Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondenceJason Schubert From: Jason Schubert Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 4:23 PM To: 'v@mitchellandmorgan.com' Subject: RE: existing curb vs. new curb - Plaza 36ft public access way area Veronica, the 36-foot public way, as you call it, is fine. With the opposite side being off of your client's property, you are not responsible for building the sidewalks or getting the additional public access easement dedicated to accommodate it. That will be their responsibility which once done, as you've mentioned in the Home2 Suites example, will provide the full width of the public way. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Jason Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Development Services City of College Station office: (979) 764-3570 fax:(979) 764-3496 www.cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University O From: Veronica Morgan fmailto:veronica@mitchellandmorgan.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 5:15 PM To: Jason Schubert Subject: existing curb vs. new curb - Plaza 36ft public access way area Jason, as requested we pulled together a drawing for you showing the existing vs. proposed curbline on Meadowland and how they fall in relation to the 36' public way.. as you can see the new curbline is well within the area that was reserved by the city as a public access easement for Meadowland. We have placed the 40ft public way on the access easement line throughout and only here where the garage4 is located do we pinch that public access easement location, on our side thus reducing it to 36ft. does this give you enough information to send me back a response to my initial question? which was - is it ok to pinch this 40ft public way requirement to 36ft only in this location given that we still are maintaining a 2611 roadway (it does not get pinched) and we are still maintaining a 6ft sidewalk on our side of the public way? In addition we do have the layout for the new extended stay hotel and they show a sidewalk on their side outside the public access way so you will end up with sidewalks on both sides of this 2641 roadway.... thanks much Veronica Jason Schubert From: Jason Schubert Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 5:23 PM To: 'Will Quintanilla' Cc: Benjamin Mccarty;'bobby@humphreys.com' Subject: Plaza apartment building plans I know that Ben had responded to you and I wanted to make sure that you had heard from me as well for the apartment building plans. I have a couple of comments related to the plans: 1) A Northgate Building Review application needs to be submitted for review and be approved before building permits for these buildings can be issued. In looking at the elevations generally, they appear to be addressing a number of standards (as required by the PDD rezoning to meet UDO Section 5.6.13.4 Building Design Standards) but I would need to verify that through the application that includes material and color percentages, material samples, and identifies architectural relief/design elements on the facades. 2) Describe what the "26 Employee Space" label means in the service aisle of Building 2 on sheet GA4.20a&b. 3) As mentioned in yesterday's site plan comments, how sanitation services will be provided to the development needs further explanation and approved by the City's Sanitation Department. Wally Urrutia, Sanitation Foreman, can be contacted at 979-764-3841. 4) Update the parking tables and retail square feet calculations to reflect the latest version. I spoke with Veronica Morgan late this afternoon about a coordination meeting taking place tomorrow. If you have any questions about these or other comments, please feel free to contact me. Thanks, Jason Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Development Services City of College Station office: (979) 764-3570 fax:(979) 764-3496 www.cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University Jason Schubert From: Jason Schubert Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 5:25 PM To: 'v@mitchellandmorgan.com' Cc: 'rick@woodridgecapital.com'; 'bobby@humphreys.com'; 'Awallis@Capstone-dev.com' Subject: Plaza redevelopment site plan comments Attachments: Plaza Phase 1 site plan comments.docx Veronica, I have attached the comments regarding the Phase 1 site plan. Also, I know we're close on the garage -only site plan and building permits. I spoke with Will on Friday regarding reconciling the rear egress out of Garage 1 and the ramp shown on the building plans and stairs shown on the site plan. Also, the building plans show Garage 1 has two difference finished floor elevations, one for the storage area and the other for the garage. We can discuss further as needed. Thanks, Jason Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Development Services City of College Station office: (979) 764-3570 fax:(979) 764-3496 www.csix.00v City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University Jason Schubert From: Bob Cowell Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:06 PM To: 'Chuck Ellison'; 'Veronica Morgan' Cc: Jason Schubert; Kathy Merrill; David Schmitz; Frank Simpson; Bridgette George Subject: Plaza Parkland Fees Chuck and Veronica, As we discussed at our meeting last Friday, I am forwarding the following regarding the Plaza redevelopment and its related parkland fees. As stated by staff and applicant representatives at previous meetings, there