5.7, 5.8 PCSR 12-27-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DEC - 21 - 94 WED 16 : 59 MSA S T PAUL P . 03 IDMr. Steve Ach December 21, 1994 Page Two B. Preliminary Grading Drainage and Erosion Control Plan Since the site is greater than 5 acres in area, an MPCA Permit will be required prior to initiating grading operations. It is not clear whether the ponding area will be completely constructed prior to grading of the twin home site. If this is the case, silt fence should be placed around the perimeter of the pond adjacent to any grading to preclude material from washing into the pond. If final grading of the pond is part of the grading of the overall twin home site, this additional silt fence will not be necessary. The grading plan needs to be revised in many areas to accurately reflect the way in which the site will need to be graded. As an example, between Lots 50 and 51, there is an 884 contour connecting the fronts and the rears. Both Lots 50 and 51 are proposed to be at a finished grade of 884. This would indicate that the grade between the two buildings would be somewhat less than this, perhaps 883.5. Clearly, if that is the case, with an 84 contour in the front, and an 84 contour in the • rear, this would create a low spot between the two homes, which would not drain. There are several other examples of similar areas where the grading plan needs to be revised to reflect how the site will actually be graded. This has been discussed with the developer, and with John Oliver & Associates, so that they understand the changes that are required. In the northwest corner of the site, there is an existing 886 contour, which runs underneath a proposed 884 contour. Obviously, this cannot happen. The 886 contour needs to be re-muted around that area, which may cause a small amount of grading off of the project site, onto the corner of the lot, within Sandpiper States Addition. This should be accurately reflected, as to how the developer plans to deal with this corner on the grading plan. The street section proposed is 26 feet from back of curb to back of curb. The curbing is proposed to be a surmountable type of concrete curb and gutter. This will provide approximately 241 to 25 feet of total driving area. There was much discussion relative to this width roadway at the concept review meeting. The Fire Chief was quite concerned about whether or not this would provide adequate width for emergency vehicles, assuming cars may be parked on the street. He has done some additional research on surrounding communities, and has concluded that the IIIwidth is adequate if the streets are signed, no on street parking. All home sites should be adjusted, if necessary, to provide a minimum of 20 feet driveway length from the garage door to the curb line. At areas where the homes