HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Comments 1 1101 Texas Avenue,P.O. Box 9960
College Station,Texas 77842
/—� Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
MEMORANDUM
April 24, 2008
TO: Ross Albrecht, Forestry& Urban Landscape Manager, via fax 764.3737
FROM: LINDSAY BOYER, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: COCS MEMORIAL CEMETERY (SP) - Site Plan
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list of staff
review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. The next submittal will be the third
and final review by staff for this round of reviews. If all items have not been addressed on the
next submittal, another $200 processing fee will need to be submitted for the subsequent set of
three (3) reviews. Please address the comments and submit the following information for
further staff review:
MAN
development with the revised site and landscaping plans attached (one set will
be returned to you, please submit additional copies if you want more than one
approved set)
tiAnuc# Papi g pla C stroe s . irtg 94n !
eikt-:',r-Dralti6geROPottif
Development Permit Application
►t . !CIP tg!Atalite t r .,, 1?p! r?Y
One (1) 11x17 grading and erosion control plan
If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a
letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please
call me at 764-3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
cc: Michael Martin, Jacobs, Edwards & Kelcey, via fax 764.9229
Case file #07-00500344
Home of Texas A & M University
JE ® JACOBS
Edwards and Kelcey
526 University Drive East
Suite A201
College Station, Texas 77840 U.S.A.
1.979.764.9119 Fax 1.979.764.9229
May 29, 2008
Ms. Lindsay B. Boyer, AICP
Senior Planner
City of College Station
1101 Texas Avenue S.
College Station, Texas 77840
Reference: City Memorial Cemetery and Aggie Field of Honor
Cemetery Design Services— Project No. GG-9905
Dear Ms. Boyer:
The following are responses to comments on the site plan and design plans for the Memorial
Cemetery and Aggie Field of Honor. The responses are in bold.
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1
Project: COCS MEMORIAL CEMETERY (SP) —07-00500344
PLANNING
1. Please sign the application. Done and returned under separate cover.
2. Phase 1 site plan title block should just reflect the area being developed in phase 1. Phase
line should be drawn 20 feet from any proposed improvement on the property. Done
3. What is the committal shelter? Will it have electricity? The committal shelter is a meeting
facility for internment services. It will have electricity.
4. Will the information center have electricity? Yes.
5. Both of these areas may need fire coverage, what is the distance as the hose would lay
from the hydrant to the committal shelter? Based on a revised location provided by the
Fire Marshal, the hoses would be laid a maximum of 300' from the hydrant.
6. Please remove topo information from the sheets and provide on a separate sheet. (Both
Phase 1 and Overall Site Plans). Topo removed from the site plan and provided on
separate sheet.
7. Please remove landscaping information from the sheets and provide on a separate sheet.
Landscape plan should be provided to show compliance with City of College Station
streetscaping requirements (See UDO, Section 7.5 for requirements) (Both Phase 1 and
Overall Site Plans) Landscaping information removed from the site plan and placed on
a separate sheet in addition to revisions to the landscaping plan to meet the
streetscaping requirements of the UDO.
8. Please show more detail in the parking area. It may be necessary to provide an additional
sheet with more details on this. How deep are the parking spaces, also, how wide are the
parking spaces. Minimum parking lot size is 9 feet by 18 feet. Detail provided on separate
layout of the central plaza and submitted with this package.
9. Provide detail for curbing. The curbing selected is from the City Standard Details
included in the construction plans submitted.
0 3' 14LI" _)
Edwards and Kelcey, Inc.
:2'`
JACOBS
Edwards and Kelcey
10. Where are you accommodating bicycle parking? No bicycle parking will be required per
previous discussions by Ross Albrecht with Development Services. None is provided.
11. If parking is going to be allowed as pull off on the internal roads, how will fire access be
maintained? It may be necessary to increase the width of the access drive and/or restrict
parking to one side of the drive since fire access of 20 feet must be maintained.
12. Provide overall height of structures on site plan. Included on site plan.
13. Please clearly note the phases on the overall site plan. Revised on site plan.
14. TxDOT permit is required for all utility work and driveway cut on Raymond Stotzer. Permit
requested and received for both driveways from TxDOT.
15. Provide driveway separation distances between the Williams driveway and the proposed
cemetery drive. Included on site plan.
16. How is ADA compliance being accomplished? There are no sidewalks or handicap parking
clearly designated . ADA-compliant walkways included on site plan. Plans reviewed
and approved by Eddie Hare, licensed reviewer by TDLR.
