HomeMy WebLinkAbout15-12...
CASE NO.: ..__
DI,\ TE SUBMITTED: -+-_.__...._._,_"---
TIME: c:q; {0
CITY OP C OLLEGE STATION
Home o/Texas A&M University• STAFF:~
(Check one) D Minor
($700)
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION
D Amending
($700)
~Final
($932)
D Vacating
($932)
0Replat
($932)
Is this plat in the ET J? [8] Yes D No Is this plat Commercial D or Residential ~
. / MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
~ $700-$932 Final Plat Application Fee (see above).
D $233 Waiver Request to Subdivision Regulations Fee (if applicable).
D $600 (minimum) Development Permit Appl ication I Public Infrastructure Review and Inspection Fee. Fee is
1 % of acceptable Engineer's Estimate for public infrastructure, $600 minimum (if fee is > $600, the balance is
due prior to the issuance of any plans or development permit).
~Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
~Six (6) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after approval.)
[8] Two (2) copies of the grading, drainage, and erosion control plans with supporting drainage report.
[8] Two (2) copies of the Public infrastructure plans and supporting documents (if applicable).
D Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (if applicable). ~ Title report for property current within ninety (90) days or accompanied by a Nothing Further Certificate
current within ninety (90) days. The report must include applicable information such as ownership, liens,
ncumbrances, etc.
Paid tax certificates from City of College Station , Brazos County and College Station l.S.D.
The attached Final Plat checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not.
NOTE: A mylar of the approved preliminary plan must be on file before a final plat application will be considered
complete. If the mylar is submitted with the final plat application, it shall be considered a submittal for the
prel iminary plan project and processed and reviewed as such. Until the mylar has been confirmed by staff
to be correct, the final plat application will be considered incomplete.
Date of Optional Preapplication or Stormwater Management Conference _N_YA ______________ _
NAME OF PROJECT Indian Lakes -Phase 19
ADDRESS Near intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Kachina Cove
SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLAT:
Near intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Kachina Cove I
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name Travis Martinek E-mail travis@clarkewyndham.com
Street Address 3608 East 29th Street, Suite 100
City Bryan State Texas Zip Code 77802
Phone Number (979) 846-4384 Fax Number (979) 846-1461 -----------------
Revised 4/14 Page 1 of 9
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORM,£>; I ION (All owners must be identified. Please cittach an additional sheet for multiple
owners):
Name Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd. E-mail travis@clarkewyndham.com
Street Address 3608 East 29th Street, Suite 100
City Bryan state Texas Zip Code 77802 -------
Phone Number (979) 846-4384 Fax Number (979) 846-1461 -----------------
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION:
Name McClure & Browne Engineering/Surveying, Inc. E-mail Jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com
Street Address 1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103
City College Station State Texas Zip Code 77845 -------
Phone Number (979) 693-3838 Fax Number (979) 693-2554
----------------~
Do any deed restrictions or covenants exist for this property? ~Yes D No
Is there a temporary blanket easement on this property? If so, please provide the Volume __ N_'f,_'.4 __ and Page No. ---NIA
Total No. of Lots 16 Total Acreage _3_4_.4_8_0 _______ _ ------R-0-W Acreage 6.228 --------
Existing Use _v_a_ca_n_t ___________ _ Proposed Use Single-Family Residential
Number of Lots By Zoning District NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA I NIA
Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District:
NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA
Floodplain Acreage _o_.o_o_o _________________________________ _
Is there Special Flood Hazard Area (Zone A or Zone AE on FEMA FIRM panels) on the property? I Yes IX] No
This information is necessary to help staff identify the appropriate standards to review the application and will be used to
help determine if the application qualifies for vesting to a previous ordinance. Notwithstanding any assertion made,
vesting is limited to that which is provided in Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code or other applicable law.
Is this application a continuation of a project that has received prior City platting approval(s) and you are requesting the
application be reviewed under previous ordinance as applicable?
fXi Yes
I No
If yes, provide information regarding the first approved application and any related subsequent applications (provide
additional sheets if necessary):
Project Name: Indian Lakes Subdivision
City Project Number (if known): Unknown
Date I Timeframe when submitted: 2000
Revised 4/14 Page 2 of 9
A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and Preliminary Plan (if applicable):
NIA
Requested waiver to subdivision regulations and reason for same (if applicable):
NIA
Regarding the waiver request, explain how:
1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of the
subdivision regulations will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
NIA
2. The waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
NIA
3. The granting of the waiver will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other
property in the area, or to the City in administering subdivision regulations.
Nia
4. The granting of the waiver will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in
accordance with the provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance.
NIA
Fee in lieu of sidewalk construction is being requested because of the following condition (if applicable):
1. n An alternative pedestrian way or multi-use path has been or will be provided outside the right-of-way;
2. [] The presence of unique or unusual topographic, vegetative, or other natural conditions exist so that strict
adherence to the sidewalk requirements of the UDO is not physically feasible or is not in keeping with the
purposes and goals of the UDO or the City's comprehensive Plan;
3. n A capital improvement project is imminent that will include construction of the required sidewalk. Imminent shall
mean the project is funded or projected to commence within twelve (12) months;
4. I Existing streets constructed to rural section that are not identified on the Thoroughfare Plan with an estate I
rural context;
5. n When a sidewalk is required along a street where a multi-use path is shown on the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Master Plan;
Revised 4/14 Page 3 of 9
6. rJ The proposed development is within an older residential subdivision meeting the criteria in Platting and
Replatting within Older Residential Subdivisions Section of the UDO; or
7. n The proposed development contains frontage on a Freeway I Expressway as designated by Map 6.6,
Thoroughfare Plan -Functional Classification, in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Detailed explanation of condition identified above:
N/A
NOTE: A waiver to the sidewalk requirements and fee in lieu of sidewalk construction shall not be considered at the
same time by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Requested Oversize ParticipationNIA
-----------------------~
Total Linear Footage of
Proposed Public:
NIA Streets
NIA Sidewalks
NIA Sanitary Sewer Lines
NIA Water Lines
NIA Channels
NIA Storm Sewers
NIA Bike Lanes I Paths
Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat:
ACREAGE:
NIA
NIA
NIA
NIA
---
OR
No. of acres to be dedicated + $ __ N._'f,_~ __ development fee
No. of acres in floodplain
No. of acres in detention
No. of acres in greenways
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND:
NIA No. of SF Dwelling Units X $ NIA = $ NIA -------
NIA (date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FILING.
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are
true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPL/CATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf LIEN
HOLDERS identified in the title report are also considered owners and the appropriate signatures must be provided as
described above.
Signature an~ • Date
Revised 4/14 Page 4 of 9
Existing
[ZJ
FINAL PLAT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(ALL CITY ORDINANCES MUST BE MET)
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING:
(Requirements based on field survey and marked by monuments and markers.)
[ZJ Drawn on 24" x 36" sheet to scale of 100' per inch.
[ZJ Vicinity map which includes enough of surrounding area to show general location of subject property in
relationship to College Station and its City Limits. No scale required but include north arrow.
[ZJ Title Block with the following information :
[ZJ Name and address of subdivider, recorded owner, planner, engineer and surveyor.
[ZJ Proposed name of subdivision. (Subdivision name & street names will be approved through Brazos
County 911 .)
[ZJ Date of preparation .
[ZJ Eng ineer's scale in feet.
[ZJ Total area intended to be developed.
[ZJ North Arrow.
[ZJ Subdivision boundary indicated by heavy lines.
[ZJ If more than 1 sheet, an index sheet showing entire subdivision at a scale of 500 feet per inch or
larger.
[ZJ All applicable certifications based on the type of final plat.
[ZJ Ownership and Dedication
[ZJ Surveyor and/or Engineer
[ZJ City Engineer (and City Planner, if a minor plat)
[ZJ Planning and Zoning Commission (delete if minor plat)
[ZJ Brazos County Clerk
[ZJ Brazos County Commissioners Court Approval (ET J Plats only)
[ZJ If submitting a replat where there are existing improvements, submit a survey of the subject property
showing the improvements to ensure that no encroachments will be created.
[ZJ If using private septic systems, add a general note on the plat that no private sewage facility may be
installed on any lot in this subdivision without the issuance of a license by the Brazos County
Health Unit under the provisions of the private facility regulations adopted by the Commissioner's
Court of Brazos County, pursuant to the provisions of Section 21 .084 of the Texas Water Code.
[ZJ Location of the 100-Year Floodplain and floodway , if applicable, according to the most recent available
data.
[ZJ Lot corner markers and survey monuments (by symbol) and clearly tied to basic survey data.
lZJ Matches the approved preliminary plan or qualifies as minor amendments (UDO Secti on 3.3.E.2).
[ZJ The location and description with accurate dimensions, bearings or deflection angles and radii, area, center
angle, degree of curvature, tangent distance and length of all curves for all of the
following: (Show existing items that are intersecting or contiguous with the boundary of or forming a
boundary with the subdivision, as well as, those within the subdivision).
Proposed
[ZJ Streets. Continuous or end in a cul-de-sac, stubbed out streets must end into a temp
turn around unless they are shorter than 100 feet.
Public and private R.O.W. locations and widths. (All existing and proposed R.O.W.'s
sufficient to meet Thoroughfare Plan.)
Street offsets and/or intersection angles meet ordinance.
Revised 4/14 Page 8 of 9
Existing
[ZJ
[ZJ
[ZJ
[ZJ
Proposed
[ZJ
[ZJ
[ZJ
[ZJ
Alleys.
Easements.
A number or letter to identify each lot or site and each block (numbered sequentially).
