Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse to Comments 1 OF 4 Project: 2818 PLACE PROPERTIES (SP) - 07-00500192 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS IN THE EMAIL PREAMBLE TO THE COMMENTS DATE NOVEMBER 28, 2007 Attached are the comments for 2818 Place Site Plan. Because we did not receive layout of the sidewalks until Wednesday, there are several major issues that relate to handicap accessibility and parking/pedestrian safety that have not been previously raised. THE RETAINING WALL PLANS WILL BE SUBMITTED BY LAND DESIGN PARTNERS UNDER SEPARATE COVER. THE DESIGN PROVIDED BY LDP WILL BE CHANGED ONLY AS REQUIRED TO SHOW THE REVISED WALL LOCATIONS REQUIRED BY THE EXTENSION OF THE PARKING SPACES AND THE CHANGE OF THE ADA PARKING SPACE LOADING ZONES TO 8' WIDE FROM 5' WIDE. e are also still issues with the fire lane that need to be addressed. THE FIRE LANE ISSUES WERE RESOLVED WITH STEVE SMITH ON 11/30/07. FIRE LANE STRIPING WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE LANE ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE SITE AND IN THE PARKING LOT ISLES BETWEEN BUILDINGS 12 AND 14. THE ARE INFRONT OF THE CLUD HOUSE WILL BE STRIPPED AS REQUIRED TO DEFINE THE FIRE LANE. The dumpster enclosure detail issue and outstanding landscaping issues are minor issues that can be easily corrected, however, dealing with the van accessible spaces and the appropriately sized sidewalks to meet city requirements is not as easily remedied. I will be happy to meet with everyone tomorrow or Friday if there is any confusion on these comments. However, since fire lane and pedestrian safety are health and safety concerns, we cannot issue any permits until the issues are resolved to meet City Code. COMMENTS DATED 11 28 07 PLANNING umpster enclosure must have a 12-foot by 12-foot clear space. This detail is showing 11' 11.5"clear of the gates. JENNY LOZIER WITH HUMPHRIES HAS ADDRESSED THE ARRANGEMENT OF THIS DETAIL. 1 All non-accessible parking spaces must be at least 9 feet in width. I found one in front of the clubhouse that is 8 feet. -.° �� 1 20F4 ALL PARKING SPACES HAVE BEEN WIDENED AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE MINIMUM WITH OF A HANDICAP PARKING SPACE AS DEFINED IN a • 4.6.3 3. A sidewalks adjacent to parking spaces between 18 feet (minimum depth) and 20 feet aximum depth) must be at least 6 feet in width. If there is no room for the overhang due to a retaining wall or other obstruction, the parking spaces need to be 20 feet in depth. (See UDO Section 7.2 for all off-street parking standards). THE PARKING LOTS ADJACENT TO BUILDINGS 8,9 AND 10 IN ADDITION TO BUILDINGS 1 AND 2 HAVE BEEN REGRADED TO ELIMINATE THE RETAINING WALL PREVIOUSLY SHOWN. THE PARKING SPACES ADJACENT TO THE REMAINING BUILDINGS WERE EXTENDED TO A DEPTH OF 20'. THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING WAS ADJUSTED 1 TO 2 FEET TO ALLOW FOR THE RETAINING WALL BATTER AND TO ALLOW A MINIMUM 5.25' WIDE SIDE WALK AND HAND RAIL BETWEEN THE TOP OF THE WALL AND THE FACE OF THE BUILDING. ✓4. None of the accessible parking spaces are grouped. Each grouping of 6 or fraction of 6 must have a van accessible space. All of the accessible spaces that are not van accessible and part of a group of accessible spaces must be van accessible. In your layout all of the accessible spaces must be van accessible. If you have questions about the accessible standards,please contact our Commercial Plans Examiner,Ben McCarty. ALL ADA PARKING SPACES HAVE BEE CONVERTED TO VAN ASSESSABLE SPACES. dal The sidewalk in front of building 10 is insufficient for accessible entry and to accommodate the overhang from a parked vehicle. THE PARKING LOT WAS MODIFIED AS REQUIRED TO ALLOW FOR 5 FOOT CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE PARKING SPACE AND THE BUILDING LINE. ✓6. There is an insufficient turning radius for a fire truck between phase 11 and phase 7. If there was a dumpster fire, the trucks cannot access this area, and the turning radii around the parking island area needs to be adjusted. THIS ARRANGEMENT WAS REVIEWED BY STEVE SMITH. THIS AREA WILL BE STRIPED TO SHOW FIRE LANES ,7-7. The fire land needs to run the length of the driveway from phase 15 to phase 4. If you have questions about any fire comments, please contact our Steve Smith with the Fire Marshall's office. THIS REQUIREMENT WAS REVIEWED AND VOIDED BY STEVE SMITH. 8. How is pedestrian connection to the amenities at the clubhouse being addressed? There appear to be no sidewalks connecting the clubhouse and amenities to the apartment units. A 5' WIDE SIDEWALK WAS ADDED 2' OFFSET FROM THE CURB ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE MAIN ENTRY PRIVATE STREET. 3 OF 4 9. Why are some of the parking spaces shown outside of the property line on page 4? ALL PARKING SPACES ARE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY. SHEET 4 DID NOT SHOW THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY AS PLANNED. THE CIVIL SITE PLAN SHOWS ALL PARKING SPACES BEING LOCATED ON-SITE. 10. (Repeat Comment) Complete Page 2 of the application. Specifically if any 2 bedroom units have bedrooms less than 132 sf and the date parkland dedication was approved by the Parks Board. I still have not received a completed Page 2 of the application. THIS SHEET WAS EMAILED ON 11/29/07 11. (Repeat Comment) Provide height of each building on the site plan. 2-story is insufficient, actually height in feet is needed to determine fire lane requirements. It appears that the height of the clubhouse is also over 30 feet according to the building plans which requires an aerial fire lane — 26 foot fire line within 15 to 30 feet of the building. Also, the entire building must be able to be covered by the 150- foot spray arc from the fire lane. The hydrant must also be on the fire lane, and within 150 feet of the FDC connection. THE CLUBHOUSE FIRE LANE ARRANGEMENT WAS APPROVED BY STEVE SMITH ON 11/29/07. dille hardscape plan parking and dumpster layout is not the same as other plans. All of the •lans need to show the same layout. THE HARDSCAPE PLAN WAS REVISED BY LDP 13. Provide note concerning dumpsters in public easements on site plan. THIS NOTE WAS ADDED TO THE PLAN. 14. Clearly show that all of the retaining walls are outside of the A-O area(sub-grade footing encroachments excluded). THIS BOUNDARY WAS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 411)I only counted 10 bald cypress trees on the landscape plan. THIS IS BEING REVISED BY LDP. 0.1 only counted 423 shrubs on site. Both of these comments can be corrected by correcting he numbers in the legend. It appears that there are sufficient points on site without them. THIS IS BEING REVISED BY LDP. 17. 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 4 OF 4 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: November 28, 2007 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 7 Public Water and Sewer Plans Set 1. (Sheet 7) The 2 culvert creek crossing where the water main is without at least 4-ft of cover are required to be ductile iron and have cement stabilized backfill, please revise. The use of ductile iron pipe is not an option and must be included. DIP IS SHOWN AS BEING REQUIRED ON THE UTILITY PLANS 2. (Sheet 8) At Sta. 3+00, a 2-in blow off is missing at line termination. THIS BLOW OFF IS ADDED TO THE PLAN AND PROFILE. 3. (Sheet 8) In profile view, near Sta. 3+00, remove (8" Plug), (8" Gate Valve), and (2" flushing valve). THIS COMMENT IS NOT CLEAR 4. (Sheet 11A and 11B) All public utilities located under pavement required structural backfill, please illustrate the use of structural backfill where needed in profile view on Sheets 11A and 11B. Site Plan Set 5. (Sheet 10 and 11) Please label AO area to remain undisturbed on the Grading and Drainage Plan. THIS NOTE IS ADDED 6. (Drainage Report) I understand that this project is using the parking lot and private storm lines for some detention (designed to the 10-yr storm). Please illustrate the performance of this system during the 100-yr storm event, as the parking lot can not back up storm water more than 6-in during the 100-yr storm event. It is our understanding per Dodson that Bury and Partners is to address this comment. THIS WORK WAS DETAILED IN THE DODSON REPORT DATED Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: November 27, 2007 1 OF 4 Project: 2818 PLACE PROPERTIES (SP) - 07-00500192 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS IN THE EMAIL PREAMBLE TO THE COMMENTS DATE NOVEMBER 28, 2007 Attached are the comments for 2818 Place Site Plan. Because we did not receive layout of the sidewalks until Wednesday, there are several major issues that relate to handicap accessibility and parking/pedestrian safety that have not been previously raised. THE RETAINING WALL PLANS WILL BE SUBMITTED BY LAND DESIGN PARTNERS UNDER SEPARATE COVER. THE DESIGN PROVIDED BY LDP WILL BE CHANGED ONLY AS REQUIRED TO SHOW THE REVISED WALL LOCATIONS REQUIRED BY THE EXTENSION OF THE PARKING SPACES AND THE CHANGE OF THE ADA PARKING SPACE LOADING ZONES TO 8' WIDE FROM 5' WIDE. There are also still issues with the fire lane that need to be addressed. THE FIRE LANE ISSUES WERE RESOLVED WITH STEVE SMITH ON 11/30/07. FIRE LANE STRIPING WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE LANE ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE SITE AND IN THE PARKING LOT ISLES BETWEEN BUILDINGS 12 AND 14. THE ARE INFRONT OF THE CLUD HOUSE WILL BE STRIPPED AS REQUIRED TO DEFINE THE FIRE LANE. The dumpster enclosure detail issue and outstanding landscaping issues are minor issues that can be easily corrected, however, dealing with the van accessible spaces and the appropriately sized sidewalks to meet city requirements is not as easily remedied. I will be happy to meet with everyone tomorrow or Friday if there is any confusion on these comments. However, since fire lane and pedestrian safety are health and safety concerns, we cannot issue any permits until the issues are resolved to meet City Code. COMMENTS DATED 11 28 07 PLANNING 1. Dumpster enclosure must have a 12-foot by 12-foot clear space. This detail is showing 11' 11.5" clear of the gates. JENNY LOZIER WITH HUMPHRIES HAS ADDRESSED THE ARRANGEMENT OF THIS DETAIL. 2. All non-accessible parking spaces must be at least 9 feet in width. I found one in front of the clubhouse that is 8 feet. Al 4,J -(f2) C60 1 2 OF 4 ALL PARKING SPACES HAVE BEEN WIDENED AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE MINIMUM WITH OF A HANDICAP PARKING SPACE AS DEFINED IN SECTION 4.6.3 3. All sidewalks adjacent to parking spaces between 18 feet (minimum depth) and 20 feet (maximum depth) must be at least 6 feet in width. If there is no room for the overhang due to a retaining wall or other obstruction, the parking spaces need to be 20 feet in depth. (See UDO Section 7.2 for all off-street parking standards). THE PARKING LOTS ADJACENT TO BUILDINGS 8,9 AND 10 IN ADDITION TO BUILDINGS 1 AND 2 HAVE BEEN REGRADED TO ELIMINATE THE RETAINING WALL PREVIOUSLY SHOWN. THE PARKING SPACES ADJACENT TO THE REMAINING BUILDINGS WERE EXTENDED TO A DEPTH OF 20'. THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING WAS ADJUSTED 1 TO 2 FEET TO ALLOW FOR THE RETAINING WALL BATTER AND TO ALLOW A MINIMUM 5.25' WIDE SIDE WALK AND HAND RAIL BETWEEN THE TOP OF THE WALL AND THE FACE OF THE BUILDING. 