HomeMy WebLinkAboutjuly 5 ♦�� City of College Station
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE
\ / COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840-2499
July 5, 1984
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Olsen, Jerry Bishop & Associates, Inc.
FROM: Project Review Committee:
Al Mayo, Director of Planning
Mark Smith, Assistant City Engineer
Ron Kaiser, P &Z Representative
Other Staff:
Dan MacGilvray, P &Z Representative
Harry Davis, Fire Marshal
Joe Guidry, Electrical Superintendent
David Riley, GTE
Jane Kee, Zoning Official
Bob Epps, Ass't Director Public Services
Kim Johnson, Ass't Zoning Official
Jim McCord, Elec. Power Engrs.
Ann Yakimovicz, Temporary Planning Technician
SUBJECT: Parking Lot Plan - College Station Retail Center (84 -407)
The P.R.C. met on this date to review the above mentioned project and
recommended approval, subject to the following conditions:`
(1) Two dumpsters are not sufficient to meet the needs of the restaurant
and retail space shown. A battery of three dumpsters placed together
across the back is recommended.
(2) Fire hydrant must be relocated to be within 300 feet of both buildings
as the hose lays. (Coordinate location with Fire Marshal and Superintendent
of Water and Sewer.)
(3) Drainage information should be supplied on the site plan.
(4) Handicapped access to retail /restaurant level needs to be provided.
(5) Flood plain area cannot be deleted from calculations for landscaping
points. 330 points are needed, which may be picked up in trees.
(6) Landscape instructions regarding the Indian Hawthorne to be planted
at one driveway entrance should be clarified. 55 plants will not fit
into the space shown.
(7) Show cross sections of plans for the flood plain area.
(8) Traffic may be heavy enough in the future to require placement of a
median to prevent left turns into the development.
P.R.C. Continued (84 -407)
Page 2
(9) A 6" raised curb is required around all edges of all parts of all paved
areas without exception. (To include islands, planting areas, access
ways, dumpster locations, utility pads, etc.) Curb detail to be approved
by the City Engineer. No exceptions will be made for areas indicated on
site plan as "reserved for future parking ".
*Any changes to an approved site plan must be cleared through the Office
of the Director of Planning.
SUBMIT 7 COPIES OF REVISED SITE PLAN FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT.
ADDENDUM
As discussed at the previous P.R.C. meeting regarding this project, it has
been suggested that there be a Development Agreement reached between the
Developer and the City regarding uses and required parking for these uses.
Please set up an appointment with the City Planner and the Legal Department
to discuss.
ady
� � �� City of College Station
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE
\ COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 -2499
July 6, 1984
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Murff, Wayne Gregory, Golemon & Rolfe Assoc., Inc.;
Wally Moon, representing John Fortney
FROM: Project Review Committee:
r 4A°11.-.
Al Mayo, Director of Planning
Mark Smith, Ass't. City Engineer
Ron Kaiser, P &Z Representative
Other Staff:
Dan MacGilvray
Harry Davis, Fire Marshal
Joe Guidry, Electrical Superintendent
David Riley, GTE
Jane Kee, Zoning Official
Bob Epps, Ass't Director Public Services
Kim Johnson, Asst Zoning Official
Jim McCord, Elec. Power Engrs.
Ann Yakimovicz, Temporary Planning Technician
SUBJECT: Parking Lot Plan - University Inn - Jersey /Wellborn Rd. (84 -414)
The P.R.C. met on July 5, 1984 to review the above mentioned project and
recommended approval subject to the following conditions:
(1) Drainage plan should be shown on the site plan, especially plans for
the area now shown as an open hole on the plan.
(2) Drainage study must be made and approved by City Engineer before
building permit can be approved.
(3) Electrical service, loop or radial, should be designated. (Coordinate
in a separate meeting with Electrical Superintendent and Electrical
Power Engineer.)
(4) Dimensions for setbacks should be shown. Ordinance requires a minimum
8 -foot setback from R.O.W, to any paved area.
(5) Curb cuts on the project should be shown in relation to existing curb
cuts across the street so as to avoid left turn conflicts.
(6) The angle of parking in the north corner should be changed to eliminate
backing hazards, or eliminate parking spaces where backing maneuvers conflict.
(7) Self - contained trash compactor should be in service drive with access
for City trucks, (Coordinate with Department of Public Services.)
P.R.C, Continued (84 -414)
Page 2
(8) Light industrial traffic from Drew Woods should be separated from hotel
traffic instead of being accessed through hotel lot.
(9) A 6" raised curb is required around all edges of all parts of all paved
areas without exception. (To include islands, planting areas, access
ways, dumpster locations, utility pads, etc.) Curb detail to be approved
by the City Engineer. No exceptions will be made for areas indicated on
site plan as "reserved for future parking ".
*Any changes to an approved site plan must be cleared through the Office
of the Director of Planning.
SUBMIT 7 COPIES OF REVISED SITE PLAN FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Since this site plan now shows additional parking spaces, the applicant
is to notify ZBA whether or not he wishes to continue with a variance
request currently pending before ZBA.
P.R.C. REVIEW RESULTS
Director of Planning Mayo said that this site plan will probably be approved
by staff without another P,R.C. meeting required if the revised plan for
handling Drew Woods' access is acceptable.
P &Z Representative Kaiser stated he cannot vote for approval of the site
plan until the access problem is resolved.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Director of Planning Mayo, Fire Marshal Davis and City Engineer Pullen still
consider this to be a very poor site for this type of project and have submitted
memos to this effect to the Building Official for consideration when he reviews
the request for a building permit after the site plan is approved.
Director of Planning Mayo pointed out that the Building Official may choose to
follow Section 6K of City Ordinance 850 when asked to approve the building
permit. This section allows the Building Official to submit large projects to
the City Council for their approval of the building permit. However, Director
of Planning Mayo stated that since the City Council has already approved commercial
usage for this particular piece of M -2 zoned land, it is unlikely that they will
deny a building permit for the project.
Should the applicant choose to ask the PAZ or the City Council for a "straw
vote" before continuing with the project, a discussion item on the agenda of
either body is perhaps the best action. The City Manager may be able to advise
the applicant on the most appropriate course of action regarding an approach to
the City Council.
acv