Plan Council Packet 2005 11-17-05 ti0 cJr o United City of Yorkville
+ '/` 800 Game Farm Road
EsT " rid 1836 Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone:
hone: 630-553-4350
�' Fax: 630-553-7575
<LE ‘V‘'
PLAN COUNCIL AGENDA
Thursday, November 17, 2005
9:30 a.m.
CITY CONFERENCE ROOM
8:30 a.m. Staff Meeting
1. Minutes for Approval/Correction: October 27, 2005
2. 9:30 a.m. PC 2005-34 Evergreen Farm Estates - Preliminary Plan
3. 10:30 a.m. PC 2005-50 Windett Ridge Unit 3 - Concept PUD Plan
MAE T
Plan Council t;J
October 27,2005
Attendees:
Joe Wywrot, City Engineer Mike Schoppe, Schoppe Design Associates
Scott Sleezer, Parks Dept. Eric Dhuse, Director of Public Works
William Dunn, Engineering Enterprises Tim Fairfield, Bristol-Kendall Fire Dept.
Bart Olson, Administrative Intern Sgt. Ron Diederich, Policy Dept.
Guests:
Attorney Dan Kramer Tom Small, MPI
Jason Nijim, MPI John Zediker, MPI
Wendy Yaksich, MPI John Martin, Jen Land Design
The meeting was called to order at 9:50 a.m. by Mr. Wywrot. The October 13, 2005 minutes
were approved with corrections.
PC 205-49 Oak Grove Subdivision - 1 1/2 Mile Review:
Attorney Kramer gave an overview and stated that this project was reviewed by the City about
two years ago regarding the zoning issue and received a positive recommendation from the Plan
Commission and City Council. The biggest issue is with Timber Creek, which has become the
area detention. Based on this, the petitioner has put in sizeable ponds with an extra 2 1/2 acres of
detention which is over and above what is required for this subdivision just as a safety net. The
plan has a curb and storm system profile and does not have sidewalks, however, there is a trail
system in lieu thereof.
Mr. Wywrot stated that he saw the plan and the trail system doesn't serve the pedestrian
movement throughout the subdivision.
Land Planning comments:
1. Should this property ever be annexed, it would likely be zoned Estate Class One - Family
Residence District. The minimum lot size in this district is one acre, although the proposed
lot design does not meet these standards, there is significantly more open space. The
increase in the open space is an appropriate trade off for the smaller lots.
2. Either sidewalks or a trail system abutting each lot should be provided.
Engineering comments:
1. All right-of-way lines at intersections and the necks of cul-de-sacs should be rounded off with
25' radii. The cul-de-sac ROW radii should be 65 feet.
Page 1 of 5
2. The intersection of Long Grove Road and Highpoint Road should be at least 400 feet from the
Tanglewood Trails Drive intersection.
3. The cul-de-sac at Lots 27-30 is too long to be considered an eyebrow cul-de-sac. This
roadway should have a separate name.
4. The Utility Easement language should also grant rights to Kendall Township and Kendall
County.
Attorney Kramer responded that all plat issues have been given to their engineer, Jim
Nanninga, and he will make changes if he has no trouble working them in and after
consulting with Fran Klaas.
5. A City public sidewalk or an expanded trail system should be constructed along the frontage
of all lots and along the Highpoint Road frontage to give access to each lot.
6. Sheet 2: Streetlight#2 should be moved to the lot 23/24 common lot line. Streetlight#4
should be moved to the lot 19/20 common lot line Provide streetlight details.
7. Sheet 7: A flat area at least 10 feet wide should be provided between the top of the slope of
Basin A and the sidewalk along Highpoint Road.
8. Sheet 14: Long Grove Road is proposed to be 35-feet wide B-B, and Acorn Drive is
proposed to be 33-feet wide. Both roads appear to be unnecessarily wide. They could both
be reduced to 30-feet B-B.
Attorney Kramer responded that the County requires the clear cut of right-of-ways.
