Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMisc. City of College Station POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840-0960 May 12,1988 Jackson Associates Archi.tect&Planning ATT: Mr. Bruce Jackson,.AIA 8834 Capital of Texas Highway North Suite 110 Austin, Texas 78759 RE: SPRING LOOP APARTMENTS -SITEPLAN- DRIVE ACCESS Planning file 1188-500 Dear Mr. Jackson, We have reviewed your site proposal with respect to our Access Management and Driveway Design Policy. Due to the locations of the streets opposite th~s property you are limited to one driveway access point in accordance with our policy. Your drive center line may either line up with the Summer Court centerline or it must fall between 85'east o.fthecenterline of Summer Court and 250'westofthe center line of Fall Circle. Our measurements show that distance to be about 73.' Our Traffic Engineer. has provided you with his suggestion regarding access to your site. ENCLOSURE: Memo from J. Black, P.E., Traffic Engineer Access Management & Driveway Design Policy cc: John Black (Jim Callaway DJP/vw / City of College Station POST ()FFICE BOX 99601101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840-0960 INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: David J. Pullen, City Engineer FROM:~!).JOhn Black, Traffic Engineer DATE: May 6, 1988 RE: DRIVEWAY REQUEST FROM JACKSON & ASSOCIATES ON SPRING LOOP DRIVE I have reviewed<thisrequest using our current Driveway Access Policy as shown (attached). I recommend that the developer build one drive rather thaIlthetwopropose.d because the east drive shown fails to meetourdrivewayspacing>criterion. By dropping one driveway, five .parking spaces can be gained and some consideration should be....madeto improve circulation where the drive intersects the park'ingarea. If five parking spaces could be remo~ednear the thtoat of this drive as shown, the turning characteristics . of dtiyersp.enteriIlgthelot... from . Spr'ing Loop would be improved. This would correct a circulation problem evid;ent in. the. propos~~driveswhich do not line up with.. the parking isles along the sides of the property. If two drives were built as ..ShOYlJ51,pC)orcirculatio.nwoulddevelop . at the corners '.. of thesitebe9a.1.lse .turning maneuvers.. at the. driveway would overlap with turniIl~iftJ:"affiC;lIloV'ingpast the. corners of the site. The .....recommended..~t~y~wayllsesa20' radius return and a 30' width as called for in>'our policy.rather than the 11' radius and 25'width shown on the <plat. This too would improve access to this site. JB:dgw CITY OF COLLEGE STATION .REQUEST FOR DRIVEWAY ACCESS REVIEWED BY THE CITY TRAFFlt ENGINEER FOR THE CITY ENGINEER USING THE CITY DRIVEvlAY ACCESS POLICY DATED:_1fzZ/8'1-- [>AffE: s/s 1~0,---- LOCA T ION: .:sf'" i "j t-oo P REQUESTED BY: "~CLch~ ItS.ScJC1'o..tQ.s . ~1'tQ ckure 0 f' 14. 1'1I1 ,''>j Aj>CVf'-tMfJ\ r5 ~~ friO PROPOSED LAND USE: CHANGE IN LAND USE: NO. OF DRIVES: 6l I. FRONTAGE ON : Sfln "j L.oep S TR.EET C:L AS S I F I CAT I ()N : \A. ('b~ Co; l<Lc,t-or -:3 5 Mf_~ SPEED: A. DRIVE #1 (IJeft to right as viewed exiting the property) Proposed OPl)OS i te dr ive spacing LEFJ, I ~b OK fS' m; Ill. /' )'\0 3iS' :)",3 '5 ( Ml'tt/ Geometric de$ignitems in policy not. met: Lo{S(!; J.().' '(Cl.c.li....