Parkland dedication/greenbelt area/park linkages. All proposed dedications must be
reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and documentation of their
recommendation provided prior to being scheduled for P&Z Commission consideration.
[ZJ Construction documents for all public infrastructure drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and properly
sealed by a Licensed Texas Professional Engineer that include the following:
[ZJ Street, alley and sidewalk plans, profiles and sections. One sheet must show the overall
street, al ley and/or sidewalk layout of the subdivision. (may be combined with other
utilities).
[ZJ Sewer Design Report.
[ZJ Sanitary sewer plan and profile showing depth and grades. One sheet must show the
overall sewer layout of the subdivision. (Utilities of sufficient size/depth to meet the utility
master plan and any future growth areas.)
[ZJ Water Design Report and/or Fire Flow Report.
[ZJ Water line plan showing fire hydrants, valves, etc. with plan and profile lines showing
depth and grades. One sheet must show the overall water layout of the subd ivision .
(Utilities of sufficient size/depth to meet the utility master plan and any future growth
areas.)
[ZJ Storm drainage system plan with contours, street profile, inlets, storm sewer and
drainage channels, with profiles and sections. Drainage and runoff areas, and runoff
based on 5, 10, 25 , 50 and 100 year rain intensity. Detailed drainage structure design,
channel lining design & detention if used. One sheet must show the overall drai nage
layout of the subdivision.
[ZJ Detailed cost estimates for all public infrastructure listed above sealed by Texas P.E.
[ZJ Letter of completion for public infrastructure or guarantee I surety in accordance with UDO
Section 8.6 .
[ZJ Drainage Report with a Technical Design Summary.
[ZJ Erosion Control Plan (must be included in construction plans).
[ZJ All off-site easements necessary for infrastructure construction must be shown on the final plat with a
volume and page listed to indicate where the separate instrument easements were filed.
Separate instrument easements must be provided in recordable form to the City prior to being scheduled
for P&Z Commission consideration.
[ZJ Are there impact fees associated with this development? D Yes [ZJ No
Impact fees must be paid prior to building permit.
[ZJ Will any construction occur in TxDOT rights-of-way? D Yes [ZJ No
If yes, TxDOT permit must be submitted along with the construction documents.
NOTE: 1. We will be requesting the corrected Final Plat to be submitted in digital form if available prior to filing
the plat at the Courthouse.
2. If the construction area is greater than 5 acres, EPA Notice of Intent (NOi) must be submitted pri or to
issuance of a development permit.
Print Form
Revised 4/14 Page 9 of 9
I -r
TITLE REPORT
GF No.: 142426
Certification Date: December 29, 2014
Examiner: LBJ
Property Description:
Tract One: Fee Simple
Metes and bounds description of all that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in THE J.
M. BARRERA SURVEY, Abstract No. 69, Brazos County, Texas. Said tract being the same tract of land
called 16.67 acres as described by a Deed to Donald E. Feltz recorded in Volume 1190, Page 303 of the
Official Records of Brazos County, Texas, and being further described in Volume 292, Page 18 of the
Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas.
Said tract being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
Beginning at a 1/2 inch iron rod found on the West line of a called 18.21 acre tract as described by a Deed
to Herbert Winfred Flanagan, Jr., recorded in Volume 1245, Page 532 of the Official Public Records of
Brazos County, Texas, said iron rod found marking the Northeast corner of said 16.67 acre Feltz tract and
the Southeast corner of a called 16.68 acre tract as described by a Deed to Joe Restivo recorded in
Volume 3993, Page 58 of the Official Public Records of Brazos County, Texas, said Restivo tract being
further described in Volume 292, Page 15 of the Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas;
THENCE: S 04° 17' 25" E along the common line of said 16.67 acre Feltz tract and said 18.21 acre tract,
same being the West line of a 30.00 foot wide road easement as described in Volume 292, Page 18 and
Volume 342, Page 800 of the Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas, for a distance of 713.78 feet to a
1/2 inch iron rod found marking the Southeast comer of said 16.67 acre Feltz tract and the Northeast
corner of a called 18.307 acre tract as described by a Deed to Lubradford Properties, Ltd., recorded in
Volume 3442, Page 39 of the Official Public Records of Brazos County, Texas;
THENCE: S 87° 34' 56" W along the common line of said 16.67 acre Feltz tract and said 18.307 acre tract
for a distance of 1037.51 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found on the East line of a called 1037.24 acre tract
described as Tract Two by a Deed to Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd., recorded in Volume 4247, Page
51 of the Official Public Records of Brazos County, Texas, said iron rod found marking the Southwest
corner of said 16.67 acre Feltz tract and the Northwest corner of a called 17.417 acre tract as described
by a Deed to Robert Allen Hall recorded in Volume 4673, Page 259 of the Official Public Records of
Brazos County, Texas. said 17.417 acre tract being further described in Volume 498, Page 840 of the
Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas;
THENCE: N 01° 03' 16" Walong the common line of said 16.67 acre Feltz tract and said 1037.24 acre
tract for a distance of 713.70 feet to a 5/8 inch iron rod set marking the Northwest comer of this herein
described tract and the Southwest corner of said 16.68 acre Restivo tract;
THENCE: N 87° 35' 17" E along the common line of said 16.67 acre Feltz tract and said 16.68 acre
Restivo tract for a distance of997.20 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING containing 16.66 acres of land.
more or less.
Tract Two: Easement
Being an easement thirty feet (30') in width through that 24.108 acre tract in the J. M. BARRERA
SURVEY, Abstract No. 69, Brazos County, Texas, described by Contract of Sale to Anthony L. Restivo
recorded in Volume 249, Page 305, Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas, and that 126.45 acre tract
conveyed to Charles A. Ernst, et al, by Deed recorded in Volume 273, Page 846, Deed Records of Brazos
County, Texas, and lying along and fifteen (15') either side of the following described centerline:
BEGINNING in the Southeast line of Deer Park Drive, S 81 ° 48' W 15.0 ft. from an iron rod at the most
Northerly comer of the said Restivo 24.108 acre tract in the Sterrett D. Smith Survey, A-210 in Brazos
County, Texas;
THENCE S 8° 12' E 1229.7 ft parallel to and 15' from Restivo's Northeast line to a point 15' inside the said
Ernst 126.45 acre tract;
THENCE S 88° 54' E 245.6 ft. parallel to and 15' from Ernst North line;
THENCE S 1' 51' W 740.0 ft. parallel to and 15' from the East line of the said Ernst 126.45 acre tract;
THENCE N 88' 43' W 1024.3 ft.;
THENCE S 1° 17' W 28.5 ft.;
THENCE So• 33' E 713.7 ft. to the end of this easement.
NOTE: The Company is prohibited from insuring the area or quantity of land described herein.
Any statement in the above legal description of the area or quantity of land is not a representation
that such area or quantity is correct, but is made only for informational and/or identification
purposes.
Title Vested In:
Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd.
Vesting Deed to owners shown herein was dated June 3, 2008 and recorded in Volume 8765, Page 176,
Official Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Subject to:
Deed of Trust to secure a Note:
Grantor: Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd.
Trustee: David Zalman
Beneficiary: Prosperity Bank
Amount: $500,000.00
Dated: January 23, 2013
Recorded: Volume 11148, Page 115, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. (Multiple properties on
Lien)
Restrictions:
None of Record
Exceptions:
Easement:
From: A. L. Restivo
To: C. A. Ernst, et al
Dated: August 6, 1970
Recorded: Volume 292, Page 26, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Mineral Reservation in Deed:
By: Donald E. Feltz
To: Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd.
Dated: April 28, 2004
Recorded: Volume 6011, Page 116, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said Interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Mineral Reservation in Deed:
By: M. H. Jones
To: J. W. Batts
Dated: June 27, 1g45
Recorded: Volume 119, Page 565, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Mineral Reservation in Deed:
By: J. W. Batts, Jr.
To: Glenn E. Edling
Dated: March 31, 1952
Recorded: Volume 153, Page 350, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Mineral Reservation in Deed:
By: Frances C. Janus, et al
To: Earl Newman
Dated: January 3, 1969
Recorded: Volume 275, Page 247, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Oil and Gas Lease, and all terms, conditions and stipulations therein:
Lessor: Doanld E. Feltz, et ux
Lessee: Lometa Petroleum Corporation
Dated: September 22, 1992
Recorded: Volume 1605, Page 173, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Amendment:
Dated: July 25, 2003
Recorded: Volume 5797, Page 173, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Modified:
Dated: April 28, 2004
Recorded: Volume 6011 , page 135, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Upon examination of the public records Brazos County, Texas, we fin:! no exception to title of the
subject property other than those shovm above. This Title Report is issued with the express
understanding, evidenced by acceptance of same, that the liability of the undersigned is limited to
the actual monetary consideration paid for same.
University Title Company
---~
l
,,
TITLE REPORT
GF No.: 142425
Certification Date: December 28, 2014
Examiner: ARB
Property Description:
TRACT ONE: FEE SIMPLE
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF ALL THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND LYING AND BEING
SITUATED IN THE JOSE MARIA BARRERA SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 69, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS.
SAID TRACT BEING THE SAME TRACT OF LAND CALLED 16.68 ACRES AS DESCRIBED BY A DEED
TO JOE RESTIVO RECORDED 3993, PAGE 54 OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF
BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS, SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED IN VOLUME
292, PAGE 15 Of THE DEED RECORDS BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS.
