HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff CommentsCrITor COJJJ-.GF SrMON
Ham, of fiXx AirM unimsity'
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
MEMORANDUM
January 29, 2010
TO: Steve Duncan; via fax 979-846-2893V Kw !0
FROM: Jason Schubert, AICP
Senior Planner
SUBJECT: VALLEY PARK CENTER PH 2 (SP)
I reviewed the above -mentioned Site Plan and associated applications turned in for the July 27"' deadline and
determined it to be incomplete. The following is the preliminary list of items needed to complete the submittal
so that staff may conduct a thorough review. Please submit the following information by 10 a.m. on any
Monday and if all information has been submitted sufficiently, the project will be forwarded for staff review that
week:
Development Permit Application fee of $600. The development permit is not just for public
infrastructure but for the review of all private improvements;
Complete the Non -Residential Architecture Standards Application by providing all the proposed
materials and colors and their percentages for each elevation; and
Traffic Impact Analysis or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not
necessary for this proposed development as detailed in UDO Section 7.12 Traffic Impact Analyses (not
Section 7.9.6.d). The calculations provided were based on a threshold of 5,000 daily trips, the current
threshold is 150 trips in the peak hour.
Please be aware that if this application is not completed before March 15, 2010: Monday after 45 days from
January 27t' deadline, it will expire and a new application and fees will be necessary to continue the
development process.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 979.764.3570.
cc: Titan Valley Park, Limited Partnership; via fax 713-355-4275✓ K4{ 1'2F1' I O
Case file No. 10-00500008 (SP)
Case file No. 10-00500009 (NRA)
An
CITY or C01.1.1tca: ST THIN
Homeo%iirns.4c'.11 Uuiur+sirr`
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
MEMORANDUM
February 1, 2010
TO: Steve Duncan; via fax 979-846-2893/I 114 a• V 10
FROM: Jason Schubert, AICP
Senior Planner
SUBJECT: VALLEY PARK CENTER PH 2 (SP/NRA/DP)
Thank you for your submittal of the requested information for your Site Plan and associated applications. This
project was submitted for the January 27t" submittal deadline and will be distributed to staff this week for their
review.
cc: Titan Valley Park, Limited Partnership; via fax 713-355A275✓'m' 2•I•�p
Case file no. 10-00500008 (SP)
Case file No. 10-00500009 (NRA)
Case file No. 10-00100002 (DP)
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1
Project: Valley Park Center Ph 2 (SP) — 10-00500008
PLANNING
1. As previously discussed, you may build over the existing lot lines of Lots 2 and 3 without
pursuing a replat. With this, please add phase line that encompasses all site improvements
on both lots. The phase line should be located 20' from any new improvement. Please
remove the "pending lot line" and re -bold the existing lot lines. All of lot 3 needs to be
shown on the site plan. Lot 2 should be included in the site plan is detention pond
improvements are being made.
2. Please revise the title block to show the acreage for each lot as it currently is platted.
3. The site plan does not appear to be meet interior island requirements and Concept 3 of
Section 7.9 of the UDO. If 1200 SF of island spaces is counting toward the interior island
requirement, then there is only 938 SF counting toward Concept 3.
4. Request: Please reduce the font size of the label on the site plan to make it easier to read.
Thank you.
5. The number of handicap spaces provided is correct. However, the ratio in the parking
analysis should be 1:6 instead of 1:8 for van accessible spaces.
6. Please dimension each drive aisle and periodic parking spaces.
7. There should be a 3' clear space between the bike racks and the parking spaces.
8. Please clarify how the transformer will be screened from view of the abutting property.
9. If CMU is being used to screen the dumpster, it must be painted with a high build paint to
resemble plaster.
10. The fire lane sign should state, "Fire Lane — No Parking — Tow Away Zone.
11. Please provide curb, pavement, bike rack, and tree well details on the site plan. Also, the
height of the building should be an exact number.
12. FYI ... The eastern fagade will be considered "facing a right-of-way".
13. Please adjust the Tree Well Analysis to show 360 linear feet of building fagade.
14. There should be a 5' wide pedestrian pathway that connects each of the buildings within the
Valley Park developments.
