Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutComp. Plan Update Minutes 1/10/90 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE January 10, 1990 In Attendance STAFF Wes Bucher, Rick Brandau, Dave Cunningham, Terry Jones COMMUTEE Jeff Davis, Sue McMullen, Ila Badger, Alan Potasnik, Will Wright, Lindley Myers, George Sweet, Greg Binder, Jim Dillon. HNTB Joann Green, Brad Yarger, John Meyers Randall Krupsaw 3884 Shelborne Ct, Carmel, IN Marilyn Anderson 3884 Shelborne Ct., Carmel, IN Paul Reis 14166 Williamsburg Dr., Carmel John Molitor 10523 Breckenridge Dr., Carmel Mari Millican 10526 Fergus, Carmel J.A. Janeway 10515 Fergus Mary F. Janeway 10515 Fergus Patricia White Carmel Ledger Lee A. Webb 10442 Connaught Drive Peter B. Bucks 3751 W. 106th, Carmel Nancy Maretto 3751 W. 106th, Carmel Bernie Sharpey 31 W. 111th Ron Houck 315 W. 107th, Carmel Jennifer Shea 349 Bailey Circle,!Carmel Jamie Shea 349 Bailey Circle, Carmel Richard Good 1036 W. 136th St., Carmel Shirley Good 1036 W. 136th St., Carmel Carlos Watkins 3840 Shelbourne Ct. Al Moss 3818 Shelbourne Ct., Carmel Randy Schultz 3796 Shelbourne Ct., Carmel John Pittman 201 W. 106th St. Sue Dillon 507 Cornwall Ct. Bill Merrill 3729 W. 106th Steven M. Brown 1220 Hemlock St. Curt Wuelfing 3601 W. 106gh St. Judy Hagan 10946 Spring Mill Lane COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MINUTES - JANUARY 10 , 1990 1 The Comprehensive Plan Update Meeting was called to order by Jeff Davis, President on January 10, 1990 at 7 : 34 P.M. at the Carmel City Meeting Hall . The committee members present were : Will Wright, Jeff Davis, Sue McMullen, George Sweet, Lindley Myers, Alan Potasnik, Ila Badger, Greg Binder and Jim Dillon. The staff members present were : Wes Bucher, Rick Brandau, David Cunningham, Terry Jones, and Dorthy Neisler. Ms . Joann Green and Mr. Brian Pieplow were also present from HNTB. Mr. John Myers made the presentation . There were agendas passed out to everyone . (which is a part of the official minutes and attached to the Master Copy) . Mr. Myers went through the agenda briefly. There were several different scenarios displayed during the presentation. A. Process Overview Mr. Myers gave a brief summary of what had been discussed previously. There were 3 different scenarios for traffic for part of this plan development, the first one being an existing scenario, the problems that were found were some intersections on Meridian St . and also on Keystone . These were needs for turn lanes, some of these problems have been corrected. The focus is on future conditions . There are two scenarios , one is a programmed or committed scenario, this takes a look at projects that have been approved through the Plan Commission. The third scenario we refer to as a future scenario, which is a build-out scenario . We have looked at the entire Land Use Plan and we generated the traffic from that in a similar way. B. Review of Existing Conditions & Needs . C. Review of Programmed Scenario & Needs . There were three different alternative ways of addressing the demands that are created by the programmed scenario. Our recommendation at that time was that this be the scenario alternative that was selected from the three . They focused on alternatives that widened road ways and basically that would include widening all arterior roads from Ditch Road to Gray Road. Another alternative made maximum use of Towne Road with the assumption that there would be an COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MINUTES - JANUARY 10, 1990 2 interchange at Township Line Road with expanding of the east west arteriors to be able to get over to the new interchange . The third alternative is the one shown that recommends raising US31 to freeway standards, which is to eliminate some cross roads and create interchanges where other crossroads are . They recommended an interchange at 106th and 116th Street . D. Review of Build-Out Scenario . 