Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes SpecStdy 02-09-99 Thoroughfare PlanCARMEL /CLAY PLAN COMMISSION SPECIAL STUDY COMMITTEE SPECIAL SESSION THOROUGHFARE PLAN FEBRUARY 9, 1999 The Special Session of the Special Study Committee met at 7:00 PM in the Caucus Rooms of City, One Civic Square, Carmel, on February 9, 1999. Members in attendance were: Kevin Kirby; Pat Rice; Rick Sharp; and Paul Spranger. Also in attendance were Dave Cremeans, ex- officio; Tom Yedlick, chairman of the Subdivision Committee; and County Commissioner Sharon Clark. Steve Engelking, Director; Mike Hollibaugh; and Terry Jones were present representing the Department of Community Services. Announcements: a) On March 1, at the John Hensel Township Center, 7:00 PM, the County will be conducting a public hearing regarding the proposed intersection improvements for 116 Street and Towne Road. b) 96 Street Task Force will hold its first public meeting on February 23' d 7:00 PM at the Nora Library. c) Carmel Drive Streetscape Committee will meet Thursday, February 11 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers, One Civic Square, Carmel. Single Item: Committee to consider Docket No. 84 -98 CPA, proposed amendments to the Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan, specifically Chapter 6, the Thoroughfare Plan. Filed by the Plan Commission. Les Locke's letter of November, 1998 to Paul Spranger, copy attached, was discussed openly on a point -by -point basis, some of which is past history at this time. Some points: 146 Street the Committee unanimously concurs with the County's plan. 96 Street Bridge Over I -465 (Monon) makes sense and is cheaper; however, the City does not control it -it is County. The consensus of the Committee is to keep options open on this area until the 96 Street corridor study is completed later this year. Towne Road it was voted unanimously to make Towne Road a primary arterial parkway, exact route to be determined, with 140 feet of right -of -way, to run from 96 Street north to 146 Street. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 1 131" Street from Spring Mill west as far as is practical, should be designated "Main Street Boulevard." 131 Street (Bridge over U.S. 31) re- classify as primary parkway from Spring Mill to Old Meridian. Dorsett To Remain Open, however, landscaping can be done to narrow it and slow it down rather than putting in speed bumps. Note: Dorset is functioning as initially designed. 116 Street Maintain right -of -way at 150 feet for long term plan of boulevard and design area for 4 lane retain designation of Primary Arterial throughout Clay Township. (Three in favor, Paul Spranger opposed) 106 Street classified as Secondary Arterial west of Shelborne, 100 feet of right -of -way. Hoover Road Extends north to 146 Street and remains on the map. Amendments to be spelled out in Text as well as conceptual drawing. 126 Shelbome No School proposed at this location at this time. Range Line Road Westfield Boulevard Clarification South of 116 Street is Westfield Boulevard; north of 116 Street begins Range Line Road. Residential Parkway could be a new classification of Westfield between 96 Street and 98 Street, perhaps north to 116 Street. DOCS will look into adding this classification. Meridian Corners Boulevard Extension construction tied to completion of a building in Duke's Hamilton Crossing Development. Consensus of the Committee The objective is not to design the roads but to reserve right -of -way for future roads and roadway expansion. The Committee voted to recommend the amendments to the Thoroughfare Plan to the full Plan Commission for approval, (Paul Spranger opposed). The amendments will be brought before the Commission at the March meeting. There being no further business to come before the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 PM. Rick Sharp, Committee Chairperson Ramona Hancock, Secretary z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 2 OPEN DISCUSSION VOTE SPECIAL SESSION THOROUGHFARE PLAN FEBRUARY 9, 1999 Rick Sharp asked about the placement of an ATM at the Parkwood Crossing Complex at 96 Street. The Committee had approved the ATM but it was to be stripped of signage There is currently a banner being displayed for a "grand opening," however, the time has probably run out by now and the Department will look into the situation. In regard to the RELIASTAR site at Guilford and Carmel Drive, there are some wonderful trees on the property and the petitioner should be prepared to preserve. Single Item: Committee to consider Docket No. 84 -98 CPA, Rick Sharp: An interesting place to start would be Les Locke's point -by -point letter to Paul Spranger in November, 1998 regarding his comments as to the proposed amendments. Paul Spranger: Just to give you some background, that was fairly early in the process so that some of the things were still in draft form and Les was responding to some very early drafts and is a little bit of past history. Dave Cremeans: It would appear that there are still some differences between Les' letter and the Plan Commission's position. Rick Sharp: There are some material differences in proposed minimum right -of -way between what is proposed by the County and Carmel's Thoroughfare Plan. Paul Spranger: Perhaps part of the difference is that Carmel has been pressing for HCAT, bike path sort of thing, so he is sort of throwing it back at us in some ways. We do want to reserve as much right -of -way as we can, but at the same time, we don't want to build 96 Street east of Keystone. Dave Cremeans: The first question that I have is 146 Street, classified now as a parkway on our Thoroughfare Plan- -Les Locke has it listed as a secondary arterial. Kevin Kirby: Les controls within the Township and the City of Carmel gave our rights on 146 Street to the County. It doesn't matter what you call it, the road will be whatever the County builds. Even if we did get jurisdiction, to re -build it into a parkway in 20 or 30 years is not feasible anyway. Terry Jones: In the event of an interlocal agreement, we would have to follow the plan. Dave Cremeans: Is there any talk in the 146 Street area of a circumferential road? (Called the outer loop) z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 Steve Engelking: If it was ever going to be another "ring road" all around the greater Indianapolis area, the minimum distance is 20 miles from I -465. Terry Jones: Other cities have a minimum of 5 to 7 miles. There have been plans that go back to the sixties for 146 Street, Road 32, etc. Rick Sharp: In order to make linear progress, why don't we get a vote as a suggestion comes up and then we will be done with it and move on to the next item, seconded by Kevin Kirby. Rick Sharp consensus is we will drop 146 Street back to being in concurrence with the County's plan. Dave Cremeans: The 96 Street thing --I have no idea where that's going to go, but it seems nuts to have spent all the money that everybody did and have 96 Street basically ?inaudible. Rick Sharp: Well, I don't argue with that, but I think...... Dave Cremeans: But it's coming the other way -we're going to turn from 96h Street, from Keystone to US 31 if all of this stuff happens, it is going to be the most heavily traveled two -lane road in America. Pat Rice: What is? Dave Cremeans: 96 Street, from Keystone to Meridian. I don't know the answer. Pat Rice: Well, that's why I think the study is so critical. Rick Sharp: I agree, but I think it's ludicrous to keep the door open on the Monon as an option. I think the Monon has got to be closed as an option so they begin thinking of other alternatives -we probably need a bridge over it. That is unpalatable, people don't want to think about it, but I think we've got to be a little more forward thinking. Mike Hollibaugh: comments inaudible Rick Sharp: We are just responding to what Les is saying. Les wants the door open. Kevin Kirby: In Les' defense, keep in mind that from an engineering standpoint, that makes sense. Rick Sharp: Yes, and it is cheaper. Kevin Kirby: I've been in this business a long time.... Sharon Clark: Excuse me, what engineering standpoint -not to go under the Monon?... z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 4 Kevin Kirby: Yes. Sharon Clark: No, that is not a good engineering decision. Kevin Kirby: I see. Where is your engineering degree? Sharon Clark: My degree is the study that has been done by other engineers, and I will defend that study... Kevin Kirby: From a technical standpoint, the underpass, the way 465 is and the way 96 Street is, it is still a viable option, but what politicians do, (and I'm a politician) we take that and then subvert it into what is politically correct. It is not politically correct to go under the