15. The tree wells should be 6' squares.
16. Please show the Fire Department Connection on the building.
17. Thank you for showing the 300' lay of hose. However, to simplify the site plan these lines
may be removed.
18. Is the bold dashed line intended to show the fire lane?
19. Please show and label all existing easements with their volume and page numbers.
20. Is there a private access agreement between Lot 2 and Lot 3 and 4. If not, this should be
provided.
21. Retaining walls must be screened or treated to resemble stone or brick.
22. Setbacks dimensions should be shown on the site plan. Also, please provide a width for the
FM 2818 right-of-way.
23. Please show the curb along the existing driveway and drive aisle.
24. Please add a note stating that Valley Park Center will be considered one building plot and
shall comply with additional standards for building plots over 50,000 SF found in Section 7.9
of the UDO.
25. Provide a general note on the site plan that all roof and ground -mounted mechanical
equipment shall be screened from view or isolated so as not to be visible from any public
right-of-way or residential district within 150' of the subject lot, measured from a point five
feet above grade. Such screening shall be coordinated with the building architecture and
scale to maintain 2 unified appearance.
26. Provide a general note on the site plan that states the following: Exterior building and site
lighting will meet the standards of,Section 7.10 of the Unified Development Ordinance. The
light source shall not project below an opaque housing and no fixture shall directly project
light horizontally. Fixtures will be mounted in such a manner that the projected cone of light
does not cross any property line.
27. 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: Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner Date: February5, 2010
LANDSCAPING/STREETSCAPJNG/BUFFER
1. Please revise the landscape and streetscape calculations to include all the property within
the phase line as well as the detention pond area.
2. Since this building plot is over 50,000 SF, landscaping point must be doubled according to
Section 7.9.E.3.a of the LIDO.
3. There is shown to be crepe myrtles on Lot 3 outside of the proposed parking area. This
area will be future parking with the Lot 3 development.
4. Please add a note that non -canopy trees are measure 12" from grade on a single cane.
5. Landscaping points should be distributed into the detention pond.
6. Please remove any reference to a new plat being pursued.
7. Please label each plant species with the number being planted.
8. The caliper information in the legend and the analysis do not match. FYI... Canopy and
non -canopy trees should be a minimum 2" caliper.
9. Please provide a different symbol for each plant species.
10. FYI.... Loose rock is not a permitted groundcover.
Reviewed by: Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner Date: February5, 2010
MISCELLANEOUS
1. 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.
2. All BackFlow devices must be installed and tested upon installation as per City Ordinance
2394.
TXDOT
If no additional access required, there is no is comment. Appropriate data, including drainage
will be required for any future work/permits in the ROW @ this development site.
Reviewed by: Karl Nelson
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1
Date: 1/29/10
1. Please submit letter of acknowledgement, found at www.bcsunited.net
2. Please submit engineers cost estimate.
3. Please submit TxDOT permit for proposed drainage improvements. Please use the most up
to date TxDOT driveway access permit for this submittal. Also please provide all relevant
construction documents and drainage calcs. Please provide 5 (11x17) sets of these permits
and documents. This submittal should be made to the CoCS and will be forwarded to
TxDOT for final review and approval.
4. Please provide detail of how the proposed drainage system inlets will operate for this phase.
5. Please identify and call out the existing storm drain proposed to collect the runoff
surrounding the structure and take it to storm inlet #1. Please verify that this is appears on
all sheet.
6. Please provide a note on the landscaping plan that the proposed canopy trees are not be be
planted directly above the existing water main.
7. Please identify FDC connection.
8. Please provide water / waste water demands.
9. Please provide a note addressing construction sequencing, as it is required that the
detention facility be constructed with the initial construction phase.
10. Although it will not affect your proposed design, please check your fire flow report, as the
required fire flow for this structure is 3250 gpm and with a 50% reduction is 1625 gpm.
11. Also revise note 9 accordingly and state the use of the (50%) sprinkler system reduction.
12. Please provide BCS Details when submitting for stamping.
13. Please submit 11x17 grading and erosion control plan.
14. The sanitary sewer main that is currently under construction (95%) complete will need to be
located within a PUE eventually, please verify that the proposed private storm system does
not encroach this area.
