11-25-2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

fined type of interlocking construction with some larger boulders spanning tiers and by having a reasonable amount of size variation. The walls need to be embedded in a stable base and have the voids within the wall backfilled with free draining soil. The type of boulder was not indicated. Weathered and glaciated granite boulders would provide a more natural appearance than quarried limestone boulders. 14. Detail 6 Tree Protection Fence on Sheet C3.2 calls for installing and maintaining tree protection fencing at the drip line during project construction. This fencing needs to be cnrefiilly monitored and administered during the construction process to ensure that the trees to remain are protected. Additional space should be provided beyond the drip line wherever possible. 15. Sheet C3.3 shows an extensive system of walks, steps and low boulder walls. If well constructed, landscaped and maintained this extensive system of walks and boulder walls could be veiy dramatic. 16. The walk system shown on Sheet C3.3 is not continuous around the lolls units. E)oes this walk system need to be continuous for fire, police or convenience access? 17. 'ITiere is a driveway narking conflict between two townhome end units located immediately west of the main project entrance road (Central Avenucl. Cars parked in the driveway of the southeastern end unit will block the driveway of the northeastern unit. 18. Sheet C3.4 shows boulder retaining walls abutting the west side of tlie parallel parking spaces and the turn around on Northwest Lane. These walls appear to vary in height up to a maximum of approximately 6 to 8 feet. The driving and walking surface is immediately adjacent to tliese walls. These walls present a hazardous condition for both traffic and pedestrians as well as a potential long-temi durability/maintenance issue for the frimaround and roadway, 'fhe walls should be moved away from the roadway to provide a safe buffer or a suitable guardrail installed (not a good solution), fhe issue appears to be a conflict between the wall locaticTS, necessary fill and the required wetland buffer. 19. Section 6 on Sheet C7.3 shows a cross section for concrete sidewalk. The 4 inch thickness should be increased to 8 inches (pedestrian cross walk thickness) wherever the walk crosses driveways. 20. Section 7 on Sheet C7.3 shows a detectable surface per ADA requirements and 12:1 slope for the accessible curb ramps. The developer should review the materials proposed for the detectable surface with the City. In addition, accessible curb ramps should be as close to 20:1 as possible but not exceed 12:1 slope. Sidewalk cross slopes should not c.xceed 2 percent. 21. WTiile the project will preserve significant parts of the surrounding existing wooded lowland and wetland system, its construction will require removal of a large amount of existing woods and brush. The developer is proposing extensive landscaping and his I.andscape Architect has prepared a detailed landscape plan. As proposed, the landscape master plan exceeds the City ’s minimum requirements. Most of the proposed trees will be I60I/U02-2T89/2S40 DaMsttoirJLanttform DevelopmetU "StoneBay"Page 5