Plan Council Packet 2004 07-29-04 >, . .
United City of Yorkville
County Seat of Kendall County
EST.IN wki 1836 800 Game Farm Road
.41-.6. Cf/ Yorkville, Illinois 60560
O Fl ,,, 0 Phone:630-553-4350
K". Fax:630-553-7575
kLE \v
PLAN COUNCIL AGENDA
Thursday, July 22, 2004
9:30 a.m.
CITY CONFERENCE ROOM
8:30 a.m. Staff Meeting
1. Approval/Correction of Minutes: July 8, 2004
2. 9:30 a.m. - PC 2001-16 Fox Hill Unit 7 POD 10 - Preliminary/Final Plat
3. 11:00 a.m. - Site Plan Review of Commercial Property SW of 47 & 71
4. BKFD Station #2 Lot
5. BKFD Westbury Annexation Concerns
6. Additional Business
United City of Yorkville
Plan Council Meeting
July 8, 2004
Attendees:
Tony Graff, City Administrator Laura Brown, Director of Parks & Rec
Mike Schoppe, Schoppe Design Anna Kurtzman,Planning Coordinator
Joe Wywrot, City Engineer Eric Dhuse, Director of Public Works
Tim Fairfield, BKFD Sgt. Ron Diedrich, Yorkville Police Dept.
Guests:
Cris Lannert, The Lannert Group Jeffrey Hyman, Burnside Homes
Patrick Williams, ENCAP, Inc.
The meeting began at 9:45 AM. The minutes from the June 24, 2004 were approved,
after addition of the word - "submit" six sets - in the very last paragraph.
Villas at the Preserve - Preliminary Plan
Comments by Mike Schoppe
1) Point 2 under preliminary plan—Mr. Lannert would like to look at the Hughes
property adjoining and his concerns with an emergency access road is that it would
mix the residential and commercial aspects of the two properties. He would like to
design the boulevard road divided- throughout the development, and have just an
emergency lineage on the southeast corner. The City would not want to promote
this as a primary emergency access drive, and Mr. Graff stated the City will want
an access easement for this drive. The City pointed out that that commercial/retail
development is coming—Larry's Diner. Mr. Lannert wants to explore the 28'
wide road with the property owner to the east. Mr. Schoppe suggested the access
go further south, so as not to make it conducive for residents to use as a thru-road.
The City favors a"No Thru Traffic" signage. Mr. Graff suggests that the drive be
24" wide, so as not to encourage traffic. The homeowner's association will
maintain the driveway, but it will be a private drive. The developer will check with
Mr. Hughes to the east, in proposing a sidewalk that would abut the joint property.
2) Point#4 under preliminary plan - Mr. Lannert said they are looking at impacting
approximately .42 acres of wetlands on the site, in terms of jurisdictional
wetlands. The modified plan shows improved creek channelization, increasing the
length from 900-1200 feet, improving with bio-swales. Mr. Lannert will resubmit
the site analysis, providing clarification for drainage. The Army Corps of
Engineers has determined one area is jurisdictional and Mr. Graff suggested that
the developer keep the Army Corps jurisdictional permit, since our storm
water/wetlands ordinance is undergoing technical review. The City staff will
decide, as part of the PUD agreement, if we will be mitigating those area that are
non-jurisdictional.
3) Point#3 under preliminary plan - Mr. Lannert said their plan shows 30' setback on
the side loaded garages, making for large driveways. He is requesting 20'. The
ordinance states the building setback line,per Anna Kurtzman. Mr. Graff's
concern is that two cars can park in the driveway, and that there is adequate
parking and sufficient utility easements. Joe Wywrot stated 5' within a footing is
not favorable. This age targeted development will have driveway maintained by
the association, per Mr. Lannert. Mr. Graff suggested that the first issue is that the
back of curb setback fits with all engineering issue. The closest footing will be the
garage footing. Potentially, if there is a tree line in the rear, the utilities would be
in the front. Mr. Schoppe would look at the side load garage and assure that the
owner will be able to make a 90 degree turn into the drive. Lannert will look at
rear utilities. Mr. Lannert will add preliminary footprint and driveways to the
preliminary plan for all lots.
4) Point# 5 under preliminary plan— The City is looking that at this property as an
addition to the Harris Preserve, as open space. The City will have a meeting with
Dan Kramer's office, Tony Graff and Ryan and Nelson Pottinger to determine the
land use for this property.
5) The Bristol Kendall Fire Department's concerns are covered in Joe Wywrot's
comments.
