Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-05-19 RES A. Cityof C I /ND / Carmel Plan Commission RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE March 5, 2019 Meeting Minutes LOCATION: CAUCUS ROOMS CARMEL CITY HALL,2ND FLOOR ONE CIVIC SQUARE CARMEL,IN 46032 Members Present: Joshua Kirsh Nick Kestner Brad Grabow Susan Westermeier Members Absent: Michael Casati Staff Present: Angie Conn,Planning Administrator Joe Shestak,Administrative Assistant Legal Counsel: John Molitor Meeting Time: 6:00 p.m. 1. Docket No. 18010004 Z: Westbridge PUD Rezone The applicant seeks rezone and primary plat approvals for 13.91 acres to change to PUD/Planned Unit Development. The site is located at 4281 W. 106th Street and is zoned S-1/Residential. Filed by Randy Green with ISBG Capital,LLC. Petitioner: Randy Green: • This has been a tough site to develop. Everyone involved is well aware of this.There's a lot hardships. We are in a position today we believe that everything has been answered to the Cannel Engineering Department and TriCo Regional Sewer Utility. We have presented you with a packet with this information. Dave Ayala,Terrah Site Development: • We had some minor changes done • No major lines have moved.The sanitary sewer and amenity area are in the same spot • We have added more information to the site legend to help identify the areas in the open space • The Engineering Dept. identified two obstacles for us to overcome: the sanitary sewer and drainage • We were asked to make sure there's enough clearance over the gas mains for the sanitary sewer • We are clearing below the gas mains by 5' -6' • We can revise the manholes if needed • We are dealing with an unstudied legal drain meaning there's never been a studied to determine the 100 year flood elevation of this site. Some engineering models were prepared; see C1.0. • We answer the comments from the City and County • We investigated the flooding from the subdivision to the south. We don't know the reasoning of the flooding. • TriCo asked us to prove there's capacity and a significant reduction going to this area from our development • 25-35 CSF are going into this drain from existing site. We will reduce it to 15 CSF after this area is developed. 1 Residential Committee Minutes 2-5-19 Brad Grabow: Is that drain shown in the packet? Dave Ayala: Shown on C1.0. The drain goes north to south,turns at the easement,just south of the property. The hook/turn in the line could be the problem for the drain. If the drain would just go straight down, it would help for better flow. David Compton: In the 50%reduction of the CFS, is this for a 2 or 10 year event? Dave Ayala: In a 100 year event, it's a 50%reduction. In a 2 year event it will be even greater. The allowable discharge for this site is 0.1 CFS per acre for the 2 or 10 year event. For the 100 year event,the allowable discharge for the City of Cannel is 0.3. The County Surveyor requested that we reduce this because of the existing flooding problems. David Compton: At the first public hearing, it was stated by the adjacent neighbors to the south they have a drainage problem. They claimed this development would make it worse,and I disagree. We make it a lot better. With the elimination of all the single family lots to the south east of the pipeline,we took out more impervious surfaces. David Ayala: We are taking in all the drainage that is west of the ditch and detaining and providing water quality. This is about a half-acre that just flows to the drain,and now we will detain it. Randy Green: • We added a 2°d retention pond on the southern side of the pipeline. This took over the majority of lot 3. • The tennis court and two barns make up 10,000 sq. ft.of impervious area • We are not adding much drainage distress to that side of the development • We will add a basin as a catch all for this area • We will have a commitment on Lot 3,that no one will be allow to build on the southern side of the pipeline • We have rearranged the amenity areas which included the common area and guest parking area.This is shown in our info packet. Dave Ayala: • The existing driveway in the decel lane was moved to not be in the turning lane • A small turnaround was added for Fire Dept.and garbage trucks • We eliminated two townhome lots due to the approximately of the legal drain and easements • We have shown all the sidewalks. Lots 1,2, 3 will face out towards 136th street and the sidewalks will be in front. Lots 4, 5,6, 7, 8 will face south and the sidewalks in front. They will all connect together throughout the site and connect to the City's outside path. Department Report: Angie Conn • The Petitioner has addressed some of our concerns in the last 5 days since the Department Report was written • The PUD texts and exhibits typos need to be corrected • The PUD text on the townhome's architecture need to be added • The TAC members received updated plans late today and not had the time to