HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 08-06-02
CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE
DEPARTMENT REPORT
August 6, 2002
2. Docket No. 81-02 PP; Laura Vista Subdivision (primary Plat)
The applicant seeks approval to plat a 55-lot residential subdivision on 34.94 acres. The
site is generally located south of Danbury Estates subdivision between SR 431 and the
Foster Estates Subdivision. The site is zoned R-l/Residence.
The petitioner also seeks approval of the following Subdivision Waivers:
81-02a SW sea 6.5.1 50' offrontage
81-02b SW sea 7.6.3 < 2 points of access to open space
81-02c SW sea 7.6.3 open space < 75' in width
81-02d SW sea 6.3.7 cul-de-sac> 600' in length
81-02e SW sea 6.2.1 subdividing within floodway
Filed by Brandon Burke of The Schneider Corporation for Primrose Development, LLC.
The applicant is proposing a 55-lot subdivision on approximately 35 acres. Please note that the
number of lots has been revised from 54 on the original plan submitted by the applicant. This
change was made after the Technical Advisory Committee meeting based on the direction of
DOCS. Please see the information packet provided by the applicant and specifically the narrative
provided going into greater detail regarding the layout of the subdivision, the proposed
Alternative Transportation Plan Path the crosses the site, and the incorporation of the existing
home site into the subdivision.
To expand on the information the applicant has provided the density of the proposed subdivision
is 1.57 nits per acre. This density is significantly lower than the permitted base density of 2.9
units per acre. Also, as a comparison, the density ofthe Foster Estates subdivision is 2.03 units
per acre (313 lots on 155.78). The significant distinction between the two developments is lot
size and open space. The Foster Estates subdivision has typical lot sizes of 16,000+/- s.f. and no
open space other than a pool and play area of less than one acre. The proposed subdivision has
typical lot sizes of 10,500+/- s.f. and 38% (11 + acres) of open space.
Questions/concerns/comments raised at the Public Hearing included the following:
1. Concern regarding traffic on streets within Foster Estates, both safety and congestion
were discussed.
2. Support for the type of construction was heard
3. Questions were asked regarding the impact on property values
4. Requests were made to allow more time to review the requests. The Department has not
received additional questions regarding this request after the public hearing.
Committee Report 2002-8-6
Remaining Department concerns/issues:
1. Paths within the development open to public access via easement.
2. Construction of ATP path responsibility of developer.
3. Access to lot #55 shall be from Vista Drive. The existing easement to Danbury shall be
vacated with secondary plat approval.
Background information on subdivision waivers:
1. The first waiver, minimum lot frontage of 50' at the right-of-way is necessary due to
the location and access to the existing home, proposed lot 55, within the middle of the
subdivision. This parcel is currently served via an easement out to Danbury Estates
Subdivision. The applicant proposes to provide access to the lot via an easement running
west off of the proposed Vista Drive. The Department has asked the applicant to include
this area in the plat and provide an option for access to the property other than crossing
Cool Creek. The Department is in favor of the request.
2. The second waiver, < 2 points of access to open space, relates to the open space between
Foster Estates and the proposed lots. The applicant has indicated that they do not want to
encourage use of this buffer area and that providing the second point of access may
encourage people to walk through the area. They have provided opportunities for
walking trails in other open area within the subdivision. The Department is in favor of
this request
3. The third waiver, minimum 75' width of open space to separate the lots from the
existing Foster Estates subdivision. The proposed width is 55'. This is necessary to
accommodate the size of the lots that will be between the proposed Vista Drive and the
existing Foster Estates subdivision. The applicant has expressed a willingness to reduce
the size of these lots to meet the 75' required. The larger lots and fee simple ownership
of more of the area between the two subdivisions should, like waiver request number two,
discourage use of the area and enhance the buffer intent and effect. The Department is in
support ofthis request.
4. The forth waiver, cul-de-sac> 600' in length, is necessary for the proposed Faust Court.
While the length of Faust Court does not exceed the permitted length the distance from
the closest intersecting street (not a cul-de-sac) exceeds this length. As one can see from
the layout Faust Court is designed to follow the contours ofthe land. The limiting design
factor is that the only option for serving the property to the north, which is land-locked
today, would terminate Vista Drive in a Cul-de-sac on that property. The Department is
in favor of this request.
5. The fifth waiver, subdividing within floodway, is necessary exclusively to
accommodate the existing parcel, proposed lot 55. All other lots are outside the
floodway. The Department is in favor of this request.
As noted above two of the waivers are necessary to accommodate the existing parcel (1 & 5) and
two are requested to enhance the quality of the buffer between the tow subdivisions (2 & 3). The
Committee Report 2002-8-6
Department finds merit in all five requests having determined that they will serve to enhance the
quality and character of the proposed subdivision or address the existing and unique layout of the
existing parcel in the center of the site.
In summary, the proposed subdivision conforms to the intent of the Open Space requirements,
provides for the construction of the ATP Trail and connection, and serves as an appropriate infill
between the Keystone Ramp (under construction) and the existing Foster Estates Subdivision.
The Department recommends that this item be forwarded to the full Plan Commission with
a favorable recommendation after all comments and concerns have been addressed.
Committee Report 2002-8-6