17. Please provide proof that the City has the ability to put our utilities in the Citgo pipeline
easement. Right now you are showing 4 crossing with our utilities. Easement document
provided in this submittal.
18. Provide water and sanitary sewer legend. Included on site plan.
19. Provide separate irrigation plan. At this scale you cannot see it with everything else on the
site plan. Irrigation plan removed from site plan and provided separately in
construction plans and separate submittal.
20. What is the purpose of the circular change in grading located in the middle of Section MC1?
It is not labeled. The change in grading is either the location of the pond overflow
system inlet or the location of the pond. Both labeled on the grading plans.
21. Please correct the note concerning the land use. The property has been designated as
Institutional on the Comprehensive Plan. It is not proposed, it has been adopted by Council.
Revision has been made on the site plan.
22. Please submit an application for Non-Residential Architectural Review with 24x36 copies of
building elevations, material and color samples, in compliance with UDO Section 7.9, Non-
Residential Architectural Standards. Submittal made April 11, 2008; Comments received
from Ben McCarthy on April 23, 2008; Revised sheets sent to Ben McCarthy on May
16, 2008; Additional comments received May 28, 2008; revised drawings submitted
May 29, 2008.
23. Provide a general note that all roof and ground-mounted mechanical equipment shall be
screened from view or isolated so as not to be visible from any public right-of-way or
residential district within 150' of the subject lot, measured from a point five feet above grade.
Such screening shall be coordinated with the building architecture and scale to maintain a
unified appearance. Note added.
24. Please note that 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 the City has not be made of aware of will
constitute a completely new review. Note added.
Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer Date: January 14, 2008
LAN DSCAPI NG/STREETSCAPING/BUFFER
1. Provide a general note that 100% coverage of groundcover, decorative paving, decorative
rock, or a perennial grass is required in parking lot islands, swales and drainage areas, the
parking lot setback, rights-of-way, and adjacent property disturbed during construction. Note
added.
JACOBS
Edwards and Kelcey
2. Irrigation system must be protected by either a Pressure Vacuum Breaker, a Reduced
Pressure Principle Back Flow Device, or a Double-Check Back Flow Device, and installed
as per City Ordinance 2394. Double check back flow preventer added
3. All BackFlow devices must be installed and tested upon installation as per City Ordinance
2394. Note added.
Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer Date: January 14, 2008
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1
1. Please submit drainage report. Drainage Report now submitted.
2. Please submit a fire flow report. Fire flow report now submitted.
3. Please submit an engineer cost estimate for all infrastructure main extensions. Estimate
now submitted.
4. Please remove 6-in water meter. This 6-in line will be considered a main extension up to
the point of the fire hydrant. Please submit 2 full size sets of plan and profile detail for any
infrastructure main extensions. Meter removed and plan sets submitted.
5. Please submit easement dedication application and all supporting documents for any
proposed off-site public utility or public drainage easements. Easement submitted under
separate cover by Ross Albrecht.
6. Please submit TxDOT permit for proposed driveways. Permits request submitted and
permits received.
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: January 11, 2008
FIRE
1. Either move the proposed fire hydrant for the distance not to exceed 500 ft between
hydrants or add another hydrant. Per meeting with Fire Marshal, this will not be
required.
2. If the drive aisle in the circle (around information center) can be increased to 28 feet in width
and parking restricted to the outside of the circle (except in areas where there is designated
parking), then fire lane striping will not be required. Entrance roadway width increased for
parking. Fire lane striping not required per fire marshal for central loop road.
Reviewed by: Eric Dotson Date: 1-14-08
SANITATION
1. Sanitation is ok with this project.
Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: January 8, 2008
Notes:
1. All roof and ground-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view or
isolated so as not to be visible from any public right-of-way or residential district within
150' of the subject lot, measured from a point five feet above grade. Such screening
shall be coordinated with the building architecture and scale to maintain a unified
appearance. Note added.
JACOBS
Edwards and Kelcey
2. 100% coverage of groundcover, decorative paving, decorative rock, or a perennial grass
is required in parking lot islands, swales and drainage areas, the parking lot setback,
rights-of-way, and adjacent property disturbed during construction. Note added.
3. Irrigation system must be protected by either a Pressure Vacuum Breaker, a Reduced
Pressure Principle Back Flow Device, or a Double-Check Back Flow Device, and
installed as per City Ordinance 2394. All BackFlow devices must be installed and tested
upon installation as per City Ordinance 2394. Note added.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 2
1. Please submit drainage report. Drainage report submitted.
2. Please submit a fire flow report. Fire flow report submitted.
3. Please submit an engineer cost estimate for all infrastructure main extensions.
Estimate submitted.
