HomeMy WebLinkAboutstaff review ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 2
The following comments reflect issues that were identified in a telephone conversation with Fred
Paine on Friday, July 14, 2006. Please address these issues as well as those issues faxed to your
offices July 11,2006:
1. Please update the following verbage:
a. Page 1,"Purpose",Paragraph 1.
b. Page 2,"Drainage Design Criteria",Paragraph 1.
c. Page 6, "Proposed Drainage Improvements",Paragraph 1.
2. Please provide revised information, tables, drainage area maps further explaining the
relationship between comparable pre and post basins.
3. Please provide discharge velocities throughout system,specifically at discharge points.
4. Please label proposed surface treatments on construction documents. These treatments
should comply with their associated velocities as listed in the Drainage Policy and Design
Standards.
5. Please provide additional information explaining the relationship in Table 12, specifically
which drainage basin does each pre and post flow reflect and how these basins are
comparable.
6. Please provide an explanation of pre and post flows that are ultimately leaving the site via
TxDOT ROW.
7. FYI — It appears the open ditch along SH 30 surrounding the proposed Channel 2C /
TxDOT ROW connection does not properly drain.
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: July 17,2006
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1
Project: CRESCENT POINTE—06-0500144
ENGINEERING
1. Please re-design so that the portion of parkland property, which is not dedicated public
drainage easement,is not encroached by the drainage improvements.
2. These proposed drainage improvements need to be within a private drainage easement or
facility, not a public drainage easement. However, the portion of drainage improvements
which is not detention and discharges into TxDOT ROW could be dedicated as a public
drainage easement and should be built to public standard.
3. Please submit the final plat for Phase 3 which includes the proposed drainage improvements.
These drainage facilities must be constructed on property which is final platted. The
development permit for these drainage improvements could be issued prior to the P&Z
approval of Phase 3 Final Plat, but should be submitted for review prior to. The
infrastructure and drainage facilities required for the Phase 3 final plat will need to be built,
accepted,and the plat filed prior to any associated future site plans receiving CO.
4. The Final Plat of Phase 2, should also be amended, as "Note 8" pertaining to the
maintenance of the private drainage facilities does not appropriately link the lots to their
associated regional detention facilities.
5. It appears that this process will continue to occur as long as lots are being platted separately
from their associated drainage facilities. Would it not be easier to go ahead and final plat all
phases, lots, and associated drainage facilities. However, Final Plat Phase 2 will still need to
be amended as to correct the verbiage of"Note 8".
6. Please let me know if you have any further questions or would like to meet to address these
issues.
7. The drainage report and construction documents are still under review and comments will
be returned as soon as possible.
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: July 11,2006
GENERAL ELECTRICAL COMMENTS
1. No Comments
2. To discuss any of the above electrical comments,please contact Tony Michalsky at
979.764.3438.
Reviewed by: Tony Michalsky Date: July 6,2006
SANITATION COMMENTS
1. Sanitation is ok with this project.
Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia: Date: July 10,2006
Home of Texas A&M University