Loading...
Plan Council Minutes 2005 05-26-05 t Plan Council l�=v,trl!° F17- May 26, 2005 Staff Joe Wywrot, City Engineer Tony Graff, City Administrator John Wyeth, City Attorney Eric Dhuse, Public Works Director Mike Schoppe, City Land Planner Jeff Freeman, Engineering Enterprises, Inc. Attendees R.T. Stanciu, S & K Development (Blackberry Woods) Kelly Knierim, S & K Development (Blackberry Woods) Sean Michaels, McCue Builders (Blackberry Woods) Greg Igemunson, Attorney (Blackberry Woods) Patti Bernhard, DBCW Attorney(Kendallwood Estates) John Tomasik, Kendall Land Dev, LLC. (Kendallwood Estates) George Bator, Kendall Land Dev, LLC. (Kendallwood Estates) Wesley Dydyna, Kendall Land Dev, LLC. (Kendallwood Estates) Scott Mai, Smith Engineering (Kendallwood Estates) The minutes from the May 12th meeting were approved as written. Blackberry Woods—Preliminary PUD Plan The Developer discussed revisions on comments made by Joe Wywrot and Mike Schoppe. It was requested that the revisions be presented in a completed form rather than in pencil. The Developer asked to go over their specific questions, specifically the road issues. They wanted to make sure that their revisions were in compliance with the City and complete before proceeding with final revisions. Tony Graff discussed the open space area and location. The Park Board requested a 2.5 acre park in the southwest comer of the site. Mr. Graff recommended showing the display to Laura Brown. For Plan Council discussion purposes the decision was to leave the park site mute. A Council policy discussion needs to be made about the location of the park site. There were questions in regard to the collector road connection and the fact there is a possible future Blackberry Bridge. The City's Transportation Planning Report indicates connection to the school. There is still a need for a traffic study under the City's PUD Ordinance. We could incorporate in the traffic study feasibility on a bridge crossing. Due to the environmental sensitivity of the Blackberry Creek area and the depth of the ravine, the section linking Cannonball Trail to Game Farm Road may not be feasible or cost effective due to the required bridge. At this point the decision is the developer will contact the transportation engineers and have them render an opinion about the Blackberry Creek Crossing. It was also decided that EEI will be doing the traffic impact f study for the subdivision. The developer was informed that the study will be part of the engineering review at the cost of the developer. The Developer went on with questions regarding EEI's comments. The developer fixed the issue with Patrick Court and Cody court. Also, the Developer corrected the land plan to provide continuous extension of Cannonball Trail to the Southerly Line of the subdivision with its ultimate extension being either to River Road or the so called Beecher Road extension linking Fox Road and Route 34. They did show an 80 foot cross section that tapers down to 70 feet. It is believed that that will be permitted, but Mr. Wywrot recommends waiting for the traffic study to provide further information on this issue before a decision is made one way or another. If the decision is made to go from 80 to 70 feet it must be decided where that change will be made, at an intersection or at a block. The next question was in regard to the lots backing up to the jail facility. It was recommended to meet with the Sheriff and the police department and return with a written recommendation. The idea is that there will be a ten foot see through fence. There is a concern that the inmates will disturb the homeowners and consequently there will be phone calls made. They want to forecast ahead of time and prevent complaints. The developer plans to have a six foot berm as a buffer between the homes and the jail facility. The final decision was to have a letter of recommendation on the record. There was discussion about still needing a 1) Stormwater Management Report; 2) Soils Report; 3) Field Tile Investigation; 4) Wetland Study; and 5)Natural Resource Information Report. It was recommended to also see the IDNR, IHPA, and YBSD weigh in prior to the PUD plan approval. In regards to the teardrop cul-de-sacs, Eric Dhuse stated that they were accessible but not the easiest to deal with. Mr. Dhuse recommended that since the developers are planning on building the houses that if they worked with the City in their planning that will help with the accessibility. He also stated that he is okay with the cul-de-sacs as is. It was then discussed that both the block length of North Cary Circle and South Cary Circle exceed the City Standard Maximum of 1320 feet. It was deemed that the issue with South Cary would be corrected somewhat. There was the idea of a connecting street to separate the different zoning classifications