4. What is the status of the proposed off-site public utility or public drainage
easements? Revised Easement with Mr. Smith should be executed in next 2-
3 days.
5. What is the status of the TxDOT permit for proposed driveway? Permits
approved.
6. Did the placement of the proposed fire hydrant at Sta. 17+25 consider providing
fire coverage for any of the existing structures? Existing structures on the
property will be removed. The hydrant also appears to be placed in front of the
TxDOT inlet structure; will this placement interfere with accessing the hydrant?
Hydrant relocated.
7. The gate valve spacing needs to be adjusted as there is not a gate valve
between Sta. 6+39 and Sta 17+23 (>800ft max spacing). Valve spacing revised
to 800 foot max spacing.
8. We did not receive any plans for the sanitary sewer line with this submittal.
Submitted.
9. Please submit development permit application and supporting documentation.
Submitted.
UTILITY COMMENTS
1. 60-degree bends on water line (2)? Replaced with 45 degree and 22.5 degree
bends
2. 30-degree bends on water line (1)? Replaced with 22.5 degree bends
3. There are several bends on 6-in water line (tee, 60, 90, 30, 45, 45, 45, 45, 90
thru tee, 22.5, 45, 90, hydrant) in 1,000 feet? Bends revised.
4. Encasement not needed under driveways (2, 16-in, 44-ft, 22-ft) Encasement
removed.
5. Encasement under the Citgo Gas Line? Encasement added.
6. Plans do not show boring under this gas line. We usually bore and install
encasement under full easement width. Allowing the contractor to construct it
in the most efficient manner. Easement does not require boring.
7. Plans show 1-ft separation between gas line and water line, does this meet Citgo
needs? Easement shows 1.5 foot required. Line elevations modified to meet
this requirement.
JACOBS
Edwards and Kelcey
8. The 8-in water line is not needed south of northern most driveways except for an
irrigation service line. Line ended at low point near pond for flushing and service
needs.
9. We may need an air-relief on this line: it goes from Elev 322 to 328 in 2,000 feet as a
12/ 10-in, reduces to an 8-in and goes up another 3-ft in 500 feet. Guidelines may
not require one in such a situation, but this will be a one-way feed for a long time
and Parks alone will probably not have enough flow on it to eliminate entrapped air.
The elevations of the proposed water line only rise a maximum of 1.4 feet in
480 feet, then drop 4.8 feet in 1325 feet to a fire hydrant the end of the line.
The algebraic difference in grades of 0.9 is well below the requirements in the
BCS Guidelines.
April 24, 2008 (New comments only)
Seven (7) Complete sets of construction documents for the proposed development
with the revised site and landscaping plans attached. Enclosed
Two (2) revised site plans (including sheet C-120) Enclosed
One (1) landscaping plan and streetscaping plan Enclosed
Drainage Report Enclosed
Fire Flow Report Enclosed
Development Permit Application Enclosed
Non-Residential Architectural Application Enclosed
One (1) 11x17 grading and erosion control plan Enclosed
3. Please dimension the driveways on the site plan. It is difficult at this scale to
determine the width because of the line types. The driveway widths have been
added.
We thank you in advance for expediting the processing of approval of these plans and
allowing the construction to proceed. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me any time.
Sincerely,
Jacobs Edwards and Kelcey
Michael A. Martin, P.E.
Project Manager
1101 Texas Avenue,P.O.Box 9960
ff,„4-.144 College Station,Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
MEMORANDUM
April 24, 2008
TO: Ross Albrecht, Forestry& Urban Landscape Manager, via fax 764.3737✓
FROM: LINDSAY BOYER, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: COCS MEMORIAL CEMETERY (SP) - Site Plan
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list of staff
review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. The next submittal will be the third
and final review by staff for this round of reviews. If all items have not been addressed on the
next submittal, another $200 processing fee will need to be submitted for the subsequent set of
three (3) reviews. Please address the comments and submit the following information for
further staff review:
Seven (7) complete sets of construction documents for the proposed
development with the revised site and landscaping plans attached (one set will
be returned to you, please submit additional copies if you want more than one
approved set)
Two (2) revised site plans (including sheet C-120)
One (1) landscaping plan and streetscaping plan
Drainage Report
Fire Flow Report
Development Permit Application
Non-Residential Architectural Application
One (1) 11x17 grading and erosion control plan
If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a
letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please
call me at 764-3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
cc: Michael Martin, Jacobs, Edwards & Kelcey, via fax 764.9229 /
Case file #07-00500344
Home of Texas A & M University
Griff1114
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
Planning 6.'Development Services
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
MEMORANDUM
March 14, 2008
TO: Ross Albrecht, Forestry & Urban Landscape Manager, via e-mail ralbrecht.cstx.gov (----
FROM:
iFROM: Bridgette George, Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: Engineering Document Comments for Memorial Cemetery
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, including the sanitary sewer line;
One (1) Copy of the Drainage Report;
One (1) Copy of the Fire Flow Report;
One (1) Copy of the Engineer's Cost Estimate; and
One (1) Development Permit with supporting documents.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Josh Norton, EIT, at
