HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 10-16-07
CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT REPORT
October 16,2007
15-191-1. Docket No. 07080036 PP: Rosado Hill
The applicant seeks primary plat approval for 3 lots on 9.05 acres. Also, subdivision
waivers requested are:
Docket No. 07080037 SW
Docket No. 07080038 SW
Docket No. 07080039 SW
parkway/arterial road
Docket No. 07080040 SW sca 8.09.02 - installation of paths Is ide walks
The site is located at the southeast corner of 106th St. & Spring Mill Rd. and is zoned S-
2/Residence. Filed by Joseph Scimia of Baker & Daniels, LLP.
SCO 6.03.03 & 6.04.04 - stub streets to adjacent parcels
SCO 6.05.01 - all lots shall abut a public right of way
SCO 6.05.07 & 6.03.19 - homes must face a
Thc 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.
Regarding the waiver for stub streets to adjacent parcels, the property owner to the east would like to see
a street stub to his property for possible future residential or commercial development. The property to the
south is already developed and it would not make sense to provide a stub street to this subdivision. The
Commission should consider these aspects when voting on this waiver request.
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, tl1 is email from the Alternative Transportation
Systems Coordinator explains the City's viewpoint:
Recently it seems as if there have been several Subdivision Waiver requests from developers to not put
sidewalks on both sides of internal subdivision streets. It is my (and the Engineering Department's)
opinion that DOCS 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. By allowing subdivisions to develop without sidewalks on
each side of their internal streets, we would be supporting just the opposite. Furthermore, at1er 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 implement them. Therefore, by denying these
waivers, the City's new developments will be fully connected and any possible safety or convenience
concerns related to these potential sidewalks can be avoided.
DOCS concerns/comments:
1. The City Forester, Scott Brewer, needs a revised landscape plan and a tree preservation plan. He
does not havc any problem with the waiver requests. The bufferyard requirements can be
fulfilled by existing vegetation, but he would like a tree preservation plan that shows the
significant trees to remain (over 6" dbh). Careful attention should be paid to any drainage
easements between lot lines; hopefully they can be left not cleared so 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 of the County Surveyor's Ot1ice. (They still
have a few minor issues but nothing that will affect the layout or feasibility ofthe project.)
4. The petitioner may be required to commit to the Draft Residential Architectural Design
Guidelines.
5. DOCS outstanding issues:
Will there be a subdivision sign? Ora fence/watl? If so, please provide details.
Will there be any covenants/restrictions?
A ] O-ft asphalt path is required, per A TP. Or, it may be possible to provide monies to the non-
reverting thoroughfare fund.
Address the issue of the drive location, and its proximity to the roundabout.
The Department of Community Services recommends the Plan Commission forward this item to
the Nov. 1 Subdivision Committee meeting for further review.