6) Mr. Lannert, in response to a question from Anna Kurtzman regarding shared
access for driveways, stated that there would be right of ingress and egress will be
incorporated in the homeowners' documentation. Blanket easements will be
available for cable, utilities and driveways.
Engineering comments from Joe Wvwrot
1) Storm calculations will be provided to Joe Wywrot, including lot size and grading
concerns. Mr. Graff stated this development fits with compatibility with nature
and the council also likes the designs with the side load garages. It also
compliments the commercial area nearby. Mr. Lannert stated that architectural
standards will be provided, in particular the brick used.
2) Last bullet on page 1 Mr. Lannert is requesting 24' on the eyebrow. The City is
suggesting a decrease in the size of the island. The fire department's concerns is
difficulty of bringing in equipment. The City's position has been 28'. The
developer is given the option of resubmitting new plans after Plan Commission.
for consideration for Public Works, BKFD and the Police Departments review.
3) Point#1 on page 2 The City is requesting a traffic study and the City prefers
Metro. Mr. Wywrot stated this study will go to IDOT and work with the City for
completion.
4) Point #2—The typical pavement section will be revised, because of the wetlands,
will be provided to Mr. Wywrot.
5) Point#4—The developer will submit a true grading of the sides and 4-5/1 side
slopes will be shown. Mr. Graff suggests the developer meet with the Forest
Preserve prior to the Public Hearing.
6) Point # 8 — The developer will determine after meeting with the Preserve, whether
a stub will need to be provided. Mr. Wywrot stated a pump station may need to
be cited there.
7) Point# 10—Lannert will comply with and add the drainage swale extending from
Harris Court to the NW pond.
3
8) Point#1 on page 1 —The City is needs a uniform parkway width. Mr. Lannert -'
will get a copy of their survey to Mr. Wywrot. The developer will send the plans
to IDOT and will copy the information to Joe Wywrot.
9) The park donation is 100% cash and the pedestrian trail goes across the front of
the development.
The preliminary plan will be presented at the Plan Commission on July 14th and at EDC
on July 21 at 7 PM. The targeted public hearing date will be August 24. The draft of the
PUD / annexation agreement needs to be submitted 2 weeks prior to the public hearing.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 AM.
Respectfully submitted,
Annette Williams
` 10) C/),`
? �i 0 United City of Yorkville
1gCounty Seat of Kendall County
EST. - 1836
800 Game Farm Road
ill
tq Yorkville, Illinois 60560
O t�j ,,,- O Phone:6'30-553-4350
1:1 �1 Fax:630-553-7575
L/4LE \\"
July 2, 2004
Mr. Pete Huinker
Smith Engineering Consultants, Inc.
759 John Street
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Re: Fox Hill PUD —Final Plat& Plan
Dear Pete:
I have reviewed the revised final plat and plan for the referenced development, received on
June 17, 2004, and the comments listed below.
General
• The name of this development was previously Fox Hill Unit 7. The unit designation
should remain the same.
• Please provide the plat and plan to Kendall County, Walter E. Deuchler Associates,
and the City of Plano for review.
Plat
• Show Cummins Street, which is the entrance road to the Lakewood Homes
development. I understand that the plat that created this street was recorded
recently.
• The plat refers to the cul-de-sac as Fox Hill Court, while the plan refers to Hill
Court. Which is correct?
• Check with the Parks Department whether a pedestrian trail is needed to the bridge
over Rob Roy Creek at this time.
• Revise the language for the stormwater easement to refer to "Stormwater
Management Easement" as shown on Sheet 1.
• Blanket public utility and drainage easements should be dedicated over Lot 7 and
that part of Lot 6 that falls within the conservation easement.
• Easement language is needed for the conservation easement.
• A landscape buffer easement is needed along Eldamain Road.
• Specific utility and drainage easement locations and widths will need to be
reviewed once the final plan is approved.
Plan
Sheet 2:
• Revise General Note 2 to refer to Unit 7.
A
• Revise General Note 8B to delete specific standards regarding proof rolls. State that
the proof roll must demonstrate adequate bearing to the satisfaction of the city.
• Revise the stationing for the typical details. The entrance road should have a
collector road pavement structure for its entire length.
• Revise the prime coat application rate in each typical detail to agree with General
Note 8C.
Sheet 3:
• Revise Watermain Note 5 to refer to Trench Adaptor valve boxes instead of cast
iron valve boxes.
• Revise Watermain Note 6 by referring to Trench Adaptor instead of Tread
Adaptor.
• Revise Sanitary Note 5 by stating that the pressure test may last up to 2 hours.
