Loading...
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