SAID TRACT BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A 1/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND ON THE SOUTH LINE OF DEER PARK SUBDIVISION
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 221 , PAGE 295 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF
BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS, SAID IRON ROD FOUND MARKING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF A CALLED 1037.24 ACRE TRACT
DESCRIBED AS TRACT TWO BY A DEED TO SMILING MALLARD DEVELOPMENT, LTD. RECORDED
IN VOLUME 4247, PAGE 51 OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS Of BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS;
THENCE: N 87° 00' 06" E ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT AND DEER
PARK SUBDIVISION, SAME BEING THE COMMON LINE OF THE JOSE MARIA BARRERRA SURVEY,
A-69, AND THE STERRETI D. SMITH SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 210, FOR A DISTANCE OF 868.08
FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND MARKING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 16.68
ACRE TRACT AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF A CALLED 24.108 ACRE TRACT AS DESCRIBED
BY A DEED TO ANTHONY L. RESTIVO RECORDED IN VOLUME 249, PAGE 305 OF THE DEED
RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS;
THENCE: S 12° 00' 40" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT FOR A DISTANCE OF
80.06 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND MARKING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF A CALLED
16.67 ACRE TRACT AS DESCRIBED BY A DEED TO A DONALD GENE ANDERSON RECORDED IN
VOLUME 342, PAGE 800 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS;
THENCE: S 12° 03' 05" E ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT AND SAID 16.67
ACRE TRACT FOR A DISTANCE OF 669.26 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND MARKING THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF A CALLED 18.21 ACRE TRACT AS DESCRIBED BY A DEED TO
HERBERT WINFRED FLANAGAN, JR., RECORDED IN VOLUME 1245, PAGE 532 OF THE OFFICIAL
PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS;
THENCE: S 02° 14° 18" E ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT AND SAID 18.21
ACRE TRACT FOR A DISTANCE OF 43.61 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND MARKING THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF A CALLED 16.66 ACRE TRACT AS DESCRIBED BY A DEED TO SMILING
MALLARD DEVELOPMENT, LTD. RECORDED IN VOLUME 6011 , PAGE 116 OF THE OFFICIAL
PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS;
THENCE: S 87° 35' 17" W ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT AND SAID 16.66
ACRE TRACT FOR A DISTANCE OF 997.20 FEET TO A 5/8 INCH IRON ROD FOUND ON THE EAST
LINE OF SAID 1037.24 ACRE TRACT MARKING THE COMMON CORNER OF SAID 16.68 ACRE
TRACT AND SAID 16.66 ACRE TRACT;
THENCE: N 02° 07' 26" W ALONG THE COMMON LINE OF SAID 16.68 ACRE TRACT AND SAID
1037.24 ACRE TRACT FOR A DISTANCE OF 773.49 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING
CONTAINING 16.725 ACRES OF LAND AS SURVEYED ON THE GROUND JANUARY 2006. SEE PLAT
PREPARED JANUARY 2006, FOR MORE DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION. BEARING SYSTEM SHOWN
HEREIN IS BASED ON GRID NORTH AS ESTABLISHED FORM CPS OBSERVATION.
TRACT TWO: ACCESS EASEMENT
BEING AN EASEMENT THIRTY FEET (30') IN WIDTH THROUGH THAT 24.108 ACRE TRACT IN THE
I. M. BARRERA SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 69, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS, DESCRIBED BY
CONTRACT OF SALE TO ANTHONY L. RESTIVO RECORDED IN VOLUME 249, PAGE 305, DEED
RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS, AND THAT 126.45 ACRE TRACT CONVEYED TO
CHARLES A. ERNST, ET AL, BY DEED RECORDED IN VOLUME 273. PAGE 846, DEED RECORDS
OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS, AND LYING ALONG AND FIFTEEN (15') EITHER SIDE OF THE
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE:
BEGINNING IN THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF DEER PARK DRIVE, S 81° 48' W 15.0 FT. FROM AN IRON
ROD AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THE SAID RESTIVO 24.108 ACRE TRACT IN THE
STERRETT D. SMITH SURVEY, A-210 IN BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS;
THENCE S 8° 12' E 1229.7 FT. PARALLEL TO AND 15' FROM RESTIVO'S NORTHEAST LINE TO A
POINT 15' INSIDE THE SAID ERNST 126.45 ACRE TRACT;
THENCE S 88° 54' E 245.6 FT. PARALLEL TO AND 15' FROM ERNST NORTH LINE;
THENCE S 1° 51' W 740.0 FT. PARALLEL TO AND 15' FROM THE EAST LI NE OF THE SAID ERNST
126.45 ACRE TRACT;
THENCE N 88° 43' 1024.3 FT.:
THENCE S 1° 17' W 28.5 FT:
THENCE S 0° 33' E 713. 7 FT TO THE END OF THIS EASEMENT.
NOTE: The Company is prohibited from insuring the area or quantity of land described herein.
Any statement in the above legal description of the area or quantity of land is not a representation
that such area or quantity is correct, but is made only for informational and/or identification
purposes.
Title Vested In:
Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd ., a Texas Limited Partnership
Vesting Deed to owners shown herein was dated June 3, 2008 and recorded in Volume 8765, Page 176,
Official Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Subject to:
Deed of Trust to secure a Note:
Granter: Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership
Trustee: David Zalman
Beneficiary: Prosperity Bank
Amount: $500,000.00
Dated: January 23, 2013
Recorded: Volume 11148, Page 115, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. (Multiple properties on
Lien)
Restrictions:
None of Record
Exceptions:
Easement:
From: A. L. Restivo
To: C. A. Ernst, et al
Dated: August 6, 1970
Recorded: Volume 292, Page 26, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas. (Tract 2)
Easement:
From: The Veteran's Land Board of the State of Texas
To: Aquila Southwes1 Pipeline Corporation
Dated: May 25, 1993
Recorded: Volume 1824, Page 238, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Access Easement Granted in Deed:
From: Charles Ernest, et al
To: The Veteran's Land Board of the State of Texas
Dated: September 8, 1970
Recorded: Volume 292, Page 15, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Access Easement Granted in Deed:
From: Smiling Mallard Development
To: Partners in Habitat Preservation
Dated: December 27, 2007
Recorded: Volume 8386, Page 181 , Official Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Access Easement Granted in Deed:
From: Partners in Habitat Preservation
To: Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd.
Dated: June 3, 2008
Recorded: Volume 8765, Page 176, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas.
Mineral Deed:
By: The Veterans Land Board of the State of Texas
To: Joe Restivo
Dated: September 30, 1992
Recorded: Volume 1612, Page 254, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Mineral Reservation in Deed:
By: M. H. Jones
To: J. W. Batts
Dated: June 27, 1945
Recorded: Volume 119, Page 565. Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Mineral Reservation in Deed:
By: J. W. Batts, Jr.
To: Glenn E. Edling
Dated: March 31, 1952
Recorded: Volume 153, Page 350, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Mineral Reservation in Deed:
By: Frances C. James, et al
To: Earl Newman
Dated: January 3, 1969
Recorded: Volume 275, Page 247, Deed Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Mineral and Water Reservation in Deed:
By: Joe Restivo
To: Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd.
Dated: April 20, 2006
Recorded: Volume 7275, Page 182, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Oil and Gas Lease, and all terms, conditions and stipulations therein:
Lessor: Joe Restivo, et ux
Lessee: Lometa Petroleum Corporation
Dated: September 22, 1992
Recorded: Volume 1605, Page 205, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Oil and Gas Lease, and all terms, conditions and stipulations therein:
Lessor: Frances James Kimbrough
Lessee: Lometa Petroleum Corporation
Dated: September 29, 1992
Recorded: Volume 1623, Page 185, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Oil and Gas Lease, and all terms, conditions and stipulations therein:
Lessor: J. W. James, Jr.
Lessee: Lometa Petroleum Corporation
Dated: September 29, 1992
Recorded: Volume 1635, Page 142, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Oil and Gas Lease, and all terms, conditions and stipulations therein:
Lessor: Waller Thomas Burns, II, Trustee
Lessee: Lometa Petroleum Corporation
Dated: March 4, 1993
Recorded: Volume 1760, Page 72, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Oil and Gas Lease, and all terms, conditions and stipulations therein:
Lessor: Meredith H. James, Jr.
Lessee: Lometa Petroleum Corporation
Dated: September 30, 1992
Recorded: Volume 1645, Page 28, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Oil and Gas Lease, and all terms, conditions and stipulations therein:
Lessor: Harriett Cartwright
Lessee: Lometa Petroleum Corporation
Dated: January 8, 1993
Recorded: Volume 1698, Page 246, Official Records, Brazos County, Texas. Title to said interest has not
been investigated subsequent to the date of the aforesaid instrument.
Upon examination of the public records Brazos County, Texas, we fin:! no exception to title of the
subject property other than those shown above. This Title Report is issred with the express
understanding, evidenced by acceptance of same, that the liability of the undersigned is limited to
the actual monetary consideration paid for same.
University Title Company
------~-----·--
TO :
CLARKE & WYNDHAM
REAL EST ATE 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
DATE:
Deborah Grace-Rosier 8/26/2015
COMPANY: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER:
FAX NUMBER: PHONE NUMBER:
RE:
Indian Lakes-Phase 19
FP'2 0\ s -q (j)O \ 2-
6'6/2.1.011 s
q·.so
M
0 URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY 0 PLEASE RECYCLE
NOTES/COMMENTS:
Deborah,
Attached is the Final Plat for Indian Lakes Phase 19, ready for filing. I've also attached an email from Wellborn
Water accepting the water lines. Also, can you send me a digital scan of the filed plat when available.
We are looking at closing on the first lot on Friday, if possible.
Let me know if you need anything further to get this plat filed.
Thanks!
Travis
CITY or Coli.EGE STATION
Home of Texas A&M University•
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CASE NO.: # Jof5°-<qtJOOk:J..
