HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Comments1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
MEMORANDUM
March 10, 2011
TO: Veronica Morgan, Mitchell & Morgan, LLP., via fax: 979.260.3564V/
FROM: Molly Hitchcock, AICP
Planning Administrator
SUBJECT: COTTAGES OF COLLEGE STATION (SP)
Thank you for the submittal of your SITE PLAN ! RESIDENTIAL application. This project will be
distributed to staff next week for their review.
cc: Rob Howland, C.O.O., Capstone -CS, LLC., via email: rhowland(a)capstoneemail.com✓
Case file no. 11-00500045
1101 Texas Avenue, P.O. Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone 979.764.3570 / Fax 979.764.3496
CITY OF COLi.RGIt STATION
11--fT. mA&M Uni—iiy
MEMORANDUM
May 26, 2011
TO: Veronica Morgan, P.E., Mitchell & Morgan, via email: v@mitchellandmorgan.com
FROM: Jennifer Prochazka, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Cottages Of College Station (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:
City of College Station Transmittal Letter;
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;
$ Parkland Dedication fees prior to issuance of a building permit;
Please note that this application will expire in 90 days from the date of this memo, if the
applicant has not provided written response comments and revised documents to the
Administrator that seek to address the staff review comments contained herein. 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
Matt Robinson at 979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
pc: Capstone — CS, LLC c/o Rob Howland, C.O.O., via email: rhowland@capstoneemail.com
Case file #11-00500045
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 2
Project: Cottages Of College Station (SP) — 11-00500045
PLANNING
1. In regards to General Construction Note #16, 1 want to clarify that landscape can be bonded,
but the buffer (that required by 7.6) will need to be installed prior to CO.
2. Overall height listed as N/A for buildings 170-207. Please provide information.
3. While the fencing is still included on the site plan, you had mentioned possibly removing the
fence from the perimeter of the site. This will not be possible in the required buffer areas.
4. Please include alternative garbage collection plans within the site as a note on the site plan
(as referenced in the comment response letter).
o( 5Thank you for including the note related to compliance with Section 7.10 Site Lighting.
Generally, the lighting detail provided conflicts with this requirement. Lighting not visible
from the perimeter of a development is exempted from this requirement. Please ensure that
the proposed lights are either in compliance or not visible from the perimeter.
6. Please provide the dimensions of the roll -off compactor enclosure (need to meet the 29'x16'
inside dimension).
7. Pages 47, 58 and 59 should be included with the site plan package for stamping (include
site plan details).
8. Buffer fence height is 6' minimum. Detail shows 5'-6".
9. Screening fence for compactor will need to exceed the height of the compactor.
10. Signage information has been included on page 59. These have not been reviewed for
compliance. A separate sign permit application with minimum information for review will
need to be submitted.
11. The PDD ordinance requires that the trail system connects each block shown on the
Concept Plan. Based on this requirement, the trail system will need to stub to the next block
to the northwest with this development.
12. Thank you for providing the grading information on the site plan. Please label the grading
lines (existing topo labeled, proposed is not).
13. Minimum buffer requirements also include shrub plantings — one every three feet. Please let
me know if you need the list of approved buffer plants.
14. The buffer berm along the single-family property line includes several very large gaps.
Please address.
15. 1 apologize for not making this comment on the previous review, however, streetscape
plantings and points are also required for the Dowling right-of-way (732 feet according to the
plat — please dimension on site plan). To help out with the points, the ordinance allows you
to deduct the buffer area (that required by 7.6 — adjacent to the single-family area) from the
overall site area when determining the required landscape points. Please contact me if you
need clarification. Again, I apologize for the oversight.
- WCA d try U/t bzr�
Reviewed by:"Jennifeochazka Date: May 25, 2011
ENGINEERING
Site plan submittal looks good. Please submit the followi g:
Response to 5/13/11 comments (below)
Engineers Cost Estimate - signed/sealed
Letter of Acknowledgment
Final Draft of all design reports: water, sewer& drainage - Signed/Sealed
Technical Design Summary - Signed/Sealed
I' rad" Sdi+' 0s a s Ie pm
Remaining DP balance $5,853.06
Private Sewer Plans to Building - No Application Needed (Send Ben an e-mail with Licenced
Plumber's Name once you have it)
Sets for stamping - 7 full sets, 2 stand alone site plans, 1 stand alone landscape plan (This will
give you 1 set back with permit)
May 13, 2011 comments.
I will need an updated, signed/sealed drainage report prior to site approval, as well as a signed/sealed
technical design summary. In addition please submit the finalized version of the sanitary sewer or water
reports.
The comments I have are related to the drainage report & grading/storm plans and are as follows:
*(Drainage Report) Please verify HGL in private storm system and depth of drainage at inlets during 100-
yr event. Please provide data to support your findings. Ultimately please verify that during the 100 yr
event the parking lot is not holding more than 6 inches of water, as it appears that several culverts/inlets
are surcharged during the 100-yr event.
*(Drainage Report) Please provide detention pond routing data and WSE at each storm event threshold.
*(Sheet 51) Would erosion control or stabilization measures be appropriate in the low lying area directly
above the proposed sanitary sewer main and directly downstream of "Section B-B" emergency outfall? I
would be curios if this area is already experiencing erosion/stabilization issues, if not it may not be a
concern
*(Sheet 51 & 52) When comparing the proposed outlet locations to an aerial showing the adjacent 2818
Place Apartment buildings they do not appear to align. For example, the outlet for Pond 1 appears to be
located 25 feet away from and be pointed directly at a retaining wall/foundation on the 2818 Place
development? The Pond 2 outfall does not appear to align with the 2818 Place receiving culvert?
Related to 5/31/11 meeting, the following items were discussed:
*(Sheet 51) Revise grading plan in order to create a 4:1 slope above the proposed sanitary sewer main
as it crosses the detention pond berm. Also please note this change in Section A -A Inset Detail.
*(Sheet 51) Please add inset to sheet of plan view of Detention Pond 1 area
*Please add water demands corresponding to each meter in the "Meter Table"
*Please verify fire flow capabilities on scenarios requiring greater than 1500 gpm out of a single hydrant
*Please verify that structural backfill is in profile view where appropriate
*Please check and adjust isolation valve location in proximity to structures
*Adjust specific street light locations as discussed
*Label "new" hydrants on "Overall Site Plan" sheets
Reviewed by: Josh Norton Date: May 31, 2011