When there is curb and gutter in a wooded subdivision they will let you take it down to
60 feet to preserve trees. This plan is following County requests/requirements.
BKFPD comments:
1. Acorn Drive -Name needs to be changed,Acorn Lane already exists.
2. The smaller cul-de-sac is too long to be considered an eyebrow, it needs a"court"name.
This project is moving on to the October 27th Park Planning Meeting and November 9th Plan
Commission.
PC 2005-13 MPI South -Concept PUD Plan:
Mr. Wywrot stated water and sanitary financing needs to be worked out and will not be
discussed at this time and will be addressed through the annexation agreement.
Page 2 of 5
Wheeler Road: Earlier meetings were had to talk about how roadways compare to the City
wide transportation plan. Wheeler Road was supposed to align with the section line heading
west toward Lisbon Road or bending southwest of Immanuel. City is looking for MPI South to
demonstrate if that was feasible, show what type of floodplain issues there are for Immanuel, any
property line issues, demonstrate that the other would be a better option. Mr. Schoppe asked if
this information could be provided to the city via the preliminary plan. Mr. Martin responded
that if the road was put in the location where the comprehensive plan called for it, it couldn't be
accomplished today because the petitioner doesn't control the triangle piece of property on the
section line by the cemetery. Mr. Schoppe asked what the physical problems were to build the
road where it was shown on Smith's plans. Mr. Small responded that the road would terminate
in land they don't own and cross at the juncture of two major streams. Also, Wheeler is to be an
east/west collector and tie into Lisbon Road. Mr. Schoppe asked that the additional information
regarding the floodplain be submitted with their preliminary plan submittal.
Residential interior connections and connection between commercial areas: Mr. Dhuse
stated that the city was going to ask for interior connections from neighborhoods two to three and
seven to nine. Mr. Small responded that they have a pedestrian trail that could function as an
emergency access. Mr. Wywrot stated that the city is not in favor of using emergency access
roads. Mr. Small stated they have been very successful using neighborhoods and doesn't want
thru roads going through those neighborhoods. Mr. Dhuse stated the city was looking for a
crossing over the creek some where between Rt. 47 and Immanuel Road. Mr. Wywrot stated it
could be a minor collector but that the determination of the type of road would be determined by
the city after considering the information in the traffic study. Mr. Schoppe stated that a
convenient access should be provided to get to the school site without relying on the perimeter
roads. Mr. Small reiterated that they did not want an internal collector road running through the
middle of the development. Mr. Schoppe stated that when the city had Smith prepare the
transportation report it showed the major roads and out of that process it identified that
essentially every interior square mile would have another north/south and east/west road that
would serve to get to the perimeter road. Mr. Wywrot stated that the City Council has indicated
the desire to not have to rely upon county roads or a busy state highway to accomplish getting
from the north end of a development to the south end. The petitioner responded that they would
take another look at it.
Parks: Mr. Sleezer asked to confirm that the Land Cash requirement is +/- 50 acres. Mr. Small
stated they are providing additional open space which is above the requirement. Mr. Sleezer
stated that one of the Park Board's concerns is the half mile radius, to the north more park site
was needed at the school site. Petitioner stated that all park sites are expandable. Mr. Sleezer
stated that the park site at neighborhood 8 is not needed and suggested moving it to the west side
of neighborhood 9 because that area is not served by the half mile radius. Mr. Small thought it
was a sizable neighborhood requiring a park. Mr. Small stated it could be moved to the
northwest corner by the water tower site for expansion with neighboring developments. Mr.
Small asked if this project was the best site for the water tower. Mr. Dhuse stated that if it was
going to be a well treatment facility and storage site he would have to confer with Engineering
Enterprises. Mr. Sleezer stated that neighborhood nine was not served by a park and a small site
was needed. Mr. Wywrot suggested that maybe another park could be downsized to provide for
this. Mr. Small suggested that this requirement could possibly be served by a surrounding
Page 3 of 5
•
development. Mr. Schoppe suggested locating a small park on the west side of neighborhood
nine that could be expanded by other developments providing one central park and that this was
an issue that the Park Board could address. Mr. Sleezer asked about the park site between
neighborhood 13 & 14, what is the park/club meaning, is it public/private? Ms. Yaksich
responded that it has been identified as a site for a private recreational amenity, possibly another
pool.