DATE SUBMITTED: 7/<[ ft 5
TIME 11 :44
STAFF:
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
Please check one of the options below to clearly define the purpose of your submittal.
D New Project Submittal
D Incomplete Project Submittal -documents needed to complete an application. Case No.: -·J Existing Project Submittal. Case No.: /5-JZ-
~-------~
Project Name ~b.~d-'-rM_'\L,._~e~"-~-~-' ~/l{~f,_A_1t!_f~_af _____________ _
Contact Name ~ .. ....,J,..,te,~f~~-"~fl~e;~~-~----------
We are transmitting the following for Planning & Development Services to review and comment (check all that apply):
D Comprehensive Plan Amendment
D Rezoning Application
D Conditional Use Permit
D Preliminary Plan
• Final Plat
D Development Plat
D Site Plan
D Special District Site Plan
D Special District Building I Sign
D Landscape Plan
D Non-Residential Architectural Standards
D Irrigation Plan
D Variance Request
D Development Permit
D Development Exaction Appeal
D FEMA CLOMA/CLOMR/LOMA/LOMR
D Grading Plan
D Other -Please specify below
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS
All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set.
The following are included in the complete set:
D Comprehensive Plan Amendment D Waterline Construction Documents
D TxDOT Driveway Permit D Sewerline Construction Documents
D TxDOT Utility Permit D Street Construction Documents
D Drainage Letter or Report D Easement Application
D Fire Flow Analysis D Other -Pl ease specify
Special Instructions:
10/10 Print Form
CITY OF Cou.EGE STATJON
Home ofTexm A&M University•
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CASE NO.: 15·-( z_
DATE SUBMITTED: {)2» \f?J . \ S
TIME: ...L\ ·_ • ..:__\ 0=------------
STAFF: ~A-:1~~-------
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
TRANS MITT AL LETTER
Please check one of the options below to clearly define the purpose of your submittal.
D New Project Submittal
D Incomplete Project Submittal -documents needed to complete an application. Case No.:
'ijJ Existing Project Submittal. Case No.: \ '5--\?., --------~
--------~
Project Name \ \\J. \ 2¥\ L2t \<:.-CS ?'o \ 0\ -Contact Name ______________ _ Phone Number ____________ _
We are transmitting the following for Planning & Development Services to review and comment (check all that apply):
D Comprehensive Plan Amendment D Non-Residential Architectural Standards
D Rezoning Application D Irrigation Plan
D Conditional Use Permit D Variance Request
D Preliminary Plan D Development Permit
D Final Plat D Development Exaction Appeal
D Development Plat D FEMA CLOMA/CLOMR/LOMA/LOMR
D Site Plan D Grading Plan
D Special District Site Plan D Other -Please specify below
D Special District Building I Sign
D Landscape Plan
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS
All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set.
The following are included in the complete set:
D Comprehensive Plan Amendment D Waterline Construction Documents
D TxDOT Driveway Permit D Sewerline Construction Documents
D TxDOT Utility Permit D Street Construction Documents
D Drainage Letter or Report D Easement Application
D Fire Flow Analysis D Other -Please specify
Special Instructions:
10/1 0 I. Print Form
TO :
CLARKE & WYNDHAM
REAL EST ATE INVESTMENT SERVICES
Mark Bombek
TRAVIS MARTINEK
3608 East 29th Street, Suite 100
Bryan, Texas 77802
Office: (979) 846-4384 Fax: (979) 846-1461 Cell: (979) 229-9877
TRANSMITTAL SH E ET
DATE:
3/18/2015
COMPANY: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER:
CS Ping & Dvlpmt Serv See below
FAX NUMBER: PHONE NUMBER:
RE:
Indian Lakes -Phase 19 Final Plat and Construction Plans
0 URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY 0 PLEASE RECYCLE
NOTES/COMMENTS:
Attached are the following:
• Response to staff comments
• 1 -24"x36" copy of the revised Final Plat
• 1 -24"x36" copy of the revised construction plans
• 1 -copy of the revised drainage report
TO:
CLARKE & WYNDHAM
REAL EST ATE 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
DATE:
1/13/2015
COMPANY: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER:
CS Ping & Dvlpmt Serv See below
FAX NUMBER: PHONE NUMBER:
RE :
Indian Lakes-Phase 19 Final Plat and Construction Plans
0 URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY 0 PLEASE RECYCLE
NOTES/COMMENTS:
Attached are the following:
• Final Plat Application and Checklist
• Tax Certificates (3 total)
• Title Reports (4 total)
• Drainage Report
• 6 -24"x36" copies of the Final Plat
• 2 -24"x36" copies of the construction plans
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
April 1, 2015
C ITY OF C OILEGE STATION
Home of Texas A &M University•
MEMORANDUM
Travis Martinek, via ; travis@clarkewyndham .com V
Mark Bombek, Staff Planner
SUBJECT: INDIAN LAKES PH 19 (FP)
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned final plat as requested. The following page is a list of staff
review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the comments and
submit the following information for further staff review and to be scheduled for a future Planning
& Zoning Commission meeting:
One ( 1) 24"x36" copy of the revised final plat;
Thirteen (13) 11 "x17" copies of the revised final plat;
One (1) Mylar of the revised final plat (required after P&Z approval);
One (1) copy of the digital file of the final plat on diskette or e-mail to
pdsdigitalsubmittal@cstx.gov.
Upon receipt of the required documents for the Planning & Zoning meeting, your project will be
considered formally filed with the City of College Station. 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 all comments have not been addressed your project will not be
schedu led for a Planning & Zoning Commission meeting . Your project may be placed on a
future agenda once all the revisions have been made and the appropriate fees paid. Once your
item has been scheduled for the P&Z meeting, the agenda and staff report can be accessed at
the following web site on Monday the week of the P&Z meeting.
http://www.cstx.gov/pz
Please note that a Mylar original of the revised final plat will be required after P&Z approval and
prior to the filing of the plat. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call
me at 979.764.3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
PC: Jeff Robertson, McClure & Browi e Engineering/Surveying, via;
jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com V
P&DS Project No. 15-00900012
Pla11ni11g & Development Services
P.O. BOX 9960 ·l10J 'l1:XAS AVENUE · COLLEGE STATION · TEXAS · 77842
TEL. 979.764.3570 ·FAX. 979.764.3496
cst>t.gov/devservices
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 2
Project: IND/AN LAKES PH 19 (FP) -15-00900012
PLANNING
1. Repeat-Provide a note to the Final Plat stating that lots 1 and 4 on Catori Cove and lots 5-
10 and 16 along Halon a Court should only take access from Catori Cove and Halona Court.
2. Please note that you may be required to submit paid tax certificates if they are not current
prior to the filing of your plat.
3. Please be aware that County response to comments are still being reviewed at this time.
Any further comments will be sent out as soon as possible.
Reviewed by : MARK BOMBEK Date: 03-25-2015
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 2
4. Remove the 16' PUE shown on the Final Plat. FYI... The easement needs to be
dedicated by separate instrument or blanket easement and filed prior the approval of the
construction plans.
5. Please show the volume/page for the existing P.U.E.'s outside the Plat boundary. It
currently is shown as just P.U .E. which may be misinterpreted as it being dedicated with
this plat.
6. The note regarding requirement of compaction of fill or engineered slab for lots that have
greater than 2 feet of fill still needs to be added on the Final Plat. Lot 11 appears to
going to have greaterthan 2 feet of fill , and possibly lot 10, 12, 14-16, and 5. This note is
still required even if a building permit is not going to be required through the city of
College Station.
7. Please double check your 100-storm year Intensity equation. I'm getting a different
value. Are you guys using B/CS 's Table C-1 when determining the Intensity? Or is
something else being used? Since all the years appear to follow the equation except for
the 100-year storm event.
8. Please update exhibit B-1 map. The delineation did not change from the previous report
but the area size appears to have been changed.
9. Exhibit C-3 appears to use a different wetted perimeter and areas for manning's
equation compared the calculated values.
10. Provide sealed engineer cost estimate, and letter regarding Acknowledging City
standards.
Reviewed by: Kevin Ferrer Date: March 27, 2015
Home of Texas A&M University
rt' q
.................. ______ ~~-----CITY OF COLLEGE STATION~------------------Hom e of Texas A&M Univmity• 1 $ $
j"M
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 11, 2015
TO: Travis Martinek, via ; travis@clarkewyndham.com
FROM: Mark Bombek, Staff Planner
SUBJECT: INDIAN LAKES PH 19 (FP)
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned final plat as requested. The following page is a list of staff
review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the comments and
submit the following information for further staff review and to be scheduled for a future Planning
& Zoning Commission meeting:
One (1) 24"x36" copy of the revised final plat;
One (1) revised set of construction documents;
Upon receipt of the required documents for the Planning & Zoning meeting, your project will be
considered formally filed with the City of College Station. 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 all comments have not been addressed your project will not be
scheduled for a Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Your project may be placed on a
future agenda once all the revisions have been made and the appropriate fees paid. Once your
item has been scheduled for the P&Z meeting, the agenda and staff report can be accessed at
the following web site on Monday the week of the P&Z meeting.
http://www.cstx.gov/pz
Please note that a Mylar original of the revised final plat will be required after P&Z approval and
prior to the filing of the plat. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call
me at 979.764.3570.