Sheet 4:
• Call for the existing hydrant and valve (EX2 and EX3) to be removed and
returned to the city. The existing Tee fitting would be capped,
• Revise the stationing for the streetlights in the Tag Schedule. Where is Pole#5?
• Add a valve on the 8" watermain at the SW corner of Lot 5.
• Move Storm MH 202 into the Eldamain ROW to eliminate the skewed crossing of
the 16" watermain.
• The utilities proposed between Lots 5 and 6 are much too congested. The deeper
sewer design suggested by Deuchler and the sandy soils only make matters worse.
To improve things, consider moving the sanitary sewer and forcemain into the
conservation easement area. A shorter and shallower sanitary sewer would serve
the individual dwellings on those two lots and connect the trunk sewer before
flowing on to the lift station.
• Re-align the forcemain near Rob Roy Creek by crossing the 16" watermain about
25 feet west of EXl.
Sheet 5:
• Our minimum allowable roadway widths at entrances with medians are 28' B-B
for outbound traffic and 20' B-B for inbound traffic. Make these changes by
reducing the width of the median.
• Eliminate the vertical curve at Sta. 3+02.
• The two valves at Sta. 3+55L are too close to each other. Move Valve 214 to a
point 10' north of the sanitary sewer stub to the commercial lot.
• Revise the slope on the sanitary sewer stub to the commercial lot to 0.50%.
Maintain the stub elevation and change the elevation at MH 107.
• Provide watermain and sanitary sewer stubs to the north at the temporary end of
Fox Hill Lane.
1,4
Sheet 7:
• Revise the profile of sanitary sewer Runs 200 and 300 to minimize the depth of
cover. We require 5' of cover over mains and services. Revise the main line slope
of 0.50%.
Sheet 8:
• Revise the profile of sanitary sewer Runs 400 and 500 to minimize the depth of
cover. We require 5' of cover over mains and services. Revise the main line slope
of 0.50%.
• Correctly identify Lot 7 for sewer Run 400.
Sheet 9:
• Revise the profile of sanitary sewer Run 600 to minimize the depth of cover. We
require 5' of cover over mains and services. Revise the main line slope of 0.50%.
• See previous comments regarding Run 700.
Sheet 10:
• The site plan for the lift station site needs to be expanded upon to show better
detail. Move the station north to avoid blocking the 10' utility easement along the
south side of the development.
• Show the 15' landscape easement required by the Third Amendment to the Fox
Hill PUD Agreement.
Sheet 13:
• Provide additional spot elevations to confirm that during storms greater than 10-
year frequency, water will drain overland to the detention basin rather than
through the area where the reverse-pitch sidewalk is proposed.
Sheet 14:
• The detention basin needs to be made larger because it is influenced by the flood
profile of Rob Roy Creek. First determine pond HWL's for the 2, 25, and 100-
year storms and the corresponding restrictor sizing based on a free outfall. The
restrictors are then re-evaluated to determine their actual outflow rates using the
same pond HWL's and a 10-year flood stage elevation for Rob Roy Creek, which
is 622.09 at the outfall. The required pond volume is then modified using the
revised orifice outflow rates. This method has been suggested by EEI and is used
in Kane County.
• Provide information on the two proposed retaining walls. The base of the wall on
Lot 6 appears to be around elevation 623, which would result in a 7'-high wall.
Contact our Building Department to find out what information they might need
and to determine if railing is required.
• Storm sewer section 101 is much too close to the proposed retaining wall east of
the building on Lot 6.
• The proposed grading on the commercial lot has a 632' contour tying into an
existing 628' contour. Also, provide spot elevation for the sidewalk along the
commercial lot frontage.
0
• The storm sewer outfall to the creek should be more than just a simple swale. It
may include areas of differing slope, width, and direction. Rob Roy Creek in this
area also has an embankment immediately adjacent to the creek that might force
the discharge from the detention basins onto the adjacent property to the south
before the water finds a low point where it would join the creek. Mike Schoppe
will be involved in the review of swale design; you should contact him directly to
discuss design objectives.
• Provide a location for the topsoil stockpile to avoid conflicts with utility
construction.
Sheet 15:
• The landscape plan has been forwarded to Mike Schoppe for review.
• A landscape plan must be provided for the conservation easement area, and would
also include treatment of the swale from the storm sewer outfall to Rob Roy
Creek.
Sheet 16:
• Data is needed for the restrictor structures.
Sheet 17:
• Revise the MH frame and cover detail by requiring"City of Yorkville" and either
"Sanitary", "Storm", or"Water" on the lid.
