouses, and any other Assessory stIuctures shall not count toward th~ .S~SR. I. Ponds. Stormwater management ponds that are designed, landscaped, and available for use as an integral part of a subdivision's open space network may be counted toward a portion of the SOSR, based on a percentage equal to that portion of a pond's perimeter which is not bounded by lots (e.g. 30% bounded by lots) 10% open space). 43 I. The Commission may approve other fonns of Design Open Space ifa proposed open space meets the following criteria: 1. It is designed as a neighborhood focal point. 2. It is designed for people, and with one or more specialized functions, such as a sitting or gathering place; tot lot or playground; an area for court games, or a roque or croquet field. 3. It meets the general description of Designed Open Space found in Section 7.3.D. 4. It meets the General Standards for Open Space, Section 7.4 - 7.1 0 STANDARDS FOR CONSER.V ANCY LOTS. Conservancy Lots may be used where applicants opt to develop portions oftbeit property at very low densities and offer to place a restrictive conservation easement preventing futuro subdivision oftbe newly created parcels. A. Conservancy Lots 'shall be a minilnurn offive (5) acres. B. Minimum front yards for Conservancy Lots: 1. Primary Structurcs:200 feet from right-o$.wa.y 2. Accessory Stnlctures: 225 feet from right-of-way - C. Up to 50% of each Conservancy Lot may CODtnoute to the asp D. Conservancy Lots-may contribute up to 50% of the overall SOSR. . , . . .". . '..... ..' 7.11 PERMANtNT PROTEctION. THROUGH CONSERVATION EASEMENTS;..::! >" . A. SubdiViSion open spaCciSl3a1~ 'tie subject to pennanent conservatiOn easements prOhil!titing futurci4~elopmentand.defininstherangeofpermitted~s.., ':.: ". :......:.;...: . · ..l~..~..t::.. ":. .";.: ,. :.:.:'~. :t'. ;',.:.; :' I.~r..: ..' , . . ::":' '.' :. . B. T,he C.~siQn:'~haIl. ~ew ~l proposed easements an!i~~ ~:thempro\'idecf ~e4": '\\iofdfiigaoomnpliShes the pUtposeSofthis Ordinance aiid'u'cOnsiStCnfwith.the: .. ;: .... .,. ..... ,.. Comprehensive Plan. ./ -. t -} . ::.:.~, ~. ....} 7.12 OWNERSHIP OF OPEN SPACE AND CO:MM:ONFACILITIES A. Ownership Options. The methods below may be used, either individually or in combination, to own common 1kcilities; however, project open space which is contiguous to an existing public park or trail (linear park) or contiguous to an area identified as a park (or trail) on the Park Master Plan shall be initially offered for dedication to, or purchase by. the Carmel Clay Township Board of Parks and Recreation. B. Open space sball not be transferred to another entity except for transfer to another method of ownership permitted under this section, and then only when there is no chango in the common facilities or in the open space ratio of the overall development. Ownership methods shall conform to the following: 1. Fee Simple Sale or Dedication to the Park Board. The Park Boimi may. but shall not b~ . required to, purchase or accept the dedication of any portion of the common fucilities. 2. Condominium Association. Common facilities may be controlled through the use of condominium agreements,. All open land and common facilities shall be held as common element. 3. Homeowners J Association. Common facilities may be held in C01tl1l10n ownership by a homeowners' association, subject to any of the provisions for homeowners' associations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. In additioDa the following regulations shall be met: 44 ". . .".., ~. . J.... !.:..:. .' ... .. -. ,. " \ ? . 1. .. . '"fit ".... .' . . .. , " . :'. " ,."~,.~." :':-, '0 . ..' . . . . .. . .. .' '. a. The applicant shall provide the Commission a description of the organization of the proposed association, including its by-laws, and all documents governing ownership, maintenance, and use restrictions for common facilities. b. 'The proposed association shall be established by the owner or applicant and shall be operating (with fmancial subsidization by the owner or applicant, ifnecessary) . before the sale of any dwelling units in the development. c. Membership in the association shall be automatic (mandatory) for all purchasers of dwelling units therein and the~ successors in title, . d. The association shall be responsible for maintenance and insurance of common facilities. . e. The by-laws. shall cOnfer legal authority on the association to.place a lien on the real property of any member who fid1s delinquent is his dues. Such dues shall be paid with the accmed interest before the lien may be lifted. f. Written notice of any proposed transfer of common mcilities by the association or the assumption of maintenance for common facilities must be given to all members of the association g. The association shall have adequate staff to administer. maintain, and operate such common f8.cilities. ' 4. Private Conservation Organization. With permission. of the Commission, an owncrmay transfer either fee simple title of the open space or easements on the open space to a private non-profit conservation organization provided that: a. The conservation orzan;?ation is acceptable to the Commission and is a bona fide conservation organization int~ to exist indefinitely; b. The CODveyantC contains appropriate provisions for proper reversion or retransfer, in the event that the organization becomes unwilling or Unable to continue carrying out its functions. ., ' , . c. The open space is p~~};:restricted from future developm~ through a.';. ~'i ~. ';. .. :.. co~on easement a:nd:t1ibDirector is given the ability to ~orce these. '.'~f,.'.-r...';.' ;'J. : resb:icti.o~; and ,. , ,: ' . . . : 1. ~'..!" ~.. , d. A mainteriance. agreemeni ~~~ble ~ the Commission is establis}:led :~~eerl the..:. >'-':;:. :. owner and the or~oti, '.. . ~ '. ....t, : .. , .! :..... ,. :.:";: .. '. .. . . : '? 5. DedicationofSUeinents to the Park BOard> tlbe Park Board may~ b1it:sba11:not. be . :.', ..,. . :~'. ,:," ..:;. " required to, accep* easements for public use ~f any portiOD: oftbc common land or facilities. In such cases, the facility remaiils in the ownership of the condominium association, homeowneIS~ association, or private conservation organization. In addition, the following regulations shall apply: a. Any such easements for public use shall be accessible to the general public. b. ^ satisfactory maintenance agreement shall be reached between the owner and the PukBomd . 6. Non-Common Private Ownership (Conservancy Lots). Up to fifty (SO) percent of the sosa may be included within one or more large "conservancy lots" of at least three (3) acrest provided: a. A maximum of75% of each'lot area may be applied to the SOSR; b. the open space is permanently restricted from future development; c. the Director is given the ability to enforce these restrictions. 7.13 MAINTENANcE Unless otherwise agreed to by the Plan Commission, the cost and responsibility of open space land shall be borne by the property owner, condominium associatio~ homeowners' association, or a conservation organization. 