Loading...
Plan Council Minutes 2007 03-08-07 A APPROVED Plan Council 2 March 8, 2007 Staff John Crois,Interim City Administrator Travis Miller, Community Dev.Director Joe Wywrot,City Engineer Charles Wunder,Urban Planner Anna Kurtzman,Zoning Coordinator Dave Mogle,Ex.Director of Parks&Rec Sgt.Ron Diederich,Police Dept. William Dunn,EEI Guests Bob Bright,Fox Valley View, Inc. Vince Rosenova,DBCW,Ltd. Kevin Biscan, Smith Engineering The meeting was called to order at 9:30 by Joe Wywrot. The Feb. 22 minutes were approved as corrected. Brighton Oaks II—preliminary plan The two cul-de-sac street designs are ok as submitted.EEI comments#7-10 stated the sidewalk down the west side should be extended to connect to the trail. The city standard for a pathway should be revised to meet the 10 feet city standard. Mr.Dunn has been in contact with Smith Engineering, and they indicated the Yorkwood Estates pathway will be constructed to tie into Brighton Oaks II trail. Bill Dunn stated the annexation makes reference to a potential connection to Brighton Oaks' Phase I sanitary system. It mention use of the sanitary system in Unit I for temporary treatment until the acquisition of the YBSD connection. The preliminary plan shows no provision for this. Smith Engineering is not considering the stub to the south line of Brighton Oaks as a future sanitary connection, should the property be annexed. Staff will discuss using the system on an interim basis and how the system would be vacated,then discuss with the petitioner. Kevin Biscan stated this was proposed as a prototype and will be monitored by the IEPA. Vince Rosenova said,hopefully,the grove of trees on the Yorkwood Estates property will be saved. At the time of final,the petitioner will show path realignment and adhere to the city standard 10 foot path width. Regarding the recording of side and rear setback lines,Vince Rosenova stated this creates a separate right of enforcement to every property owner in the subdivision outside of the city zoning authority. Rebecca Houseman's memo, stated Anna Kurtzman, asked for setback notation on the eight problematic lots,but at the minimum on lot 16,assuming 87' and 106' are the rear lot lines. The petitioner will call out the side lot lines of lot 16. The note on the typical must indicate"whichever is greater"(comment#2 on Rebecca's comments)as noted by Anna Kurtzman. The annexation agreement language states that the side yard should be noted as"10%or 10',whichever is greater,or refer to the zoning code". An exception or a sign easement should be noted on lot 55, in addition to the storm water easement. Travis Miller noted comments from Laura Haake's memo, indicating the petitioner follow the tree protection policy in the landscape ordinance. The petitioner should follow tree protection and flexibility when realigning the trail location. "Future"notation on the trail, in lieu of sidewalk,along Highpoint Road should be changed.The trail will be completed by the petitioner. A traffic study should be prepared and studied,to determine the potential need for a turn bay at the Yorkwood entrance,addressing the payment for improvements.High Point Rd.is a collector roadway and there is a need for a dedicated right of way. The study and financing will be resolved at final engineering. 1 r � 1 This plan has been reviewed by Plan Commission and is at the Plan Council for the second time, to address the lot configuration. This is being targeted for the EDC agenda on March 201n Minutes submitted by Annette Williams 2