Sheet 18:
• Provide clarification on the hydrant detail by stating that the auxiliary valve box
shall be Trench Adaptor by American Flow Control.
• Delete the tapping valve detail and replace it with a butterfly valve in vault detail.
• Need a detail for water service.
Sheet 19:
• Delete the collector streetlight detail.
• Recently we were advised that the GE luminaire our ordinance specifies is no
longer a valid number. Replace C728 N 609 with M2RR-15-S-1-N-2-A-MS3-F.
• Revise both curb details by requiring the gutter flag height to be at least 10 inches.
Sheet 22:
• Utilize the waterway plan detail for the swale between the pond outfall and Rob
Roy Creek.
Sheet 25:
• The lift station design should use a precast concrete wet well. The only time we
have allowed a pre-fabricated metal wet well was when we were certain that the
life span of the station was less than 5 years.
• Ordinance also requires that the lift station controls and generator be housed in a
building. Given the tight location for the sight, I will recommend that we allow
weatherproof enclosures.
ti
This plat and plan are scheduled for review at Plan Council on July 22, 2004. If you have
questions regarding any of these items, please call me at 553-8545.
Very truly yours,
Joseph Wywrot
City Engineer
Cc: Tony Graff, City Administrator
Liz D'Anna, Deputy City Clerk
July 14, 2004
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City Engineer
City of Yorkville
800 Game Farm Road
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
RE: Fox Hill PUD —Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
Dear Joe:
We have received your comment letter dated July 2, 2004 regarding the above referenced
project. Below is a point-by-point response to that letter:
General
Comment:
The name of this development was previously Fox Hill Unit 7. The unit designation should
remain the same.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Please provide the plat and plat to Kendall County, Walter E. Deuchler Associates, and the City
of Plano for review.
Response:
New plans have been distributed as requested.
Plat
Comment:
Show Cummins Street, which is the entrance road to the Lakewood Homes development. I
understand that the plat that created this street was recorded recently.
Response.
Added as requested.
Mr.Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 2
Comment:
The plat refers to the cul-de-sac as Fox Hill Court, while the plan refers to Hill Court. Which is
correct?
Response
Hill Court is correct.
Comment:
Check with the Parks Department whether a pedestrian trail is needed to the bridge over Rob
Roy Creek at this time.
Response:
We have submitted plans to the Parks Department as requested.
Comment:
Revise the language for the stormwater easement to refer to "Stormwater Management
Easement" as shown on Sheet 1.
Response.
The language has been revised as requested.
Comment:
Blanket public utility and drainage easements should be dedicated over Lot 7 and that part of Lot
6 that falls within the conservation easement.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Easement language is needed for the conservation easement.
Response:
Added as requested.
Comment:
A landscape buffer easement is needed along Eldamain Road.
Response:
Added as requested.
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 3
Comment:
Specific utility and drainage easement locations and widths will need to be reviewed once the
final plan is approved.
Response:
Noted.
Plan—Sheet 2
Comment:
Revise General Note 2 to refer to Unit 7.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Revise General Note 8B to delete specific standards regarding proof rolls. State that the proof
roll must demonstrate adequate bearing to the satisfaction of the city.
Response.
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Revise the stationing for the typical details. The entrance road should have a collector road
pavement structure for its entire length.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Revise the prime coat application rate in each typical detail to agree with General Note 8C.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Sheet 3
Comment:
Revise Watermain Note 5 to refer to Trench Adaptor valve boxes instead of cast iron valve
boxes.
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 4
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Revise Watermain Note 6 by referring to Trench Adaptor instead of Tread Adaptor.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Revise Sanitary Note 5 by stating that the pressure test may last up to 2 hours.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Sheet 4
Comment:
Call for the existing hydrant and valve (EX2 and EX3) to be removed and returned to the city.
The existing Tee fitting would be capped.
Response:
Note added as requested.
Comment:
Revise the stationing for the streetlights in the Tag Schedule. Where is Pole #5?
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Add a valve on the 8" watermain at the SW corner of Lot 5.
Response:
Added as requested.
Comment:
Move Storm MH 202 into the Eldamain ROW to eliminate the skewed crossing of the 16"
watermain.
Mr.Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No.DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 5
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
The utilities proposed between Lots 5 and 6 are much too congested. The deeper sewer design
suggested by Deuchler and the sandy soils only make matters worse. To improve things,
consider moving the sanitary sewer and forcemain into the conservation easement area. A
shorter and shallower sanitary sewer would serve the individual dwellings on those two lots and
connect the trunk sewer before flowing on to the lift station.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comemnt:
Re-align the forcemain near Rob Roy Creek by crossing the 16" watermain about 25 feet west of
EX l.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Sheet
Comment:
Our minimum allowable roadway widths at entrances with medians are 28' B-B for outbound
traffic and 20' B-B for inbound traffic. Make these changes by reducing the width of the
median.