7.14 MODIFICATIONS ' A. The Commission may, after a public hearing, permit the modification of the provisions of this Chapter. However, in terms of modifying any dimensional requirement (lot ar~ width, setbacks, etc.), such modification may not be greater than thirty-five (35) percent. 45 EXHIBIT te' Perimeter ButTering A. Perimeter buffering shal1 be located along the side and rear lot lines ofa lot/parcel and shan extend the entire length of the side and rear lot lines. B. Where residential or other buildings back onto a public thoroughfare) bufferyard plantings be provided per paragraph shall occur outside of the public right-of-way. c. Perimeter buffering shall not be located within any portion of a dedicated public street right-of- way, private street right-of-way, or County legal drain easement D. Existing vegetation may be used to achieve project buffering if: (i) the vegetation located upon the subject parcel is of a quality and sta~ of health to achieve buffering, and, (ii) tho vegetation is proposed to be preserved using accepted.best management practices fOf.tree protection during . construction. B. BUFFBRYARD DETERMINATION. To determincthc applicable bufferyard requirements: (1) Use the TABLE FORBUFFBRYARD DBTERMINAnONtoidentifythe land use category of tho proposed project use. (2) Use the TABLE FOR BUFFERY ARD DET:BRMrnATION:to identify the land use(s) of the adjoining property (s)~ or identify tho street classification adjoining'~e=FOPoscd use by referring to the Otticja1 Thoroughfare Plan of Cannel Clay Township;:.. , :.:~ ;::'.~': ~ . (3) ~etcrmine the bu~d(s) required on each tiounda1'y (oJ! segment thCr~::~~c .subject parCel by refenin8;to~~e.:TABLB FOR BUFFERY ARD.\DETERMINA~,QN"~:f:~ .:... : . '.. . . r ", _, . . TABLE I'O~B~&YAIm'nETERMJNATION ' {.1:':d~:~f.~' i...~...:-:..l ~!. ..~,~.r'i f;.:,~~. f:r~'{~f. ~ t .. :., . ~. . . ~). 7; 1 :.. ,...- 0 0 . It, . ., .. ~ ;0 z . :.. . . .,. .: ~:., ':-i,' ~2'" n~~ J1I-i~ ;c SlNGLE FAMILY B DUPLEX C MUL11-FANILY C ACnVE 0 INlnTUTlONAt.:; D DFPlCEi RlTAIL 0 WAREROUSI!i D HVV.INDUSTRV 0 D ~ c: ' e ~ . ., ... ~ ~ ~ ~ "":"~ !i~ ! . g .. 3 r- ..; , a .~: III 1= ~ ~ .. 2 % ::--: ~ . ~~~' ~ -...-a t ~ > is - 0 i ~ ~. a I: .\ .' .:s' , !.> : !i,!: I,. ~.?f. "".'m. , 1:1': 'i~":;(' "'!g; ~:I . 2 i! It t: gJ 0(.. '. ~. ! 0( oll;. ~ ~ or c c 0 0 0 0 0 C D 0 D A C B B C C D B 0 D 0 C B B B. C C D C 0 D 0 B B A C C c C B 0 0 0 B B C A A C C B D D D C C C A A C 0 B 0 D 0 C C C C C A B B 0 0 0 0 0 C C D B B B 0 D D. F. Bufferyard Design Standards in the table below are stated in terms of minimum width and number of plants required per one bundred (100) linear foot increment. · BUPFER.YARD MINIMUM YARD WIDnt SHADE TREES ORNA!vmNTAL TREES SHRUBS. SIDE REAR A 5' 10' 3 2 9 B 5' 10' 3 3 15 C 10' 20' 3 4 21 D 1S' 25' 5 S 27 *Evergreen trees may substitute in lieu of shrubbery, on a 1:3 basis (1 conifer equals three sluub&) 49 . i . I i' ;'- ... .',.., .' ~: '... ) ...,. ..-' . ~ II ~ k ~ + ~ ~ I ~ -e;~ e .i J ~ II @ 11 ..... + ~ . ~~ ;:~ . ~a. ~ If ~ a.t ~ + ~ 2 ~ , '"='~ .......~ ~~ ~ t-oI ..... to.,) N c.H W ~ U\ ~~~.~ 0\ ~ 0 IV. 0 W 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ iJ. ~ '#. '#. ~~f;~ ~Otr1 ..- ~. tJ tjbi o~ g tX rn 0 ~tlI ~ .... .-- ..- ..... ...... ~ ~ ~. sa2 iN ~ W W 0\ ~ 0\ 0\ ij ~o ..;;, en .\J ~ ~ t-J 8 ~ ....- ! ::to .,a I~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~ 0\ ~ ~a. ~ ...... ~ 0 0 ~ ~ g t:J.tJ:S ~.~ a= fI.t (I) ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...... .... ..... ~ \H ~ t,., L.J W i.>> W ~ ~ 18 .~ ~ tj"'d en ~ .00 .' g. ;. . ...... ;t ~ .... .~ ~ ~ 'tW ..... a--& ...... 2l ~ ~~ 'w. w \,.) ~ th lI'I 0\ r;aS- '9 ..b; .~ w, 0 .~ ~ ~ ..... . . g ..: : " . . . '.. ,... .. -":~.. ... 4. . .t:j td ~.t-a . ~ ~ o~ ..... ...... ..... ..... ...... ,....,. ~ t-l ~. ~a w ~ w W ~ w w ~ ~ n~ ~ -.:;, a . tj.1-d 2: n CD ..... ~ =' ~ ' t-6 ..... ~ ~ ...... ...... \0 W !'~ w w ~ in C\ ~ \on t-l ?dB. 0 co ~ 0\ \0 ~ ~ ~ s tjt1j o~ 8 ~ ~~ tI) 0 ...... t-' ..... ..-. ~ ..... .... ....... ~. W t..> W W \H W W W ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ UJ tj~ ..... .... 8 ~ ..... t-'" ..... .... ...... ...... ~ \0 ~. Ei. t.J W ~ '-" 0\ ~ \Q QO S 0 0\ 0 0 0 '-" ~ ~ ~~ I g ~ . ~ ~ ~ + ~ u. -0 ~ , ~ tI2 ~Q ~a '== 'f ... ~ ~ i = a en .. 4 tIJ o ~ ,. .... fA ~ :,:: :l(~>:. , f ~ u ~ >t ~ + "" -0 ~ "'=" I ~ ~ ~ ...: 4 . .~.L".f'"-,:,, ~ D ~ ~ ~ + ~ E3 . ~ ~ '~ ~ (". ) ..... '.! . "'.. i . ;."...O' : .,. .. ...~'. .:.. .:.: eO ~ '. . ..". . ..~ >;. ".: '" : ":~" .. ~ n ~ ~ ~ + l\J ~ ~ . ~ ~ e r;i ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ + ..... ~ @ htJ , ~ ~ e ~ ~ ..... ..... ~ ~ w UJ ~V\ a~~~ V\ 00 UI 0 W ~~ '#- ~ '$. ~ '#. ~ cno~~ o 0 ;3~g ~ .~ t:;;tri ~~ 9 = r.n ('D ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C:;. ~~ 00 00 '< 00 ...... ....... .... ..... ..... ~ ~ l11 tjl-O ~ ~ ~ tt ~. ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ t-& ~= i.H t v. ~a. ..... ~ ~ g t;ttf I~ 8 I: . tn 0 ~ ..... ..... t-o& ..... ..... .... ...... ~. 00 00 00 00 00 QQ Co 00 @ ~E ~ ~~ ?irn w en : . ~ ~ ~ 6 ij.: ;~l .J!-' ~ t--:I ~ t..) ~.. a- z ::2 00 ~ e w I>> 00 ~ ~a 'fi!' 0\ ~ ; :~ ..... ..-:,- g. .I' . r .... . . '.. . ~ .' . . . ' , . .. .~ . ..:..... :.... ~.;S ~~ ... a ~r 'So ~ G ...... ~ ~ ..... ~ ~a !"""' ~ ..... ...... ,<' 00 00 00 00 00 QO co OC) ~ ntn ~~ p ~ ,a.- t:( ~. s ~ ~ ts ..... --- ~ ~ ~ N !. e. 00 \0 ~ ~ i.A 00 ~:;; ~ 00 0\ -4 W 00 1da. g ~ttI o~ 9 ~ ~~ ~ CD t-l """'" ...... t-4 .... ..... ..... ~ ~. . ,~~ co co co OQ 00 QQ 00 co ~ ~~ IV ffi Ul tj~ ("0 ~ ~ ~ ..... .... N t-J t-.J ~ ~'l Co ~ <=> ...... i..J ~ -..l U\ ~ ..... rFa~ I S I , t ~ ~ t-t ~ = fa a ..... 4 tfJ o ~ II ~ = ~ D . " f. '.,;L'... . ~ . '.. .II : '; .d' ~. F : . ,.,. . t .. l :' . ., . ~. .:- .' ~ tj a ~. ).( ~. + ~ ~ ""a -=" I e f3 ~ ,1 ~ R ~ ~ ~ + 0 ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~J': . .~ jt . . ~ 11 ~ H ~ + ~ ~ ." . "'=' ~ t-..J So ~ eo -. :... ... :: " . , . . ~"? .~..t. ~;: . ~.: . ~ !. ".' ~I . ... ,... . . ... '..# ... ~ eo .':, .~ II ~ 1'< ~ + ....... ~ fh ~ . ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ .... ~ N ~ ~ J=r.. Ul a~~O I I..h oa ~ Ul 0 W 0 0 "#. '$. ~ ~ '$. ~ '#- ~ tfJ~~~ 0 ~C3QZ ..... ~ t'ta o~ B &l fA Q ~tIJ ~ ~ ~ t-.) ~ N to.J ~. ~~ N ~ C:J\ 0\ \0 \0 \c \0 \0 \0 @ nO ~ trJ Ol-d N ~ J).. !~ ,a a t-) ~ W IN b ~ ~. a. \0 ..... ~ 0\ 0\ ~a '0 00 VI ~ ~ S t;Jtc I~ g t: en 0 W N t-J ~ N ~ W N =-. '0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 ~ ~ ~~ ~ 0--= t1:1 W tIl . . . . 8 (I 6 ,.' I : ' , ii,) ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~J \J,) .~ [ z ~ i \0 O. ~ ~. .~. ~ 'u.. '9. .~.. ~ ~ ! " t : : -: .- ~~. .: t : ! a" . -. s. : . .. t:ltx1 ~;8 o...~ ii CD g~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \D \D S >~ is ~ tjl-tf Z n (D ~ ~ m :::1 ~ ~ ~ W u,) ~ ~ ~ =- ~ \0 ...... ~ 0\ (:) ~ \0 00 lit 0\ ~ ~& g ~td 8~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ 1m ~5a ~o \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 ~ ~~ ~ K4 U1 tj'"'d ~ a ~ N UJ ..u ~ ~ ~ ~. E!. F: ~ \-e ...... t.J ~ ~ ~ ~::t ~ ~ -....1 ~ rFa~ g f ... UJ o ~ II N = ~ ... :.. .'. :.: " . . I , , : ,.; : :;.: ~ ....:'..::,~;... . ..;. .~1:: ~:\ ,..'.} ..~ ~ ',~. . . .'i: . :.