HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff CommentsCITY OF COLLEGE STATION
Planning d Development Services
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
REVISED MEMORANDUM
July 22, 2008
TO: Chuck Ellison, via fax 693.8819
FROM: Lindsay Boyer, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: TOWER POINT (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. If all comments have been
addressed and the following information submitted by Tuesday, July 29st, 10:00 a.m., your
project will be placed on the next available Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
scheduled for August 14th, 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue.
One (1) 24" x 36" copy of the revised Preliminary Plat; and
Nineteen (19) 11" x 17" copies of the revised Preliminary Plat.
Upon receipt of the required documents for the Planning & Zoning meeting, your project will be
considered formally filed with the City of College Station. Please note that if all comments have
not been addressed, your project will be pulled from the scheduled Planning & Zoning
Commission agenda. Your project may be placed on a future agenda once all the revisions
have been made and the appropriate fees paid. Once your item has been scheduled for the
P&Z meeting, the agenda and staff report can be accessed at the following web site on Monday
the week of the P&Z meeting.
http://www.cstx.gov/home/index.asp?page=2481.
Please note that a Mylar original of the revised preliminary plat will be required after P&Z
approval and prior to processing subsequent final plats. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
cc: College Station Marketplace, via fax 713.623.0178
Kling Engineering, via fax 846.8252
Case file #08-00500153
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1
Project: TOWER POINT (PP) - 08-00500153
PLANNING
1. Please correct the Metes and Bounds. Two areas did not close - Block 5 and Blocks 2 and
3
2. Would it be possible to provide a set of 11 x17s showing just each phase for future
reference? This would no be an official plat document and need not show everything,
however we have found this to be beneficial in large projects to have this in the file for ease
of tracking phases.
3. Please correct the boundary of the Overlay. Attached is the map from the ordinance. It ends
south of Oxburgh/Arrington Road on this side of 6.
4. Please add Lots 1 and 2 in Block 3 to the building plot for this area.
5. Please correct the zoning for Block 5. It appears that the zoning line may bisect lots 2 and
10 of this block. Also, the zoning in the notes is incorrect for this block. The lots on the
corner (3, 4, 5, and part of 2 and 10) are C-1, the remainder are A-P.
6. Please confirm that the access easement between Lots 1 and 2 of Block 5 line up with the
approved driveway for Springcreek Townhomes Phase 3. It appears that they do, but please
provide the spacing.
7. Please identify the volume and page number of all existing easements. This includes those
dedicated by separate instrument, or indicate the note on Sheet 1 that references this
easement.
I.o
TIP
GREENS PRAIRIE OV Case: COMP.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 06-28 PLAN
Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer Date: July 15, 2008
TXDOT
1. Access driveways to SH 6 & SH 40 must meet TxDOT's current "Regulations for Access
Driveways to State Highways". Regulations are primarily based on posted speed limits
& distances between proposed & adjacent access points. Where the posted speed
limit is 50 MPH or more the required spacing between access points is 425'& at 45 MPH
the required spacing is 360' Where access spacing is insufficient joint access will
be required or access to internal /external streets. Location of Control of Access
Sections along the north ROW of SH 40 should be reviewed.
Appropriate data will be required for any future work /permits in the ROW @ this
development site.
Contact Mr. Carlos Rodriguez, P.E., @ the TxDOT Bryan Area Office (778-6233) for
further Project Details in regard to the current TxDOT Ramp Project.
Reviewed by: Jay Page Date: Comments from previous submissions
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1
1. Depict medians in Arrington Road as well as the existing sleeves that were planned for utility
crossings. These sleeves need to be utilized before adding additional crossings.
2. Based on the location of the northernmost access easement/driveway to SH6 on the
previously approved Preliminary Plat, TxDOT has tentatively approved a driveway on the
adjacent property. Your new proposed location does not meet spacing requirements with
this new adjacent drive. Cross-access is required and will need to be worked out with the
adjacent property.
3. Show the limits of the floodplain per the LOMR being prepared by Walter P Moore.
4. The 24" water line cannot be tapped for a service.
5. As depicted, not all lots have water and sewer. The lots are separated from public utilities
by the 40' Access Easement. You may want to also designate the 40' Access Easement as
a PUE.
6. The layout of the utilities will only be approved conceptually. Line size and any additional
looping requirements will be determined with engineering reports at Final Plat. However, it
does appear that the water line in Phase 5 will need to be looped back to Decatur.
7. It was expressed to Walter P Moore that as the site is designed, the City needs is a surface
drainage path that will accommodate 5,000 gpm flowing away from the tower to occasionally
drain the tank. I don't see a drainage easement on the plat.
8. The 24" water main cannot be tapped to serve individual Lots. You need to extend a public
main to provide water. The 24" main may only be tapped to provide a loop to the over all
system. Lot 2, Block 2 and Lots 4 and 5, Block 3 appear to only have water from the 24"
main.
9. Access between Lots 5 and 6, Block 3 does not meet driveway spacing requirements.
10. FYI: Any utilities buried deeper than 14 feet required additional PUE width for maintenance.
11. FYI: Extra precautions will be required in area near Conservation Easement to insure no
negative impacts from construction activities.
Reviewed by: Carol Cotter Date: July 22, 2008
ELECTRICAL COMMENTS REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ATTENTION
1. Developer provides temporary blanket easement for construction purposes.
2. Developer provides descriptive easements for electric infrastructure as designed by CSU
and for electric lines (where applicable, including street lights).
3. Developer may be responsible for locating easements on site to insure that electrical
infrastructure is installed within easement boundaries.
GENERAL ELECTRICAL COMMENTS
1. Developer installs conduit per CSU specs and design.
2. CSU will provide drawings for electrical installation.
3. Developer provides 30' of rigid or IMC conduit for riser poles. CSU installs riser.
4. Developer will intercept existing conduit at designated transformers or other existing devices
and extend as required.
5. If conduit does not exist at designated transformer or other existing devices, developer will
furnish and install conduit as shown on CSU electrical layout.
6. Developer pours electric device pads or footings (i.e. transformers, pull boxes etc) per CSU
specs and design.
7. Developer installs pull boxes and secondary pedestals per CSU specs and design (pull
boxes and secondary pedestals provided by CSU).
8. Developer provides digital AutoCAD 2000 or later version of plat and/or site plan. Email to:
gmartinez@cstx.gov.
9. Developer provides load data to CSU as soon as it is available to avoid construction delays.
Delivery time for transformers not in stock is approximately 40 weeks.
10. Final site plan must show all proposed electrical facilities necessary to provide electrical
service, i.e. transformer(s), pull box(es), switchgear(s), meter location and conduit routing as
designed by CSU.
11. To discuss any of the above electrical comments please contact Gilbert Martinez at
979.764.6255.
Reviewed by: Gilbert Martinez Date: 07/08/08
SANITATION
1. Sanitation is okay with this project.
Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: July 9, 2008