Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Comments 0 McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC. Of p 1008 Woodoreek Dr.,Suite 103•College Station,Tx.77845•(979)693-3838 Engineer Reg:No.F-458 Survey Reg.No.101033-00 September 28, 2015 Ms. Bridgette George Planning & Development Services City of College Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Re.: DUCK HAVEN PH 8 Staff Review Response MBESI#: 1062-0051 Below is the summary of the revisions made per staff's comments. ENGINEERING: COMMENT#1: On the final plat, increase the width of the drainage easement to include the entire Detention Pond. ACTION: See revised plans. Pond shape has been modified to keep within the easement. COMMENT#2: Please provide fire flow report applying 1,000 gpm on Node J-4. ACTION: See attached fire flow report. COMMENT#3: Provide roadside ditch calculations/street analysis and ensure that they meet BCS requirements. ACTION: See revised drainage report. COMMENT#4: The overland flow length exceeds the allowable 300' for the computation of the travel time of the sheet flow. ACTION: See revised exhibit C-9. COMMENT#5: Please provide explanation for what the gutter flow length is representing in existing drainage area. ACTION: See revised exhibit C-I. COMMENT#6: Provide storm sewer analysis. ACTION: See attached C-3. COMMENT#7 Has clogging been taken into account for the grate inlet design? If so, please note on the bottom table that capacity has been reduced by 25%. ACTION: Clogging was taken into account on the available open area of the culvert. The note has been added to the bottom of the exhibit. COMMENT#8 Was sedimentation taken into account with the detention pond design? If so, note it in the drainage report. ACTION: 10% clogging was taken into account in accordance with Section Vl.E.3.e of the B/CS Design Guidelines. COMMENT#9 The post development condition for one of the storm events is exceeding pre- development conditions. ACTION: See attached exhibits based on revised detention pond design. PLANNING: COMMENT#1: The curve table and curve labels have been removed from the plat. Please add them back in. ACTION: See revised plat. COMMENT#2: The label for the tie to a College Station horizontal control monument was removed, please add back to plat. ACTION: See revised plat. COMMENT#3: Provide volume and page labels for the existing easements in the two adjacent phases in Saddle Creek and the two existing adjacent phases in Duck haven. Also, provide volume and page blanks for the PUEs and lots for the proposed Duck Haven Phase 7 as it will need to be filed for record before phase 8. ACTION: See revised plat. COMMENT#4: Please be aware that Phase 7 will need to be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the same or a prior meeting before Phase 8 can be approved. Phase 7 will also need to be filed for record before Phase 8. ACTION: Duly noted. COMMENT#5: Please note that confirmation has not yet been received from Brazos County regarding if all their comments have been addressed. ACTION: Duly noted. COUNTY: COMMENT#1: Correct General Note on Plat to state '13'total lots rather than '3'total lots. ACTION: See revised plat. COMMENT#2: Regulatory watercourse appears to be Franks Creek and Boggy Creek. Please review and correct. ACTION: See revised drainage report. COMMENT#3: Subject property doe appear straddle a basin. Please review and correct. ACTION: The revised grading causes all drainage from this phase to flow to Franks Creek. COMMENT#4: Provide letter of service from water provider. ACTION: Owner to provide. COMMENT#5: Provide letter of approval for OSSF's from Health Department. ACTION: Owner to provide. COMMENT #6: Upon review of existing pavements in other phases of Duck Haven and the attached supplemental soils info and any further soils investigation you may choose to consider thicker pavement section. ACTION: Owner has selected the county standard pavement section to use in this phase. COMMENT#7: Provide construction details. ACTION: See revised plans.. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, J:l, '•.ertson, P.E. t� cc STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: DUCK HAVEN PH 8 (FP) - 15-00900085 PLANNING 1. The metes and bound of the plat do not close. It appears the call behind Lots 9-11 does not include the length of the back of Lot 9. 