4. None of the accessible parking spaces are grouped. Each grouping of 6 or fraction of 6 must have a van accessible space. All of the accessible spaces that are not van accessible and part of a group of accessible spaces must be van accessible. In your layout all of the accessible spaces must be van accessible. If you have questions about the accessible standards,please contact our Commercial Plans Examiner,Ben McCarty. ALL ADA PARKING SPACES HAVE BEE CONVERTED TO VAN ASSESSABLE SPACES. 5. The sidewalk in front of building 10 is insufficient for accessible entry and to accommodate the overhang from a parked vehicle. THE PARKING LOT WAS MODIFIED AS REQUIRED TO ALLOW FOR 5 FOOT CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE PARKING SPACE AND THE BUILDING LINE. 6. There is an insufficient turning radius for a fire truck between phase 11 and phase 7. If there was a dumpster fire, the trucks cannot access this area, and the turning radii around the parking island area needs to be adjusted. THIS ARRANGEMENT WAS REVIEWED BY STEVE SMITH. THIS AREA WILL BE STRIPED TO SHOW FIRE LANES 7. The fire land needs to run the length of the driveway from phase 15 to phase 4. If you ='N= have questions about any fire comments, please contact our Steve Smith with the Fire Marshall's office. THIS REQUIREMENT WAS REVIEWED AND VOIDED BY STEVE SMITH. 8. How is pedestrian connection to the amenities at the clubhouse being addressed? There appear to be no sidewalks connecting the clubhouse and amenities to the apartment units. A 5' WIDE SIDEWALK WAS ADDED 2' OFFSET FROM THE CURB ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE MAIN ENTRY PRIVATE STREET. 3 OF 4 9. Why are some of the parking spaces shown outside of the property line on page 4? ALL PARKING SPACES ARE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY. SHEET 4 DID NOT SHOW THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY AS PLANNED. THE CIVIL SITE PLAN SHOWS ALL PARKING SPACES BEING LOCATED ON-SITE. 10. (Repeat Comment) Complete Page 2 of the application. Specifically if any 2 bedroom units have bedrooms less than 132 sf and the date parkland dedication was approved by the Parks Board. I still have not received a completed Page 2 of the application. THIS SHEET WAS EMAILED ON 11/29/07 11. (Repeat Comment) Provide height of each building on the site plan. 2-story is insufficient, actually height in feet is needed to determine fire lane requirements. It appears that the height of the clubhouse is also over 30 feet according to the building plans which requires an aerial fire lane — 26 foot fire line within 15 to 30 feet of the building. Also, the entire building must be able to be covered by the 150- foot spray arc from the fire lane. The hydrant must also be on the fire lane, and within 150 feet of the FDC connection. THE CLUBHOUSE FIRE LANE ARRANGEMENT WAS APPROVED BY STEVE SMITH ON 11/29/07. 12. The hardscape plan parking and dumpster layout is not the same as other plans. All of the plans need to show the same layout. THE HARDSCAPE PLAN WAS REVISED BY LDP 13. Provide note concerning dumpsters in public easements on site plan. THIS NOTE WAS ADDED TO THE PLAN. 14. Clearly show that all of the retaining walls are outside of the A-O area (sub-grade footing encroachments excluded). THIS BOUNDARY WAS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 15. I only counted 10 bald cypress trees on the landscape plan. THIS IS BEING REVISED BY LDP. 16. I only counted 423 shrubs on site. Both of these comments can be corrected by correcting the numbers in the legend. It appears that there are sufficient points on site without them. THIS IS BEING REVISED BY LDP. 17. 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 4 OF 4 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: November 28, 2007 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 7 Public Water and Sewer Plans Set 1. (Sheet 7) The 2 culvert creek crossing where the water main is without at least 4-ft of cover are required to be ductile iron and have cement stabilized backfill, please revise. The use of ductile iron pipe is not an option and must be included. DIP IS SHOWN AS BEING REQUIRED ON THE UTILITY PLANS 2. (Sheet 8) At Sta. 3+00, a 2-in blow off is missing at line termination. THIS BLOW OFF IS ADDED TO THE PLAN AND PROFILE. 3. (Sheet 8) In profile view, near Sta. 3+00, remove (8" Plug), (8" Gate Valve), and (2" flushing valve). THIS COMMENT IS NOT CLEAR 4. (Sheet 11A and 11B) All public utilities located under pavement required structural backfill, please illustrate the use of structural backfill where needed in profile view on Sheets 11A and 11B. Site Plan Set 5. (Sheet 10 and 11) Please label AO area to remain undisturbed on the Grading and Drainage Plan. THIS NOTE IS ADDED 6. (Drainage Report) I understand that this project is using the parking lot and private storm lines for some detention (designed to the 10-yr storm). Please illustrate the performance of this system during the 100-yr storm event, as the parking lot can not back up storm water more than 6-in during the 100-yr storm event. It is our understanding per Dodson that Bury and Partners is to address this comment. THIS WORK WAS DETAILED IN THE DODSON REPORT DATED Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: November 27, 2007 Page 1 of 3 Lindsay Boyer - 7015203 Retaining Wall and Sidewalks for 2818 Place From: "Siemon, Randall" <rsiemon@burypartners.com> To: "Lindsay Boyer" <Lboyer@cstx.gov> Date: 12/11/2007 11:54 AM Subject: 7015203 Retaining Wall and Sidewalks for 2818 Place Attachments: CIVIL SITE RETAINING WALLS.pdf; CIVIL SITE WITH UTILITIES.pdf THANKS FOR GE I I I ING THESE COMMENTS BACK SO QUICKLY. TE RESPONSE TO YOUR COMMENTS IS BELOW. Clubhouse - some of the spots still have 18 foot spaces with a 5 foot walk. Not just in front of the club house but along Harvey Mitchell and southwest of the building. THE WALL WAS MOVED TO ALLOW 2' OF SPACE BETWEEN THE CURB AND THE WALL o N of Bldg 1 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THE WALL • WAS REMOVED LSE/SE Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THIS WALL WAS REMOVED Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THIS WALL WAS REMOVED /Between 4 and 5 (S) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6' ON THE LDP PLANS SE Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6' ON THE LDP PLANS ./ S Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6'ON THE LDP PLANS /Between 6 and 7 (s) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6' ON THE �DP PLANS N bldg 8 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE WALL WAS MOVED 2'AWAY FROM THE FACE OF CURB What is the dimension of the spaces south of 9? 18' DEEP, THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THE WALL WAS REMOVED, Building 10, sidewalk looks like less than 3 feet in area, ADA issues THE OUTER EDGE OF THIS SIDEWALK WAS REVISED AS REQUIRED ✓ E bldg 10 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet THE PARKING LOT WAS RE-GRADED AND THE WALL REMOVED. THIS WAS CHANGED IN THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS f) W bldg 13 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. SOUTH OF THE BUILDING ALL OF THE PARKING SPACES ARE 18' DEEP. THE WALL WAS MOVED 2'TO ALLOW FOR OVERHANG. E and W of bldg 14 one side has 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet, other has 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall E OF 14 (TOWARD BLDG 5) HAS 20' DEEP PARKING SPACES. SOUTH OF 14(TOWARD 12) HAS 18' SPACES WITH A 6'WIDE SIDEWALK AT GRADE t 00 6 v < < cl_.iin.\,.._.._.,..__.4,. ,.._a 0..44:«,..,.\11.,._.,.. CmV\T ---1 0..44:«� \m,......_\Vnr_.....Axr:,, \A'7 t7 1'1/11 /^1nm Page 2 of 3 Between 10 and 16, 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall. I assume the retaining wall will not interfere with parking, but spaces should have wheel stops to keep from going over the retaining wall. THE CURB WILL KEEP PREVENT DRIVING OVER THE WALL. What is the dimension of the spaces south of building 16? THESE SPACES ARE ALL 18' DEEP WITH OVER HANG ABOVE THE WALL Also Building Type 1 is over 30 feet and the fire lane in front of building 15 and building 7 is not 26 feet. I am guessing this happened to meeting the parking space depth. Both requirements have to be met. PLEASE CHECK THE CIVIL SITE PLAN AND THE DIMENSION PLAN TO SEE THE 26'WIDE FIRE LANE IN THIS AREA. THE NOTE SHOWN ON THE CIVIL SITE PLAN STATES 23' PRIVATE STREET. THE DIMENSION ADJACENT TO THE NOTE SHOWS THAT THE STREET WIDTH IS 26' WIDE. I am sending two civil site plans, 1 showing the underground utilities and 1 showing the locations of the retaining walls and the sidewalks. I AM HAVING THESE PRINTED AT COPY CORNER NOW. THEY WILL BE DELIVERED BY THOMAS HOLT'S COURIER SERVICE. The revised retaining wall plans will be sent to you in a separate email. Two copies of these plans will also be delivered after lunch. Randall E. Siemon, P.E. Senior Project Manager Bury+Partners Engineering Solutions 1001 West Loop South,Suite 200 Houston,Texas 77027 (713)212-0011 Tel (Ext. 119) (713)212-0010 Fax rsiemonna.bypartners.corn www.burypartners.com From: Lindsay Boyer [mailto:Lboyer@cstx.gov] Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 12:15 PM To: Siemon, Randall Cc: Bob Cowell Subject: Sidewalks for 2818 Place fitA•��(�•�Tl.. .,,m�.-.f.. ......7 C ..4t:��_\11_______ rvr}m�r\r .. Page 3 of 3 I found the following issues with the sidewalks Clubhouse - some of the spots still have 18 foot spaces with a 5 foot walk. Not just in front of the club house but along harvey mitchell and southwest of the building. N of Bldg 1 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. E/SE Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall S Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall Between 4 and 5 (S) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SE Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet S Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet Between 6 and 7 (s) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet N bldg 8 18 foot spaces with retaining wall What is the dimension of the spaces south of 9? Building 10, sidewalk looks like less than 3 feet in area, ADA issues E bldg 10 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet W bldg 13 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet E and W of bldg 14 one side has 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet, other has 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall Between 10 and 16, 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall. I assume the retaining wall will not interfere with parking, but spaces should have wheelstops to keep from going over the retaining wall. What is the dimension of the spaces south of building 16? Also Building Type 1 is over 30 feet and the firelane in fornt of building 15 and building 7 is not 26 feet. I am guessing this happened to meeting the parking space depth. Both requirements have to be met. Lindsay B. Boyer, AICP Senior Planner City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, Texas 77840 (979) 764-3570 / (979) 764-3496 Fax Iboyer@cstx.gov www.cstx.gov College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this e-mail or any of its attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sending individual or entity by e-mail and permanently delete the original e-mail and attachment(s)from your computer system. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient. you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this e-mail or any of its attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sending individual or entity by e-mail and permanently delete the original e-mail and attachment(s)from your computer system. ri__iir,_\ -a 0 \ ----rcrrv\T ,.,,,.1 Q,.++;„,„\ YD/=,-,,A1U;c,o\/tic-G'7 11/11/111m 2818 PLACE RESPONSE TO CITY OF COLLEGE STATION COMMENTS OF 12/9/07 Clubhouse - some of the spots still have 18 foot spaces with a 5 foot walk. Not just in front of the club house but along Harvey Mitchell and southwest of the building. THE WALL WAS MOVED TO ALLOW 2' OF SPACE BE I WEEN THE CURB AND THE WALL N of Bldg 1 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THE WALL WAS REMOVED E/SE Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THIS WALL WAS REMOVED S Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THIS WALL WAS REMOVED Between 4 and 5 (S) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6'ON THE LDP PLANS SE Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6'ON THE LDP PLANS S Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6' ON THE LDP PLANS Between 6 and 7 (s) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6' ON THE LDP PLANS N bldg 8 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE WALL WAS MOVED 2'AWAY FROM THE FACE OF CURB What is the dimension of the spaces south of 9? 18' DEEP, THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THE WALL WAS REMOVED. Building 10, sidewalk looks like less than 3 feet in area, ADA issues THE OUTER EDGE OF THIS SIDEWALK WAS REVISED AS REQUIRED E bldg 10 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet THE PARKING LOT WAS RE-GRADED AND THE WALL REMOVED. THIS WAS CHANGED IN THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS W bldg 13 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. SOUTH OF THE BUILDING ALL OF THE PARKING SPACES ARE 18' DEEP. THE WALL WAS MOVED 2'TO ALLOW FOR OVERHANG. E and W of bldg 14 one side has 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet, other has 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall E OF 14 (TOWARD BLDG 5) HAS 20' DEEP PARKING SPACES. SOUTH OF 14(TOWARD 12) HAS 18' SPACES WITH A 6'WIDE SIDEWALK AT GRADE Between 10 and 16, 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall. I assume the retaining wall will not interfere „ /l with parking, but spaces should have wheel stops to keep from going over the retaining wall. , 0 1 THE CURB WILL KEEP PREVENT DRIVING OVER THE WALL. h.,A0 ic/ What is the dimension of the spaces south of building 16? THESE SPACES ARE ALL 18' DEEP WITH OVER HANG ABOVE THE WALL Also Building Type 1 is over 30 feet and the fire lane in front of building 15 and building 7 is not 2(i feet. I am guessing this happened to meeting the parking space depth. Both requirements have to be met. PLEASE CHECK THE CIVIL SITE PLAN AND THE DIMENSION PLAN TO SEE THE 26' WIDE FIRE LANE IN THIS AREA. THE NOTE SHOWN ON THE CIVIL SITE PLAN STATES 23' PRIVATE STREE I. THE DIMENSION ADJACENT TO THE NOTE SHOWS THAT THE STREET WIDTH IS 26'WIDE. I am sending two civil site plans, 1 showing the underground utilities and 1 showing the locations of the retaining walls and the sidewalks. I AM HAVING THESE PRINTED AT COPY CORNER NOW. THEY WILL BE DELIVERED BY THOMAS HOLT'S COURIER SERVICE. The revised retaining wall plans will be sent to you in a separate email. Two copies of these plans will also be delivered after lunch. Randall E. Siemon, P.E. Senior Project Manager Bury+Partners Engineering Solutions 1001 West Loop South,Suite 200 Houston,Texas 77027 (713)212-0011 Tel (Ext. 119) (713)212-0010 Fax rsiemon@burvbartners.com www.burvpartners.com From: Lindsay Boyer [mailto:Lboyer@cstx.gov] Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 12:15 PM To: Siemon, Randall Cc: Bob Cowell Subject: Sidewalks for 2818 Place I found the following issues with the sidewalks Clubhouse - some of the spots still have 18 foot spaces with a 5 foot walk. Not just in front of the club house but along harvey mitchell and southwest of the building. N of Bldg 1 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. I'y E/SE Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall (f` 0 S Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall Between 4 and 5 (S) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet 'V \'O SE Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet -V � /') ` S Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet � Between 6 and 7 (s) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet �' N bldg 8 18 foot spaces with retaining wall `, What is the dimension of the spaces south of 9? Building 10, sidewalk looks like less than 3 feet in area, ADA issues E bldg 10 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet W bldg 13 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet E and W of bldg 14 one side has 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet, other has 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall Between 10 and 16, 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall. I assume the retaining wall will not interfere with parking, but spaces should have wheelstops to keep from going over the retaining wall. What is the dimension of the spaces south of building 16? Also Building Type 1 is over 30 feet and the firelane in fornt of building 15 and building 7 is not 26 feet. I am guessing this happened to meeting the parking space depth. Both requirements have to be met. Lindsay B. Boyer, AICP Senior Planner City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, Texas 77840 (979) 764-3570 / (979) 764-3496 Fax lboyer@cstx.gov www.cstx.gov College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. mow`\/o 2818 PLACE RESPONSE TO CITY OF COLLEGE STATION COMMENTS OF 12/9/07 Clubhouse - some of the spots still have 18 foot spaces with a 5 foot walk. Not just in front of the club house but along Harvey Mitchell and southwest of the building. THE WALL WAS MOVED TO ALLOW 2' OF SPACE BL 1 WEEN THE CURB AND THE WALL N of Bldg 1 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THE WALL WAS REMOVED E/SE Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THIS WALL WAS REMOVED S Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THIS WALL WAS REMOVED Between 4 and 5 (S) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6'ON THE LDP PLANS SE Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6'ON THE LDP PLANS S Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6' ON THE L.DP PLANS Between 6 and 7 (s) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet SIDE WALK WAS WIDENED TO 6' ON THE LDP PLANS N bldg 8 18 foot spaces with retaining wall THE WALL WAS MOVED 2'AWAY FROM THE FACE OF CURB What is the dimension of the spaces south of 9? 18' DEEP, THE PARKING LOT WAS REGRADED AND THE WALL WAS REMOVED. Building 10, sidewalk looks like less than 3 feet in area, ADA issues THE OUTER EDGE OF THIS SIDEWALK WAS REVISED AS REQUIRED E bldg 10 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet THE PARKING LOT WAS RE-GRADED AND THE WALL REMOVED. THIS WAS CHANGED IN THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS W bldg 13 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. SOUTH OF THE BUILDING ALL OF THE PARKING SPACES ARE 18' DEEP. THE WALL WAS MOVED 2'TO ALLOW FOR OVERHANG. E and W of bldg 14 one side has 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet, other has 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall E OF 14 (TOWARD BLDG 5) HAS 20' DEEP PARKING SPACES. SOUTH OF 14(TOWARD 12) HAS 18' SPACES WITH A 6'WIDE SIDEWALK AT GRADE Between 10 and 16, 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall. I assume the retaining wall will not interfere with parking, but spaces should have wheel stops to keep from going over the retaining wall. nn THE CURB WILL KEEP PREVENT DRIVING OVER THE WALL. \ O isthe dimension of the spaces south of building16? THESE SPACES ARE ALL 18' DEEP WITH �," What p OVER HANG ABOVE THE WALL Also Building Type 1 is over 30 feet and the fire lane in front of building 15 and building 7 is not 26 feet. I am guessing this happened to meeting the parking space depth. Both requirements have to be met. PLEASE CHECK THE CIVIL SITE PLAN AND THE DIMENSION PLAN TO SEE THE 26' WIDE FIRE LANE IN THIS AREA. THE NOTE SHOWN ON THE CIVIL SITE PLAN STATES 23' PRIVATE STREET. THE DIMENSION ADJACENT TO THE NOTE SHOWS THAT THE STREET WIDTH IS 26'WIDE. I am sending two civil site plans, 1 showing the underground utilities and 1 showing the locations of the retaining walls and the sidewalks. I AM HAVING THESE PRINTED AT COPY CORNER NOW. THEY WILL BE DELIVERED BY THOMAS HOLT'S COURIER SERVICE. The revised retaining wall plans will be sent to you in a separate email. Two copies of these plans will also be delivered after lunch. Randall E. Siemon, P.E. Senior Project Manager Bury+Partners Engineering Solutions 1001 West Loop South,Suite 200 Houston,Texas 77027 (713)212-0011 Tel (Ext. 119) (713)212-0010 Fax rsiemon@burypartners.com www.burypartners.com From: Lindsay Boyer [mailto:Lboyer©cstx.gov] Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 12:15 PM To: Siemon, Randall Cc: Bob Cowell Subject: Sidewalks for 2818 Place I found the following issues with the sidewalks Clubhouse - some of the spots still have 18 foot spaces with a 5 foot walk. Not just in front of the club house but along harvey mitchell and southwest of the building. N of Bldg 1 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet. E/SE Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall /\ S Bldg 2 18 foot spaces with retaining wall Between 4 and 5 (S) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet j� /O SE Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet nV S Bldg 6 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet (� Between 6 and 7 (s) 