HomeMy WebLinkAbout64 DP Gateway L1 B1 Ph 3 03-67 Private St Univ On E((~ DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
PERMIT NO. 03-65
Project: GATEWAY STATION
COLllGl STATION FOR AREAS OUTSIDE THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA
RE : CHAPTER 13 OF THE COLLEGE STATION CITY CODE
SITE LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT 8 BLOCK 1
PHASE 1
GATEWAY SUBD
DATE OF ISSUE: 10/02/03
OWNER:
DELMARBARRONHEADI
TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT:
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
SITE ADDRESS:
1501 UNIVERSITY DR E
DRAINAGE BASIN:
Burton Creek
VALID FOR 6 MONTHS
CONTRACTOR:
Clearing and Grading Permit
All construction must be in compliance with the approved construction plans
All trees must be barricaded, as shown on plans, prior to any construction. Any trees not barricaded will not
count towards landscaping points. Barricades must be 1' per caliper inch of the tree diameter.
NOTE : PHASE 2 OF TPDES (TCEQ) IS IN EFFECT .
The Contractor shall take all necessary precautions to prevent silt and debris from leaving the immediate
construction site in accordance with the approved erosion control plan as well as the City of College Station
Dra inage Pol icy and Design Criteria. If it is determined the prescribed erosion control measures are ineffective
to retain all sediment onsite , it is the contractors responsibility to implement measures that will meet City , State
and Federal requirements . The Owner and/or Contractor shall assure that all disturbed areas are sodden and
establishment of vegetation occurs prior to removal of any silt fencing or hay bales used for temporary erosion
control. The Owner and/or Contractor shall also insure that any disturbed vegetation be returned to its original
condition , placement and state. The Owner and/o r Contractor shall be responsible for any damage to
adjacent properties, city streets or infrastructure due to heavy machinery and/or equipment as well as erosion ,
siltat ion or sedimentation resulting from the permitted work .
Any trees required to be protected by ordinance or as part of the landscape plan must be completely fenced
before any operations of this permit can begin.
In accordance with Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station , measures shall be
taken to insure that debris from construction , erosion , and sedimentation shall not be deposited in city streets ,
or existing drainage facilities.
I hereby grant this permit for development of an area outside the special flood hazard area. All development
shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications subm itted to and approved by the City Engineer in the
development permit application for the above named project and all of the codes and ordinances of the City of
College Station that apply.
~~
Date
Bury+ Partner s-SA , In c . ! p Bur y + Par tners 10000 San Pedro Ave., Ste . 100
San Antonio , Texas 78216
(210) 525-9090 -Telephone
(2 10) 525-05 29 -Fax Co n s ult in g En gin ee rs and Sur-r r) ors
Letter of Tran smittal
To : Bridigette George Project No .: 50229-02.30
Compa ny: City of College Station Dat e: 08 /13 /03
Address: 1101 Texas Avenue cc:
College Station, Texas 77842
Re: University Driveway -College Station, Texas
D Delivery ~Ov e rnight D Pick-Up D Courier D Other
Quanti Desoi tion o Item(s)
2 Signed and Sealed Driveway "A" University Drive @ Forest Lane Plan (signed 8/13/03)
-Notes-
Please contact our office at 210/525 -9090 if you have an y questions . Thank you .
Prepared By: Ricardo M Villmrea l, E.f T ~ti /GC-
for Coy D . Armstrong, P .E.
! p Bur y +Par tners
Co ns ultin g Eng in eers and S un c ~ ors
1 .0'2 _o~ ~
Q . 6 Bury+ Panners-SA, Inc.
0 10000 San Pedro Ave ., Ste. 100 z San Antonio, Texas 78216
"'2 ..J C9-' (210) 525-9090 -Telephone
_ {) ..:/ (210) 525-0529 -Fax
Letter of Transmittal
To: Bridigette George Project No .: 50229-02.30
Company: City of College Station Date: 08 /22/03
Address: 1101 Texas Avenue cc :
College Station , Texas 77842
Re: University Driveway -College Station , Texas
D Delivery 181 Overnight D Pick-Up D Courier D Other
Quan · Des cri tion o ftem(s)
2 Copies of Plan and Profile of University Drive and State Hwy 6 Bypass
-Notes-
Please contact our office at 210/525-9090 if you have any questions. Thank you.
Prepared By: RicardoM Villarreal, E.JT ~V /r;-c_,
for Coy D. Armstrong, P.E.