2. Rename Wigeon Trail Drive to Wigeon Trail Court. — See revised plat. 3. Revise the Certificate of Ownership and Dedication to include the sentence "All such dedications shall be in fee simple unless expressly provided otherwise." — See revised plat. 4. Revise the year listed in the A Certificate of County Judge to state 2015 instead of 2014. — See revised plat. 5. Add "Witness my hand and official Seal, at my office in Bryan, Texas." to the Certificate of County Clerk and relocate the certificate to provide additional area for the certificate to be completed. — See revised plat. 6. Update the Vicinity Map to have the existing City limit line. — See revised plat. 7. Provide a label for the easements between Lots 2&3, 10&11, 12&13, and 13& 7 in Phase 7 and for the 16-foot PUE along the southern side of Wigeon Trail Court. — See revised plat. 8. Please note that the final plat for Phase 7 will need to be recorded prior to Phase 8. — Duly noted. 9. Please note that you, the applicant, are responsible for scheduling the plat for consideration by the County Commissioner's Court and for getting the County Judge's signature on the Mylar after they approve the plat. — Duly noted. Reviewed by: Jason Schubert Date: April 24, 2015 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1 1. Provide Abbreviation Description for H.O.A.E. — See revised plat. 2. Please show the (volume/page) for the existing easements abutting this tract. — See revised plat. 3. Has there been effort to acquire offsite drainage easement for the Detention Pond discharge? — There is an existing 20' PUE at the discharge point and a natural low area (ponded water) at the discharge point. 4. Add a note on Final Plat stating that fences, grading, structures, landscape, etc. cannot impede the flow of the private drainage easement. — See revised plat General Note #7. 5. Add a note on Final Plat and construction documents regarding requirement for compaction of fill or engineered slab for affected lots that have greater than 2 feet of fill. Also list the lots that would require this. — See revised plat General Note #7. 6. On the Final Plat, increase the width of the Private drainage easement to include the entire swale and Detention Pond. — See revised plat. 7. Provide cross section detail for swale, or specify the side slopes. — See revised plans. 8. Inset "C" on sheet C3.2, specify the length of headwall. Is the amount of rip rap pass the head wall sufficient to dissipate the runoff's energy? — See revised plan. Energy Dissipators have been added along with a flared headwall to reduce energy. 9. Extend the silt fence to the rear lots of 5 and 6. —See revised plan. 10. On the Fire flow report, please apply the 1,000 GPM on Node J-4 which is the most remote & lowest Fire Hydrant Location. Please resubmit Exhibit C. 11. Place a gate valve by the Fire Hydrant on WA-1. Please make it is labeled on the plan & profile. — See revised plans. 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. Page 2 of 3 12. GIS is showing a Ponded area by lots -11-12 and the grading plan is not reflecting the elevation changes. The pond is to be eliminated with this phase of construction. The pond has been shown on the revised plan. 13. Provide B/CS standard details, and sealed & signed: engineering cost estimate, drainage report, a letter acknowledging that there have been no deviations from the B/CS guidelines. Drainage Report 14. Page 8 is stating a runoff from upland, please show this on your drainage area maps. A portion of the "EX" and "PROP" drainage areas include a small portion of Phase 7 which is upland of Phase 8. 15. Complete page 18-19 (Detention Section) See revised Drainage Report. 16. Please provide exhibit for the Ditch's capacity for 25 storm year and 100 storm year. Please make sure that the 25 storm year event has a freeboard with the ditch of a minimum of 6- inch. See revised Drainage Report. 17. Provide calculations showing the capacity, water elevations, and velocity for the swale in the Private drainage easement. Is it possible to have an analysis for the required pipe size in case the future owners decides to have it piped?—The ditch has been eliminated and a pipe placed in the easement on the revised plans. 18. Exhibit C-2, the existing condition is using the C value for residential. It should use the C value for undeveloped area. See revised Drainage Report. 19. How's the travel time for the proposed so much higher than existing condition? See revised Drainage Report. 20. How's the overland flow length for the proposed condition twice the length of existing? The Hydraulically furthest distant point shouldn't vary that much if the same delineated drainage basin was used for existing and proposed condition. See revised Drainage Report. 21. The existing drainage area is taking into account gutter flow length? I'm not sure what this length is supposed to present since existing condition shouldn't have "gutter flow" if there is currently no ditch. See revised Drainage Report. 22. Why's the velocity for the proposed condition slower than existing condition? The increase impervious and ditch should make it faster. See revised Drainage Report. 