15. The City adopted the 2006 Building Codes which require a standalone Building Permit and
inspection for all retaining walls greater than 2 feet above grade - and need to be sealed by
an engineer. This application is the standard Building Permit application which is reviewed
and inspected by Building.
16. Please verify and detail that the proposed pilot channel meets the standards set in the BCS
Drainage Guidelines.
17. It appears that the top of the retaining wall is below the 100-yr WSE.
18. Please provide detail of proposed outfall structure.
19. The emergency spillway should be set at the 100-yr elevation. Please provide detail of the
emergency spillway.
20. Please verify that the 6 inch freeboard has been provided above emergency spillway (100 yr
WSE).
21. Please provide detail for tying into existing inlet box.
22. Please sign and seal the drainage report and technical design summary.
23. In addition to the following standard comments, if more than 5 acres will be disturbed during
construction of this project a NO] must be filed with the state and a copy provided to the
ELECTRICAL COMMENTS REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ATTENTION
1. Developer provides temporary blanket easement for construction purposes or provides
descriptive easements for electric infrastructure as designed by CSU for electric lines
2. Developer may be responsible for locating easements on site to insure that electrical
infrastructure is installed within easement boundaries.
GENERAL ELECTRICAL COMMENTS
1. Developer installs conduit per CSU specs and design.
2. CSU will provide drawings for electrical installation.
3. Developer provides 30' of rigid or IMC conduit for riser poles. CSU installs riser.
4. Developer will intercept existing conduit at designated transformers or other existing devices
and extend as required.
5. If conduit does not exist at designated transformer or other existing devices, developer will
furnish and install conduit as shown on CSU electrical layout.
6. Developer pours electric device pads or footings (i.e. transformers, pull boxes etc) per CSU
specs and design.
7. Developer installs pull boxes per CSU specs and design (pull boxes provided by CSU).
8. Developer provides digital AutoCAD 2000 or later version of plat and / or site plan. Email to:
sweido@cstx.gov.
9. Developer provides load data to CSU as soon as it is available to avoid construction delays.
Delivery time for transformers not in stock is approximately 40 weeks.
10. Final site plan must show all proposed electrical facilities necessary to provide electrical
service, i.e. transformer(s), pull box(es), switchgear(s), meter location and conduit routing as
designed by CSU.
11. To discuss any of the above electrical comments please contact Sam Weido at
979.764.6314.
Reviewed by: Sam Weido Date: 2-4-10
SANITATION
1. Sanitation is ok with this project.
Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: February 4, 2010
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Cirr or Cora res STdTTON Phone 979,764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
Home ofTc. A6-bl Univeaity'
MEMORANDUM
February 11, 2010
TO: Steve Duncan via fax: 979-846-2893
FROM: Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner
SUBJECT: Valley Park Center Ph 2 - 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 by any Monday at 10:00 a.m. for further staff review:
Cover memo providing written responses to all of staff's comments (identify the
specific page that each comment was addressed on or the reason for not
addressing the comment);
Four (4) revised site and one (1) landscaping plan;
Easement Dedication Sheet and required documents (please note that the Site
Plan will not be stamped approved until the Blanket Easement, or all other
appropriate easements, have been dedicated to the City of College Station).
If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a
letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please
contact Lauren Hovde at 979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
cc: Titan Valley Park, Limited Partnership via fax: 713-355-4275
Case file #10-00500008
CoCS. Storm water management requirements are as follows, any questions may be
directed to Donnie Willis, CoCS Drainage Inspector, at 979-764-6375:
Storm Water Discharges from Small Construction Activities
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has issued a general permit for construction
activities under the Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System. The general permit
(TXR150000) is for construction activities disturbing at least 1 but less than 5 acres or is part of
a common plan of development disturbing at least 1 butless than 5 acres.
You will need to follow these steps to discharge storm water from your construction site to the
City of College Station's Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer System (MS4):
1. Read the general permit (TXR150000) to make sure it applies to your situation.
2. Adhere to the requirements of the general permit (TXR150000).
3. Prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan in accordance with Part
III of the general permit (TXR150000).