Response:
The roadway widths already meet the standards. The median and the road are the same.
Comment:
Eliminate the vertical curve at Sta. 3+02.
Response:
The vertical curve has been eliminated.
Comment:
The two valves at Sta. 3+55L are too close to each other. Move Valve 214 to a point 10' north
of the sanitary sewer stub to the commercial lot.
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No.DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 6
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Revise the slope on the sanitary sewer stub to the commercial lot 0.50%. Maintain the stub
elevation and change the elevation at MH 107.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Provide watermain and sanitary sewer stubs to the north at the temporary end of Fox Hill Lane.
Response:
Provided as requested.
Sheet 7
Comment:
Revise the profile of sanitary sewer Runs 200 and 300 to minimize the depth of cover. We
require 5' of cover over mains and services. Revise the main line slope of 0.50%.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Sheet 8
Comment:
Revise the profile of sanitary sewer Runs 400 and 500 to minimize the depth of cover. We
require 5' of cover over mains and services. Revise the main line slope of 0.50%.
Response:
Revised as requested. We designed the sanitary deep enough to avoid services crossing over the
watermain.
Comment:
Correctly identify Lot 7 for sewer Run 400.
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No.DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 7
Response:
Revised as requested.
Sheet 9
Comment:
Revise the profile of sanitary sewer Run 600 to minimize the depth of cover. We require 5' of
cover over mains and services. Revise the main line slope of 0.50%.
Response:
Revised as requested. We designed the sanitary deep enough to avoid services crossing over the
watermain.
Comment:
See previous comments regarding Run 700.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Sheet 10
Comment:
The site plan for the lift station site needs to be expanded upon to show better detail. Move the
station north to avoid blocking the 10' utility easement along the south side of the development.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Show the 15' landscape easement required by the Third Amendment to the Fox Hill PUD
Agreement.
Response:
Shown as requested.
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 8
Sheet 13
Comment:
Provide additional spot elevations to confirm that during storms greater than 10-year frequency,
water will drain overland to the detention basin rather than through the area where the reverse-
pitch sidewalk is proposed.
Response:
Provided as requested.
Sheet 14
Comment:
The detention basin needs to be made larger because it is influenced by the flood profile of Rob
Roy Creek. First determine pone HWL's for the 2, 25, and 100-year storms and the
corresponding restrictor sizing based on a free outfall. The restrictors and then re-evaluated to
determine their actual outflow rates using the same pond HWL's and a 10-year flood stage
elevation for Rob Roy Creek, which is 622.09 at the outfall. The required pond volume is then
modified using the revised orifice outflow rates. This method has been suggested by EEI and is
used in Kane County.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Provide information on the two proposed retaining walls. The base of the wall on Lot 6 appears
to be around elevation 623, which would result in a 7'-high wall. Contact our Building
Department to find out what information they might need and to determine if railing is required.
Response:
Information provided, see the detail for the wall. The wall will be built as part of the building.
Comment:
Storm sewer section 101 is much too close to the proposed retaining wall east of the building on
Lot 6.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No.DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 9
Comment:
The proposed grading on the commercial lot has a 632' contour tying into an existing 628'
contour. Also, provide spot elevation for the sidewalk along the commercial lot frontage.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
The storm sewer outfall to the creek should be more than just a simple swale. It may include
areas of differing slope, width, and direction. Rob Roy Creek in this area also has an
embankment immediately adjacent to the creek that might force the discharge from the detention
basins onto the adjacent property to the south before the water finds a low point where it would
join the creek. Mike Schoppe will be involved in the review of swale design; you should contact
him directly to discuss design objectives.
Response:
The note has been added to the plan. We will revise per Mike Schoppe's comments.
Comment:
Provide a location for the topsoil stockpile to avoid conflicts with utility construction.
Response:
Provided as requested.
Sheet 15
Comment:
The landscape plan has been forwarded to Mike Schoppe for review.
Response:
Noted.
Comment:
A landscape plan must be provided for the conservation easement area, and would also include
treatment of the swale from the storm sewer outfall to Rob Roy Creek.
Response:
Will revise based on Mike Schoppe's review.
Sheet 16
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
July 14, 2004
Page 10
Comment:
Data is needed for the restrictor structures.
Response:
Provided as requested.