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet �u N bldg 8 18 foot spaces with retaining wall What is the dimension of the spaces south of 9? Building 10, sidewalk looks like less than 3 feet in area, ADA issues E bldg 10 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet W bldg 13 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet E and W of bldg 14 one side has 18 foot spaces with sidewalk less than 6 feet, other has 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall Between 10 and 16, 18 foot spaces with a retaining wall. I assume the retaining wall will not interfere with parking, but spaces should have wheelstops to keep from going over the retaining wall. What is the dimension of the spaces south of building 16? Also Building Type 1 is over 30 feet and the firelane in fornt of building 15 and building 7 is not 26 feet. I am guessing this happened to meeting the parking space depth. Both requirements have to be met. Lindsay B. Boyer, AICP Senior Planner City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, Texas 77840 (979) 764-3570 / (979) 764-3496 Fax lboyer@cstx.gov www.cstx.gov College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. BURY+PARTNERS RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 2 Project: 2818 PLACE PROPERTIES (SP) - 07-00500192 11-07-07 PLANNING 1. (Repeat Comment) Complete Page 2 of the application. Specifically if any 2 bedroom units have bedrooms less than 132 sf and the date parkland dedication was approved by the Parks Board. Without a complete application I cannot approve a site plan. You have not provided all of the information I need to verify site plan compliance with City Regulations. THE TABLE ON SHEET 4 OF 27 SHOWS THE NUMBER OF TWO BED ROOM UNITS WITH BEDROOMS THAT HAVE LESS THAN 132 SF OF AREA IN THE BEDROOMS. THE PARKING CALCULATION WAS REVISED TO SHOW THE REDUCED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 2. (Repeat Comment) Provide an overall civil site plan that shows phasing, parking, dimensions, fire lanes, utilities, easement, and any improvements being made to the site, as well as provide/address the following items on that site plan. Please see the attached site plans as an example of the type of submittal we will be expecting. See Section UDO Section 3.5. A civil site plan is required that addresses all of the issues that I have identified in the previous site plan review comments. A site plan must meet all of the requirements of the City of College Station Code of Ordinances, including but not limited to the Unified Development Ordinance and the Fire Code. A construction document package will not be approved without a civil site plan. THE OVERALL CIVIL SITE PLAN IS ATTCHED OUTSIDE OF THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN SET. 3. (Repeat Comment) Please clarify the phasing. Is this the planned construction phasing for all infrastructure or just the buildings? If you are planning to phase all parking, landscaping, infrastructure and buildings based on this layout, I cannot verify if each phase meets minimum standards. At a minimum, you will have to have complete firelanes, landscaping to meet the phase, and parking to support the building, in addition to any sanitation and engineering items. As an FYI, if infrastructure is not phased, ALL of the parking and landscaping and other association infrastructure must be in place, operational, and clean for the CO of the very first building. ALL SITE WORK IS PLANNED TO BE COMPLETED IN ONE PHASE. 4. (Repeat Comment) Provide an adequate parking legend. If you are phasing by building, I need a breakdown of the type of units in EACH building and the associated parking for each building. Otherwise, please provide a legend comparable to the following: #of #of bedrooms Required Spaces units 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom A civil site plan serves as the public record for the compliance of this site. The information in the table above has to be provided on the site plan to verify accurate parking ratios were calculated. THIS TABLE WAS UPDATED ON SHEET 4 OF 27 5. (Repeat Comment) Please verify parking spaces provided. I only counted 676 spaces. 6. (Repeat Comment) Provide gross square feet of each building, and the height of each building on the site plan. The phasing plan only shows the building type. The gross square feet of buildings and building height is specifically listed in the site plan checklist with the application as required on the site plan. Do not refer to architectural plans. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN RESOLVED WITH THE RECALCULATION OF THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ABOVE. 7. (Repeat Comment) Provide overall density on the civil site plan. Please make sure that when the civil site plan is submitted, that the density is provided. THIS NOTE IS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 8. (Repeat Comment) Provide current owner and zoning of all adjacent properties cn civil site plan. Please make sure that when the civil site plan is submitted, the zoning and current owner is reflected for all adjacent property owners. THIS NOTE IS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 9. (Repeat Comment) Provide all dimensions on site plan, not separate sheet. Dimensions of building are unnecessary. Please make sure that when the civil site plan is submitted, that all dimensions are reflected. THIS IS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 10. (Repeat Comment) Show all fire lanes on civil site plan, not separate sheet. Please make sure that when the civil site plan is submitted, that all fire lanes are clearly marked and meet the requirements of the 2006 International Fire Code. THIS IS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 11. (Repeat Comment) Clearly label and/or show all existing and proposed easements on civil site plan. Please make sure that when the civil site plan is submitted, that all existing and proposed easements are shown. THIS IS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 12. (Repeat Comment) Clearly label and/or show all building setbacks on civil site plan. Please make sure that when the civil site plan is submitted, that all building setbacks are clearly labeled and reflected accurately. THIS IS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 13. (Repeat Comment) All parking islands must be at least 180 square feet (9 x 20 or 10 x 18). Where the parking row is double or at a corner where two parking rows meet, end islands must be at least 360 square feet. A number of the end islands and interior islands do not meet this minimum standard. THE PARKING LOT ISLANDS HAVE BEEN REVISED AS REQUIRED. 14. (Repeat Comment) You must have at least 41 interior islands, or 7,380 of combined interior island space above and beyond end island requirement (See UDO, Section 7.2.E). TH NUMBER OF INTERIOR ISLANDS HAS BEEN REVISED 15. (Repeat Comment) All parking spaces must be at least 9 x 20 or 9 x 18 if adjacent to a 4 foot landscape strip or 6 foot sidewalk (See UDO, Section 7.2.C). There appear to be spaces that do not meet this requirement. Sidewalks are not shown ALL SIDEWALKS BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND THE BUILDING ARE 6 FEET WIDE (6" FOR CURB WIDTH AND 5'-6" FOR SIDEWALK WIDTH 16. (Repeat Comment) All dumpsters should be separated from parking rows by a 180 square foot end island. The Unified Development Ordinance requires a landscaped end island at the end of every parking row — not a dumpster. THE PLANS HAVE BEEN REVISED 17. (Repeat Comment) Show all sidewalks. Is there to be no sidewalk connections from the parking areas to the buildings? I would assume these would be required at a minimum to comply with ADA standards, regardless of for the ease of residents. ALL improvements being made to the site should be shown on the site plan. THE LANDSCAPE AND RETIANING WALLS PLANS SHOW THE REQUIRED SIDEWALKS 18. (Repeat Comment) Show all fire department connections on civil site plan, not separate sheet. Fire department connections must be within 150 feet of a hydrant as the hose would lie. Additionally, these should be easily accessible/identifiable from the front of the building per the Fire Marshall's office. HYDRANTS HAVE BEEN ADDED AND RELOCATED TO COMPLY WITH THE 150 RULE. 19. (Repeat Comment) All buildings included the clubhouse must be sprinkled, otherwise a second access must be provided with this phase. THE CLUBHOUSE HAS A FIRE PROTECTION SPRINKLER SYSTEM 20. (Repeat Comment) Show all fire hydrants on civil site plan, not separate sheet. Hydrants should be placed to cover all buildings. Hose length is 300 feet along driveways with a 150 foot spray arc. Please make sure all buildings are completely covered. THE FIRE HYDRANT ADDITIONS AND RELOCATIONS HAVE REMEDIED THIS COMMENT. 21. (Repeat Comment) If buildings are over 30 feet in height, a firelane must be provided to accommodate an aerial apparatus truck. This requires a 26 foot wide firelane which has an outside edge within 15 and 30 feet of the building for the entire length of one side of the building. Building height is measured as the top part of the roof as determined by the Fire Marshall. An aerial fire lane is required if the top of the roof is over 30 feet. This dimension is not provided on any site plan or on the architectural plans. It is required to be shown on the civil site plan per the site plan checklist. THE FIRE LANES HAVE BEEN WIDENDED TO COMPLY 22. (Repeat Comment) Clearly label the setback for the lot. For areas that are zoned A-O, the front and rear setback is 50 feet, there is no determined side setback. For R-4, front setback is 25 feet, the rear is 20 feet, and side setback from the property line is 7.5 feet. THE SETBACKS HAVE BEEN NOTED OF SHEET 4 23. (Repeat Comment) Verify all turning radii for fire lanes. See the Site Design Standards for radii requirements. TURNING RADII HAVE BEEN VERIFIED 24. (Repeat Comment) Dimension all opposite and adjacent driveways. SEE THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 25. (Repeat Comment) Provide curbing and curb detail. All pavement must be curbed with 6-inch raised monolithic curbing. Provide detail on civil site plan. SEE THE CIVIL SITE PLAN 26. (Repeat Comment) Show all areas to be paved on the site plan. This includes sidewalks which are still not shown. SEE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE SIDEWALK ARRANGEMENT 27. (Repeat Comment) Driveway width exceeds the maximum allowable width. (UDO Section 7.3) The two drives combined cannot exceed 36 feet in width. The outbound lane may be 20 feet and can also accommodate the firelane. The inbound lane may be no more than 16 feet in width. TXDOT HAS ISSUED A PERMIT FOR THE DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION SHOWN ON THE PLANS 28. (Repeat Comment) Provide details for sanitation screening. Plantings only are inadequate. (UDO Section 7.7) While these were provided in the architectural drawings, they should also be reflected on the site plan. SEE THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. DUPLICATE PRESENTATION OF THESE DETAILS WILL CAUSE UN-NECESSARY CONTRACTOR CONFUSE AND DUPLICATION OF EFFORTS AND COST. 29. (Repeat Comment) Provide details for sanitation pad. A standard detail is available in the site design standards. Clearly indicate the type of wall or fence being constructed. Also, all sanitation routes must be built to a 20 foot firelane pavement standard. This detail 30. (Repeat Comment) Will the site be fenced? If so, a fencing and gate detail must be provided. The site will note be fenced 31. 