Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 08-01-06 ,.. LJ , u CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE DEPARTMENT REPORT August 1, 2006 7. Docket No. 06050020 PP: Clay Creek The applicant seeks to plat 30 lots on 29.971 acres. The site is located on Hoover Road north of 116th Street and is zoned S 1. The app lieant seeks the following waivers for the proposed plat: 06050022 SW: SCO Chapter 6.05.07 Orientation of Rome - request to allow dwellings to face internal street 06050023 SW: sca Chapter 7.05.07 Clearing of greater than 15% of mature woodlands. Filed by Charlie Frankenberger for MHE Development Co. LLC. The applicant is requesting approval of a primary plat consisting of 30 lots on 30 acres. Please refer to the draft ordinance and proposed site plan submitted with the packet mailing for full details. As part of this plat a Thoroughfare Plan required segment of Meeting House Road would be constructed. The subdivision is laid out as two cul-de-sacs, both of which gain access from the extended Meeting House Road. Because the site is heavily wooded in areas, a waiver has been requested to allow the clearing of more than 15% of the mature woodlands. Part of the wooded area is located in the right-of-way of Meeting House Road; however, all clearing is subject to review by the Urban Forester. The petitioner has also requested a 'waiver to allow homes adjacent to Hoover Roaci and the Meeting House Road Extension to face inward. Elevations, as well as written site and architectural commitments, have been submitted to mitigate the inward- facing dwellings. The public hearing for this item was held at the July 18th Plan Commission Meeting. Several members of the public spoke in opposition with concerns about existing tree preservation, and the installation of the Thoroughfare Plan required extension of Meeting House Road. At the meeting, the Plan Conunission requested that staff answer the following questions: Why tlte new collector street construction standard (why does this proposed segment of Meettng House Road /lot match the existing segment in the Village of West Clay)? When the segment in the Village of West Clay was constructed, this area was still under the County Highway's jurisdiction. While our standards require a median and pedestrian paths for a collector street, theirs do not. Now that this site is within the City of Carmel's Engineering jurisdiction, the road segment must be built to our standards. A two lane roadway with median and pedestrian paths is the standard for all collector streets within the City's jurisdiction. The reason for this design is as follows: ~ u u a. A median provides a better visual aesthetic for a road carrying such capacity, and it also reduces the impact on the surrounding properties. With a median the visual and sound impact of the roadway is greatly reduced. With the addition of required street trees and median plantings, the road (and its "separated" traffic) is more in character with a residential context. b. The required paths along collector streets are a vital link: of the non motorized transportation system. While these paths are conveniently located for their adjoining residences, they are meant to serve as links for the community as a whole. Will the extension 01 Meeting House Road create nonconforming double frontage lots? The Subdivision Control Ordinance does not permit residential lots to be double frontage lots. The desired construction of Meeting House Road (as required by the adopted Thoroughfare Plan) will in fact create some double fronting lots. This is a situation that can not be avoided, given the previous approval of the plat layout for the High Grove Subdivision. The Thoroughfare Plan required this segment of Meeting House Road at the time ofPtimary Plat approval of High Grove. The responsibility of I and allotment for this street segment was not made as part of the High Grove plat approval. Given the need to align with the existing Meeting House Road at the Hoover Road intersection, the proposed route is the only feasible geometry that works for these parcels. It should be noted that the intent of prohibiting double frontage lots is to deny "cut through" access to two different streets through a privately owned parcel (both to reduce points of public right of way conflict, and to protect the homeowner from other potential "cut through" traffic). Collector Streets do not pennit direct lot access, so in reality such is not an issue with this proposed scenario. This situation does warrant special consideration to allow the double frontage lots to occur in that its is not a local serving street, and that there are no other feasible options that will work to accommodate the road segment that is a necessary link in the community's transportation network.. Staff recognizes that additional buffering has been requested by existing homeowners in the adjoining lots in High Grove. One option to consider would be to increase the width of the pedestrian path on the north side of the new street segnlent (from 10' to 14'), and reduce the path width (or better yet install only a 5' sidewalk) along the southern portion of the street. This would in effect shift the travel lanes to the south by a few more feet. This scenario has received a preliminary approval from Camlel Engineering. The following items are to be discussed at the Subdivision Committee: 1. An update on landscape plan approval status. Given the exiting trees on site, the Urban Fonester is working to preserve those trees that could be easily included in required bufferyards and common areas. The Plan Commission requested a tree survey overlaid on a proposed site plan that identifies what is being removed, and how much over 15% of the existing mature woodlands is being removed (and where such is being removed). 2. An update on outstanding Carmel Engineering issues. Many of these issues have been resolved through the petitioner's design alterations. The petitioner must touch base with Engineering to identify those items yet to be resolved. 3. Staff recommends that the proposed stub to the east from Blackhawk Court be shifted either north or south to avoid lining up with the existing trees along the fence row to the east. By shifting this stub a future connection can be made without requiting the removal s u u of these trees. 4. The Plan Commission required illustrative views into the lots from the adjoining rights of way (to support the vvaiver for houses facing internally). The Department recommends that these petitions be continued to the September 5th Committee Meeting to allow time for the above items to be fully resolved. -- u u DeVore, laura B From: Sent: To: DeVore, Laura B Friday, July 28,2006 10:28 AM DeVore, Laura B; 'Jon Isaacs (E-mail)'; 'Steve Pittman (E-mail)'; 'Paul Reis (E-mail)'; 'Chris.laystrom@woolpert.com'; 'tgeorge@signcraftind.com'; 'MSchmidl@klcorp.com'; 'Ann Walker (E-mail)'; Larry Kemper (E-mail); 'Charlie Frankenberger (E-mail)'; 'Mary Salada (E- mail)'; 'Shahpor Shahbahrami (E-mail).;.jpearson@pearsonford.net.; 'tslakes@mirandaconstruction .com' Carmel Special Studies and Subdivision Committee Department Reports Subject: Attached are the Department Reports for the Special Studies and Subdivision Committee Meetings to be held on August 1, 2006. They are contained in a single document, so it will be necessary for you to scroll through to find the Department Report that pertains to you. Should you have any questions regarding this information, feel free to contact me by replying to this email or by telephone at (317) 571-2417, Thank you! Sincerely, Laura Rouse-DeVore City of Carmel, Indiana Department of Community Services Planning and Zoning ~.......... ~ Committee Report 2006-0801.doc... 1