Sheet 17
Comment:
Revise the MH frame and cover detail by requiring the "City of Yorkville' and either "Sanitary",
"Storm", or"Water" on the lid.
Response:
The detail has been revised and moved to Sheet No. 16.
Sheet 18
Comment:
Provide clarification on the hydrant detail by stating that the auxiliary valve box shall be Trench
Adaptor by American Flow Control.
Response:
The note has been added. See Sheet No. 17.
Comment:
Delete the tapping valve detail and replace it with a butterfly valve in vault detail.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Need a detail for water service.
Response:
Added on Sheet No. 17.
Sheet 19
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 11
Comment:
Delete the collector streetlight detail.
Response:
Deleted as requested.
Comment:
Recently we were advised that the GE luminaire our ordinance specifies is no longer a valid
number. Replace C728 N 609 with M2RR-15-S-1-N-2-A-MS3-F.
Response:
Revised as requested. See Sheet No. 18.
Comment:
Revise both curb details by requiring the gutter flag height to be at least 10 inches.
Response:
Revised as requested. See Sheet No. 18.
Sheet 22
Comment:
Utilize the waterway plan detail for the swale between the pond outfall and Rob Roy Creek.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Sheet 25
Comment:
The lift station design should use a precast concrete wet well. The only time we have allowed a
pre-fabricated metal wet well was when we were certain that the life span of the station was less
than 5 years.
Response:
Revised as requested.
Comment:
Mr. Joseph Wywrot
City of Yorkville
Fox Hill PUD—Final Plat and Plan
Job No. DECS-030871-3
July 14,2004
Page 12
Ordinance also requires that the lift station controls and generator be housed in a building.
Given the right location for the sight, I will recommend that we allow weatherproof enclosures.
Response:
Noted.
If you have any questions or require any additional information, please call. I may be reached at
(630) 553-7560.
Sincerely,
SMITH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
Peter J. Huinker, P.E.
General Manager of Land Development
PJH/ams
cc: Fran Klaas, Kendall County
John Frerich, Walter E. Deuchler
City of Plano
Y:Uobs\Smith\2003\030871 Fox Hill\correspondence\letters\030871-3-Comment Response to City-070604-pjh.doc
Jul : 15. 2004 2 : 26PM No . 5532 P. 2/3
Ct, _) 0 IC,
Schoppe Design i1ssoc fates
Landscape Architecture and Land Planning
430 W.Downer Place Ph. (830) 896-2501
Aurora,IL 60506 Fax(630) 896-3228
July 15, 2004
MEMORANDUM
To: Joe Wywrot, City Engineer
From: Mike Schoppe - Schoppe Design Associates, Inc.
Re: Fox Hill Pod 10
We have reviewed the Final Plat of Subdivision dated 5/18/04 and the Civil Engineering Plans
dated 5/17/04, both prepared by Smith Engineering Consultants, and provide the following
comments:
Final Plat
1. It was agreed at the February 12th Plan Council meeting that a pedestrian easement would
be granted to the City over the entire floodplain for a possible bike trail. This needs to be
shown. The location of this bike trail needs to be drawn,on the plan from the pedestrian
bridge south through this property to determine if any additional easements are necessary.
2. Add a 25' landscape easement along Eldamain Road per the P.U.D. agreement.
3. Add language to the plat for the conservation easement.
Civil Enzineering Plans
1. At the February 12th Plan Commission meeting, Tim Fairfield requested a stubbed
turnabout at the dead end drive between buildings 5 and 6 to allow fire trucks to pass
through. I do not believe the design of the proposed turnabout accomplishes this. Tim
should provide his input on the layout of the turnabout,
2. Given that Fox Hill Lane will serve as a main entrance into the commercial property, it
should be discussed if on-street parking will be allowed on Fox Hill Lane. If parking is
not allowed, we recommend additional guest parking to serve buildings 9, 10, 11 and 12.
v..aicf2
Jul . 15 . 2004 2 : 26PM No . 5532 P . 3/3
3. Architectural plans need to be forwarded to our office in order to complete our review.
Three items that will be looked at are:
a. Is the front porch uncovered, therefore being an allowable encroachment into the
front yard
b. Incorporation of planting islands between garage doors
c. How does sidewalk circulation work with these units?
4. Will trash dumpsters be used in this development?
5. Show the contouring of the outfall swale from the FES to Rob Roy Creek. The specific
type of vegetation for this swale and conservation easement needs to be shown on the
landscape plan.
6. Show the required berming along Eldamain Road on the grading and erosion control
plan.