~ ~ Glr',v(L ('iL~t'J ~'30' cl'Y'I\le w I ck.,~ B. DRIVE #2 (Left to right as viewed exiting the property) Desirable " " " Was desirable spacing adjusted for speed? ytu Proposed adjacent drive spacing Des"irable " " If Was desirable spacing adjusted for speed? Proposed opposite drive spacing Desirable ~ 5 Jyv\(Il.'/ " " " Was desirable spacing adjllsted for,speed? Proposed adjacent drive spacing 315' ~.35Imlt\.~ Desirable If " " Was desirable spacing adjusted for speed? (,0 RIGHT 'f 3' . ~50 '1^;1\ t~ )~3S' o~ ~J5Imi"~/ ~~O Geometric design items in policy not met: \.AS! ~r.\VCl :x () I r~\.i,> CJ'^- ('Cltvd'l'\ 4- SO)ct1';Ulw_{,t~ .~ r.J l" () <~ -.....: L{ '~ eJ Q ..$s X/!,eJ. I'~ 'tre v (7-) Clf\~ Ct.re "'\ ~~.CLn.l(SPQC{.'5 MtJ",lf/~, -aM/If ..., l)ril.~,: .5""'7"..,, 8 $ Pet CJ2...5 p'-!r df'I:r. '-, ci rl vt.j res ; cte~ t-lei.. ctr <:"011 s .,"C{ e ('eel Thflse Cls no.t- 6 () * Note ~ 'J 13 LOOf 'fJ 5urvej cLa ~ by ei--ry S ..,f' IJ "J Crt:;.,J 4' /:1- 7/t:l:3 3/S1 flo.:t 88-.500 ~~ Dr}vQ. ,#.~ Sfri17j Lao!, fjparfme'1fS A~ . Ja-ck.stro-\ & ItsSCI cia/t,.s I }I ==- &'0 I I ~ Dr i"dQ$t City of College Station POST OFFICE BOX 99601101 TEXAS',' AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, 'TEXAS 77840-0960 March 16, 1988 MEMORANDUM TO: Bruce Jackson, 11. I . A. , 8834 Cap i tal of Texas Hightvay N., #110,~~ustin, TX 78759 John E.Hollipgshead, 8834 Capital of Texas Highway N.,#llO, Austin, TX 78759 ProjectRevie~vCommittee ~~ J",1,..""m"'",."."C""".,,,a,.llaw, ay,""".".'".. D,i,r."".e,"'",cto"',..,.,...""r,'"...,..,,,"'"'"",.,0,, ',f,., "p,lann, ,ing~,...,...,..".,... · David Pullen,' City ,Engineer Lynn Colson, P&ZRepresentative FROM: Others attending: Laverne. A~in,GTE Jane Kee,SeniorPlanner Kean Register, LoneSt'ar' Gas Tony Michal sky,.Electr~c ,Distribution Bill Riley, Water & S~wer<Department Coy P.erry,BuildingOfficia.l IHm Johnson, . PlanningAs~~$.taIlJ Jim Smith, Solid Waste Superintendent Shirley' >V 0 lk , Plan n i ng'fec hni.cian Site Plan.Revielv...., "Spring Loop Apartments tl to be locatedonLots4,5,6'i7, 8 &.9 Block U, University Park Section II subdivision (88:---500) The P.R.C.onlyhastheauthority<t()approv~site plans if all ordinance requirements are met. The P.R.C. met on this date to reviet-lthesubjectproposal and approved the proposal with the followingconditions*= 1. Easements\villbe required for all utility service to the complex>. The> applicant stated these\"iillbeaddressed on the replatof these lots. 2. BuildingF, 16,300 sq. ft. in size must either be equipped witha,sprinkler system, or be reduced in size. Coordinatewith the Building Department. 3. Include a general note covering a list of species for the canopy trees to be used. 4. Trees in islands next todumpsters\teJilleventual1~7 suffer. ill .# PRe - 88-500 4-16-88 Page 2 Moving those canopy trees to an alternate location and replacing thenl t~ith low shrubs was suggested. 5. If electrical service used is underground, the developer is responsible for covering the cost differential between overhead and underground service. Submit a letter to the Electric Distribution Department requesting underground service. 6. There is awaterl inein an easement on this property in t\lhich a fire h~'drantis located which provides coverage for the adjacent office complex on University Drive. 7. The City Engineer expressed concern about the proposed location of the drive\vays to this complex. Relocate those drives to avoid anyo\7erlapping left turn movements.. 