~" .. ." ..:.. ; .:., .... . '~pp'eare' " .,.:":. 0:-:>'. " . .' ....... . ..' . .,'. .... '. ':. ".::.: . '. .' . ...:'. .' '. ., ::.... . . '.:Jhn;Be~~" pr~ .:', erit:~f.the. Par~ ~~~, JI~~~O~~' ASso~i~tlonappear~d befoi~ :., '. . . ." the ~o.nui1issi()n... tese.nting.~e2i8 '~otneoWners in:.the.sUttotinding area; there are . . . : .' $OIXl8Spec;me.CQnCe regarding traffic 'an~ how ~~ neighbQrhood wnl'be .affected; :... . . . . . '. . Ci1rrently~' Mendi.an 'Co rs Boulevard, which is going to be a part of.the.Illinois S:treet .' . '.' .' project, is ~ ciead~e'nd'road. propose<! entfarice is directly across the street :from the '. ... .... entrance' to 1:'ark Meadows. . T . ark. Meado~s"entranCe'~sused by ail 218 .homeQ~ers. . . to. *ess th~ swi;nming 'po~l and '.' '.' S ,coUrts. The .concet;n is ~t. people.~li use' this . . entrance until Dlinois Street i~ exten .' Mr.. Berry understood tha~ there weieno more' curb euts being gtant.ed off of 131R Stre '. The neig)J.bors would like to see limited development (?D the .1.87 acre tract; to. d.evel this tract would add another roa~ more buildings, and more traffic. Mr.,:Benyasked . all three :Dockets pertaining to the . .' DePauw Rezon~ be Tabled," . .' pave Co~ts.rebutta1: D~v~ ec;ois ~aid h~ waS cogniz~t 0 .' e traffic ~ncerns and that is .the're~6li for.~Steve :Fehribach's Traffic 'Operations &. ~i1ys . report. ,At the Committee ': .. ........ ieve~ the. c~~c~. cQ b~ ~ddrc:ssed, .~e ~er fo~ ihIs type of o' . e is: no~ an S'to S us.et; .....it'iS:1i1,ore,generallyal1.in..~..ou~~v~us.hoursof*eda~> .:. .' . . '.' .., . .' ..~.':" L~etWe'Liili~ 'reported' ~~.DeparttAen~:s .te~~e~dation; .these iMe~.'ite . ..' . '.' . fOIWardedto the'~ 6.,2001 SpeciaIStUdy Committee..' . . . .' ~. :. .... Nick Kestner~ke4 that the Committ~ebe fbrnishedwith a clearer p.icture than the o. :'.' .: ..~ailect in the WormatioiW packets,'rhe surrounding ;tea should be looked ~to see th '. . .' '. : poteri~a1 impact. .....:.. '. . . . _: . .: . . . .' . . . '.. . pocket No~. .t86~.OO .~, i.87~OO Z, a~d 188.~O 'Zt :oePau.w ReZon~ were forwarded to '.. . the~Ch'6,2901.Spe,cial $tu9y'Committee~ :. . . . '. ....., ., . : . . . .9h.,.. ]~locJcet No. 13~011P, B~~b~ :P]ace~$~~divisio;n . ". . . . 'P.entio~~ seeks appt:oval to pl~t a 7S-1ot subdivision on'3S..17 acr~.. The site is. . .' . . located'at' the northwest ~metofi-46S imdthe Carmel/Cla.y Monoi1:Gre~nwa.y, . . . ..' Th.e. site is zoned:R~.llResidence.' ...:'. . .... '.': Fiteq byP~111G.R.els'.'o.fTb,eReisLawFiim:forKosene&Kosene ' . Paul ReisofThe1.\~isLaw ;Firm, 123S8Hancock.gtre~ Catmel, .appeared before tlie " . 'Commissionrepte$enting the pentioi:1er. .MarkMo~oe,land planner and law.clerk, was' ...~~~in~ttend~ee.i..:....... .... ...... ..... .:" ..... ....... '. . .'. The' prppeny is 'boUnded onth~ north by COUege'1-4eadows SuqdiviSio'l1 and to the east ~y.. . ..' '.' " the Monon TnUI,Swirlse Goif'Course,'ai1d the Retreat, a multi~fainUYl1ouSing': '. .... : " .' ~elopment; ~e are als'O unp1att~ single: family residentiallots to the west; to the . .' south is' 1..465 and th~ Korea.n Presbyterian Church. The Marwood Trails Subdivisio~ is .. . " . s:\planCommission\Minutes\pc200ife~2o '. 4 . .EXHlatT 'F , MIW-:16-200l. WED. 03 :02 .P~. Ca~MEL ,GOM"U~n:Y .~YG~.. > ... .~..AX.. N~.... ~..r~ brl. ~4co:. .. · . . . . : : . :. . . .// : ... :....... .. .:... ,; .. . :. ... ..... ... <. .:. :-'. :.. '. :. . . .' : . . .'. .. . ~"""""..::. .' . . ..' : . .. . . :. ... :.. . . ........~.. :.. . l.. .....: ...:-'. . . .' .' : . '. .'.:. . '. '. .<" . :. . .'. . . . '. . .. . . . . : . '. .... . . '. . . . . .' . . ....... -.' .,.. '. . '.' ". .. .. ...... .. . . . ..: . .. . ,..... ..... ..... . .... . . . . ..... . . . ... . . .",'. .'. .:...:. .' Space Ordmanc~ tha~: w~ last @mended by ~e CIty Councd on. October 2,2000. There .' '. .##1... . : are no wai~ersot.W1riilnces be!ns ~oU8,ht:'..~'1:.23.~cres of~e .site are. ~eing pres~~d as .... '. '. '/ . .. Open ..Space tbroughthe~mbmatlon o(preservatlon and enhancement of the eX1stmg r / . pond;.: as. well as another.9.47 acres of niature, jroun& and sozub woodlands. A tiiil ./ connectiQD to the Monon I!ail ~llbe const%uct~d.:~ursua.nt to specifications to be . d~t~n,ed. by the Parks Department, . . .' . ... . ." . . . ... ' .Asrequiredund~ the, Open SpaCe Ordii1an~ as the lots are developed, there will be. . .. . . reforestation to the mctent that.there is 18114 cle.8IinS inthe 'co~ction of the sUbdivision. . : Additi~n81ly~ ~ conversation With the Dq,artiirent,a 20 foot landscape bu;fFerh~ been. . . added .on .the south end; the.se. Jots are.. inunediately adjacent ~.46S; The I and s cap tf plan ' : . an~ the.tree pfes~ation.plan hay:~ been filed With and approved by the Urban Forester.' . : . Th,e plat speojfie~ 7S lot~ :a densi~y ot.2~.1 upits.per~cre... The Residential Op.en Space. . . . . . .()rdi~ce provides. ~t the'base de~ty under..the~.,l.c1~ss~Iicatibn forthi~parcelis 2.9 .'. . ... .' . ~ts..The Ope#:SpaCeO~dill8ricerequ,jre~ op.en space' ofi1o~ less.than 1.15 acr.es'or~()G~. . . : ., 0:' . .. . .... ::'ofthe'parc~l;:.the proposed phit provides fO~~..14.99 ot41.9Y~idjt1Ste4.' Under'the Open' . : .. . . . .Spac~ O:r:dinan~ the size ofthe.pon4 and the computation. of the opc.r;t space is computed. . . . . 9J1 the percentage of the pond that is' not adjacent to residentiallo~s. S~S2 acres oftbe . . ~ 1. 76. acre lake were ~luded in .the. op~h space cal.culatioi:1. ..... . ..' . . '. . " . '. . '. . .' . . .. . As a plUt ofth~ preParatjon pf~e reVised pla~ the envjrozime~tai. engineering :fimi ~f . ... .' J.F;New"& Compari.y was engaged to provide a: wetlands. delJneatioll study of the P4I'Cel. .' -. . .:The reppit identified'two ~eaS'that Coristi~te I'oth~w.aters of the United States,~ ateJm . . . of ~ within the Feder81 ~d State:&viro.nn.tenta1Statutes,whic~are the existing' pond .. .and an intermittent drain that CUrr~tly .i~ fo4~d'in the llorthwest comer oithe parcel. . . There is als9 ident4ied. in'thewetland$ report the pOl1d itself. The. proposed. development. . .. . .: willllotreduce nor negatively"impact the e,pstirig po~d. In strict conformance wi~ the . . . . Ope~:Spaee 0{4inan~ the pon~wilI be pres~ed in its entirety andthepiat provides for .. .. a so foot perimeter .bu:frer area to . ensUre :the protection of the area. Only a notification . . . .foI111 will be requ~ed.t() be fil~d with the Indiana Dept. ofBnviromnental Management. ... The drain isexeinp~ from.the applicab~ mitigation.and perinit-tequirernents of the federal - . . and state environmental laws azid .regulations. . T~e Wetlands Delineation Report has been . ..filed with the Army..Corps. ofEngiriee@ arid appro'Ved'by'them. .. . . . . . '.':. .... ". '.' '. .... . . . '. . . . . . . . . .' . . . ." . . . '. . . ...' . '.. . . . :. . . . . ... :.. . '. As requiTed by. the SUbdivision GonttOl Ord~~.ih~e will b~ two. points of.. ' . . .' . : . mgresslegtessfo( thisSubdivis~on;' the prin;J,ary one at 10 lit Stree~ "the $econd one at . : ., . MarWood. Driv~,.. .' . . ". . .' . . . . . . ... ... . . - '. . .'