23. Double check your 100-storm year intensity it appears higher than it needs to be. See revised Drainage Report. 24. Please provide a Detention Pond summary table showing the relationship of Peak flow, water surface elevation, volume, and freeboard. See revised Drainage Report. 25. Provide 100 year plugged condition with the detention pond calculations. See revised Drainage Report. 26. During 100- year plugged condition the water surface elevation needs to have a freeboard with the top of berm of at least 6". It appears the berm elevation needs to be increased since the 100 year storm even is reaching water surface elevation reaching the top of the current berm. See revised Drainage Report and construction plans. Reviewed by: Kevin Ferrer Date: April 7, 2015 BRAZOS COUNTY 1. Comments emailed to Travis Martinek and Jeff Robertson. Reviewed by: Alan Munger Date: April 20, 2015 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. Page 3 of 3 sadLAJasAap/AOr`)t;s) 96f,- 't'9L'6 i6 Xt.1• OLSC"1,9L'(7_6-1-1.I. Z,FHLL• St"X i L• NOT L81 J0!I IO::)• :1 'NINE/s'VX LI.€01 E • 0966 X0 i•O'd saazn.ta5 JuautiO/aaaCJ,tp%ttzurcV1d 980006-91.0Zdd .°N Peioad Sa'8d nob'xiAwnoosozeaggaabuniAlya :eln `A uno3 sozea8 `aa6unn uely woo'aunnoagaanloowgnjaf 'eln `6uuaaui6u3 aunnoa8 '8 amooW `uospagogi jier :3d swawwo3 nnainaj gels :swawyoefly :0LgE'tz9L:6L6 }e ew Ileo aseald `uonewaotui leuoipppe peau JO suoilsanb i(ue anal noi(}i ieid an to 6uillt aqi 01 loud pue lenoadde Z'Sd Jei a paainbaa aq II!M mid leu!. paslnaa ay}40 leul6uo aelAW a Ieyn a4oU aseald 68frZ=ebede:,dse'xapui/awoy/nob'x1so'nnnnnn//:dnq '6ui4aaw Z'8d an to )1aann an Aepuon uo alp germ 6u!molio} an w pessaooe aq ueo podaa gels pue epua6e an `6ui4aaw Tgd an ao4 palnpayos uaaq sal wap anon( aou0 'pied seat aleudoadde an pue °pew uaaq anal suoisinaa an Ile aouo epua6e an-nn; e uo paoeld aq Aew pafoad anoA '6ui4aaw uoiss!wwo3 6uiuoZ '8 6uluueld an lot palnpayos aq 4ou lllnn poafoad anon( `passaappe uaaq lou anal swawwoo lie 11 'uiaaaq pauie4uoo s4uawwoo nnainaa }te1s ay4 ssaappe 04 >lees Tey ao4ea4siuiwpy an 04 s}uawnoop pesinaa pue s4uawwoo asuodsaa ualwm papinoad lou seq lueolidde an ti `owew sm jo a}ep ay} woat sAep 06 ul aaidxe II!M uo!leolldde siy4 ;Geyi a}ou aseald 'uoi4e4S 0601100 40 APO 9144 Wm PHI Allewaot paaaplsuoo aq iilM 4oafoad anoA `6urraaw 6uiuoz '8 6uiuueid an aoJ s4uawnoop paainbaa an jo 4diaoaa uodn '(lenoadde s,Awnoo an Jane paainbaa aq il!nn) seanneu6is s,a6pnr A4uno3 pue aaunno an ypnn mid pun paslnaa an jo leu!bpo aelAW ayl pue 'nob'x}sogietpwgnsiep6ipspd 04 flew-a JO ana){slp uo geld ieu!J 0141 40 014 le}i6!p all to Adoo (1,) eu0 `s4uawwoo payoene an ui palle4ep se s4uawnoop pas!nai `swawnoop uoi}ona}suoo lingo paslnaa Jo 499 „9CX„jZ (1,) 9110 'ieid ieuit paslnaa an Jo Adoo „9£x„tiZ (6) auo :nna!naa }}els aay1an}lot uoi4ewao}ul 6ulnnolloJ 0144 pwgns pue swawwoo He ssaappe aseald 'passaappe aq o} peau Ieyn swap 6u!iielap s4uawwoo MelAaa }}e4s Jo Ts!' e s! a6ed 6u!nnoiloJ au_ 'pa4sanbaa se lead pun pauoguaw-anoge an pannainaa gels (dI) 8 Hd N3AVH mono :1or8f1S aauueld ledioulad `dDI`d `pagny°S uosef:1/10Hd woo'weypuMna){aelo)sinea4 :ein `)lauipelJl smell :01 91.0Z 'VZ I!ad`d :31`da wnaNdaowJw 6,s.Jaaru11 Wry y snxaLI0 aruoll NOLL'v LS=10 1 11C)D K).k L0 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1 Project: DUCK HAVEN PH 8 (FP) - 15-00900085 PLANNING 1. The metes and bound of the plat do not close. It appears the call behind Lots 9-11 does not include the length of the back of Lot 9. 2. Rename Wigeon Trail Drive to Wigeon Trail Court. 3. Revise the Certificate of Ownership and Dedication to include the sentence "All such dedications shall be in fee simple unless expressly provided otherwise." 4. Revise the year listed in the A Certificate of County Judge to state 2015 instead of 2014. 5. Add "Witness my hand and official Seal, at my office in Bryan, Texas." to the Certificate of County Clerk and relocate the certificate to provide additional area for the certificate to be completed. 6. Update the Vicinity Map to have the existing City limit line. 7. Provide a label for the easements between Lots 2&3, 10&11, 12&13, and 13& 7 in Phase 7 and for the 16-foot PUE along the southern side of Wigeon Trail Court. 8. Please note that the final plat for Phase 7 will need to be recorded prior to Phase 8. 9. Please note that you, the applicant, are responsible for scheduling the plat for consideration by the County Commissioner's Court and for getting the County Judge's signature on the Mylar after they approve the plat. Reviewed by: Jason Schubert Date: April 24, 2015 ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1 1. Provide Abbreviation Description for H.O.A.E. 2. Please show the (volume/page) for the existing easements abutting this tract. 