7.3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Mr. Steve Ach February 19, 1996 Page Three The Grading Plan shows grading off of the proposed plat at the north end of Streets B, C, D, and east end of Street A. We are not aware of any agreement with the surrounding property owners for this type of arrangement. Either proof of agreements from the surrounding property owners must be provided or adjustments to the Grading Plan will have to be made. In the case of the grading at the north end of Street C, more contours are needed in this area. In the case of grading at the north end of Street D, it is not possible to construct as shown on the Grading Plan. This area should be revisited. 6. We question whether it is wise to discharge storm water runoff into the low area in the rear of Lots 1 and 6, Block 3, where there is no outlet, when a ditch is available on the west edge of the property. We would suggest that the storm drainage be run from Street D to the west plat limits and discharged into the ditch. 7. There is a low area in the rear of Lots 9 and 13, Block 6. Given the • proposed home elevations in the immediate area, there appears to be no good way to provide for overflow drainage out of this low area. We would suggest that this be evaluated and filled if an emergency overflow cannot be provided. 8. The high point on Street A is adjacent to Lot 4, Block 3. From this point, drainage to the west flows all the way down to the intersection of Street A as it enters off of CSAH #1. This is an excessive amount of street flow. We would suggest that storm drainage be provided at the intersection of Street B with Street A. 9. In the southwest corner of Lot 2, Block 3, there is a proposed knob that rises to approximately elevation 950. The first floor of the home on this lot is set at 943. We question the need for maintaining the knob in this area. Also on this same lot, there is proposed a full basement walkout type of home with the lowest floor at 935.0. The lot itself is much lower than that at the rear of the building site. This will require filling in of the low area in this location. However, on the adjacent lot, Lot 3, Block 3, this low area is maintained and a drainage easement is provided. We question whether the low area should be filled, and if it is filled, why not fill it on both lots and eliminate the drainage easement on Lot 3. 10. The sedimentation ponds should have a minimum of 4:1 side slopes. It appears they are shown slightly steeper than that. Also, the drainage that runs through Lot 1, Block 4, needs treatment prior to discharge into the wetland. 230/288-1901.feb