Monon. Rick Sharp: For a variety of reasons. There is a large group of people who would say "Yea, go under there and close down that damn trail! I think what I am trying to say is we're taking Les' comments and I think we should keep the door closed. I don't think we should open the door and put it on the table. Kevin Kirby: It was a politically correct study. Pat Rice: Oh, that is not right -HNTB did not do a politically correct study. Rick Sharp: OK For all concerned, I would love to continue with this, but unless you want to open the door and put the Monon on the table to put 96 Street through, I'm sorry I raised this -it was only to say "Do we agree with Les or not," and I think the sentiment is we don't agree -We keep the Monon off the table. Kevin Kirby: Politically, it is.... Steve Engelking: He is absolutely correct. The door was closed on this when the Council voted to incorporate into the plan the course of action other than the Monon. But we don't control it! Today, we don't control it. Rick Sharp: Absolutely correct, but that is the purpose of amending.... Paul Spranger: That was the one item we couldn't reconcile, in between the Comprehensive Plan/Thoroughfare Plan for both Township and County. That is the one where Les Locke and I went toe -to -toe. Sharon Clark: The reason he didn't call .....inaudible Paul Spranger: No question. But also, I think there was a discussion about looking at the cost of the alternatives raised: Spanning over 465 was going to be triple the cost of going z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 under and there was disagreement about numbers at that point. We stated our position, and we didn't want to go any further. Sharon Clark: ....the 96 Street corridor study... Paul Spranger: Right, and that's where the 96 Street special study is so critical. So really, the 96 Street study is off the chart here; 146 Street is off the Chart according to his letter. Steve Engelking: One reason we chose to make a study area identified on the map is that until that is done and some formal decisions made, there is no sense..... Rick Sharp: ...beating a dead dog. I agree. Let's move on and beat another dog. Terry Jones: .....The only thing closing the door on the Monon is the State Highway. While it may be politically incorrect today to put a road through there, if there is a trail there, 20 years from now it could be politically correct to put a road there. I can guarantee you the pressures will change. People were sitting around talking about a bridge across White River 20 -30 years ago -There is a bridge there today because people kept that line across the River and 30 years later, it gave the people the option of using that to put the bridge in. So, I think you can show the line going across 465, maintaining that. It may look like something that will work. You can't tell people we've closed the door on the idea. Rick Sharp: I agree with you. Next point is 131S Street. We can almost say "We agree with Les or we don't agree with Les." Kevin Kirby: 131s'-- it really should be in our Thoroughfare Plan. Dave Cremeans: Secondary arterial? Kevin Kirby: We say it should be a boulevard. I think you need to keep your grid roads as your main roads. I know boulevards are pretty and everything. And, if we are successful at getting 131S Street put back over Meridian, that will once again become a very important east /west road. We've got to convince the State to let us build it and then give us the money or we're going to wait forever. Sharon Clark: Well, I would like the County to participate with the State Highway, we need that road. Paul Spranger: Well, it's going to tie west Clay to Carmel City and the High School. I mean, it is the road the High School is on. Rick Sharp: What High School? Oh, you mean our high school -I thought you were talking about the new one. z ACommittees \spst\ 1999feb9 Kevin Kirby: I think it's a very good idea to call 131 Street... number one, our plan recommends that it go over 31; number two, make it a primary or secondary Terry Jones: Either way, adding the word primary arterial to parkway begs the existence.... Rick Sharp: No, I think the big key is that if we are going for designations that delineate the type of right -of -way, we go for the biggest chunk of pie we can get. I'm in complete agreement -I think that road can play a major role in the future of the community, especially with the Bridge. The Bridge is going to come -I have a feeling that the City and the County, especially teamed up, will be successful. Kevin Kirby: 146 Street is an excellent example. Is there State money in that? We've got to do better than that. We're working on it. Rick Sharp: OK then, what would we call it? The designation as either a secondary or a primary grabs more right -of -way than a boulevard, right? Sharon Clark: It's a primary. Kevin Kirby: And when you think about it, those are the original farmer market roads, the main roads, and they make sense for them to still be there. It will alleviate some of the problems of Dorsett. Paul Spranger: Mike, can you see any problems with classifying as a primary for the purposes of the State -any fall out or down side? Mike Hollibaugh: It would depend on whether the primary ......inaudible Paul Spranger: Well, there are also some high value homes Kevin Kirby: Right now, we show it as a primary or secondary from Springmill to Old Meridian. You're going to cut through an old neighborhood there, but when you realistically look at the future of that neighborhood, it is not going to be there long. It might be the first place in Carmel where there is re- development. Terry Jones: From the INDOT perspective, people I know down there, they are engineers and they have put a lot of thought into something like this preferential, primary or secondary arterial. Kevin Kirby: Well, from Springmill on to Meridian, it's not a problem.. Dave Cremeans: Old Meridian. Kevin Kirby: I'm thinking the Day Care is surely far enough back from the road not to be a problem. West Park..... z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 Paul Spranger: The edge of West Park is on the right -of -way. Terry Jones: The only time you would be worried about that.... Paul Spranger: There's not that many houses up against. We're not talking about that many houses, maybe 6 houses that would be impacted. But that stretch from Springmill to Old Meridian, if we class that as a primary, because that's going to see a lot of activity, it's going to be a connector, that will solve the problem with State, and then we can take it from Springmill on as a secondary or however we wish to class it, or back to boulevard status which goes through the country but also, there aren't...... Kevin Kirby: What are we going to do about that little one lane piece of 131 that goes into that new addition...... Rick Sharp: I wanted to ask about that, it's still in litigation. Have I got my stories right, is that the one that will take half a garage and put the road outside someone's bay window? So that's where we are on that, it's not resolved. Sharon Clark: Well, it was a farm road....... Kevin Kirby: There was a lot of discussion as to whether or not it was every really a County Road. I know when I was a kid it was Herman deBoers.... Paul Spranger: Mr. Chairman, will you accept a motion? I make the motion that we re- classify 131 Street from Springmill to Old Meridian as a primary parkway. All in favor. I would like to make a second motion that the section of 131 Street from Springmill West to as far as practical, (the western edge of 131 Street may be defined by the Courts) shall be the Main Street Boulevard. All in favor. Interrupted by visit from Doug Haney. Rick Sharp: Well, I guess we are going to have to talk about Towne Road. Les has grave concerns about Towne Road being a primary parkway from 96 to 116 Street. I'm going to see how we can hand this. Does anyone else have grave concerns? No grave concerns -Move On! Dave Cremeans: In the Towne Road issue, we've got that listed as a parkway. I'm having trouble keeping up with all of this, but what's the right -of -way on a parkway? (140 feet) So we have that as a primary arterial according to the proposed geometric standards for Towne Road? Rick Sharp: Right. Dave Cremeans: I'm looking at the proposed here and it says primary arterial 140 foot minimum without multi -use path. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 Rick Sharp: Yes. 120 is their current standard. Paul Spranger: These are the proposed. In other words, what we did if you look at Towne Road, the County was 120, we went to George in a you remember that conversation in a sidebar, that we needed to reserve, given the fact that Indpls. had 140 feet of right -of -way, we needed to reserve 140 feet of right -of -way through there so we could have a parkway commensurate to West Clay, through his project. He was going to actually have parking set up-- parallel, on- street parking, within the 120 foot right -of -way. So, we now have 140 thanks to George and Staff We've cleared that blockage. Obviously we are going to have some issues with certain houses on the south end, but it is going to be a matter of reserving 140 and probably building and making some modifications as it gets down.... Dave Cremeans: I drove that tonight very slowly because I thought it might come up. There are six houses that will have to come out. Paul Spranger: If the actual build -out isn't modified. Dave Cremeans: You have a 140 foot right -of -way, and unless it's going to snake around the houses, which I don't think so, we're going to have to plow down six houses. I assume those houses are worth a couple hundred grand a piece. Kevin Kirby: Where are those houses, I'm trying to picture.... Dave Cremeans: If you go north on Towne, the first house on the west side is about one quarter mile north of 96 Street, that's the very first house. There are two houses going in which will be Simon's son -in -law. The next couple of houses are OK. There is another house close to the road, and then on the east side, there are three in a row that are 30 -40 feet off the right -of -way. But that's the only issue from 106 to 96 Street. Steve Engelking: But how much right -of -way would there be possible without disturbing those -we may not be able to get 140 feet, but maybe we could get 100 feet and have a four lane road going through without a median. We're looking at doing that on Illinois Street right now. Kevin Kirby: Do we knock down Kirk's house? Steve Engelking: No, right at Carmel Drive there is only 100 feet in reserve between two buildings. You're only going to be able to put in a 100 foot right -of -way in there. We know Illinois wants to be larger than that, but we could have it narrow in and go out where it has the ability to do so. Dave Cremeans: Have you guys ever driven through Houston? You can drive down the interstate and reach out and touch the buildings -you could scrape your knuckles on the buildings. That's where we're going to be with these houses. z ACommittees \spst\ 1999feb9 Paul Spranger: Houston is a great classic example of farm to market state without the enabling legislation. It's an unbelievable place. Now, Texas today has the enabling legislation that they can build a road anywhere they want to because of the Houston experience. Hopefully we won't go through that. The question is, of course, the County now has a 120 foot right -of -way so we're talking about an additional 10 feet on each side. Those houses are going to be impacted by the County. Dave Cremeans: But those houses, I think, there would be enough outcry, that if we built a street in somebody's living room, they are not going to be happy with us. We are going to have to buy those houses. Now, I don't understand how all this works, but that's my understanding. Sharon Clark: We're buying houses -all the time. Rick Sharp: I think that one of the things we might want to try is -I think Paul raises an excellent point that regardless of the standards we might put into place, the County standards are going to be 120 in all likelihood. Paul Spranger: They are right now. Rick Sharp: Oh, they are 120 you're right. You're going higher yet. Sharon Clark: We are trying desperately to get 150. Rick Sharp: That's correct, I'm sorry. So we're really only debating two things: one is 20 feet, and the other is a future vision because no one is going to knock those houses down today. Paul Spranger: They'll pick them up and move them. Dave Cremeans: But think about Towne Road that runs from 146 Street to 96 Street and dead -ends. Steve Engelking: No, it continues south into Marion County. Dave Cremeans: I know, I drive it every day. 96 Street goes south to this very narrow, two lane bridge over 465. Sharon Clark: This is one of the things that's coming up in the study -they are looking at both sides of 96 Street at the overpass, so it is very possible that it will be a four lane overpass. Dave Cremeans: OK. Because today it isn't and it would sort of be a bottleneck. But as I drove further north, if you come from 106 Street north, there is plenty of right -of -way. The houses on the west side, the new school No. 10, the llama farm, there's three houses, zACommittees \spst \1999feb9 10 another new house that was just built, there is one problem and that is that house, remember where they straightened out Shelborne Road, (Towne Road) there's that little piece of high land out there, that little wedge that's not going to hurt anything. That would certainly help ease all that. But there is an old farm house there. It's on the southwest corner. On the east side is Crooked Stick II and that's all wide open. Rick Sharp: Just north of there is one potential problem; someone's got a concrete garden sculpture..... Dave Cremeans: With a truck parked right on the edge with a sign on it! What I was wondering was if the right -of -way north of 106 Street shouldn't differ with the right -of- way south of 106 Street, and maybe go from a parkway and bike paths to simply a road- secondary arterial road. So you don't have to spend all that money on... Paul Spranger: On those six houses. Rick Sharp: Well yes, but they are going to have schools on that road in that area. Dave Cremeans: Well, I'm not talking about -it would still be a four lane road. I'm just talking about it not being a boulevard. End Tape 1, Side A Steve Engelking: It could be the Hazeldell of the west side Kevin Kirby: Absolutely. Steve Engelking: For the most part, the capability for the right -of -way, at least a four mile stretch of it, exists. The more construction that takes place on 106 Rick Sharp: The more pressure you're going to have, no question. In fact, if we were able to carry it through as parkway, past the road on the other side of 465, I think that would help dictate to the State what that bridge needs to be that crosses 465. Paul Spranger: I think they know that there's not much argument about that. Kevin Kirby: I believe Towne Road with the turn lanes pretty much turns into 4 lanes once you get south of the bridge. So, I think we need to look at that, it could be a big reliever there's a lot of employment centers down there, there's a lot of people that would.... Dave Cremeans: Towne is only four lanes from the interstate actually south way south of the interstate, 91 Street. The other concern I have, there is a school at 106 and Towne, and another proposed at 116 we have to make sure we don't build a highway. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 11 Paul Spranger: I think a parkway enhances compared to a four lane roadway, particularly with school buses. Dave Cremeans: Then I take back what I said, it should be a parkway. Rick Sharp: I heard that as a motion -is there a second? Kevin Kirby: Second! Rick Sharp: See, I was right -we don't have a problem with Towne Road. Dave Cremeans: I just wanted to make sure everybody understood the issue. Kevin Kirby: We're 140 foot right -of -way, primary parkway -so we're agreeing. Rick Sharp: We are agreeing. Does anyone share a need to go into this discussion about alleys and 40 foot required by the State? No -OK. Les thinks we need to review in general all of our rights -of -way and that's what we're doing. So, let's move on -that takes care of that letter. Next. Pat Rice: I have a backup question. That section that we were talking about (back to Towne Road) could there be something worded that would take into account what we talked about narrowing Rick Sharp: Squeezing the road down. Paul Spranger: That is a build- out..... Kevin Kirby: You leave that to the designers. Steve Engelking: It becomes obvious when the buildout occurs. Pat Rice: Well, the only reason I bring that up is, you know, that "little voice in the wilderness" kind of thing is that people live there and they see something, something gets published and they are scared to death if they haven't had suddenly it's put in front of them --"my goodness, they are going to take my front porch away." Dave Cremeans: Well, I think what is going to happen is six people are going to have to move. The main reason I bring up that street is because of how close the houses are, the remaining houses are not close enough to the right -of -way to be taken, but their front porch is right up on the pass lane. Pat Rice: That's what I thought I heard, that some places it would be narrowed down. Dave Cremeans: There's really about six houses that are really going to have to move. The rest of them are smaller impacts. zACommittees \spst \1999feb9 