3. Has there been effort to acquire offsite drainage easement for the Detention Pond discharge? 4. Add a note on Final Plat stating that fences, grading, structures, landscape, etc. cannot impede the flow of the private drainage easement. 5. Add a note on Final Plat and construction documents regarding requirement for compaction of fill or engineered slab for affected lots that have greater than 2 feet of fill. Also list the lots that would require this. 6. On the Final Plat, increase the width of the Private drainage easement to include the entire swale and Detention Pond. 7. Provide cross section detail for swale, or specify the side slopes. 8. Inset "C" on sheet C3.2, specify the length of headwall. Is the amount of rip rap pass the head wall sufficient to dissipate the runoff's energy? 9. Extent the silt fence to the rear lots of 5 and 6. 10. On the Fire flow report, please apply the 1,000 GPM on Node J-4 which is the most remote & lowest Fire Hydrant Location. Please resubmit Exhibit C. 11. Place a gate valve by the Fire Hydrant on WA-1. Please make it is labeled on the plan & profile. 12. GIS is showing a Ponded area by lots -11-12 and the grading plan is not reflecting the elevation changes. 13. Provide B/CS standard details, and sealed & signed: engineering cost estimate, drainage report, a letter acknowledging that there have been no deviations from the B/CS guidelines. Drainage Report 14. Page 8 is stating a runoff from upland, please show this on your drainage area maps. 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. Page 2 of 3 15. Complete page 18-19 (Detention Section) 16. Please provide exhibit for the Ditch's capacity for 25 storm year and 100 storm year. Please make sure that the 25 storm year event has a freeboard with the ditch of a minimum of 6- inch. 17. Provide calculations showing the capacity, water elevations, and velocity for the swale in the Private drainage easement. Is it possible to have an analysis for the required pipe size in case the future owners decides to have it piped? 18. Exhibit C-2, the existing condition is using the C value for residential. It should use the C value for undeveloped area. 19. How's the travel time for the proposed so much higher than existing condition? 20. How's the overland flow length for the proposed condition twice the length of existing? The Hydraulically furthest distant point shouldn't vary that much if the same delineated drainage basin was used for existing and proposed condition. 21. The existing drainage area is taking into account gutter flow length? I'm not sure what this length is supposed to present since existing condition shouldn't have "gutter flow" if there is currently no ditch. 22. Why's the velocity for the proposed condition slower than existing condition? The increase impervious and ditch should make it faster. 23. Double check your 100-storm year intensity it appears higher than it needs to be. 24. Please provide a Detention Pond summary table showing the relationship of Peak flow, water surface elevation, volume, and freeboard. 25. Provide 100 year plugged condition with the detention pond calculations. 26. During 100- year plugged condition the water surface elevation needs to have a freeboard with the top of berm of at least 6". It appears the berm elevation needs to be increased since the 100 year storm even is reaching water surface elevation reaching the top of the current berm. Reviewed by: Kevin Ferrer Date: April 7, 2015 BRAZOS COUNTY 1. Comments emailed to Travis Martinek and Jeff Robertson. Reviewed by: Alan Munger Date: April 20, 2015 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. Page 3 of 3 Jason Schubert From: Robert A. Munger<RAMunger@brazoscountytx.gov> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 1:29 PM To: Travis Martinek Cc: Jeff Robertson (jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com); Gary Arnold; LLoyd J. Wassermann Subject: Duckhaven 8 Review Attachments: Duckhaven8.pdf Travis: Attached comments and soils information is provided for your further review and use. Thanks, R.Alan Munger, PE County Engineer Brazos County Road & Bridge 2617 Highway 21 West Bryan, TX 77803 Phone: 979-822-2127 x 3026 1 • Duckhaven—Phase 8 Subdivision Brazos County Review Plat& Construction Drawing Review Comments and Suggestions by Munger (979)822-2127 20 April 2015 Sheet No Description Plat Comment: Correct Plat General Note 11 to state"13"Total Lots rather than"3"Total Lots. Drainage Comment: Regulatory Watercourse/Watershed(s)appear to be Franks Creek and Boggy Report Page Creek(not Peach Creek South Tributary). Please review and correct. 4 Drainage Comment: Subject property does appear to straddle a basin divide, please review and Report Page correct. 