Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 12.01.2005 MINUTES Laurel-Yellowstone City-County Planning Board December 1, 2005 7:00 pm Council Chambers Present: Gerald Shay, Chairman Bud Johnson, City Rep. Ed Thume~, City Rep. Hazel Klein, City Rep. Todd Linder, City Rep. Greg Johnson, County Rep. Dan Koch, City Rep. Rick Flanagan, County Rep. Others present: Cai Cumin, City Planner Cheryll Lund, City Secretary Mmates of November 3, 2005 were approved with the addition of Greg Johnson being added to the "present" list and correction on page 2 to Highway 10 (not 212). Public Hearing - Governor's Subdivision- Annexation - Zone Change & Preliminarg Plat- (continuation from November 3~ 2005) Chairman Shay stated that this public heating is a continuation from the November 3, 2005 public hearing and that it would be limited to the comments from MDOT on the traffic study; Steve Klotz recommendations; and, the issues of the Italian Drain. Proponents: Mac Fogelsong of Engineering, Inc. spoke representing the Laurel Development Corporation. Mac went over the comments that the MDOT had regarding the traftic study for the subdivision. (Attached). · Question on validity of peak traffic hours: The peak hours were verified by Engineering, Inc. through actual traffic tube counts. · Question on emergency gate to be located on W. 4th Street: Because there is no traffic coming from W. 4th Street this will be addressed as the first phases are th completed and 4 Street is reached. · Question on trip generation numbers: The trip generation numbers were discussed with MDOT but do not effect the recommendations of the original traffic study as submitted. · Question on right-turn deceleration lane: Tiffs is required for the intersection of Solid Avenue and Highway 10 and will be included in the improvements. · Question on the 100-foot throat depth: Engineering, Inc. concurred and this was included in the traffic study. · Question on design vehicle to be used: A WB-67 will be considered (a 67-foot long tractor trailer) for turning radius design. Mac commented on Steve Klotz comments (attached): · An alternative park was requested by Mr. Klotz, as he did think a park on delineated wetland was not desirable. An additional centralized public dedicated park area will be created. The park previously show will be modified in the revised preliminary plat. A 50-foot wide corridor will remain for the future bike trail/path nmning north to south along the western boundary of the property. This trail could also be utilized as a path to the proposed commercial lots in the subdivision. Much of the area in the SW coruer of the subdivision could be used for regional storm water detention, something that is currently needed by the City of Laurel. · A 41' residential street width was requested by Mr. Klotz, not the proposed 37'width. The 37' street allows for 2 -11 'driving lanes and 7 foot for parking. Generally it is found that wider streets promote more traffic, and there is also no fundamental reason for having a 41' width. The City's adopted Growth Management Plan encourages narrower streets. Opponents: Marge Herman Holden, 837 Old Highway 10 west, spoke in opposition. She asked how a decision could be made on this proposal without an approval from MDOT in Helena. She stated that she had talked with Bruce Barrett and there are a lot of things to iron out. Bruce told Marge that he has not received any decision from Helena. Dale Ahrens, 1518 W. 9th Street asked how the subdivision road (Solid Avenue) will affect his property. No other opponents spoke. Michael Sanderson, Professional Transportation Engineer from Engineering, Inc., spoke in regards to Marge Herman Holden's comments regarding not having received official notice from MDOT. Mr. Sanderson was not surprised that Bruce Barrett had not received an official answer from MDOT because of the short time frame prior to this meeting. Engineering, Inc. did receive an email from MDOT's Helena office, stat'mg tbat they concurred with what Engineering, Inc. wrote in response to their comments. Mac Fogelsong read the email that they received. Ed Thumer asked if there is a walking trail or sidewalk proposed along Old Highway 10 West. Mac stated that there was a condition by Cai Cumin fora boulevard sidewalk along US 10. 