10-21-97 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Baker asked why Clark and Barr were not recommending a larger pipe. Harrison responded a larger pipe would not solve the problem. The storm sewers have been properly designed, but the grading between the existing Brightondale building and the houses does not carry the water away. The water meanders because the drainage way is poorly defined. The proposed plan shows a defined swale where the water would accumulate going through the corner and across the park. Baker asked if all the water from the front parking lot at Brightondale goes into a pipe. Harrison responded the water goes into the pipe in a ten-year event. Most cities use the ten-year standard when designing storm sewers, although some cities use a five-year standard. The existing pipe is sized properly, but the current grading does not allow the water to flow into the storm sewer. Baker stated, under the proposed plan, all the water would still not go into the pipe. Baker asked Harrison if the problem with the existing pond its size or its maintenance. Harrison stated the storm sewer is not perfectly clean. Sediment in the pipe reduces its capacity. The sediment needs to be cleaned out. Harrison said that the problem with the existing pond is the berm on the downstream side. The berm is high and the water cannot flow. Baker asked Chandler if it were her opinion that the problem with the pond is not a maintenance problem. Chandler said that, when she did the modeling for the ponding area, the flood levels did not seem too high. However, there were extreme rains in July, and the pond would have to fill up to quite a depth before it would overflow. Chandler said it could be a maintenance issue if the pipe is clogged. The modeling would not reflect the clogged pipe. Chandler said, before Harrison talked about the clogged pipe, she thought the issue was the runoff from the Brightondale property going to the neighbors’ property. Gould said he would like to talk about the runoff on the western side of Brightondale. Gould asked Harrison if the primary cause of water problems on the neighbors’ property has been the runoff from the Brightondale building and the parking lot off Rice Creek Road. Harrison responded affirmatively. Gould stated Harrison is proposing regrading the Brightondale property and creating a swale to carry the water back to the manhole that would carry the water to the park. Harrison said that was correct. Gould said the cause of the current drainage problem is the grading of Brightondale. Gould said regrading the Brightondale property and creating the swale on the Brightondale property would carry off most of the stormwater. Gould said G & P would continue to work on any problems caused by water draining onto the property of the two homes to the west. Gould said he was committed to seeing the stormwater stays on the Brightondale property. Gould said the underground connection between the two buildings is very important for the quality of life of the residents. The number of people more than sixty-five years of age would double by 2000. By 2020, over 25% of the population will be over sixty-five. Therefore, senior housing will be in great demand and we hope Brightondale will be able to meet this demand. Zisla stated he understood the function of the Alzheimer’s wing and the assisted living housing, but how does coop housing fit a particular niche in the community. Gould stated the resident would own the senior coop units. The assisted living portion of Brightondale is rental units. The coop would have congregate facilities such as congregate dining and activity spaces. Zisla asked if coop housing is not just a transition from single family homes. Gould responded it was a transition from single family living, but with health care and other services. However, the coop residents would be paying less than they would at an independent congregate facility and for much the same service. Zisla asked if the proposal has components that make it distinctly a senior housing facility as opposed to housing that would fit the needs of the general population. Gould responded this is a product for seniors, not just a coop housing project. Gould said the coop was unique because it is more affordable than rental congregate facility and would provide much the same services. Gould said the monthly costs of an independent facility would be $1,000 to $1,100 per month. The monthly costs of the coop would be $600 or $700. I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\1997\10-21-97.WPD 4