exists no legal basis to compel parkland fees that differ from current ordinance requirements. Previous use of portions of the property (specifically the Plaza Hotel) for residential dormitory purposes should have resulted in the payment of parkland fees in effect at the time. No evidence has been presented to demonstrate that such fees were ever paid. Further, since that time the property had reverted to commercial use (hotel) and subsequently was demolished and rezoned for the current mixed use development. Current City practice includes the "crediting" of parkland fees for residential uses that either existed prior to the date of the ordinance enactment or for those residential uses that previously paid fees. In this instance, the City is willing to permit the proposed Phase I residential units (currently proposed at 307) to pay parkland fees equivalent to the amount that should have been paid originally (based on fees in existence in 1999) when the units were converted into residential dormitories. Because this concession is one not of legal requirement but of an exercise of judgment, the City will not allow any Phase I "credits" to be used in Phase 11, nor will any Phase 11 "credits" be allowed for Phase I. It is understood that there exists credit in Phase II for 50 4-plex units that either pre-existed City parkland fee requirements or where it has been demonstrated that required fees were paid. These credits will be applied in Phase II of the development. It is essential that all parties involved understand the significance of this concession —that is it represents a reduction in project development costs of more than $400,000. It is my understanding that the project is currently undergoing a "value engineering" process to facilitate development of the site. While I do not seek to underestimate the significance of this effort, I want to stress that further cost -savings are expected to come from the private side of this project and not through the reduction of necessary public improvements required to accommodate the redevelopment of this site. As the project moves forward please continue to work with Jason Schubert, Principal Planner on finalizing the required parkland fees. Thank you for your assistance with this project and I look forward to seeing its continued success and completion. If you have any questions or need additional information please let me know. Jason Schubert From: Jason Schubert Sent: Thursday, October 23. 2014 2:18 PM To: 'Joseph Greive'; Amanda Wallis; 'Mclnturff, Mike' Cc: Veronica Morgan; Billy Prewitt; Kerry Pillow (kerry@mitchellandmorgan.com); 'Ben Thornton'; Joaquin Jaramillo; Erika Bridges Subject: RE: call in # for today @ 11 is below M1 The three trees along the turn lane on Texas Avenue nearest University Drive can be removed as per TxDot's request. I looked again at the approved plans, the applicable ordinance, and did a site visit after lunch. I do not believe there is a good place to relocate them so removal is the only option. I also noted that some of the other trees around the site appeared to be dead or near dead and should be replaced. I've called Amanda and relayed these items directly to her. Thanks, Jason Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Development Services City of College Station office:(979) 764-3570 fax:(979) 764-3496 www.cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University From: Joseph Greive [mailto:Joseph.Greive@txdot.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:31 PM To: Amanda Wallis;'Mclnturff, Mike' Cc: Veronica Morgan; Billy Prewitt; Kerry Pillow (kerry@mitchellandmorgan.com); 'Ben Thornton'; Joaquin Jaramillo; Erika Bridges; Jason Schubert Subject: RE: call in # for today @ 11 is below To all, the following is what I captured from our phone conversation earlier and the answers I have received regarding several action items on the punchlist: Page 1- Contractor will remove top row of blocks and attempt to turn over to gas station owner. Loose dirt will be cleaned up. Page 2 - Erika is forwarding both items to Ed for addressing with signal contractor. Page 3 - Top picture, sidewalk and pull out explained by Mike's comments; no further action needed. Bottom picture, truncated domes will be added by contractor at all four locations on this corner. TxDOT will allow screw down type detectable warnings to be used as requested by Billy Prewitt in lieu having to cut in the pavers. Limits of curb replacement explained by relocation of mast arm and provided markup sheet. Page 4 - Erika is forwarding to Ed for addressing with signal contractor. Likely solution is to use an extended button. Page 5 -Top picture, sign to be installed by Contractor. Bottom picture, measurements confirm no adjustment is warranted. Mike Mike Mclnturff, PE, PTOE Vice President I Professional Associate HDR 1008 Woodcreek Drive College Station, TX 77845 D 979.693.5800 M 512.586.8310 mike.mcinturff(@,hdrinc.com hdrinc.com/follow-us From: Amanda Wallis[mailto:Awallis(abcapstonemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 3:56 PM To: 'Joseph Greive' Cc: Veronica Morgan; Billy Prewitt; Kerry Pillow (kerrv(amitchellandmorgan.com); 'Ben Thornton'; 'Joseph Greive'; Joaquin Jaramillo; McInturff, Mike Subject: call to discuss the TXDOT punchlist with TXDOT tomorrow @11 All — I have spoken to Joseph from TXDOT and asked for a call to discuss resolution of this list (yall have mentioned some of these items were part of the signal contractors scope). As I have mentioned to each of you, we are looking for resolution this week so I'm requesting this call to move this along. He suggested a call today (at 4) but I cannot get Mike on the phone to confirm. I was able to reach everyone else so .... I'm proposing 11am tomorrow. Mike, please confirm this time works and if so I'll send out a call in #. Please reply to all. Amanda L. -waCCis 205-612-1107 Join us Jan. 14, 2015 as we celebrate 10 years of transportation transformation in Texas. 