2 Ed Thurner asked if there were any plans to put a crosswalk or raised median for so kids can walk safely while going to the park. Michael Sanderson stated that he would discourage putting a raised median on the highway because of the higher speed limits on the highway. The speed profile on the highway is 65 mph. Ed Thurner stated that he would like to see sidewalk or trail dedication along the long park. Motion by Ed Thurner, second by Dan Koch to recommend to the City Council that a crosswalk or pedestrian safety island be put in the cross walk for the required sidewalk along US 10 at the entrance, and a trail go along the long park on the west edge of the property (parkland). The motion carried 7-0. Question on the whether W. 4a~ is being looked at for a proposed breakaway gate, or as a connector street? Dan Koch questioned how they could get the speed lowered on Highway 10 West. Michael Sanderson stated that a speed zone study could be requested but it would probably only result in the speed limit staying the same or going down a insign/ficant amount. Bud Johnson stated that the City requested a speed zone on First Avenue (north of town) towards the City landfill, but the study did not result in a significantly lowered speed limit. Cai Cumin recommended: 1. Since sidewalks are designed to move volumes of people safely, such sidewalks in the short cul-de-sacs in Smith Court, Rickards Court, Dixson Court, Holt Street cul-de-sac, and Howard Court are not necessary. On short interior streets, a boulevard sidewalk is only needed along one side: not needed on south side of Howard Street, the inside of Norris Circle, on only one side of Stewart Avenue, Erickson Court, and Norris Street, and only needed on the outside of Toole Circle east of Solid Avenue and the southeast side of Ayers Avenue north of Holt. 2. A boulevard sidewalk is required along the north side of Highway 10. 3. A sound barrier fence is required along the residential lots that abut Highway 10. 4. Park Maintenance District creation forms are needed with the final plat submittal. 5. Provision must be made to have City Public Works inspectors should be on-site during the construction of public improvements even if the final plat has not been filed and land annexed or some other way of insuring proper inspection satisfactory to the City Public Works Department, which may require hiring an independent inspector satisfactory to Public Works. 6. Access to Lots 1 and 2 shall be limited to Highway 10 with a non-access strip platted along Solid Avenue. 7. Lot 3, Block 2 be limited to Residential Professional zoning. 8. Make Lots 2 & 3, Block 3, flag lots with common access from inside of Rickards Court. 9. Require that ali lots with frontage on a cul-de-sac access the cul-de-sac only. 10. Requke a pedestrian refuge island (in the middle of the street) at the entrance off US Highway 10 for sidewalk crosswalk. 11. Provide for a temporary cul-de-sac be placed at the west end of North Toole. 12, Provide for a more centrally 1pcated park facility to the satisfaction of the City. I3. Require the creation of a Special Improvement District (SID) for street paving, curb, gutter, and boulevard sidewalk for the entire subdivision with the understanding that such SID will be expanded in the future 14. Recommend that 4* Street West be annexed into the City of Laurel at the end of the Phase 3 of Governors Subdivision. Discussion by Board. Motion by Greg Johnson, second by Ed Thurner, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Annexation, Preliminary Platting, and Zone changes for Governors Subdivision, subject to CaPs recommendations and Ed Thurner~s recommendation (motion). Motion carried with 6-1 with Rick Flanagan voting No. Tom Robertus, 1220 Trewin School Road, asked to spealc and stated that he was a member of the Planning Board for several years and as he recalled this land about 4 or 5 years ago came up with a proposed subdivision for double wide mobile homes. That proposal got a lot of opposition as well. Opponents at that time said that they supported development of the site into single-family homes but not trailer houses. It seems now that the adjoining property owners are discouraging any kind of development for the land. He wonders what is going to happen to property owner's rights if every sale of land is opposed. He stated that the Kukes property has been for sale for many years, and he knows that Mr. Kukes would take a check from anyone. He wondered how many of the people that are opposing this have spent time on Kukes land (trespassing) and have not thought twice about doing so. Greg Johnson responded to Tom's comments by saying that there were many people in attendance at the November 2005 public hearing that were proponents