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, Senior Planner Date: September 25, 2007 LANDSCAPING/STREETSCAPING/BUFFER 1. (Repeat Comment) Provide parking screening in compliance with UDO Section 7.7.D.5 this will be done by LDP 2. (Repeat Comment) Verify the number of live oaks. I only counted 41 live oaks 3. (Repeat Comment) Verify the number of yaupon hollies. I only counted 7 Yaupon hollies 4. (Repeat Comment) All streetscaping trees must be placed within 50 feet of the ROVV. 5. (Repeat Comment) 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. This will be added to the landscape plan. 6. (Repeat Comment) 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. This will be added to the landscape plan. 7. (Repeat Comment) All BackFlow devices must be installed and tested upon installation as per City Ordinance 2394. This will be added to the landscape plan. Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer, Senior Planner Date: September 22, 2007 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 2 Public Water and Sewer Plans 1. (Sheet 4) Please provide the detailed construction documents for the connection to the sanitary sewer lift station. The lift station area will need to be repaired to pre- construction conditions. The detail that was submitted is not sufficient. 2. (Sheet 4) Please explain the intent and scope of the "Prop FG" below the sanitary sewer aerial crossing. This area is Floodway per the LOMR and disturbance of this area should be kept to a minimum. 3. (Sheet 4) Concerning the sanitary sewer aerial crossing, please provide the runs that depict the proposed floodway encroachment to result in a zero rise per Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance, Section 5.G.2.d. 4. (Sheet 6) The proposed 90's need to be 45's for the creek crossing? 5. (Sheet 6 thru 10) Please verify that all isolation valves are located at least 15-ft away from buildings. Please modify accordingly. 6. (Sheet 6 thru 10) Two gate valves should be used at all tees. This includes fire hydrant and meter lead lines 7. (Sheet 6 thru 10) Any fire hydrant or meter lead line that is longer than one joint of pipe requires profile detail. 8. (Sheet 6 thru 10) Please label all FDC connections and verify each is within 150-ft of a fire hydrant. 9. (Sheet 6 thru 11) It appears there is easement being proposed for the sanitary sewer system which provides sewer service to each building. This system should more appropriately be a private system built to building code standard and does not require easement dedication. Obviously the sanitary sewer main extension required with the final plat would be public infrastructure, built to public standard within an easement. Please clarify the intent of the internal sanitary sewer system. 10. (Sheet 7) It appears that at least one gate valve identification was left off the profile detail. 11. (Sheet 7) Water mains without at least 4-ft of cover are required to be ductile iron and have cement stabilized backfill. 12. (Sheet 10) Check water main labels on both lines "C-900"? Site Plan 13. (Sheet 8 and 9) It appears there is easement being proposed for the sanitary sewer system which provides sewer service to each building. This system should more appropriately be a private system built to building code standard and does not require easement dedication. Obviously the sanitary sewer main extension required with the final plat would be public infrastructure, built to public standard within an easement. Please clarify the intent of the internal sanitary sewer system. 14. (Sheet 8 and 9) Please label all proposed public utility easements. 15. (Sheet 8 and 9) Please revise notes and labels as C-900 is still being illustrated. 16. (Sheet 10 and 11) Please label AO area to remain undisturbed on the Grading and Drainage Plan. 17. (Drainage Report) It appears this project is in an area which must be evaluated to determine if detention is required (see Appendix B, Table B-1). In the event that detention is not recommended for this site, please provide required certification (see Section 11.C.3.b). 18. (Drainage Report) As this project is not proposing detention, please certify that the development is utilizing rapid conveyance to the primary channel, verifying that the sites discharge hydrograph and peak is ahead of the main channels hydrograph is such a manor that it does not create a new resulting peak greater than the main channels existing peak, so that there are no negative impacts. 19. (Drainage Report) Please provide pre and post flow data for each drainage area as well as the overall pre and post performance of the site. 20. Please submit engineers cost estimate to reflect all proposed public infrastructure for the project. 21. Please sign and return the temporary blanket easement that was prepared by our legal department. This must be done prior to beginning construction. 22. Please provide an exhibit that shows the entire phase on one sheet and illustrates all proposed PUE's that were not previously dedicated by plat. These specific easement dedications need to be submitted once proposed infrastructure locations are field verified. Please dedicate the easements using the City's Easement Dedication Application. 23. (Electrical) Please address all outstanding electrical issues. Please contact Weldon Davis at (979) 764-5027 for additional information. Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: September 20, 2007 SANITATION 1. Some dumpster enclosure locations need to be turned and angled to meet Sanitation access requirements. Have developer contact myself or Rodney Harris at 764-3690. Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia / Rodney Harris Date: August 17, 2007 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 3 Project: 2818 PLACE PROPERTIES (SP) - 07-00500192 PLANNING ceT✓cp 0/'f' Tv 6/7/ife */3 PA0,7 4 i 1. FYI: All standard details for planning items can be found in the Site I)esi.gn Standards: website: http://www.cstx.gov/docs/site design standards.pdf\ 2. Complete Page 2 of the application. Specifically if any 2 bedroom units have bedrooms • less than 132 sf and the date parkland dedication was approved by the Parks Board. I still have not received a completed Page 2 of the application. The completed page 2 of the application is on the next page. The summary tables are below. Each TYPE 1 3 story building has the following number of units and bedrooms. # of # of bedrooms Required Spaces units 1 Bedroom 0 0 0 Apt 2 Bedroom 4 8 10 • Apt • 3 Bedroom 0 0 Apt 4 Bedom' . 10 40 40 • Tot 48 50 Each TYPE 2 2 story building has the following number of units and bedrooms. 3. # of # of Required units bedrooms Spaces 1 Bedroom 4 4 6 Apt 2 Bedroom 0 0 0 Apt 3 Bedroom 0 0 0 Apt 4 Bedroom 6 24 24 Total 48 30 The total number of parking spaces required is: q Type One buildings, 50 spaces per building = If Wspace 7 Type Two buildings, 30 spaces per building =21 0 space Total parking required is 66b spaces. Total parking furnished is 655 spaces OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e. project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.) Name Street Address City State Zip Code E-Mail Address Phone Number Fax Numb( CURRENT ZONING R-4 /A-0 PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY VACANT PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY MULTI FAMILY DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE(S) REQUESTED AND REASON(S) Sidewalk along FM 2818, rear utility easement, side yard utility easement(all required variances approved by City Council # OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 640 # OF PARKING SPACES PROVIDED 655 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARKLAND DEDICATION Total Acreage 43.633 #of Multi-Family Dwelling Units Floodplain Acreage 9.54 196 X $452 = $ 67,620 — Housing Units 196 9.54 # of acres in floodplain 32 # of 1 Bedroom Units 0 #of acres in detention 32 #of 2 Bedroom Units 0 # of acres in greenways 0 # of 3 Bedroom Units N/A date app. by Parks Board 128 #of 4 Bedroom Units COMMERCIAL FOR 2 BEDROOM UNITS ONLY Total Acreage N/A N/A # Bedrooms = 132 sq. ft. Building Square Feet N/A 32 # Bedrooms < 132 sq. ft. Floodplain Acreage N/A NOTE: Parkland Dedication fee is due prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true and correct. • 4. (Repeat Comment) Provide the following parking legend: # of # of bedrooms Required Spaces units I Bedroom Apt 2 Bedroom Apt 3 Bedroom Apt 4 Bedroom Apt Total SEE COMMENT ABOVE 5. Please verify parking spaces provided. I only counted 655 spaces. I still do not know how many parking spaces are required since there is no indication on the site plan of how many 2 bedroom apartment units there are total. Based on my calculations from • the information provided, if all of the 2 bedroom units have bedrooms less than 130 • s.f., the required parking is 660. 1 bedroom units require 1.5 spaces per bedroom. I based my calculations on the following: # of # of bedrooms Required Spaces units 1 Bedroom 28 28 42 • Apt 2 Bedroom 36 72 90 Apt 3 Bedroom 0 0 0 Apt 4 Bedroom 132 528 528 Apt Total 196 628 660 THIS ITEM IS RESOLVED IN COMMENT #2 ABOVE 6. (Repeat Comment) Provide height of each building on the site plan. THE HEIGHT OF THE TYPE ONE BUILDING IS 40' FROM THE FINISHED FIRST FLOOR TO THE TOP OF THE ROOF PEAK THE HEIGHT OF THE TYPE 2 BUILDING IS 29'-10" FROM THE FINISHED FIRST FLOOR TO THE TOP OF THE ROOF PEAK PREVIOUS REVIEWS HAVE DISCUSSED THIS FEATURE AND IT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CITY. THE OWNER UNDERSTANDS THAT REPLACEMENT OF THE CARPORT AT HIS EXPENSE WILL BE REQUIRED IF THE UTILITY LINE IS REQUIRED TO BE ACCESSED AT THAT LOCATION. 5-(cc Nd SA-(ce s 67- 7 O 23 15. Provide note concerning dumpsters in public easements on site plan. THIS NOTE WAS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN AND SHEETS 6 AND 7 OF 25. 16. Provide detail for sanitation enclosure in compliance with the Site Design Standards. THE ARCHITECT IS WORKING ON THIS DETAIL REVISION SF`� Ci rJ e L P LAA) tON3ThO 7ton2 17.1 still have not received a revised landscape plan. A landscape plan in compliance with 101.41/3 the Unified. Development Ordinance is required to be approved prior to the issuance of any permits. THIS PLAN IS BEING PREPARED BY LDP 18. Sanitation locations, handicap accessibility, and fire safety issues are still under review. Further comments may be forthcoming regarding these issues. 