HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous5 ~~
r~
!°~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I ~~~~'~
ENGINEERING DMSION
Post Office Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue
"1 Li~'~
College Station, Texas .77842-0960
(409) 7b4-3570
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mark Smith,. Director of Public Services
CC: Kent Laza, City Engineer
Jim Callaway,. Assistant Director of Development Services
FROM:. Brett McCully, Engineering Project Manager
DATE: November 14, 1994
RE: ` Shenandoah Flooding Mitigation
In response to the input from citizens living at the south end of Windfree Drive in the Shenandoah
subdivision, we have reviewed. the site along with the original construction drawings, and offer the
following observations and recommendations.
It appears. that the problematic flooding occurs in and south of Southern Plantation Drive, which
in turn is due to a lack of capacity in the underground system intended to drain this street to the
undeveloped land to the south. Several limiting factors were identified in this part of the system,
with related remedial suggestions listed below.
1. Endwall Removal: There is presently a large endwall structure at the downstream .end of
"Line G" which runs behind the homes on Windfree. This structure is presently forcing the water
to completely fill the storm drains in order for the flows to exit the system on the adjacent land.
It is therefore recommended that the downstream end. of the structure be removed, thus leaving a
normal endwall structure, and that the existing channel downstream of the structure be excavated
to the downstream at as flat a slope as possible (even 0.0%) to a matching point in the existing
channel.
2. Storm Drain Integrity Verification: The 42" pipe that drains Southern Plantation Drive and
end at the endwall described below (Line G) is somewhat silted in, and possible suffering from
more serious .failures due to the presence of concrete apparently from the pipe in the channel
downstream of the endwall. If this line is .clogged, or has suffered significant damage, the storm
carrying capacity would be limited. In addition, it is apparent that .the second 42" pipe .that ends
at the structure is a portion of "Line J", which was never completed.. There are markers in the
field indicating where the pipe was to have met the continuation of Hunter Creek Drive, but no
inlets.
it is therefore recommended that these two lines be inspected internally by .the use of remote
Video equipment presently used by the Wastewater Division. The Line J pipe end at the extension
of Hunter Creek will have to be exposed by a backhoe prior to examination of that line.
3. Line J Extension: If the :internal inspection of Line J reveals no significant defects, then we
suggest. that it be extended north to Southern Plantation Drive,. where two 12'. drainage inlets
would be installed. These inlets would. be installed on the south side of Southern Plantation on
either side. of the platted Hunters Creek extension so no interference with future development
would be caused. At the depths of flow reported in the street, these inlets will capture a significant
amount of runoff.
4. Line G .Replacement: Should the pipes which make. up lines G rand J south of Southern
Plantation show significant damage, then increasing the flows .through these pipes would only
cause more damage and ultimately a potentially dangerous failure. At that point we would
recommend that. these pipes be replaced with pipes of like size, of pipes of larger size, or even a
concrete box of equal or greater capacity.
In considering. a course of action for. the present, we suggest that Items T and 2 be performed as
', soon as possible, with the selection between items 3 and 4 being dependent on the results of the
video inspection.
Should you have any questions or wish to discuss these options further, please let Kent or me
know.
~~/ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Post Office Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas 77842-0960
(409) 764-3570
Project Memorandum
To: Tom Brymer, Acting City Manager.
cc: Kent Laza, City Engineer
From: Brett McCully, Engineering Project Manager~~~
Date: November 28, 1994
Re: Shenandoah Phase I Replat
Drainage Considerations
At the November l lth Council Meeting, the plat for this project was brought before Council for
approval with Staffs recommendation for approval.
However during the Public Hearing portion of the item, Council heard from several homeowners
living on the southern end of Windfree Drive who have been .experiencing flooding problems over
the .rear of their lots from the existing improvements within the old portions of the Shenandoah
Subdivision.
The plat .approval decision was eventually tabled until the December 8th meeting, and Staff was
given direction to evaluate the existing flooding situation.
On November 12th, City Engineer Kent Laza and myself visited. the site, and then prepared a written
course of action and directed it to the Director of Public Services Mark Smith.. In short, the existing
outfall of the storm .drainage ystem between Southern Plantation Drive and the southern limit of the
existing subdivision is seriously inadequate, and should be remedied as soon as possible. In this
memorandum (which is attached for your reference), four steps are outlined to .mitigate the existing
situation.