Mr. Sleezer stated that in looking at the minutes from the March and September meetings,the
Park Board felt strongly about the 50/50 land split so that they would have money to develop the
parks.
Fire: Mr. Fairfield stated that the fire station site was ok.
Police: Sgt. Diederich stated that the police did not have any problems with this plan.
Frontage Road: Mr. Dhuse and Mr. Wywrot stated that the Council has expressed a desire for a
frontage road in developments to provide for access to commercial along Rt. 47. Mr. Schoppe
stated that this could possibly be accomplished by a series of internal roads to serve as a corridor.
Resolution Locating Utilities Underground: Mr. Wywrot brought this resolution to the
attention of the petitioner stating that it needs to be talked about and negotiated in the agreement.
Deuchler's Proposal to add this property to the FPA: Mr. Small stated that they will not
support this until they have some idea where they are in the approval process. They need
resolution with the city, such as does the city like the plan? They would like an understanding of
the sewer and water. Basically they want affirmation that this project is coming to Yorkville.
They would also like a guarantee on sewer capacity and resolve how water is to be funded.
They need specifics to facilitate making this happen quicker.
Mr. Schoppe stated that based on the data that was given, this plan is consistent with the city's
comprehensive plan. There is not enough information to tell if the plan is consistent with the
design guidelines. He stated neighborhood 14 is single family, however, because it is on Caton
Farm, and next to commercial and open space, it seems like a logically place for multifamily.
Mr. Martin responded that with the percentages it would make the multifamily number higher.
Mr. Small stated that they would look into it. Mr. Schoppe stated that the unit count is consistent
and that more information is needed to review the open space. He also stated that the plan is
consistent with the Transportation Plan and School Site study. Mr. Schoppe will setup a meeting
with the School District, the city and the petitioner.
Mr. Small stated that they understand the water and sewer and just need to know how it is going
to be paid for and who is paying for what. Until they get that feedback from the city, they are at
a loss. Mr. Wywrot stated that in order for that decision to be made the city would need to know
what we are building and how much it is going to cost, will it be phased, etc. This is all part of
the preliminary plan process.
Page 4 of 5
•
•
The petitioner asked what the next step was. Mr. Schoppe responded that it would be filing an
application for annexation, zoning and submitting a preliminary plan. Mr. Small stated that they
want some assurance that this project is coming to Yorkville before they go through the effort of
producing preliminary plans. Mr. Wywrot stated that in order to address the concerns of the
petitioner in regard to water and sewer, with all other preliminary plan issues aside, the city
would need population projections, which they already have. Also needed are the proposed
location of storage supply and distribution lines. The city would need to know of that
infrastructure what would the petitioner be asking to bond for. Mr. Small stated that he needed
to know how the water is being paid for, with this information they can make a decision. Mr.
Small stated the same thing with the sewer district, they have given them a solution they think
will work but if they don't buy it, then there is a problem. Mr. Small stated that there is a
problem with treatment plant capacity and that they need answers to these two things so that they
can make a decision. They want to make sure that they don't spend all the money for this
infrastructure and then end up with no treatment plant capacity. Mr. Wywrot stated to Mr. Dunn
that the city would need something from EEI recommending that there be "x" dollars worth of
infrastructure in place, by what time and can it be phased or not. Then it would be up to Finance
Director Pleckham, City Attorney Wyeth and the City Council to make the decision if we can do
it.
The meeting ended at 11:42 a.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by:
Elizabeth D'Anna, Administrative Assistant
Page 5 of 5
11/10/2005 THU 9:09 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI 2001/008
Pc
• 52 Wheeler Road • Sugar Grove, IL 60554
TEL: 630 /466-9350
• FAX: 630/466-9380
www.eeiweb,com
•
Engineering
Enterprises,
Inc.