8. Coordinate draiI18:ge requirements with the Ci tyEngineer' s office. Drainag~"j":e':<}ulrements \vere provided to the applicant. ,- '. . .., ,". --..' . - .. . , , . . ." -,.. -_....- . ... "." .... .. .. - - .... . . - . . .. . . o. ,'.....-..-... . '. ...... '," ',',".' ... ".'.', . ,.........'.'. . .. - , ." - . ,. . - . . . . . . . - . . . . .' . .. ' '. ." ,.,. ..,..- . -.' " SUBMIT 10 OR MO.R.E.' COPI.ESO:F,;X::J7~$;;V,;I$.E:D ';SJTE PLAN TO P:LANNING DEPARTMENT, F 0 It'~:"llE V I~,\:V;:';.AN D<:,A:RJ{llO:V/A::LP:({.t,QRT 0 CO NT I tf.UlNG WITH STEP I IOF THEllHILDING .P~RMl'I'Pi{~~ESS WHldHWAS.. PROVIDED. '-:': '::':-:"". ':-'. ," '. .., -' -' ':':"-',,: . '- ",' :_'- :: .' ..', .' , :"-;'~:~,'~' -;-,'.:.: ",: ~ - "~-.:' :-- ;~:- - . .-'.-',': ::.:,.-_:>: _.--.,~ ,', .- . . -:',.. .'-:...', .", - : -: - .,.-:.'. , ,'.'-; ':-:-;, '.' .- :.; ,',' apPI'()ved; s ite<:p,l'~:n.;::; ,mu ~(t'b e c le:flre d through" the ~, - SUBMIT A~" Lie A'f 1 ON> ~N~;~tll;~~(0i4.;;\';I'~'; ... .' ..t... JS1;/ cn~B~ ~i. .... . ~fffi"'\JlJ~#:4\,~Y;i ,,;l2\";'lf~i\~;"" c" 'fi';';JO',',..','.." ,CQelE$.'\OF;,4l1S'f;,rE;'.Pl.AN'..,.fQR>"'.'f(i~~':~,:~,W ',' OR. 5.COPlESg.:FllM.POSJ Tl\lti. REC~UIREMENTS FOR SITE PLAN PROPOSALS 4 Sheet size - 24ux 3611 vI) TItle block to Include: a) Project name, location and legal description b) Name, address and telephone number of applicant c) Name, address and telephone number of d~veloper/owner d) Name, address and tel~phone number of architect/engineer ) Date of submittal ~~Ownershipand curr~nt zoning of all abutting parcels. ~ A key map (not nec;~ssaril y to Sea lel '. '. ~/Scale should _b~ largest standard engineering scale possible Orf'sheet. << Orient plan with north dIrection to upper left hand corner of sheet. ~~/TOP, og,raph, Y," nnd f,' ,,', n,";) 19r, ,ad i ng"", pl a, n ,and""""',, 0,' ",th, er pert lnen,,' t" dr,ai n" age"" i n,form,',at,l on. 'Itr} All existing streets, drtves, buildings, and water courses on or adjacent /to the proposed prclectslte-. ~ Locate 100 year floodplain on oradjaeent to the proposed project site. ~/lOcatlon and size of existing utilities within or adjacent to the proposed project site. ~n fi!~~;~~::~~l~;t:~~;:~~i: s ~;;~O:a::: n:o:~::~:g :rawn ~ tabulated and.d imens i oned. \Afl SIdewalks ~,e'} Landscape Information as required in Section 11 of the Zoning Ordinance (Ord.No.1638). tv(t", Common open space 5 1 tes ~/ Sites fa, r, so, lid was te conta i ners ~) Proposedsignage 1~ The total numbe~ of residential buildings and units to be constructed on the proposed /projectsite. . 1n::, "The total number 0', ,f,', b, e, d, rO,o,ms included in t,he propo"""sed,""prOject. 1>1:r}fte density of dwelling units per acre of the proposed project. l~The gross square footage of all buildings and the proposed use of each building. /'/"'" 1~~~ total site area and percent of building coverage of site. ~/, /l1esignate, ,number of"par,klngspa"c.e,s required by ordinance and provided by proposal.. w} Show dimensions to size and locate all structures, parking spaces, drives, curb cuts, parking islands and setbacks. THE FOLLOWING ARE TVP I CAL STANDARDS FOR PLAN DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHED aVORD I NANCE OR POll CV: 1) Building separation is a mInimum of15 feet. 2) Building setbacks are outllned in Ordinance 1618. Zonlng ~rdinance, Table A {Sec.7,pg 30) 3) Minimum parking space 1591 ><20', or on a perimeter row, 9' x 181 with a 21 overhang. 