7.2 Final Plat Final Plat Georgetown Villas Addition
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
11/17/2008
TIME
4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
7
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
Development Services
Planning
BY: Dean Andrew
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 1
2
BY:
ITEM: Application #P08-5/5A
Acceptance of offered easement, right-of-way and restricted access dedications in a proposed replat
of a portion of Block 8 of the Georgetown Addition. The subject property is a 4.76 acre tract of land
located on the north side of East Crawford Street between Fairdale Road and Georgetown Road. (To
be known as the Georgetown Villas Addition.)
BACKGROUND:
The final plat of the Georgetown Addition was approved by the Planning Commission on October 1,
1974. Block 8 which is bounded by Fairdale Road, Village Lane, Georgetown Road and Crawford
Street consists of eight (8) platted lots. A PDD overlay approved in 1979 and amended in 1993
created building tracts that were superimposed over the eight platted lots.
Nature of Current Request
This proposed replat was filed as a companion item to carry out the proposed land use change from
neighborhood commercial to townhome development. A total of 16 individual platted lots are
proposed, 15 for townhome units and one for future commercial development. As proposed, these lots
would subdivide what is currently identified as Tract #3 of the Georgetown Village Place PDD. A new
public street is being proposed that would provide access to the proposed townhome lots.
Street Access and Desiqn
As proposed, the new internal street would be a public street with asphalt or concrete or paving and
curb and gutter. The design plans submitted by the applicant's engineer proposed a reduction in right-
of-way width from 60 ft. to 50 ft. and a reduced paving width from 33 ft. to 29 ft. This option is available
for short segment and dead end streets under the city's street design standards.
Proposed Street Name
Georgetown Court
This proposed name does not conflict with any existing street name in the city or county. The Planning
Commission has the discretion to approve or disapprove street names and approved the proposed
street name as part of the plat.
Lot Desiqn
All lots and blocks have been numbered on the final plat drawing. A total of 15 townhome lots
comprising two blocks are proposed on the plat, with one lot (Lot 9, Block 1) being retained for
commercial development. There are no areas set aside as common open space.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
11/17/2008
TIME
4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
7
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
Development Services
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 2
All lots shown would have legal frontage on a public street. Lot 9 would have frontage but no direct
access to Crawford Street. It appears that the width and area dimensions of all lots shown on the plat
would meet or exceed the minimum standards of the R-2 district, the proposed depth of the lots does
not, and the applicant is requesting a variation from that standard through the PDD process. It does
not appear that there would be any foreseeable difficulties in obtaining building permits to build on any
of the proposed lots if the applicant's requested variations are approved, once streets, water, and
sanitary sewer service are provided.
Planning
2
BY: Dean Andrew
BY:
Public Utilities and Services
1. Water and Fire Protection - When the Georgetown Village Townhomes on the east side of
Georgetown were developed, a 6 inch public water line was extended north from Crawford Street
through the development and tied back to a line in Georgetown Road to create a looped system.
The Director of Utilities has reviewed fire flow simulations submitted by the applicant's engineer
and has concluded that the existing system in Georgetown Road would provide sufficient flows to
serve the 15 townhome sites with a 6 inch line as proposed by the applicant. This internal water
line loop could be financed privately or publicly financed over 15 years through creation of a
benefit district.
2. Sanitary Sewer - The applicant and their design engineer plan to install an 8 inch gravity line in the
Georgetown Court right-of-way and connect back to an existing north - south line on the west side
of Georgetown Road that serves the townhome area to the north. Internal public sewer lines could
be financed privately or publicly financed over 15 years through creation of a benefit district.
3. Natural Gas - Kansas Gas has existing facilities in Georgetown Road. They plan to extend gas
service lines to serve this area in the public street right-of-way at the developer's expense.
4. Electricity - Under the City of Salina's Subdivision Regulations all electrical lines serving this
subdivision must be placed underground. This would not include high voltage lines or pre-existing
overhead lines. Westar has indicated that due to the tight quarters in the front of the lots they plan
to install underground electric service lines in a loop at the rear of the lots. Westar has specific
questions about the conflict between the 15 ft. access easement being both a traveled roadway
and a location for rear yard transformer boxes. The easements appear to conflict.
5. Storm Drainage - The original Georgetown Addition is pre-1980 subdivision and therefore no
drainage study or stormwater detention was required at the time of platting or at the time the
commercial PDD for this property was approved. The applicant is proposing a less intense use of
the property than the previously approved shopping center plan.