19.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: November 12, 2007 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Site Plan 1. (Sheet 4) Concerning the sanitary sewer aerial crossing, please provide the runs that depict the proposed floodway encroachment to result in a zero rise per Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance, Section 5.G.2.d. No work in this area is allowed until this issues is resolved. This work is being completed by Dodson and Associates 2. (Sheet 7) Concerning the use of the 2 box culverts in the floodway, please provide the runs that depict the proposed floodway encroachment to result in a zero rise per Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance, Section 5.(i.2.d. No work in this area is allowed until this issues is resolved. This work is being completed by Dodson and Associates 3. (Sheet 8 and 9) Please label all proposed public utility easements. • These labels will be added to the dimension plan on the private plan set. 4. (Sheet 8 and 9) Please revise notes and labels as C-900 is still being illustrated. These corrections have been made on the 11-07-07 revision that is the current revision on the public and private plans. 5. (Sheet 10 and 11) Please label AO area to remain undisturbed on the Grading and. Drainage Plan. These notes are clearly presented on sheets 6 and 7 the dimension control plan. These plans are stated to be used as a set. 6. (Drainage Report) I understand that this project is using the parking lot and private storm lines for some detention (designed to the 10-yr storm). However, if detention is being proposed instead of rapid conveyance for this project, it must be designed for the 100-yr storm plus 6-in of free board. This work is being completed by Dodson and Associates 7. (Drainage Report) It appears this project is in an area which must he evaluated to determine if detention is required (see Appendix B, Table B-1). In the event that detention is not recommended for this site, please provide required certification (see Section 11..C.3.b). This work is being completed by Dodson and Associates 8. (Drainage Report) As this project is not proposing detention, please certify that the development is utilizing rapid conveyance to the primary channel, verifying that the sites discharge hydrograph and peak is ahead of the main channels hydrograph is such a manor that it does not create a new resulting peak greater than the main channels existing peak, so that there are no negative impacts. This work is being completed by Dodson and Associates 9. (Drainage Report) Please provide pre and post flow data for each drainage area as well as the overall pre and post performance of the site. This work is being completed by Dodson and Associates Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: October 17, 2007 7. (Repeat Comment) There are still dumpster locations that do not have adequate end islands. All end islands must be at least 180 s.f. ONE LOCATION IN PHASE 5 NEAR BUILDING 4 HAD THIS PROBLEM. THE ADJACENT PARKING SPACE WAS ELIMINATED 8. (Repeat Comment) Dumpster locations still do not appear to meet the requirements of the Site Design Standards for maneuvering. - See Sanitation comments from August 17`'. WE HAVE ROTATED 4 DUMPSTER SITES AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH WALLY 9. (Repeat Comment) Provide curbing and pavement detail. All pavement must be curbed with 6-inch raised monolithic curbing. If are not going to show where the curb line is, please provide a note that all pavement must be curbed with 6-inch raised monolithic curbing. ALL PARKING LOTS WILL BE CURBED AS NOTED ON SHEETS ETS06 AND STATE 7 O THIS A NOTE WAS ADDED TO THE CIVIL SITE PL REQUIREMENT 1.0. (Repeat Comment) Provide details for sanitation screening. Plantings only are inadequate. (MO Section 7.7). If you are not going to provide a specific detail, please note how they will be screened, i.e., 6' cedar fence, or 8' masonry wall, etc. ALL DUMPSTERS WILL BE SCREENED WITH 8 FOOT TALL LATS CMU WALLS WITH A WELED STEEL GATE THAT IS COVERED WITHN CEDAR 11. (Repeat Comment) All sidewalks must be shown in order to meet the Site Plan Review Criteria, UDO Section 3.5.E.2. The interior sidewalk arrangement is required to be shown not only to insure pedestrian safety but to also verify ADA compliance. THE SIDEWALKS ARE SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS FROM LDP 12.There is a parking row along phase 5 that does not appear to be striped correctly. There looks like a row that has a parking space that is not 9 feet in width. THIS SPACE WAS NOT COUNTED IN THE TOTAL. THE PARKING LOT ISLAND WILL BE ENLARGED 13.Show location of retaining walls. Provide details for retaining walls. THESE PLANS ARE BEING PREPARED BY ERW SYSTEMS OF EULESS TEXAS 14.Carports and other permanent structures are not allowed in public easements. SANITATION 1. Some dumpster enclosure locations need to be turned and angled to meet Sanitation • access requirements. Have developer contact myself or Rodney Harris at 764-3690. • We have discussed the arrangement with Wally Urrutia of the Sanitation Department. The revisions are shown on the Civil Site plan. / or 6 4 7---(6 Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia ; Rodney Harris Date: August 17, 2007 LAND DESIGN November 19,2007 Ms. Lindsay Boyer City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842 Re: 2818 Place Properties(SP) Site Plan Dear Ms. Boyer: This letter is in regard to comments dated August 19, 2007. The following is a list of responses to the comments pertaining to the landscape plan. 1. Provide parking screening in compliance with UDO Section 7.5.D.5 Parking screening has been provided. Please refer to sheet L1. 2. Verify the number of Live Oaks. I only counted 41 Live Oaks. ALLA The number of Live Oaks is forty-two (42). 3. Verify the number of Yaupon Hollies. I only counted 7 Yaupon hollies. The number of Yaupon Hollies is eight(8). 4. All streetscaping trees must be placed within 50 feet of the ROW. Per your attached email, all streetscaping trees have been placed within 50 feet of the ROW. Please refer to sheet L1. 5. 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. Land Design Partners. Inc. • • • • 221 West Sixth Street, Suite 300 • • • ■ Austin . Texas 78701 ■ ■ ■ ■ Ph 512.327.5900 512.328.1253 Fx ■ ■ # ■ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS PLANNERS Ms. Lindsay Boyer November 19,2007 Page 2 A general note has been added. Please refer to sheet 3L. 6. 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. City Ordinance 239.1 shall be complied with during the design of the irrigation system. 7. All Back Flow devices must be installed and test upon installation as per City Ordinance 2394. City Ordinance 2394 shall be complied with during the installation of the irrigation system. 10. (Repeat Comment) All sidewalks must be shown in order to meet the Site Plan Review Criteria,UDO Section 3.5.E.2. The interior sidewalk arrangement is required to be shown not only to insure pedestrian safely but to also verify ADA compliance. A11 sidewalks are shown on plans 1H through 8H. Please call if you should have any questions or comments. totoizmi .4.Sincerely, 4,2) Michael Fishbaugh Landscape Designer MF/al Land Design Partners, Inc. ■ ■ ■ ■ 221 West Sixth Street. Suite 300 ■ ■ ■ ■ Austin . Texas 78701 ■ ■ ■ ■ Ph 512.327.5900 512 328 1253 Fx i ■ ■ ■ L AND DESIGN PARTNERS Page 1 of 3 Needham, Jessica From: Lindsay Boyer[Lboyer@cstx.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 1:19 PM To: Needham. Jessica Subject: RE: Landscape comments Jessica- I spoke with engineer about the utilities in that easement, and it will be fine if you will stay out of the first 20 feet of the public utility easement. Let me know if this doesn't make sense. Thanks- Lindsay Lindsay B. Boyer, AICP Senior Planner City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, Texas 77840 (979) 764-3570 / (979) 764-3496 Fax Iboyer@cstx.gov www.cstx.gov >>> "Needham, Jessica" <jneedham@landdesignpartners.com> 11/13/2007 1:26 PM >>> Lindsay, I called you alittle while ago, but I wanted to explain what I meant, before you contacted me back. In the comment that states that all frontage trees need to be within 50' of ROW (property line). I have looked through the drawings and noticed around the existing water lines that there is a 40' City of College Station Public Works easement and then after that a 5' City of Bryan Public Works easement. I was wondering if there was a variance we would deal with or what are the options pertaining to this. Our parking lot is located in or off of the 50'. I am having trouble fitting all the trees into this width. I would appreciate it you can email or call me back. Thanks. Jessica Needham 1 From: Lindsay Boyer [mailto:Lboyer@cstx.govj Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 4:55 PM To: Needham, Jessica Subject: RE: Landscape comments Jessica- Here is the link for that article: http://www.cstx.gov/docs/1112272072006article_7.pdf 11/19/2007 • Page 2 of 3 It is section 7.5. not 7.7, Sorry about the typo, Lindsay Lindsay B. Boyer, AICP Senior Planner City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, Texas 77840 (979) 764-3570 / (979) 764-3496 Fax Iboyer@cstx.gov www.cstx.gov »> "Needham, Jessica" <jneedham@landdesignpartners.com> 11/12/2007 4:22 PM »> Lindsay, Can you send me the UDO Section 7.7.D.5? I can't seem to find it on your Ordinance on the Internet. I have a printed out version, hut what I think you are referring to in Section 7.5. Jessica I From: Lindsay Boyer [mailto:Lboyer@cstx.gov] Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 3:57 PM To: Needham, Jessica Subject: Landscape comments Jessica- Attached are the first round of comments. The second round that was sent back in September had the same comments since we did not receive a revised plan Let me know if you have any questions. Lindsay Lindsay B. Boyer, AICP Senior Planner City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, Texas 77840 (979) 764-3570/ (979) 764-3496 Fax Iboyer@cstx.gov www.cst cgov College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. 