Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Comments(*// CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM June 15, 2005 TO: Travis Martinek, via fax 846.1461 FROM: Molly Hitchcock, Staff Planner SUBJECT: INDIAN LAKES (PP) PH 9 - 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 Monday, June 20, 10:00 a.m, to be placed on the next available Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for July 7, 2005, 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue. One (1) Mylar original of the preliminary plat. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc: Smiling Mallard Development, LLC, via fax 846.1461 Mike McClure, via fax 693.2554 Gary Arnold, Brazos County Planning & Traffic, Via fax 775.0453 Case file #05- 00500083 Home of Texas A &M University STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 2 Project: INDIAN LAKES (PP) PH 9 - 05- 00500083 ENGINEERING 1. No Comment. Reviewed by: Alan Gibbs Date: 6/14/05 PLANNING 1. FYI: Utility easements along side lot lines are not required by the City of College Station. Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock Date: June 15, 2005 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 ps g3 VARIANCE REQUEST Basis of Request From its inception, the Villages of Indian Lakes has been a community designed around the central theme of conservation and enjoyment of our natural environment. Our mission is to provide our client families with an opportunity to live in a community that allows them to experience nature through outdoor activities like hiking, biking, fishing, boating, and wildlife watching. Until now, our land planning efforts have focused on providing families with large acreage home sites. Based on experience and market study, we have found a large group of potential clients who wish to experience what The Village of Indian Lakes has to offer in the way of amenities, but do not want large acreage home sites that they must personally maintain. Phase IX, also known as The Settlement, was designed in response to the alternative lifestyle mentioned above. With Phase IX we have packaged access to the Indian Lakes' amenities with the often - desired reduced yard maintenance common with small lot, patio home -style subdivisions. At the plat level, with only few exceptions, we are presenting a subdivision layout similar to many other patio home projects located with the city limits of College Station. For instance, our proposed lots will exceed the minimum lot square footage and dimensions for typical R -1 lots required within the city limits. The proposed subdivision will not require any public utility services from the City of College Station. Water service will be provided by Wellborn Special Utility District, electrical by Bryan Texas Utilities, sanitary sewer by an onsite package wastewater treatment plant, and gas utilities by an independent contractor. We have met in previous months with members of Planning and Development Services regarding this project and have received positive feedback on preliminary plans. We have also met with members of the Brazos County Commissioner's Court and Brazos County Road & Bridge and have received similar positive feedback on preliminary plans. Acknowledgments Smiling Mallard Development would like to acknowledge the following items with regard to the development plans for Indian Lakes Phase IX. Private Drive The proposed subdivision will provide access to lots through the use of a 24' wide concrete, inverted - crown private drive. Cul -de -sac portions of the driveways will be 20' wide concrete, inverted -crown sections. Street drainage will follow along a path in the center of the street then to drainage structures that will outfall into adjacent creeks and ultimately into neighboring Lake Arapaho. Water and sanitary sewer utilities will be placed within the private drive right -of -way. Electrical, gas, and telephone will be placed within the 10' public utility easements along the fronts of all lots. Refer to the submitted Preliminary Plat for further information. The drawing below shows a typical street section. PLATTED LOT --- Ur P.U.E. 28' RIGH- - WAY - -_ —___ 1P P.U.E. PLATTED LOT f -- - - - - -- ---- - - - -- ------------ -------- -- - - -- ----- - - - - -- --- --- -- - - -- IoEPIRVARKB) I wcow_P I I I WEMN VAREB) 1 I I I i i I I 14VERTEDCRDWN 0 0 O oaAnADE AaEw 1 Q o 0 7ELEPOE EIECTRrAL SANTARY WATERLINE EIECfRfX (M6 LSE UNE SEWERUNE UNE UNE TYPICAL PRIVATE DRIVE CROSS SECTION Page 1 of 7 Packaae Wastewater Treatment Plant An onsite package wastewater treatment plant will provide sanitary sewer utility services for the proposed subdivision. This facility will be owned and maintained by the subdivisions Homeowner's Association. The developer has submitted a wastewater treatment plant permit application to TCEQ. This application is currently under review by TCEQ staff. Fire Flow The developer fully intends to provide waterlines capable of supporting the necessary water volumes to meet fire flow requirements. Gated Entry The developer is planning to develop this project as a gated community. The entry gate feature will be designed and installed according to the setbacks and other requirements provided within the LIDO. Emergency entry will be provided at the access control box. Requested Variances Smiling Mallard Development is requesting a Variance consideration for the following items: Lot