Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 09-19-00 CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19,2000 H. Public Hearings: Docket No. 108-00 PP,Long Branch Estates Petitioner requests approval to plat 150 lots on 119.6 acres. The site is located on the northwest corner of West 116th Street and Shelborne Road. The site is zoned S-1/Residence and is being developed as a Qualifying Subdivision under Chapter 7 of the Subdivision Control Ordinance(ROSO). The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers: 108-OOa SW SCO 6.3.3 to forego a stub street connection to adjoining property 108-00b SW SCO 6.3.7 to plat a cul-de-sac greater than 600 feet in length 108-OOc SW SCO 7.7(D)(7)to clear more than 50%of scrub woodlands on site 108-OOd SW SCO 7.7(D)(8)to clear more than 15%of steep slopes on site Filed by Richard J.Kelly of Paul I.Cripe,Inc. for Pulte Homes Tim Ochs, attorney,Ice Miller Donadio&Ryan,One American Square,Indianapolis, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant,Pulte Homes. Richard Kelly of Paul I.Cripe Engineering was also in attendance. This item was heard previously by the Plan Commission; however,it was discovered that there was faulty notice and this has now been corrected. Laurence Lillig confirmed that according to the Department Report,the Commission would need to determine whether or not the public notice requirement had been met and if so,a motion would need to be made to suspend the rules in order to re-open the public hearing. According to Rich Kelly of Paul I. Cripe,the auditor's office confirmed that 7 adjoining property owners had not been notified. Notices were then sent by registered mail on the 6th of September. A petitioner's Affidavit of Notice was filed with the Department. John Molitor opined that the Notice would not be sufficient under the Rules of the Plan Commission but would be sufficient under State Law. A suspension of the Rules would be required. Marilyn Filo,bordering the property on Shelborne and 121"Street,appeared before the Commission and stated that a neighbor,Dr. and Mrs.Edwards who are directly opposite the property on the west side of 1213`Street,were not noticed. Mr. Ochs stated that notice had been sent to this particular neighbor,but it was refused. After further discussion,John Molitor recommended that the Commission consider suspending the rules and hear this item, since minimal notice for the missing 7 property owners had been given under the State law. Additional testimony should be allowed, essentially a supplemental public hearing,to accommodate the 7 people who missed the initial hearing. The initial public hearing remains open. Ron Houck moved to suspend the rules to waive the 25 day notice period and allow the hearing of this item, seconded by Kent Broach. APPROVED 11 in favor,2 opposed(Leo Dierckman and Norma Meighen.) Mr. Ochs stated that a Traffic Study by A&F Engineering was completed for the entrance at 116th Street, 121' Street,the intersections at 421 (Michigan Road)and 1213L Street and 116th Street and Michigan Road. The petitioner is willing to put into place those improvements suggested for 1161 Street and 121st Street.The capacity was acceptable with the exception of US 421,but the study did note that when the improvements by INDOT are made on 421,those would be of sufficient capacity and the impact of this development,until that time,is minimal compared to the overall traffic on 421. rAConservation Area Study by J.F.New&Associates identifies the conservation areas under the ROSO. The only wetlands identified on the site are point one acre in size and very minimal; this will be mitigated pursuant to the requirements of the INDEM and US Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Ochs stated that the petitioner had met with surrounding neighbors. Notices were delivered and the meeting was conducted to show the development in greater detail and answer any questions. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the petition;no one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the petition;the following appeared: Jack Bigham, 3755 West 116th Street, stated opposition to the number of homes being proposed. Mr.Bigham lives directly south of the project and was not noticed the first public hearing. Mr.Bigham was not opposed to developing,but was definitely opposed to the density of this development. Mr.Bigham was curious to know what improvements would be made to benefit the intersection of 116t and Shelborne Road. Mr.Bigham questioned whether or not he would be required or allowed to hook into City Water and Carmel Sewer at the time this property is developed. Andris Berzins,3805 West 116th Street,wanted to see the rolling hills,trees,wildlife and rural character of the area maintained. Developing the property at the proposed density is excessive. There is no question that the proposed development will cause traffic problems and roadway improvements will have to be made in this area. The area residents would like to see the woods on the property maintained as much as possible. Michael Pritz, 3930 West 121St Street,Zionsville,46077,did receive notice of the first meeting,not the second. Mr. Pritz has met with Pulte Homes,but at the time of the meeting,there was no information available on transportation and traffic report, and not a lot of detail as to how the ground would be arranged and the impact on the environment. Mr.Pritz echoed agreement with the previous speakers. Mr.Pritz stated that the proposed development would change the character of that portion of western Clay Township. There are also transportation problems; Michigan Road will not be