0 Roadway & Misc. Crown of Texas Ave. SIB breaks over approximately at the solid stripe between the left turn lane and thru lane. Provided topo does not appear to be accurate in this area and drainage openings need to be cut in extended median. There is an existing median cut at approx sta. 7+50. Recommend locations for additional curb cuts at 5+30 and 6+40. fI OF -I turn lane. Page 6 - Signs shown on plans will be place ay Contractor (plan sheet 22). Stripe will ..3 be placed by Contractor. Page 7 —Top picture, TxDOT is requiring that cut-outs be made in the Texas Ave extended median. Contractor should match dimensions of the existing curb cut that is closer to the intersection. Bottom picture, TxDOT is requiring that these three trees be removed. TxDOT Landscape Architect had reviewed pedestrian facilities, but never received Landscape Plans. Page 8 - Lane widths clarified by provided as -built; no further action needed. Page 9 - Top picture, TxDOT accepts Mr. Mclnturffs justification for the existing luminaire foundation to remain in place. Bottom picture, no action needed. Page 10 - Contractor will shorten protruding bolt heads on SET. Thanks, Joseph Greive, P.E. TxDOT Bryan Area Office Jose ph.G re ive @txdot.gov 979-778-6233 From: Amanda Wallis [mailto:Awallis(abcapstonemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 8:38 AM To: 'McInturff, Mike'; Joseph Greive Cc: Veronica Morgan; Billy Prewitt; Kerry Pillow (kerry(@mitchellandmorgan.com); 'Ben Thornton'; Joseph Greive; Joaquin Jaramillo Subject: call in # for today @ 11 is below Scheduled Conference Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 Scheduled Start Time: 11:00 AM Central Daylight Time Scheduled End Time: 11:40 AM Central Daylight Time Scheduled # of Participants: 8 Type of Conference: Web -Scheduled Standard Dial -in Number: Participant Access Code: Organizer Access Code: Conference Controls: Amanda L. WaMs 205-612-1107 1-626-677-3000 (West Coast) 57105 *8933950 (you must include the leading star key) Conversation Mode (all Participants can be heard) Entry Chimes - Enabled Exit Chimes - Enabled From: McInturff, Mike [mailto:Mike.Mclnturff@hdrinc.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:57 PM To: Amanda Wallis; 'Joseph Greive' Cc: Veronica Morgan; Billy Prewitt; Kerry Pillow(kerrv@mitchellandmorgan.com);'Ben Thornton'; 'Joseph Greive'; Joaquin Jaramillo Subject: RE: call to discuss the TXDOT punchlist with TXDOT tomorrow @11 Amanda, I just returned from a meeting and presentation at the City where I've been since 3:00. Tomorrow at 11:00 works for me. Jason Schubert From: Jason Schubert Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 4:34 PM To: 'Rick Arambulo'; 'Amanda Wallis' Cc: Ben Thornton; John Sims; Veronica Morgan; Alan Gibbs; Brittany Caldwell Subject: RE: Landscaping bond release Rick, thanks for the confirmation. We'll send it out with next week's batch. Have a good weekend. Jason -----Original Message ----- From: Rick Arambulo [mailto:rick@woodridgecapital.com] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 4:33 PM To: Jason Schubert; 'Amanda Wallis' Cc: Ben Thornton; John Sims; Veronica Morgan; Alan Gibbs; Brittany Caldwell Subject: RE: Landscaping bond release Hi Jason, thank you for facilitating the release of the bonds. Woodridge College Station I, LLC is the recipient of the refund check and pis send it to: 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2850 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Thanks again. Rick Arambulo Woodridge Capital Partners, LLC (310)824-2200 -----Original Message ----- From: Jason Schubert [mailto:jschubert@cstx.gov) Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 2:20 PM To: 'Amanda Wallis' Cc: Ben Thornton; Rick Arambulo; John Sims; Veronica Morgan; Alan Gibbs; Brittany Caldwell Subject: RE: Landscaping bond release Amanda, I was not able to go by last Friday as I thought I would. I went out today and the landscaping/hardscape is substantially done but there are some odds and ends that still need to be completed. I feel comfortable releasing the landscape bond and including the remaining items as part of the temporary CO. I need to do a closer inspection but outstanding things include items such as install trees next to parallel parking spaces outside of garage 3, screening for natural gas utilities, completing dog park area, benches in front of clubhouse, and improvements at hard corner of Texas Avenue and University Drive. Based on Michael Rosenfeld's letter dated July 31st and countersigned by Alan Gibbs, City Engineer, on August 1st, some of the landscape bond funds will be retained as surety for street/pavement improvements. There is $10,560 for Meadowland and $125,820 for University Drive and Texas Avenue which total $136,380. Given that $472,216.50 has been provided, $335,836.50 will be refunded with the $136,380 being retained at this time in relation to street improvements. I know many of the street improvements are well under way and Alan Gibbs will oversee the release of those funds when those are complete. Our internal deadline is noon on Mondays _ request a check to be cut on Wednesday mailed. The checks that submitted were from Woodridge College Station I, LLC. Please confirm that this is the recipient of the check and also confirm the address to be sent to. If you would like, we can hold the check for pick up at City Hall but we would need to know that and who is the designated person to pick it up. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Jason Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Development Services City of College Station office: (979) 764-3570 fax: (979) 764-3496 www.cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University (r) -----Original Message ----- From: Amanda Wallis[mailto:Awallis@capstonemail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 7:08 PM To: Jason Schubert Cc: Ben Thornton; Rick Arambulo; John Sims; Veronica Morgan Subject: Landscaping bond release Jason, I wanted to follow up in the release of funds the Northpoint crossing owner posted for the landscaping bond. I understand our contractor CEI called the inspection in last week and that you may have been coming out last Friday. They didn't see you but they may have missed you. Were you satisfied with everything... is there a punch list? Or can you release funds now? Sent from my iPhone City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University (r) Woodridge College Station 1, LLC 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2850 Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310)824-2200 F (310)824-7931 July 31,2014 Alan Gibbs, PE City Engineer Development Engineering City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S College Station, TX 77840 Reference: Northpoint Crossing Development Subject: Phase 1 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Buildings 1 thru 3 / Roadway & Medina Work Bond Dear Alan, Per your discussions today with our representative, Amanda Wallis of Capstone Collegiate Communities LLC, it has been agreed that the City of College Station ("City") is ready and will issue the Temporary Certificates of Occupancy for buildings 1, 2, and 3 of the Northpoint Crossing Phase I Project ("Project") by August 1, 2014 which would allow students to move -in and occupy said buildings. it has been further agreed that in order to provide the City with the assurance that the remaining site improvements on the Project are completed, Woodridge College Station I, LLC ("Woodridge") will provide cash bonds for the completion of the following: (1) All Meadowland pavement improvements per the approved construction plans in the amount of Ten Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Dollars ($10,560.00); and (2) All University Drive and Texas Avenue pavement improvements including medians, ramps, micro -paving, and striping per the approved construction plans in the amount of One Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty Dollars ($125,820.00). The City currently is holding cash bonds totaling Four Hundred Seventy Two Thousand Two hundred Sixteen Dollars ($472,216) for the completion of landscaping work in accordance with Woodridge's letter to the City dated June 25, 2014. The landscaping work is now substantially complete and our general contractor, CEL will be requesting final inspection next week which will be the basis for the release of the landscape bonds within 10 days of verification by the City. It has been agreed that the City will withhold a portion of the landscaping cash bond proceeds to cover the cash bond amounts for the completion of the site improvements noted above. Similarly, the cash bonds shall be released to Woodridge within 10 days of the City verifying that the work has been completed. Please sign and return a copy of this letter representing the City's confirmation of the agreements discussed herein. Sincerely, WOODRIDGE LLEG TATION 1, LLC CITY OF COLLEGE STATION A Delaware Li ited Lia ity Company, /e n BY: Michael Ro III Alan Gibbs Authorize ignatory City Engineer July 31, 14 Dale: Cc: Amanda Wallis, Capstone Collegiate Communities, LLC Veronica Morgan — Mitchell & Morgan, LLP Jason Schubert From: Bob Cowell Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:06 PM To: 'Chuck Ellison'; 'Veronica Morgan' Cc: Jason Schubert; Kathy Merrill; David Schmitz; Frank Simpson; Bridgette George Subject: Plaza Parkland Fees Chuck and Veronica, As we discussed at our meeting last Friday, I am forwarding the following regarding the Plaza redevelopment and its related parkland fees. As stated by staff and applicant representatives at previous meetings, there exists no legal basis to compel parkland fees that differ from current ordinance requirements. Previous use of portions of the property (specifically the Plaza Hotel) for residential dormitory purposes should have resulted in the payment of parkland fees in effect at the time. No evidence has been presented to demonstrate that such fees were ever paid. Further, since that time the property had reverted to commercial use (hotel) and subsequently was demolished and rezoned for the current mixed use development. Current City practice includes the "crediting" of parkland fees for residential uses that either existed prior to the date of the ordinance enactment or for those residential uses that previously paid fees. In