Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Huber Heights approves development agreement with Carriage Treehouse for Carriage Trails 2
Summary
The Huber Heights City Council voted 8-0 to authorize a development agreement with Carriage Treehouse Company LLC for the Carriage Trails 2 project. Public commenters raised concerns about street widths, school enrollment projections and neighborhood assessment (NCA) fees.
Huber Heights City Council voted 8-0 July 28 to authorize the execution of a development agreement with Carriage Treehouse Company LLC for the Carriage Trails 2 subdivision.
City staff presented the agreement as the next step after basic development-plan approvals. Councilmember Nancy Bursch moved to adopt the resolution authorizing the development agreement; a councilmember identified as Mark seconded. The subsequent roll call recorded Mayor Mary Gore and seven other members voting yes.
During public comments, Cynthia Swartz, a nearby resident, asked how the new development agreement differed from the previously approved basic development plan and raised several concerns: - Street and lane widths: Swartz cited National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance and asked that the city ensure bus and emergency apparatus access when the agreement allows "significant flexibility" in street design. - Emergency access: Council and staff said fire-division approval is required for street widths; staff stated the city evaluates designs for the largest fire apparatus to ensure access. - School impacts and assessments: Swartz said the site plan called for about 396 single-family, patio and townhome units and asked how the projected student yield and school costs would be addressed. She asked whether neighborhood capital assessments (NCA) would apply only to Carriage Trails 2; staff said NCA fees in question apply to the district in which the development is located.
Aaron (staff) presented the agreement and indicated he would follow up by email with details Swartz requested; the transcript records that Aaron had been in contact with the school district treasurer about financial questions but that some numbers remained unresolved.
The development agreement was adopted on a unanimous 8-0 vote. The agreement itself and related exhibits were not read into the record during the meeting; the council approved the staff recommendation without floor amendments. Several substantive matters raised by public commenters'including exact student projections, NCA revenue estimates and final street-section dimensions'were not finalized during the meeting and remain subject to the executed agreement, subsequent site-plan approvals and coordination with Bethel Local Schools and the fire division.