1 . Process Review a. Land-use and intensity (additional) Mr. Myers stated that they did not want to overstate the possible effects of these developments . We recognized that we are ignoring some things like undevelopable land, low areas, streets that are included in subdivisions , etc. . We tended to be on the lower end of the densities . For low density we assumed one residence per acres (light yellow) , medium density assumed 2 residences per acre (medium yellow) , and high density residential (orange) we assumed 6 residence per acres . These were applied to vacant land in our township. For commercial, we assumed 10, 000 sq. ft . per acre which is a conservative estimate . Local commercial we assumed would be 58% retail and 50% office for the purpose of our analysis . b. Trip Generation We used the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation report to apply trip generation rates and estimate the number of trips that would come from each zone . c. Trip Distribution With the committed scenario we used the results of the Indianapolis Thoroughfare model . That gave us a table from one zone to every other zone to where the trips were going. d. Trip Assignment They assigned these trips to the quickest path. That is a matter of looking at operating speeds on the different roadways and having the shortest path from one zone to another. 2 . Findings & Observations . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MINUTES - JANUARY 10 , 1990 3 A Summary of Findings and Observations and a Traffic Review of Build-out Scenario was passed out to everyone and Mr. Myers discussed the summary (which is a part of the official minutes and attached to the Master Copy) . A Recommended Minimum Geometric Design Standards sheet was passed out to everyone and Mr. Myers discussed the standards (which is a part of the official minutes and attached to the Master Copy) . Mr. Myers stated that on a residential street in Carmel there is parking and on this type of roadway in the County there is no parking they have a lesser width. They suggested that the board consider another classification for local roadways that will not have parking. 30 ' is an awful lot of width where there is not any parking. Maybe another classification with 26 ' is fine that would allow for parking, it would allow for roadways that are obviously access roadways, where there is no parking anticipated. Mr. Myers recommended that they include a new parkway standard, (shown on exhibit) . A parkway is no more than a wide divided roadway. They have suggested a minimum and a desireable standard for a parkway would be a right-of-way of 150 ' , which is about 30 ' more than a primary arterial . It is desireable for a couple of reasons, with the design speed of 40 with curb and gutter on each side, you could actually have trees in the middle of this parkway. This has a 56 ' median, a median that would also have the advantage that if there was ever a need to widen this it would be right there and once it is widen you would still have a 30 ' median remaining. The minimum right-of-way for parkways should be 120 ' and that is a four lane divided roadway with 30 ' median. A 30 ' median would allow for landscaping, as well turn lanes and if needed at intersection a double left hand turn lane . The meeting was opened to the public for a question and answer time to Mr. Myers . This was presented as a very informal discussion. Mr. Myers estimated that if all the land was built out as displayed on the Comprehensive Plan the population of Carmel would double to approximately 50, 000 . Mr. Myers stated that the possibility of staggered work hours would have a significant impact on the traffic . Mr. Alan Potasnik brought up the point of the removal of the bridge over 1465 . Are any of those scenarios taking this lightly or taking it seriously? Mr. Myers stated that he felt it was a pretty bad idea to close the Springmill Rd. bridge . There are several reasons for this, I465 serves as a barrier across the south side of Hamilton COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MINUTES - JANUARY 10, 1990 4 County; there are only two roadways in the western part of Hamilton County that have good potential and likelihood of being a continuous roadway north and south, one is Towne Road and the other one is Springmill Road. Mr. Sweet stated that the committee should address the fact, where the funds are coming from for the roadways . Dr. Dillon stated that he had a concern along Springmill Road to whether or not a bike path has been allowed for, it is a real danger with all the bikers that we have . Ms . Joann Green stated that the next meeting will be on February 13 and they will discuss the text changes , and we hope to have final approval and adoption of the proposed land use plan. We have started to complete the final graphics for the final text and will continue on with that, with the hopes that by the middle of March we will have a finished update printed and delivered. The meeting was adjourned at 9 : 40 P.M. .