8 Construct. Comment: Provide Letter of Service from Water Provider. Plans Construct. Comment: Provide Letter of Approval for OSSF's from Health District. Plans Construct Comment: Upon review of existing pavements in other phases of Duckhaven and the Plans C1.1 attached supplemental soils info and any further soils investigation; you may choose to consider thicker pavement section. Construction Comment: Provide Construction Details Plans k b To u A p ass= OVULE CaSScEE COKLEE O1v4ttE OvEWEE aatEE u,e3 m..9,51 ac c M at ac.90. C z A. re K e c 1 �.. cg cn a-- _ g coY 1s ii u„ 11z 1 x / < 1 fi & I 11 11 p 1 1 15 o c E; ix OSWEE Ot99/EE C WEE 0619itE OtSiEt CbfWEE OreSIEE R k A R GO FS az ; .; ' 0. OlLilik bi O CC• E H �. UHL y tV Y� g O4 as � „ E USw 303 ¢ig 0 HN 2 3 m � ct M V Ng 0m- evau D am m �m Z S 2 si S mal fugal Et uc aEa a 'g ofgc m m=m ntKE: .fig ES i a § £ s` '3 - m32 m' a mscil - .w 0 m - gv -5.9,-- a . m gsm S of u,, $ 4 .5� , a 41. r�i mu Nm . c g 5 .. N m � G� al pp huH O I ' 3 l ft 18 030 ull ate' liii m m N 8 .2 2'n to g m 2 m C i C O 1 ■ W ..1 g -Q• .- ill V a a n i a. C N 8 5 8 t ifi A• Ts 3 1 ❑ 1 -. 1 © i9 ® Acxi' -d -It 0 a > ;. 4. aA Ilkr ii il Soil Map—Brazos County,Texas Buckhaven 7 and 8 Map Unit Legend Brazos County,Texas(1X041) Mop Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres In AO1 Percent of AOI BwC Buriewesh fine sandy loam,1 to 0.2 0.5% 5 percent slopes BwD Burlewash fine sandy loam:5 to 1.4 3 2% 8 percent slopes SCC Shalba-Rock outcrop complex, 0 4 1 0% 2 to 6 percent slopes SnB Singleton fine sandy loam,1 to 40.8 95 3% 3 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 42.6 100.0% t�sp� Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/20/2015 ammo Conservation Service National Cooperative Sod Survey Page 3 of 3 Local Roads and Streets—Brazos County,Texas Duckhaven 7 and Local Roads and Streets Local Roads and StreetsSummary by Map Unit—Samos County,Texas(TX041) Map unit Map unit name Rating Component Rating reasons ,Acres In AOt Percent of AOI symbol name(percent) (numeric values) • BwC Burtewash fine Very limited Burtewash(88%) Shrink-swell 0.2 0.5% sandy loam,1 (1.00) to 5 percent slopes Low strength (100) BwD Budewash fine Very limited Buriewash(88%) Shrink-swell 1,4 3,2% sandy loam,5 (1 00) to 8 percent Low strength slopes (1.00) ScC Shalba-Rock Very limited Shalba(50%) Shrink-swell 0 4 1 0% outcrop (1 00) complex,2 to 8 )}epth to sort percent slopes bedrock(1.00) Low strength (1.00) SnB Singleton fine Very lirni#ed Singleton(93%) Shnnk•swell 40 6 95.3% sandy loam,1 (1:00) to 3 percent slopes Low strength (1.00) Totals for Area of interest 42.6 100.0% Local Roads and Streets-Summary by Rating Value Rating I Acres In AOt Percent of AOl Very limited 42 6 100.0% Totals for Area of Interest 42.6 100.0% riaNatural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/20/2015 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of b Local Roads and Streets—Brazos County,Texas Duckhaven 7 and 8 Description Local roads and streets have an all-weather surface and carry automobile and light truck traffic all year.They have a subgrade of cut or fill soil material;a base of gravel, crushed rock,or soil material stabilized by lime or cement;and a surface of flexible material(asphalt),rigid material(concrete),or gravel with a binder.The ratings are based on the soil properties that affect the ease of excavation and grading and the traffic-supporting capacity.The properties that affect the ease of excavation and grading are depth to bedrock or a cemented pan.hardness of bedrock or a cemented pan,depth to a water table,ponding,flooding,the amount of large stones,and slope.The properties that affect the traffic-supporting capacity are soil strength(as inferred from the AASHTO group index number),subsidence,linear extensibility(shrink-swell potential),the potential for frost action,depth to a water table,and ponding. The ratings are both verbal and numerical. Rating class terms indicate the extent to which the soils are limited by all of the soil features that affect the specified use. "Not limited'indicates that the soil has features that are very favorable for the specified use.Good performance and very tow maintenance can be expected. "Somewhat limited"indicates that the sof has features that are moderately favorable for the specified use.The limitations can be overcome or minimized by special planning,design,or installation,Fair performance and moderate maintenance can be expected."Very limited"indicates that the soil has one or more features that are unfavorable for the specified use,The limitations generally cannot be overcome without major soil reclamation,special design,or expensive installation procedures.Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected. Numerical ratings indicate the severity of individual limitations.The ratings are shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00.They indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative impact on the use(1.00)and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation(0.00). The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the Aggregation Report in Sol Data Viewer are determined by the aggregation method chosen.An aggregated rating class is shown for each map unit.The components listed for each map unit are only those that have the same rating class as listed for the map unit.The percent composition of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better understand the percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented. Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit.The ratings for all components,regardless of the map unit aggregated rating,can be viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil Survey or from the Soil Data Mart site.Onsite investigation may be needed to validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified salNatural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/20/2015 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 5 Local Roads and Streets—Brazos County,Texas Duckhaven 7 and B Tie-break Rule: Higher Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/20/2015 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 5 of 5 In R It p O099LEY =WEE OSSWEE 0314CEE OE09CEE OKIVII Oa941 in 4 41.11,1df Q - M31 Si 496O a. 1 g iI oT �.a A 01 Cr) ` . a gL le ac .0 Ii Its§fg ID I 11irs3 4 le -J p I le o E x t. I I 8i A 1 . 5 fi 0NWCE OL49rEE 04GWEE CSWEE: 011,94E OD£WEE 0resat i ll z z k b x A A ; c ca 5 p cQi m 15m oo LOT N NppN C . liuF g flu _ `� Ti _YE �� a8 ff N Pt Iifl !i rw goal , E m O Ira75 mE = E :. m m� 3m L co E 0 ¢ L2 " 16 - E e i `�4L = Em c � m o 09 > LL0 E t 2 o e ' �S a -- of a gz m -agfM m L2 (7) S r2 t m z 2 and Ui p m> 2 tl3geEE IE _ 40 c c _ tom no �+ E iLl =eeosgl -go ms' IE 2ith gE shin NO 83m guiti m r c§— V° ilglI N r (71 0 t 3 ! M z TO i g Ci 1 Z � � W t9 W St 4 m L2 1 xi a i^i z I N "gs g =still a ui st. . ' 1 1 = 6. 15 -6 (Lt zaili11211 Ro 3 0 0 3 . 1 0 4 0 " 11 4 } :' A :- , '''' ' 4 E zu t x A A k 069941 0199tEE 02WEE 09b9LEE Qtb9LEE O4E4tEE 0.29LEE uo rs a 15i R I 0 0 P m g (if R8 1r f. I R 2 R g R x f 8 gl 21 1 1 1 i i w t a . 1 i IAIV,ST AL OSSVEE (MEE OWES °MEE ` OnOttE Cbt wa OftWEE ill k = x b A A k k WIel cS` $ m 2 o C m; W $ y, ;e s- '3 3N vQ, t°t m � ` v e f To 4Q otm O 15 i VI_ yj}� m �g 4mi 411 i z Q ga pht' i Q hi 1 !Id EN Li!i m g'ay 1 — 1 z It6T1 1 5 1 Li Azgu . 152 -� = ¢ >Q � � oil m { _ _ER 2s 3km S,m E °$i gs4 . .'t-r, yv it 1 aa hit C , ' mEE g�tai " e _ t mNo._ Wg- mai7� u m H� I m N AiUr 72 lo z G W f 1 aI, g -2 Sonll ‘ ! Rol , 1 . . . , . g II11 1.1 I Gypsum—Brazos County,Texas Duckhaven 7 and B Gypsum Gypsum-Summary by Map Unit--Brazos County,Texas(TX041) Mem unit symbol I Map unit nine Rating(percent) Acts In AOI Percent of AOI BwC Budewash line sandy 0 0.2 0 5% loam,l to 5 percent slopes Bwa Burtewash fine sandy 0 1 4 3.2% loam,5 to 9 percent slopes ScC Shalba•Rock outcrop 0 0 4 1 0% complex,2 to 6 percent slopes Soft Singleton fine sandy 0 408 95 3% loam,Ito 3 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 42.4 100.0% Description The content of gypsum is the percent,by weight,of hydrated calcium sulfates in the fraction of the soil less than 20 millimeters in size.Gypsum is partially soluble in water.Soils high in content of gypsum,such as those with more than 10 percent gypsum,may collapse if the gypsum is removed by percolating water.Gypsum is corrosive to concrete. For each soil layer,this attribute is actually recorded as three separate values in the database.A low value and a high value indicate the range of this attribute for the soil component A"representative"value indicates the expected value of this attribute for the component.For this soil property,only the representative value is used. Rating Options Units of Measure: percent Aggregation Method: Dominant Component Component Percent Cutoff.' None Specified 77e-break Rule: Higher Interpret Nulls as Zero: Yes Layer Options(Horizon Aggregation Method): Depth Range(Weighted Average) Top Depth: 6 Bottom Depth: 36 Units of Measure: Centimeters alNatural Resources Web Sod Survey 4/20/2015 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 Engineering Properbes—eruns Canty,Taxes Dickhaven 7 end 8 Engineering Properties This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering properties for the layers of each soli in the survey area. Hydrologic soil group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar storm and cover conditions.The criteria for determining Hydrologic soli group Is found