but the Laurel newspaper only wrote about the opponents in attendance. This gave the town of Laurel the wrong idea that there are more against it than for it. Most of the public hearing was for the development and how good it was for Laurel- economically, because of all the new work, and culturally because this gives Laurel people homes. Larry Tanglen, Laurel Outlook, stated that he was not aware that the newspaper was the subject of the public meeting. He would be happy to discuss it with Greg in Iris office at the Outlook. Public Hearing - Clark's Fork River Ranch~ 2"d Filin~ - Preliminarg Plat Proponents: Dennis Soelter of Zuck Soelter surveying spoke for landowner Clint Reynolds in regards to the proposed preliminary plat for Clarks Fork River Ranch, 2nd filing. 4 Tl~s is an addition of 14 lots with a min/mum size of 1.85 acres and maximum of 3.99 acres. The existing use is vacant pasture land and the proposed use is residential. Access to the subdivision will be via River View Drive, a public road, located off Spring Creek Road. The maintenance of the public access road is accomplished with a Rural Improvement District (RiD). The existing RID will be revised to include this filing. Fire protection will be provided by Laurel Volunteer Fire Department. The present installed water tanks meet the requirements for fire protection. (see attached) Opponents: None present. Discussion by board. Items discussed were park land requirement; cash-in-lieu of park land; and covenants. Cai recommended approval subject to the developers addressing, the items in his letter to them dated October 21, 2005 and then submit a corrected plat (4 copies) showing those corrections. (see attached letter) Cai also requested approval by the Department of Environmental Quality, Yellowstone County Weeds, and the inclusion of both Phases in an RS1D to be included in the Subdivisions Improvements Agreement. Motion by Rick Flanagan, second by Dan Koch, to recommend approval of the preliminary plat, subject to CaPs recommendations. Motion carried 6-1 with Ed Thurner voting No. Public Input: Clint Re)molds spoke regarding h/s property and why he chose to give cash-in-lieu of park land. The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 pm. Respectfully submitted, Cheiyll Lurid, Secretary ENGINEERING, INC. Consulting Engineers and Lan~ Surveyors November 30, 2005 Mr. Cal Cumin, AICP City of Laurel Planning Director P. O. Box 10 Laurel MT 59044 Reference: Governors Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application E.I. No. 03122.01 Dear Mr. Cumin: This letter is in response to those comments received fi.om Mr. Steve Klotz, Mr. Larry McCann, Mr. Gary Colley, and the Montana Department of Transportation (MDOT) regarding the review ofthe preliminary plat of Governors Subdivision. We received a copyofthe letters generated by the City of Laurel on November 3, 2005, and the MDOT letter on November 17, 2005. This letter utilizes bold headings as delineators between the various review letters for response. Letter from Mr. Steve Klotz, City of Laurel Public Works Director, to the Laurel Development Corp. dated October 27, 2005: Mr. Klotz requested a residential street width of 41 feet back of curb to back of curb and referenced the Standards for Public Works Improvements for the City of Laurel, Montana, 2003. That document contains a reference in Table 1. for a 41- foot back of curb residential street width, as well as a 32-foot back of curb width shown in two separate detailed drawings (Asphalt Section for Residential Streets). The City of Laurel Subdivision Regulations require a 37-foot back of curb width for residential streets. A 37-foot residential street width was proposed based on our meeting with Mr. Klotz prior to the preliminary plat submittal and subsequent follow-up correspondence. The 37-foot width was based on a street width that allows two lanes of parking while allowing two travel lanes consistent with national standards and the City of Laurel Subdivision Regulations. The Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2004) prescribes a minimum 10-foot wide travel lane and an 11-foot wide travel lane if practical That document also prescribes a minimum 7-foot wide parking lane. The 37-foot width proposed is 1300 North Tmnstech Way · Billings, MT 59102 · Phone (406) 656-5255 · Fax(406) 656-0967 · vowv.enginccom Mr. Cai Cumin, AICP November 30, 2005 Page 2 based on two 11-foot wide travel lanes, and two 7-foot parking lanes for a total width of 36 feet. Including the 6-inch wide curb head on both sides of the street, the total back of curb width is 37 feet. Numerous 37-foot wide streets currently exist in Laurel and operate efficiently. Generally, wider streets may promote higher traffic speeds and rightrtum passing at intersections. There is no fundamental reason for a 41-foot wide residential street width. Figure 1. below illustrates a 37-foot street to scale with parked cars and the two travel lanes with large vehicles, including a bus. 37 FOOT WIDE RESIDENTIAL STREET Figure 1. 