2011_0411_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment D '38 Applicant Representative,, Clark Wicklund, Alliant Engineering Wicklund addressed the issues addressed by Ms. Bloom: sanitary sewer, storm sewer and sidewal 40 extension on Walnut; and addressed the status of each component. I 41 Storm Sewer 42 Mr. wicklund advised that site drainage was sufficient based on the previous development on the site; and 4'3 while there was no capacity issue, N best treat the runoff remained in process. Mr. Wicklund noted that 4-4 there were a variety of options to treat the drainage as the site developed, while addressing drainage from the 45 City is perspective and the network of available surrounding storm sewers and concern that the site may • 46 tributary to a local regional retention pond. Mr. Wicklund advised that, in working with staff, it was determined 4 7' to route the northern portion of the site to an already-�installed storm sewer N Road C2 and Walnut, 48 thus bypassing the regional pond, which had been • primary concern to City Engineer Bloom based on a history 49 of flooding at that lift station. 50 Mr. Wicklund noted that the site was already developed and surrounded by runoff capacity, but that with the 51 addition of newer stormwater management requirements, discharge would be reduced from the site. However, 52 Mr. Wicklund advised that until more detail was known as individual users came forward, additional mitigation 5'3 remained an unknown. Mr. Wicklund advised that based on current use, the site drained northerly; however, 54 when demolition was done and the site graded, grades were revised inward onto the site and drained the site 55 northerly into the stormwater system, providing adequate drainage for the interim and providing additional 56 space as lots develop. 5 7' Sanitary Sewer 58 Mr. Wicklund noted that the sanitary sewer was already in place on this developed site, and while talked about 59 to-clate only conceptually, it was proposed to provide a ten inch (10") extension connecting to the manhole and 60 south to another location, meeting City design criteria. Mr. Wicklund advised that to make the sanitary sewer 61 possible would require an easement outside existing righ of for installation and maintenance; and assured 62 M�embers that it was more than sufficient to meet City requirements. 6'3 At the request of ber Gottfried, Ms. Bloom confirmed that she had not yet reviewed the sanitary sewer 64. proposal from the consulting engineer in detail. 65 Sidewalk 66 Mr. Wickland advised that there was adequate room for a five foot (T) walk on the west side of Walnut, as well 6 7' as sufficient room within the right-of-wa► for installation of that sidewalk. 68 Mr. Wicklund noted that the Planning Commission did not have the detailed information available for their 69 review for this meeting, he assured bers that all outstanding components were cloable. ro=- 7'1 M�ember Gottfried advised that, without the City Engineer's detailed review, a request for approval was 7'2 premature, and while it created challenges to meet the 610-clay land use review process, it prevented due 7'3 diligence by the Planning Commission. M�ember Gottfried opined that the Planning Commission relied on staffs 74. analysis and sign off for any review, and even with assurances by the Applicant's consulting engineer, and by 7'5 City Engineer Bloom, he further opined that it was in the best interest of the City to delay approval, following 7'6 more detailed review and recommendation of the City Engineer. Page 2 of 3