4) Minimum drive width is 21'wHh head-in parking or 20t without parking. S) Landscaped Islands of6"raisedcurb are lOCated at both ends of each parking row. 6) Landscaped islands are aiso located every 15 spaces on interiorrO'wsand every 20 spaces on perimeter rows. 7l A 6" raised curb is required around all edges of all parts of al-l paved areas without exception. (To include isTands, planting areas, acc~ss way.s, dumpster locations, utility pads, etc.) ." Cu rb det~i lt~be iapproved bye {ty Eng i n~e r. No exception s wi 11 be made for i.lfl?' a s de slqnated I. reser\;/E~d fOf f utu re park i og". ~ . '~ - Standards for Plan Development (Continued) page 2 8) Wheelstops may be required on interior rows longer than 10 spaces or in special situations. 9) Sidewalks are a minimum 4 ft. wide On site; 6 ft. wide adjacent to parking spaces. 10) Director of Public Services determines number, size and approves location of dumpsters. 11 ) Parking islands are 9 'x 20'; or 180 squa.re feet. 12) Healthy, native trees over 611 caliper should be retained whenever possible. 13) Curb cuts are determined by City Engineer. Standards are one c,""rb cut fora site with 125 feet street frontage and two cuts for 250 feet frontage. An additional 500 feet of frontage is needed for each additional cut. In general, keep cut s at1"'east 200 feet from maJo'r'i ntersections · 14) See. Ordinance 16~aSection 11. for landscaping requirements. 15) Fire lanes of amjnlmomoT ~.~ feet .inwidth with a minimum height clearance of 14 feet must be estab Ii shed if any structure of any type is more than 150 feet from a public street or hiighway. 16) Any structure in any zoning distriqt other than R-l, R-1A or R-2 must be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant as measured along a public street or highway. 17) Fire hydrants must be located on t~~ same side of a major street as a project, and shall be 1n a location approved by the Fire Marshal's office and the Super- intendent of W'8'ter and Sewer · 18) Office or business facilities in excesS of 5,000 sq. ft. must furnish parking spaces (minimum sizel2' x 20') designated for use by handicapped persons only, with ramps with no greater gradient than 1:12 and a minimum width of 4 feet. SEE SECTION 508 Of THE STANDARD BUILDING CODE FOR AODlTIONALINFORMATlON. City of College Station POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840-0960 May 12, 1988 Jackson Associates Architect & Planning ATT: Mr. Bruce Jackson, <AlA 8834 Capital of Texas Highway North Suite 110 Austin, Texas 78759 RE: SPRING LOOP APARTMENTS -SITE PLAN-DRIVE ACCESS Planning file 188-500 Dear Mr. Jackson, We have reviewed your site proposal with respect. to our Access Management and Driveway DesigIlPolicy.Due to the locations of the streets opposite this ,property you are limited to one driveway access pointinaccordancew.ithour/policy. Your drive center line may " either line IIp wi th" theS~mIllerCourt centerline or it must fall between 85 , east of the center line of Summer Court and 250' west of the center line of Fall Circle. Our measurement's show that distance to be a.bo'llt 73.' Our Traffic Engineer has provided you with his suggestion regarq.ing access to your site. David J.Pu en, City Engin er ENCLOSURE: Memo fromJ. Black,P.E., Traffic Engineer Access Management & Driveway ,Design Policy cc: John Black Jim Callaway DJP/vw ,,--. POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION" TEXAS ,77840... 