7. A landscape plan needs to be submitted before we can complete our review.
8. The plans should show the location of the entrance road into Lakewood Springs.
We will complete our review when the requested information is forwarded to our office.
CC: Mayor Art Prochaska
Tony Graff, City Administrator
Liz D'Anna, Deputy Clerk
Bill Dettmer, Building Code Official
John Whitehouse, Engineering Enterprises
hgcRof2
')C) c:4-0 I -- (
63
Qii United City of Yorkville
EST.il% x`1936 County Seat of Kendall County
800 Game Farm Road
'tet V? Yorkville, Illinois 60560
O �� \ O Phone:630-553-4350
op,, KenMeYCOUMy 4...
July 16, 2004
TO: Tony Graff
FROM: Anna B. Kurtzman, AICP
SUBJECT: Compliance Review
Final Plat of Subdivision—Fox Hill Pod 10
I have reviewed the document identified above for compliance with the terms of the original
annexation agreement and subsequent amendments. Based upon this review, I have the
following comments:
1. Section F (page 5) of the original Annexation/PUD agreement stipulates that there is
to be a 25 foot wide "green area/berming" along Eldamain Road. This landscape area
is to be in addition to the required rear-yard setback area.
2. Section N(1) (page 8)of the original agreement states that the developer will dedicate
"...for roadway purposes, a sufficient amount of real property contiguous with the
east side of Eldmain Road so as to create a roadway of 50 feet east from the
centerline of Eldmain Road." It appears that the intent is being met, however, I do
not see language on the plat that actually dedicates this right-of-way.
In addition to reviewing the plat against the annexation agreement, I have the following
comments:
1. Other than for front yard setbacks and corner side-yard setbacks, I typically do not
advocate putting building setback lines on plats. In this case, I believe it would be
advisable to include all building setback lines. This is due primarily to the
configuration of Lot 5. Lot 5 is what is commonly referred to as a"flag lot." The
way the City's zoning code is currently written, it is impossible to issue a building
permit for flag lots. This is due to the definitions used for defining front, side and
rear lot lines. In applying the definitions, one or more property lines in a flag lot
cannot be classified and therefore a setback yard cannot be determined. To avoid this
problem at the time of building permit issuance, I would recommend that all building
setback lines be denoted.
2. I believe there may be a problem with building the proposed product on Lot 6.
Scaling the proposed product from Sheet 4 of the engineering plans, it appears that
i
T. Graff
Final Subdivision Plat—Fox Hill Pod 10
July 16, 2004
Page 2 of 2
the northeaster corner of the building will be approximately 62 feet from the western
lot line. This places the northeastern corner of the building in the middle of the
eastern drainage and utility easement for Lot 6.
3. Building setback lines should be denoted for all sides of property that abut a public
right-of-way. The building setback line should be reflected from Fox Hill Lane
within Lot 13.
4. The zoning code stipulates that minimum lot width is measured at the front building
setback line. Please have the developer provide the lot width for each lot as measured
at the front building setback line.
5. Although a conservation easement is shown on the face of the plat, there is no
corresponding language.
6. It should be noted that final landscape plans are required. I believe that it was the
intention that sheet 15 of the engineering plans would suffice, however, no landscape
details are provided.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 553-8556.
/abk
filename: C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Desktop\Yorkville\7-16-04FoxHill.doc
United City of Yorkville
County Seat of Kendall County
EST g -1836
800 Game Farm Road
N Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Q 11 �� Q Phone:630-553-4350
Count,f �� Fax:630-553-7575
4,/t L E
July 15, 2004
Timothy Fairfield, Assistant Chief
Bristol Kendall Fire District
103 East Beaver Street
Yorkville, IL 60560
RE: BKFD Station #2 Lot&
Westbury Annexation
Dear Asst. Chief Fairfield:
I received your letters date July 12, 2004 in regards to Station#2 lot configuration issues
and Westbury Annexation Agreement concerns. I placed these items on the next planning
council agenda, July 22, 2004 as additional business to address your concerns.
Furthermore, the Westbury Annexation still needs to have staff and legal review before
recording so I believe there is an opportunity to address your concerns. Thank you for
your cooperation and patience.