Width According to the Subdivision Regulations, minimum lot widths in the ETJ are 100'. The developer is requesting a variance for lot widths less than 100'. Since the proposed plan calls for a variety of different lot widths, please refer to the Preliminary Plat for actual lot dimensions. At the private drive right -of -way, the majority of the proposed lot widths range from 61' to 66'. Based on reasonable design standards, the proposed lot width is adequate for the type of development planned. Response to Subdivision Regulations, Section 5, Variances: 5 -A.1: As explained in the Basis of Request section of this document, through this proposed subdivision, the Developer is intending to create a community where families who do not desire large lot ownership can experience nature and enjoy the amenities of Indian Lakes. In this situation, the "special circumstances or conditions affecting the land" are not physical characteristics, such as topography or access issues, but ordinance - related items. With this proposed subdivision, the Developer will be providing a product with plat conditions that are, for the most part, acceptable by ordinance within the city limits of College Station. The Developer will provide utility services of a quality and standard acceptable for the type of development proposed. If this project were located in the city limits of College Station, variances of this nature would not be required. Since this project is in the ETJ, it is being held to a different set of standards. If the Developer is willing to provide adequate utilities and drainage, private street maintenance, and standards of construction equal to or greater than that required in the City of College Station, which the Developer intends to do, then this project should be addressed on those accounts rather than just by its location in the ETJ. Since the Subdivision Regulations do not address development requirements within the city limits of College Station and the ETJ by similar standards and with respect to the accounts mentioned above, then the Subdivision Regulations are truly depriving this Developer "reasonable use of his land ". 5 -A.2: The basis of any land use regulations is to provide a method to insure that the public good is met in every new development within the community. If a developer is willing to create a product that provides adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, is built based on construction standards equal to or better than those required by Ordinance, and provides Page 2 of 7 a suitable quality of life for its inhabitants, as is the case with the proposed subdivision, then the intent of land use regulations has been met. To deprive a developer, who wishes to meet the intent of land use regulation but in a way slightly different than standard procedure, of the ability to turn their vision into reality is a denial of the developer's "enjoyment of a substantial property right ". 5 -A.3: With the proposed development, the Developer intends to provide adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, suitable access for emergency vehicles, provide a quality of life desirable to the inhabitants of the subdivision, and consist of a land use type complimentary to the surrounding property. Based on this, the proposed subdivision "will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area ". 5 -A.4: The proposed development "will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area" primarily due to its location within a parent tract that has been previously subdivided into a land use type complimentary to the proposed development. Additional development within the area is currently being developed in an "orderly" fashion maintaining consistency with the residential land use type initially planned for the area. Right -of -Way Width Access to lots within this subdivision is planned by way of a 28' private drive right -of -way. Currently, the minimum public road right -of -way is 70' in the ETJ. The developer is requesting a variance for a 28' private drive right -of -way to provide access to the lots within this development. Since the proposed access drive is planned as a 24' paved private street with centerline storm drainage, the proposed 28' right -of -way will provide adequate space for the design and construction needs of the street system, particularly for the type of development planned and the anticipated minimal amount of traffic volume expected within this small gated community. Response to Subdivision Regulations, Section 5, Variances: 5 -A.1: As explained in the Basis of Request section of this document, through this proposed subdivision, the Developer is intending to create a community where families who do not desire large lot ownership can experience nature and enjoy the amenities of Indian Lakes. In this situation, the "special circumstances or conditions affecting the land" are not physical characteristics, such as topography or access issues, but ordinance - related items. With this proposed subdivision, the Developer will be providing a product with plat conditions that are, for the most part, acceptable by ordinance within the city limits of College Station. The Developer will provide utility services of a quality and standard acceptable for the type of development proposed. If this project were located in the city limits of College Station, variances of this nature would not be required. Since this project is in the ETJ, it is being held to a different set of standards. If the Developer is willing to provide adequate utilities and drainage, private street maintenance, and standards of construction equal to or greater than that required in the City of College Station, which the Developer intends to do, then this project should be addressed on those accounts rather than just by its location in the ETJ. Since the Subdivision Regulations do not address development requirements within the city limits of College Station and the ETJ by similar standards and with respect to the accounts mentioned above, then the Subdivision Regulations are truly depriving this Developer "reasonable use of his land ". 