. .... . .: M~ood Drive'was 'istubbed in II dI.1rii1g the development of Marwood Trails .to provide future access to, this si~e as required by tl1e Subdivision Regulations. . Due to the existing . .. 'neighborhood. and the configuration of the existIng Street,. A&F Traffic Engineering. was . . . . retained to StucJy the pQtential impact oft~#Iic.on the sUlToun~g residential areas as a. . . . result of the proposed development.. A. Trafiic Operations Analysis was prepared and .. . submitted to th~ Department, copies to the Co~ission members; . . . . s:\PlanCominissicin\MmuteS\pc2001feb20 ... .:. s MAY~16~.2001 ~WED '03:03' ~I1 .CARMEL.. COMMUN.ITY'SVCS.' . .:.: :FAKN.. 1. . . .: . . ... . : '>'("':::'::' "::" . .<.: ..:..' . :::'. .:..:. '. : ..';::'.. ,,::, :.'.:. :':'. .~:.. .': ': . . . "'. ~. '.:. <" . ...... ,/. .' ... . . . . .... '. .' '.' ' :' ..' . . .' . ..' .' . . .... .' ,. . '. : ~.:> ..":~..l..j/.... .\:: 'T~s.i~i~e~.n:~~.~alys{&;:sc~ol~s.i~sessiQ.;..lnd US'?l:~'nlfl~~er.Und~... '" . ..' ~ 'f...: . ..c~~Cijon::...SpecjficEl.lly~ :thr~~ar~ w~te asked tob~ .addressed: "How.WIll the traf;tic . . .)" / > .. :. . ,'.:' en~~. and' e~dt ~e' propo~~d. Sl1b~vis.iop,' h~w wilt t)1e "level of servic.e change. at k~y' . . . . . .;j'~~/ : '.' " j~terseCti6nsin.the.surroundingare~ wi~h thetraffi~to be generated during the peak AM . /.... . : . ," . .~. peak PM.hours, . and .:will' the peVe~~p1i1ent of this' parcel sie~cantly, Jiegativ~ly. '. l:', . .'. '. impa~.the'heaJ,tp. safety and welfareofthe'currentre~dentsin.~ adjacent '. . . /.. . ". neighbo~hood?. --. '.~. .:. ........ .:. '.' ..' .... . '. .... '. ..' '. . .':. .' Steve Fehribach, professional engineer, said the~flftlcstudy was re-don* in 'Januai-y. . There was a question as.to whether or not schools were in se$sion at the'tiine .ofthe first . study, and the density changed significantly to 75. units. On those bases., the traffic w~ '. . . . re:"ai1a1yzed.The $ttidy intets.ections:were maintained at 103M.and.College; 101st and . . . ..College, lQ1st and CarrolIton;andJOl":and GUi1fotd~and the access point. 'lh,uing the . . ..... . :AMpe8k: hour 'at .l03~ and Co.uege~ .there would. be level. of service' liB II' existing today . . '. '. ........ .' 'l1nd~ scenario two with the prOpo~eddeve1opm~~t, level of s~oeIID. II For the: PM '. . '.' . .peak.hour, scemi.rio one level of se.rvice '!C," sceI1arlo two JEwel of serVice also 'iC.II . '. .$ceriaric:>' one is existirig frafficonly; s~narlo. tWo. adds in .the Pt9posed . development. . . . .'. traffic. At 101 It ~d CoUeg~.~g AMpe8k; hours;scenar1o: one and two are the same' . '. . '. . .' . with 'a~p~able leV~ls or.servic~ t]u, loweSt being "C. Ii. In ~e PM peak hoUrs,. in t!iewest . '. .:. ...... .: .b~d approac~ the.le'Velof~erVice is "e", ~er scenario one~and leyelofsCrvice ''1)11' '.:' . :. ,:'. underso~ario.'tWo,. M:i:"F~'bach ~ explained''d1eleve1 ofserv1ce spelled Qu~'m . . . . the repoJtt, 'J;'he differel1oeof de1ay:between soenario one ~d ~ 'is for ~e west bound . .:approach, therei~ 20.Sseconds.ofaverage delay...:Once. the p~oposed develop;ment is . ...,. .implemented, there Will'b~'an average.of2S.1 seconds of delay, a 4.6 second increase.' , . .' .... 10 lilt and, Cartollton will have t~u" same level of service " A. n . Also, Guilford level of. '" . ..... . : ". . ~ervi.ce n A" is for~oib.. scenarios: The ~mount <>f delay,. 4.0 seconds, .is not enough to . . .' . .' .' :'" caus'e a safety problem.: Jfthere.were 4~O sect?I1ds Of delay and 5 more seconds. were. . . : . '" .adde~ the existing safety problem would aIieady be there.' However, we ar.e very dose .. .' ..toleve16f.ser.vice ire.." 'Th~efox:e).theConclusio~isthatthisdevelopm~ntwillJiotcause. .. . "anyinterse~tioD. to be un~safe1y burdened and. Will not ~ect the :heaIth arid welfare of the . . roadway system. .'.:' . . . .... ....., . '.. . .. . . .. " Paul Reis' said as 'lltesulto~the tra:ffi~ study and in consultation with the County ". . . Highway Department, ilie app.1icant is conimitted to "Widening fOIR . Street from the w~st : . . . .' bouridaiy,.~:f the Su~dh1si,?n~o the ~est. prQPertY Iin~ of.the Kore~.l1" Presbyterian Church .; .... 'wher~ the'road currently narrows; .~ right~f-waY was ~ntirniecl today as being SO: .' '. .... .feet.pres~ly, INbO~ had aequiredthe.road for access to ~e barrow pit wlWn'I-46S was . . built;up~ncoUlpletiQn of46.S. the State abandolled.theroad'andthe ~ght-of..wayto'the .' ..~lton Co~tYCommissioners.. The. State. does. not r~cord their docwneIits; . the .' Ef.b~ndonri1~nt w~ 'done by lett~r only.. . The right..of:.way.should be ~cient to do the '.. : .' 'n~eded widening weSt of,the' site to the west 'p~operty line of the 'Korean ~resbytetian :' . '. ,,' . Church. , ..... .' ... ". ", .. ,. , . . , . , . " ...' .' . . '. . . . . " '.' '. '.' 'A teat" estate appraiset-was engaged by the applicant to review the 'proposed sribdivislon .' .to d~eni1ine the pO$sible etrect, ifany, ol'i"the'valueofthe existit?-s hQnies in the . .'. neighborhood. . Bob Ge~dnick, certified general appraiser with WillStump'& Associates, . . '. s:\PI~Co~on\Minutes\pc2QOlfeb20'. 6 . . . l1~Y~16.~2001'WED:03:04 Pl1CARI1;L 'O.ol1M~~}TY.~Y~~.. .... : .'FA~..NO. ...31.7. 57~.2426 .... .... . '.'; .....,~ ":'. . . .....:. >7 ..... .' . . ..: . "d '::'.:. :~> .... ':.<. '.':.: '. '. ..... ......:..:':. . :'..: ...... "J : ,'. ':. .:.... .,...... . . : .....l / ..' ".:'1l49S:N~rthPennsylvimia Stre~, rep~rtc;4.on'his opiniQ~Mi..Getdnick subnut~ed a .... .' ."Ill... '. .... letteraupporting ~s .:findings'. :.Mr..~ditiek also reviewed the Traffi~ Study and. . . . . ~;Jf I /: .;..... -reyi~w~preVious 'sa1~s of p~~p.~ in. th.e .ne~ghbQrhood.ApproX~DiateJy 36 'saleswere '. .' ;,4,:,/.,:... . . '.' 'reviewed.i~~e..thr~eS11bdivi~iOiJsJo.tbe west.and'nort1;lpfthe:subject site.. ~saIes: .... :.. /" ....... averaged 1633 square ~e~ ()f~ouilCHIoorar~ and.rangedbetween.S8S,700 to' $160,.000.- . './. '. .'. .'. "'inse~ing.piice; .'rheaver.ag~.s~epn~ewas$110,oOO. Lo'o1Qngatt4eplansforth~3S . : . /' '.' . . '. " acres and ~eadmg the .qi'dinanc;' ~ development is within the' c.Qnfines 'ofthe: : .' ". . :-' ..' '-.: '. .' requ.ir~~ei1ts;.' 'I'his':is. aD '()ldbar(ow p~t-where)heyhauled thedirt'04t to: build the' , . ". :....... . interstate. . The lake .i~'suzrou.ride(l.by.the Morion Trai1ori~e east. tQ.e interstate on the :.'. '. : :. So~ an4 established' subdivisions' CUI. the ~ast'and north." The development not only falls .... .':' ". '. :. ,'.:-WitlliIi theSt~ards,butit:is a'Very.go~d and)en.sible'J1Se fot'a.umquepiece ofre.a].. . . '. .' .~'. ..... .', estatei~ that.it nQi Pn1yprovides ~e:hous.ing.1t arsa presetyes the natural attributes oithe . .... . . . . .ofthe property.:'rhe traffic: study basi~y says it wiU not have .ari impact. Base4 on all: . . .'. · ..... "'ofthereYie.W,'"Mr.'.Getdnick did:no~ fe~l#1at.the project would have ar;L adverse effect on '. . . the neighborhood and :certainly not o,n the.existing propeI'o/ valJIe.s. .' -:.... . . .o' .. . . . . ~ . . .'. . . . . . . '. :Mt~Reia':said: all. oftha isSUes have .been resolved' concerning the sub.diviSiOns that have . .' been expressed' by .members.of~. Tec.hnical Advisory Committee., speeifi~Iy the . . .' .' Hanilltott County:Higb:waY.Depattme.