Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00072919CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (979) 764 -3570 / Fax (979) 764 -3496 MEMORANDUM TO: Wallace Phillips, Greens Prairie Investors, Ltd. via fax 690.1480 FROM: Bridgette George, Assistant Development Manager SUBJECT: CASTLEGATE SEC 10 (PP) - Preliminary Plat Staff reviewed the above - mentioned preliminary plat as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the comments and submit the following information by Friday, May 24, 2002, 10:00 a.m. for review before the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for June 6, 2002, 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue. Ten (10) copies of the revised preliminary plat; and, One (1) Mylar original of the revised preliminary plat. One (1) copy of the digital file of the preliminary plat on diskette or e-mail to nmanhart@ci.college- station.tx.us If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 764 -3570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc: Joe Schultz, Texcon General Contractors via fax 690.9797 Case file #02 -095 Home of Texas A &M University CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (979) 764 -3570 / Fax (979) 764 -3496 MEMORANDUM TO: Wallace Phillips, Greens Prairie Investors, Ltd. via fax 690.1480 FROM: Bridgette George, Assistant Development Manager SUBJECT: CASTLEGATE SEC 10 (PP) -Preliminary Plat Staff reviewed the above - mentioned preliminary plat as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the comments and submit the following information by Friday, May 24, 2002, 10:00 a.m. for review before the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for June 6, 2002, 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue. Ten (10) copies of the revised preliminary plat; and, One (1) Mylar original of the revised preliminary plat. One (1) copy of the digital file of the preliminary plat on diskette or e-mail to nmanhart @ci.college - station.tx.us If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 764 -3570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc: Joe Schultz, Texcon General Contractors via fax 690.9797 Case file #02 -095 Home of Texas A &M University STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: CASTLEGATE SEC 10 (PP)- PRELIMINARY PLAT (02 -095) PLANNING 1. Need to rename Mileham Court as this name is too similar to Milam Ave in College Station. 2. To justify the meritorious modifications in this section of Castlegate, please note what amenities will be provided. 3. Since the property has already been rezoned, please correct Note #3. 4. Please identify the minimum lot area for this section. Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock Date: May 20, 2002 ENGINEERING 1. Please connect dead -end water mains. College Station Utilities has asked Development Review to hold dead -ends on the public water supply system to a minimum, as per TNRCC 290.44.(d).(6). Please consider this in future designs. 2. There are no drainage appurtenances on Mileham Court. Rainfall runoff should be transported under Norham Drive and not through the intersection. 3. It appears that only the "east- west" portion of Colchester is a cul -de -sac. Please include sidewalk on one side of the street to the cul -de -sac. Reviewed by: Spencer Thompson Date: May 13, 2002 ELECTRICAL 1. Developer provides temporary blanket easement for construction purposes. 2. Developer provides digital sight plan in autoCad version 2000i and emails to rbolin(aD-ci.college- station.tx.us 3. Developer provides metes and bounds easements for all electric lines including street lighting. Reviewed by: Ronnie Bolin Date:5 -15 -02 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City, will constitute a completely new review. 2 of 2 Castlegate Subdivision, Section 10 Response to Staff Review Comments No. 1 Planning: 1. Mileham Court has been renamed to Drogo Court. 2. Castlegate Section 10 shares some amenities with the other sections of the Castlegate Subdivision. These include the neighborhood park with all of its park improvements, the park at the subdivision entrance and the concrete pathway provided in Sections I thru 4. A 5 -acre park with a lake will be located south of the intersection of Castlegate Drive and Victoria Avenue. This park area will be included on the plat of Castlegate, Section 7. A greenway area of approximately 5 acres is proposed in the future development of Castlegate. This area will extend from Castlegate Drive to the future State Highway 40. Pedestrian access to these amenities from Section 10 will be by the sidewalks along Victoria Avenue and the concrete pathway along Castlegate Drive. Also, the right -of -way width of Castlegate Drive has been increased from 60 feet to 70 feet to allow for more grass area between the street and residential lots. 3. Note #3 has been corrected. 