Laserfiche WebLink
October 23, 1997 <br />Mr. Steve Ach <br />Page Two <br /> <br /> It is unclear how the rear yards of Lots I - 4, Block 5, will drain. This entire area <br /> appears to be treed and relatively fiat. Some type of positive drainage has to be <br /> provided in this area. <br /> <br /> The rear yards of Lot 8, 9, and 10, Block 3, have a relatively steep sic:e slope <br /> shown. It appears that this side slope is almost 1:1. No grade greater than 3:1 <br /> should be allowed in this area. <br /> <br />The rear yard drainage across Lots 6 and 7, Block I appears to flow through the <br />middle of the rear yards and not along the drainage and utility eas¢~ments, <br />provided at the perimeter of the lot. if this is to continue, additional easement will <br />be needed on these lots. It would be advisable to actually move the drainage to <br />the rear lot drainage and utility easement. In cases where this (:trainage <br />easement is provided, across the middle of the back yard, there cc. uld be <br />problems with variances or easement vacations required if the homeowner wants <br />to put on a deck or expand the home. <br /> <br />Where the storm drainage pipe from the southerly pond flows across to the <br />northerly pond between Lot 1, Block 4 and between Lots 20 and 21, Block 5, the <br />emergency overflow elevation should be noted. <br /> <br />The northerly pond shows a high water elevation of 878.9. This would provide <br />for flooding of the rear yards of Lots 15 - 20, Block 5. Additional ea,'~ement <br />should be provided for this area as it would be inundated in the 100-year fi,sod. <br /> <br />Detailed drainage calculations have been provided. However, we have riot had <br />SUfficient time to adequately review them for this memo. I hope to have them <br />reviewed prior to the Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br />The grading plan shows a temporary cul-de-sac at the east end of SI'met C <br />located partially in the park area. However, the grading plan does not indicate <br />any grading for this cul-de-sac. The grading plan should be revised to indicate <br />the grading necessary for this temporary turn around. <br /> <br />The grading plan indicates drainage from Block I flows across the park through a <br />swale, out to Street C. This does not appear to provide for a very usab'~e park <br />area with the drainage swale that is provided. Some other means of providing for <br />the drainage should be considered which would allow the park area to be <br />relatively fiat for park uses. <br /> <br />C. Preliminary Utility Plan <br /> <br />This plat will receive sanitary sewer and water service from the utilities th~lt were <br />jacked under TH 10, along the east line of the Sherbume County Government <br />Center property, with the Western Area Phase 2 improvements. Essentially, <br />water service will be provided through a long dead-end relying .on the c~ossing <br />under TH 10. An analysis of the water pressure and fire-fighting capability <br />indicates that it is not necessary to loop the water system on the north side of TH <br />10 for service to this development. <br /> <br />O:\PROJ~801610j\610-2306.oc~.do¢ <br /> <br />Howard R. Green Company <br /> CONSULTING ENGINEERS <br /> <br /> <br />