~oonC:erning.the layout and design of the street. . . '. Steve Bt~erm8n.n has h~ input teg~~ng: the:right~of-way.. The Fire Departinent has . . beei1advised and' they .have "signed ofrl ciJnceqIing the access for ~ergency v~cles 'arid acceSS..to the'poIid~in the event of ~niergency. Thepetinoner has dealt with the . .Hanillto~ County Soil & Water GQriserva'ticn District .a.p.d lI~ton coUnty Surveyor's Office conc~g the desi~ and ii1sti1a:tio~ of yard 'inlets for sUp..surface dtaii1age as . wen:'.s overliUdrainage on thesitei ....:. '. .... ..... " ... .. 1b uti1j-fi.es provi~gservi.ce to .the.~~te.haye'~so sign~ off' ~d b~~~tJPon: . .:. . '. '.. . .' :.... . .co~versati6~wi~~ Directorof'CO~uri.itYSer.vjc.es. there .are ~o 'knoWn i~~eB . .' . .... '.' ..... 'ciut~andjp:g'reWdingthe pIat'and~compl~an~e and'~nfonnance.with.the~sidential ." : .'. " .... . ..: .:OP~"~p'a:ce O!~ce and the regulations 6fthe Subdivision ControlOrdmanoe. The ". : '. .. . ; '. '. ' D1~~etial submitte4 ~s eveniD.? is .request~d to .be' a. part o~ the public reC?Qrq. . . . ~~ber5ofthOpUbiic.were 'invited to'speak in favor~rt!ie proposed devel~~ment;:no . .: .' . 6n~ appeare(t Meznbers of$ public Wci"einyitedto sp~ in opPOsition to th~ proposed . . ~e~~lop~ent;. the.'foUb~ing. appeared: '.: :'. ... ". '. . . . '., . '. ." . John GaiVey~: i0139 Marwood irati Ita~ Drive, a member of the Coalition Co~ttee . :.: .'. . . .: .... . . rein'esent4Ig' Colleg~ Hills, Col1~e:' Me~ows;' ~d :M~ood Trails~ appe~ed 'b.efore the ." '.' . Coriunission to pickup where the previpus Boilbar proposal left offSeptetnb~t 19th, The '. . '. O~6ber aM field trip: to the site was productive and worth more than au of the graphics that might otherwise have been present~d, The original' plan w~ based on' obtaini~g . . ~evera1. variances; it also ignored ~e wet1~ndsrequirements.' There should b.e so~e limit . regar(ijnghow long the Comniis.sionmtist devote to one iteIll; and this is. particularly true . when the proposal is ashap..hazatd as the original One. Considerable time and eff'ort has. . been spent by the Coalition' Committee pointmg out the, short comings to the p~tioner, . and. it woJJ1d seem th~ the petitioner sbo~ld have addressed these in the fust place. . . . .' s:\P%anCommission\'Minures\pC2001feb20 7 . I1AY-H~a001~EDD3:Q4'PI1.CA~I1ELC0I1I1UNITY:SVCS,:' ','FAXNO. '317'5712426., . ...,. .";,/,1";:.'. ..., .... >:. . , . /.. . , ' ':,' :'. ,/ ,/. ,,' ": ,,' '.:' "Mr~G8tvey said'.Mr; KOsei1~ had.~tte~Ptedtohtt~date th~'nejghbbrfug residents 'in ~e ' .' .' f~s~'ine'etmg.'. ~4bseqti,e~t. meetfugs' wer~,nc)b.~tter.. When the'resjdents declined.to:' ' .... ' . , . ,~tiend,thelast..~eetingJ.we pecUne It~~aso~blen and "unpooperative." If\Ve had'met .' , . 99 tizn.e~. an4 declined on, ~ lOOth. this would 'atiU l1ave been the claim.' . this petitioner . has'. not . a~ctressed ~e real is Sl,1es, 'lnY9~y~d.... The ,p.etitioner offered .the resi~e~ts a change to have the.proposal.tabledfor ~O days ~o,consider greatex: det~ls, befo~e it'welit to '. .' cainmi~ee.. When the. residents d~clliied, the petitioner requested.1 tabling anYway, 'Xhe . .".. petit~9~er w~ tQta.1ly unptepared and. was trying.to use .the resident~. as ~eir alibi ror . .' . . . .' buYing time to get. prepared. 'rhis typifies. the ~eatm~nt the area ,residents have received" - . .' . . '.. . ":'. /'while.hopipg 'th~t-.the p'etitiorier w~" s~i1e~e"in wan~ng to' reach a 'compro~se. ,Mr.~ ~..' , , .':',: Kosene's.suppo~'st~has'nqttreate4.the ~e~.~sidents~ tIle same'manner~-they have . .... ....,'... ",~~ ~Pi~o~s in th~ir lack ofC~tmr1e~t during his 'pre~ence" ' : ,,:. ' , '. " . '.' · Finally, the Coalition. +~sedthe repres~tati()nQY the petitiQner t~atthis new planY"ith ' .' '. '. . the red~oed ~umber of lots was developed i$ an a~empt to placa~e the neighbors~ It is an . , insult 'to. ~eryone' s intelligence to put forth such a. preposterous claim. the original . . . . proPQs~ hardly. deserVes to be' cal:Ied' a: plan., It',was a greedya,ttempt to~ab every 'lot pos~ible,and'hope that.no one wo~d notice.,?r botherto.object tQ it.. It is.diffic~lt to, b~tieve ~hat the Plan Co~ission. would 'approye.'the developme~t, eveil'ifth~ ~eighbors , had .~ot rais.~d obj ect~oD::.. " ,. /'.' ," . .' . . . . .,~. Garvey said' the petiti~n subI;nitted by the atearesiclents was"signed by more than ISO . neighborhood'residents Who9Pposed..the orlgmal plal1'~ . In, sununation, the residents .," .,' .'... .r~n tlnitec;l in, :their obje~on' to tJie revised 1>la~ and ask that the CoD::lIllissio~, deny this '". p~t1~on.,' : .' ":' ,'. ~ . .' " . '., " .' '. , . " , " .,,'.'~ .jeny'Wilso~ 1012,9 North Guilfor~ ad,dr~s~ ~eo ar~: 1) the traffic and ~ety" 2) , ' , ..... .. .' produ~ .~o~parison, 'and 3) the'den$i~,and' J;espo~ibility. . The new traffic ~tudy has, . , : ...... : .:~' '......' ~.: "b~~D:done"at..th~ izit~s~~o~':9f".'10~~'.anct:,C~1l~ge ~d lq~~ 'and C~ll,ege~ 'Dtiring,th~'last .>. :. ..' ,:' .... ..: .... '~dy,.the J.O~'~' Sfreet.mtersectlo:Q.was 'go~ng.fromserVice level to "D"" to' service' lever' . , '. ,..... ":" . . !':F'ld~g ~4e.M4'p~:hours~ 81ld.,:fro'm se(Vic~ level "D" to service level"~.. 'during:~e " ", ": ',':: .:PM'peakhours:, Now. the petitioner'iS, saying that service level at that intersection during , ..' ..... . .th~AM peak.hqurs.is cuiT~ntly level "C" ~d'wil1.reniain' at level.Je" after the " . .. " d~velopm~nt 15 completed. Du~ng the PM p~ak hours, the intersection has 'impr~ved t~ :-. ". serv~cel~v~ "'e" 41,the last six month~'and is now'.goingto service level nD" after the.' .' ".'. development' is' co~plete. Who is'.kidding .wh~'m? " The service level will not i~prove ," .' , '. aft~r.add~tional homes.. in Bonbar have.. been: constructed and,to.say that-there will be no .. '. .:tr~cimpact.i:s a ludicrous ~tate~ent. Mr. WilS9i1 ~spected th~t the fIrst.tr~c report. 'wasclos'er:to. the tnith. The residents of:Bonb~ will probably 'not use.Maiwood to enter .' and exlt the area. The residents Will. probably use '10 lit Street' for that Purpos;Ci and when' the resid~nts canno~ e?dt at 101 II ~d ~oIleg~, they will. go. thr9~gh theneighb6rh~od on Carrollton,and..~j1ford &:n4',this' ca.us'~s concern for safety. . The are~ residents 'use the street$ for exercis~ . and' health, reasons. .' .' . . Mr. Wils6n~poke ab~~the product b~~g ptoPQs~d... The original ~venants specified " homes with 1600 square feet and no 'vinyl siding or, aluminum siding was peimitted; s:\PlanCommission\Minutes\pc200 lfeb20 8 ....':.. 'HAY~16~200"1WED.:03:05)".;;CARI1EL bOHMoNr~y,.:.sVOS:':".' "':.rAK:NO; 317 571'2~26'.:.:.:'. .' .... P....07/~O ~ :-: ::<:.' .'l/~'" ... '. '.': -: .:. ..:.... '< . .. . .>. ':.' .:. .... '::'. :: :....; '. >:.:. :'~ . <...::....:. .... '-.: : " .'.. : '. .'.' :""'J'~: .:. :, :..... .' . ..,..... ." . " . . '" . . '. .' . . . : '. . ..,'. . . . '. . '. . ". ' . ,': .... . . '. . . . . ., .. . . .: .::' . .. . '. .... '.' . :. '. . . .... , '.' . . ..... . :.': ..';.(' ,....... "Mr. 