0960 TO: David J. Pullen, City Engineer FROM:~~.JOhn Black, Traffic Engineer DATE: May 6, 1988 RE: DRIVEWAY REQUEST FROM JACKSON & ASSOCIATES ON SPRING LOOP DRIVE JB:dgw CITY OF COLLEGE STArrIONREQUEST FOR DRIVEWAY ACCESS REVIEWED BY,THECITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER FOR THE CITY ENGINEER USING TIlE CITYDRIVEWAYACCESSPOLI(~YDATED: .f/z.z/8? DAtrE : .s-Is 180 LOCATION: SfdW\~ !-cop REQUESTED BY: :!'CLck.~ ~SSCJCI~~ ~ltqe.btr~ ~. (->t"''''n/:; PROPOSED LAND USE: AfCV{'kM L" 1-5 ~~ 1+/0 CHANGE IN LAND USE: I. FRONTAGE ON : StJrl' "~ L-oe>f> STREET CLASSIFICATION: u..'1'b~ eolla..c.1-or NO. .OF DRIVES: Gt. SPEED: 35 Wl,.p ~ A. DRIVE #1 (Left to right as viewed exiting the property) nu Rfg~~ J. 50 'Mitl · 'Ii' (\,0 De,sirable " II " LEFJI I ~5 C'J"-- " 'is'lt'lI' "'l' /' Proposed opposite drive spacing Was desirable spac~irlg a(jjl1sted for spee(l~j Proposed adjacent drive spacing I 315 :J.. 3 5" t'41~/ Desirable n " " Was desirable spacing adjusted for speed? Geometric design Items in policy not met: USe J..()' fClcliiA.,s ~ el('~iV~ f't: ,~~ ~. 30' dt,."e, w f cl,~ B. DRIVE *2 (Left to right as viewed exiting the property) Desirable " If " LEFT, 3/5 ~51 mIll. ,/ RIGHT ~3 ' ~50J~J\~'j.. Proposed oppos i te dr.ive spacing Was desirable spacing adjusted for speed? Desirable n n II 3 ,5 ' " ft35' tnlt\./, (\0 ") ~3S' 0,,"- ~35(mlt1~ Proposed adjacent drive spacing Was desirable spacing adjusted for speed? rlO Ge.ometr ic des ign i terns in pol icy not met: \.A S( ~(';\J'fi ~() f r~\N> ~ f'(l ~t\ 4-" 3o) cL~lutw.cl~ JZ\~l(~(~N!\~~ca(Jlz\rpE~ ARCtll TE C TURE rsJ PLANNING April 8, 1988 Mr. Jim Callaway, Director of Planning City of College Station P.O. Box 9960 l College Station, Texas 77840 Re: Spring Loop Apartments Site Plan Submittal Dear Jim, As you are aware, the referenced site plan has been resubmitted addressing the items noted by the Plan Review Committee. The putpose of this letter is to clarify a misrepresentation onthepl~n concerning the new locations of the driveways onto Spring Loop. As you know, the Committee requested that the driveway location~be shifted so as not to interfere with traffic patterns created by existing'cuts along the north side of the street. The western driveway was relocated to line up with the centerline of Summer Court and is so indicated on the plan. T.he eastern driveway was moved toward the west in an attempt to lineup with Fall Circle. My initial information concerning the location of Fall Circle was erroneous and in fact, the centerline of Fall Circl.eliesapproximately20 feet to the east of'ourproperty,corner. In any event, I see the new location as an improvement9ver the original alignment. Our proposed eastern drive, as shown, is approximately 100 feet to thewest of the centerline of Fall Circle and 315 feet to the east of the centerline of Summer Court. The plan indicates that the ,."centerlineofour eastern drive is the same centerline as Fall Circle. Is it possible for",,'you'to simply,.,,'mark "out that"reference",to Fall",Cfrcle",s centerline and approve the plan as is,assllmingthe new, driveway locations are accept~ab;le? I apologize for any inconvenience or confusion this has caused. Please let me know at your earliest .convenience. ~ 88 34 Capital 0 f Te'xas Aust'in,Texas 18159 Suite 110 (512)343-5570 ~../ Cifyd' Co"eg.eiSfaliDR, . Texas ACCESS MArlASEMENT 8- DRI\'.E\VAl'DESIGN CITY OF ~OLLEGE STATION DRIVEWAY ACCESS POLICY ( 4/22/87,) (ORIGINAL REPORT WITHOUT THE APPENDICES) I. PURPOSE AND INTENT OF DRIVEWAY ACCESS CONTROLS Driveway location and design impacts traff1csafety. Right turns into and out of driveways have the least impact, requiring only a speed change (rear-endaccident.potential), a merge or demerge, and a turn which may cause encroachment on an adjacent travel lane. Left turns cause more conflicts and requ1reaspeedchange, a merge or demerge, and the crossing of opposing traffic. Adequate driveway spacing provides enough roadway for vehicles making turns at adjacent drives such that acceleration - deceleration areas. for the turning movements do not overlap. AccidentP'otential increases when dri veway spacing decreases to the point where these speed challge and merge areas begin to overlap for turning movements at adjacent driveways. The impact of driveways on traffic safety makes it apparent that it 1s in the best interest of a community to have a driveway access policy which accomplishes the following: 1.) Limits the number of driveways to those which are actually needed to safely accomodate the traffic generated by each development. 2.) Provides adequate spacing between drivewaya and adjacent arterial or collector streets to reduce accidentpotentlal. 3.) Ensure proper geometric design to promote traffic safety and enhance the capacltyof the intersection. II. AUTHORITY City of College Station Ordinance No. 850, hereafter refered to as the "Zoning Ordinance", requires City Engineer approval of driveway access ,prior to approval of a site plan (Section 5-F.2.E) and allows the City Engineer to establish adriv.ewayaccess' policy: "All interior streets, drives, utilities, drainage facilities and sidewalks shall be designed and Qonstructed in accordance with accepted engineering practice. The City Engineer is hereby empowered to alter the provisions of the Section and Ordinance re ferred toab()ve, where ,owing.the pe Quliar circums tances, the publiC health, safety, or general welfare of residents of the project would be imperilled in ~he absence of such alterations." This policy should be considered a tool allowing the City Engineer to make decisions concerning driveway access which .promote the safety and welfare of the community and thus maY be amended at any time. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION.l>RIVEWAYACCESS POLICY ( 4/22/81) ( ORIGINALRE'PORT.WITHO.UTTHEAPPENDICE>SJ I. PURPOSE AND INTENTQF DRIVEWAY ACCESS CONTROLS Driveway location and design impacts traffic safety. Right turns into and out of driveways have the least impact, requiring only a speed change (rear-end accident potential), a merge or demerge, and a turn which may cause encroachment on an adjacent travel lane. Left turns cause more conflicts and require a speed clllilnge, a merge or demerge, and the crossing of opposingtraffic.Adequati~'driveway spacing provides enough roadway for vehicles making turns at adjacent drives suchtha t acceleration - deceler.,ation areas forr the turning movements do not overlap. AccidentPotentiali~crease~ when driveway spacing decreases to the point wheret~,~,se speed change and merge areas begin to overlap for turningulovements atad.jacent driveways. The impact of driveways on traffic. safety makes it apparent that it is in the best interest ofa c,ommunityto ha.ve a driveway aOcess policy which accomplishes the following: 1.) Limits the.. number of driveways to those which are actually needed to safely ac.comodate the traffic generated by each development. 