As reflected in the answering memorandum from Mark Smith, these actions are being initiated with
the first two steps being performed as soon as possible.
With respect to the .replan in question, in response to the concerns of the .citizens and Council, the
developer's engineer has decided to enlarge the existing basin upstream of the properties being
flooded which will allow more of the runoff to be detained and thus kept within the capacities of the
pipes draining Southern Plantation Drive.
Staff believes that the existing situation has been evaluated and .remedies provided as directed by
Council at the November l lth meeting. Staff believes that these measures, along with the increased
basin capacity will significantly reduce if not eliminate the existing flooding of the homes on
Windfree.
As shown on the Council Agenda Item Coversheet, Staff recommends approval of this plat with the
added condition that the basin be enlarged to double the effective hydraulic capacity.
~~I (CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
~~
MEMORANDUM
ENGIPEERING DNIS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Post Office Box 9960 1701 Texas Avenue
Post Office Box 9960 11.01 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas 77842-0960
.College Station, Texas 77842-0960
(409) 764-3570
{409) 764-3570
TO: Mark Smith, Director of Public Services
CC: Kent Laza, City Engineer
Jim Callaway, Assistant Director of Development Services
FROM: Brett McCully, Engineering Project Manager
DATE: November 14, 1994
RE: Shenandoah Flooding Mitigation
In response to the .input from citizens living at the south end of Windfree Drive in the Shenandoah
subdivision,. we have reviewed the site along with the. original construction drawings, and offer the
following observations and recommendations.
It appears that the problematic flooding'. occurs in and south of Southern Plantation Drive, which
in turn is due to a lack of capacity in the underground system intended to drain this street to the
undeveloped land to the south. Several limiting factors were identified in this part of the system,
with related remedial suggestions listed below.
1. Endwall Removal: There is presently a large endwall structure at the downstream end of
''Line G" which runs behind the homes on Windfree. This structure is presently forcing the water
to completely fill the storm drains in order for the flows to exit the system on the adjacent land.
It is therefore recofnmended that the downstream end of the structure be removed, thus leaving a
normal endwall structure, and that theexisting channel downstream of the structure beexcavated
to the downstream at as flat a slope as' possible (even 0.0%) to a matching point in the existing
channel.
2. Storm Drain Integrity Verification: The 42" pipe that drains Southern Plantation Drive and
end at the :endwall described below. (Line G) is somewhat silted in, and possible suffering from
more serious failures .due to the presence of concrete apparently from the pipe in the channel
downstream of the endwall. If this line is clogged., or has suffered significant damage, the storm
carrying capacity would be limited. In addition, it is apparent. `that the second 42" .pipe that ends
at the structure is a portion of "Line J", which was never .completed. There are markers in the
field indicating where the pipe was to have met the continuation of Hunter Creek Drive, but no
inlets.
It is therefore recommended that these two lines be inspected internally by the use of remote
Video equipment presently used by the Wastewater Division. The Line J pipe end at the extension
of Hunter Creek will have to be exposed by a backhoe prior to examination of that line.
3. Line J Extension: If .the internal inspection of Line J reveals. no significant defects, then we
suggest that it be extended north to Southern Plantation Drive, .where two 12' drainage inlets
would be installed. These: inlets would be installed on the south side of Southern Plantation on
either side of the platted Hunters Creek extension so no interference with future development
would be caused. At the depths of flow reported in the street, these inlets will capture a significant
amount of runoff.
4. Line G Replacement: Should the pipes. which make up lines G and J south of Southern
Plantation show. significant damage,. then increasing the flows through these pipes would only
cause more damage and ultimately a potentially dangerous failure. At that point we would
recommend that these pipes be replaced with pipes of like size, of pipes of larger size, or even a
concrete box of equal or greater capacity.
In considering. a course of action for the. present,. we suggest that Items 1 and 2 be performed as
soon as possible, with the selection between items 3 and 4 being dependent on the results of the
video inspection.
Should you have any questions or wish to discuss these options further, please let Kent or me
know.
C McCLURE ENGINEERING, INC.
1722 Broadmoor,-Suite 210
Bryan, Texas 77802
(409) 7.76-6700
FAX 776-6699
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
DATE • 8/4./94
TO: Mrs. Veronica. Morcian, P.E.