this instance, the City is willing to permit the proposed Phase I residential units (currently proposed at 307) to pay parkland fees equivalent to the amount that should have been paid originally (based on fees in existence in 1999) when the units were converted into residential dormitories. Because this concession is one not of legal requirement but of an exercise of judgment, the City will not allow any Phase I "credits" to be used in Phase II, nor will any Phase II "credits" be allowed for Phase I. It is understood that there exists credit in Phase II for 50 4-plex units that either pre-existed City parkland fee requirements or where it has been demonstrated that required fees were paid. These credits will be applied in Phase II of the development. It is essential that all parties involved understand the significance of this concession —that is it represents a reduction in project development costs of more than $400,000. It is my understanding that the project is currently undergoing a "value engineering" process to facilitate development of the site. While I do not seek to underestimate the significance of this effort, I want to stress that further cost -savings are expected to come from the private side of this project and not through the reduction of necessary public improvements required to accommodate the redevelopment of this site. As the project moves forward please continue to work with Jason Schubert, Principal Planner on finalizing the required parkland fees. Thank you for your assistance with this project and I look forward to seeing its continued success and completion. If you have any questions or need additional information please let me know. e Jason Schubert From: Veronica Morgan [v@mitchellandmorgan.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 1:42 PM To: Jason Schubert Cc: Amanda Wallis; Robert Young; Will Quintanilla; Joaquin Jaramillo Subject: Re: Northpoint outdoor seating areas Jason, thanks for the review. Your comments are very helpful! thank you very much. I will forward these to the owners and the broker for their use when discussing outdoor dining areas with potential leasors. Veronica On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Jason Schubert <jschubertna estx.gov> wrote: Veronica, I am following up on the exhibit you dropped off to me last Thursday regarding outdoor seating/patio area for potential restaurants. Here is the background and parameters of the areas: 1) There are two 653-square foot areas near the center intersection that have already been shown on the approved site plan (without a defined shape) and included in the parking calculations. Part or all of the two 653 square -feet of areas can be shifted around to other seating areas if the square feet is desired elsewhere. 2) Restaurant seating areas need to be site planned and parking provided at a 1 space:250 gross square feet ratio. Additional seating areas will result in the gate(s) in the parking garage 1 and/or 3 being moved to provide more commercial parking in them. 3) Seating areas need to be located on private property and in front of the business they are serving. 4) Sidewalk minimum widths are 12 feet along University Drive and Texas Avenue, 9 feet along public way A -A (which is from University Drive to the clubhouse), and 10.5 feet along public way B-B (which is from Texas Avenue to Garage 3). The public access easements can be reduced in width to the minimum sidewalk if the existing ROW and/or easement cover more than the minimum. If you want to reduce a public access easement to the minimum, an amending plat can be used to accomplish that. 5) Seating areas are allowed into the minimum sidewalk up to 5 feet away from the building as long as at least 6 feet of clear space is maintained on the sidewalk. There is not a 5-foot distance limitation from the building in areas outside the minimum sidewalk. 6) Seating areas within a public access easement cannot be fenced off. Based on the above items, there would be some changes to the exhibit: 1) I'd clarify the description of the purple areas to state that they are possible seating areas if public access easement is removed. 2) The orange areas near the center intersection (which can be fenced) need to be reduced to be outside of the existing public access easement. Perhaps some purple can be added to this area if 9 feet of sidewalk along public A -A remains covered by access easement. 3) The minimum clear space to remain is 6 feet not 7 feet as shown (I think the 7 feet may have come from 12'-5'=7'). Also, the 6 feet represents the clear path of unencumbered sidewalk width so take into account trees, light posts, benches, etc. While considering this and parking implications, I will note that all surface parking spaces are currently counted toward the commercial parking requirement. The clubhouse does not require parking itself but if it is intended that some surface spaces will be signed as "clubhouse/future resident parking only" then those spaces can't count toward the commercial parking and the corresponding amount will need to be added in the garage(s). I know this was a lot of detail but hope it helps. Thanks, Jason Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Development Services City of College Station office: (979) 764-3570 fax:(979) 764-3496 www.cstx.00v City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University O City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University