37-Foot Wide Residential Street with Scaled Vehicles We have communicated with the County Public Works Department regarding the potential increased traffic on West 4th Street. Obviously, with the proposed emergency break-aWay gate as proposed, no traffic would occur on West 4th Street. Acknowledged that 5-foot wide boulevard sidewalks are required on both sides of the streets except cul-de-sacs where only one side is required. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement (SIA) as submitted (page SIA-6: Interior Curbs, Gutters, and Sidewalks) notes this requirement. An alternative park plan was requested by Mr. Klotz. An additional centralized public dedicated park area will be shown in the southwest comer of Lot 38 encompassing 1.99 acres. This park size is consistent with neighborhood type parks recently completed in the area that function well. The park previously shown will be modified as shown in the attached revised preliminary plat as requested by Mr. Klotz. A 50-foot wide corridor will remain for the future bike Mr. Cai Cumin, AICP November 30, 2005 Page 3 trail/path area running north to south along the western boundary of the property. The trail area is not within delineated wetland. A square 200-foot by 200-foot area will be dedicated to the public for potential detention at the southwest corner of the subdivision, as shown, and will be left in a relatively undeveloped state. This area could be used for regional storm water detention currently needed by the City of Laurel. The geotechnical report discusses an option for rigid concrete intersections. This option is not required based on the residential traffic levels generated in the subdivision. Typically, concrete intersections are used for arterial street intersections. We have attached further clarification to the report by Terracon for your re¥iew. As requested, a geotechnical investigation will be performed for foundation designs at the time of residential construction. Type V Portland cement or Type II cement with a low water/cement ratio shall be specified for all project concrete. Memorandum to the planning board from Larry McCann, Public Utilities Director dated October 27, 2005: Acknowledged that metal pipe shall be cathodically protected. This is a design issue that will be incorporated into plans and specifications. Acknowledged that the reimbursement agreement must be approved by City Council in accordance with Ordinance 005-03. A storm report consistent with the preliminary plat level of design was submitted to the City of Laurel along with the preliminary plat submittal outlining general stomawater detention requirements for the subdivision. The preliminary report recommended detention areas and volumes to allow pre-developed rates of discharge in the developed state. With the first construction phase, a comprehensive design-level report will be prepared for review that will identify any specific detention. The memorandum requested all open ditches to be piped and piping be installed within the public right-of-way. Based on a discussion with Mr. McCann, we understand that request was specifically for the Italian Drain running north to south through the property. The Italian drain would benefit from City of Laurel ownership and maintenance since this is a significant method of control for off- site storm water runoff.. Piping of the Italian drain would negate any positive effects of any on-site storm water detention. Maintenance of any detention area(s) would easily be incorporated into the proposed park maintenance district Mr. Cal Cum/n, AICP November 30, 2005 Page 4 whereby off-site properties do not pay for maintenance of the on-site detention facilities. The preliminary plat, as submitted, allows current and historical flow of irrigation water through the site as required by law. Letter to the Laurel Development Corporation from Gary Colley dated October 6, 2005: We understand the request by Mr. Colley is to eliminate the proposed breakaway emergency bollards ("gate") and allow through traffic from Governors Subdivision east along West 4th Street. As originally proposed, the breakaway "gate" could be constructed ofbreakaway PVC bollards with ground level couplers requiring only replacement of the couplers atter use. There are also commercially available break, away or hydrant wrench operated bollards that could be installed to achieve traffic control for this specific emergency purpose (copy 0lone available manufacturers spec sheet attached). The intent of the breakaway barrier as submitted was to eliminate through traffic to West 4th Street, while allowing emergency access. A meeting was held with Mr. Colley prior to the preliminary plat submittal and, at that time, it was determined the breakaway "gate" concept was appropriate. If the emergency gate is removed from the proposal, traffic will utilize West 4th Street. We have analyzed the effects on traffic patterns of removing the gate, details of which are provided in the attached technical memorandura. In summary, up to 40 percent of the traffic fi-om the full-build- out might utilize West 4th Street under tkis scenario, or 71 cars in the PM peak hour (1.2 cars per minute in the peak hour). To minimize the traffic that would utilize West 4th Street under a no emergency gate scenario, a second layout has been provided by the subdivider with this response. This layout would deter a significant amount of traffic from using West 4th Street by offsetting intersections. Approximately 16 percent of the full-build-out traffic would utilize West 4th Street under this scenario, or 28 cars in the PM peak hour (one car every two minutes in the peak hour). We understand the Yellowstone County Cormuissioners prefer either the emergency "gate" approach for through traffic control, or for the City of Laurel to annex the West 4th fight-of-way in its entirety if the gate is removed. The annexing of the County right-of-way and associated traffic may not be popular among adjacent residents. In summary, the original breakaway traffic control is still preferred by the subdivider that provides both traffic control for West 4th Street and emergency access. If the "gate" were required to be removed, the alternate layout is provided by the subdivider for mitigation of this City-generated request. A third alternative would be to modify the construction phasing to provide the full connection to 4th Street at subsequent phases (i.e., five or six). Mr. Cal Cumin, AICP November 30, 2005 Page 5 Montana Department of Transportation letter to Engineering, Inc. from Mr. Dan Martin dated November 16, 2005: Responses to this letter were sent directly to the Montana Department of Transportation for review in a letter dated November 28, 2005 (copy attached). A summary of those comments follow: The AM and PM peak hours were verified through actual traffic tube counts. That data was presented in the original traffic study submitted with the preliminary plat. The intersection of West 4th and 8th Avenues was not considered under the emergency gate proposal, as no traffic would be generated on West 4th Street. The intersection currently operates at a level of service "A." This intersection was subsequently analyzed under a "no gate" scenario and found to operate at a level of service "B" (refer to attached technical memorandum). The intersection operates at a level of service "A" with the alternate subdivision layout. Trip generation numbers were discussed with the MDOT but do not affect the recommendations of the original traffic study as submitted. A right-turn deceleration lane is required for the intersection of Solid Avenue and Highway 10. Acknowledge MDOT concurrence with the 100-foot throat depth recommended by the Engineering, Inc. traffic study. A WB-67 will be considered as the design vehicle (a 67-foot long tractor trailer) for turning radius design. We appreciate your input through the process and the input of the City review officials. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at your convenience. Respect fully Submitted, /dmi encls P:03122_0 l_Cumin_L~'_ ! 