2.) Proviciesadequate spacing between driveways and adjacent arterial or 'collect'or "'streets to reduce accident potential. 3.) Ensure proper geometriC design to promote traffic safety and enhance the capacity of the intersection. II. AUTHORITY City .of CollegeStationOrdinanceNo.85(),~ereafter refered to as the "ZoningOrciinance", req\liresCityEngineer approval of driveway access prior to approval of a site plan (Section 5-F.2.E) and allows the City Engineer to esta,blish adniveway access policy: "All interi'or s.treets,drives ,utilities ,d'rainage facili ties and sidewalks shall be designed and constructed in accordance withacceptedengineerin~>practice. . TheCi ty Engineer is here by emppwered toalter.the provisions of the Section and. Ordinance refe rredtp ab ove<,whe re"ow;n~~:hepe c utiarc i I' C umstanc es, the public health,. safety, o.rgeneral' welfare. of residents of the project would be imperilled in the absence of such alterations." This policy should be considered a toOl allowing the City Engineer to make decisions concerning driveway access which promote the safety and welfare of the community and thus may be amended at any time. " A. Urban Pr~ncipalArter1als East, Bypass -SH6 Texas Ave. ,~ Loop 507 University Dr1ve- FM 60 (from west city limit to 5H 6) Wellborn Boad - FM2154 West Bypass - FM 2818 B. Urban Minor Arterials Barron Road College Ave. - SH308 C~EDFDrive (Unnamed Street) Dartmouth St. (from Southwest Parkway to SH6) E.Tarrow St. Emerald Parkway FinfeatherRoad Green Prairie Road Harvey Road - SH30 Jersey St. - FM 2347 Marsh Avenue Bock Prairie Road Southwest Parkway Tarrow st. (from north c1tylim~t to University Drive) University Dr. - FM 60 (from just east of SH 6 to FM 158) C.Urban Collectors Anderson St. AppomattoxDr. Brentwood Dr. Brothers Blvd. College Main Dartmouth St. (from SH 30 to Southwest Parkway) Deacon Dr. Dexter Dr. Dominik Dr. Enterprize Blvd. Foster St. Fr'ancis Ave. Glade St. Graham ',Road Holleman Dr. Krenek Tap Rd. Kyle Ave. - Kyle South Lincoln St. Longmire Dr. Marion Pugh Dr. Millers Ln. Munson Ave. Nagle st. Ponderosa" ',Dr. Rio Grande Blvq. Sebesta Ln. Southwood Dr. Spring Loop TarrowSt. (from Unive'rsityDr. to Lincoln St.) Timber St. University Oaks Blvd. Welsh Ave. (from Rock Prairie Rd. to Holleman Dr.) D. Local Street = any city street not listed in A,B,orC. '# IV. MINIMUM DRIVEWAY SPACING REQUIREMENTS nn n n nn .. n n n n"" nun nn" n.nn " n.. n" " n"" "nn"" I . ---,I I --, I opposite "'drive opposite drive L<"- upstream spacing -->r<-- downstream spacing ->1 c I 1----------...----------1 proposed 1---...-<..........------------- I lid r iv-ewa.y J,' I I I<-adjacent drive spacing->c(-adjacent dridve spacing -> I 1 I-- I NOTES: Driveway spa.cingis measured from the centerline of the proposed drive' to the nearest edge of roadway for the adjacent or opposite driveway or street. If the centerline of an opposite drive is less than 15 ft. from the centerline. of the proposed drive then these ,drives form an intersection and the mininluIIlspacing requirements apply for the nextc losest'dr i ve'. If the street terminates at a stopsigncontrolledlntersection, then the driveway sp