to fix the issue with the North. It was decided that North Cary would still exceed the City Standard and the developer would have to include that in their request. Blackberry Woods will be going to the EDC Committee June 16'h, 2005 with updated submittals. Kendallwood Estates of Yorkville—Preliminary Plan In regard to the Route 126 intersection, the City ordinance dictates that the angle should be as close to 90 degrees as possible, 80 is the minimum allowed. It was asked if it is possible to achieve this. The developer stated that they will not be able to achieve a 90; they are attempting to achieve at least 80. Joe Wywrot recommended creating a left hand turn bay. The developer stated that they are doing a traffic study. It was recommended that they meet the 80 degree City required minimum and also that the developer meet with the owners to the east and encourage a joint access. There was discussion over the 13 acre frontage. Per the ordinance the owners need to have two access points. The owners of the 13 acres will be in contact with the developer about the possibility of an access point. It is possible that this is another viable option, to have a joint access between the two properties. Tree preservation was deemed to be critical. A suggestion by the engineers was to use the detention areas and consider some best management practices. Replacement of trees was discussed. There is the possibility of a land bank to replenish trees in that way. It was asked that the trees to be removed be present on the plan. Scott Mai brought up an idea of using rock-check dams to slow the flow of water. Detentions would be provided per code and per ordinance for the southerly portion. This would help leave as many of the trees as possible. Mr. Wywrot said he would support trying to get the water down into these areas and back into the ground as much as possible. He also stated there was a need to work more through the engineering to see if this idea would in fact actually work. The developer requested to sit down with EEI to discuss the water issues so it can be fully understood. There was a request for the submittal of a Wetland Report. EEI brought up concern with the pressure zones. There is a divide right through the middle with the west being a lower zone and the other on a higher zone. The issue was where the water was going to come from to reach these two zones. It was determined that this must be addressed. EEI requested IHPA Phase I Survey. The developer stated that it was completed and clean and they would submit documentation. Documents also requested included IDOT point of access, the Stormwater Management Report, and a Traffic Study (already in progress). There was discussion about a temporary easement or right of way to be provided for 300 Road. The developer stated that temporarily it would be a cul-de-sac and then become a road when the property next door is developed. Mike Schoppe noted that it is probably not necessary to have both road stubs extending into the McKenna property. It may be possible to leave one of the roads as a cul-de-sac. There was discussion about applying for a PUD instead because of the number of variances. It was decided that the developer would consider their options and be in contact with their end decision. 1 Kendallwood Estates will be returning to Plan Council June 23rd with new engineering and preliminary plat submittals. Fox Hill Unit 6 Lot 1 Final Plat There was discussion for the need of standard easement language for access and egress and right of way dedication. The developer asked if IDOT could require 10 feet if there is no access to them. It was decided that the developer should get in contact with IDOT now to discuss the issues including the request of a future right in right out to prevent future problems. It was also discussed about the detention area that consumes lot 5. There is a request to build two office buildings on lot 4. The sharing of the detention area is an issue. The office building was originally within 10 feet of the detention. Now that there is a lot line it is a 20 foot setback for the building. The developer was asking for 20 foot setback to be reduced to 10. The decision was to look in to moving the side lot line 10 feet while making sure the detention is still fully located on lot 5. A site plan was shown as per request. Joe Wywrot discussed the possibility of a traffic signal in the future. Mr. Wywrot asked if there was a way to document that Fox Hill had done their fair share to contribute to the traffic signal. The City or Rob Roy Falls would have to contribute the rest. It was decided that when Rob Roy Falls files to request that contribution of them following an analysis of the need for the signal. Fox Hill will be at Economic Development Committee June 16d'. Respectfully submitted, Alyssa D'Anna