Loading...
Plan Council Minutes 2002 09-26-02 Page 1 of 6 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE Plan Council Meeting Minutes September 26,2002 Convened at 9:40 A.M. Attendees: Tony Graff—City Administrator Mike Schoppe— Schoppe Design Joe Wywrot—City Engineer Tim Fairfield—BKFPD Don Schwartzkopf—Police Dept. (until 10:20) Wally Ahrens—BKFPD Harold Martin—Police Dept. (arrived at 10:50) Eric Dhuse—Public Work Lynn Dubajic—YEDC (arrived at 11:00) Laura Brown—Parks&Recreation Ralph Pfister— YBSD Richard Marker—Heartland Circle Clayton Marker—Heartland Circle Attorney John Philipchuck MINUTES Minutes from September 12, 2002 were accepted by consensus with one correction on page one, first paragraph under Kylan's Ridge, the fourth line should read"the balance will be private...."not"one will be private...." PC 2002-02 HEARTLAND CIRCLE—PRELIMINARY PLAN Sanitary Sewer Issue Mr. Graff discussed the sanitary issue for Heartland Circle. Walter E. Deuchler Associates has recommended a regional solution such as a lift station be built. This will allow the City to eliminate the temporary station and service other areas. The city is willing to share the cost for this project with developers because it will save money by eliminating two pump stations however the cost benefit of this is unknown at the present time. A policy was recommended at the September 25, 2002 Economic Development Committee meeting that the city would credit $1,800.00/house of the sewer fee toward any regional benefit for sewer expansion and $600.00/house of the water fee for regional water solutions. This policy will be created and voted on by the City Council. There was discussion with Ralph Pfister(Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District-YBSD) regarding who should build the lift station. Mr. Wywrot recommended that the city build the pump station and force main with funding from developers however this has not been finalized yet. Mr. Pfister agreed with Mr. Wywrot's recommendation. The cost of the pump station and main are not currently known but Mr. Wywrot estimated that it could cost $1.5 million. Mr. Pfister was asked if the YBSD would contribute a portion of the infrastructure fee to the funding of the station since it is a regional solution. He explained that the fee was developed for a certain amount of acreage, interceptor sewers and identified lift stations the district owns and maintains. He stated that they do not want to own or maintain any Page 2 of 6 other lift stations. He felt that the district would not want to participate with this station because they prefer not to own or operate stations. The infrastructure fee and application was discussed. Mr. Pfister stated that if YBSD contributed to this station, it would take fees away from other areas in the district. The funds are to build interceptor sewers throughout the entire facility planning area. Mr. Philipchuck stated that developers would probably more comfortable paying the fees if they knew the fees would directly impact their projects. Fox Metro's system of applying fees was discussed. Mr. Pfister was asked if the City should work with Deuchler to size the station for current areas in the City or to plan for future annexations. Mr. Pfister suggested planning for the current needs. Mr. Graff stated that the recommendation would be for Yorkville and YBSD to work together to provide sewer in the area for the annexation. He stated that the city would look at funding the pump station/force main project along with the developer. Mr. Marker stated that if the funding is not found or cooperation is not achieved, they have the potential to build a lift station, which would handle both the Heartland in Yorkville and Heartland Circle projects. Mr. Graff noted a problem with this concept because capacity needs to be opened up for the Marketplace area. Mr. Wywrot noted that there are two ways to correct this. One is to increase the size of the sewers downstream of the Heartland with a Yorkville lift station and the other is to change the discharge point which Deuchler recommended. Mr. Graff stated it is a city solution to provide sewers and Mr. Marker stated that if there is no solution by April 2003 when they are ready to begin building, he will have a problem. Mr. Graff stated that City Attorney Dan Kramer and Mr. Philipchuck should include some assurances in the annexation agreement that if the City doesn't find the financing for the solution to correct the problem then an alternative would have to be considered. CITY PLANNER'S COMMENTS Mr. Schoppe reviewed his comments(see attached). Items discussed were: • The parcels of open space being used as credit against the Land Cash Ordinance - Mr. Marker stated that at the last meeting with the Park Board it was discussed