5 -A.2: The basis of any land use regulations is to provide a method to insure that the public good is met in every new development within the community. If a developer is willing to create a product that provides adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, is built based on construction standards equal to or better than those required by Ordinance, and provides a suitable quality of life for its inhabitants, as is the case with the proposed subdivision, then the intent of land use regulations has been met. To deprive a developer, who Page 3 of 7 wishes to meet the intent of land use regulation but in a way slightly different than standard procedure, of the ability to turn their vision into reality is a denial of the developer's "enjoyment of a substantial property right ". 5 -A.3: With the proposed development, the Developer intends to provide adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, suitable access for emergency vehicles, provide a quality of life desirable to the inhabitants of the subdivision, and consist of a land use type complimentary to the surrounding property. Based on this, the proposed subdivision "will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area ". 5 -A.4: The proposed development "will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area" primarily due to its location within a parent tract that has been previously subdivided into a land use type complimentary to the proposed development. Additional development within the area is currently being developed in an "orderly" fashion maintaining consistency with the residential land use type initially planned for the area. Side Lot Utility Easement Lots in the ETJ are required to provide a 10' utility easement along all side property lines. The developer is requesting a variance for a 7.5' utility easement along the side lot lines of each lot to match up with the requested 7.5' side setback. This reduced utility easement would be adequate taking into account its feasibility for lots in similar developments within the city limits of College Station. Response to Subdivision Regulations, Section 5, Variances: 5 -A.1: As explained in the Basis of Request section of this document, through this proposed subdivision, the Developer is intending to create a community where families who do not desire large lot ownership can experience nature and enjoy the amenities of Indian Lakes. In this situation, the "special circumstances or conditions affecting the land" are not physical characteristics, such as topography or access issues, but ordinance - related items. With this proposed subdivision, the Developer will be providing a product with plat conditions that are, for the most part, acceptable by ordinance within the city limits of College Station. The Developer will provide utility services of a quality and standard acceptable for the type of development proposed. If this project were located in the city limits of College Station, variances of this nature would not be required. Since this project is in the ETJ, it is being held to a different set of standards. If the Developer is willing to provide adequate utilities and drainage, private street maintenance, and standards of construction equal to or greater than that required in the City of College Station, which the Developer intends to do, then this project should be addressed on those accounts rather than just by its location in the ETJ. Since the Subdivision Regulations do not address development requirements within the city limits of College Station and the ETJ by similar standards and with respect to the accounts mentioned above, then the Subdivision Regulations are truly depriving this Developer "reasonable use of his land ". 5 -A.2: The basis of any land use regulations is to provide a method to insure that the public good is met in every new development within the community. If a developer is willing to create a product that provides adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, is built based on construction standards equal to or better than those required by Ordinance, and provides a suitable quality of life for its inhabitants, as is the case with the proposed subdivision, then the intent of land use regulations has been met. To deprive a developer, who wishes to meet the intent of land use regulation but in a way slightly different than standard procedure, of the ability to turn their vision into reality is a denial of the developer's "enjoyment of a substantial property right ". 