November 9, 2005
Mr. Joseph A. Wywrot, P.E.
City Engineer
United City of Yorkville
800 Game Farm Road
Yorkville, IL 60560
Re: Evergreen Farm, Preliminary Plan and Plat Review,
United City of Yorkville, Kendall
County, Illinois
Dear Mr, Wywrot:
Our review of these plans is to generally determine the plan's compliance with the
United City of Yorkville's Subdivision Control Ordinance, the city's Soil Erosion and
Sediment Control Ordinance (SESCO) and other applicable standards. This review and
our comments do not relieve the developer, the designer or any contractors from their
duties to conform to all required codes, regulations, and acceptable standards of
engineering practice and construction means and methods.
We have reviewed the Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat for the referenced
Evergreen Farm Subdivision consisting of the following materials received to date:
• Preliminary Plan Application and Petition by Tanglewood Development
Corporation, dated July 1, 2005.
• A plan set, titled Evergreen Farm, prepared by Craig R. Knoche & Associates
Civil Engineers, P.C., with latest revision date of October 11, 2005, consisting of
the following:
a Title and Index Sheet
o Existing Conditions Exhibit
o Preliminary Site Plan
o Preliminary Grading Plan
o Preliminary Utility Plan
o Landscape Plan
o Preliminary Plat of Subdivision (Dated: 10/05/05)
Consulting Engineers Specializing in Civil Engineering and Land Surveying
11/10/2005 THU 9:09 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI 2002/008 ,
r
• Landscape Plan, prepared by Craig R. Knoche & Associates Civil Engineers,
P.C., with latest revision date of 10/10/05.
• An undated Preliminary Stormwater Report, prepared by Craig R. Knoche &
Associates Civil Engineers, P.C.
We offer the following comments:
General
1. No part of the proposed development is located within a Special Flood
Hazard Area as identified by FEMA based on Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) 170341 0075 C, dated July 19, 1982.
2. Permits or Sign-offs will be required from the following agencies:
a. (IDNR) Consultation Agency Action Report regarding endangered -
threatened species or natural areas.
b. (IHPA) Division of Preservation Services regarding Historic and
Archaeological Resources.
c. Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District regarding Sanitary Sewer Facilities.
d. (IEPA) Division of Water Pollution Control regarding Sanitary Sewer
Facilities.
e. (IEPA) Division of Public Water Supplies regarding water supply and
distribution.
f. (TPA) Division of Water Pollution Control regarding a Notice of Intent
(N01) General permit to discharge storm water.
g. Kendall County Highway Department regarding points of access to Fox
Road.
We recommend that items a, b and g be received prior to Preliminary Plan approval.
Items c, d, e & f will be required prior to the start of construction activities.
3. A Natural Resource Information Report should be applied for and prepared
by the Kendall County Soil and Water Conservation District and submitted
for review.
4. Preliminary comments from Fran Klaas, P.E., Kendall County Engineer
should be solicited and submitted to the City when received.
G:U'utIi Yorkvill02004\YOQ411 Evergreen f:jrnt Estate:•\docs\IwywrotP"elimPI rrO2.doc:
11/10/20.05 THU 9:09 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI 2003/008
5. A wetland delineation and report should be submitted and reviewed by the
City's wetland consultant prior to Preliminary Plan approval.
6. A Preliminary Soils Report should be submitted showing the nature of the on
site soils and noting any limitations to road construction and dwellings with
basements. If the stormwater management facilities are to hold water, the
soils report should specifically address the capability of the soils to do so.
Preliminary Engineering Plans
7. The title of the current set of plans being reviewed should be identified as
"Preliminary"engineering plans.
8. Any culverts or bridge openings under the railroad to which the existing field
tiles discharge should be shown on the Existing Conditions sheet (C0.2)
9. The existing conditions contour lines shown on sheet C0.2 are not
sufficiently visible for review purposes and should be darkened.
