HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes SpecStdy 10-04-11`Q NT\fftr�
i ty o
!NDjpN
Carmel Plan Commission
SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE
October 4, 2011
Members present: Nick Kestner, Kevin "Woody" Rider, Steve Stromquist, Susan Westermeier.
DOCS Staff. Director Michael Hollibaugh, City Planner Angie Conn; Legal Counsel John Molitor
Also Present: Ramona Hancock, Plan Commission Secretary
The Special Studies Committee considered the following item:
1. Docket No. 11050013 Z: Silvara PUD
The applicant seeks approval to rezone 304 acres from S- 1 /S -2/ Residence West 116 Street
Overlay Zone to PUD/Planned Unit Development. The site is located at 11960 Spring Mill Rd.
at the northwest corner of 116 St. and Spring Mill Rd. Filed by Steve Hardin of Baker
Daniels LLP.
(The main topic of discussion will be the development and design standards)
Present for Petitioner: Steve Hardin, attorney, Baker Daniels, 600 East 96 Street; Land Use
Consultant, Jesse Pohlman; property owner Otto Frenzel; Larry Moon, Republic Development; Doug
Wagner.
Up -date Overview:
4 Main Changes: 1) Apartments removed 2) Neighborhood retail reduced to 35,000 sq ft 3)
Residential units reduced to 685 4) Tab "L" added to PUD Ordinance for empty nester
standards
Discussions have continued since submitting the packets regarding Neighborhood Retail area
21 acres at south end of development have officially been withdrawn from this proposal as a
result, number of units further reduces to 605
Discussion this evening will involve development standards
Concept plan shows as same, only with squared -off southern area retail eliminated
Minor changes before returning to Plan Commission
Dept Comments, Angie Conn:
Dept is favorable to proposed changes
Proposed changes alleviate a lot of remonstrance
Recommend returning to Oct 18 Plan Commission
Committee Questions /Comments:
How do the changes affect the entrances, roads, trails, etc.?
Village Neighborhood rentals? Attached dwellings?
Larry Moon:
o All areas remaining in concept plan stay the same
Common Areas, primary preservation areas not affected with changes
Entrance /exit remain the same
Southern-most entrance will stay still 3 entrances on Springmill Road
Right in/right -out at Springmill in Village Neighborhood area will not exist
Internal road patterns also do not change
Village Neighborhood —no rentals, only fee simple title holders possibly condos, flats, or
townhomes with some cottages mixed in (free standing)
Public Comments /Questions:
Sylvia Naegge, Brighton Avenue, Springmill Streams Retail now eliminated? Similar product
that can be seen?
Developer says project is all residential; no specific builder committed to this project at this time
there will be many builders and will probably take 10 years to build -out; there is no similar product on
the market at this time
Dee Fox, 11389 Royal Court, still has concerns and issues regarding density, multi family units
needs to be language to ensure no rentals and language to nail down senior housing that is
TRULY senior housing erha s one erson could buy up
Marilyn Anderson, 3884 Shelborne Court: Regarding rentals, p p P
a lot of units and rent them would like to see number of units owned by one entity limited in
es it
number and would like owner- occupied only. Empty nester does component the
to be truly empty nester.
unattractive to 40 year -olds or 20 year -olds is optional
This should be locked in as far as language or we are only fooling ourselves
David Walsh, Teal Lane. Would developers /owners be willing to sign covenants restrictions
to prohibit rental of units or property?
Jill Meisenheimer, Burlington Lane: Density is still an issue 39 out of 42 neighbors were
opposed to any high density or townhomes, and opposed to commercial/office use. Only one
neighbor in favor of the PUD as initially presented would like school use eliminated
Pat Sweeney, Devon Lane: Would like to see density lower and consistent with Comp Plan,
especially around/close to Springmill Streams. The buffering needs to be addressed
Developer says buffering has not changed. Large buffers on Clay Center Road where the District abuts
have been matched and are a minimum of 40 feet. All 30 -foot buffer areas adjacent to all residential
neighborhoods and tree preservation areas are as planned or required
Woody Rider: Hesitant to restrict school use because it would be community approaching developer
rather than vice -versa would not want to restrict
Marilyn Anderson, 3884 Shelborne Court: Would like clarity regarding the 30 -foot buffer
responsibility of each individual land owner? Density: Very little of project aimed at seniors or
empty nesters density not consistent with Comp Plan
John Ricks: Developer submitting price point for each distinct area? How much per square
foot?
Larry Moon empty nester standards and how applied probably have 3 or 4 different builders to 2
target empty nesters. Development restrictions include: Over 75% of house plans offered will require
bedrooms on first floor 75% of home plans will be limited to one and one and one -half stories,
ranches and will require low maintenance materials, irrigation system in front yards, sidewalks to front
of each door, automatic dusk -to -dawn lights, enhanced walk ability connecting trail system, close
proximity of community amenities and social aspects. Covenants will require lawn mowing,
maintenance and snow removal; will prohibit play sets, trampolines, etc in all units. If community
center is built in the Bridgecreek area, it will target aerobics, wellness, cards, bocce ball, etc for empty
nesters. Universal design elements include wider doorways, grab bars, wheelchair access —an area
where people will have choices these areas are truly meant to be empty nester areas. Regarding the
rental issue: The Developer will commit to limiting the number of units any one person/entity can own
to two (2).