12 Steve Engelking: I'm not arguing with you, but the conversation went on and I suggested that would be one way to relieve it. But then, there was a motion made to accept 140 feet of right -of -way from 96th to 146 Street which overlooked that. Pat Rice: I thought it incorporated it. Rick Sharp: It did -and it didn't explicitly. One of the things we talked about is taking the view that we were trying to make a plan for the long term, and it's almost impossible to determine what is going to physically develop. We are trying to provide flexibility because let's face it, these are political decisions someone is going to make ten years, five years, three years from now. The whole political outlook and whole political makeup can shift between now and then. I have looked at this as an exercise in preserving options for future decision makers. Steve Engelking: I you want to preserve options, you want to preserve them to the widest possible if that's what you want in that area. You can always come in. Kevin Kirby: The place for compromise for individuals is not on the Thoroughfare, it's in the actual Plan. Steve Engelking: If you look at Hazeldell, we did just exactly what I described on 146 and Hazeldell- -we've got greater right -of -way south of there than we do on 146 Street, basically because of the buildings that existed there, so we narrowed it in, paved the grass area in between, made it non existent or minimal. Kevin Kirby: And the road still works very well. Pat Rice: And that's what I thought I heard us saying, I just in some way, for the public to know that somebody isn't just sitting out with a drawing board, saying "so what if somebody lives there." I don't know how you do that, but I think that helps the public accept certain things that otherwise, they just get terrified. Steve Engelking: Well, let me just draw an analogy. If the northeast corridor decision was to try to solve or to contract with the farmers in the northeast corridor, and they decided to re -enact the decision that went down years ago, and that was to terminate I -69 at the spaghetti bowl, they have a plan right now that cuts a swath right down through there. They decided not to go on with it, it takes out 300 businesses, a thousand or so houses. Yes, the people got upset about it, but the reality was Long Range Planning might say "Yes, we had to make that decision to do it." And that's where I think Terry is thinking outside the box. If you've got primarily undeveloped areas, then you want to put the right plan to build what you feel will be the future need, whether it's five years or ten years down the road. If you're building toward the future with future planning, you build 140 foot right -of -way and you say, "we think today that's what we'll need someday, but we don't need it tomorrow. Pat Rice: There's no argument with that. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 13 Stege Engelking: And then, when it happens, you build what you need based on the right of -way you have preserved. Rick Sharp: Let's face facts planners in the past made political decisions in regard to Springmill Road, not planning decisions. If they had made planning decisions, it would have taken some of the pressure off of us now, because we would have the right -of -way in place for a beautiful northwest primary and we don't because they made political decisions instead of planning. And now, when it's planners, and now even people who live there and influence the decisions say, "we screwed up -we need the roads." Steve Engelking: The whole hope is that decisions made today can be used in the future. We all know that we may not be part of that decision. Administrations change. Sometimes political decisions aren't the decisions that Pat Rice: Terry, in response to you, I think outside the box, it's just the language of how I'm thinking outside the box. Terry Jones: And another thing, when you think about this, are those six houses going to dictate today the right -of -way to be dealt with ten years from now? Because, if those six houses dictate that we are going to make it a country road for the next ten years, all of a sudden, if it goes all the way through there we're sort of stuck. This plan deals with existing right -of -way, the plan has very little proposed, new right -of -way, and that's unfortunate. Steve Engelking: The interesting thing is that the current age here is twenty years and up, so we are talking about a road that might take ten or fifteen years from now, and houses that are made no longer utility anyway. Someone would make the decision to either sell the house or allow them to build through. At that point, there may be a good decision made, we don't know, we can't forecast that. Paul Spranger: Well, I'll give you another one, a point to think about. If (take Springmill for example) they had been very clear to the community and those residents that were moving in, of what was coming, then we are being fair to those people. What's unfair is being vague about what is going to happen or not honest because no one wants to make a hard, political decision, and then, all of a sudden, reality comes and you've got a whole bunch of people that have built on basically false premise and those people are critically injured. It is critical that we don't do that. We have to be responsible and up front and say "this is what is going to happen." Rick Sharp: Back in December, the staff prepared a list of comments that were the results of the first committee meeting on this topic. I was going to read through them and see if there is a "hot button" that someone wants to address. The first one is confirmed- 96 Street right -of -way width east of Keystone and I have marked 120 feet. Does someone want to spit that answer out. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 14 Pat Rice: I thought that was going to be part of the study..... Rick Sharp: East of Keystone. Pat Rice: You're right, I did that again. You're right. Rick Sharp: There was a comment made about the Frenzel property at 126 Street that has caused some consternation and there was a comment made somehow about a deed restriction on the Frenzel property restricting the extension of 126 into the property unless the property is developed. I believe, to take that further, the comment also spoke about a change in the character of use as opposed to simply just developing it. That language was....I think this is worthy of consideration because there were a couple of other areas that we had some discussion about as to whether or not we should take the same tack as 126 Street. If we're going to say that it should at least be considered, then there are some other areas that we should look at and say perhaps they should be considered as well. What was the one that would cut across Sweet Charity? Hoover? Yes. Discussion of extending Hoover Road north. And that of course tied in with the discussion of not deleting Hoover Road from the current plan, because of right now it is still a road that exists and is open. Yes, there is a Planned Unit Development proposed that would do away with that, but Sharon, have they been petitioned to vacate Hoover? (No) So that's still a good road in an area that's really paltry in terms of grid system and I don't see that we should just deem it should come off, in fact, I'd like to see it stay. Anyway, with that in mind, the Staff tried to give us some language that would allow us to indicate where we thought roads should be extended, but not necessary deemed that that straight line would automatically be built like the bridge over White River. Proposed roadways as indicated by dotted lines, or proposed roadway and right -of -way widths should only be required to be extended or constructed as property develops or other compelled public good is justified. What do you guys think about that concept? Kevin Kirby: You know, I have to lobby pretty heavy on this Frenzel road -our relationship with them goes way back; a very good friend of mine is their logger. Once I got this and started looking at it -that the road actually goes somewhere besides Springmill, it brings on in to Illinois, the proposed Illinois, which can take you somewhere, I think it makes a lot of sense to leave it on there. It's not a road that we're going to go out and build ourselves tomorrow, but the Frenzel piece of ground we all know that that is not going to stay cattle pasture..... Steve Engelking: The key words in the recommendation are "as development occurs," as long as there is right -of -way to do that, whether it meanders or goes in a straight line.... Rick Sharp: Yes, I think that owners of tracts of land like that deserve some protection from future political decision makers. Just by the same virtue that you can sit here today