4. Sign and post a construction site notice.
5. At least 2 days before beginning construction, provide a copy of the site notice to the
operator of any Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer System (MS4) into which storm
water will be discharged.
A MS4s include streets, channels, gutters, ditches or anything else that is publicly owned,
designed or used to collect or transport storm water.
As long as you meet the conditions of this general permit, you are authorized to discharge storm
water.
No notice of intent (NOI), notice of termination (NOT), or fee is required under this option —as
long as the requirements of this general permit are followed.
This particular general permit will expire at midnight on March 5, 2013.
A copy of General Permit 7XR150000 can be obtained from TCEQ at:
http/www. tceq. state. tx. us/assets/public/permitting/waterquality/attachments/stormwater/txr150000. pdf
A copy of the construction site notice can be obtained from TCEQ at.-
http/www. tceq. state. tx. us/assets/public/permitting/waterquality/attachments/stormwater/txr152d2. pdf
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: February 11, 2010
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box
9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
CITY OF COtJYG6 STATION
Hm AEMU� MEMORANDUM
March 18, 2010
0 ®�.1�Y
TO: Steve Duncan via fax: 979-846-2893� L(,
FROM: Lauren Hovde, Staff Planner
SUBJECT: Valley Park Center Ph 2 - Site Plan Comments #2
Staff reviewed the above -mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list of staff
review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. The next submittal will be the third
and final review by staff for this round of reviews. If all items have not been addressed on the
next submittal, another $668 processing fee will need to be submitted for the subsequent set of
three (3) reviews. Please address the comments and submit the following information by any
Monday at 10:00 a.m. for further staff review:
Eight (8) complete sets of construction documents for the proposed development
with the revised site and landscaping plans attached (one set will be returned to
you, please submit additional copies if you want more than one approved set)
Four (4) revised site plans
One (1) landscaping plan
One (1) 11x17 grading and erosion control plan
If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a
letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please
call me at 979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
� gg�.\ ,0
cc: Titan Valley Park, Limited Partnership via fax: 713-355-4275v L,
Case file #10-00500008
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO.2
Project: Valley Park Center Ph 2 (SP) - 10-00500008
PLANNING
1. The site plan scale is 1 "=40'. Please adjust the scale to show this.
2. Please submit a sample of the retaining wall material that is supposed to simulate stone.
3. The FDC should be within 150' if afire hydrant.
4. The fire lane must be shown on the site plan itself.
5. The parking islands are no longer labeled with their square footage. Please revise.
6. Is there a new driveway shown on Lot 4?
7. Please clarify the purpose of Note 9.
8. The Private Access Easement must be filed prior to site plan approval.
9. Please resubmit a landscape plan that includes the development of Lot 4, which should be
landscaped.
10. Please clarify which 6 spaces are not included as interior spaces for the parking island
calculation.
11. 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: Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 2
Date: March 16, 2010
1. Please submit engineers cost estimate.
2. The proposed maximum water demands would only allow for a .75 inch meter, please
revise.
3. Please provide a note addressing construction sequencing, as it is required that the
detention facility be constructed first.
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: March 16, 2010
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
CITYOF COIJ.IiGI' STATION
H.,rr. AdMUI.h�1 MEMORANDUM
April 19, 2010 J�A \� 4
TO: Steve Duncan via fax: 979-846-2893J
FROM: Lauren Hovde, Staff Planner
SUBJECT: Valley Park Center Ph 2 (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 by any Monday at 10:00 a.m. for further staff review:
$668 processing fee for the next round of three (3) staff reviews .
Seven (7) complete sets of construction documents for the proposed
development with the revised site and landscaping plans attached (one set will
be returned to you, please submit additional copies if you want more than one
approved set)
Four (4) revised site plans
One (1) landscaping plan
One (1) 11x17 grading and erosion control plan
If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a
letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call
me at 979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
PC: Titan Valley Park, Limited Partnership via fax: 713-355-4275 0/
Case file #10-00500008
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 3
Project: Valley Park Center Ph 2 (SP) - 10-00500008
1. Please revise Island C on Sheet C1.1 to be 431 SF. Also, interior islands must be a
minimum of 180 SF each.