respond yet • The Engineering Department has concerns as it relates to the flood plain and the wetlands • We recommend to continue this to the March 28th Residential Committee meeting Committee Comments: Josh: I'm concerned with the Engineer's outstanding comments. The Committee can get through the architecture details. David Compton: If there's anything you can give us as homework,we would appreciate it. Josh: You need to meet with the Engineering Department before the next meeting and work out their comments and concerns.David Ayala: The proof is there,they need a chance to digest first. The wetland is a very complicated issue. We need to sit down with Engineering Department and understand their requirements. It's an isolated wetland and a nonregulated flood plain. It all comes down to what the Engineering says. Josh: Work with the experts. This is an impossible site. Nick: Besides the drainage,I have concerns with parking safety. If there's a fire and someone is parked outside their garage,then the emergency vehicles cannot get passed it. If you are familiar with the area,the traffic creates a bottleneck. I was confused with the traffic report to show only 15 people leaving in the morning from 41 units. This is not an empty nesters community,and assuming the residences are working,you will have around 60-80 cars leaving around rush hour and not 5-15. There's no landscaping on the east side of the project. I don't see this as a transition from an S-1 to a PUD. 2 Residential Committee Minutes 2-5-19 Nick: The three story buildings will stick out like a sore thumb. Brad: Can we discuss the building height? The PUD allows for buildings up to 40' in height. How is this measured? 35' is typically what we see in a 3 level townhomes. David Compton: We can put this on our homework list. We will find out about our foundation heights. Carmel Imeasures half way up the roof peak. I want to look at the roof pitch and what part of the building is sunken in the ground. We picked a rear load product, so you'll only see the nice fronts. We will look in the PUD and include it in our submittal for the next Committee meeting. Brad: Do you expect the plans to be the same as your most recent development in the VOWC? David Compton: Yes, it will be very similar. They are both 2400 sq. ft. but different architecture styles. We do focus groups throughout the Midwest for our interior and exterior layouts. Sue: Staff has asked about your architecture designs and standards. Rex Ramage,Pulte Group: We previously spoke with Alexia Lopez and worked out some of the details. We thought staff was comfortable with the architecture standards. We were surprised by this comment.It's not brick on all three floors. We want more variety with the use of different materials and colors on the front facade. We are happy to discuss this. David Compton: This is shown on Exhibit E in the PUD. Rex Ramage: We committed to adding four windows to the side facades that are visible at the perimeter of this development. If there's something specific you want, let us know. Angie: Alexia is out on maternity leave. Looking at the prior Staff Report,the comments about the brick were still there. Can you commit to more brick to those side homes? Sue: Can you do all brick? David Compton: Brick on the Pt floor for sure. We try to go for a mix of materials. I think all brick looks out of character. I'm willing to do two stories on the end homes. Sue: Is there a percentage of brick that is listed in the PUD? David Compton: It states all of the first two stories are all brick. Sue: At the next Committee can you show us examples of this product? David Compton: We have a similar product of these townhomes at The Retreat on Monon in Westfield on 16181 and the Monon. We will bring in pictures. There's a model that's open there if you wanted to walk through it. Sue: We would feel more comfortable to have the approvals from TriCo and the Engineering Dept. David Compton: I Iunderstand. Brad: When looking at the front elevations of the townhomes, it's hard to see this as six individual dwellings. Instead I see this as one, six unit building. Rex Ramage: The footprint is a 2' offset for every other unit. Brad: Could we add something to break up the first floor elevation of all brick? David Compton: We will submit photos of some examples. We are open to your suggestions. Rex Ramage: The printed rendering doesn't show how the 3rd floor pops with a difference of color and material. Brad: Anything to help make it look like individual dwellings. Brad: When the columns and railings are installed,they reduce the width of the stoops/steps. The useable width is now 4'. It would help if you could put the railings as wide as possible. David Compton: We can bring this up to our purchasing department and see what they say. Brad: The open space plan was not completed in last month's packet. Rex Ramage: We got a stamped approved plan from Darren Mindham on