Assistant to City Engineer
CITY-OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
1 Y~
ATTN:
ATTACHED PLEASE FIND:
RE: REPEAT OF Lot 25, Block 14,-SI~NANDOAH, PHASE ONE
Attached please find'xerox copy of letter;ao Mr. Martin Rumbaugh of
the TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION concerning the
definition of "Rehabilitation Project".`
THE5E ARE TRANSMITTED'TO YOU FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON:
For Approval XX Your Use Revisions Made
As `Requested For Review and Comment
Returned after Loan to Lis
RECEIVED BY•
DATE•
SIGNED BY
~~
MIC AEL R. McCLURE, P.E., R.P.L.S.
~~ s
~~ ~n„~i i IBC CnI~1nI000ln1l_ Lnlr`
~.~~ IVII.iVLVI IL L.i rule ~a_.~~ i~~ ~~w~ ~~ ~v.
August 4, 1994
Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission
Plans and Specifications Review Section
P.O. Box 13087
Austin, Texas 7.8711-3087
Attn.: Martin Rumbaugh
Re: Telephone Conversation August 2, 1994 at 13:30 concerning
the definition of "Rehabilitation Project".
Dear Mr. Rumbaugh:
Thank you for- promptly returning my call. The purpose of this
letter is to-document. the answer to my question.
It is my understanding from our conversation that a sewer line
project which. entails:
a. the removal and replacement of existing pipe
b. in the same trench
c. at substantiallythe same grades'
d. with the same diameter ..pipe
constitutes rehabilitation and:. does not warrant review by your
agency.
If my understanding is not correct, please contact me at the
office address listed below so that I may conform to the TNRCC
regulations,
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
iG~ ~~~~
Jo 1 J. Mitchell
Project Engineer
xc; Veronica Morgan, P. E., Assistant City Engineer, City of
College Station, Texas
Robert Gadbos, P.E. Engineering Services .Manager, City of
College Station., Texas
1722 Broadmoar, Suite 210 Bryan, Texas .77802 {409)776-6700 -FAX {409) 776-6699
4 ~~ of
~'' ~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI~i
Post O€flce Box 4950 1101 Texas Avenue
Ooklege Station, Texas 77842-0960
(409j 764-3500
June 9, 1994.
McClure Engineering
1722 Broadmoor, Suite 2100
Bryan, TX 77802
Attn: Mike McClure
RE: Shanendoah Subdivision
Existing Improvement Plans
Dear Mike,
First. of all, I would like to apologize for the apparent confusion over. this issue. Weeks ago. I
informed you by telephone that he water and sewer materials installed in the .undeveloped phase
were not being accepted into he City's system, and therefore would have to be replaced.
At that point I thought you were going to advise your clients; while T looked for the improvement
plans, and let me know if the replacement of the utilities was .too costly for their intentions. Since
that tune we had located the plans; and I was awaiting your response from the clients. ,
I understand now from Shirley .Volk that you were awaiting my response to the plans review,
..possible prior to contacting your clients, and that I had' become an accidental delay in the process.
Therefore I have reviewed the .construction drawings,, and am providing this response- to your
duestions.
Water .Improvements As I advised you before; the existing:. water ,lines are made of asbestos".
`.cement which are no longer allowed by the TNRCG, and so are no .longer accepted by the ,City.
These materials will have to be removed and replaced with PVC orDuctile Tron..
Sanitary Sewer Improvements Also as advised, the existing sewer lines are made'of vitrified clay,
which is no longer: accepted by the .City. primarily due to tl~e :high incidence `of failure due to the
expansive materials in our area. These materials will. need to be removed and replaced with PVC.
Construction Drawings The drawings we have on file are only the as-built drawings, and do not
include the portions previously designed- Like the final plat, these dcawix~gs indicate that the
remainder area is reserved for future. development. ~ -
- ~,
f~cx~~ az Tex Atv€ tSnzversity
°~
Drainage Improvements. As you. know, this project. was approved prior to the enactment of our
current drainage, ordinance. any. development of this area will need to show compliance with the
current ordinance.
' I believe this answers all of the significant questions raised in our meeting.
If I have missed an issue, or if you have any additional questions, please let me know.:
Sin erely,
~`
Brett McCully
:Project Manager
cc: Veronica Morgan; Assistant City Engineer
Shirley Volk, Development Coordinator
.Robert Gadbois, Engineering Services Manager
I
i
i
i
`~
Interoffice Memo
To: Tom Brytner~
From: Mark Smith ~l~
Dates November2 , 1994.-- (rev' e ~~~~
Subject: Shenandoah Drainage
I received the attached memo from,Brett containing recommendations for. mitigating the flooding
problems on Windfree Drive. I support the recommendations and have directed Paul Urso to begin
implementing tasks i & 2. Paul says that he wiII have a crew available to work on this project
immediately after Thanksgiving.