improved for quite some time. Also,the Shoopman property to the west will have nearly twice as many homes,with one to two cars,and the traffic impact will be significant. It is understandable that the property will be developed,but the area residents would like to see the types of homes and environment that would complement the community and that everyone would be proud of as opposed to an"eyesore." The Department is recommending that this item be referred back to the Subdivision Committee and be removed from the Table at the Committee level. The public hearing was then closed on this Docket. Mr. Ochs deferred rebuttal. However, developing under the Residential Open Space Ordinance would allow an increase in the density and 164 lots could be platted. The developer is platting 150 lots, 90 to 100 feet wide, side- entry garages. A 25 foot conservation easement is also being added along the rear of the lots around the mature woodlands and along the bank. The petitioner is in agreement with the neighbors and would like to preserve the natural topography and woodlands; the home sites would be more marketable. Questions and comments from Commission members: Leo Dierckman questioned the photos provided and the captions;Mr. Ochs responded that the captions were reversed and what is labeled scrub woodlands is actually mature trees. Jeff New had visited the site and measured the trunks of the trees. Nick Kestner questioned the traffic study and wondered what the impact would be on Towne Road for traffic headed east;not everyone would turn onto Michigan Road. Mr. Ochs responded that there were on-going discussions with the highway department on the necessary improvements and the traffic study. The traffic engineer could be made available at the Committee meeting to address those concerns. Dave Cremeans questioned the drainage and roadway improvements and how those improvements would affect the homeowner to the northeast of the property. Mr. Ochs responded that this is not actually a traffic concern but rather drainage. The petitioner would be happy to work with the County Surveyor and the highway department. Marilyn Anderson questioned the traffic study after improvements are made and after this development is constructed--the level of service at 116t and Michigan Road would be a"D" level of service in afternoon rush hour. Marilyn asked why there was no traffic study done for 116th and Shelborne Road. Mr. Ochs responded that there are guidelines in the Ordinance for the scope of a traffic study and these have been complied with. Also,the highway department was consulted on the scope;the highway department is contemplating the improvements to Shelborne Road and 116th Street will be aligned to improve the functionality of the intersection. Laurence Lillig explained the parameters for traffic studies;the petitioner meets with members of the staff and the Department lets them know what intersections are to be looked at. It is uncertain what was asked of this petitioner; however,there are two intersections with Michigan Road to be looked at outside the County--116"'Street and 1215` Street,and the two entrances into the subdivisions. Marilyn Anderson said 116th and Shelborne need to be included in the traffic study inasmuch as it borders the corner of the property. Mr. Ochs stated that his firm was involved in the initial research to determine what this intersection should look like. Discussions occurring between the developer and the County indicate that the 116th Street and Shelborne realignment has been set by the County. The County has determined the number of lanes that will ultimately be associated with the intersection improvements. It was not requested that this appear in the traffic report,however,the County has gone a long way to look at this intersection. Madeline Fitzgerald said that considering the Eagle Ridge Development going in to the west of this site,the Commission needed to look at Shelborne and 1215t Street because the west access over on Michigan Road is a very difficult intersection. The eastbound traffic will be seen as going to Shelborne down to 116th Street,even if traffic is trying to go west to Michigan Road. Even with the improvements to 421, 1215`is not scheduled to be a signalized intersection. Again, Shelborne and 1215`Street needs to be included in the overall package. Ron Houck asked about the variance for the percentage of scrub woodlands to be removed. Mr. Ochs responded that Paul I Cripe had determined that the only area designated as scrub woodlands was a small pocket. J. F.New has since assessed the site and reported that there is actually scrub woodland instead of young woodlands and does not meet the criteria under ROSO. As a result,the petitioner is now less than 50%impact on scrub woodlands. Since the reclassification to scrub woodlands,it meant that the amount of young woodlands was significantly reduced. The petitioner is impacting more than 30%of the young woodlands and it must be excluded from the open space requirements. The variance will be needed under section 7.7(D)(6). John Molitor commented that the petition should be amended and the committee can do this at the committee level. The cul-de-sac length is at 720 feet as opposed to 600 feet,and a variance is being requested. Leo Dierckman asked if the petitioner intended to complete the additional information for the traffic study;Mr. Ochs responded that the petitioner would do whatever it takes to address the concerns of the Plan Commission. Docket No. 108-00 PP; Long Branch Estates,was referred to Subdivision Committee,October 3rd, at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City Hall.