and say "Nancy Irsay is never going to sell that horse farm forget it!" 20 years from now -many nevers have expired between now and 20 years from now. Dave Cremeans: No one has ever taken it with them! z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 15 Rick Sharp: I could make a comment, but I'm not going to! I think the concept of showing it as a proposal and having some protective language in there is only fair to people who do own large parcels like that and for as long as they will hold it in that use, I think they deserve to be protected from eminent domain down the line. Kevin Kirby: I don't have any problem with that at all. Terry Jones: Somebody said that they didn't have a problem with telling the public the good, but the thing there is that is basically the language for a condemnation proceeding. The City or County, whatever, would have to approve that...... Dave Cremeans: Terry, the other side of this is, assuming that I own an acre someplace, how much is it going to devalue my property? For example, take the front two parcels, and say I want to develop it into one project or whatever.... Terry Jones: Well, it didn't seem to bother George. I think you have to look at this that everybody wants to save property from being devalued, but there is also a value to it... Pat Rice: If you're going to develop, you have to have roads. Dave Cremeans: But is it a trade off? Terry Jones: If it goes somewhere, it think it is even better, I mean, if you plan for a road and it is serving as a collector and it's going somewhere, then I think it serves as a valuable point as development. As far as dots on a map, I don't know, if Frenzel wants to sell it and you and you want to keep cattle out there just as he has been doing, I... Rick Sharp: But you're never going to become the DOCS! Kevin Kirby: But the main thing is, that we could get another east /west road. If that road were to take off from Clay Center and angle over, that is all relatively undeveloped. That could even head north at a 45 degree and come back out to Illinois pretty close to....I mean, there are many different things that could be done with that road if a developer came in -but what the developer would need to know is-- people, we want a -what are we calling this, a collector road? with 80 feet of right -of -way somewhere through here you are going to give us an 80 foot, we want a public road to go east /west with no cul -de -sacs and will be a passive road, you make it fit your property and you make it come out somewhere where it makes sense. Paul Spranger: I think it makes sense to draw this as an undefined section and maybe that is one of the ways to deal with that, at some point from one boundary to another, it is drawn in as a defined route, but a route through that parcel. Kevin Kirby: That is absolutely do -able, and actually...... z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 16 Paul Spranger: and looking at after we are long gone and somebody looks at this from an appraisal standpoint and says what is going on here? If it is defined so that in the appraisal it says that "the community has the right to do a collector through here, but its actual routing could have some effect on the appraisal of the property. Kevin Kirby: What we have here is certainly highlighted the proposed future new road. There is no reason that can't be treated the same way on the map and a little disclaimer down there that "eventual route may not..... Terry Jones: Exact location to be determined...... Sharon Clark: It's just conceptual. If you want to get from here to here, it is just conception. Kevin Kirby: Yes. Now, some of these are pretty clear, that there is not much else you can do with them. Paul Spranger: Some delineation between perhaps that one and Rick Sharp: Something that will show up in black and white, because the majority of the people see the map in black and white, (by Xerox) highlighting won't work all that well. Terry Jones: Kevin, you suggested having it right on this....this language that we are reading here was technically included.... Rick Sharp: I think we need both. Kevin Kirby: Most people are going to be like me, they are going to want to see the picture. The supporting text of course needs to match this, but you asked if it could be delineated and it could be done with words there and an asterisk here, down here you just use a little different symbol for it and it just says "proposed" or "site to be determined." Rick Sharp: I think we should do that with all of these segments that are highlighted. I believe that includes.... Hoover is still on the map, it includes the extension of Hoover to 146 and what we need is, the sense I am getting from people is we would like to have the textual amendment as well as a different delineation of the proposed future roads on the Thoroughfare Map.... Pat Rice: If you just say "route to be determined..." Rick Sharp: "Exact route to be determined." Is there a motion to that effect? Paul Spranger and Kevin Kirby: So moved. Rick Sharp: It's made several times over and seconded, passed. You got that? That's all of these roads. Hoover remains on, 126', Hoover extended north to 146 all that you've zACommittees \spst \1999feb9 17 got highlighted, and we'll want to be able to spell that out for the full Plan Commission so that they understand what we are talking about. Dave Cremeans: Just make sure that everybody understands that That's how stuff happens! Rick Sharp: Well, that's why we are sitting here....... Dave Cremeans: We may be sitting here talking about conceptual, but a year from now, five years from now, somebody may pick up this Thoroughfare map and say "that's a hell of an idea -let's go with it." Rick Sharp: I think that's why this textural amendment along with the drawing is a key to expressing out intentions. Pat Rice: Under "route to be determined," say see text, whatever text it is. Dave Cremeans: What's the name of that little street that goes into the landscape- Rowlsky's? Rick Sharp: North Augusta. Dave Cremeans: Is that what that road is? Is that North Augusta? That is North Augusta Road that is going to run.... Mike Hollibaugh: Well, what we have is this segment. (It's already in). Steve Engelking: And the idea there is similar to the Penn Street or Illinois Street around U.S. 31. It could relieve traffic on Michigan Road, 421, to those businesses by getting in through that direction. Terry Jones: And, if you think about it, this is a perfect example of that out of the box thing because in 1970, the 421 Overlay, if you look at a zoning map, they've got all of the North Augusta Subdivision blocked out. That was brought on because of what happened at Parkwood and Trammel Crowe, those two developments bought all that area and got rid of all the houses and it was thought at that time that that could not happen there. You've got to pick the lines on here, if and when you decide to do that, and to make it happen. But, obviously, we are not going to go in, and this one that cuts over and connects with North Augusta, that could take out about 3 or 4 of the existing houses there. Rick Sharp: All right. We are moving through here. I'm just reading through a lot of these that we have kind of dealt with along the way. There is not going to be a school at Shelborne and 126 Some of it is informational. Clarify Range Line Road and Westfield Boulevard -they are the same road with two different names. (with two different spellings) z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 18 Steve Engelking: South of 116 Street, it is Westfield Boulevard. Rick Sharp: I thought it was 106 Street, but OK. Steve Engelking: I believe it is 1 16 Street. South of 116 Street is Westfield -not 106 Rick Sharp: Is that what we actually want to clarify? Pat Rice: Why did you jump down to there? We missed something in between. Rick Sharp: I think a lot of it is redundant over things that we have done before, but feel free to pick anything out. Pat Rice: Well, number 10. Rick Sharp: "Residential Parkway term could be used as a new classification for Westfield Blvd between 96 Street and 98 Street." Pat Rice: And I added "Why not 116 I mean, I just have a question. Paul Spranger: While we are looking at those two intersections, and maybe to consider the traffic counts -you know, when we look at this whole, our whole township, Westfield and College right now, both counts are humongous. We think we've got counts on the west side. Those two north/south roads have some horrific traffic counts -big numbers. And, especially in the case of Westfield. It has really picked up since the bridge...... Rick Sharp: Well, if I remember this correctly, and now it's coming back to me, was it the idea that we create another term of a residential parkway? Pat