5 -A.3: With the proposed development, the Developer intends to provide adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, suitable access for emergency vehicles, provide a quality of life Page 4 of 7 desirable to the inhabitants of the subdivision, and consist of a land use type complimentary to the surrounding property. Based on this, the proposed subdivision "will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area ". 5 -A.4: The proposed development "will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area" primarily due to its location within a parent tract that has been previously subdivided into a land use type complimentary to the proposed development. Additional development within the area is currently being developed in an "orderly" fashion maintaining consistency with the residential land use type initially planned for the area. Maximum Dwellinq Units Per Acre & Lot Size City /County Subdivision Regulations recommend a minimum 0.5 -acre lot within the ETJ. The developer is requested a variance from this recommendation to allow lot acreages less than 0.5 acres. Since the proposed plans call for a variety of different lot acreages, please refer to the Preliminary Plat for requested lot acreages. Based on a comprehensive review of the development planned, the proposed lot acreages are adequate. Response to Subdivision Regulations, Section 5, Variances: 5 -A.1: As explained in the Basis of Request section of this document, through this proposed subdivision, the Developer is intending to create a community where families who do not desire large lot ownership can experience nature and enjoy the amenities of Indian Lakes. In this situation, the "special circumstances or conditions affecting the land" are not physical characteristics, such as topography or access issues, but ordinance - related items. With this proposed subdivision, the Developer will be providing a product with plat conditions that are, for the most part, acceptable by ordinance within the city limits of College Station. The Developer will provide utility services of a quality and standard acceptable for the type of development proposed. If this project were located in the city limits of College Station, variances of this nature would not be required. Since this project is in the ETJ, it is being held to a different set of standards. If the Developer is willing to provide adequate utilities and drainage, private street maintenance, and standards of construction equal to or greater than that required in the City of College Station, which the Developer intends to do, then this project should be addressed on those accounts rather than just by its location in the ETJ. Since the Subdivision Regulations do not address development requirements within the city limits of College Station and the ETJ by similar standards and with respect to the accounts mentioned above, then the Subdivision Regulations are truly depriving this Developer "reasonable use of his land ". 5 -A.2: The basis of any land use regulations is to provide a method to insure that the public good is met in every new development within the community. If a developer is willing to create a product that provides adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, is built based on construction standards equal to or better than those required by Ordinance, and provides a suitable quality of life for its inhabitants, as is the case with the proposed subdivision, then the intent of land use regulations has been met. To deprive a developer, who wishes to meet the intent of land use regulation but in a way slightly different than standard procedure, of the ability to turn their vision into reality is a denial of the developer's "enjoyment of a substantial property right ". 5 -A.3: With the proposed development, the Developer intends to provide adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, suitable access for emergency vehicles, provide a quality of life desirable to the inhabitants of the subdivision, and consist of a land use type complimentary to the surrounding property. Based on this, the proposed subdivision "will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area ". Page 5 of 7 5 -A.4: The proposed development "will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area" primarily due to its location within a parent tract that has been previously subdivided into a land use type complimentary to the proposed development. Additional development within the area is currently being developed in an "orderly" fashion maintaining consistency with the residential land use type initially planned for the area. Additional Variance Request This additional Variance Request may be necessary depending on staff's consideration of Developer's response to Planning Staff Comment #6. If staff does not agree with the Developer, then the Developer wishes for Staff to include the following Variance Request within their submittal to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Block Length Based on the Developer's interpretation of the Subdivision Regulations, Section 12 -1.7 (Cul -de- Sacs), this proposed subdivision meets the recommended maximum 2000 LF length of cul -de -sacs. See the diagram below for actual lengths of cul -de -sacs for this proposed development. The cul -de -sac length represented in pink is 916 LF and the cul -de -sac length represented in blue is 1,214 LF. These cul -de- sac lengths are less than the recommended maximum length of 2000 LF. Based on Section 12 -1.7, the developer does not feel that the proposed subdivision will require a