PC: Jeff Robertson, McClure & Browne Engineering/Surveying, via;
jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com
P&DS Project No. 15-00900012
Attachments: Staff Review Comments
Planning e!r Development Services
P.O. BOX 9960 • l l 01 TEXAS AVENUE • COLLEGE STATION • TEXAS • 77842
TEL. 979.764.3570 ·FAX. 979.764.3496
cstx.gov/devservices
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1
Project: Indian Lakes PH 19 (FP) (15-00900012)
PLANNING
1. Provide a note to the Final Plat stating that lots 1 and 4 on Catori Cove and lots 5-10 and lot
16 along Halona Court should only take access from Catori Cove and Halona Court.
2. 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. Any additional changes
on these plans that the City has not been made aware of will constitute a completely new
review.
3. Please note that you may be required to submit paid tax certificates if they are not current
prior to the filing of your plat.
Reviewed by: Mark Bombek Date: 02-06-2015
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1
1. Show a Private drainage easement on the common area between lots 10 & 11 .
2. Add a note stating whose responsibility it is to maintain and stating that fences,
grading, and landscape cannot impede the flow of the private drainage easement.
3. Add a note regarding requirement for compaction of fill or engineered slab for
affected lots that have greater than 2 feet of fill on final plat and construction
documents. Also list the lots that would require this.
4. Show the future 10' PUE along the rear of the PUE of Lot 11-16 totaling 20' PUE.
5. Dedicate the 16 feet PUE easement outside the plat by separate instrument.
6. Please make sure that all lot numbers are labeled on the construction sheets.
7. Move WS4.01 to the common lot boundary.
8. Provide a gate valve at the tee with the fire hydrant on Halona Court. Also please
confirm that the gate valve spacing between Catori Cove & Kachina Cove does not
exceed 800'.
9. Relocate WA-2 in such a way that the clearance between waterline's center line &
the PUE's boundary is at least 6' or provide additional easement.
1 O. It appears another drainage area (south of Holona Court) needs to be taken into
accounted for.
11 . Check your Rainfall Intensity's equation for the 100 storm event.
12. Please provide calculations showing that the water surface elevation in the ditches
are at least 6 "below the top ditch during a 25-year storm.
13. Culvert #1 requires a freeboard of at least 1' during a 100-year storm event.
14. Does the culvert analysis take into account the flow hindrance of the Rock Rip Rap
at the discharge location?
15. Specify the length type, and grade on profile for culvert 1 on C3.1
16. Provide Cost Estimate, and B/CS Standard details.
Reviewed by: Kevin Ferrer Date: February 5, 2015
SANITATION
1. Sanitation is ok with this project.
Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: January 28, 2015
COUNTY
Overall Comments:
1. Access concerns are considerable with the development of these phases.
Previous commitments need to be executed so that work by others in completing
Mesa Verde extension to SH 6 can commence. Please provide detailed estimate
of total number of lots to be developed.
2. Provide all approvals from City of College Station
Plat Comments:
3. Provide for Private Drainage Easement across back of Lots 11-6.
Construction Plan Comments
4. Page C1 .1-Typical Section 1 (re: 75' ROW) -Provide 8" Flex Base; Show
Section as 34' Primed Base with 38' Subgrade Crown. Indicate Typical Section-
Chaco Canyon Drive.
5. Page C1 .1-Typical Section 2 (re: 70' ROW) -Provide 6" Flex Base in Roadway
and 8" Flex Base at Cul-de-Sac; Show Section as 30' Primed Base with 34'
Subgrade Crown. Indicate Typical Section-Catori Cove and Halona Court.
6. Page C1 .1-Typical Section 3 (re: 100' ROW) -Provide 8" Flex Base; Show
Section as 30' Primed Base with 34' Subgrade Crown. Add 6' Earthen Shoulder,
then 8' Front Slope and 19' Back Slope. Indicate Typical Section-Mesa Verde
Drive.
7. Page C1 .1-Modify Typical Shoulder Detail to be reflective of previous 3
comments.
8. Page C1 .2-Correct spelling of "Hay Bail" to "Hay Bale".
9. Page C2 .1-Show existing 6" Water Line and Rock Riprap near Kochina Cove
(from Phase 16).
10.Page C2.1-Indicate Ditch Slope from Sta. 10+100 to Sta. 10+35/ Indicate Limits
of Rock Riprap
11 . Page C2.1-C/L elevation at Sta. 10+100 and Profile Grade of Mesa Verde Drive
do not match plans provided from Phase 16-Please verify that grades match and
that profile grade matches field conditions ...
12. Provide Construction Details.
Drainage Report Comments:
13 . Page 7-There are flows from Phase 19 (depicted in Drainage Area 1) which flow
off property. Please analyze Post-Development Flows against Pre-Development
Flows for potential effect to adjacent property owner(s).
14. Exhibit 8 -Drainage Area 1 is incorrectly sized (should be larger).
15. Page 20-Culverts in this phase do serve arterial or Major Collector Streets. Mesa
Verde and Chaco Canyon are both functionally classified as such .
16 . Page 26-Conclusion should clarify any effects to downstream properties along
Deer Park (from Drainage Area 1 ).
Reviewed by: Alan Munger Date: 02-09-2015
CITY OF C ol.LEGE STATION
_qq _______ _,__._..._.._______ Home of Texas A&M University"
arwd
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 26, 2015
TO: Travis Martinek, via; travis@clarkewyndham .com /
FROM: Mark Bombek, Staff Planner
SUBJECT: INDIAN LAKES PH 19 (FP)
Thank you for the submittal of the required documents for 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 Monday, February 9, 2015. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel free to
contact us.
PC : Jeff Robertson, McClure & Browne Engineering/Surveying , via ; /
jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com
P&DS Project No. 15-00900012
Pla11ni11g & Development Sei·vices
P.O. BOX 9960 • 1101 TEXAS AVENUE · COLLEGE STATION · T EXAS . 77842
TEL. 979.764 . .3570 ·FAX. 979.764.3496
cstx.gov/devservices
•.... -.............. ___________ C ITY OF C OT.LEGE STATION Home of Texas A&M University"
JJ --
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 16, 2015
TO: Travis Martinek, via; travis@clarkewyndham.com
FROM: Jason Schubert, AICP Principal Planner
SUBJECT: INDIAN LAKES PH 19 (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:
Submit a water/fire flow report for the proposed plat. The area in this plat is not
part of the original Indian Lakes Master Plan approved in 2002 but part of the
Partners in Habitat Preservation Tract 1 Master Plan application that was
submitted in December 2007 and approved in February 2008. Therefore, as
stated during the Preliminary Plan review, the water/fire flow requirements
adopted in 2004 apply to this plat.
Please be aware that if this application is not completed before Monday, March 2, 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 & Br9Wne Engineering/Surveying, via;
jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com -,/
P&DS Project No. 15-00900012
Pla11ni11g & Development Services
P.O. BOX 9960 • 11 01 TEXAS AVENUE • COLLEGE STATION • TEXAS • 77842
TEL. 979.764 .. 3570 ·FAX. 979.764.3496
cst>1.gov/devservices
\ INDIAN LAKES PHASE 19 -FINAL PLAT
RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS NO. 1
PLANNING
1. The Applicant intends to allow lot owners to choose where they wish to take access. Chaco
Canyon is not an arterial street; therefore, driveway access to this street is permitted. Please
note that the lots in Phase 20, as shown on the approved Preliminary Plat, will be required to take
access from Chaco Canyon.
2. No comment.
3. No comment.
ENGINEERING
1. See revised Final Plat.
2. See revised Final Plat.
3. This note has not been added. It is up to the builder, homeowner, and their engineer to
determine the requirements for the slab of the house in this subdivision since no building permits
will be required through the City of College Station. Additionally, no lots are intended to have fill
in excess of 2 feet.
4. See revised Final Plat.
5. A temporary utility easement will be provided and filed of record prior to the recording of the Final
Plat. A permanent utility easement will be provided with the Final Plat for Phase 20.
6. See revised construction plans.
7. See revised construction plans
8. A gate valve at the tee with the fire hydrant on Halona Court is shown on the construction plans.
Also, the gate valve spacing between Catori Cove and Kachina Cove measures to be less than
800 feet (approximately 624 feet).
9. See revised construction plans.
10. Water from Phase 19 that will drain to land south of Halona Court onto Phase 21 has been taken
into account in Phase 21 design.
11 . See revised drainage report.
12. See revised drainage report.
13. See revised construction plans and drainage calculations.
14. Yes, Exhibit C-2 has Outfall Channel Design Criteria, but the culvert is in inlet control in all storm
events, so the outfall has little effect on it.
15. See revised construction plans.
16. See revised drainage report.
SANITATION
1. No comment.
BRAZOS COUNTY
1. The Applicant is in the process of developing towards multiple additional access points, Phase 19
and Phase 25 are extensions within this greater plan. The Applicant is in the process of
preparing additional phase submittals for further extensions to obtain additional access points.
The total number of lots planned for Indian Lakes is unknown since the Applicant is in the process
of acquiring or has acquired several additional tracts of land that have not been fully land-planned
to allow for preliminary lot counts to be determined.
3/18/2015 Page 1 of 2
INDIAN LAKES PHASE 19 -FINAL PLAT
2. To be provided when available.
3. Drainage is not anticipated to run along these back lot lines. Drainage from these lots will flow to
the streets on either side of this block.
4. See revised construction plans.
5. See revised construction plans. 8-inch crushed stone was not added to cul-de-sacs as the 6-inch
base has been used throughout the project and in all other subdivisions around the county.
6. See revised construction plans. The typical section has been revised to 30 foot primed based
and 42' subgrade to crown.
7. See revised construction plans.
8. See revised construction plans.
9. See revised construction plans.
10. See revised construction plans.
11 . See revised construction plans. C/L elevation at Station 10+00 is shown to be 292.38 , which
matches plans from the previous phase (Phase 16). Previous plans show a grade of 1.43% while
proposed plans show a grade of 1.60% on Mesa Verde Drive . Revised plans show a Pl (no
curve) at Station 10+00.