'
August29 , 2003
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
1101 Texas Avenue South , PO Box 9960
College Station , Texas 77842
Phone 979 .764.3570 I Fax 979 .764.3496
MEMORANDUM
TO : Frank Mihalopoulos ,.Via fax 972 .233 .1870 V
FROM : Bridgette George, Assistant Development Manager
SUBJECT : DP-Gateway Private Street L 1 B1 Ph3 -Construction Documents
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned engineering documents 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
for further staff review and approval of the plans :
__ One (1) set of revised construction documents .
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Spencer
Thompson or myself at 764 .3570 .
Attachments: Staff Review Comments
Cc : Jamil Boukarim , Via fax 822 .1763 v
Coy D. Armstrong, P.E., Via fax 210.505 .0529 v'
Case file no. 03-00100067
Home of Texas A&M University
WGJNEERING REVIEW
COMMENTS No. 1
A cursory review was do ne on this item prior to this submittal. We requested
comments from TxDOT but have not received any to date. No application for a
TxDOT permit was submitted to date. This item will be officially submitted to
TxDOT when a permit application is received.
1. Please remove all references to yellow stripping on drawing . All traffic
stripping to be white.
2. Concerning drainage, will drainage come off University drive onto this street?
How is drainage accounted for on street? Is a storm drain to the creek
needed?
3. TxDOT required a traffic study to justify a traffic signal at this intersection.
The traffic study shows traffic counts that warrant a "major collector" roadway
section to Gateway Phases 1-4 . The roadway section from University Drive
to the first access point complies with the traffic study.
4. The study shows traffic counts that warrant a "minor collector" roadway
section to service Gateway Phases 2 and 4 . A minor collector is 38-ft B-8.
• An addendum to the original traffic study has been submitted. The
addendum reduces the traffic flow to 1254 vpd . According to City
Subdivision Regulations, this still warrants a minor collector. The study
states the 29-ft section with parking removed will handle the traffic .
• However, it is our understanding that additional driveways are planned to
access this roadway from Gateway Phases 1 and 3 north of this drawing .
• The roadway should be constructed as proposed to the first driveway
intersection shown on this plan . Call this intersection #10 .
• The roadway should transition to a 38-ft section from the first driveway
intersection to the second driveway intersection. Call this intersection #
11 .
• The roadway can then transition from a 38-ft section to a residential
section from that point into Phases 2 and 4 to intersection # 12.
• If no intersections are planned from intersection # 10 to intersection # 12 ,
the roadway can be constructed as a residential section.
5. Sidewalks are required along all streets except cul-de-sacs. It is my
understanding that this can be accomplished when site plans are submitted
for adjacent tracts .
6. An additional valve is needed in the 12" water line northwest of the cross.
Plan and profiles of the water line extensions are required for construction of
this project. All utility lines under pavement to utilize ~tructural fill, as noted._
7. Please indicate what is to be done with the water hne at the relocated fire
hydrant. Tee removed?
8. Change Forest Lane to Forest Drive .
Reviewed by: Spencer Thompson Date: August 19 , 2003
NOTE : Any changes made to the plans , that have not been requested by the City. of College Station , mus t be
explained in your next transm ittal letter and "bubb led " on your plans : Any add itional changes _on these plans
that have not been pointed out to the City of College Station wi ll constitute a completely new rev iew .
Page 2 of2
,
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Case No. 03-& ']
Date Submitted
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
~ . $200.00 development permit fee .