2. Parking spaces must be measured from the face of curb. Please revise Sheet C1.2.
3. 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: Lauren Hovde Date: April 19, 2010
LANDSCAPING/STREETSCAPING/BUFFER
1. Please provide a different symbol for each plant species.
2. What do the two sizes of non -canopy tree symbols mean?
3. Canopy trees with a 2.1" diameter only receive 150 points; you have those receiving 200
points in the calculations. Please revise.
4. The calculation table for Lot 2 & 3 states there are 61 non -canopy trees, but I can only find
57. Please correct.
5. The property has 270' of frontage along FM 2818. Please revise the landscaping
calculations accordingly. 11 canopy trees will be required for streetscaping. This
requirement is being met, but please revise the Streetscape Analysis.
6. There appears to be more 5 gallon shrubs provided than what is shown in the landscaping
calculations.
7. Please change the symbol for 1 gallon shrubs. It is difficult to count the number being
provided.
8. Do the LIDO Article 7 Applied Notes mean that you are asking for the two separate 10
percent point credits? Please clarify.
9. The right-of-way frontage should not be excluded from the detention pond phase.
10. There is a note on Sheet C1.7 that states the landscape plan is subject to change. If future
changes are made during installation, an as -built plan will be required.
11. Landscaping must be dispersed into the detention pond.
Reviewed by: Lauren Hovde Date: April 19, 2010
FIRE
1) Either the landscaping needs to move for a clear view of the FDC or the FDC needs
to be a remote to the street side.
Reviewed by: Eric Dotson Date: 4/6/10
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO.2
Project: Valley Park Center Ph 2 (SP)—10-00500008
PLANNING
1. The site plan scale is 1"=40'. Please adjust_tbo scale to show this.
Adjusted. Please refer to City Site Plan sheet.''
2. Please submit a sample of the retaining wall material that is supposed to simulate stone.
I am submi ing a photo of a recent project in Bryan, as well as a sample of the stone used on the same
project.
3. The FDC should be within 150' if afire hydrant
I have labeled the existing hydrant loyated in the PUE along the lot i and lot 2 boundary. The FDC is
within 3.5o' of this hydrant location. /
4. The fire lane must be shown on the site plan itself.
I have shown the fire lane on the City Site Plan /
5. The parking islands are no longer labeled with their square footage. Please revise.
I have shown the entire island squa(g footage. Please refer to the chart describing the property meeting
the individual LIDO requirements. �✓�C
6. Is there a new driveway shown on Lot 4? Z
No, that is a spillway for the detention pond. The spillway is to bean earthen spillway
7. Please clarify the purpose of I)Tote 9.
Note 9 has been removed. /
8. The Private Access Easement must be filed prior to site pl approval.
Please see attached Private Access Easement documentation,i
9. Please resubmit a landscape plan that includes the development of Lot 4, which should be
landscaped.
I have submitted the landscape plans. I have shown a phase lime on lot 4 around the detention pond. The
landscape plan only includes the area within the phase line.
10. Please clarify which 6 spaces are not included as interior spaces for the parking island
calculation.
I have included all of�e spaces as interior spaces for the LIDO Calculations. The UDO chart has been
adjusted accordingly.
11. 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.
From Previous Review Comments:
Note 9: If CMU is being used to screen dumpster, it must be painted with a high build
paint to resemble plaster.
Please see note added to City Site Plan Sheet Ci.i, Project Specific Notes No.16
The following changes have been made to the plan sheet:
i. City Site Plan Sheet Ci.i Earthen Spillway for detention pond.
2. Dimension and Striping C1.2 None
3. Grading and Erosion Control C1.3 Ex. Manhole note added.
4. Grading and Erosion Control ci.4 Detail: Junction Box: Future Storm Inlet Detail
added. Modified the bottom of the detention pond to meet city min slope requirements.
5. Utility Plan Ci.5 None.
6. Landscape Plan C3..6 Made changes to plant quantity and locations to
meet LIDO requirements.