February 20. Tab 4,exhibit LOS 2 shows the approved plan. Nick: Did he approve no landscaping on the east side? Rex Ramage: He did. There's 25' tree preservation on the east side. Sue: Is it heavily wooded now?Randy Green: There are some existing trees. If you look at the eastern boundary you can see the heavy tree line. We have 7 acres on the south side of the pipeline,and we only 3 homes. S-1 allows up to 8 homes. Our overall site density is at 3.01. S-2 allows 2.1. We want to respect the homeowners to the east and southeast. There are at least 40 mature trees.Josh: Why not identify lots 8 and 10 as tree preservation areas(TPA)? Randy Green: The existing home on lot 8 will be remodeled. Josh: I know you don't want remove trees if you don't have to,but I have seen some bulldozer take out trees not marked as a TPA. I would suggest you talk to Darren Mindham and ask him how to save trees. I want to a written commitment for lots 8 and 10 to have TPA fencing around these trees. David Compton: I Ihave no problem with orange fencing but let's talk about lot 10 because there's no house there. Josh: For lots 8& 10, if you take down a tree,you add 2 trees. I would defer to the City arborist on the type of species and size. The tree arborist overrules my statement,and if he doesn't believe a tree can be placed there,you will place it elsewhere. Clean up the dead trees. I want a written commitment of these. Nick: Adding landscaping on the east side of the buildings between the sidewalk and next to the building will help break 3 Residential Committee Minutes 2-5-19 up the brick wall. Josh: Is there any room? David Compton: We will check. Josh: If there's no room between the sidewalk and the building,what would happen if you put the trees along the pipeline easement? David Compton: They would come and cut them down. We will follow up on what is allowed.Brad: What's the distance between the sidewalk and the foundation? David: We will find that out for the next meeting Brad: There are several places in the PUD text that duplicates the standard of the underlying zoning district. I would rather you be silent in those cases. Code Enforcement can then look at the UDO and site that section rather than the PUD.It's easier for the Department. David Compton: We can do that. Brad: Staff addressed the typos and confusing language. Rex Ramage: I did look through the PUD prior to this meeting to make some corrections and I'll go look through it again for the next meeting. Brad: An Ashbrook residence remonstrance letter showed photos of the flooding. In one of the photos they showed the beehive drain. The beehive is on their property. Is this the same location you referred to earlier where the drain twists and turns and ends at this drain? David Ayala: Yes. Brad: Is there an opportunity to fix that? Is it possible to fix the bends? David Ayala: It's not on our property. If you were to straighten it out, it's right in the middle of the gas easement. The gas company does not want us to do anything in that area. They won't allow for us to straighten the drain. David Compton: Reducing the drainage off our site will provide some relief. It will not stop the ponding of water. David Ayala: We are slowing it down. It will be going through our detention pond system first. We will be making it better. The sheet draining off of Ashbrook is a lot. Brad: There's no culver off of 106th Street. There's nothing to keep the water up against 1066 Street. David Ayala: Everything on the west side of this will flow right through our site. Brad: Will the developer or the homeowner do the townhouse plantings? David Compton: That will be the builder, subject to the weather. We do a spring planting catchup if needed. Brad: Has the language for the maximum height for fences in the front been removed or been reinstated to the PUD text? David Compton: We will coordinate with Staff and get something consistent that has been in the VOWC and other communications. Brad: I'm referring to line 315. Rex Ramage: That was a duplicate from the zoning ordinance. You made the comment of us wanting to be silent. Brad: That is exactly the situation there. Brad: Are you keeping the tennis court? Randy Green: No. In the new layout,the tennis court will be removed. Brad: There was language that showed you may install sidewalks along the single family drive. Is that optional? I would rather see a yes or no. Randy Green: I like the private drive to stay more rural without sidewalks. I like the rural look better. Brad: State your intention in the PUD text. This item will be continued to the Thursday,March 28th,2019 Residential Committee meeting. 2. TABLED TO THURSDAY, MARCH 28-Docket No. 18100001 PUD: 106th and Ditch PUD Rezone . - . . . . • . _ .: _ _ ••: • _ • _ •• _. . • _ _. - _ .+h Street nd Ditch The meeting adjourned at 7:11 p.m. 1/4 t• lilt • e Shestak—Recording Secretary Josh a Kirsh—Cha• •erson 4 Residential Conunittee Minutes 2-5-19