12. See revised construction plans.
13. Changes in post-development flows from Drainage Area 1 are negligible compared to pre-
development flows.
14. See revised drainage map. Drainage Area 1 has been increased to 2.13 acres.
15. See revised drainage report.
16. See revised drainage report.
3/18/2015 Page 2 of 2
Zoni rtg Di!itrict!i
R
E
RS
GS
R-18.
0
T
Ru11I
E$tttt:
Ruttlct d Subu bin
Gane al Subu ban
Single Family Res identiaJ
Duplex
Townhouse
R-4
R-6
MHP
0
SC
GC
Cl
BP
vr DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Multi-Famliy
igh Density Multi-Family
MenuftctUJ•d om• P11
Offle
Subu ban Commerelal
Gene al Commercial
Commercial-Industrial
Business Par
BPI
NAP
C-3
M-1
M-2
C -U
R& D
P-MUD
Bu:siness Par Industrial
Natural Areas Protectl!'d
Light Comme1olll
I.lg ht lndustti.I
Hvy lndu'itrial
Colle1je and Univ INS ity
Research and Development
Planned Mixed-Use Development
INDIAN LAKES PH 19 Case:
15 -12
I I
POD
WPC
G-1
G-2
NG-3
ov
ROD
KO
\
I
Planned Development District
Wolf Pen Cu~E" Dev. CotridCf
COie Olthgst•
Tunt ltlon1 I 0tthg1t•
Res identlal Ofthgate
Co idor Overlay
Redev elopment District
Kren Tap Overlay
FINAL PLAT
INOIAN LAKES PH 19 Case: FINAL PLAT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 15·12
INDIAN LAKES PH 19
4
2 3
13
12
Scale = 1: 564 (Feet)
1 N 03° 02' 35" W 100
2 N 86° 57' 25" E 250
3 N 03° 02' 35" W 400
4 N 86° 57' 25" E 254.36
5 N 86° 58' 44" E 365.89
6 S 03° 02' 35" E 399.86
7 N 86° 57' 25" E 367.74
8 S 03° 03' 28" E 100
5 6
7 8
11
9 S 44° 32' 57'' W, ch 33.72, r 25.14 L
10 s 02° 42' 58" w 556.47
11 s 86° 57' 25" w 1808.47
12 N 01° 25' 55" W 237.83
13 N 63° 25' 25" W 501 .97
14 N 79° 08' 35" E, ch 666.18, r 2450 R
15 N 86° 57' 25" E 420.88
Travis Martinek
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Travis,
Stephen Cast [wsud.sc@verizon.net]
Wednesday, August 26, 2015 9:15 AM
Travis Martinek
RE: Indian Lakes -Phase 19
Wellborn Special Utility District has inspected and approved the water lines in Indian Lakes, Phase 19.
Stephen Cast
Wellborn SUD
-----Original Message-----
From : Travis Martinek [mailto:tmartinek@clarkewyndham.com]
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 9:39 PM
To: Stephen Cast <wsud.sc@verizon.net>; Julia Skrivanek <wsud .js@verizon.net>
Cc: Jeff Robertson <jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com>
Subject: Indian Lakes -Phase 19
Stephen,
We have completed Indian Lakes Phase 19 and are preparing to file the plat on Wednesday. Can you reply to this email
stating your acceptance of the water lines for inclusion into the Wellborn Water system? I need this confirmation to file the
plat.
Jeff ... can you print out a copy of the plans and I will get them to Stephen for his records .
Thanks!
Travis Martinek
Clarke & Wyndham, Inc.
1
DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
INDIAN LAKES SUBDIVISION
PHASE 19
December 2014
PREPARED FOR:
SMILING MALLARD D EVELOPMENT, L TD .
3608 E AST 29 TH S TREET
B RYAN, T EXAS 77802
9 79-846-4384
MBESI No. 10620046
McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC.
1008 Woodcreek Dr., Suite 103 ·College Station, Tx. 77845 · (979) 693-3838 Engineer Reg. No. F-458
Survey Reg. No. 101033-00
Indian Lakes Subdivision, Phase 19
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
MEES! No. 10620046
PART 1-Executive Summary Report
Section 1 -Contact Information
Project Designer: McClure and Browne Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103
College Station, TX 77845
979-693-3838
Project Developer: Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd.
3608 East 291h Street
Bryan, Texas 77802
Section 2-General Information and Project Location
This development is the 19th phase of a multi-phase subdivision. Phase 19 consists of 16 lots. The
phase is located in the Indian Lakes Village which is down Arrington Rd. approximately 2 miles from
the Arrington Rd. William D. Fitch Pkwy intersection. Phase 19 lies in the northeast portion of the
subdivision near the intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Sundance Drive. The entire subdivision has
been analyzed in the initial drainage report submitted in September, 2000. The development is located
within the ETJ of College Station.
The project site is in the Peach Creek watershed. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for
Brazos County, Texas and incorporated area, Map Number 48041C0350E effective May 16, 2012 ; no
portion of this property is located in a 100-year flood hazard area.
Culvert pipe and ditch sizing calculations are shown with this submittal.
The culverts and ditches peak runoffs were found using the Rational Method. A runoff coefficient ( c) of
0.50 was used for residential areas since all the lots have an area greater than 1 acre. The ditches along
the proposed roadways are uniform throughout the project. The ditch profiles along all proposed
roadways were determined using the largest ditch drainage area found for Phase 19. The culverts and
ditches were analyzed using an Excel Spreadsheet which utilizes Manning's Equation for the analysis.
Section 3 -Reference
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C-1
Exhibit C-2
Exhibit C-3
Technical Design Summary
Drainage Area Map
Rational Method Calculations
Culvert Sizing Calculations
Ditch Capacity Calculations
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBITS
Drainage Repo1i
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBIT A
Technical Design Summary
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
The Cities of Bryan and College Station both require storm drainage design to follow these
Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. Paragraph C2 of Section Ill (Administration) requires
submittal of a drainage report in support of the drainage plan (stormwater management plan)
proposed in connection with land development projects, both site projects and subdivisions.
That report may be submitted as a traditional prose report, complete with applicable maps,
graphs, tables and drawings, or it may take the form of a ''Technical Design Summary". The
format and content for such a summary report shall be in substantial conformance with the
description in this Appendix to those Guidelines. In either format the report must answer the
questions (affirmative or negative) and provide, at min imum, the information prescribed in the
''Technical Design Summary" in this Appendix.
The Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report shall include several parts
as listed below. The information called for in each part must be provided as applicable. In
addition to the requirements for the Executive Summary, this Appendix includes several
pages detailin g the requirements for a Technical Design Summary Report as forms to be
completed. These are provided so that they may be copied and completed or scanned and
digitized. In addition, electronic versions of the report forms may be obtained from the City.
Requirements for the means (medium) of submittal are the same as for a conventional report
as detailed in Section Ill of these Guidelines.
Note: Part 1 -Executive Summary must accompany any drainage report
required to be provided in connection with any land development project,
regardless of the format chosen for said report.
Note: Parts 2 through 6 are to be provided via the forms provided in this
Appendix. Brief statements should be included in the forms as requested ,
but additional information should be attached as necessary.
Part 1 -Executive Summary Report
Part 2 -Project Administration
Part 3 -Project Characteristics
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Part 5 -Plans and Specifications
Part 6 -Conclusions and Attestation
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY REPORT
Part 1 -Executive Summary
This is to be a brief prose report that must address each of the seven areas listed below.
Ideally it will include one or more paragraphs about each item.
1. Name, address, and contact information of the engineer submitting the report, and
of the land owner and developer (or applicant if not the owner or developer). The
date of submittal should also be included.
2. Identification of the size and general nature of the proposed project, including any
proposed project phases. This paragraph should also include reference to
applications that are in process with either City: plat(s), site plans, zoning requests,
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 1of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECH NI CAL DESIGN SUMMARY
or clearing/grading permits, as well as reference to any application numbers or
codes assigned by the City to such request.
3. The location of the project should be described. This should identify the Named
Regulatory Watershed(s) in which it is located, how the entire project area is
situated therein, whether the property straddles a watershed or basin divide, the
approximate acreage in each basin , and whether its position in the Watershed
dictates use of detention design. The approximate proportion of the property in the
city limits and within the ET J is to be identified, including whether the property
stradd les city jurisdictional lines. If any portion of the property is in floodplains as
described in Flood Insurance Rate Maps published by FEMA that should be
disclosed.
4. The hydrologic characteristics of the property are to be described in broad terms:
existing land cover; how and where stormwater drains to and from neighboring
properties; ponds or wetland areas that tend to detain or store stormwater; existing
creeks, channels, and swa les crossing or serving the property; all existing drainage
easements (or ROW) on the property, or on neighbori ng properties if they service
runoff to or from the property.
5. The general plan for managing stormwater in the entire project area must be
outlined to include the approximate size, and extent of use, of any of the following
features: storm drains coupled with streets; detention I retention facilities; buried
conveyance conduit independent of streets; swales or channels; bridges or culverts;
outfalls to principal watercourses or their tributaries; and treatment(s) of existing
watercourses. Also, any plans for reclaiming land within floodplain areas must be
outlined.
6. Coordination and permitting of stormwater matters must be addressed. This is to
include any specialized coordination that has occurred or is planned with other
entities (local, state, or federal). This may include agencies such as Brazos County
government, the Brazos River Authority, the Texas A&M University System, the
Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Commission for Environmental
Quality, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Environmental Protection Agency,
et al. Mention must be made of any permits, agreements, or understandings that
pertain to the project.
