Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 11-01-07 CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE DEPARTMENT REPORT November 1, 2007 6-9. Docl{etNo. 070800:16 PP: Rosado\I'LilI The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 3 Jots on 9.05 acres. Subdivision waivers requested are: WITHDRAWN: Docket Nfl. 07080037 Sll/ sea 6.03.03 & e .0'1.01 stue streets t8 adjaeeHt f:lareels Docket No. 07080038 SW sea 6.05.01 - all lots shall abut a public right of way Docket No. 07080039 SW sea 6.05.07 & 6.03 .19 - homes must face a parkway/arterial road Docket No. 07080040 SW seo 8.09.02 - installation of paths/sidewalks The site is located at the southeast corner of 106,11 St. & Spring Mill Rd. and is zoned S-2/Residence. Filed by Joseph Scimia of Baker & Daniels, LLP. The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 3 lots on 9.05 acres. This is a density of 0.33 units per acre, which makes this subdivision exempt from the Open Space Ordinance requirements, since it is less than 0.85 u/ac. This site is heavily wooded, and tree preservation should be a primary goal. The property owner to the east would like to see a street stub to his property for possible future residential or commercial development. Regarding the waivers that state all lots shall abut a public right of way & face and a parkway/arterial road, this site is unique in the fact that it is very wooded. The homes will be nestled in the woods. The rear of homes will most likely not be seen from the streets. The Department docs not have a concern with this waiver request. Regarding the waiver for Installation of paths/sidewalks, the eity's Alternative Transportation Systems Coordinator explains...I1 is my (and the Engineering Department's) opinion that Does should not support these requests and require the sidewalks to be implemented wherever required. The City has made it a goal to provide its citizens the best network of walkable/bikeable infrastructure possible. Furthermore, after these subdivisions have been fully developed and their residents request that sidewalks be implemented where they lack, it will be the City's full responsibility to construct them. By denying these waivers, the City's new developments will be fully connected and any possible safety or convenience concerns can be avoided. DOCS concerns/comments: l. The City Forester, Scott Brewer, still has a concern with the conflict between the drainage easement and tree preservation areas; they should be separate from each other on the site plan. Careful attention should be paid to any drainage casements between lot lines; hopefully they can be left not cleared S0 whatever trees present in them can remain. 2. The petitioner should provide the approval status of the County Highway Dept. (They are still waiting to receive revised plans.) 3. The petitioner should provide the approval status oftbe County Surveyor's Office. (They still have a tew minor issues but nothing that will affect the layout or feasibility ofthe project.) 4. The petitioner ;nay be required to commit to the Draft Residential Architectural Design Guidelines. 5. The petitioner needs to work out issues regarding compliance with the Thoroughfare Plan and Alternative Transportation Plan, especially with the installation of paths or contributing monies to the non-reverting thoroughfare fund for the cost to build the pedestrian paths/bridges. DOCS recommends the Committee table this item to the November 29 Committee meeting to provide the petitioner time to address all comments & concerns.