6.5. SR 11-17-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

October 23, 1997 Mr. Steve Ach Page Three When we met with the developer and his engineer we provided several comments regarding minor modifications to the utility system. All these c'~anges have been made with one exception; the hydrant shown between Lots 21 ;and 22, Block 5, should be moved to the south east corner of Lot 22. Based on a staff comment, the plat now provides for street and utility access to the west for the Custom Motors site. The street access has been provided at the mid point between Streets A and C. This puts three intersections in relatively close proximity to each other. The closest of these intersectio,~s are approximately 170 feet apart with the other two intersections over 200 feet apart. We feel that this should be acceptable in this instance because of the limited amount of property to develop to the west. Therefore, there is a limited amount of traffic that will access these intersections. We felt that this access poirt to the west was better then lining up with Street C which would provide for straight 'cut- through" opportunities when the whole area is developed. The straight streets tend to lead to complaints regarding the speed of traffic through neighborhoods. The plan shows a 10-foot wide bituminous trail along the south plat boundary on the north side of the service road. One issue that has yet to be resolved is what should happen with the service road relative to this development. Clearly, as this whole area develops, there will be a need to rebuild this road. This road should, at some time, be rebuilt to a City standard section, 32-foot wide with concrete curb and gutter. It may be more appropriate at this time to require the developer to pay an amount of money equal to his share of the rebuilding of the frontage road. At some poin'! in ',.he future, probably when the watermain needs to be relooped, reconstruction of the entire frontage road from Naples Street to the west connection with T~ 10 will take place. D. Preliminary Plat and Landscape Plan The landscape detail shows boulevard trees being planted every 60 feet, 6 feet into the lots. We would suggest that these trees be 10 feet into the lots, to keep them out of the drainage and utility easement provided along the front of e~ch lot. Along the rear lot lines of Lot 6, 7, and 8, Block 5, additional drainage ea.~sement needs to be provided based on the grading plan. The drainage and utility plan along the rear lot lines of Block 3 need.~ to be clearly called out. In this area there is a 15-foot landscape buffer planned to be planted, with the drainage and utility easement provided inside of this buff~;r. The drainage and utility easement should be labeled in width and location. Consideration should be given to whether or not the City is interested in having a separate document that provides for a landscape easement. Where the landscaping is planned along the south plat boundary and the rear lot lines of Block 3. as it stands right now, a homeowner on any one of these Iot.~ would have the right to remove the landscaping that is planned to be planted. If Howard R. Green Company CONSULTING ENGINEERS O: \PROJ'~8016 I0j\6l 0-2306.oc[.d~c S0/~0' d