~ Drainage and erosion control plan , with supporting Drainage Report two (2) copies each (Drainage
Letter)
D Notice of Intent (N.0 .1.) if disturbed area is greater than 5 acres
LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 1 Block 1 Phase 3 --------~-'---'---=-~'-'--'-""'--'-"'-'="-"--=-----------------
APPLICANT (Primary Contact for the Project):
Name _____ ~F_r~a_nk_M_ih~a_lo~p_o~u_lo_s_. ____ ~ E-Mail ___ f'""'-m'"'"'i.;....;.h=al:..::.o=-p"'-ou=l-=-os=@=a=o.:.;..l.c=o:..:..m:....:...._ __
Street Address ________________ 1'"""5-"9""""0-=-0-=D'""'o'"""o;..;..;le"-'y""""'R'""'"o.=..;a=d"--------------
City ----~A-'--'d~d'"'"'is'"-'o"'"n'"------State ___ T;_:e'"'"'x=a.=...s __ _ Zip Code ____ 7,.o...50"""""0"-1'------
Phone Number 972-233-3333 Fax Number 972-233-1870 ------=:....:...::-===--:,~6~0~}----
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION :
Name ---------=-J=am:..:..=il-=B;..;:o=u"--'k=arc..:..:im-"-'-------E-Mail --------------
Street Address ________________ 1:..:2:.=8:..::.9....:.N""'""' . ....:.H...:..:a::..:.rv..:...e:::..yL..!..!.M:..:..:it:..::.ch:...!:e:::..:l~I P~a~r...:..:k:.:..:w~a..z...y _____ _
City Bryan State Texas Zip Code 77803 ~~'"-----
Phone Number _____ 9_79_-_7_79_-_7_20~9~---Fax Number 979-822-1763
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION :
Name Coy D. Armstrong , P . E . E-Mail carmstrong@burvpartners .com
Street Address 10000 San Pedro Avenue Suite 100 ---------------~-"--"-~~'-'--'=--=-.;:;_;_.;...:...=..:...=.=-i.....:=-=.=-'-=-='------
C it y San Antonio State Texas Zip Code 78216 ~~'"-----
Phone Number 210-525-9090 Fax Number 210-525-0529
Application is hereby made for the following development specific site/waterway alterations :
Private street and public waterline construction
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS :
I, ---------------' design engineer, hereby acknowledge or affirm that:
The information and conclusions contained in the above plans and supporting documents comply with the
current requirements of the City of College Station , Texas City Code, Chapter 13 and its associated Drainage
Policy and Design Standards .
Owner
As a condition of approval of this permit application , I agree to construct the improvements proposed in this
application according to these documents and the requirements of Chapter 13 of the College Station City
Code
Contractor
1-Aug -02
Unknown
1 of 2
CERTIFICATIONS:
A I, __ , certify that any nonresidential structure on or proposed to be on this site as part of this
application is designated to prevent damage to the structure or its contents as a result of flooding from
the 100-year storm .
N/A
Engineer Date
B. I, __ , certify that the finished floor elevation of the lowest floor, including any basement , of any
residential structure , proposed as part of this application is at or above the base flood elevation
established in the latest Federal Insurance Administration Flood Hazard Study and maps , as amended.
N/A
Engineer Date
C . I, Coy D. Armstrong , certify that the alterations or development covered by this permit shall not diminish
the flood-carrying capacity of the waterway adjoining or crossing this permitted site and that such
alterations or development are consistent with requirements of the City of College Station City Code ,
Chapter 13 concerning encroachments of floodways and of floodways fringes .
Engineer Date
D. I, Coy D. Armstrong , do certify that the proposed alterations do not raise the level of the 100 year flood
above elevation established in the latest Federal Insurance Administration Flood Hazard Study.
Engineer Date
Conditions or comments as part of approval: Detention for proposed private street was accounted for in the
design of the detention pond for the Home Depot. The street will drain to the detention pond once the retail
center on Lot 1A is constructed .
In accordance with Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station , measures shall be
taken to insure that debris from construction, erosion , and sedimentation shall not be deposited in city streets ,
or existing drainage facilities . All development shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer for the above named project. All of the applicable codes and
ordinances of the City of College Station shall apply .
1-Aug-02 2 of 2
JEFF MILBuRN ENGINEEttmr;:;:r
August 26, 2003
Mr . Brett McCully
Assistant City Engineer
Development Services
City of College Station
1101 Texas Ave .
Jeffrey T. Milburn, P.E.
P .O. Box 10240 , College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979-690-2560 Fax 979-690-2540
College Station, Texas 77842
Re: Gateway Driveway for Phases 2, 3 & 4
Dear Mr. McCully:
Having recently been made aware of your concerns about the common driveway that is to
be shared by the Gateway phases mentioned above I have been asked to respond to you directly by
Stewart Kling of Kling Engineering. He forwarded me the email you sent to him on August 21
regarding the driveway width, traffic impact assessment and related issues.
The TIA which I authored made an assessment of traffic expected to be generated by the
overall Gateway development, including the areas that Mr. Kling is currently designing. At the time
of the study (August 2002) the proposed development density was estimated at 340 units for the
approximately 19 acres currently in the planning stages as Phases 2 and 4 of the Gateway project.
The actual proposals for development show approximately 190 units. Consequently trip generation
will decrease for this one area, called Area 14 on the trip generation tables, on a proportional basis .
Trip generation previously estimated to be.2244 vehicles per day (vpd) should actually be more like
1254 vpd. Similarly afternoon peak hour generation should decrease from the previously estimated
238 vehicles per hour (vph) to a current estimate of 133 vph.