to the National Engineering Handbook,Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http:tl directives,sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?contenfr I7757.wba). Listing HSGs by soil map unit component and not by soil series is a new concept for the engineers,Past engineering references contained lists of HSGs by soil series.Soil series are continually being defined and redefined,and the list of soil series names changes so frequently as to make the task of maintaining a single national list virtually Impossible,Therefore,the criteria is now used to calculate the HSG using the component soil properties and no such national series lists will be maintained.Alt such references are obsolete and their use should be discontinued. Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum rate of infiltration fora bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen.These properties are depth to a seasonal high water table.saturated hydraulic conductivity after prolonged wetting,and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission rate.Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes also cause the hydrologic soil group to change,The Influence of ground cover Is treated Independently.There are four hydrologic soil groups,A,B,C.and 0,and three dual groups,ND.BID,and CID.In the dual groups,the first letter Is for drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas. The four hydrologic soil groups are described In the following paragraphs: Group A.Soils having a high infiltration rate(low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet.These consist mainly of deep,well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands,These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B.Soils having a moderate Infiltration rate when thoroughly wet,These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep,moderately well drained or weir drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture.These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C.Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D.Soils having a very slow infiltration rate(high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential,soils that have a high water table,soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface,and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated. e�o Natural Resources Web Sol Survey 4nOt2015 Conservatlon asrdlce National Cooparaeve Sal Survey Page t or 4 Engineering Properties—ewros County,Taxes DocMaven 7 end B Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U,S.Department of Agriculture. These terms are defined according to percentages of sand,sett,and clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter."Loan"for example, is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay,28 to 50 percent silt,and less than 52 percent sand,If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more,an appropriate modifier Is added,for example,"gravelly." Classification of the soils Is determined according to the Unified sol classification system(ASTM,2005)and the system adopted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO,2004), The Unified system classifies saps according to properties that affect their use as construction material,Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of the fraction less than 3 inches In diameter and according to plasticity index,liquid limit,and organic matter content.Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP,GM,GC,SW,SP,SM,and SC:silty and clayey soils as ML,CL,CL,MH,CH, and OH.and highly organic soils as PT.Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two groups can have a dual classification,for example,CL-ML., The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect roadway construction and maintenance,In this system.the fraction of a mineral soil that is less than 3 inches In diameter Is classified in one of seven groups from A-1 through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution,liquid limit,and plasticity index, Sops In group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines(silt and clay),Al the other extreme,soils In group A-7 are fine grained.Highly organic soils are classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection,. If laboratory data are available,the A-1,A-2,and A-7 groups are further classified as A-1-a,A-1-b,A-2-4,A-2-5,A-2-8.A-2-7,A-7-5,or A-7-6.As an additional refinement the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated bye group index number.Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to 20 or higher for the poorest. Rock fragments larger than 10 inches len diameter and 3 to 10 inches in diameter are Indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis.The percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in the field to weight percentage. Percentage(of soil particles)passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight.The sieves, numbers 4,10,40,and 200(USA Standard Series),have openings of 4.78,2,00, 0.420,and 0.074 millimeters,respectively.Estimates are based on laboratory tests of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in the field. Liquid limit and plasticity index(Atterberg limits)indicate the plasticity characteristics of a soh.The estimates are based on test data from the survey area or from nearby areas and on field examination. References: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO). 2004.Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing.24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM).2005.Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes.ASTM Standard D2487-00. iggi, Natural R1p01wwe Web Sof Survey 1120/2015 # Conservation Sank* National Cooperative Sod Surrey Pape 2 of 4 a g m �< a Z6. oo I z N 1 Q 1 2 �, .21-0 4 i d < ' I d < NN Q d y �+ ^ 2 8 V' iri Y7 I e C3 WI el L.. C .�+ QQ p CJ. 0 ./f 4 u] ;C1 8 ! I I Q ? H o o O i, yXi -,T1 ni i I � ', I Qt-0 L p pp p �)'p ) 8 p S 8 8 i.� ,: a o g I o I SL 0 goo -a a�a e1, Q � ' a a c I o 0 1 �, c� 0n w $° a . 1^ ra � � c: c a ( ca a 1 N H .„,,., a ¢ Q l a € _� (3x o x id al G tj -�uI V� J J N -, Q C 12.� U U U U U I •O h• e1 - i 41 3 �� • t 19 � � ti E �. O. 9FU � N ugik x . J �x� O r � L >,k OL. r c mm - a} �" N l0 O C �� Imo + est .1r N O ii [� N N Rl O i :E_ti '`a, ' i U .- OC co c c O � �2Z t is-II <g d w a� c �u, 8m I g ix 0) ! n W Lo =o its a $.= a 0 IIm _ CO - co � � e P 3 E c.ti G [ to v o$ 0 Z r3 I ! Z g c‘J I v Ea P {QQj I - 11F G I a * @ a o.., 47? ' Q I h ( ( 7 h to t0 O 1 U7 0 O 4j 4 t, 0 � , co v u o_ 0 0 0 ',ft, ui 5 d 0 ca I I-.? 0 to CA I !r 8 S 0 SS t :1 ,, .... 0 0 I I 0 0 0 A l',2=' w 7* �4CS 11 . _ a I 1:% O p o . . , , '1 1 4 . 1i1 " ¢ a f 38 • vl2 U 1 1 U U Q I z 7 1 E E �p 0 v) rei u x CV F A. Y C �J 1 t`t�11f' V g 0 I- a a/6 : ...,,, : 14,' E O• r _ > Y CO p o 10 afu ti li8 al � . 3. c a Ti m i 1112 i@ _m g' c o CI) t w La CA G 1 1.k.... r/ CITY O1:COLLEGE STAT ION Home of Texas A&M University' MEMORANDUM DATE: March 19, 2015 TO: Travis Martinek, via; travis©clarkewyndham.comk/ FROM: Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner SUBJECT: DUCK HAVEN PH 8 (FP) Thank you for the submittal of the required documents of your Final Plat - Residential application. Kevin Ferrer, Graduate Engineer, and I have been assigned to review this project. It is anticipated that the review will be completed and any staff comments returned to you on or before Thursday, April 2, 2015. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel free to contact us. PC: Jeff Robertson, McClure & Browne Engineering, via; jeffrmcclurebrowne.com 1.7 P&DS Project No. 15-00900085 Planning&Development Services P.O.BOX 9960 • 1101 i FXAS AVENUE •c.Of I_EC T_ S,FAFION •TE\AS • 77843 €'1i1 979.764.3570 •FAX. 979 764.3196 c s tx.go v/d evs a rvi c e s CLARKS & WYNDHAM REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT SERVICES TRAVIS MARTINEK 3608 East 29th Street,Suite 100 Bryan,Texas 77802 Office: (979)846-4384 Fax: (979)846-1461 Cell: (979)229-9877 TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: DATE: Jason Schubert 3/18/2015 COMPANY: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: CS Ping & Dvipmt Sery See below FAX NUMBER: PHONE NUMBER: RE: Duck Haven— Phase 8 Water Report ❑ URGENT ❑ FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY 0 PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES/COMMENTS: Attached is the water report for Duck Haven Phase 8. (111Ar. "7444 CITY OP COLLEGE STATION Home of Texas A&M University" MEMORANDUM DATE: March 13, 2015 TO: Travis Martinek, via; travisQclarkewyndham.com FROM: Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner SUBJECT: DUCK HAVEN PH 8 (FP) I reviewed the above-mentioned Final Plat - Residential application and determined it to be incomplete. The following is the preliminary list of items needed to complete the submittal. Please submit the following information so this application can be forwarded for review: Provide a copy of a water/fire flow report for the proposed subdivision. Please be aware that if this application is not completed before Monday, April 27, 2015, it will expire and a new application and fees will be necessary to continue the platting process. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570. PC: Jeff Robertson, McClure & Browne Engineering, via; jeffr(cr�,mcclurebrowne.com P&DS Project No. 15-00900085 Planning er Development Services P.O.BOX 9960 • 1101"1TXAS AVENUE •COLLEGE STATION •"TEXAS •77843 ILL.979.764.3570 •FAX. 97 9.764.3496 cs tx.go v/d evs a ry i c e s