aci ngbetwee nt'heproposeddr ivea ndthe stop signcontrollshallbebasedontheopposite drive minimum ',spacing rather than the adjacent drive>spacing. A.) Opposite '.Upstream "Drives 85 ft. minimum (all street classifications) ,B.) Opposite Downstream Drives Opposite Arterial Opposite Local Street, Classif'ication Or Collect'or Street Or Drive It n nn nltltnnnnll n II nn nit nit It It nn nltlt .ltn n n n,n" "nn nnn n n lilt nnnnltn nn n n n n n n n n nn Urban, Princ.ipal -Arterial Urban Minor Arterial Urban Collector ~ocal Street ,400'ft. 350 300 225 275 ft. 275 250 200 C. ) Adjacent DriveSp<aci.ng Minimum Spacing Street Classification Street Continuous n n nit n.. .. n....unnnn "n".. n nn n n ......nnnn nn nnn nnn ..n,n .... Urban. Principal Arterial' Urban Minor Arterial Urban Collector Local Street 350 ft. 300 235 190 '" v. SPACING REQUIREMENTS FOR SH 6 - EAST BYPASS FRONTAGE ROADS SH 6 East Bypass is the only facility in College Station having controlled aocess. Driveway access location on the frontage roads near entrance and exit ramps is critical. Driveways should not be closer than 250ft. from an exit ramp as measured from the striped gore .of the. exit ramp to the centerline of the drive . Driveways should no.t be located closer than 100 ft. from an entrance ramp as measured from thecenterline>ofthe drive to the goreoftheent.ranceramp. Refer to figure 1 taken from the "Operations and Procedur.es Manual" published by the Texas State Department of Highways & Public Transp. (SDHPT). Section 4-601 and 602 related to driveway access and also Appendix A. The local district office of SDHPT has the ultimate approval or denial of access on state rights-of-way and even though the City lsresponslblefor administering driveway policy under the Municipal Maintenance Agreement betweenSDHPT and the City. The s egu id ellnesa p p lyt ofu t u r e 1 n t er chang es a tSo ut .hwe s t Par kw ay , Emerald Parkway (Dartmou th> St. ), RockPrairle Rd. ,Barron Rd., and Greens Prairie Rd. whichwlll be Inoperatlon by 1990. At that time the east frontage road from Rock Prairie Rd. north will be one-way and from Rock Prairie Road south two-way. The west frontage road from Deacon Dr. north will be one-way and from Deacon Dr. south two-way. .... Besides the ramp spacingdescrlbedabove, driveways located on frontage roads must also follow the .policy set for collector streets. The frontage road is considered a collectors'treet and spacing requirements for adjacent drive and street Intersectionsmust be met. .. VI. GEOMETRIC DESIGN 1 . ata right-angle is provided. allowed if a used. or with or when turning guideline on Islands, Appendix D. 6 . right angle with tbe roadway. Any exceptions,shoul~ follow the AASHTO green book on Obliq~e-angle Turns With Corner Islands, Appendix E. 7. Adequate sight distance should be provided for a passenger vehicle making a left or right exit at the drive. Design should follow Case III-Band Case III-C from ~he AASHTOguidelines, Appendix F. As a general rule, if at least 450 ft. of eight distance is provided at 30mph , 600 ft. at 35 mph, 750:ft. at 40 mph or 950 ft. at 45mphusingthe posted speed limit then no additional checks need be performed. Be sure to consider vertical alignment of the roadway along with profile grade of the drive when checking sight distance. Maximum profile grades recommended for each street classification are listed in Appendix F.