11/19/2007 Page 3 of 3 College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. t 1 1 19/2007 -'s 4' 10 ' 01 a : f8' OfD O1' 1ate 2818 PLACE 1300 HARVEY MITCHEL DRIVE' RESPONSE TO CITY OF COLLEGE STATION COMMNETS Page 1 of 12 1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 /-� Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION MEMORANDUM August 19, 2007 TO: Ryan Griffis, via fax 972-868-9001 FROM: Lindsay Boyer, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: 2818 PLACE PROPERTIES (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: One (1) revised site and landscaping plan. $88,592 Parkland Dedication fees prior to issuance of a building permit. Easement Dedication Sheet and required documents. The blanket easement dedication was submitted to the city along with the final plat application RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 September 7, 2007 Project: 2818 PLACE PROPERTIES (SP) — 07-00500192 THE BURY+PARTNERS RESPONSE TO THE CITIES COMMENTS ARE IN UPPER CASE PLANNING 1. Completely Page 2 of the application. Specifically if any 2 bedroom units have bedrooms less than 132 sf and the date parkland dedication was approved by the Parks Board. THE PARK BOARD APPROVED THE MONEY INLIEU OF LAND DURING THEIR JULY 17 MEETING A COPY OF THE MINUTES ARE ATTACHED THE ARCHITECT HAS ADDRESSED THE BEDROOM AREA QUESTION 2. Provide an overall civil site plan that shows phasing, parking, dimensions, fire lanes, utilities, easement, and any improvements being made to the site, as well as provide/address the following items on that site plan. Please see the attached site plans as an example of the type of submittal we will be expecting. THIS CIVIL PLAN WAS NOT PREPARED OR SUBMITTED SINCE IT IS NOT REQUIED IN THE REGULATIONS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS PLAN IS REQUESTED FOR COORDIANTION OF VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE SITE DESIGN. BURY+PARTNERS DOES NOT EXPECT THE CITY TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COORDAINATION OF THE DESIGN. 3. Please clarify the phasing. Is this the planned construction phasing for all infrastructure or just the buildings? If you are planning to phase all parking, landscaping, infrastructure and buildings based on this layout, I cannot verify if each phase meets minimum standards. At a minimum, you will have to have complete firelanes, landscaping to meet the phase, and parking to support the building, in addition to any sanitation and engineering items. ALL PARKING LOTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PHASE ONE WILL BE COMPLETED ALONG WITH ALL BUILDINGS IN PHASE ONE. THE PHASING OF THE BUILDING WAS SHOW TO ALLOW FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF BUILDINGS AS THEY ARE COMPLETED. A SHORT TIME FRAME WILL EXIST OF ABOUT 2 WEEKS THAT WILL BE THE OVERLAP TIME BETWEEN THE FIRST BUILDING BEING COMPLETED AND INSPECTED AND A CO ISSUED BY THE CITY AND THE LAST BUILDING BEING INSPECTED AND ITS CO BEING ISSUED. 4. Provide an adequate parking legend. If you are phasing by building, I need a breakdown of the type of units in EACH building and the associated parking for each building. Otherwise, please provide a legend comparable to the following: #of #of Required units bedrooms Spaces 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom ALL PARKING WILL BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE BUILDINGS ARE COMPLETED. THIS TABLE IS NOT REQUIRED. 5. Unit tabulation table is unnecessary on Sheet 4. THIS TABLE WAS INCLUDED AT OUR DISCRESSION 6. Please remove sheets 2, 3A, and 3B. These are unnecessary THESE SHEETS WERE INCLUDED AT OUR DISCRESSION 7. Please verify parking spaces provided. I only counted 676 spaces. 8. Provide gross square feet of each building, and the height of each building on the site plan. THIS INFORMATION IS NOW SHOWN ON THE PHASING PLAN 9. Provide overall density on the civil site plan. THIS INFORMATION IS NOW SHOWN ON THE PHASING PLAN 10. Provide current owner and zoning of all adjacent properties on civil site plan. THIS IS SHOWN ON THE PLAT 11. Provide all dimensions on site plan, not separate sheet. Dimensions of building are unnecessary. DIMENSIONS REQUIRED BOFOR CONSTRUCTION ARE SHOWN ON THE DIMENSION PLAN. 12. Show all fire lanes on civil site plan, not separate sheet. SEE RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2 13. Clearly label and/or show all existing and proposed easements on civil site plan. SEE RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2 14. Clearly label and/or show all building setbacks on civil site plan. SEE RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2 15. All parking islands must be at least 180 square feet (9 x 20 or 10 x 18). Where the parking row is double or at a corner where two parking rows meet, end islands must be at least 360 square feet. A number of the end islands and interior islands do not meet this minimum standard. 16. You must have at least 41 interior islands, or 7,380 of combined interior island space above and beyond end island requirement (See UDO, Section 7.2.E). DUE TO THE LARGE LANDSCAPED AREA BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AND WITHIN THE AO ZONED AREA WE BELIEVE THAT THE INTENT OF SECTION 7.2.E IS SATISFIED. 17. All parking spaces must be at least 9 x 20 or 9 x 18 if adjacent to a 4 foot landscape strip or 6 foot sidewalk (See UDO, Section 7.2.C). There appear to be spaces that do not meet this requirement. THIS REQUIREMENT IS SATIFIED SINCE ALL SIDEWALKS BETWEEN THE PARKING AREA AND THE BUILDINGS ARE 6' WIDE. ALL PARKING SPACES AT 20' DEEP IS THEY ARE NOT ADJACENT TO A 6' SIDEWALK OR A 4' WIDE GRASS STRIP. 18. All dumpsters should be separated from parking rows by a 180 square foot end island. ALL DUMSTER ARE SHOWN IN A FUNCTIONALLY PROPER LOCATION 19. Show all sidewalks. Is there to be no sidewalk connections from the parking areas to the buildings? I would assume these would be required at a minimum to comply with ADA standards, regardless of for the ease of residents. ALL improvements being made to the site should be shown on the site plan. THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ALL BUILDINGS AND THE PARKING AREA IS SEPARATED BY A SIDEWALK. 20. Show all fire department connections on civil site plan, not separate sheet. Fire department connections must be within 150 feet of a hydrant as the hose would lie. Additionally, these should be easily accessible/identifiable from the front of the building per the Fire Marshall's office. ALL BUILDINGS ARE SPRINKLERED. ALL FDC'S ARE BUILDINGS A 21. All buildings included the clubhouse must be sprinkled, otherwise a second access must be provided with this phase. THE CLUB HOUSE WILL HAVE A FIRE PROTECTION SPRINKLER SYSTEM. 22. Show all fire hydrants on civil site plan, not separate sheet. Hydrants should be placed to cover all buildings. Hose length is 300 feet along driveways with a 150 foot spray arc. Please make sure all buildings are completely covered. 23. If buildings are over 30 feet in height, a firelane must be provided to accommodate an aerial apparatus truck. This requires a 26 foot wide firelane which has an outside edge within 15 and 30 feet of the building for the entire length of one side of the building. THE TOP OF THE EXTERIOR WALL AT THE 3 STORY BUILDINGS IS NOW LESS THAN 30' AFTER REPLACEMENT OF THE FLOOR JOISTS WITH A LOWER HEADROOM DESIGN. 24. Clearly label the setback for the lot. For areas that are zoned A-O, the front and rear setback is 50 feet, there is no determined side setback. For R-4, front setback is 25 feet, the rear is 20 feet, and side setback from the property line is 7.5 feet. THE SITE PLAN DRAWINGS WILL BE REVISED TO SHOW THE SETBACKS 25. Verify all turning radii for fire lanes. See the Site Design Standards for radii requirements. ONE SET OF RADI WERE CHANGED AT THE FIRST RIGHT TURN INTO THE SITE. THREE 'T' TURN AROUNDS WERE ADDED ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. 26. All standard details for planning items can be found in the Site Design Standards: website: http://www.cstx.gov/docs/site design standards.pdf WE USED THESE DETAILS 27. Dimension all opposite and adjacent driveways. THE SITE PLAN WAS REVISED AS REQUIRED. 28. Provide curbing and curb detail. All pavement must be curbed with 6-inch raised monolithic curbing. SEE NOTES ON SHEETS 6 AND 7. SEE DETAILS ON SHEET 24 29. Show all areas to be paved on the site plan. SEE SHEETS 6 AND 7 30. Provide paving details. In addition, I cannot distinguish the pavement types on the plan because of the copy quality. If these are on the BCS standard detail sheet, please X out all details that do not pertain to this development. WE WILL X OUT THE DETAILS NOT NEEDED 31. Driveway width exceeds the maximum allowable width. (UDO Section 7.3) THE DRIVEWAY ONTO HARVEY MITCHELL IS A ONE WAY DIVIDED DRIVEWAY. THE CONFIGURATION SHOWN ALLOWS FOR LEFT AND RIGHT TURNING MOVEMENT LANES AND WILL PREVENT SIGNIFICANT BACKUP ON-SITE DUE TO THE DELAY IN LEFT TURN TRAFFIC MOVEMENTS ONTO HARVEY MITCHELL. 32. Dimension driveway throat depth on civil site plan in compliance with UDO Section 7.3. THE DISTANCE SHOWN FROM HARVEY MITCHELL TO THE FIRST POINT OF CONFLICT IS 125'. THE ALLOWABLE DISTANCE IN 7.3.c.7 IS 50' THE DRAWING WAS REVISED 33. Provide details for sanitation screening. Plantings only are inadequate. (UDO Section 7.7) PLANS FOR THE DUMPSTER SCREEN WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE RE-SUBMITTAL. 34. Provide details for sanitation pad. A standard detail is available in the site design standards. Clearly indicate the type of wall or fence being constructed. Also, all sanitation routes must be built to a 20 foot firelane pavement standard. PLANS FOR THE DUMPSTER SCREEN WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE RE-SUBMITTAL. 35. Will the site be fenced? If so, a fencing and gate detail must be provided. 36. 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, Senior Planner Date: August 28, 2007 LANDSCAPING/STREETSCAPING/BUFFER 1. Provide parking screening in compliance with UDO Section 7.7.D.5 2. Verify the number of live oaks. I only counted 41 live oaks 3. Verify the number of yaupon hollies. I only counted 7 Yaupon hollies 4. All streetscaping trees must be placed within 50 feet of the ROW. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. All BackFlow devices must be installed and tested upon installation as per City Ordinance 2394. Reviewed by: Lindsay Boyer, Senior Planner Date: August 28, 2007 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1 (Site Plan) 1. It is my understanding that the final plat construction documents and site plan construction documents would be combined into one set leading up to a development permit for all construction. THIS WAS DONE 2. Please revise engineers cost estimate to reflect all proposed public infrastructure for the project. A REVISED ESTIMATE IS INCLUDED 3. (Drainage Report) It appears this project is in an area which must be evaluated to determine if detention is required (see Appendix B, Table B-1). In the event that detention is not recommended for this site, please provide required certification (see Section 11.C.3.b). 