that the use of the park would be passive and that they would give 50% credit for the open space with trails in the project against the Land Cash Donation. He stated that when the Land Cash donation is calculated and the open space divided in half, the Land Cash donation is fulfilled by the acreage(50% of the 16.926 acres). Mr. Schoppe stated that this is not the information he interpreted from the Park Board's minutes however if the City Council wants to support this recommendation from the Park Board it would be fine. He stated that if this is the case, it would be very difficult for the City to review this is the future without having these statistics summarized on the plan_ Mr. Schoppe recommended that this formula be clarified on the preliminary plan. Page 3 of 6 Mr. Marker noted that 20 acres of the project is already annexed to the city so the requirements for Land Cash Donation do not apply to that acreage. He commented that the 2.84-acre park in the center of the property would have to be purchased by the city or donated to the city by the developer in addition to fulfilling the Land Cash Donation. The second option is being pursued and discussed. • Mr. Schoppe recommended that the land that the city give credit for against the Land Cash donation would be the center park area and the north/south corridor running from the park. Any other open space, even if dedicated to the city,would not be used as credit against the Land Cash Donation. Mr. Marker stated that the Park Board did not recommend this and Mr. Schoppe stated that this was his recommendation. This would be a City Council decision. Mr. Schoppe clarified for Mr. Philipchuck that the credit should be given to the open space that has the largest community(Yorkville as a whole)benefit based on the intent of the ordinance. He indicated areas of the plan that he felt had diminished community benefit and further explained his recommendation. • The intent of the Land Cash Ordinance was further discussed. Laura Brown, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that she understood that Land Cash Donation included the center park. Mr. Marker stated that the Park Board discussed that they would give a 50% credit for the open areas that included the trail system. Considering the full donation against the 50%credit there is no other donation required. Mr. Marker's intent is to voluntarily donate the center area as a passive use park. Ms. Brown indicated that the Park Board has recommended that Land Cash donation be five acres of usable land. Mr. Marker stated that the Park Board never made this distinction. Mr. Graff stated that without a contiguous five-acre park there would not be a positive recommendation on the park use issue and he reiterated the Park Board's recommendation for a five-acre park in the center of the development. Mr. Marker stated that he would not donate a five-acre park in the center that would be used as an active park for sports activities. He stated that he has met the donation requirements and is not required to donate this area. • Further discussion covered the use of the park,the possibility of acquiring an additional 10-acre parcel to be used for an active park site,the city purchasing 5 acres for the park, etc. Mr. Graff offered Mr. Schoppe's skills to redesign the park without losing lots. Mr. Marker declined the offer. Mr. Graff asked them to revise the plan and as long as the revisions do not interfere with any engineering bring it to the Plan Commission on October 10, 2002. A totally different plat or a reduction in lot size to gain the acreage would not be allowed to go on to Plan Commission. • The trail system was discussed. Mr. Marker stated that if the City would like own, install and/or maintain the system, they would be glad to make the trails fifteen feet wide. The City has indicated that they do not want to do this. Mr. Marker discussed deeding the linkage trails to the City and Mr. Graff stated that this was negotiable. The width of the trail was discussed and Mr. Schoppe recommended that the linkage Page 4 of 6 trail (any trail that connects to other parts of the property)be a minimum width of eighty feet. He recommended that the city not grant credit against Land Cash if a Homeowners Association(HOA)will govern the trail. The HOA can elect to put in any size trail. Mr. Schoppe explained that the eighty-foot width provides for separation from the trail and activity on it and the backyards of the lots adjacent to it. Elimination of the trails was discussed and Mr. Schoppe noted that since the trail was already begun in Heartland I, it should at least continue into Heartland Circle to the park. He also noted that if the trail ended at the park, he would recommend that the road system be reconfigured to provide better access