10.Sheet C1.1 should be labeled as a Preliminary Site Plan
11. Typical Cross Sections should be provided for each classification of
roadway being constructed. Each section should include right-of-way and
roadway dimensions, pavement composition, sidewalk, pathways and
utilities. Cul-de-sac right-of-way and pavement dimensions should be
shown.
12.The Pavillion Road geometry will need to be redesigned at the Fox Road
intersection to comply with the City Subdivision Control Ordinance. Minimum
radii shall be in accordance with the standards shown for a collector road.
See the attached Exhibit illustrating proposed acceptable geometry.
13.Illustrations of the detention basin and recreation path easement on the
property east of the subject development should be omitted unless they are
existing features. (Sheets C1.1, C2.1, and C3.1)
14.The grading plans and utility plans indicate storm sewers discharging directly
to the wetlands along Pavillion Road. Direct discharge is not permitted.
Methods for discharging storm water to wetland areas must be reviewed and
approved by the City's wetland consultant.
15,Existing contours should be shown on the Utility Plan.
G:\Public1Yorkviii,A2(11)4\YO0411 Evt'rgrt;t 1 F"i)rnl tHsthletAc.loc;1UwywrotPrelimPl:.in62.doc
11/10/2005 TRU 9:09 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI ( 004/008 .
16.Proposed Contours should be labeled on all stormwater management
basins. Proposed contours should be shown on the grading plans.
17.The requirement for total easement widths of 20 feet (10 feet on each lot)
should be noted in the plans as well as on the plat.
18.Our Southwest Area Water Study will provide the required locations and
sizing of water mains in this area. Final sizing of internal mains other than
those addressed in the study will be determined following an update of the
City water model based on all proposed area developments.
19.The funding and timing of the construction of the required off-site water
mains which will serve this development will need to be established prior to
approval of the Annexation Agreement.
20.Sanitary sewers generally appear to be too shallow and should be
coordinated and verified with the latest design of the proposed YBSD
sanitary interceptor.
21.Funding and timing of the construction of the required off-site interceptor
sanitary sewer which will serve this development will need to be established
prior to approval of the Annexation Agreement.
22.It is our opinion that the westerly extension of Greenbrier Road to Evergreen
Farm, and ultimately to Pavillion Road and possibly beyond, should be
accomplished prior to any development in this area to handle all
construction traffic and to minimize all future impacts to existing Fox Road.
23.It is anticipated that the reconstruction of Pavillion Road will be a joint effort
of the developments on each side of the road. The respective developers
should discuss and resolve the details of this project, including the
imbalanced dedication of right-of-way, prior to Preliminary Plan approval and
annexation. Pavillion Road reconstruction should be included in the
Preliminary Plan submittal.
Stormwater Management Review
24. Based on cursory review of the USGS quadrangle maps for the area, a
potentially significant area appears to be tributary to the development site.
Offsite tributary area should be delineated and factored into the design.
Offsite flows should be routed around the site or accounted for in the design
of the interior conveyance system; and ultimately the out fall structure.
c:IPubIicwortwiliono4 X004'11 Evergreen Farm EstatcsltlocsllwywrolProliml'lano).riar,
II/10/2005 THU 9:09 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI 0005/008
25.The Fox Road Area Stormwater Management Study should be completed
prior to City approval of the Preliminary Plan. Issues addressed in Comment
#24 will be dealt with in said study.
26,The interconnectivity of the proposed ponds should be incorporated into the
proposed conditions modeling. The tailwater elevation of downstream ponds
should be taken into account, The discharge from upstream ponds should
also be taken into account.
27.An outfall pipe is shown discharging west from basin B on the plans;
however, this discharge is not included in the supporting calculations.
28.The channel/wetland area into which the proposed ponds outfall appears to
have significant tributary area. As such, a conservative tailwater assumption
should be used in the design of the ponds to account for the expected
reduced discharge capacity of the outfall structure. Additional storage
volume should be provided, as necessary.