13005 November 30, 2005 Mr. Mac Fogelson9, P.E. Engineering, Inc. 1300 North Transtech Way Billings, Montana 59102 rl!!ffEIEon Consulting Engineers & Scientists Terracon ConsultantS, inc. 2110 Overland Avenue, Suke 124 Billings, Montana 59102 Phone 406.656.3072 Fax 406.656.3578 w'ww.terracon.com Subject: Geotechnical Services Proposed Governor's Subdivision Laurel, Montana Terracon Project No. 26055054 Dear Mac: As requested during our phone conversation on Monday, November 28, 2005, this letter transmits our clarification concerning the rigid (concrete) pavement section considerations for the above referenced project. As you are aware Terracon performed the geotechnical exploration study for this project and presented our findings and recommendations in a report dated September 20, 2005. On page 11 of our report, it is stated that 'M/e recommend that a rigid (concrete) pavement section be considered at all intersections and areas of anticipated high traffic." Based on our phone conversation and your subsequent fax, we understand the City of Laurel's Public Works Director, Mr. Klotz, has indicated that "As recommended in the Gectechnical Engineering Report submitted, rigid concrete pavement shall be used at all intersections and areas of anticipa;~ed high traffic." Typically, rigid sections within subdivisions are considered at intersections along collector or main arterial roadways where the traffic intensities are relatively high, as compared to the surrounding residential, sub-collector or cul-de-sacs streets. These main intersections typically see greater volumes of "start and stop" traffic which can shorten the design life of normal flexible (asphalt) pavement sections. The streets within a subdivision do not necessarily meet the criteria for the use of dgid sections at all the intersections or areas of anticipated high traffic. As.stated in our report, we indicated that the rigid sections should be considered, however, they may not be necessary. Asphalt sections can be considered as an alternative to the ¢igid sections, and in fact, do provide a section that is structurally equivalent to concrete. The streets within the subdivision should be designed accordingly. If you have any questions regarding this matter, or if we can be of further service, please contact us st your convenience. Sincerely, TERRACON Geotechnical Engineer Delivering Success for Chents and Employees Since 1965 More Thar~ 70 Offices Nationwide ENGINEERIHG, ConsultTng Engineers and Land Surveyors November 28, 2005 Mr. Dan Martin Montana Department of Transportation Planning Division P. O. Box 201001 Helena MT 59620-1001 Reference: Traffic Accessibility Study Governors Subdivision, Laurel, Montana E.I. No. 03122.01 Dear Mr. Martin: This letter is provided in response to your comments on the Traffic Accessibility Study (TAS) for Governors Subdivision outlined in your letter dated November 16, 2005. The following responses correspond to each of your bulleted comrnents: Through experience performing traffic studies in the Billings and Laurel areas, we often assume the peak hours to be between 7:30 and 8:30 AM and 4:30 and 5:30 PM. This is almost always the peak, plus or minus 15 rrdnutes. Through examination of the tube counts we were able to determine that we were indeed off by 15 minutes during both peak hours. However, this would have resulted in the difference of only four vehicles during the AM peak hour and six vehicles during the PM peak hour. Therefore, we feel that the peak hours assumed in the TAS are still an accurate representation of existing conditions. The TAS should have been clearer in the identification of West Fourth Street as an emergency access. The TAS was performed based on the developer's proposal that this would be a "gated" emergency access, and trips generated by the subdivision could not use this roadway to access the site. We feel that the trip generation estimates developed for Governors Subdivision represent an accurate estimate of the magnitude of traffic that would be generated. For multi-use subdivisions, we typically assume that a certain percentage of the total number of trips would be internal capture or passerby trips. These assumptions are based on data from the Trip Generation Handbook, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, a nationally accepted source for 1300 North Tmstech Way Billings, MI 591a2 · Pk, ne (406) 656-5255 · Fm((406) 656-g967., www.sngiac.com Mr. Dan Martin November 28, 2005 Page 2 determining trip generation rates. In general, we would not recommend design'mg for the "worst-case scenario," because it can easily resuk in over design. The proposed layout for the right-tm lane on Highway 10 shown on the preliminary plat was based on MDT's request on other recent projects. Through discussions with a representative from the Traffic aud Safety Bureau, we are now aware that we need to go back to using MDT's original right-tm lane design with full deceleration. We