HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments PWE 11/18/2008
~
,-"..
MEMORANDUM
Citv of Snrinl!field
DATE: NOVEMBER IS, 200S
TO: Lissa Davis, Urban Planner
FROM: Clayton McEachern, PW Engineering
SUBJECT: ZON200S-00039, Schulz/Bar-D& Company Land Partition
Development Issues Meeting
Public Works Engineering Comments
The subject application involves partitioning an ~xisting developmentthat is currently under
constructio~.
Applicant's Questions:
"
1. The primary access for all parcels is 30th st./Commercial St." We are proposing an
irrevocable private Joint Use/Access Easemerit across Parcels 1 and 3 for all lots. Do
you anticipate any issues with access? "
The joint access easement needs to apply to all 3 parcels. All utilities will need to be in a Joint
Utility Easement. Maintenance Agreements:will need to be in place and easements for any
private or public utilities that cross parcel lines with the proper beneficiaries named. In addition
a maintenance agreement covering responsibilities for shared private improvements (drainage)
will be required.
2. Does .the City have any issues with the:proposed lot configuration?
There doesn't appear to be sufficient setback for one of the buildings in parcel 2. Thewater
treatment swale should be totally contained on a single parcel. Parcel lines should follow ut.ility
lines where possible to make easements follow property lines. To continue to function as an
emergency access the entrance off of2Sthwill need to be dedicated as a easement to ensure its
continued access if the proposed parcels are sold to a different owner.
3. There is emergency/fire access from tWo locations; one is located at the west property
line through a locked gate and the other is from the primary access at 30th St.
Commercial St. Refurbished fire hydrants are located at the west and east of Parcell.
Does the Fire Marshal have any comments for existing access and/or fire safety?
Answered by Fire Life safety.
4. Utilities will be provided to each parcel including electric, cable, telephone, gas,-sewer,
storm and water. We are proposing private utility easements, as illustrated on the
attached plan. Are there any issues with this design?
The sewer and water lines appear to be in easements wide enough per the guidelines in section
2.02.8. However the answer to question #2 applies to this question as well.
5. In general, do you see any issues with this proposed partition?
A possible future issue will be concerning the maintenance for the joint utilities and
improvements necessary to make all of the proposed parcels viable, and comply with City of
Springfield code requirements such as Stormwater quality.