While these changes are significant for the localized areas, they are not so significant to the
overall project or for the signal warrant at Forest Drive. ADT at Driveway 8 in the study would
decrease from 7669 vpd to 6679 vpd. Evening peak hour volumes would decrease from 720 to 615
vph. Following these volumetric changes into Table 9 of the TIA on page 31 thereof we find that
the signal continues to be warranted despite the changes and no changes to the study
recommendations are necessary due simply to the correction of estimated traffic volumes based on
the actual development proposals currently before the City for review. Just for review, the minor
street volume requirement for signal warrant is 200 vph.
Table 9
Volume Warrant Analysis
Civil Engineering Transportation Engineering Accident Reconstruction
Gateway Driveway
Page2
Hour University Drive Minor Street
Rank Volume Volume
EB WB Percentage VPH
1 1694 682 10% 401
2 1310 655 10% 401
3 1209 714 9% 361
4 1191 696 9% 361
5 1170 694 8% 321
6 1167 638 8% 321
7 1109 736 7% 281
8 1024 724 7% 281
As I understand it there may also be questions about roadway width and geometric design
requirements for the entrance roadway to Phases 2 and 4 . As you are probably aware I have
previously made a transition alignment drawing for this entry driveway at the point where the
southern entrance to Gateway Phase 3 currently is under development. The remaining section of
this letter will indicate my perspective on these issues. No recommendations about roadway width
or geometric design of the interior circulation for Gateway were provided in the TIA of August
2002 . I have considered AASHTO design guidelines in making the following observations as
opposed to City of College Station ordinance requirements .
AASHTO uses a functional design concept as opposed to a volumetric design guide. This
means that roadway widths, radii and so forth are selected based not on the traffic volume but on
the functional class of the roadway itself Fundamental to the consideration of functional class are
the expected service area of the roadway and trip length. For this entry drive the trip length is under
114 mile. This typically would be considered a local street, as opposed to a collector. The roadway
will service two driveways to the commercial area, the north service drive and the driveway to the
front of the retail portion of Phase 3, as . well as the residential area to the rear of the Gateway
development. This could be considered a collector roadway in function, however the short trip
length lends consideration more to a driveway/local street than anything else. There is no question
that through movement is restricted on the subject roadway.
Control of geometric features should be based on design speeds of 20-30 mph. This
translates to minimum curve radii of 100-200 feet for adverse crown and reasonable lane widths.
Greater radii are, of course, allowed. For short trip lengths, less than 1/4 mile, lower speeds
consistent with this design assumption are expected. No tangent section between curves is
necessary, however, the addition of brief tangent sections is sometimes helpful, particularly in
longer length curves.
Generally parking is allowed in residential areas and this expectation affects roadway width.
In this development, according to Mr. Kling, fire lanes are expected to be established which will
prevent parking adjacent to the curbs along the entry roadway and will allow the reduced roadway
widths down to 28 feet (face of curb to face of curb).
Two times of day are of particular interest for this development and this driveway/roadway
Gateway Driveway
Page 3
connection; these being the peak morning and evening hours . During the peak morning hour the
adjacent commercial development will generate minimal traffic, mostly inbound and mostly to the
Home Depot area directly. The geometrics of the primary entry drive and full width entry roadway
to the south near Driveway 8 will provide excellent distribution of the traffic that enters the site
there. Very little of that traffic will utilize the reduced section of this driveway/roadway. During
the peak evening period there will be entering and exiting traffic to both the residential and
commercial areas , however, the primary residential generation, frequently 70% will be inbound
while the majority of the traffic using the north commercial entrance onto the reduced width
roadway will head south . Very little southbound traffic from the residential area will access the
commercial area of Gateway Phase 3 during this period. The reduced expectation of conflicts also
argues for allowing reduced roadway widths .
Recommendations
1. It is recommended that the reduced roadway width be allowed to the north of the initial
connection of the entry drive at University and Forest Drive to the commercial Gateway
Phase 3, based on the functional needs , expected speeds and reduced conflicts expected.
2. The reduced roadway width should not pose a reduction in function or safety for the
residential or commercial areas within the Gateway development.
3. Fire lanes should be utilized to prevent parking and maintain function of the reduced width
roadway .
4. Design criteria of the reduced width roadway may include centerline radii of 100-200 feet
and little or no tangent sections between curves without significant deterioration of function.
5. The reduced width roadway may be reasonably considered a local street as opposed to a
collector street based on trip length, function and area of service.
6. The traffic signal at Forest Drive and University Drive remains warranted by the projected
traffic.
If you have questions regarding this information or require additional information please let
me know. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely tA~f!:!