'WijsonBPok~.about.tbe,'p.rodudbe~g'p~op~g~~ TIi~ Ori~ai'covenantssp~ified ':. ~: ,< /. ..' .'. :. . .:. ho~~s.:~~'1600'~'ci~aie.feet . and .~ '~ri:Yl. ~d~ng' or alU:minutn siding W~ ~e~!ted~ ". ;,dt: /.":' . '.: Bnck facIa was reqUlI'ed. '"That haS all. 9hange~L The new coyenants have ~ ~mum . t /.' ". ..' :sqtiar~ footage 'of1300 square"feet;vinyrancf.a1~un1S1ding may.be:used,'.and there'is . ': ': '.' .' . . no .mention' of brick' facia. required on the.~mes.', If this i$~ot changed; ~ere' will be. . ..: .' homes completely vin:yl.wrappedan~nobric~-this would.bea blight on the neighb b ring . ., , .' community as well a~ Carmel; Al.m:Qst all.ofthe hOlUesin the neighboring community '. ' . are brick or stone wrapped. . If.the covenants ateno~ changed to specifY at least brick '.' . : facia c~ the.4QIiles .in Bonbar. the develop~ent will i1,ot be compatible With the. . .... . .' . neighboring homes.'The developnie.nt as' present~d takes: advantage of the Open Space' . .' . . Ordinance' and ~ density is still far. too high for.the amount. of available,' buildable' . '. ground;' Bonbar is unique in thaNt is; landlocked.....to gaiil acce'ssone' must ~ve tbrougb .:. · ." . .'. . the neighboring conimunity. The develpper~, soriiercsp.onsibility to the area residents . . ". .... .and ~at responsibility sb,ould ~~ude..D1linta41,ing '10 lB Str~ during th~ construction . " . ..:. . .' ". . .period:'Since~o~It"Stre~is.~'~ain:po~iot".acces$.itsh9u1dbeinainta.inedaUtheway.to '. . . ,,,: . ..' .... ..' . CCJllege'Avenue~ Aiso, 'a'traffi9 COmol d'evice 'at'lOl~.Stree1: an4College"AveniIe should . '.:' .: ....: 'be required of the petitioner tO~ethe)1?cre~e inti!fti~ gell~ate4 by Bonbar.' ..' ':.. ;.:'.:'.' ..' '. . ':'In.~~i~g. Mr/Wi1s~~ Said~~'~~n~ho~gh thedeVelop~ has'a iegal pJan.itis '. " . ......... ,still fa(too (ie1iseand should.be.d~nied by the Plan Commission. '&y ~pprOva.z should . . . r~quire a dra$#c reduotion in 4ensitY' and a o~ge in the covenants to provid.e for' at least ..:" . .~.'.:'" ~brickfacia~ ..' ...~.. . .. '. .' . '.' . . .. . . . . . ..... . . '. .' . : . . '. Mark. Abbey, 103 7 ~irnam Woods Trai( Coilege Hills/College Meadows neighbo~hood. . . " :.' . . addr~ssed.the Co.riunission in. regard tothe:.Open SpaCe Ordinance and tlie density of the . . . "proposeddeVe1opInent. In regard to traffic, the intersection of tooth and COllege Av~nue 'is th~ focuS ofan,on';'going study.to 8lleviate traffic problems through.the H~.D1e Place . . - area from .the' US 3.lIMerid,i~ coriidor~. "It-is 'generci1.1cDowledgelhat I06d1 Street is . .... sche~u1~dfor imi)I;qv~ents and .traffic problems 'con;tinue to inciease throughout. . . .. 1:tarnilton CoUnty~ '.Th~e arejusta.few of the area,S'adjaeentto College Hill~College. . :. .'. Mea4ow~.' Large tracts 'orland have. beeIl propOsed for commer~at deve10PInent south of . CQllege'HillslCollege Meadows, 'and anapartInCnt'coniplex is'expanding and clm"ently " . undc;t constrUcti.on. .These'.d~veloplD.entS':are also meetUig r~sistance fibril adjaeent.. . .' ~roperlyown,er$, be~ause $ey are also concerned aJJout traflic problems. . . : Mr.. Abbey. was. unsure as to'wh~' the ar.ea was .zonect .butthe zoi1ingisR':'11ow,~ei1Sity. . ,.' tesidentialnei~bo.rhood~' Alarid deve~opme~t. decision is a traffic. decision as WeU.' The' '. . . .... petitiQnerh.as gjv~n no tho.ught as to what will happen beyqnd.the in~"ersection of lOl~ .'...:. '. '. ,'and Guilfotct ~ide'frotn'the "nlandatoIyI~.traffic study that has proven to be nmdo.m ~t . : .' . best At one of the' mee~gs,. the petition~' st~tedJ "That is.the. County's problem, n~t .' .' . . . mmelll This statement Was made in.a most unprofessional'way. The.Plan COmnUssio~ . : . :.': should consider the i~p~ct the. various de:yel~pm~nts' will have on the surrounding area~. '. '. . . . '. . .... Mr. Abbey went on'to say tbatmostpersons on the.Conimissionattended the fi.eId trip'on' October 3Id through Maiwo'o~ Trails' ap,d back;' to..! 03.Id Str~t the streets m. the area. . .. ....: 'w~re designeq on a ~~linear aligIunenfforar.easol) o~er than ae~hetics. The' s:\Plan~nunission~utes\pc2001feb20 . 9 . ......... 1 r' . .... . I..... . .. . '. .. . . ...... '.' .. . .... '. ". . . ... . . . .' . . . . ': '. .'. '. '.' '. . .... . . . '. . . . ...... '. . . , . " . ;.' '. , .' :'.' ',.' '. .' . ..: ... . . . . .' . .. ,... .' :. :/,:.' .~::. .:..... ..:::.:.'aIi~e~t.wa~"l1.~Oj~teridedto :.~sco~a~~ ~~'q thio~~,the;:immediat~ neigh~~rhOO~'. ...:...../...:. .' . .It~esn~.s.eIiS~..to~s.e~ood.;a.s.an.access.po~t.,There:~e'only 18:hom~in"" , . . ~c I ' . . . . ". '. .' '. Marwood; ~ the' CLtrrentproposi.t provides for .75' J;1onieB. . ',The ,traffic flow through: . 11 ':..' ....: . . M~ood 'Trails er~tes.~' po~entUiJ.for ~d'8nd sends the majority. of tia:tHc to'l Olsc .: ,...;.... : ." StCe~t; :.The $'~ts in:Marwood are iri'pfetty.good'.condi~io~' the homes are'weil kept, .'. '.' .:'.' '. 'h6weV~,thetraffie'issue at.pr'~sentis:notiA gc)od condition. The ar~I:esidents certainly . .' . disagree With the curr~t traffic study:and find it unbe1ievable-..theyare 'not interested in h8.ving t~enumbers justified by. a' set of statis1:ics~ ~p~operty is ijDique because it is : : . . landlocked on thr~ sid~s and there is. n~ chojce butte gel through the' adj acent ...... . .' neighborhood There ate a number. of childre1i iri the neighborhood .~t Consists of lSrge .' . . '. l,?ts;' ~~.petiti<?ner ~as not provided'yards for'~bildren. :.......... '. . . .:. . .. . . . . .'Mr. Abbey ~arizedby saying that the area residents do.nothave'high-P9wered '. . '. . . .1awYers~ traffic engUleers,' or appraisers,.. but. they can .~~ that this . deve1opm:e~t just does.. . .noqn2ike..sen~e ~ri.tl1is l~c~tion and tJieYtJrged the.qommission.~o denyt~isproject... '.. . '. . . .' ." ~ .'.... .' . .' . .... .;..... . .'. .'. . Mrs.:.R.on Mer~th, 93:i Marwood Trail; North:brive, spo~e as.a foimer'real estate agent" . and said' she knew the averasepr9pertjt.value in 1Y.Cazwood Trails and it is much greater . than stated. by the appraiser. A ~ome: on a: cul-de-sac usually commands a higher price' and is a key 'selling point; 'this will.also' adversely affeetthe:Marwood Trails 'property . . . values. Most inipQrtantly,. Mis. Meridith .wanted to stress' concern for the safety of the .' : children and rpentally arid pllysically,chaileitgedpers.ons in theneighborhoOd.'.The . . . majority. of the neighborhood 40es not have streetIigh~s; Bonb~ liot ailly adversely . .' . . . . ........~..Ufects.th~~rop.~e~.~ut~~~ivesof~ene~ghbors.:.... .... .'. .. '.' '.' :. , :' William Long~ loi42 'Carrollton; .spoice'ofthe tfa.ffic Situatioiuwi the wait from 1011t . .' . Street onto CoUeg~ Avenue. at 5 :00 PM ~i b~irig siX. or seven minutes~ 'No one' has: said . ...., specifiCally howbig.the proposed lots ai~. '. Also. 