6. Fire Protection - Fire response from Station #4, located about 3 blocks away at Marymount and
Crawford is well under the 5 minute response standard.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
11/17/2008
TIME
4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
7
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
Development Services
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 3
7. Police Protection - Provided by the Salina Police Department once Georgetown Court is built and
open to traffic.
Planning
2
BY: Dean Andrew
BY:
8. Schools - Students in this townhome development would attend the following schools:
Meadowlark Elementary School - Grades 1-5 (5 blocks away);
Lakewood Middle School- Grades 6-8;
Salina Central High School- Grades 9-12.
U.S.D. #305 has not indicated to City staff that this development will create any crowding problems
at the above mentioned schools.
9. Parks - This property is shown as being located in Neighborhood Park Service Area #9 in the
City's Neighborhood Park Plan. There are no neighborhood parks in this area of the city. Under
the City's Park Land Ordinance, developers of residential subdivisions have the option of
dedicating land within their subdivision for public park purposes or paying a fee in lieu of
dedication. The fee is set at $150/dwelling for attached single-family dwellings.
10. Streets & Traffic - Based on a trip generation rate of 10 vehicle trips per day per household, staff
estimates that up to 300 vehicle trips per day on to Georgetown Road would be generated from
this small subdivision. Georgetown Road is a lightly traveled street and this proposed townhome
development is adjacent to Crawford Street, so traffic generated by this development would not
have to travel through neighborhoods to reach an arterial street. Crawford Street carries 7,420
vehicles per day in this location.
Easements and Dedications
The applicant is proposing to dedicate all street right-of-way and improvements shown on the plat to
the public for City maintenance. All utility easements shown on the plat would be dedicated public
easements.
The plat also shows a 15 ft. cross-access easement for a shared private drive that would provide
access to Lot 9, Block 1 from Fairdale Road across the northern edge of the Kwik Shop property.
Required Public Improvements
The developers of the Georgetown Villas Addition would be responsible for the following public
improvements:
Streets - Approximately 830 ft. of asphalt or concrete paving, 2 lanes, 29 ft. wide with curb and gutter
for internal streets.
Sidewalks - A sidewalk along the west side of Georgetown Road.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
11/17/2008
TIME
4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
7
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
Development Services
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 4
Drainage - Design and construction of any street inlets needed to carry runoff from Georgetown Court
to Georgetown Road and the public storm sewer system.
Planning
2
BY: Dean Andrew
BY:
Utilities - Design and construction of internal public water and sewer lines needed to serve individual
building lots.
Special Assessments
Property owners outside of the proposed Georgetown Villas Addition should not be impacted by
additional assessments for streets and water and sewer lines extended into this area.
Covenants
The developers have not submitted a draft of Restrictive Covenants for this subdivision. It is not clear
whether covenants and I or an architectural control committee will be used to establish design
requirements and other building restrictions for the townhomes constructed in this PDD.
Conformance with Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Map - The City's Future Land Use Plan shows this area as being appropriate for medium
density residential development. The residential density of the proposed townhome development (30
units on 4.0 acres) computes to 7.5 units per acre which falls within the medium density residential
classification of 8.0 units per acre.
Planninq Commission Action
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposed replat of a portion of Block 8 of the Georgetown
Addition on October 21, 2008 as a companion item to the Planned Development District. Following
presentation of the staff report, comments from the developer's representative and comments and
questions from by Commissioners, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to approve the proposed
replat of this 4.76 acre tract subject to the following conditions:
1. Primary electric lines and the individual service lines must be placed underground except for
those lots which can be served by existing overhead power lines. The developer will be
responsible for providing the trenching, conduit and backfilling for the underground primary
service.
2. The plat drawing shall be revised to provide the necessary utility easements to allow rear yard
electric service to all platted lots.
3. A sidewalk shall be required on the west side Georgetown Road.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
11/17/2008
TIME
4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
7
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
Development Services
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 5
4. A Certificate of Completion for all public improvements must be issued by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of any building permits in this subdivision.