29.The placement of trees within or on the banks of the proposed detention
ponds, as shown in the landscaping plan, should be avoided.
30.The detention pond outlet designs have only addressed the 10-year and
100-year peak storm discharges. The United City of Yorkville also requires
the design to consider the 2-year peak storm discharge. Additionally, the
maximum bounce for the 10-year storm event shall be 2 feet.
31.The stormwater storage areas must include an emergency overflow weir a
minimum of six inches (6") above the calculated 100-year design high water
level. The weir should provide capacity for the greater of either 1.0 cfs/acre
of tributary area or the calculated peak discharge into the basin from the
100-year critical duration storm event (including off-site tributary area).
32.Emergency overland flow routing paths should be indicated on the plans.
Design calculations should be provided to demonstrate the capacity of the
system to convey the 100-year event assuming that all sewers are blocked.
All buildings shall have a lowest water entry a minimum of 18 inches (18")
above the elevations determined for the bypass scenario.
33.The City's wetland consultant should verify the following items:
a) The wetland delineation has been completed in accordance with
the ordinance.
b) An appropriate buffer distance has been provided between the
wetland areas and the development.
G.public\Yoc(villc\20040,00411 Ev<:rgt ern Parra E.^>tat<;51uaus\!wywrmi),(?liitrl't9riO')„(Ic><;
11/10/2005 THU 9:10 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI 006/008 ,
Preliminary Plat
34.The "Plat of Subdivision — Evergreen Farm" should be titled as a Preliminary
Plat.
35.The easement and building setback detail needs to be revised to state, 1)
the side yard on each side of lot not to be less than ten (10) feet, or ten
percent (10%) of the lot width, whichever is greater, except when a side yard
adjoins a street, in which case the minimum shall be thirty (30) feet, and 2)
The rear yard set back should be shown as forty (40) feet. A note should be
added to the Plat which states "Where City Storm Sewers, Sanitary Sewers
or Water Mains are run along side lot lines, a minimum 20 foot wide (10 feet
each side) Utility and Drainage Easement shall be provided."
36.The easement adjacent to the east line of lots 33 through 41 and 50 through
53 should be widened to provide a minimum width of 10 feet,
37.A note should be added stating future ownership, usage and maintenance
responsibility for lots 30, 31, 66, and 79.
38.An arc length should be added on the front of lot 17 along Kaiden Lane.
39.Please correct text overlap along the north line of lot 27.
40.The bearing along the south line of lot 7 should be changed to North 64
Degrees 50 Minutes 07 Seconds East to make said lot geometrically correct,
41.Minimum 25' radii need to be added to the lots at the intersection of Fox
Road and Evergreen Farm Road. Also, see the attached Exhibit for the
recommended Pavillion Road right of way geometry.
42.Bearing needs to be added to the easterly line of lot 30, relating to the
distance, deed 305.69 feet and measured 340.28 feet.
43. A list of proposed street names should be submitted to the U. S. Postal
Service and to KENCOM for approval. A copy of the letter approving the
names should be submitted to the City for their records. One name should
be drawn from the City's list of historic names.
Conclusion
Our review of this Preliminary Plan will continue as the above comments are
addressed by the developer and the design engineer and additional information
is submitted as requested. If you have any questions or require additional
information, please contact our office.
G:\puolloyorkvinow04\y00411 rvergrecn farm Lstater.l.dor.mUwywrotPrr:IimPl:m02.doc
11410/2005 THU 9:10 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI Z007/008
Sincerely,
ENGINEERING ENTERPRISES, INC.
it4 ( (./(/(
John T. Whitehouse, P.E., P.L.S.
Senior Project Manager
William E. Dunn, P.E.
Senior Project Manager
pc: Liz D'Anna, Administrative Assistant
Tanglewood Development Corporation
Craig R. Knoche &Assoc., P.C.