7. Reference is to be made to the full drainage report (or the Technical Design
Summary Report) which the executive summary represents. The principal
elements of the main report (and its length), including any maps, drawings or
construction documents, should be itemized. An example statement might be:
"One __ -page drainage report dated one set of
construction drawings ( __ sheets) dated ____ , and a
___ -page specifications document dated ____ comprise
the drainage report for this project."
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 2 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration I Start (Page 2.1)
Engineering and Design Professionals Information
Engineering Firm Name and Address: Jurisdiction
City: Bryan
McClure & Browne Engineering/Surveying, Inc . x College Station 1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77845 Date of Submittal:
(979)693-3838
Lead Engineer's Name and Contact lnfo.(phone, e-mail, fa x): Other:
Jeffery L. Robertson, P.E.
Supporting Engineering I Consu lti ng Firm(s): Other contacts:
Developer I Owner I Applicant Information
Developer I Applicant Name and Address: Phone and e-mail:
Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd. (979) 846-4384
3608 East 29th Street
Bryan, Texas 77802
Property Owner(s) if not Developer I Applicant (&address): Phone and e-mail:
Project Identification
Development Name: Indian Lakes, Phase 19
Is subject property a site project, a single-phase subdivision, or part of a multi-phase subdivision?
Multi-phase Subdivision If multi-phase, subject property is phase 19 of
Legal description of subject property (phase) or Project Area:
(see Section II, Paragraph B-3a )
Indian Lakes , Phase 19
If subject property (phase) is second or later phase of a project, describe general status of all
earlier phases. For most recent earlier phase Include submittal and review dates.
The project is the 19th phase of a multi phase subdivision . At this time the first phase has
been built. Phase 1 was submitted in September, 2000 and consisted of 58 lots. The most
recent phase submitted was Ph. 25 .
General Location of Project Area, or subject property (phase):
Project site is located near the intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Sundance Drive
in College Station, Texas .
In City Limits? Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (acreage):
Bryan: acres. Bryan: College Station: 34 .48
College Station: acres. Acreage Outside ET J:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 3 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration Continued (page 2.2)
Project Identification (continued)
Roadways abutting or within Project Area or
subject property:
Mesa Verde Drive
Abutting tracts, platted land, or built
developments:
Indian Lakes, Phase 16 & Undeveloped Land
Named Regulatory Watercourse(s) & Watershed(s): Tributary Basin(s):
Phase 19 is located in the Peach Creek Watershed . The nearest tributary is Peach Creek S .
Tributary 7.2 (See FEMA Map 48041C0350E).
Plat Information For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Preliminary Plat File#: ____ _ Final Plat File#: ______ Date: ____ _
Name: Pending Approval Status and Vol/Pg: Pending Approval
If two plats, sec
Status:
Zoning Information For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Zoning Type: Existing or Proposed? Case Code: _____ _
Case Date ____ _ Status:
Zoning Type: Existing or Proposed? Case Code: _____ _
Case Date ____ _ Status:
Stormwater Management Planning For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Participants:
Page 4 of 26
When? ____ _
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration Continued (page 2.3)
Coordination For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Note: For any Coordination of stormwater matters indicated below, attach documentation
describing and substantiating any agreements, understandings, contracts, or approvals.
Coordination With
Non-jurisdiction
City Needed?
mmarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Yes No x
Coordination with
Brazos County
Needed?
Yes No x
Coordination with
TxDOT Needed?
Yes No _x_
Coordination with
T AMUS Needed?
Yes No x
Permits For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
As to stormwater management, are permits required for the proposed work from any of the entities
listed below? If so, summarize status of efforts toward that ob·ective in s aces below.
Entity
US Army Crops of
Engineers
No x Yes
US Environmental
Protection Agency
No x Yes
Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality
No Yes x
Brazos River
Authority
No x Yes
Permitted or
A
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Status of Actions (include dates)
A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be
implemented prior to the start of construction
according to TPDES General Permit No . TXR150000 .
Page 5 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Property Characteristics Start (Page 3.1)
Nature and Scope of Proposed Work
Existing: Land proposed for development currently used, including extent of impervious cover?
Existing undeveloped land (Dense tree cover) . Existing impervious cover is
approximately 0 sf.
Site
Development
Project
(select all
applicable)
Subdivision
Development
Project
Describe
Nature and
Size of
Proposed
Project
evelo ment of one platted lot, or two or more adjoining
__ Building on a · e platted lot of undeveloped la
_x_ Construction of streets and utilities to serve one or more platted lots.
__ Construction of streets and utiliti es to serve one or more proposed lots on
lands represented by pending plats.
Site projects: building use(s), approximate floor space, impervious cover ratio.
Subdivisions: number of lots by general type of use, linear feet of streets and
drainage easements or ROW.
This phase of the subdivision includes 16 lots . The development
consists of approximately 3,177 LF of streets with 16' PUE on each
side of the streets ROW .
Is any work planned on land that is not platted
or on land for which platting is not pending?
x No Yes
FEMA Floodplains
Is any part of subject property abutting a Named Regulatory Watercourse No x Yes
(Section II , Paragraph B 1) or a tributary th ereof?
Is any part of subject property in floodpla in
area of a FEMA-regulated watercourse?
Encroachment(s)
into Floodplain
areas planned?
No x
No
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 6 of 26
Yes x
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Property Characteristics Continued (Page 3.2)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase)
Has an earlier hydrologic analysis been done for larger area including subject property?
Yes
x
No
Reference the study (&date) here, and attach copy if not already in City files.
Indian Lakes Subdivision; September, 2000
Is the stormwater management plan for the property in substantial conforma nce with the
earlier study? Yes x No If not, explain how it differs.
·ect propert y is not part of multi-phase project, describe stormwater manag eme
plan for roperty in Part 4.
If property is part !ti-phase project, provide overview of stormw management plan
for Project Area here. operty will comply
therewith.
Do existing topographic features on subject property store or detain runoff? _x_ No Yes
Describe them (include approximate size, volume, outfall, model, etc).
Any known drainage or flooding problems in areas near subject pro perty? __ x_ No Yes
Identify:
Based on location of study property in a watershed, is Type 1 Detention (flood control) needed?
(see Tabl e B-1 in Appendix B)
__ Detention is required. _x_ Need must be evaluated. __ Detention not required.
What decision has been reached? By whom?
Detention study during Phase 1.
If the need for How was determin ation made?
Type 1 Detention
must be evaluated: Detention was required and is provided for the entire
Indian Lakes Subdivision. However, Phase 19 does not require
any additional detention.
STORMWATER DESIGN GU IDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 7 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Property Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.3)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
Does subject property straddle a Watershed or Basin divide? x No __ Yes If yes ,
describe splits below. In Part 4 describe desiqn concept for ha ndlinq this.
---Watershed or Basin Larger acreage Lesser ----:e -----------------------~
--t---._
--r----_
Above-Project Areas(Section II, Paragraph 83-a)
Does Project Area (project or phase) receive runoff from upland areas? _x_ No __ Yes
Size(s)ofarea(s)inacres: 1) 2) 3) 4) __ _
Flow Characteristics (each instance) (overland sheet, shallow concentrated, recognizable
concentrated section(s), small creek (non-regulatory), regulatory Watercourse or tributary);
Overland flow to proposed ditch lines on Phase 19 streets.
Flow determ ination : Outli ne hydrologic methods and assumptions:
The Rational Method was used for flow calculations and the post development
land was treated as large acre residential tracts.
Does storm runoff drain from public easements or ROW onto or across subject property?
_x_ No __ Yes If yes, describe facilities in easement or ROW :
Are changes in runoff characteristics subject to change in future? Explain
No , upstream land is already developed.
Conveyance Pathways (Section II , Paragraph C2)
Must runoff from study property drain across lower properties before reaching a Regulatory
Wate rcourse or tributary? No x Yes
Describe length and characteristics of each conveyance pathway(s). Include ownership of
property(ies ).
Runoff from Ph . 19 will leave the phase and be discharged into existing
tributaries of Peach Creek . The property is a future phase
of t he Indian Lakes Subdivision .
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 8 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Property Characteristics Continued (Page 3.4)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
Conveyance Pathways (continued)
Do drainage
easements
exi st for any
part of
pathway(s)?
es, for what part of length? % Created by? __ plat, or
instrument. If instrument(s), describe their provisions.
x No
Pathway
Areas
Nearby
Yes
Where runoff must cross lower p ert ies, describe charac istics of abutting lower
property(ies). (Existing watercourse Easement or Co ent aquired?)
Describe any built or impr ed drainage facilities existing nea e property (culverts,
bridges, lined channels uried conduit, swales, detention ponds, tc).
Dra inage I'-::----.,,-,----,----...,.--,---,-----,-----------------~ Facilities Do any of these have hydrologic or hydraulic influence on proposed stormwater
design? _x_ No __ Yes If yes, explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 9 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Start (Page 4.1)
Stormwater Management Concept
Discharge(s) From Upland Area(s)
ff is to be received from upland areas, what design drainage features will be used t
accomm it and insure it is not blocked by future development? Describe fa
flow section, or 1 e point.
Discharge(s) To Lower Property(ies) (Section II, Paragraph E1)
Does project include drainage features (existing or future) proposed to become public via
platting? _x_ No __ Yes Separate Instrument? x No Yes
er Guidelines reference above, how will
ru ff be discharged to neighboring
prop (ies)?