concur that the right-tm lane on Highway 10 should be designed and constructed to these standards. The largest regularly anticipated vehicle would be a WB-67, the largest vehicle expected for deliveries to the commercial developments. Therefore, the WB-67 turn radius should be considered in the design of the intersection of Highway 10 and Solid Avenue. Feel free to contact me if you have questions about these or other issues. Sincerely, Transportation Engineer /ceg P:03122_01 _Mm~in_Ltr_112805 MaxiForce Traffic Control BoLLards Focus: Colla MaxiForce Traffic Control Collapsible Bollards are a cost effective and flexible barrier solution that allows you to control, re-route or grant quick vehicular access to suit your traffic flow requirements. MaxiForce Collapsible Bollards offer patented technology that enable the bollards to be collapsed for vehicle passage and then quickly and easily reset. These collapsible bollards also contain a unique breakaway feature allowing, when necessary, emergency personnel in vehicles to penetrate the passage or roadway without exiting their vehicle. The bollard units may then be repaired with simple replacement parts without the need for a total bollard replacement. Features: ~ FOLDSTO$~91f(,'HIGHABOVEROADSLIP, FACE ~ BREAKAWAYALLOWSPORE,YTRE/aEEAIEROENCYA¢¢ESS '. ~ UNLOCK5 & FOLDS DOWN QUICKLY '. '. 3 eASE OPTION5 FOR VERSATILE INSTALLATION OPTIONS ~ ~ FOLDS UP B RE-LOCKS QUICKLY ~ ~ CAN ACCEPT $ DIFFERENT HEAD STYLES '. ~ BREAKAWAY FEATURE Ei~SURES EASY REPAIR ~ ~ AVAILABLE IN 0 VER 80 COLORS ~: FINISHES Standard Hydrant-Wrench ODerated Bollard I ~ The Hydrant-WrenchCollapsibleBollard J is ideal for locations requiring traffic J control while allowing designated J vehicles such as delivery, service, emer- I gency and first responders to quickly pass with the use of a fire hydrant wrench. The standard hydrant nut is a 5-sided AWWA nut. Standard Padlock Operated Bollard The Padlock Collapsible Boliard is ideal for designated locations where traffic control is required and only authorized vehicles / personnel (maintenance, security, etc.) with the appropriate key may unlock the bollard and pass through. The MaxiForce line of bollards have several style options. Included in J' ~ these options is the choice of various head styles to top the bollard bodies. All MaxiForce Traffic Control Bollard heads are removable, and thereby interchangeable. The MaxiForce Traffic Control Collapsible line of bollards offers three head styles as pictured to the right. From left to right: the Standard Style 1 Head (SS1),the Standard Style 2 Head (SS2) and the Standard Style 3 Head (SS3). MaxiForce Traffic Control Collapsible Bollards have three base options to fit various installation requirements. Collapsible bollard operation is not affected by the choice of base type. The colla psible base optio n s shown are from left to right:the EZ Base (EZ), Universal Base (U), and Simple Base CS). Office Buildings School Grounds Parking Areas College Campuses Military Installations Playgrounds & Parks Malls and Shopping Centers Residential Subdivisions Ball Parks and Stadiums Apartment Complexes Biking Trails Pedestrian Walkways City Downtown Areas Playgrounds Government Facilities BLUE EPIBER Blue Ember Technologies, LLC - 7566 Main Street, Suite '113 - Sykesville, MD 21784 -~c..oLo~=s LLC Phone: 410-552-9888 Fax: 410-552-9939 Email: sales@maxiforcebollards.com - MC-SW-SS1-U Page 1 of 2 ~,1 MY ACCOUNT ~1 DOCUMENT LIBRARY (~) M~ HOME TRAFFIC CONTROL BOLLARDS Bollard Configurator Collapsible Boliard Removable Bofiard Fixed Bollsrd Parls and Accessories DOCUMENT LIBRARY Cotor Cha~ts Installation Manuals Specifications CONTACT US Welcome Guest (Login) MC-SW-SS1-U Product and Information: Options: Paint Options (required) Model NIC-SW-SS1-U This unit is MaxiForce's standard style collal is operated by turning a standard AWWA 5 ~ about a 1/4 turn to allow the unit to lay down Once collapsed the bollard body is only 3 5~ easily allowing vehicles to pass over. To tek simply lift the unit back to its upright position includes a standard style 1 head and a univ~ standard style 1 head is a rectangular head bollard body in size and shape. A style 1 he~ reveal or recess above the bollard body cra~ look. All MaxiForce Traffic Control Bollard h~ removable, and thereby interchangeable. OI fixed bofiard the head may be removed for fi with concrete and the head may be reattach appearance and increased s~'ength. The Un the most flexible and secure base. It acceph and