I feel. certain that tasks. 3 & 4 will also reduce the flooding problem, but a firm plan of action can not be
determined until we have completed 1 & 2. Also, extending storm drains and building inlet boxes will
require a funding level that is not available through drainage operations. We have committed the existing
drainage bond funds to projects in the Southwood Valley area.
I will proceed with tasks 1 & 2 and work with-Kent to develop. some firm plans for 3 & 4 so that we know
haw much money we are talking about. Once I lrnoW more detail I'll sit down withKent and. Charles
Cryan to develop a funding strategy.
I will .also work to develop a drainage pathway between the outfall end of the subdivision's storm drainage
system and the main channel to Spring Crcek. To do this I will need to work with Engineering to identify
the best route and determine easement requirements. ?he channel will be developed using City craws.
CG: Paul Urso, Kent Laza, Brett McCully
`~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I
®/ Post Office Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas 77842-0960
(409j 7643500
November 30 1994
McClure Engineering
1722 Broadmoor, .Suite 2100
Bryan, TX 77802
Attn: Mike McClure
RE: Shenandoah Phase One
Oversize Participation- Estimate
.Improvement Plans Approval
Dear Mike,
We have completed our review of your oversize participation estimate for this project, and
have the following revisions which will be made a part of Staffs recommendation for this item.
Street Construction Southern Plantation is a minor arterial, and as such is eligible for the
participation in the additional 8 feet in width along the entire width constructed (from the
existing paving to -the western. plat boundary). However the "offsite" portion of the street
between the existing paving.. and the plat: boundary is still the ..developer's responsibility.
Because the alley is not indicated on the thoroughfare plan, no participation is provided by our
ordinance.
Drainas=e Construction Other than qualifying bridges and culverts, ro participation is
provided by the City for drainage facilities.
Sewer Construction The ordinance does not provide for .participation in lines of this size, nor
would the City participate in offsite improvements required for service.
Water Construction The Ordinance provides for participation for the additional sizing of the
12 inch' line, along the entire length of Southern Plantation, both on and .off site. However the
City will not pick up the entire cost ofthe offsite portion.
The Oversize Participation provisions are intended to allow the City to increase the capacity of
various infrastructure. facilities to meet the projected demands in the area, beyond the actual
projects being constructed. Those facilities required by a project, such. as access and utility
service, are always the responsibility of the developers to the level needed for their projects.
Home of Texas ABM University
~.
By our calculations, these factors will significantly reduce the participation recommended to
Council (tentatively scheduled for January 12th), therefore we suggest that the participation
request be revised to reflect these changes.
With regard to the improvement plans, all of the onsite improvements are ready for approval.
However we have not seen any plans or revised drainage. calculationsaddressing the changes
proposed to the existing basin. Because these modifications are a recommended condition of
plat approval, we will need to review. these additions and approve them concurrently with the
'onsite' improvement plans.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please call.
Sincerely,
Brett McCully
Project Manager
cc: Kent Laza, City. Engineer
Veronica Morgan, Assistant City Engineer
~~
~~~~ ~, ~.~.~~ Vie; --
,~'~ ~ ~ ~-
SHENANDOAH PHASE ONE
BLOCK 10
LOT 30 CAMPBELL, HAROLD D. & MARY L.
1501 RICHLAND CT. N.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 39 MCCONATHY, CHARLES R. & CONNIE
PO. BOX 9797
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77842
BLOCK 11
LOT 9
LOT 10
BLOCK 14
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6
LOT 7
MCMILLIN, ROGER D. & MARILYN
1502 SOUTHERN PLANTATION
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
SHIMSHACK, ALLAN A. &
`ELIZABETH T. EAGAN
4001 MARSH ST.
BRYAN, TX 77803
WOOTEN, W. L. & BRENDA S.
1415 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845,
JOINER, DAVID M. & LAURA M.
1413 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATLON, TX 77845
HU, HENGLIANG & WENE YAN
1411 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
ZIEGELMANN, DENNIS L. & BONNIE L.