Sincerely,
Anton Graff
City Administrator
CC: Planning Council Staff
.t3 „ „
103 East Beaver Street
Yorkville, IL 60560-1704
OA. Phone: 630 553-6186
• •
Fax: 630 553-1482
July 12, 2004
Tony Graff, City Administrator
United City of Yorkville
800 Game Farm Road
Yorkville, IL 60560
Dear Mr. Graff,
This letter is in regards to the future Bristol Kendall Fire Protection District
Station 2 property located at Kennedy and McHugh Road. Our architect and myself had
a meeting with Anna Kurtzman on July 9, 2004. As you are aware of the dimensions of
the proposed lot has changed since the original inception. Due to this dimension change
our designed station will not fit on the lot with the setback requirements of the city. Due
to this situation the district is requesting an additional 16 feet on the west side of the
proposed property line. This will allow enough room for landscaping and parking lot
lights to be installed on the west side of our proposed parking lot. The district would also
like some relief from the 60' foot landscape buffer on the North side of the property. It is
our understanding that the requirements currently in place would require use to put in a
berm with landscaping on this berm. We would like this buffer be decreased to 30 feet.
We do plan on keeping our station as far south on the property as we can. We will leave
as much landscaping buffer as possible on Kennedy Road, which could possibly be
more than 30 feet. We also don't want a large berm like the one that is just west of our
property. We may possibly be able to put a small berm like the one at Kennedy and
Route 47 on the south side of the street. I think this station will provide a nice
presentation to the entrance of both the residential and commercial entrance that will be
built around this station. Originally I met with Mr. Wywrot and discussed this station
layout with him. At that time the layout of the station was fine, including a full access
onto Kennedy road. Now that has been changed to a right in and right out only, due to
the reconfiguration of Kennedy road. This changed our design plans dramatically for the
station layout.
We also received a letter from Jennifer Woodrick about the address for the temporary
trailer, which will be sitting on our property. I am a little confused as to why it is on this
property without any consultation with the District. What will happen when the property
is deeded over to the District? What will happen when the District needs to perform
soiling borings on this property?
Could you also check on the possibility of getting permission from Menards that would
allow the District to do soil borings on the property? Do you know when the property is
going to be deeded over to the District?
If you could please look into this matter for the Fire District and let us know the
responses to the questions raised. Thank you in advance for your assistance with this
matter. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
Since el ,
Timothy Fairfield
Assistant Chief
Y: y ,
103 East Beaver Street
Yorkville, IL 60560-1704
e/e/.011. • Phone: 630 553-6186
Fax: 630 553-1482
July 12, 2004
Tony Graff, City Administrator
United City of Yorkville
800 Game Farm Road
Yorkville, IL 60560
Dear Mr. Graff,
This letter is in regards to the annexation agreement with the Westbury Village
Subdivision. The Fire District and the United City of Yorkville Department of Building
Safety had a meeting in regards to Westbury on April 27, 2004. At this meeting the
District requested that a Sprinkler System (NFPA 13) be installed in any multi-family unit
located on a private drive. Attached is a copy of that meeting memo.
After reviewing the Fire Suppression requirements on page 19 of the current draft
version of the annexation agreement, the requirements have changed. I am confused as
to why the requirements have changed with no input from the district. They are
increasing the density and still are allowed minimal requirements in regards to fire
suppression. The 2000 International Fire Code Chapter 9, Section 901.4.3 additional fire
protection systems allows the installation of additional safeguards. I would like some
reconsideration on this area of the annexation agreement.
On page 25, paragraph 4 has Bristol Kendall or Oswego Fire Protection District listed.
This should only be Bristol Kendall Fire Protection District. This whole subdivision is in
the fire district.
On page 23, Section F I would like to thank you for putting in the prepay 50% of the
Bristol-Kendall Fire Fee.
If you could please look into this matter for the Fire District and let us know the
responses to the questions raised. Thank you in advance for your assistance with this
matter. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Timothy Fairfield
Assistant Chief
6----
County
��° c/rte� 0 L;nited City of Yorkville
esr. � 1836 Seat of Kendall County
800 Game Farm Road
.< -: (A Yorkville. Illinois 60560
D /1 Q Phone:630-553-4350
�� �� Fax:630-553-7575
`a-L E \\.
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING SAFETY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 27, 2004
TO: Tony Graff, City Administrator
FROM: Department of Building Safety & Bristol Kendall Fire Department
SUBJECT: Westbury
On this date, the Building Safety Department and the Bristol-Kendall Fire
Department met to discuss the Westbury plans. The following is a breakdown of this
meeting:
1. .Pod 7
a. A fully improved street is desired.
b. A grass over would not be accepted.
c. A loop through would be most desired.
Pod
a. A right-in and/or a right-out would be acceptable.
b. A grass over would not be accepted.
A fully sprinkled fire suppression (NFPA 13) is requested for any multi
family unit located on a private drive. Tir}itg would also be desired on all
future developments. ' / / � /1/
Bristol-Kendall Fire De aitment DePartrnent of Building Safety