removable bollards and allows you the ( change your operation without having to ch~ universal base is larger and heavier than th( therefore is stronger and provides extra rasi~ All bollards come primed unless a powderceat color is selected, Colors can be app bollard or to each section. (-Fo view color chips of all available colors please click i Do you want to paint your traffic control bollard? (~ No Powder Coating ~' Powder Coat The Entire Assembly The Same Color (Add $70.00) C' Powder Coat the Body and Head Different Colors (Add $75.00) Price: $817.31 Quantity: Product Kit Parts: · I - MC-SW (MC-SW) Maxiforce Collapsable, Standard Style, Wrench Operated · I - Standard Style I Head (SS1) Standard Style I Head · 1 - Universal Base (U) Universal Base · 1 - Standard Hydrant Wrench (P-205) Standard Hydrant Wrench Specifications: http://www.maxi forcebollard, com/ProductDetail, cfrn?CatlD=2&PID=24 11/29/2005 MC-SW.SS1-U Page 2 of 2 I Lead Time: 5 Weeks Size: Weight: 90.00 lbs Files: ~.olor Charts Color cha~s Ma~d Fome Traffic Control Bollard Color Chart List of available colors for all MaxiFome Traffic Control Bollards Installation Manuals Detailed installation manuals · Universal Base Installation Instructions Installation instructions for the MaxiForce Universal Base Marketing Brochures Marketing brochures and advertisements · MaxiForce Traffic Control Bollard MarketinQ Brochure Specifications Architectural specifications · Max[Force CollaPsible Traffic Control Bollard SPecification ~,ddltional Images: Home I Contact Us I Pdvacy I Terms snd Conditions of Sale (~ 2005 Biue Ember Technologies, LLC -Ail Rights !Reser'~¢ed http://www.maxiforcebollard, com/ProductDetail, cfm?CatlD=2&PID=24 11/29/2005 Page 1 of 1 http://www.maxiforcebollard.com/Images/Product/mc-sw-ssl-u detail3 1..jpg 11/29/2005 Montana Department of Transportation Jim Lynch, Director 2701 Prospect Avenue PO Box201001 Helena MT 59620-1001 Brian $chweilzer, Governor November 16, 2005 Mac L. Fogelsong, P.E. Engineering Inc. 1300 North Transtech Way Billings, MT 59102 NOV' ! 7 2OO5 CITY OF LAUREL Subject: Governors Subdivision, Laurel Montana - Traffic Accessibility Study Review We have reviewed the Traffic Accessibility Study (TAS) for the proposed Governors ' Subdivision in Laurel, Montana and have the following comments: It should not be assumed that the AM peak hour is 7:30 to 8:30 and that the PM peak hour is 4:30 to 5:30. Data should be collected and the peak hour should be determined from that data. The intersect/on ofW. 4m St. and 8m Ave. should also be included as part of this study. Defining West 4th Street as an emergency access does not mean traffic will not use it, unless it will be physically blocked in some way. The trip generation numbers seem to be incorrect for this subdivision. It appears that too many trips were used for 'internal capture' and 'passerby'. Not using any 'internal capture' or 'passerby' trips would provide a worst-case scenario and better show any potential problems. The TAS recommends an exclusive fight turn lane at Solid Ave. The right turn lane must be designed with adequate sight distance per our approach requirements. (See Attached Sheet) This sight distance is important for safety reasons for right and left turning vehicles off of Solid Ave. The fight mm lane must be designed and built to MDT standards. · We agree with the 100-ft. throat distance on Solid Ave. · The TAS must clearly state the design vehicle to be considered at this location. All approaches will need to be designed to acco~ranodate that design vehicle. · If other development is planned in the vicinity of the Governors Subdivision this should also be considered in the overall process. Additionally, we will need to review the complete stonuwater drainage plan for this proposed deveiopment. An Equal Opportunity Employer Program & Policy Analysis Bureau Raft, Transit and Planning Division Phone: (40~) 444-3423 TTY: (800) 335-7592 Fax: (406) 444-7671 Web Page: www. rndt. state.mt, us Mac L. Fogelsong PE November 16, 2005 Page 2 of 2 If you have any questions, please contact me at (406) 444-6303. Dan Martin, Plmmer Program & Policy Analysis Bureau Rail, Transit and Plamfing Division copies: Bruce BmTett, Billings District Administrator Sandra Straehl, Rail, Transit and Planning Division Administrator Danielle Bolan, P.E., Traffic Engineer Stan Brelin, P.E., Traffic and Safety Bureau Randy Boysen, Traffic and Safety Bureau Start Jonufis, Billings Traffic Engineer Cai Cumin, City of Laurel Planner ~> ~© 0:~o _?~