Rice: Yes, because, in fact, Luci was involved in that discussion. In Marion County there is that recommendation -it works south and there is no reason it shouldn't continue to work the same for us. It carries a lot more traffic than Hamilton County. Rick Sharp: Was that discussion about Kessler? Pat Rice: No, Westfield. Rick Sharp: It was Westfield, south. Paul Spranger: I'm just looking from a planning standpoint because those are two streets that we have not really homed in on. Pat Rice: Westfield in Marion County carries a ton of traffic and somebody has to count, I mean, z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 19 Paul Spranger: I know, and I guess my point is that we are going to see it continue to increase and how we want to address that or how you want to look at that for further study. So far, I think, it's a two lane road, there are not a lot of curb cuts, it somewhat works, it is fairly long shouldered, it's fairly wide, I'm speaking of Westfield now, not so much on College -it's got a lot of problems. Pat Rice: The intersections. Just like they worked on them down on the Marion County side -needs to be done..... Paul Spranger: Yes, the intersections at the point of College... Pat Rice: No, I'm talking about Westfield. Paul Spranger: Well, Westfield too. I mean it's an area that if you look at the raw data, it's picking up -it's getting worse. So, we have to think about maybe asking for Staff to take a look at that. Rick Sharp: Well, we have that down as a secondary arterial. Paul Spranger: Westfield and College, in terms of maybe needing some upgrades or improvements. Steve Engelking: You mean beyond two lanes? Rick Sharp: Well, it's down right now as a secondary arterial with two, 24 foot lanes and a 15 foot median, walks on both sides, street trees, paths, are you looking to have it considered for more right -of -way? Steve Engelking: That's what I'm asking that's pretty generous right -of -way right there. Paul Spranger: That's true --I withdraw that. Rick Sharp: I mean, we're talking about a 100 foot right -of -way and again, now you get down to the nitty gritty do we want to plan the design of the road going in or do we just want to make sure there's..... Dave Cremeans: Well, you could plan a four lane road Rick Sharp: Exactly, that's what I'm hearing -you are exactly right. Steve Engelking: If worse came to worse, with a 100 foot right -of -way, you can always take out the median and do a four lane road if traffic became untenable that you could not live with it. Rick Sharp: Or as the State loves, you could put in a soft median. You could paint lanes and have a center turn lane -you preserve a lot of flexibility with 100 feet of right -of -way. zACommittees \spst \1999feb9 20 Dave Cremeans: As I think of Westfield Boulevard south of 106 Street, there isn't a whole lot of difference north of 106 Street. Pat Rice: No, it's just that I am saying they are both two lane roads.... Dave Cremeans: I'm so close to south of 86 Street, and it doesn't seem to flow well north. Rick Sharp: That's because it get jammed up going over 465 -4 know -I'm there every day! Would this be acceptable, if we stand the potential of reporting this out tonight, would it be acceptable to ask Staff to investigate bringing back to us, at another date, another classification as a residential parkway. Because again, my thought has been all along, "We've got the right -of -way, we're protected to do a lot of things with that and it wouldn't hurt perhaps to look at another classification, but at least we know we've got the land to work with... Paul Spranger: Well, we've got work. Dave Cremeans: I certainly agree with what Pat was saying about trying to make Westfield a pretty Boulevard.... Rick Sharp: No question about that, that is a gateway... Paul Spranger: That is a gateway and could be a perfect place for a median and a really elegant road. Steve Engelking: But the Mayor's idea of what he wants to do up here, if he's going to make this somewhat of a Main Street, or south Main Street, carry that treatment on south of here and have another entrance.... Pat Rice: Now, going back to 13., it was just that it shows up sometimes as Range Line Road where it is Westfield. I just want to be sure that it is on the map correct and the Comp Plan correct and doesn't always..... Terry Jones: You're not wanting it off.. Pat Rice: No! Whatever it is, it is and needs to be consistently identified. Dave Cremeans: I think it should be the Engelking Memorial Parkway! Sharon Clark: Would you go back and address No. 3? Rick Sharp: I'm sorry, I meant to. "Close Dorsett between Meridian Corners Blvd and Spring Mill, upon completed extension of Meridian Corners." I said earlier that I was in favor of that -I have thought a lot about what Kevin had to say and about how much we z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 21 are lacking over there, and personally, I have reflected, and I was wrong -I don't think that's a good idea. Kevin Kirby: I appreciate that. I went to visit with Tom the other day and didn't have much luck. There are other methods of traffic calming besides speed humps which I hate with a passion. I still think we can use the carrot and the stick to solve the problem on Dorsett. Number one, we can give them the proper roads around the perimeter of those developments we use. Number two, we can look at doing something on the internal roads. I know I have seen an article somewhere about some things you can do with the roads, narrow the lanes, neck it down a little bit. There are other things you can do besides putting in speed humps -you can make that less attractive. Sharon Clark: We were talking about the issue of no sidewalks -how did that happen? If we put those in, it would narrow the roads considerably. I just want the sidewalks in. Rick Sharp: Let's go back to hitching posts! Kevin Kirby: We allowed that to happen. I can't blame it on the County. Terry Jones: The Thoroughfare Plan showed the street and what occurred was they were convinced by the developer that the road would serve as a secondary arterial collector road so that they could put their driveways on every one of them. Had that road been constructed, you would have seen, in my estimation, Springmill Streams not happy with a cut off Spring Mill. The reason there are no sidewalks is because they wanted to discourage pedestrian traffic. Kevin Kirby: But, it is working the way it was designed to work. Terry Jones: Exactly, that's the thing. Kevin Kirby: There is no question. It's just that the people living there now don't like that and I don't blame them. Steve Engelking: I agree with you Kevin. I think once -as it stands now, it is a means to get to 121 Street. It's Carmel Drive, then U.S. 31 comes out to 126 Street until it turns off on Dorset. If you look at the maps, it's west 126 Street. Kevin Kirby: I don't know what you call it, but it's that damn road that Rick Sharp: Is there a sense of agreement that we can skip over the idea of closing Dorset? Kevin Kirby: I certainly would not support closing Dorset. Sharon Clark: Would anybody have any objection if we pursue having the County install sidewalks in there? z:\Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 22 Kevin Kirby: I don't know that sidewalks are the answer. I think Tom didn't like my ideas, that doesn't mean that we can't go ahead with it. We need to look at.... Sharon Clark: After we get that damn road built. Kevin Kirby: You are absolutely right -there is no sense in trying to discourage traffic until you give them another avenue. Steve Engelking: For everyone's edification, that road is a continuation of West 126 Street out to 131 Street is by the City and the biggest part of it is Rick Sharp: Oh, is that the way they decided to do it? Steve Engelking: That's the way they worked it out -they will donate whatever it would have cost them to Rick Sharp: So does that relieve them of their commitment which had a specific timetable tied to it? Kevin Kirby: That commitment does not have a specific timetable if you read it. (It was written by an attorney.) Steve Engelking: And the City is also going to......... Rick Sharp: Well, that's not the motion that was made in the Plan Commission meeting. Kevin Kirby: I'm glad there is at least one other person around that....of course, Steve wasn't around at that time, I really can't blame him. I remember this commitment from reading the newspaper 20 years ago or whenever that was built, and I kept telling them that there was a commitment to build that road and they swore, not you but your predecessors, but....... Steve Engelking: There was a commitment tied to the construction of a certain building.... Rick Sharp: Oh no, I was there at that meeting. Basically we looked them in the eye, cause we had them kind of over the coals, they needed an approval, we just looked them in the eye and said "I guess we won't be able to do that tonight." But what about the commitment that came along with that approval? Steve Engelking: That is what I'm trying to articulate. The agreement for that road to be continued to 131 Street by the project that is west of it, known commonly as the Duke project, Hamilton Crossing West, that road was to be completed upon beginning construction of what they call Building No. 3 or something -they haven't even broken ground for building 3. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 23 Rick Sharp: Correct, I understand that completely. Steve Engelking: It is not a time specific, it is tied to a building. Rick Sharp: You are still not answering my question. The motion that was made at Plan Commission when we gave them permission to construct building No., what's the one they just built, the one that's topped out -The Firestone Building. Steve Engelking: You put a commitment on the Illinois Street extension. Rick Sharp: Oh, that's what I thought we were talking about. Steve Engelking: You're talking about the road that runs west of their property. Rick Sharp: Oh, I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about... Steve Engelking: By the way, Illinois may not run through their property now because of this extension. Terry Jones: Building 3 may never be constructed..... Rick Sharp: I understand, but that's a different problem. The extension of Meridian Corners Boulevard was tied to a building going up too. Steve Engelking: That's the one I'm describing right now, and that continuation to 131 Street is now going to be the money for design and construction is going to be donated by Duke and the City. The City is going to take under the construction through the Engineer.... Rick Sharp: Are they going to break ground this spring? Steve Engelking: I don't know when they are breaking ground. Kevin Kirby: There's an entire story to this that will curl your hair, but the bottom line is I told the Mayor we needed to go ahead with the design. They brought a design firm in, they were looking at everything and were going to come up with a proposal. Dick Hill carried in a set of plans and said "This is what has been built out there so far." The designer looked through them and said "Your road has already been designed -it's in these plans." Steve Engelking: In addition to the road, there is going to be a brick wall constructed..... Kevin Kirby: There is no brick wall, I can attest to that. The brick wall is not on the plans. But, the bottom line is that the set of plans provides for the road to be built, and no one knew we had the plans. I don't know if Duke knows, because they are thinking they zACommittees \spst \I999feb9 24 are going to build a little two lane road. The plans provide for a four lane road and the whole shot. But, to protect those people in that neighborhood there, I'm really pushing for the City to build a wall like we have between the reserve and Rick Sharp: I know I can go back and listen to the tape, because I know who was sticking their feet in the fire -we had a commitment, they were going to break ground this spring, and people in Springmill Streams have been told that. We expect you to get some relief out of this. Steve Engelking: I'll just put it right where it belongs -it's already been said before tonight, but there has been a political decision made on that road. The political decision is, Duke isn't going to build the road regardless of what the commitment was. Pat Rice: That was in the commitment! Rick Sharp: Oh absolutly, no question. Steve Engelking: If the money is being donated to the City for the purpose of building it, I don't know..... Rick Sharp: I understand that. Kevin Kirby: Once it gets into the City's hands, we'll have better control over when it can be built, if the word keeps coming down on high through Steve and continue on with this project. One question is the wall. The wall is not designed. Steve Engelking: The wall is not designed nor was it funded in the process of the money that's being donated..... Kevin Kirby: So, City Council is going to have to come up with a little extra money for the wall, but the bottom line is that road needs to be built. Rick Sharp: That's in the City limits -you can build that. Dave Cremeans: I'm confused about Dorset. What are we going to do to alleviate that street problem? One of the things that has come up in the conversation, I know Mike and I have talked about it a little bit planting trees in the right -of -way. Can we do that in the City? We can't do that in the County! I mean, what can you do aesthetically to make that street look -you can put in sidewalks, trees, make the road more narrow. Why don't we start doing some things that don't cost a lot of money? Terry Jones: The problem with that is in order for the City to help, it would have to be in the City and it's not. Rick Sharp: Oh please, let's not start that conversation. Let's just jump over that. zACommittees \spst \I999feb9 25 Terry Jones: That is an issue to some degree. Steve Engelking: Dorset belongs within the County. Dave Cremeans: I forgot. Now it's all coming back to me. Sharon, what can be done? Sharon Clark: We are going to wait until the City builds the damn road! Called Kirby Damn Road. Rick Sharp: It's the sense of the Committee that we'll not be closing Dorset Road. Any objection? Without objection, so ordered. Dave Cremeans: One of the things we saw was they took an area 10X6 feet, put dirt in it, and planted a tree there. Sharon Clark: And 100 feet down, they planted one on the other side of the road. Rick Sharp: OK. If I could respectfully request that we talk about this later. Kevin Kirby: It's a very important issue. We've got a mistake and we've got a problem out there and we have made it worse with the Village of West Clay and I know that...... Rick Sharp: And while you guys were talking, several motions were made and agreed upon by unanimous consent because I had the microphone. On the 20 year plan, 116 Street should go back to four lanes. We had that as a primary arterial previously, and we are proposing to take it down to a secondary parkway, right? I just would like to suggest again, as I did when this first came up, I don't think we should back off this road for 20 feet. Take the Towne Road argument, 20 feet, I don't think we should back off and we leave the political decision what actually is going to be built to the politicians of the future. Let's preserve -I look at this road, and it's one of the few roads that actually goes somewhere. You can go to Zionsville, you can go to Fishers, I think we are short -sided if we take that 20 feet off. I think we should put it back to a primary arterial and let the people in the future argue about it. Paul Spranger: This is also one of the few areas that we have developed as an estate area. 116 Street becomes one of our Estate Homes that has actually built out for the most part which is different than Towne Road the way it is currently built out, in terms of housing and Towne Road and 131 Street. So, it becomes, in some ways, through that section is the preservation. I would advocate that the right -of -way be maybe 100 feet and we can, what we currently propose is a boulevard with a design element built in should it ever become necessary to become a four lane then it moves to a four lane within that right -of- way. That is the estate home street that has been built up over a course of a number of years. Yes, it is a road that obviously ties across the community, but I make the point that Westfield is now carrying about 22,000 cars a day and currently on that section of 116 Street west of Springmill it is down between 7 and 12 thousand cars per day. With 131 Street becoming the cross Township connector, which it isn't at all today because z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 26 we lack a bridge, we then can distribute that east /west traffic somewhat and then if we have to four lane it we can; if we don't, we keep it as a wide two lane with a median in an estate home area, to the degree we can, knowing full well that at some point if we have to, we can move to do that. I think it will carry, there aren't that many curb cuts. Steve Engelking: I have a question. I asked Mike just a minute ago what the existing right -of -way is- -there are people putting fences up out there million dollar fences, and they are not building them in the right -of -way. I think, if I heard Mike correctly, 116 Street already has 150 feet of right -of -way, so I'm not sure why we're trying to narrow it. Rick Sharp: And more importantly, to chime in on that, I can take you to some of the