'Mr, Long had h~arti at one time that the . '. roads ~ the'd~veloPInc;nt were not ~atis~ctory to the Fire Dept. Has thi~ now been . . ...:'. .' '~rr~e~an~ ~c~eptable? '., . '. . . . . .': '. ". Sh~on Cl~k,' 11932' pebbl~brook t.an~ County Commis'sioner, DistrictOn~, 'said this. . .. ." .... particUlar request lies ~ the County's juiisdietion and is. outside th~ City limits of Cannel; . . . As a Cpunty Commissioner. it. IS necessary to bling information to the Plan Commission . . that is import~t in 1t18ldng a decision regarding the pr~posed project. The priinary . .., responsibiUty is puplichealth. safety and w~are, aneJ the GountyHighway Depa.rQnent . . . ~asnointention.what~c>ever ofimp'rovi~g lOllt. Street.to handle the traffic the proposed . '. developm~nt will bring. T~ ~QW, urban s~~etwa.$ .not designed to handle this amount . 'oftraffic: InCommiss.iori~r.Clark's'opinion, the stub s~reet'propo~ed to serve.as a second .entry' and e~t WQuld only add to the. safety issue, dumping far more traffic into ~he . community tbanthestudy proposes. IncreaSed ttafijo on.the convoluted routes puts at. . risk the safety of the adults .and childr~n 'in the. neighborhood; In 1998, afeUow' .' commissioI;J.er indicated to Carmel officials that there would be intersection improvements in west Clay to alleviate mcteased traffic congestio,l1; however, only one . intersec#on is'under construction and''Wil1.be~mpleted this' summer. A second . intersection is st8;Ited ~d.there are 6 more under, design, but no funds to proeeep. '. 10 . . A . . '. . . . . ...... .... ..... , . . './' .=...:. . I~pr6yiug'19ist$~eet~saefutite1y.~o~onthe.radarscre~at'an. Ms. ClarkUrge~fthe'.. . . . '.:;''',t . .' '. PlanCommiSSion:to.denytl#spetition'fOrthe:Saf~'ofth,eexisting~mmunity.:.~. . ..' .:. ",il.' '. . Clark s~d she'h8(ratte~~Cd aneighborhpod'~~ing.between.the petitioner and the : ':;;~ :. n~ighbors 'sn4 was grea~ly disturb~d .~y thew~y the neighbqts were 'treat.ed.' . '.. . ;S.. : . ..,... , 'Crai~Ryan,';93.S' :M~bod Jr~No~ Dnye,' said the 'en~rolUI,1ental impa~ of the . ..' .. .prop6~~' dev~]opment has not beeg. coVerei . Th$'e. is a lot of wildlife in the ar~~ and a . .' . .' .'. .' ".l~tofgr,eens~a~~'iS ~eeded~ext to..~~~~ay.Tpis l1as~ot b.ee~.~~dresse4. .' .'. . .: . ..' . . .... .' :. ::' .~i~a'Ryaxi, 9;38 MarWoq~ Tr~ sai~ she'iS' concerned ~bo~t the traf.fi.c..the safety ot~e' . . :. . : ..... c,bilc!~e~ ~ the impact the d~elop~entWi11 have. on the $chool system~ School buses . .... . .:.. ", ....:. :.~otPoS'sibl~ acc~~ the ~e.a; .'. '.:' .. ". .... ". .' .'. . :.'. .' :" . .. .' ': . 1tebu~~: Mr.~,eis said the Open Spac~ Ordinance~scarefuIly crafted.with.the thought. . . ". . of~~.aining.gre~' space. and the petitioner has done 'wet,ytpmg.possible to maintain as . . ". maJ;lY .~~e~ as possibl~. The petitioner.jntends to ref9re$t and the tree pr~ervation .plan. . . . . . '.' .11~s beeA.~ubmittedandapprov~~ by theU:iban. Forester' . '. . '.' . '. . .' .' :..' SecondIYJ the density ofadjaceJit properties. The Retreat project on the. opposite side of . . . . the Monon .Trail wi11 have greater t1ian 4 .units 'per a~re; College Mea~o:ws has 2.2 units . . per aore; ~ood Trails has 2~~; College Hills, 1 :98. The proposed develoP:ment is at . ..' .' 2.1' and felt to be~thin the density; : Mr. Reisasked Steve Pehribaeh to' address the . . . . . ...... c~~e~ts .re8at.ding the VaIidi~: o~tq.e tr~c .an~ysis. . . . .... 'Stev~F~hribach resp()nded tht the.nWnissUe is the: level.'of sem~e.. 'the-orlginai report '. '.' . was ,done at~ ti~e when US 31 wMw"der major constructi.on. . The d'ensity has also . . . . . .' .' .' '." . d~reas~d....troni lIS to 75 units, .~ this decr~as~sthe amount .oftraflic generated and .: . . '. . . improves the. level of: se~~. Trip generatipnis. adifii~ltissue. Pe~ hours. usually. ' ...... .occurbe~eeri6and.9,!\M~d'4.and.6 i~ the afternoon. .The:peak hours for tbediff'erent . . . . . '.':' ~tersections are not ~~: same 'hours~': This ~eEU:2s that the peaks do not Occu.r at l03rd and' . .: '. 10 l.1t or at Cilrrbllt9n. or ~o~d an a~ .the 'sam~ time--they. are slightly dlfter~nt. . .Traffic :.engineerilook..aftlie..worstcasesce.naiio and thetrlpgeneration reflects the Worst hour in . . . 'the morning (ndthe worst hoUr in theaftemoon. Mr. Fehribach ag~n eKplained hoW the . '. data was Conected fOr the trip generation analysis.' A. 6 or 7 minute delay is enemely . '. .. . long and this was not no~ed in any or au of the, site visits. '. . . . . '.' . . " , . '. . . . .. . " Ron Houck 'askec! thepetition~r to addres$ 'the t61Iowingat the Committee level: Detaij . . on the'pri~e'ofhom~s~ 'types Qfmater:iaIJ' square foot~ge3.:Iot size, minimu~ inaXimumJ . . . 'and ayerageJ and examples 'of comp!3Ial>ly priced home.s elsewher~ in the eo#untiDitt that' . ..: .ai'e':~epresent~tive ofth~ prOposed. development. . A letter.from the School corporation '. .... . " s:~I~CQ~rl~ssi.o~~utes\p~~OOl~b20. ",.1'1 ' . "-::':!..l:-:',: .:.>\..... ....... :"" . . '.': ... ..... . ...... .' .. .... .. .... .. . . j'. :.:.': spelling out how 's~hool bUses' Wilf be ha.tidledin.tbis neighbqrhood and dimensions o/the '.'; : '",I':' :' .' . . . <' .Cu1-de~sac .were.81so' r~tiested...' . '.:.:. . ..': . ..~t{ .' . . . ,.... ': '.' . '.. ....... . ". . . :' ". .....:. '. .. '. ..' . .... .... .' , '~"". '.' .' ':." .... . .patRlce ques~ioned the traftlc. $tudr.~and the~c on Marwood PI1ve; 9&h ~ C~l1ege. . '. . .'. . ..... ~.lq6th and College.. Alsoa.aIlenvlromnentahmpact study.w~.requested-,:,there 15 no . . ': . '. . .' : dotfbt that- the .enViio~~rit Will be impacted and'many species of birds will be lost. . The . . ':'~' p~tioner is nottequired to do mytlUng aboutthata but#1earea will be impa.cted.. . . '".' ." ~bra1ter did voI1.\n~eer~ohave an impaci.'study,don~;.th~i'e WC:I'e c1assitic~tions m;ade, :' "howt1i~ Wi1d1if~woti1.d.be'.re..loc~too. e1Q.7'he ~ntire area needs to'~elQ6ked'at. and'. '. '.' . ....:. ..' cotiSid~r~. ..'This 4ev~lbpin~nt WiIi have a'major impaCt on' the wild.1ife'inthe area.' Also, ..' ;: :. ;'" . . this is ~ lake; 'not ~ p()~d.'Ha$ the'$O.roQ~ f!tifferZone.aroundthe}akeb~nmet? .'." '.. . . . . . '." , . , , , ". . , ': '.' Nick1<e~er as~ed the Cfommittee to l.ook ~the lots on. the south sid~ and how they will " '. . '" ...... be utiliZed. Also; ..th~reshouId be perhaps fencing and some SO~ ~f ~enity along the. .' . .:: .::, .' .... ~or;a.o~Tiai1. .Thel~~aping.planshoulp'be'~learly..cietined. ..' ..... .' .'. : '. <:' .:. '::' <'., " '.' ;.' ~n Ho~~k': a8k~d:~Oknow'the e~St~ right~~f-~ay OI.1'College: A ven~~ into th~ B ~rili~ .' .~. . ":'::'" ...'.:.~~~e.lo~ment:.',>."..':.'. .......;:.. ......~. ':'" . . '.' ." . :.'.'. 'Docket ~o~13-()'~, Bonbar Place Subdiy'iSion, ~as. referred to th~Subdivision :.. . '.; . .' '.:' ~omnUttee. ori:~ch: 6; 200~, at 7:00 P:~l.fh1. the. Cati~s ~()oms of ~ity Hall. ..... I.... .' '. . - . . : 5~ CUl~ 6h were heard together. sedhimselffroml\ll d$scu'ssion on North HavenSubdiv~ " , , , .' , , ." ., ,. . . . '. '. . .: 'PaulSpt~ger, thegeoin~try of MarWood Trails..:.thenumber of90~degree tUrns (4)needs . . . '., . : .'. .to be looked at Marwood Trails DnVe'has the potential for.through tratlicto move as . quiddy as possible, arid this. is i concern~ The area is without $ideWalks and this is ". '. . 