cul -de -sac length variance. If Staff and /or the Planning & Zoning Commission are not in agreement to the Developer's interpretation, then the Developer requests a Variance to the 2000 LF block length requirement. The Developer interprets the Ordinance to mean that the turn - around of the cul -de -sac cannot be more than 2000 LF from an ingress /egress point. The diagram below depicts that all cul -de -sac turn - arounds within this proposed subdivision are less than 2000 LF from an ingress /egress point. Page 6 of 6 Response to Subdivision Regulations, Section 5, Variances: 5 -A.1: As explained in the Basis of Request section of this document, through this proposed subdivision, the Developer is intending to create a community where families who do not desire large lot ownership can experience nature and enjoy the amenities of Indian Lakes. In this situation, the "special circumstances or conditions affecting the land" are not physical characteristics, such as topography or access issues, but ordinance - related items. With this proposed subdivision, the Developer will be providing a product with plat conditions that are, for the most part, acceptable by ordinance within the city limits of College Station. The Developer will provide utility services of a quality and standard acceptable for the type of development proposed. If this project were located in the city limits of College Station, variances of this nature would not be required. Since this project is in the ETJ, it is being held to a different set of standards. If the Developer is willing to provide adequate utilities and drainage, private street maintenance, and standards of construction equal to or greater than that required in the City of College Station, which the Developer intends to do, then this project should be addressed on those accounts rather than just by its location in the ETJ. Since the Subdivision Regulations do not address development requirements within the city limits of College Station and the ETJ by similar standards and with respect to the accounts mentioned above, then the Subdivision Regulations are truly depriving this Developer "reasonable use of his land ". 5 -A.2: The basis of any land use regulations is to provide a method to insure that the public good is met in every new development within the community. If a developer is willing to create a product that provides adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, is built based on construction standards equal to or better than those required by Ordinance, and provides a suitable quality of life for its inhabitants, as is the case with the proposed subdivision, then the intent of land use regulations has been met. To deprive a developer, who wishes to meet the intent of land use regulation but in a way slightly different than standard procedure, of the ability to turn their vision into reality is a denial of the developer's "enjoyment of a substantial property right ". 5 -A.3: With the proposed development, the Developer intends to provide adequate utilities, streets, and drainage, suitable access for emergency vehicles, provide a quality of life desirable to the inhabitants of the subdivision, and consist of a land use type complimentary to the surrounding property. Based on this, the proposed subdivision "will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area ". 5 -A.4: The proposed development "will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area" primarily due to its location within a parent tract that has been previously subdivided into a land use type complimentary to the proposed development. Additional development within the area is currently being developed in an "orderly" fashion maintaining consistency with the residential land use type initially planned for the area. Page 7 of 7 SMD SMILING MALLARD DEVELOMENT, LTD. 6/6/05 INDIAN LAKES PHASE 9 - PRELIMINARY PLAT RESPONSE TO STAFF COMMENTS Engineering 65 - 83 1. See Note 15 on the Revised Preliminary Plat showing the Proposed Permit Number for the proposed wastewater treatment plant for this project. The wastewater treatment plant permit application is currently under review by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Issues regarding the Final Plat will be dealt with during the course of Final Plat submittal. 2. Proposed fire hydrants are shown on the revised Preliminary Plat. Fire flow analysis and construction plans will be provided during the course of Final Plat submittal. 3. Contours on the Preliminary Plat are based on USGS mapping available for the area. Contour elevations are labeled on the revised Preliminary Plat. 4. This item will be dealt with during the course of Final Plat submittal. 5. See revised Preliminary Plat for changes to Note 1. Planning 1. See revised Preliminary Plat for changes to title block. 2. Left blank — no comment 3. This item will be dealt with during the course of Final Plat submittal. 4. See revised Preliminary Plat for changes to common area labeling 5. Not applicable 6. Based on information provided in the Subdivision Regulations, Section 12 -1.7 cul -de -sacs shall not exceed 2,000 LF in length. See diagram below for actual lengths of cul -de -sacs for this proposed subdivision. The cul -de -sac length represented in pink is 916 LF and the cul -de -sac length represented in blue is 1,214 LF. These cul -de -sac lengths are less than the recommended maximum length of 2,000 LF. Based on Section 12 -1.7, the developer does not feel that the proposed subdivision will require a cul -de -sac length variance. The Developer interprets the Ordinance to mean that the turn - around of the cul -de -sac cannot be more than 2000 LF from an ingress /egress point. The diagram below depicts that all cul -de -sac turn - arounds within this proposed subdivision are less than 2000 LF from an ingress /egress point. 