Mike Hollibaugh: Who would be responsible for enforcing such a covenant? (The City tries to stay
out of enforcing covenants)
Larry Moon stated that restrictions will be a provision of the PUD rather than a covenant. All lots will
be fee titled.
Steve Hardin stated that the petitioner will work with the Dept for restrictions -this will NOT be a
rental community. There will be no age limitation/restrictions.
Price Points: The range anticipated in the Estate area is one half million dollars; Creekside from
$300,000 to $500,000; Bridgecreek from mid $500,000 at low end approaching one million dollars in
some product areas. The attached product units start around $200,000 and move upward. The
McKenzie product is priced around $500,000/600,000. Petitioner will market at different levels to
achieve a broader market area.
Larry Moon density There is a large dispersion of density developer matched densities as closely
as possible to adjoining. The Estate area was changed to 1.25 density, same with Enclave; Bridgecreek
2.0; Creekside area 1.75; Village Neighborhood at 5.0 per acre. The 30 foot buffer around the project
is within the area of the individual lots —lots will be one -third larger than current S -1 standard, 30 foot
buffer, tree preservation and Buffer B level of standard of landscaping commitment is within the
bufferyard. Overall density without Village Neighborhood is 1.6.
Lots are to be 180 feet deep –125 feet under current S -1 zoning; minimum front yard is narrower or
closer to the street; minimum rear yard is larger; lot width is the same; lot depth is 55 feet deeper;
square footage of homes is 2400 vs 1,000 and 3,000 vs 1600. Again, the development meets the S -1
minimum standards
How many of the 92 lots are Estate perimeter homes? (probably one quarter to one -third —the standard for the
rest of the lots is in the Ordinance the lot areas are consistent with S -1 the Architectural Standards are for all
the lots)
Additional public comments:
Sylvia Naegge, Springmill Streams what are the guidelines as far as materials used?
Larry Moon: No vinyl siding, no overhangs, but currently, no architectural standards, square footage
3
Sue Dillon 507 Cornwall Court, Springmill Streams. At the time her home was built, the County Health
required one acre lots to accommodate septic system, etc. The perimeter lots backing up to them are not one-
acre comparable, and only meet the minimum for S -1. he Committee should not be mis -led, the neighbors are I
not satisfied or happy with results of conversations with the owner and developer.
Dee Fox 1139 Royal Court, would like an opportunity for public to submit thoughts /comments in writing to
members of the Plan Commission prior to the full Commission meeting
Marilyn Anderson, 3884 Shelborne Court Issues with the map S -1 min lot size –the developer is saying the
smallest lot must be 15,000 sq ft but S -1 is supposed to be one unit per acre and when you look at this, there
should 74 homes but there are 92 Creekside is 66 acres and should be 66 homes, but there are 116 homes.
This proposal clearly does not comply with S -1 zoning requirements.
Dept response, Angie Conn: Marilyn Anderson is correct, the 15,000 lot size does not necessarily mean one
acre lots density is based on the average number of units per acre.
Steve Hardin: No one is questioning the current S -1 zoning when comparing lots on perimeter to the zoning,
the lots are 15,000 square feet
David Walsh 12183Teal Lane, ...Looking thru the progressions, the petitioner took one -third of the units from
Williams Creek and added into Bridgecreek the buildable ground is the same —other than eliminating
aluminum siding and vinyl, these houses would be built as $500,000 homes with no requirements
Steve Hardin: Open space is factored into every calculation for density, the developer is allowed to use open
space this is how it is calculated. 0
Jill Meisenheimer The Village Neighborhood starts at $200,000 and up
Larry Moon: The $200,000 number is for attached homes and not across from the Spring Lake neighborhood
The petitioner has tried to make many accommodations for Spring Lake Estates homeowners
Woody Rider acknowledged that the two most controversial areas are now gone and that the 21 acres is now
NOT a part of this project. The 21 acres is now an unknown commodity-
Sylvia Naegge, Springmill Streams: A Big concern is still the traffic on Springmill Road
Woody Rider: Traffic has already been discussed will guarantee that Illinois Street will be built, US 31 will
become an interstate, a huge portion of traffic on Springmill Road is driving to /from Westfield the new design
will be for an express route to Westfield –probably a 17 -year completion of US 31 Illinois Street construction
should start next spring -not piece -meal, but the entire road.
Nick Kestner re traffic, density the State Highway plans for US 31, 116' Street intersection is the last one to
be built we could have two more administrations and governors before completion.
Larry Moon: The Traffic Study looked at 80,000 feet of commercial we hae reduced the density from 1,000
to 600 and the commercial component is gone the traffic generation is dramatically lower.
Sue Westermeier: Connectivity is an issue the development looks secluded /isolated —only one major
east/west road.
Larry Moon: Petitioner offered to do road and pedestrian connection —only Claybridge accepted; other
4
neighbors declined to connect.
Sue Westermeier: With the elimination of the Village Center, would like to see the southern entrance at
Springmill eliminated
Larry Moon: Engineering wanted to add two entrances across from the I[T medical facility -two entrances
would make it too congested.
Motion: Woody Rider to forward Docket No. 11050013 Z, Silvara Planned Unit Development, to the full Plan
Commission with a positive recommendation, seconded by Nick Kestner, approved 3 in favor, one opposed
Westermeier)
Meeting adjourned at 7:40 PM
OWN
W-9 W m
1
Steve Stromquist, airperson
5