to the park from the south. If the trail continued through the park and to the south,the road system is fine. Graff stated that the petitioner, after hearing the comments from the Plan Council, could submit the present plan to the Plan Commission and see what the outcome is or they could revise the plan by the October 10, 2002 deadline. Mr. Wywrot noted that if the park were made bigger in the same location and shape, the changes would not impact the engineering review. Further items in Mr. Schoppe's September 24, 2002 memo were discussed: • Mr. Schoppe noted that the Preliminary Landscape Plan was acceptable. • Mr. Wywrot noted a typo in item#I under Preliminary Engineering Plat. It should read that the sanitary sewer structure should be buried eight inches not eight feet deep. • Sidewalks -the recommendation was that the walks through the park be redesigned or eliminated so that the center area would be more useful. Also there be a detail on the engineering plan for clarity indicating the walks ten feet wide. • It was recommended that the developer build the stub for future roadway expansion to the south. Mr. Marker noted that he dedicated the land for this but whoever developed the property to the south would be the one to build it. It was discussed and determined that the right-of-way would be dedicated but not built. Another option discussed was to make the adjoining lots larger subject to an easement for a future roadway. In the interim until the road is built,the owners of the lots would maintain the easement. Mr. Graff stated that the objective is to have a road built in the future if necessary and however the objective is met legally is fine. • The proposed 30' rear yard and 25' corner side yards are not consistent with R-2 zoning standards. It was recommended that if there are going to be deviations from the standards, that there should be justification for the changes. CITY ENGINEER'S COMMENTS Mr. Wywrot reviewed his comments (see attached). Items discussed were: • Lots 4233 & #234 do not meet the minimum width at the setback line - it was indicated that this was addressed in the PUD. • Lots#194 -202 should be 12,000 square feet not 10,000 square feet- it was noted that they back up to the detention basin and trail system of Heartland I and are consistent with the lots on the other side of the basin in Heartland I. • Front yard setbacks should be created for lots on West Road and Bluejay Drive- after much discussion it was determined that Bluejay would be a full road with curb and Page 5 of 6 gutter. Lot#208 would have driveway access to Bluejay Drive with a side lot. Lot #207 would only have a front sidewalk and the sidewalk would be eliminated on the west side of Bluejay. A gate will be located on West Road and Bluejay would be used for emergency access only. • The comprehensive plan calls for Spring Street to be a collector road to West Road. It was recommended to extend the current width of Spring Street to the intersection of Omaha Drive then taper it down between Omaha Drive and Auburn Drive. • Parcel#3 appears too small for a lift station-an eighty-foot width is usually recommended for privacy but it was felt that privacy to the neighboring lots would not be compromised. • Sidewalks around the perimeter of the park-it was reiterated that the internal trail system in the park be eliminated and a sidewalk around the perimeter of the park remain. • Concrete crosswalks across the streets-it was recommended that these be done in asphalt and striped. • Eliminating a dead-end water main on Johnson Street- it was suggested that the design and build out of the water main be handled through the design of the subdivision and paid for by the city. • The detention basins dry versus wet-it was recommended that these remain dry ponds. Issues of safety were discussed. Mr. Fairfield(Bristol-Kendall Fire Dept) asked for access to the ponds if they are wet ponds. The change was due to the ordinance, which states that the maximum bounce for a dry pond is four feet. There is no bounce limitation for wet ponds. The ponds are proposed to have a nine-foot and eleven-foot bounce. The basins could be done either way but a variance would be needed for the dry basin. Mr. Marker noted the statistical data used to design the dry detention areas; in 1 -25 years there should be 4 to 5 feet maximum based on a twenty-five year storm and in 50 - 100 years there could be nine-feet of water in the pond with a fifty-year storm. It was determined to get a policy decision regarding this and it was suggested to address the maximum bounce limitation on wet basins. Other items discussed: • Traffic study-it was noted that the study for the development was received and would be forwarded to Smith Engineering for review. • Field Tile Study-this study is