Planning
2
BY: Dean Andrew
BY:
5. A revised/corrected final plat containing all required technical corrections to the plat drawing
and plat certificates, including documentation of the Kwik Shop access easement, must be
received prior to City Commission consideration of the final plat.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff believes this replat IS In order for the Commission's consideration. If the City Commission
concurs with the action of the Planning Commission, a motion should be made to accept the offered
easement, right-of-way and restricted access dedications and authorize the Mayor to sign the final plat
of the Georgetown Villas Addition.
Encl: Application
Existing plat
Proposed replat
Excerpt of PC minutes 10/21/08
cc: Kelly Dunn
Greg Adams, Campbell & Johnson Engineers
1. Subdivision Name
2. Subdivision Location
3. Land Area (sq.ft. and / or acres)
4. Number of Lots Proposed
5. Present Zoning
6. Pending Zoning (if applicable)
Cltyof
~
Salina
Plannina &
Community
Develooment
Date Filed AUQust 1,2008 Application No. P 08-5/5A
Preliminary Plat 10 2~ DO
Approval Date 1974 Receipt No.
Site Plans Landmark Accepted Bv DA
APPLlCA TrON FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL
Georgetown Villas Addition
North side of Crawford between Fairdale Rd. & Georgetown Rd.
207,552 sq. ft. (4.76 acres)
16 (1 commercial)
POD C-2 Present Use Vacant
POD R-2/C-2 Proposed Use Attached single-family dwellings
7. Please explain any provisions of conditional preliminary plat approval and your compliance with those provisions (attach additional
sheets if necessary):
8. If any changes have occurred between the approved preliminary and this final plat, other than those required by the Planning Commission,
please explain the nature of these changes:
Proposing to change from large commercial tract to individual residential lots
9. Explain any waivers of the subdivision regulations granted with the preliminary plat or requested with this application:
10. Applicant Name: Larry Curran
Phone Number:
Applicant Address: 1955 East Bank Drive Salina, KS 67401
E-Mail:
11. Property Owner:
Address:
785-825-8100
larry@tmckansas.com
Jerry Weaver, Jack Kindlesparger Trust, Tina Lanoue
Phone Number: E-Mail:
12. Engineer/Surveyor: Don Dean, Campbell & Johnson / Landmark Surveying & Mapping
Address: 113 W. ih Street Concordia, KS 66701/ PO Box 47 Abilene, KS 67410
Phone Number:
13. Authorized
Representative
Address:
Phone Number:
785-243-1755
landmarksurvey@sbcglobal.net
E-Mail:
Kelly Dunn
2524 Berwick Circle Salina, KS 67401
822-5930
E-Mail:
I hereby agree to comply with the Subdivision Regulations of the City of Salina. Kansas, and all other pertinent ordinances of the City of
Salina and statutes of the State of Kansas. In addition, it Is agreed that all costs of recording the plat and supplemental documents thereto
with the Register of Deeds shall be assumed and paid by the owner or applicant.
Applicant(s) Signature
PLF-058, 1-08
Date
I
/
I
/
I
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~f
I'
/
/
I
/
I
(
/
I
/
I
/
I
/
GEORGETOWN VILLAS
EXISTING PLAT LAYOUT
A1JJO.lN~.G AUDITION:
VILLAGE PLACI. TOWNHOMES A.DD.
..
;" _. .L:I. _.. _ ~I'_" _'. _ .._.. _L~~~. ._. .~.._.. _..
LOTJ
/
(
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
~I
II
~
~'
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LOT4
I
/
" -" _., -.. -.. -" -.. t.. -.. -.. -.. -.. - " -.. -" -.. -"
LOTS
I
I
I
I
LOT 6
LOT?
.. -" -.. -.. -" -.. -.. -., -" -.. - '/-" -.. -.. -" -., -,. -.. -., -..
LOT 8
~
Sf
ADJOlJliLHC ADDITION:
FINAL D!.VE.LOPMItNT PlAN
GEORGETOWN' VlLJ..AGE PL.4..CE, POD
A4,IooIIIolII8Lu.....1!I"'l
1oOC.7r/1j11of11....tIDdIiI..u.c
!J33E.CawfbnlAW!.
T.."
LOT 10
I
L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ JLCRAWPORD....'~_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ ~
146~"
.._.._..I~'.._.._..
/I;
~
ADJOINING ADDITION:
'!HAL DEVELOPMENT PUN
GWRGF.TOWr>t VlI.I.AOr. PI.ACF.. POD
..\.lU.................-:
.......... A a-.
.S1''''~
r.."