finest areas in south Florida that have people who might even rival the wealth of these lovely, estate homes, and they've got bigger boulevards in front of their homes. Paul Spranger: What do we have out there Mike, is it 120 or 150 on 116 Street. I mean, if we really get out the.... Rick Sharp: It's been a primary all Terry Jones: Where those walls are being placed are along areas where there is still a rod and one -half of right -of -way, and those homes came in and were built, and if they own more than two acres, you can place up to a six foot wall fence out to your property line. You are probably right, some of those might rival several hundred thousand dollar homes if you took the entire perimeter of those walls. But, I would venture to say that if construction or re- construction of a wall included tearing a wall down in order to build a parkway or a larger street, it would probably be cheaper than buying a house over on Towne Road. And if we are going to talk out of one side of our mouth, I think 116 Street is a bigger rival than Towne. I know that may not be politically correct with the powers that be, but...... Dave Cremeans: I was going to say what you just said, but in a different way. I agree with everything Paul said, but it applies equally to Towne Road, I mean, there are some very nice million dollar homes there. But, if it can be a boulevard, or a parkway, I'm reminded of the old road that went from Louisville to Lexington, that boulevard that had tree plantings and everything, it was the most beautiful road I've ever been on in my whole life, and if you can create that, if somebody hates it -they are idiots! It's a beautiful and would move lots of traffic. Kevin Kirby: If I had a choice of a four lane street in front of my house or a line of cars setting there all day, I will choose the four lane street any day. The bottom line is, you still have to move people in and out. If we have 150 feet of right -of -way on 116 Street, I think we should stand pretty firm on a secondary parkway.... Steve Engelking: You are talking about a secondary parkway that requires only 120 feet of right -of -way. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 27 Rick Sharp: What we're talking about is keeping it at its current designation of a primary arterial which is the 150 foot of right -of -way that we are currently getting anyway. Kevin Kirby: A road is what is it. You can call it whatever you want. The bottom line is that is a primary arterial no matter what you call it because it goes someplace. Pat Rice: And did they know that when they built that? Kevin Kirby: I would think so, yes. Rick Sharp: And then you have estate homes, but you don't have estates after that point, and I just feel we need to be consistent if we are talking about maximizing right -of -way and leaving specific road design decisions to the future political decision makers so if you put in the roads, then they will have to deal with the nameless owners and decide what kind of road they can get away with, but let's preserve their options, not so much in the five year, but in the 20 year plan, I think they will need every inch of that right -of -way, especially given, we're hoping 126 Street will build out -but what if it doesn't? and what if we don't get the bridge over 31 on 131 Street -our options are so limited...... Paul Spranger: Oh, if you don't get a bridge at 131 Street, you'll get to build a highway, and you will, the political price will be dear. Sharon Clark: I guess I have a question then, Why didn't you take your black dots all the way to Guilford? It's commercial on one side and residential on the other, and that usually to protect residential. Paul Spranger: Because it should be-- you're right, east. Kevin Kirby: Well, what we are talking about is running those black dots the whole way now aren't we? Rick Sharp: Yes, we should run, did this not always have primary arterial all the way? Where was the breakpoint without my having to look it up. Steve Engelking: It's a difference in the configuration of the road. Rick Sharp: So that's what we're talking about. The whole road should retain its status as a primary arterial. Kevin Kirby: Functionally, it's always going to be a primary arterial. Rick Sharp: Is there a motion? To retain its current designation (as a primary arterial) throughout the length of the Township? Dave Cremeans: That's all residential, isn't it? What have you got there, 50 feet? z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 28 Steve Engelking: I don't know what design the road is coming in, from Range Line west to College, I'm not sure what the width of that road is. Paul Spranger: Didn't I see something about that in the three or two lanes and a center turn lane -it wasn't four lanes. Steve Engelking: Well, if it is done consistently with the way they did it east of Keystone, I don't know whether they are planning to do that or not Rick Sharp: They paved for four and striped for three, right? East of Keystone. Isn't that the way you handled it? Terry Jones:? I don't even want to talk about that. Rick Sharp: OK Forget it. Is there a motion to have 116 Street to retain its current status? There's a motion -is there a second? (Kevin Kirby). Without objection? All in favor? There is a motion on the table to have 11 Street retain its current status as a primary arterial throughout its run through Clay Township. All in favor, signify by saying Aye, opposed? All right. Let the record show that Paul Spranger is opposed. Moving on. 106 should only be a second arterial west of Shelborne. Anyone excited about that? These are pick up comments. Sharon Clark: What should it be east of Shelborne? Kevin Kirby: Isn't that what we're calling for right now, secondary arterial, 140 foot right of way, that's not a lot of right -of -way. Paul Spranger: But let me also point out that 106 Street does go someplace -it goes to 421 and it goes to Hazeldell Parkway. However, at the same time, I would argue that given the way it has currently built out, if you drive it, probably 100 feet of right -of -way is going to be... Dave Cremeans: That's what it is today, 100 foot right -of -way? Terry Jones: Since Hazeldell and the bridge over the river, east /west movement on 106 Street has increased....... Paul Spranger: OK It's taking the load because of 96 Street. Rick Sharp: Hoover should be placed back on the map and extend it to 146 Street -we did that earlier. Other new grid streets and extensions should be shown where possible. Again, I think we have done that where possible. We have left some streets, we have extended some streets, and these will all be the ones that will have special notations. Emphasize the importance of 131 crossover with U.S. 31. Well, I know it is shown on there, perhaps it might make some sense in a textual context, to have text inserted z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 29 wherever appropriate. Emphasize the importance that the bridge be built on the short term plan -not the long term. It's not on the five? Then it needs to get on the five as well. Steve Engelking: I don't understand what you mean, that you don't have it on there -it's on the five year plan the way I read it. Kevin Kirby: One of the very first things we did was upgrade that section. Steve Engelking: Characterization number 2 on the five year plan says: "Including a US 31 pass through. The thing that needs to change on it is the amendment that you made tonight to show a certain size parkway over the....... Paul Spranger: Right -See that's the thought. Kevin Kirby: We have increased the level of service from Springmill to Old Meridian am assuming that these are water marks on the map, although they kind of look like round abouts. Rick Sharp: I have to leave the room -those are teardrops. Kevin Kirby: Make them bigger, that's all I can tell you. Rick Sharp: Further comments, questions, suggestions from members of the committee or our guests. Sharon Clark, comment or question referring to the 20 year plan. Rick Sharp: Questions, comments or concerns? Absent that, a motion? Absent that, I will take either a motion on the Thoroughfare Plan or a motion to adjourn? There is a motion to adjourn. No second, motion dies. Is there a motion on the amendment? Is there a motion to forward this amendment to the full Plan Commission for their consideration with the changes and amendments made this evening? Kevin Kirby: I would vote that. Rick Sharp: Without objection, we will move to a vote. All in favor of recommending this plan for approval to the full Plan Commission, signify by saying "Aye." Opposed? Mr. Spranger votes in opposition, the motion carries. Motion to adjourn. z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 30 z: \Committees \spst\ 1999feb9 31