Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter to Jeff Davis from John Myers HNTB 3/5/91 HNTB225 HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN &. SERGENDOFF ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS New ers[n'.Street Indianapolis,Indiana 46204-2135 March 5, 1991 (31-)636-i68 FAX(31')633-0505 Mr. Jeff Davis, President Carmel-Clay Plan Commission 40 E. Main Carmel, IN 46032 Re: Final Recommended Thoroughfare Plan 1990 Carmel-Clay Comprehensive Plan Update Dear Mr. Davis: As the Comprehensive Plan approval process is drawing to a close, we would like to suggest a few final thoroughfare plan adjustments for consideration by the Commission. They are briefly discussed below: 1. Parkways - Although the proposed minimum geometric design standards (Table X.4) include both primary parkways (150 foot right-of-way) and secondary parkways (120 foot right- of-way) , all parkways shown on the plan are indicated as primary. Considering the overall pattern of roadways and potential long-term needs, we would recommend the following classifications: Primary Parkways: 116th St. , 146th Street Secondary Parkways: Towne Road, Gray Road, Hazeldell Road 2. Right-of-Way Limitations - Language is included in the report text to indicate that plans are conceptual and subject to adjustment based on project-specific factors. Nevertheless, this concept is not well communicated geographically. Therefore, a new symbol is suggested (series of slashes) to indicate "probable right- of-way restrictions," where adjustments to geometric design standards may be necessary to minimize impact on existing development. As a minimum, this symbol should be shown on 116th Street east of Keystone Avenue. We would welcome Commission and staff input on other sections appropriate for this notation. PC Hr, S.1:., Pt'- J . f a U.... PE ..rne c r•,t.l.. -.-• ) ".'• .. 1 w PE Ito I.ut r H HE U' • • K H..••n.rnf,) Pf. ..urw. ...VIJ:r..f f! .l.H•. W.W)i. 1 PE .r r,.rV U.f7ur-r. .. .rwd. lu. ' .t ,..H(. ..,... I I ._...H1 1 .,R.1 .t"l..,I,..n.✓ . _. .... ., .. r .. ..•I R , ,, r. r, AIA.I Ir....._.1 - _ .1rL-. u ... Idvl. .. .. d.... .... x,•I. a.'''.''A WI-. u r l•I .. ... .o l.u. ..r H1. 1 . IL ul n... .I _ `m ..,s ....-.......... ' ` v Mr. Jeff Davis, President Carmel-Clay Plan Commission March 5, 1991 Page 2 3 . New Roadway Alignments - Based on the legal opinion solicited by the Plan Commission, dashed lines do not indicate specific route locations as the plan is currently written and presented. We believe that the alternate approach of leaving these routes off the map and attempting to describe them only in text would seriously undermine the clarity and utility of the plan. The current approach (generalized, non-specific alignments with qualifying notes) provides an effective means of conveying information on the maps, while leaving flexibility to accommodate site specific considerations identified in more detailed studies. In our experience, the precedent for this approach is overwhelming. It should be recognized that many people will insist on perceiving specific route locations in spite of all efforts to indicate otherwise. We do not believe this warrants a compromise of the plan. Clearly, the Plan Commission will understand the plan's intent and will act accordingly. In a final attempt at clarity, it may be useful to add an asterisk (*) to the words "new facilities" in the legend, with a note (in the legend) saying "Specific alignments subject to detailed studies. " We hope these comments are helpful in developing final refinements to the Thoroughfare Plan. We are prepared to discuss them in greater detail at the March 5 plan review meeting. Very truly yours, HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF I' Jphn W. Myers,/ P.E. , AICP roject Engineer JWM/l j c cc: Ms. Joann K. Green, HNTB Plan Commission Members DOCD Staff