1409 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
TRANT, G GLENN & KIMBERLY
1407 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
PAVLASEK RICHARD JR. & JUDY
1408 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
MILBURN'BETTY MARIE
1410 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGESTATION, TX 77845
CONT. OF BLOCK 14
LOT 8 STEPHENS, CLIFFORD H. & REBECCA
1412 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 9 MCMURRY, BRYAN & ROBERTA A.
1414 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 10 HARDMAN, ROSE M.
1416 RICHLAND CT.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 11 HUBBARD, MICHEL D. & VALERIE K.
C/O VALERIE K. HUBBARD
40.1 ANDERSON: # 5-C
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840
LOT 12 PESTOVIC, EDWARD J. & JENNIFER
AND GEORGE J. & RUTH L. MARTIN
1413 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 13 POKORA, DAVID M. & JACLYNN M.
1411 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 14 MATLOCK, EDWIN MARK & DENISE V.
1409 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 15 ARNOLD, MICHAEL ALOYSIUS &
AMANDA FAITH ARNOLD
1407 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 16 MATTHEWS, CORY LYNN
HEATER`L. TATE
1408. PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 17 MEININGER, MARVIN E. & DALYNETT
1410 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 18 ROBERSON, J. DENNS JR. & JO LYN
1412 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
LOT 19 RUSSELL, MICHAEL & CATHERINE
1414 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
`e
Y
CONT.. OF BLOCK 14
LOT 20
LOT 21
LOT 22
LOT 23
LOT 24
BLOCK 16
LOT 6
LOT 7
LOT 8
LOT 9
TRACT 12
TRACT 12
97.327 ACRES
GAUTHIER, RICHARD G. JR. & JUDY.
1416 PECAN GROVE CT
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
BROSSETTE, DOUGLAS W. & JEANINE
1415 SOUTHERN PLANTATION DR.
COLLEGE STATION, TX 7785
FROEHLING, EDWARD
3887 HIGH .LONESOME
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
FROEHLING, EDW
3887 HIGH SOME
CO STATION, TX 77845
JOHNSON, WILSON H. JR & JULIE
1414SOUTHERN PLANTATION
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
HUFF, RICHARD M.
4018 DECATUR
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845
PORTER, E. BOSWELL - R. D. WOOD
C/O ROBERT WOOD
304 POST OFFICE
BRYAN, TX 77801
~i~rtiw~ ~ f""l % le ~`~«
~~~~`r~d~ c~~~d
C McCLURE ENGINEERING, INC.
December 5, 1994
Mr. Brett McCully, P.E.
Project Engineer
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
P.O. 9960
College. Station, TX 77842
RE: CITY OVERSIZE PARTICIPATION
RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 25, BLOCK 14
SHENANDOAH, PHASE ONE
Dear Brett:
Commensurate with your November 30~, .1994 letter identifying
items eligible for City Participation funding, we submit the
following. estimate for your consideration:
UNIT
DESCRIPTION ~. UNITS QUANTITY COST AMOUNT
STREET CONSTRUCTION
6' Lime Stabilized Subgrade (5% Lime)
Extra Lime
8" Flexible Base (Crushed Stpne)
1'r4' Hot M'a Asphaltic Conc. (Type D)
S.Y. 399.70 2.75 $1,099.18
Tons 2.70 75.00 202.50
S.Y. 399:70 7.20 2,877.84
S.Y. 399.70 4.52 1,806.64
WATERLINE CONSTRUCTION
12"`Oversize Participation
L.S. 438 7.70 * 3,37260
$9,358.76
* Represents the linear foot cost difference between 12" PVC
(C900, C1. 200)& 8" PVC (C900, C1. 200)
1722 Broadmoor, Suite 210 • Bryan, Texas 77802 (409) 776-6700. • .FAX (4U9) 776-6699
~~
SHENANDOAH, RESUBDIVISION
DECEMBER 5, 1994
PAGE 2
JUSTIFICATION FOR CITY PARTICIPATION IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING:
A. 449.7 L.F: of extra width Minor Arterial Street
Construction (47' vs. 39') on Southern Plantation Drive.
(Oversize Construction)
B. 438 L.F. of 12"'Waterline Construction (8" required)
along Southern Plantation Drive (Oversize Construction).
Should you have any questions, please advise.
Very truly y rs,
` •~C~ur.
chael R. McClure, P.E., R.P.L.S.
MRM/mlm