7. Landscape Plan C1.7 Entire plan sheet added.
8. Detention Pond Ci.g Adjusted bottom of pond to meet city min slope
requirements. Shows earthen spillway with short drystack side walls.
Review by: Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner Date: Match 16, 2010
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO.2
1 lease submit engineer's cost estimate.
I will submit engineer's cost estimate with signed set of plans.
The proposed maximum water demands would only allow for a .75 inch meter, please revise.
PI t elt d d t bl
ease no a rev se wa er eman a e.
La please provide a note addressing construction sequencing, as it is required that the detention
facility be constructed first.
Please see note number io on the City Site Plan Sheet Ci.i
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: March 16, 2010
LA`n- � �
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO.3_'
Project: Valley Park Center Ph 2 (SP)—10-00500008
1. Please revise Island C on Sheet C1.1 to be 431 sf. Also, interior islands must be a minimum
of 180 sf each. Asa result of increasing the interior islands to meet the 28o sf minimum, Island C now
measures 4i3 sf.
2. Parking spaces must be measured from face of curb. Please revise sheet C1.2. Sheet Ci.z has
been revised to correct the measurements showing the parking space sizes. Parking spaces are now
measured from face of curb.
3. 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. No additional changes to mention.
Review by: Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner Date: APRIL 19, 2010
LANDSCAPING/STREETSCAPINGBUFFER
1. Please provide a different symbol for each plant species. I have provided quantity callouts for the 3.
gallon plant specimens. I am leaving the selection of the plant species up to the landscape installer. I have
shown areas and quantities of i gallon plants showing that the site meets the city's minimum landscape
requirements.
2. What do the two sizes of non -canopy tree symbols mean? I have removed the smaller symbol. All
of the proposed non -canopy trees now have the same size symbol.
3. Canopy trees with a 2.1" diameter only receive 150 points; you have those receiving 200
points in the calculations. Please revise. I have corrected the associated point for the canopy trees.
4. The calculation table for Lot 2 & 3 states there are 61 non -canopy trees, but I can only find
57, please correct. I have corrected the calculation table for both landscape plans.
5. The property has 270' of frontage along FM 2818. Please revise the landscaping calculations
accordingly. 11 canopy trees will be required for streetscaping. This requirement is being
met, but please revise the Streetscape Analysis. Please seethe adjusted calculations, [am showing
20 non -canopy trees as a replacement for canopy trees between the driveway and the property line, and I am
using two of the tree well trees to apply to the canopy tree requirements for the Streetscape Analysis.
6. There appears to be more 5gallon shrubs provided than what is shown in the landscaping
calculations. I have revised the landscaping plans to correct this and to simplify the review process. Please
note the small plant quantity labels provided on the plan sheet.
7. Please change the symbol for 1 gallon shrubs. It is difficult to count the number being
provided. I have provided quantity cal louts for the i gallon shrubs on lot 2/3 and for the 5 gallon plants on
lot 4; there are no i gallon plants called out on lot 4.
8. Do the UDO Article 7 Applied Notes mean that you are asking for the two separate 10
percent point credits? Please clarify. I have removed the notes that do not apply to this plan set.
9. The right-of-way frontage should not be excluded from the detention pond phase. Per my
conversation with Lauren Hovde, I am including the frontage along the southeast edge of the property, but
not along the east facing edge of lot 4. The landscape plan has been adjusted to reflect this.
10. There is a note on Sheet C1.7 that states the landscape plan is subject to change. If future
changes are made during installation, an as -built plan will be required. I have added a note on
the landscape plans to restate this comment.
11. Landscaping must be dispersed into the detention pond. I have added some plantings into the
detention pond.
Review by: Lauren A. Hovde, Staff Planner Date: APRIL 19, 2010
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO.2
The following has been addressed from a previous submittal:
.'e0o'signed - Drainage Report
-Signed -Technical Design Summary
Signed — Engineer's cost estimate.
Note addressing construction sequencing. See City Site Plan.
FIRE
1. Either the landscaping needs to move for a clear view of the FDC or the FDC needs to be a
remote to the street side. The plants have been moved to provide a clear view of the FDC. Also the plants
that remain will not get taller than 18"