4. The minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet has been noted on the plat. Note: Lots 84 -87 and Lots 90 -93 (Block 2) did not have a minimum 50' lot width at the 20' front setback line. These lots, as well as Lots 88 -89 & 94 -97, were adjusted in order to provide a 50' lot width at the front setback line. Engineering: 1. Dead -end water mains along the cul -de -sac streets are not going to be connected; however, we have added blow -off valve assemblies at the ends of each of these lines on these streets. I feel that this complies with TNRCC 290.44.(d).(6). 2. According to our depth calculations, drainage inlets on Drogo ( Mileham) Court are not required, since the depth of flow in the gutter does not exceed 5 ". The runoff going through the Norham Drive intersection will be in valley gutters. The depth of flow in these valley gutters will be less than the depth of flow along the curb. 3. We consider all of Colchester Court after its intersection with Norham Drive to be a cul -de -sac street; therefore sidewalks on this portion of the street are not required. Electrical: All Electrical comments have been addressed. Castlegate Subdivision, Section 10 Response to Staff Review Comments No. 1 Planning: 1. Mileham Court has been renamed to Drogo Court. 2. Castlegate Section 10 shares some amenities with the other sections of the Castlegate Subdivision. These include the neighborhood park with all of its park improvements, the park at the subdivision entrance and the concrete pathway provided in Sections 1 thru 4. A 5 -acre park with a lake will be located south of the intersection of Castlegate Drive and Victoria Avenue. This park area will be included on the plat of Castlegate, Section 7. A greenway area of approximately 5 acres is proposed in the future development of Castlegate. This area will extend from Castlegate Drive to the future State Highway 40. Pedestrian access to these amenities from Section 10 will be by the sidewalks along Victoria Avenue and the concrete pathway along Castlegate Drive. Also, the right -of -way width of Castlegate Drive has been increased from 60 feet to 70 feet to allow for more grass area between the street and residential lots. 3. Note #3 has been corrected. 4. The minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet has been noted on the plat. Note: Lots 84 -87 and Lots 90 -93 (Block 2) did not have a minimum 50' lot width at the 20' front setback line. These lots, as well as Lots 88 -89 & 94 -97, were adjusted in order to provide a 50' lot width at the front setback line. Engineering: 1. Dead -end water mains along the cul -de -sac streets are not going to be connected; however, we have added blow -off valve assemblies at the ends of each of these lines on these streets. I feel that this complies with TNRCC 290.44.(d).(6). 2. According to our depth calculations, drainage inlets on Drogo ( Mileham) Court are not required, since the depth of flow in the gutter does not exceed 5 ". The runoff going through the Norham Drive intersection will be in valley gutters. The depth of flow in these valley gutters will be less than the depth of flow along the curb. 3. We consider all of Colchester Court after its intersection with Norham Drive to be a cul -de -sac street; therefore sidewalks on this portion of the street are not required. Electrical: All Electrical comments have been addressed, and street lighting easements have been added to the plat. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: CASTLEGATE SEC 10 (PP)- PRELIMINARY PLAT (02 -095) PLANNING 1. Need to rename Mileham Court as this name is too similar to Milam Ave in College Station. 2. To justify the meritorious modifications in this section of Castlegate, please note what amenities will be provided. 3. Since the property has already been rezoned, please correct Note #3. 4. Please identify the minimum lot area for this section. Reviewed by Molly Hitchcock Date: May 20, 2002 ENGINEERING 1. Please connect dead -end water mains. College Station Utilities has asked Development Review to hold dead -ends on the public water supply system to a minimum, as per TNRCC 290.44.(d).(6). Please consider this in future designs. 2. There are no drainage appurtenances on Mileham Court. Rainfall runoff should be transported under Norham Drive and not through the intersection. 3. It appears that only the "east- west" portion of Colchester is a cul -de -sac. Please include sidewalk on one side of the street to the cul -de -sac. Reviewed by: Spencer Thompson Date: May 13, 2002 ELECTRICAL 1. Developer provides temporary blanket easement for construction purposes. 2. Developer provides digital sight plan in autoCad version 2000i and emails to rbolin (aD-ci.college- station.tx.us 3. Developer provides metes and bounds easements for all electric lines including street lighting. Reviewed by: Ronnie Bolin Date:5 -15 -02 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City, will constitute a completely new review. 2of2