Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDepartment Report 10-11-221 Carmel Plan Commission RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE Tuesday, October 11, 2022 Department Report 1. Docket No. PZ-2022-00119 DP/ADLS: Flora on Spring Mill. The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for a residential neighborhood consisting of 12 brownstones, 12 two-family homes, 10 single-family homes, and 86 townhomes on 18.31 acres. The site is located at 9950 Spring Mill Rd. and is zoned Flora PUD, Ordinance Z-676-22. Filed by Jim Shinaver and Jon Dobosiewicz of Nelson & Frankenberger on behalf of Pittman Partners, Inc. and Onyx and East, LLC. *Updates to the Report are written in blue Project Overview: This project is seeking DP/ADLS approval for a new subdivision with 120 dwellings. The property was recently re-zoned to the Flora on Spring Mill PUD, Ordinance Z-654-20. Surrounding the site is Interstate 465 to the south, Meridian Corridor zoning to the east, S-2/Residence zoning to the north and S-2 and S-1/Residence zoning and Williams Creek to the west. Please see the petitioner’s information package for more information. Site Plan and Engineering: The proposed site plan is in line with the Concept Plan that was approved as a part of the PUD. There is a mix of residential uses from 4-story brownstones as you enter the community to duplexes and rooftop deck townhomes near the middle of the site, 3-story pitched roof townhomes along Springmill and I-465, and single- family homes toward the west and Williams Creek. There is a public street that enters the neighborhood and loops around with alleys coming off the street for garage access. The PUD allows for a maximum of 129 dwellings and 120 dwellings are proposed. There is one entrance into the project from the roundabout at Spring Mill Rd. and Illinois St. There is also an emergency access point south of the boulevard entrance for emergency vehicle access. A large tree preservation area is planned along the northern border with additional tree preservation along the western and southern borders. Stormwater drainage is accommodated by utilizing a large detention pond on the north side of the project. The pond will be planted with native vegetation along the perimeter. There will be sidewalks along all the public streets, and the proposed street cross section for the subdivision will meet the City’s requirement at 56 ft. wide. This allows for 5 ft. sidewalks and 6 ft. tree lawns on both sides of the street, as well as on street parking. 347 parking spaces are proposed and those are made up of garage/driveway spaces, off-street parking spaces, and on-street, parallel parking spaces. Active Transportation: Sidewalks are shown throughout the project and will connect the residents to each other as well as to the open spaces and out to Spring Mill Rd. There is a path along the south side of the detention pond and a crushed stone path around the pond. A 10 ft. wide asphalt path will be installed along Spring Mill Rd. A raised pedestrian crossing will be installed north of the duplexes to connect pedestrian open spaces. Short term bicycle parking is required to be provided throughout the site as well as 2 covered bike parking features. Petitioner, please show where the covered bike parking features are. Staff has asked for the details of the covered bike parking, and the petitioner needs to show how the bike racks are dispersed throughout the site. Architectural Design: The PUD includes Architectural Character Imagery for each dwelling type and requires all structures to be developed in substantial compliance with the Character Imagery. The proposed elevations are in line with what was shown in the PUD. The petitioner has made several changes based on staff’s comments, however, there are still some details to work through. The style of architecture is more contemporary with a diverse mix of materials, black vinyl windows, metal canopies and porch roofs, and less ornate detailing. Because there 2 are so many dwelling types proposed, there is a lot of diversity throughout the development. All of the attached homes have garages that are rear loaded, and many have front porches, which enhances the streetscape and adds to a pedestrian friendly neighborhood. Staff requested the color palettes for the buildings to ensure diversity. The PUD requires townhomes along I-465 to have increased soundproofing through the types of windows and the insulation. Petitioner, please confirm this. Lighting: Streetlights are proposed throughout the neighborhood and will be an acorn style similar to the City standard. The height of the streetlights will be 18 ft. as is required in the UDO. We also need to see the specs for any building architectural lights. Landscaping: The PUD requires a minimum of 25% of the development to be open space, and the petitioner is exceeding that amount. The common areas include the large pond, 3 central common areas, and the tree preservation areas. Tree preservation is required to be a minimum of 20% of the development. The tree preservation is mostly limited to the outer edges of the development. The southwest common area is designated as limited tree preservation in the PUD where trees will be saved if grading and utilities allow. Petitioner, please consider keeping this common area at its current grade and making it a sunken garden amenity to save those trees. Common Area amenities were submitted with the packet and will be reviewed as a part of this ADLS. Street trees and lot and foundation plantings are shown for each building. There is supposed to be a 10 ft. bufferyard along the eastern property line and a minimum 15 ft. bufferyard along the southern property line with tree preservation. The southern border has a retaining wall shown and some of the tree preservation area does not appear to be 15 ft. wide. Signage: The PUD requires all signage to comply with the UDO. A ground entrance sign is proposed as you enter the site. Entrance signs for a Residential complex may have a maximum total area of 50 sf. The petitioner has addressed some original comments on the sign design, and there are just a few more details to work out including the size of the base of the ground sign and labeling the location on all plans. September 20, 2022, Public Hearing Recap: Petitioner presented the site plans for the development and went over the tree preservation areas and the common area plans. Several people spoke in opposition to the project. The main areas for concern included the number of trees to be removed on this site, traffic, request for a tree inventory, and density. Petitioner stated that some of these issues have already been discussed and vetted as a part of the approved PUD rezone. The Plan Commission requested additional tree preservation in the SW common area, confirmation from the Engineering Dept. that the round-a-bout was a safe design, discussion on potential impacts of the widening of I-465 and tree preservation, what could have been done with the previous zoning, exhibit showing the public parking versus the parking on private property, and if there are any special designations for this area a forest. Sent to the Residential Committee with the full Plan Commission having the final vote. DOCS Remaining Comments/Concerns: As this is a large project, there are many items and details to review for compliance with the PUD. The Dept. continues to work with the Petitioner on all the comments as this project moves through Committee review. Some of the outstanding comments include: - Please label the crushed stone path around the pond per the PUD. - Label all Tree Preservation Areas on all Site Plans. - Revise plans to show a full 15 ft tree preservation buffer along the south perimeter of the site. - Can the southernmost street be moved any further north to preserve more trees along 465? - Please plant 1 tree every 50 ft. between the southern 15 ft. bufferyard and the street to help provide more buffer to the interstate and make up for any trees being removed. - Can you keep the SW Common Area at its current grade to preserve those trees and make it into a sunken garden amenity area? 3 - Ensure bike parking is dispersed throughout the development. Provide a bicycle parking plan that clearly shows where all of the proposed bicycle parking is planned. - The PUD requires townhomes along I-465 to have increased soundproofing through the types of windows and the insulation. Petitioner, please confirm. - Please provide the product specs for the architectural lighting. - Enlarge front stoops on the Courtyard homes to be a minimum of 6 ft. deep and 30 sq. ft., per the PUD. - Courtyard homes need more brick on the right-side elevations to better match the PUD images. - Provide details on the look of the retaining wall, such as the materials and the height at street grade. - Please build the deck by the pond further into the pond so there is better connection with the water, as shown in the PUD. Recommendation: The Department of Community Services recommends the Residential Committee discusses this item and then sends it to the November 1st Residential Committee meeting for further review.