18.4.42'
T9
VICINITY MAP
ARC LENGTIl
J90,7T CM&P
J 44.49' CM&C
316,37' CM&CP
184.33' eM
88.49'
45.24'
17,95'
56.00'
18,!l4'
42,33'
44,88'
6,79'
14.84'
J37.J6'
90.61'
88.60'
J32.02'
12.47'
~
,un<!
'w'"Landmaz\; CLS.116" CIlp
Iml..
anc,
'"
m Measurcnent
lei<
ubdivision Bounduy Line
.Of Lin~
.iShr..of-Way Centerline
.Uement Line
iuildiDg Sctbeclc Line
/
/
/
CHORD LENGTH
189,41' Ai
143.90' M
312,46' M
183.8J'M
88.43'
4S.23'
15.39'
54.71'
18,71'
39.79'
4l.87'
6.75'
J4.50'
136.84'
90,52'
88.52'
131.57'
12.47'
"I"'~-
Th~ Plat of
a~O.Sf~tO~D Vi1tJt~Sj!
to the City of Salina, Saline County, Ka:
A Replat of a portion of Lots 1, 2 7, 8, 9 10, and a
5, 6, Block 8, Georgetown Addition
j
PLAT NOTES
I) Ba,;! o(Bearings: Auumed S ape40'JB" W alonS the the
Southern line of the property.
2) Monuments round have 1ft unk.Qolm origin. unless noted
Qtherwise.
3) Flood Information: lbi, property illOCllted ia Flood Zone C.
according to the Flood Jnawaacc Rate Map for d1c City of Salina,
S.lineCowtty, K8D5lU'. Map Number. 200319 0015 B Effec:cive
Date:021OSJ1986
CHORD BJiARlNG
N IJ02O'40M E M
N32"10'~"E(M
N 25"32'14' E (M
S 09055'42" W M
N 13"47'43' E
N 04018.,8" E
N 36021' IS" W
S 68"0222' W
S 62'09'16' W
N 67.4)'48" W
N 03'40'3)- E
N 2S-S2'U' B
N 56'50'36' E
S l6"41'07'W
S27'S6'08.W
S 36'47'15' W
N 32.57')3" E
N 23"879" E
ADJOlNll'iG ADDITION:
ViLLAGE PLACE TOWNHOMES ADO.
N 89"25'44" E 401.13' (M) 401.22' (0) 401.10' (P)
85.00' 85,00'
15' Utility Easement
----------- ----------
128,77'
102.36'
-----------r
BLOCK 1 d
1 ~
----~
/
/
/
/
b
3
3
. to
::;j
:oj
_ O2Jlull!!W8~_
il
I
~ ""',,....
I
_ _C.QEO~G8~~~~~i//W- _ _ _ -
40 0
~--
40
,
il
I
6,
85.
UjhUllliD.~'IiL
/
Vui!llill.~L
I
j."
"<i
P
L _ lllluildiD.~
BLOCK 2
2
"",
I
/
tc ~
Ii ~
in
3
llUl<dlllil'.~'<L.
WlulldiJJ.~.'iL.. .-J~
~RGETOWN COURT /IIW _ _
N89~2f.J0'- --
il
0: ~I
il If
f;I
t I
., ~
.J" i- II
0
f~ '"
'" " "
wa
'" I
~
30'(P)
il
_ ~ulldiJJ.~<L.
12
....
::;j
13
BLOCK 1
8
84.05'
~-------------------------
J 3' 1l1gressfEgress &: Utility Easement
S 89'29'04" W 216.8('
S 01"29'04" W 146,55' 1M&D&P)
Barw/"BWRCLS-086'C
Origin: Bucher, Wi iii &: R j
(in Concrete)
S 89"29'04" W 110.56'
S 89'29'04" W 180,82'
-----~~~~~~~!~I_____-
~
g;
~
ADJ01NlNG ADDiTiON:
TRACf 2, PlNAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
GEORGETOWN VILLAGE PLACE. PDD
OF PORTION OF WTS 8" 9, BLK. 8
GEORGETOWN ADDITION
(Book HU, '8gf 1746)
I
ADJOI..NI..NG ADDITiON:
TRACI' 1, FI..NAL DEV.tLOpMEN'r PLAN
GEORGETOWN VIlLAGE P/.ACE, POD
A PORTION OF LOTS 7 " 9, BLK. 8
GEORGETOWN ADDITION
(Deed Book 325, Pale 929)
f;;
E
9
BLOCKl
I
L
S B9l'29'041 W 184.42'
~
~=
~~
~~
"''''
~::!
z~
I
~
~
Z
I
S 89'29'04' W 179.48' M&:D
228,00' P
_ _ _ _ .!.C.l!,1~QtlILST~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
_--1
Salina Planning Commission
October 21,2008
Page 4 of 10
right-of-way. The recommendation that is written there is based on
establishing the development stipulations for building the townhomes
themselves.