'troubIC$ome, At '10 1- $treet, if no unpz;ovemcllts ~. to be made includmg sidewalks arid . .' .street 'Widening to' Coll~g~ Avenue,andat:th~ density of the Bonbar developm~lit, this is . . .' a.Jso a .can.cemThe .eXhibit ~one by Stump & i\ssoc. for property values was pretty we!.1 .. done ~d' it illumiIi~tes the fact that. College Hills is.very stable'with only tWo sales in the . '.last nyoi~~s. . Marwood Trails ~s somewhat- similar~ . The Iiiaterials issue is; a good one. '. . .. ' ..' " , '. . , , .' ' .. : .. ...,. " ..' . '. ' '. " . , .'. . . . Leo Dierc;ikman .comme~ted that t1ie reala useable acreage. 'on this. property is about 21 .a~res and .applyh1g twoimits to.the .acre Would'net .42liomes. and would be lI10re in line With:;wh~t. is going on in th~ balance otthe COnimwrltysutrounding it. S~condly, a trail '.' . . shot-lid . be provid.edfor all ~e residents to go. through' this develOPll.lent for access to' the . .' .' . McmpnTnill. This Can be looked 8t duiing Subdivision. Co_tfee reView.. '.' :. . '.' . . . S'h. . . Docket No. 8-01 }lP, Nort 'n Subdivision . P~titiozierseekS approval to plat a six-IotsulJ . · .. on 42.937 acres. Th.e site is . Iocatedn.orthwest of East 96th Str~et andGray Road: t e" · zoned R- . 54tesidence.. The petitioner. also seeks approval ofi-he fOllowing' · ision ,Waivers; . '. , . s: \P1anComnusSi.on\Minutes\pc200 Ifeb20 12 r APRlL 17, 2001 Cannel/Clay Plan Commission Agenda 1 ,... ~. t".r.o ~. CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION ,'. . April 17, 2001- DEPARTMENT REPORT //. 7i. Docket No. 13-01 PP; Bonbar Place Subdivision Petitioner seeks approval to plat a 75-10t subdivision on 35.77;1; acres. The site is located at th:..e northwest comer ofI-465 and the Carmel/Clay Monon Greenway. The site is zoned R-l/residence. Filed by Paul G. Reis of The Reis Law Firm for Kosene & Kosene. The Subdivision Committee returned this. item to the full Commission with a negative recommendation. The Department recommends the Plan Commission deny the petitiol:l based on. the following reasons: 1. That it j~ not appropriate to allow a 75-lot subdivision to have ~ through either of the e;dsting C~ streets (MarwoOd Trail or 101K Street) due to the fact that these streetS both fail to confonn to the minimum right-of-way or pavement width prescribed by the Ordinance. The minimum requirement fox . right-of-way is SO-feet and pavement width 26-feet. At this time it is our understanding that the County Highway Department has neither plans. to or firi.dS~]t necessary at this time to upgrade either of these eXisting County streets in order to provide for the health, safety, convenience and welfare of this. part ~ the Coun1y. SeCtion 6.3'.6 addresses the required minimum right-of-way and roadway widths. 2. Section 6.3.21 is as.follows: Subdivisions consisting offifteen (15) lots or more shall have at least two (2) points of access. This access is to be from.a thiough street (feede~"arteriaI, or collector) or, where the Plan Commission finds it to be appropriate~ the continuation of existing~ planned or platted streets on adjacent tracts, or the extension of' proposed streets to the boundary of the subdivision. Neither point of.acc~s (Marwood Trail or lOIK Street) for the Plat is from a through Street (a feeder, . arterrial. or collector) ivhiehis in violation of the requirement of the above noted section that all access for a sUbdivision of greater that 14 lots be 'from a through street unless the Plan Commission :finds it to be appropriate. The Department does not think: t11at it is appropriate for a 75-1ot subdivision to have access from Marwood Trail because it is a street that winds between 2000-feet and 1.1'7 miles through a well established neighborhood to College Avenue and I06th Street respectively. Using Marwood for one of the access points would cause a distribution of traffic in the area which would not be favorable to the health, safety, convenience and welfare of the adjacent neighborhoods in this part of the County. 3. Section 6.5.2 is as follows: . , . Sidelines of lots' shall be at approximately rigllt angles to straight streets and on radiat lines on curved streets. Some variation from this rule is permissible, but pointed or very irregular lots should be avoided. That the Plat does not display the minimum lot standards on lots #1, #2 and #3 in that ~ey are very irregular in shape and do not conform to the standards of Section 6.5.2 of the seo. The Department would also recommend that the Plan Commission direct Mr. Molitor to prepare formal findings based on reasons displayed above and any additional input by the Commission for signature by the President. Page 7 EXHIBIT G ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL, INDIANA 46032 317/571-2417 . ' SUBPARAGRAPH (1): The Plat does not provide for coordination of subdivision streets with existing and planned streets or highways, in that the Plat proposes a Subdivision having more than 14 lots (namely 75 lots) with only two (2) points of access to the Public Highway System, and with both of those points of access to be provided through the continuation of existing, substandard County Streets on adjacent tracts (namely the neighborhood streets mown as Marwood Trail and IOIst Street), and that such proposal fails to conform to the following standards: A. Section 6.3.21 of the Ordinance-The Commission finds that neither point of access provided for in this Plat is from a through street (namely a feeder, arterial, or collector), in violation of the requirement of this Section that all access for a proposed Subdivision having more than 14 lots should be from through streets unless the Commission finds it appropriate to allow for access to be from the continuation of existing, planned, or platted streets on adjacent tracts, or from the extension of proposed streets to the boundary of the Subdivision. The Commission further finds that it would not be appropriate to allow a 75-10t Subdivision to have access through only these two (2) existing County Streets for the reason that neither of these County Streets is a through street, and neither of the two (2) has been designed, constructed, or maintained in confonnity with the current standards of the County Highway Department which are applicable to through streets; and the Commission further finds that neither the Applicant nor the County Highway Department is planning to convert either of these two (2) existing County Streets into a through street or even to upgrade either of the two (2) in order to bring it into conformity with the current County Highway Department standards for n~ighborhood streets. B. Section 6.3.6 of the Ordinance-The Commission further finds that it would not be appropriate to allow a 75-lot Subdivision to have access through either of the existing County Streets for the reason that.these existing County Streets are at best 22 feet wide and thus they both fail to conform to the minimum pavement width (26 feet) prescribed by this Section; and the Commission further fmds that there are no plans being made by either the Applicant, the County Highway Department, or the City of Carmel (pursuant to the Thoroughfare Plan contained in its Comprehensive Plan) to bring either of these existing County Streets into conformity with this Section. 2