JWF, EEI
G:\Public\Yorkville 004w00411 Ev^rrlroon Farm fcstates\docs1lwywrotPiolimPl2n02.doc
11/10/2005 THU 9:10 FAX (630) 466-9350 EEI 2008/008
-
,----- \ ,
\'' \
r---
1 11r ' \ - / \
e c4
\--'
1 ---\
I
- \.1,1i� ` � �/
Ir.; 1, RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED BY TANGLEWOOD \\
\ ".-
)%t
'N
I
0 /1r \
w
...4 \
�o O� \
171
.3, I \ \ \
,it, \ \\
1\,,
\ \ -\\ 11.
RECOMMENDED RIGHT OF WAY �-
y
�" -\
i" \ . //'' . \
. I \
'13.s\
1 r
cA\ Vt. \\..............„..
e "' '.. -\-
''''-\
\ - I/ \ \
% \
- .
\
i, \ V
,. ‘'- -- " T) \\ \
\r, \\:?is. , ..., •-• \ \
l'" \P h}Vs' \ .- \ \\
\ cp w\ J
-\\ \\,..., - -
g \ \\ \ - - \
/14 g
; - i
C1 \
\ 0 \ \
tic\ \ \
Nov . 9. 2005 4: 39PM No. 9910 P. 2/3
31"--
z
Schoppe Design Associates, Inc.
Landscape Architecture and Land Planning
126 S. Main St. Ph. (630) 551-3365
Oswego, IL 60543 Fax (630) 551-3639
November 9, 2005
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor Art Prochaska
From: Mike Schoppe - Schoppe Design Associates, Inc,
Re: Evergreen Farm
We have reviewed the Plat of Subdivision dated 10/5/05, the Engineering Plans dated 10/11/05
and the Landscape Plan dated 10/10/2005, all prepared by Craig R. Knoche & Associates and
provide the following comments:
Plat of Subdivision
1. This document should be titled Preliminary Plat.
2. The following information should be added to the plat:
a. Name and address of owner
b. Location of contiguous properties
c. Zoning of contiguous properties
d. Land use of contiguous properties
3. At the August 256 Plan Council meeting, I believe we discussed and recommended
eliminating the Fox Road access for the southern half of the site, and terminating
Evergreen Farm Road with a cul-de-sac. I believe we also discussed extending Kaiden
Lane to the west property line for future extension to the west, Even though there is a
wetland that would need to be bridged, these road changes still seem beneficial.
Petitioner should clarify why these changes have not been incorporated.
4. Identify the use and ultimate ownership of lots 30, 31, 66 and 79.
5. Identify the R.O.W. dedications on Fox Road and Pavilion Road.
6. The Park and Recreation Department had previously indicated that they prefer not to
have a park site on this development. Is this still the case?
Pi ,lof2
Nov 9. 2005 4: 39PM No . 9910 P . 3/3
Engineering Plans
1. Because Fox Road has been identified as a"Secondary Gateway", and because there is
excess volume in the stormwater basins, the berming of the basins should be pulled back
further from Fox Road.
Landscape Plan
1. The plantings proposed comply with the City's landscape ordinance. However,the
proposed plantings in the buffer consist primarily of turf and informal clusters of
ornamental shade and evergreen trees. This design would create an attractive landscape,
however, it would not be any different than other nice looking landscapes throughout the
City. One of the objectives of the City Council is that developments south of the river
look somewhat different than other developments. One of the important objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan design guidelines is that the landscaping in the City's"Gateways",
of which Fox Road is one of, be used to create "the natural feel of the rural landscape"
and"to enhance the rural identity". We recommend that the design style for the buffer
landscape be revised to more directly accomplish these goals. Elements such as fencing,
wood lots, naturalized turf, prairie or wind breaks might be considered as potential rural
landscape elements.
If you have any questions, please call.
CC: Liz D'Anna, Administrative Assistant
Joe Wywrot, City Engineer
John Wyeth, City Attorney
Anna Kurtman, Zoning Administrator
John Whitehouse, EEI
•
Pap 2 of 2