currently being done. • Endangered Species Consultation Report-This still needs to be preformed but no problems were anticipated. Also noted was an archeological study was done. • Bristol Township- it was discussed that plans should be sent to Bristol Township. • Tree Line-trees approximately 100' east of the gravel drive on the southwest side of the development will be eliminated and replaced with new landscaping. About 50% of the trees east of the drive and all the trees west of the drive will remain. Drainage way agreements with neighboring properties were noted along with the deeding of the gravel drive to the homeowners in the area. The homeowners are forming a legal HOA to accept this. The fate of the trees along the fence line of Teri Lane homes was discussed. It determined that this would be subject to utilities and if a larger easement was needed Page 6 of 6 to save existing trees this could be arranged. The location of the storm sewer was discussed and this could not be determined until the final grading. • Dedicated Right-of-way -The stub road off of Birchwood was discussed again. Mr. Wywrot stated that the lots on either side should have 30' setbacks from the right-of- way. • The drain down the rear yards of Teri lane was discussed. The beehive inlet in the corner lot and the plans did not show the storm sewer being picked up. Mr. Wywrot suggested the sewer be picked up and routed to either bypass the detention basin or put into the basin. • Mr. Fairfield(YBFD) asked when the emergency access would be put in and Clayton Marker noted that the development would not be done in phases so it would be put in all at once. • The Police, Fire and Public Works Departments recommended that Spring Street would continue all the way to West Road. The name Bluejay Drive would be eliminated and become Spring Street. Clearwater Drive would run from Omaha and meet Spring Street where it goes out to West Road. It was suggested to change Taus Circle Drive to Taus Circle. The street name list was discussed and Taus Circle qualifies as a name from the list. There was no further discussion for Heartland Circle. It was determined that a revised plan needed to be received by October 3, 2002 and a letter would go out to the Plan Commission stating that staff reviews (Mr. Wywrot&Mr. Schoppe) would be forthcoming. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS • Architectural Standards - Mr. Graff discussed that architectural standards were being proposed for the Route 47, 71 and 126 corridors. He asked the Council to review and have any comments ready for the October 15, 2002 Committee of the Whole. • MPI Submittal -Mr. Schoppe asked if the Council would be able to sit down and discuss MPI's submittal before the public hearing. He felt there needed to be discussion before the public hearing. A Plan Council meeting was planned for Thursday, October 3, 2002. • BKFD Site Plan-Mr. Graff stated that he had an address for the BKFD to send a site plan and request for acreage to Menard's. He stated that they were very open to work with the department. There was no additional business and the meeting was adjourned at 12:25 P.M. Minutes submitted by Jackie Milschewski, City Clerk ,09:'241.2002 21: 44 6308963225 SCHOPPE DESIGN PAGE 02 f I September 24,2002 MEMORANDUM To: Tony Graff, City Administrator ' From; Mike Schoppe.. Schoppe Design Associates RE: heartland Circle We have reviewed the Preliminary Plat dated 8/19/02, and the Preliminary Engineering dated 1/25/02.and the Preliminary Landscape Plan dated 8/19/02 and provide the following comments. Preliminary Plat I 1, The land to be dedicated to the City for the purpose of satisfying the City's Land Cash Ordinance needs to be labeled"to be dedicated to the City of Yorkville". As submitted, it is unclear which land would be dedicated to the City and what land would be owned by the Developer or H.O.A. 2. If parcel 10 is to be dedicated to the City for park purposes, it should be increased in size to 5 ac. This is consistent with our previous recommendations and the request of the Park Board, This can be accomplished in part by eliminating the narrow open space areas behind lots 1.08 to 123. 3. The property labeled"FUTURE- ROADWAY EXPANSION BY OTHERS" located at the intersection of Spring Street and Birchwood Drive should be a street r.o.w. dedicated to the City. We need to decide whether the road improvement should be built a5 part of the development or built by Somebody else in the future. 