4. (Drainage Report) As this project is not proposing detention, please certify that the development is utilizing rapid conveyance to the primary channel, verifying that the sites discharge hydrograph and peak is ahead of the main channels hydrograph is such a manor that it does not create a new resulting peak greater than the main channels existing peak, so that there are no negative impacts. 5. (Drainage Report) Please provide pre and post flow data for each drainage area as well as the overall pre and post performance of the site. 6. (Fire Report) Please verify that the proposed Phase 1 or Lot 1 development meets the minimum design guideline requirements, as Phase 1 or Lot 1 does not appear to be a looped system. THE SYSTEM IS INTERNALLY LOOPED. THE CITY AGREED EARLY IN THIS PROJECT THAT THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE UNTIL THE PHASE 2 DEVELOPMENT WAS CONSTRUCTED. THE WATER MAIN NETWORK ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT SUFFICIENT PRESSURE AND DISCHARGE FLOWS 7. Please illustrate and dimension all proposed easements required for all public infrastructure improvements. Please sign and return the temporary blanket easement that was prepared by out legal department. This must be done prior to beginning construction. These specific easement dedications need to be submitted once proposed infrastructure locations are field verified. Please dedicate the easements using the City's Easement Dedication Application. 8. (Sheet 8 and 9) It appears there is easement being proposed for the sanitary sewer system which provides sewer service to each building. This system should more appropriately be a private system built to building code standard and does not require easement dedication. Obviously the sanitary sewer main extension required with the final plat would be public infrastructure, built to public standard within an easement. At the beginning of the project we were directed by the city to include all main sanitary sewer lines in a public easement. We were also told that private utilities cannot cross public utility line. WE HAVE REMOVED THE EASEMENT LINES FROM SANITARY SEWERS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED BY THE FINAL PLAT. SEVERAL AREAS EXIST WHERE THE PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER CROSSES THE PUBLIC WATER MAIN. CLEARANCES AND PIPE WALL ADJUSTMENTS FOR SANITARY REASONS ARE SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND PROFILE FOR THE WATER MAINS 9. (Sheet 8 and 9) It appears there are easements being proposed for some portions of the storm sewer system. This system should more appropriately be a private system and does not require easement dedication. ALL STORM SEWERS ARE INTENDED TO BE PRIVATE. THE DRAWINGS WILL BE SO NOTED. 10. (Sheet 8 and 9) The internal water system however will need to be built to public standard within an easement due to the need for public fire hydrants throughout the site. The easement should cover all public mains, hydrants, meters and isolation valves. The fire line lead into each building does not need easement after the isolation valve, and the domestic and irrigation service lines do not need easement after the meters. THE WATER METERS WERE RELOCATED AS REQUIRED. 11. (Sheet 8 and 9) Please provide plan and profile data COMMENT NOT UNDERSTOOD 12. (Sheet 8 and 9) Please verify that all water meters have been located within an easement SEE RESPONSE TO COMMENT 10 ABOVE 13. (Sheet 8 and 9) Please provide water demands for each building or each type of building as to appropriately size the water meters. THE WATER REPORT SHOWS THE DESIGN WATER FLOW DEMAND. A LOW GRADE 2" WATER METER WILL FLOW OVER 160 GPM AT LESS THAN 9 PSI PRESSURE DROP. 14. (Sheet 10 and 11) Please label AO area to remain undisturbed. THE DRAWING WILL BE REVISED The following comments pertain to the construction documents titled "Public Utility Improvements to Serve 2818 Place" and were submitted 6/25/07. These comments were originally returned 7/12/07. It does not appear that there has been a submittal addressing these comments to date. It was my understanding that the final plat construction documents and site plan construction documents would be combined into one set leading up to a development permit for all construction. When resubmitting to address the below comments, please note the updated page number if they do not correspond with the original submittal. 1. As previously stated the utility department is not comfortable with the proposed water main alignment, as bends under pavement are discouraged. THIS THYPE OF ARRANGEMENT WILL RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER NUMBER OF WATER MAIN FITTINGS AND THRUST BLOCKS AND GREATER CHANCES FOR PIPE DEFLECTION AND LEAKAGE IN THE FAT CLAYS FOUND ON-SITE. THIS TYPE OF ARRANGEMETN WILL BE VERY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE OVER THE LIFE CYCLE OF THE PROJECT. 2. Please provide the detailed construction documents for the connection to the sanitary sewer lift station. The lift station area will need to be repaired to pre-construction conditions. THE DETAIL WAS ADDED 3. (Sheet 4 & 5) Please label the sanitary sewer main material types as SDR26-ASTM F679 or ductile iron, thru out plans. THIS NOTE WAS ADDED 4. (Sheet 4 & 5) Please check all notes in plan in profile, as the pipe size is not consistent on these plans. THIS CHANGE WAS MADE 5. (Sheet 4 & 5) Please revise note for Detail S4-02 and S3-03 regarding bedding detail, as it should be S2-02, this is inconsistent throughout plans. THIS CHANGE WAS MADE 6. (Sheet 4 & 5) Please make a note on the plans requiring all water/sanitary conflicts to meet TCEQ minimum standards, please describe in detail these requirements. THIS CHANGE WAS MADE 7. (Sheet 4) The required pier size for an 18-in is a 36-in pier (pipe size plus 18-in), see detail S4-00. THE PIERS WILL BE DESIGNED BY THE FOUNDATION ENGINEER. 8. (Sheet 4) Concerning the sanitary sewer aerial crossing, please provide the runs that depict the proposed floodway encroachment to result in a zero rise per Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance, Section 5.G.2.d. THIS ANALYSIS IS BEING PREPARED BY DODSON AND ASSOCIATES 9. (Sheet 4 & 5) Please read the "Flushing Design" requirement in the BCS Design Guidelines to verify that additional air relief valves and flushing appurtenances are not needed. FIRE HYDRANTS ARE IN PLACE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE FLUSHING 10. (Sheet 5) Please read TCEQ 290.44.f.2, pertaining to water lines laid under flowing or intermittent streams. You will need to provide a valve on either side of the encasement in these areas. THESE VALVES HAVE BEEN SHOWN ON THE PLANS 11. (Sheet 5) Please read BCS Design Guidelines, Domestic Water, specifically the "Crossing" section. Please verify that the below grade creek crossing encasement is adequate in length. THIS CHANGE WAS MADE 12. (Sheet 4, 5, 6 & 7) In profile, please provide detail of vertical transitions. THIS ADDITION WAS MADE 13. (Sheet 4 & 5) A gate valve is required every 800-ft. THIS WAS INCLUDED 14. (Sheet 4, 5, 6 & 7) Two gate valves should be used in all tees, such as the fire hydrant locations, and may satisfy the previous comment. A GATE VALVE IS NOT INTENTED IN THE CITY REGULATIONS TO BE INCLUDED AT EACH FIRE HYDRANT. THIS IS NOT PROPER DESIGN AND INCREASES THE CHANCE OF WATER MAIN LEAKS AND INCREASES MAINTENANCE REQUIRED BY THE CITY TO KEEP THE VALVES OPERABLE 15. (Sheet 4, 5, 6 & 7) Please label the water main material type: Pressure Class 200, DR-14, AWWA C-909, this is incorrect throughout plans THIS CHANGE WAS MADE 16. (Sheet 4, 5, 6 & 7) Please illustrate all valves, hydrants, bends, connections, fittings, etc in profile as done in plan view. ELBOWS WILL NOT BE SHOWN IN THE PROFILE AS THIS DOES NOT ADD TO THE VALUE OF THE PROFILE AND THE STATIONING OF THE ELBOW IS SHOWN ON THE PLAN VIEW 17. (Sheet 4, 5, 6 & 7) On all fire suppression line, an isolation valve is required just inside the PUE. Also note on the plans that fire suppression lines shall have a lockable lid on the isolation valve. The lockable lid shall, at a minimum supply protection as the AMP or USA, LL562 Locking Lid. Alternate lockable lids shall be approved by College Station Utilities Director or his designee. A NOTE WAS ADDED TO SPECIFY THE LOCKING LID 18. (Sheet 6 & 7) The required encasement pipe for a 10-in main is an 18-in casing. 19. (Sheet 6 & 7) Bedding Detail should be W4-02 not S2-02. THIS CHANGE WAS MADE 20. (Sheet 7) The appropriate casing for a 12-in main is a 20-in casing. THE NEW WATER MAIN IS LOCATED ABOVE THE PROPSED BOX CULVERT. THE LEAK TESTING CAPABILITY REQUIRED FOR A SUBMERGED CROSSING IS NOT REQUIRED 21. (Sheet 7) A gate valve is missing around Sta. 17+00, for the creek crossing. THE NEW WATER MAIN IS LOCATED ABOVE THE PROPSED BOX CULVERT. THE LEAK TESTING CAPABILITY REQUIRED FOR A SUBMERGED CROSSING IS NOT REQUIRED Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: August 28, 2007 ELECTRICAL COMMENTS REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ATTENTION WE HAVE SENT UPDATED SITE PLAN BACKGROUNDS TO WELDON DAVIS OF CSTX AND GREG BURKHALTER OF BTUTILITIES. 1. Developer provides temporary blanket easement for construction purposes. 2. Developer provides easements for electric infrastructure as installed for electric lines (including street lights). These are to be provided by a RPS after installation and executed by plat or separate instrument. 3. The following easements will be required: 10' PUE along the south line of the tract, this being the line in common with TAMU parcel; and a 10'PUE along the west line of the tract, this being the line in common with the Linda Preston-Shepard parcel. GENERAL ELECTRICAL COMMENTS 1. Developer installs conduit per City specs and design. 2. City will provide drawings for conduit installation. Customer has CSU detail plans for subdivision layout along with layout for the boring of FM 2818 to get to site. 3. Developer provides 30' of rigid or IMC conduit for riser poles. City installs riser. 4. Developer to intercept existing conduit at designated transformers and extend as required. 5. If conduit does not exist at designated transformer, developer to furnish and install conduit as shown on electrical layout. 6. Developer pours transformer pad(s) per City specs and design. 7. Developer installs pull boxes and secondary pedestals as per City specs and design (pull boxes and secondary pedestals provided by the City). 8. Developer provides digital AutoCAD 2000 or later version of plat and/or site plan. Email to: wdavis@cstx.gov. 9. Developer provides load data for project. 10. To discuss any of the above electrical comments please contact Weldon Davis at 979.764.5027. Reviewed by: Weldon Davis Date: August 14,2007 SANITATION 1. Some dumpster enclosure locations need to be turned and angled to meet Sanitation access requirements. Have developer contact myself or Rodney Harris at 764-3690. Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia / Rodney Harris Date: August 17, 2007