979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
pc: Michael Martin, Jacobs, Edwards, & Kelcey, via fax 763.9229
Case File No. 07-500344
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 2
1. Please submit drainage report.
2. Please submit a fire flow report.
3. Please submit an engineer cost estimate for all infrastructure main extensions.
4. What is the status of the proposed off-site public utility or public drainage easements?
5. What is the status of the TxDOT permit for proposed driveway?
6. Did the placement of the proposed fire hydrant at Sta. 17+25 consider providing fire
coverage for any of the existing structures? The hydrant also appears to be placed in
front of the TxDOT inlet structure; will this placement interfere with accessing the
hydrant?
7. The gate valve spacing needs to be adjusted as there is not a gate valve between Sta.
6+39 and Sta. 17+23 (>800ft max spacing).
8. We did not receive any plans for the sanitary sewer line with this submittal.
9. Please submit development permit application and supporting documentation.
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: March 13, 2008
UTILITY COMMENTS
1. 60-degree bends on water line (2)?
2. 30-degree bends on water line (1)?
3. There are several bends on 6-in water line (tee, 60, 90, 30, 45, 45, 45, 45, 90 thru tee,
22.5, 45, 90, hydrant) in 1,000 feet?
4. Encasement not needed under driveways (2,16-in, 44-ft, 22-ft)
5. Encasement under the Citgo Gas Line?
6. Plans do not show boring under this gas line. We usually bore and install encasement
under full easement width.
7. Plans show 1-ft separation between gas line and water line, does this meet Citgo
needs?
8. The 8-in water line is not needed south of northern most driveways except for an
irrigation service line.
9. We may need an air-relief on this line: it goes from Elev 322 to 328 in 2,000 feet as a
12/ 10-in, reduces to an 8-in and goes up another 3-ft in 500 feet. Guidelines may not
require one in such a situation, but this will be a one-way feed for a long time and Parks
alone will probably not have enough flow on it to eliminate entrapped air.
(ffs.4,4 1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570/Fax 979.764.3496
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
MEMORANDUM
January 14, 2008
TO: Ross Albrecht, via email
FROM: Lindsay Boyer, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: COCS MEMORIAL CEMETERY (SP)- Site Plan
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan 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:
Cover memo providing written responses to all of staff's comments (identify the
specific page that each comment was addressed on or the reason for not
addressing the comment);
One (1) complete set of civil construction documents; and
One (1) revised site and landscaping plan,
Please note that the Easement Dedication Sheet and necessary documents are required prior
to the issuance of a building permit. If there are comments that you are not addressing with the
revised site plan, please attach a letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
pc: Michael Martin, Jacobs, Edwards & Kelcey, via fax 979-764-9229
Case file #07-00500344
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 3
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1
Project: COOS MEMORIAL CEMETERY(SP)— 07-00500344
PLANNING
c1. Please sign the application.
. Phase 1 site plan title block should just reflect the area being developed in phase 1. Phase
line should be drawn 20 feet from any proposed improvement on the property.
13. What is the committal shelter?Will it have electricity?
114. Will the information center have electricity?
A. Both of these areas may need fire coverage, what is the distance as the hose would lay
j from the hydrant to the committal shelter?
6. Please remove topo information from the sheets and provide on a separate sheet. (Both
Phase 1 and Overall Site Plans)
/7. Please remove landscaping information from the sheets and provide on a separate sheet.
Landscape plan should be provided to show compliance with City of College Station
streetscaping requirements (See UDO, Section 7.5 for requirements) (Both Phase 1 and
Overall Site Plans)
6 Please show more detail in the parking area. It may be necessary to provide an additional
sheet with more details on this. How deep are the parking spaces, also, how wide are the
parking spaces. Minimum parking lot size is 9 feet by 18 feet.