4. Parcels I thru 15 should be change to lots and numbered sequentially, 5. The proposed 30' rear yard for the 1.0,000 sf lots and 25' corner side yards represents changes to the standards found in the R-2 zoning. We recommend that if tile City is being asked to consider these changes,that it be made clear what the benefits arc to the community for such changes. I Preliminary Engineering Plan l. The sanitary sewer structure located in the center of parcel 10 should be either relocated adjacent i to the walks or busied a minimum of 8' so as to not interfere with possible recreational activities. r 2• The sidewalks crossing parcel 10 needs to be re-designed to allow the City the flexibility to provide football, soccer or baseball games in the park area.. 09/24/2002 21: 44 6305963225 SCHOPPE DESIGN PAGE 0j i 3. The Park Board has requested that the asphah paths that run thru park land be 10' wide. A cross section of the trail detail should be included on the drawing. Preliminary Landscape Plan 1. The Preliminary Landscape Plan is acceptable. If you have any questions regarding these comments,please call. ,I I CC: Joe Wyrot, City Engineer f I. I I E f United City of Yorkville EST. , I®1836 County Seat of Kendall County 800 Game Farm Road -< (n Yorkville, Illinois 60560 O �� �`' O Phone:630-553-4350 �f�' Fax:630-553-7575 September 13 2002 Mr. Steve Roake Roake & Associates, Inc. 1887 High Grove Lane Naperville, Illinois 60540 Re: Heartland Circle in Yorkville Subdivision Dear Steve: I have reviewed the proposed preliminary plat and plan for the referenced development, received on 8/19/02, and have the following comments: Plat • The phasing plan looks logical from both access and drainage perspectives. • All corner lots show a corner sideyard setback of 25 feet, while ordinance requires 30 feet. Is this mentioned in the annexation agreement? • It appears that Lot Nos. 233 and 234 do not comply with the minimum 80' width at the setback line. • Lot Nos. 194-202 should be a minimum of 12,000 square feet. • The existing lots on West Road have buildings very close to their side lot lines. With Bluejay Drive now running in between those lots, we should create corner sideyard setbacks for those lots of at least 30 feet. This can be done, but will require the centering of the ROW in the gap and the elimination of Lot Nos. 208 and 209. • The comprehensive plan calls for Spring Street to be extended as a collector road to West Road. The Spring Street ROW should be 80 feet wide from the west property line to Lot 170, where an 80' wide ROW stub to the east should be provided. This will result in the elimination of two lots. If we choose not to require this, an 80' ROW should at least be extended from the west property line through the Omaha Drive intersection. • The roadway stub mentioned above and the roadway stub between Lots 188 and 189 should have a 25' radius at the intersection of ROW lines. The lots on both sides of the stubs should have a sideyard setback of 30 feet shown. Lot dimensions in the vicinity of these stubs might need to be revised slightly to make sure these are buildable lots. • Parcel No. 3 is probably too small for the proposed permanent lift station. It should be eliminated. Plan General: • Please submit the preliminary plan to Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District and Bristol Township for review. • Please submit the preliminary landscape plan to Mike Schoppe for his review. Need a traffic study. • Need a field tile study. • Need the endangered species consultation report. • Is the Park Board OK with the size and location of the proposed 2.9-acre park? • Can any of the trees along the rear of Lots 90-91 be saved? • Please show a detail for the pedestrian trail. Streets: • Sidewalks are not indicated around the perimeter of the park, but the walking trails in the park should serve the needs of pedestrians. • Spring Street should be constructed as a collector road from the west property line to Lot No. 170 to comply with the comprehensive plan. If that is not done, it's 36'B-B width should be continued to the intersection with Omaha Drive. • A collector road cross-section should be added. • Show streetlights on the opposite side of the road from the watermain. • There are over a dozen locations where concrete crosswalks are proposed. While these would improve pedestrian safety and probably have a traffic-calming effect, there could be problems with snowplowing and long-term maintenance. Watermain: • Add a note that of valves and hydrants will be determined during final design. • A second source of supply is needed for Taus Circle Drive. It appears that a good location for this would be between Lots 117-188, extending to Birchwood Drive. • We would like to eliminate a dead-end situation that currently exists on Johnson Street. This could be done by constructing a watermain between existing Lots 32-33, then north of Spring Drive. • The watermain on Kate Drive at Lots 41-42 should be shifted south to remain in the parkway. Sanitary Sewer: • Walter E. Deuchler Associates has recommended, and I concur, that