7. See revised Preliminary Plat for removal of setback lines and requested notation. 8. See attached revised Variance Request. Electrical — CSU 1. No comments. Electrical — BTU 1. See revised Preliminary Plat for additional requested easement. 2. Any additional easements required for electrical service to the wastewater treatment plant will be handled once the exact locations for electrical distribution lines have been determined. These easements will be noted on the Final Plat or granted by separate instrument prior to electrical installation. Administrative Office 3608 East 29 Street, Suite 100, Bryan, Texas 77802 Phone: (979) 846 -4384 Fax: (979) 846 -1461 Y STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: INDIAN LAKES (PP) PH 9 - 05- 00500083 ENGINEERING 1. The Preliminary Plat cannot be forwarded to P &Z for consideration until TCEQ has permitted the wastewater treatment facility and the operator. The Final Plat or Replat cannot be forwarded to P &Z for consideration until the wastewater treatment facility has been constructed and approved. 2. Depict all proposed fire hydrants. A fire flow analysis should be provided with the construction plans and approved prior to the Final Plat being forwarded to the P &Z. 3. Label elevations on the contours, verify the normal pool elevation location, and depict the 100 year water surface elevation as indicated in the drainage report. 4. The Final Plat must bear the seal of a registered professional land surveyor and provide all associated, detailed bearing and distance data. 5. Verify Note No. 1 is in compliance with Minimum Standards of Practice as approved by the Board of Texas Land Surveying, or remove the note and tie to approved monumentation. Reviewed by: Alan Gibbs Date: 5/24/05 PLANNING 1. In the title block, please remove the "s" from "Phases IX ". 2. How will Phase 9 be platted? Is the intent to vacate and plat or replat? A platted 50 -ft. private trail and 50 -ft. landscape /conservation easement are shown to be removed in Phase 9. 3. The outside boundary of the proposed Phase 9 does not match what was final platted for the corresponding lots of Phase 1. 4. Please identify each common area (e.g., Common Area A, Common Area B). 5. Will the 10 -ft. HOA (trail) easement continue on the inside of this subdivision (see Note #13). 6. Blocks 16 and 17 function as a single block and will require a variance. 7. A variance is not needed for setbacks as the City does not have setback requirements in the ETJ. Please remove the depicted setbacks. It is acceptable to note that setbacks are defined by the Covenants and Restrictions. 8. When considering variance requests, the P &Z will have to make the following findings: • That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; • That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant; • That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this chapter; and • That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The applicant should address each of these items for each variance request. 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 to the City, will constitute a completely new review. Page 3 of 6 Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock Date: May 23, 2005 ELECTRICAL - CSU 1. ETJ - No comments. Reviewed by: Sam Weido Date: 5 -19 -05 ELECTRICAL - BTU 1. Attached is a picture of an additional easement BTU needs for Indian Lakes Phase IX. 2. Also, please reiterate to the developer that if three -phase electrical service is needed for the wastewater treatment facility, it will require some rework of the existing distribution system and additional easements. Mark Telg, our line designer assigned to the project, has already spoken with someone from the project regarding this but sometimes it never hurts to remind them. Reviewed by: Randy Trimble Date: 5 -23 -05 Bryan Texas Utilities 979 - 821 -5728 C CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 MEMORANDUM May 31, 2005 TO: Travis Martinek, via fax 846.1461 FROM: Molly Hitchcock, Staff Planner SUBJECT: INDIAN LAKES (PP) PH 9 - 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 Monday, June 6, 10:00 a.m., your project will be placed on the next available Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for Thursday, July 7, 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue. Two (2) 24" x 36" copies of the revised preliminary plat; Ten (10) 11" x 17" copies of the revised preliminary plat; One (1) Mylar original of the revised preliminary plat; and, One (1) copy of the digital file of the preliminary plat on diskette or e-mail to nmanhart@cstx.gov. 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 not be scheduled for the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Your project may be placed on a future agenda once all the revisions have been made and the appropriate fees paid. Please call me if your intention is to take the variance requests to the P &Z before the preliminary plat. City staff will check for all approved items and forward the plat to the County. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Alan Gibbs or myself at 979.764.3570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc: Smiling Mallard Development, LLC, via fax 846.1461 Mike McClure, via fax 693.2554 Gary Arnold, Brazos County Planning & Traffic, Via fax 775.0453 Case file #05- 00500083 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. Page 1 of 4 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: INDIAN LAKES (PP) PH 9 - 05- 00500083 After the facilitation meeting, staff looked into several issues that needed further clarification. Comments to those items have been tracked from the original set of comments that were distributed last Tuesday. ENGINEERING 1. The Preliminary Plat cannot be forwarded to P &Z for consideration without the note that the developer will acquireTCEQ permits for�the wastewater treatment facility and the operator. The Final Plat cannot be forwarded to P &Z for consideration until the wastewater treatment facility and operator has been permitted; and the associated plant is constructed and approved or a Letter of Credit is provided to the City for the approved amount of the Engineer's Estimate_________ 2. Depict all proposed fire hydrants. A fire flow analysis should be provided with the construction plans and approved prior to the Final Plat being forwarded to the P&Z. 3. Label elevations on the contours, verify the normal pool elevation location, and depict the 100 year water surface elevation as indicated in the drainage report. 4. The Final Plat must bear the seal of a registered professional land surveyor and provide all associated, detailed bearing and distance data. 5. Verify Note No. 1 is in compliance with Minimum Standards of Practice as approved by the Board of Texas Land Surveying, or remove the note and tie to approved monumentation. Reviewed by: Alan Gibbs Date: 5/31f05 PLANNING Deleted: until TCEQ has Deleted:ted Deleted: or Replat '� Deleted:. - Deleted: 24 1. In the title block, please remove the "s" from "Phases IX ". 2. �__ - - - - ---- - - - - -- --- - - - -- ----- - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - - -- - - -- 3. , As discussed_ in the facilitation meeting, w e will be expecting a vacating and final plat. 4. Please identify each common area (e.g., Common Area A, Common Area B). 5. This comment is no longer relevant since the current _plat will be vacated. 6. Blocks 16 and 17 function as a single block and will require a variance. Block length will be measured from the centerline of the right -of -way. 7. A variance is not needed for setbacks as the City does not have setback requirements in the ETJ. Please remove the depicted setbacks. It is acceptable to note that setbacks are defined by the Covenants and Restrictions. 8. When considering variance requests, the P&Z will have to make the following findings: • That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of this chapter will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; • That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant; • That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this chapter; and Deleted: How will Phase 9 be platted? Is the intent to vacate and plat or replat? A platted 50 -ft. private trail and 50 -ft. landscape /conservation easement are shown to be removed in Phase 9. Deleted: The outside boundary of the proposed Phase 9 does not match what was final platted for the corresponding lots of Phase 1 Deleted: Will the 10 -ft. HOA (trail) easement continue on the inside of this subdivision (see Note #13). 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. Page 2 of 4 ■ That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The applicant should address each of these items for each variance request. Variances may be considered by the P &Z before the preliminary plat is considered, though the proposed plan will have to be presented. Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock Date: May 27„ 2005 ELECTRICAL — CSU 1. ETJ — No comments. Reviewed by: Sam Weido Date: 5 -19 -05 ELECTRICAL — BTU Attached is a picture of an additional easement BTU needs for Indian Lakes Phase IX. Also, please reiterate to the developer that if three -phase electrical service is needed for the wastewater treatment facility, it will require some rework of the existing distribution system and additional easements. Mark Telg, our line designer assigned to the project, has already spoken with someone from the project regarding this but sometimes it never hurts to remind them. -- Deleted: 23 Reviewed by: Randy Trimble Date: 5 -23 -05 Bryan Texas Utilities 979 - 821 -5728 1 + Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock ELECTRICAL - CSU 1. ETJ - No comments. Reviewed by: Sam Weido ELECTRICAL - BTU Date: May 23, 2005 Date: 5 -19 -05 1. Attached is a picture of an additional easement BTU needs for Indian Lakes Phase IX. 2. Also, please reiterate to the developer that if three -phase electrical service is needed for the wastewater treatment facility, it will require some rework of the existing distribution system and additional easements. Mark Telg, our line designer assigned to the project, has already spoken with someone from the project regarding this but sometimes it never hurts to remind them. Reviewed by: Randy Trimble Date: 5 -23 -05 Bryan Texas Utilities 979 - 821 -5728