,) Provide detail for curbing.
60. Where are you accommodating bicycle parking?
f parking is going to be allowed as pull off on the internal roads, how will fire access be
maintained? It may be necessary to increase the width of the access drive and/or restrict
parking to one side of the drive since fire access of 20 feet must be maintained.
Provide overall height of structures on site plan.
3. lease clearly note the phases on the overall site plan.
"�TxDOT permit is required for all utility work and driveway cut on Raymond Stotzer.
;Provide driveway separation distances between the Williams driveway and the proposed
cemetery drive.
How is ADA compliance being accomplished? There are no sidewalks or handicap parking
designated
Eflearly
lease provide proof that the City has the ability to put our utilities in the Citgo pipeline
easement. Right now you are showing 4 crossing with our utilities.
i 'rovide water and sanitary sewer legend.
19 "rovide separate irrigation plan. At this scale you cannot see it with everything else on the
site plan.
.,*What is the purpose of the circular change in grading located in the middle of Section MC1?
It is not labeled.
. Please correct the note concerning the land use. The property has been designated as
Institutional on the Comprehensive Plan. It is not proposed, it has been adopted by Council.
0 Please submit an application for Non-Residential Architectural Review with 24x36 copies of
building elevations, material and color samples, in compliance with UDO Section 7.9, Non-
Residential Architectural Standards.
,23. Provide a general note that all roof and ground-mounted mechanical equipment shall be
screened from view or isolated so as not to be visible from any public right-of-way or
residential district within 150' of the subject lot, measured from a point five feet above grade.
Such screening shall be coordinated with the building architecture and scale to maintain a
unified appearance.
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 3
2A. Please note that 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 the City has not be made of aware of will
constitute a completely new review.
Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer Date: January 14, 2008
LANDSCAPING/STREETSCAPING/BUFFER
Provide a general note that 100% coverage of groundcover, decorative paving, decorative
rock, or a perennial grass is required in parking lot islands, swales and drainage areas, the
parking lot setback, rights-of-way, and adjacent property disturbed during construction.
.2. Irrigation system must be protected by either a Pressure Vacuum Breaker, a Reduced
Pressure Principle Back Flow Device, or a Double-Check Back Flow Device, and installed
as per City Ordinance 2394.
All BackFlow devices must be installed and tested upon installation as per City Ordinance
2394.
Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer Date: January 14, 2008
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1
1. Please submit drainage report.
2. Please submit a fire flow report.
3. Please submit an engineer cost estimate for all infrastructure main extensions.
4. Please remove 6-in water meter. This 6-in line will be considered a main extension up to
the point of the fire hydrant. Please submit 2 full size sets of plan and profile detail for any
infrastructure main extensions.
5. Please submit easement dedication application and all supporting documents for any
proposed off-site public utility or public drainage easements.
6. Please submit TxDOT permit for proposed driveways.
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: January 11, 2008
FIRE
1. Either move the proposed fire hydrant for the distance not to exceed 500 ft between
hydrants or add another hydrant.
2. If the drive aisle in the circle (around information center) can be increased to 28 feet in width
and parking restricted to the outside of the circle (except in areas where there is designated
parking), then fire lane striping will not be required.
Reviewed by: Eric Dotson Date: 1-14-08
SANITATION
1. Sanitation is ok with this project.
Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: January 8, 2008
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 3 of 3
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 2
Project: COOS MEMORIAL CEMETERY (SP) - 07-00500344
PLANNING
.71. (Repeat comment) Please sign applican.
2. (Repeat comment) Please show more"detail in the parking area. (I found this information
on sheet C-120 of the construction drawings, please include this with the site plan for
stamping).
3. Please dimension the driveways on the site plan. It is difficult at this scale to determine
the width because of the line types.
4. (Repeat comment) Provide water and sanitary sewer legend on the overall site plan.
5. (Repeat comment) Please submit an application for Non-Residential Architectural
Review. The elevations appear to meet the architectural relief requirements, but we still
need the tables showing the amount and percent of each material per façade and a
sample of all of the building materials.
,o-IA 6. Please note that 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 the City has not been made
aware of will constitute a completely new review.
Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer Date: April 23, 2008
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
1. Please submit development permit.
2. Please submit drainage report. This was not included in the most recent submittal.
3. Please submit a fire flow report. This was not included in the most recent submittal.
4. Please submit an engineer cost estimate for all infrastructure main extensions.
5. Off-site drainage easements—still pending.
V 6. TxDOT permit—still pending.
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: April 24, 2008
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