a regional lift station be constructed in this general area. This lift station is identified on the YB SD regional interceptor plan. Constructing this lift station would allow us to abandon the existing lift stations that serve Heartland, Woodworth Estates, and Gawne Lane. The new lift station would ideally be located on Wooddale Drive. A sanitary sewer would be extended westward along the south property line of Heartland Circle, then south through the Greismann property, then west through the Woodworth property to Wooddale Drive. I have spoken to Dale Woodworth and he is willing to discuss it further. I haven't been in touch with Ken Greismann yet, but the proposed plan requires a utility easement for storm sewer on his property so hopefully we can include a sanitary sewer easement with it. • If we build the regional lift station, we should consider building it as a city project with the developer helping with funding. • If we do not build the regional lift station now, it will probably never be built. In that case the Heartland Circle lift station should be constructed as a permanent building on it's own lot, which would be Lot 124. The temporary Heartland lift station would then abandoned. • The outfall for the new lift station, regardless of which one is built, will have to be extended to King Street at W. Main Street, per Deuchler's 11/12/01 report. Show a smaller scale map on the preliminary plan sheet showing the alignment. • It appears that the sewer profile from the center of the park to the lift station could be raised about 6 feet. • Lower the drop connection elevation near Lot 120 a foot or two. This will allow you to lower the profile of the sewer extending to Lots 108-110. Show a dead-end manhole at Lot 111. For the sewer serving the other side of the circle, place a dead-end manhole at Lot 112. These revisions will eliminate the sanitary-sanitary crossing between Lots 111 and 112. • The sewers serving Lots 168-182 and Lots 200-206 are shown flowing in the wrong direction. Storm Sewer: • Please provide stormwater detention calculations for review. It would be helpful if you would send me the CAD drawing file to expedite review of drainage areas and pond volumes. • Provide information showing how the stormwater discharge will get to the Fox River and how it would impact adjacent properties along the way. • A significant portion of the site will drain to the existing Heartland detention basin. Was excess storage volume created in this pond, or will it need to be enlarged? • The city will soon adopt a compensatory storage ordinance that addresses depressional storage. There are some depressions at various locations; please provide volume calculations. • An opportunity exists with the rear-yard open spaces to improved stormwater quality by directing stormwater to those locations and running them overland through grassed swales before sending it to the detention basin. �+ The two detention basins are proposed to be dry ponds. The high water level would be 9 feet and 1 i feet deep, respectively, which is well in excess of the required 4' maximum. The existing Heartland pond was approved with a similar depth, but we are concerned for safety reasons about allowing more ponds with these depths. • Storm services are required for all lots unless you can demonstrate that the soils are granular and the groundwater elevation is located at least 5 feet below basement floor elevations. Soil borings in a 300'-400' grid pattern to 20 feet below existing grade are required if you wish to show storm services are not necessary. • Trunk lines through curb drain structures are not allowed. • Revise the alignment of the outfall sewer from the SW pond to avoid skewed crossing of the sanitary sewer to the regional lift station. • It appears that additional sets of curb drains are needed near Lots 22-32, 204-258, and 158-183, • Additional adjustments will be needed to maintain the maximum 300-foot spacing between curb drains. There are several locations where intervals in excess of 325' are shown, which is not acceptable. a • It may become apparent that rear lot drainage is needed as the final grading plan takes shape. • Double inlets will be needed at several locations. These can be determined during final design. • A culvert may be needed across Bluejay Drive at West Road. • Offsite easements will be needed for the detention basin outfall sewers. We need to determine if the offsite easements need to extend all the way to the Fox River. This plat and plan are scheduled for review at the Plan Council meeting on September 26, 2002. If you have questions about any of these items, please call me at 553-4350. Very truly yours, U� J Joseph Wywrot City Engineer Cc: Tony Graff City Ad ' ratoll � Y Richard Marker, Richard Marker Associates, Inc.