Mrs. Soderberg asked then in a motion we would need to indicate points under
conditions of approval?
Mr. Andrew stated well what would generally happen in a Planned
Development District like this is if Items #1-9 through the end of the listing
there would be considered conditions of approval and those would be
incorporated into an ordinance that would rezone this property. The reason
those were inserted in there is we wanted the Commission to go through them
item by item with the applicant to detennine if any of them were inappropriate
or people didn't feel comfortable with them. Those stipulations like how they're
constructed and square footage limitations and no covered porches would be
written into the ordinance that would rezone this piece of property if those
conditions seemed appropriate to you.
Mrs. Soderberg asked we'd need to add another condition for the sidewalks
then, correct?
Mr. Andrew stated no that would be addressed through companion Item #3.
The request before you is a rezoning of the property from C-2 Neighborhood
Commercial to R-2 Multi-Family Residential. If you think all things are in order
for that then the motion would be to approve the change in zoning from
Neighborhood Commercial to Multi-Family Residential and approval of their
development plan for the property.
Mr. Mikesell asked with the six conditions of approval?
Mr. Andrew stated yes.
MOTION: Mr. Schneider stated I would so move.
SECOND: Mr. Householter.
VOTE: The motion carried 5-0.
#3. Application #P08-5/5A, filed by Larry Curran, requesting approval of a replat of r
a portion of Block 8 of the Georgetown Addition into 15 lots for town home
development and 1 Jot for neighborhood commercial development. The subject
property is a 4.76 acre tract of land located on the north side of East Crawford
Street between Fairdale Road and Georgetown Road. (To be known as the
Georgetown Villas Addition). Continued from October 7,2008 meeting.
Mr. Andrew presented the staff report with visual graphics which is contained
in the case file.
Mr. Mikesell asked any additional questions of staff? Is it your contention that
sidewalks should be required on one side of Georgetown Court is that correct?
Mr. Andrew stated well what I'm saying is that your next case, Item #4, is your
classic case of a subdivision being exempt from having sidewalks. This street,
Georgetown Court, is not exempted by the subdivision regulations from having
sidewalks, but you have the discretion as the Planning Commission reviewing
the plat to determine based on the proposed configuration whether sidewalks
should be required at all or on one or both sides of Georgetown Court and if
they should be curb side or property line sidewalks. If this street was straight
and connected to Pheasant Lane, sidewalks would be required on both sides
Salina Planning Commission
October 21,2008
Page 5 of 10
of the street. They would have to be built at the time that buildings were
constructed. Because this is a short segment street which is not a cul-de-sac,
a dead end street, and it's not less than 600 ft. long, it is not exempt by code.
The other thing is the subdivision regulations state that there is a preference
for property line sidewalks meaning there is a gap between the curb and the
sidewalk. The exception to that is if you have a lack of right-of-way or
topography or other issues that require the sidewalk be built behind the curb,
South Ohio is an example of that. Because there is very little right-of-way
behind the curb the sidewalks were put right behind the curb even though it's
not ideal on that busy of a street. There just simply wasn't enough right-of-way
to push them back farther. Your options as it relates to Georgetown Court are
to say no sidewalks required, sidewalks on one side, sidewalks on both sides,
and also whether those sidewalks should be property line or curb side
sidewalks. Because this is tight and we're trying to put the utilities outside the
street, there's going to be a sewer line coming down here that will have
manholes. You would then have manholes in a sidewalk. Up here you have a
water line coming around and hydrants. Because of the tightness of the site,
there isn't a great place for sidewalks. I think the first focus needs to be on
Georgetown Court, and if you're saying that there don't need to be any
sidewalks at all, then the next step is should there be any sidewalks on the
periphery and if so, where? The sidewalks on Georgetown Court would be
internal that would serve the people that reside there. Georgetown Road is a
peripheral street, so anything built there would serve people outside of this
subdivision as well.
Mr. Mikesell stated well it sounds like any sidewalk on Georgetown Court
would be challenging at best.
Mr. Andrew asked would that be your assessment, Wayne? With the utilities
that we're fitting in there, finding a good place would be a bit of a challenge?
Mr. Nelson stated that is correct. The proposed layout of the infrastructure that
Campbell & Johnson has provided us has the sanitary sewer looping on the
interior portion of Georgetown Court. We would end up with three manholes
located in the sidewalk. The other option would be to move the sanitary sewer
to the opposite side of the street, but then we're increasing the length of the
line and adding additional manholes and providing an additional expense to
the developers. The same would be true if we were to place the sidewalk on
the exterior loop of Georgetown Court. Yes it is a challenge to fit a sidewalk in
along with the rest of the infrastructure.
Mr. Mikesell asked are there any other questions of staff? Would the applicant
care to address the Commission again?
Mr. Dunn stated I just wanted to comment on the covenants. I believe we
probably will file a small set of covenants with the final plat. I believe that isn't
due until the final plat gets recorded. Is that right, Dean?
Mr. Andrew stated yes we'd want to record them together so any transactions
under the plat would be subject to those covenants.
Mr. Mikesell stated refresh my memory if you will. Did you say that at this time
the owner will be retaining ownership of these town homes?
Mr. Dunn stated yes.
Mr. Mikesell asked then if they were sold the covenants would come into
effect?
Mr. Dunn stated yes. We haven't discussed the covenants yet, and we just
Salina Planning Commission
October 21,2008
Page 6 of 10
want to make sure that the buildings will look alike. If we did eight of them and
then quit for awhile and someone else bought it, at least the covenants would
be in place to go forward with what was originally planned. The other thing
was the sidewalks. We cjon't think they are good for that area. With the utilities
that are going in there I don't think there is a good place for them.
Mrs. Soderberg stated except on Georgetown Road.
Mr. Mikesell asked any further questions of the applicant? Would any member
of the public care to address this item? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the
Commission for discussion and action.
MOTION: Mr. Ritter stated I would move for the approval of Application #P08-5/5A with
the five staff recommendations with the exception of number 3 to read
"sidewalk to be required from property line to property line on Georgetown
Road."
SECOND: Mr. Schneider.
VOTE: Motion carried 5-0.
#4. Application #P97-2B, filed by Timberline Property, Inc., requesting approval of
a replat of the Timberline Addition into 10 lots for single-family residential
home sites. The subject property is a 1.92 acre tract of land located on the
north side of West Republic Avenue west of the Union Pacific railroad tracks.
Mr. Andrew presented the staff report with visual graphics which is contained
in the case file with Mr. Nelson presenting information regarding items relating
to Engineering.
Mr. Mikesell asked Item #4 on your recommendations clarifies the
maintenance responsibilty of the infiltration trench is that correct?
Mr. Andrew stated weill think the expectation is that the developers, once it's
built, will want to tum the infiltration trench over to the City for long term
maintenance. The real question would be coming up with an appropriate cost
estimate for that. The other thing we would work out is when the street is built,
we would want to work with the applicant and their contractor to determine
what that surface would consist of. Mr. Nelson, what is the top layer of that
infiltration trench going to consist of? If you had two sides of the street with the
west side not having the trench and the east side having the trench, is the
surface or soil consistency going to be different on the east side than we
would normally have on a street? Is it just going to be top soil with grass at the
surface or is it going to be something different there?
Mr. Nelson stated the top layer over the infiltration ditch would be a blend of
sand or top soil. It would be something standard in which you could plant
grass and other vegetation in. At this point I believe the applicant's engineers
are considering a fescue-type of grass that would then require a standard 6 to
12 inches of top soil. This is a hybrid infiltration trench because of the limited
number of drainage ports into it. Development is on the west side of the street
so there's going to be one curb inlet type of device for the water to come into
the trench. During the construction of the housing we would insist there be
some sort of protection around that inlet to keep any soil siltation from getting
into the system and fouling the trench itself. We haven't worked out the
phasing of the construction of the trench itself with the design engineers. We
would anticipate that the trench would be put in towards the latter stages of the
construction of the infrastructure, again to protect the integrity of the system
itself.