__ Establishing Easements (Scenario 1)
__ Pre-development Release (Scenari 2)
Combination of the two Scenari
Scenario 1. If easements are proposed, describe where needed, and provide stat
on each. (Atta ed Exhibit# )
Scenario 2: Provide general de ription of how release(s) wil e managed to pre-development
conditions (detention, sheet flow, p ially concentrated, et .. (Attached Exhibit# )
Combination: If combination is pro sed , explain how d1 harge will differ from pre-
development conditions at the pr erty line for each area (o oint) of release.
If Scenario 2, o ombination are to be used , has proposed design been coor · ated with
owner(s) of r eiving property(ies)? No Yes Explain and pro · e
documen
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 10 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.2)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project
· gaining Basins or Watersheds and acres shifting:
Will project resu lt
in shifting runoff
between Basins or 1------------=......_,,-----'7"""'=---.,----,--------,---~,----1
between
Watersheds?
x No
Yes
How will runoff from Project
Area be mitigated to pre-
development conditions?
Select any or all of 1, 2,
and/or 3, and explain be low.
1. __ With facility(ies) involving other development projects.
2. __ Establishi ng features to serve overall Project Area .
3. _x_ On phase (or site) project basis within Project Area.
ared facilit (type & location of facility; design drainage area served; relationship to siz
Project : (Attached Exhibit# )
2. For Overall Project Area
3. By phase (or site) project: Describe planned mitigation measures for phases (or sites) in
subsequent questions of this Part.
aquatic echosystems proposed? No Yes
?
nt Practices for reducing stormwate
Su rize type of BMP and
If design of any runoff-handlin cilities deviate from p isions of B-CS Technical
Specifications, check ty acility(ies) and explain in later q
Conduit elements I features
__ Ditches __ Inlets __ Valley gutters __
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
________ Other
Page 11 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.3)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project (continued)
Will Project Area include bridge(s) or culvert(s)? __ No _x_ Yes Identify type and
general size and In which phase(s).
Culvert 11 -24 " RCP Pipe on Chaco Canyon Drive
Culvert 12 -24 " RCP Pipe on Halona Court
· /retention serves (will serve) overall Project Area, describe how it relates t
phase or site pr · h sical location, conveyance pathway(s), constru · quence):
Identify whether each of the types of drainage features listed below are included, extent of use,
and general characteristics.
Typical shape?
V-Shape
Surfaces?
Grass
Steepest side slopes:
4 :1
Usual front slopes: Usual back slopes:
4 :1 4 :1
Flow line slopes: least __ o_. 6_8_%_ Typical dis tance from travelway: 11 '
typical __ v_a_r i_· e_s_ greatest __ 2_. ~93~%-(Attached Exhibit# )
Are longitudinal cu lvert ends in compliance with B-CS Standard Specifications?
x Yes No, then explain:
rsections or otherwise, do valley gutters cross arterial or co ll ector stre
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Yes If yes explain:
Page 12 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.4)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
L.. Q.) '§
Ol
""CJ~ c ""CJ C1l Q.)
-e .~ ~c 0 ..c (.) --·~
CJJ a;
~ u;
Q.)
4:
C:-· ""CJ Q.)
CJJ CJJ ::::J Q.)
E >-~I CJJ
c ·-0 n u;
.!!!.
Usual
Are 1 ets recessed on arterial and collector streets?
identify here and why.
Greatest
Yes
Will inlets captu 10-year design stormflow to prevent flooding of · tersections (arterial
with arterial or colle or)? __ Yes __ No If no, expl · where and why not.
Will inlet size and placemen revent exceeding allowa e water spread for 10-year
design storm throughout site ( hase)? __ Y No If no, explain.
Sag curves: Are inlets placed at low poin '2 Yes No Are inlets and
conduit sized to prevent 100-yea r storm rom ponding at greater than 24 inches?
Yes No Explain "no" answe
Will 100-yr stormflow b ontained in combination of ROW a buried conduit on
whole length of all str. ets? __ Yes __ No If no, des "be where and why.
for cu rb, gutter, and inlets comply with B-CS Technical Specific ·ons?
No If not, describe difference(s) and attach justification.
any 12-inch laterals used? No Yes
used.
Are downstream soffi at or below upstream soffits?
Yes __ N __ If not, explain where and why:
If not, explain where
Leas ount that hydraulic
grade line · elow gutter line
(system-wide):
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 13 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.5)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
C'-·
CJ)
(j)
~CJ)
-a> jTI
.8
~ 0 ooz :i i xi
CJ)
a>
Describe watercourse(s), or system(s) receivi ng system discharge(s) below
(i ncl ude design discharge velocity, and angle between converging flow line
atercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
For each outfall abov , what measures are taken to event erosion or scour of
receiving and all ilities at juncture?
1)
swale(s) situated along property lines between properties? No
Num r of instances: For each instance answer the following questio
ments (including low-flow fl umes if any):
4: Wi ll 100-year desi storm runoff be contained wi thin easement(s
ROW in all inst ces? Yes No If "no" explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 14 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.6)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
(/)
Q) .r: ~ 0
Q)
:-£2
(/)
"O
C1l 0 a:::
(/)
Q) >-
I
0 z
xj
C'-· .!!].
Q) c c
C1l .r: u
c
Q)
0. 0 -0
:::J
-~
c
"O Q)
(/)
:::J
(/) c 0 ~ c
:.0 E 0 u -:::J
"O c 0 u ]l
C1l ~ (/)
Q)
~
(/)
Q) u c
C1l Ul c
cu c 0 :E
"O "O C1l
>. c
C1l ._
0 -c 0 ~
E ._
.2 c
Q)
E C1l
(/)
Q)
"O ·::;:
0 ..... 0. w Q) .r:
(/)
Q)
~ C1l 0.
Q)
(/)
c ~
Are roadside ditches used? __ No _x_ Yes If so, provide th e following:
Is 25-year flow contained with 6 inches of freeboard throughout? _x_ Yes
Are top of banks separated from road shoulders 2 feet or more? _x_ Yes
Are all ditch sections trapezoidal and at least 1.5 feet deep? Yes
For any "no" answers provide location(s) and explain:
All Ditche s are V-shaped and a t least 2 ' deep
x
conduit is beneath a swale, provide the following information (each instance).
Is 100-ye design flow contained in conduiUswale combination?
If "no" expla· :
r storm flow? ROW Easement
Swale Surface ty , m1n1mum Conduit Type and size, minim
and maximum slopes: slopes, design storm:
Yes
ROW Easement Width
No
No
No
No
No
Conduit Type and size, mi
slopes, design storm:
um and maximum
Inlets Describe ow conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inl
escribe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into condu
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 15 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Contin ued (Page 4.7)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
c
~
E ~ e w -
"yes" provide the following information for each instance:
15 IJJ Is 100-year design w contained in swale?
c ~ within drainage ROW . __ Yes __ No
.; I f--~~~~~...,-~~~~~~~~~~~~~---,,.£-~~~~~~~~~-----j
o Access ~ 0 ;z
] x I r-:-~~~...,---::-~-,-,--~~~--,-~~~---"<----r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--l ~ Instance 2 Describe general location, ap
Q) ·c C'-·
:::J Ul
..a c
::; Q) o E
£ ffi -~ ~
Ul '-Q) 0 ~~
Ul 0 =a: ~ -~
C'-· l:l Q)
Ul
..a
:::J
0..
c
~ 0 0.. 0.. x e w
0..
Ul Ul c Q)
Q) >-
E
I
Q) > 0 '--0.. E 0 z
Q)
xJ c c Cll .!:: u
Is 100-year design flow co
within drainage ROW?
Is swale wholly
w" channels: Will any area(s) of concentrated flow be chan nelized (deepened
wide or straightened) or otherwise altered? __ No __ Yes If only s · tly
shaped, s "Swales" in this Part. If creating side banks, provide informati elow.
Will design repl1 e natural channel? Yes No If "no" reach instance
describe section sha & area, flow line slope (min. & max.), s ces, and 100-year
design flow, and amount reeboard:
Instance 1:
Instance 2:
Instance 3:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 16 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.8)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
-0 (!)
:::I c
No Yes
Wi small creeks and their floodplains remain undisturbed? __ Yes __ No How
man disturbance instances? Identify each planned location:
For each lac lion, describe length and general type of proposed improv,
(including floo lain changes):
For each location, des ibe section shape & area, flow line sl e (min. & max.),
surfaces, and 100-year sign flow.
'E Watercourses (and tributaries): ide from fri e changes, are Regulatory
8 Watercourses proposed to be altered . __ o __ Yes Explain below.
(/) c Submit full report describing proposed c n s to Regulatory Watercourses. Address
~ existing and proposed section size and sh e, surfaces, alignment, flow line changes,
~ length affected, and capacity, and provid f documentation of analysis procedures e and data. Is full report submitted? No If "no" explain: 0. E
If design is to replicate nat al channel, identify location a length here, and describe
design in Special Design ection of this Part of Report.
Will 100-year flo be contained with one foot of freeboard?
not, identify lac ion and explain:
No If
I easements sized to contain channel and required maintenance spa e?
es No If not, identify location(s) and explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 17 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.9)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
(/)
(1) >-
I
C'-· l:l
(1)
(/) 0 0.. e a...
(/)
(1)
:E
ow many facilities for subject property project? For each provide info. belo
For each facility what is 25-
Facility 1:
Facility 2:
__ yes
__ yes
Facility 2
no no
no no
Do outlets and spillways discharge 1 to a public fa 1lity in easement or ROW?
Facility 1: __ Yes No Facilit 2: Yes No
If "no" explain:
For each, what is velocity of 25-yr desi discti rge at outlet? & at spillway?
Facility 1: & ----+--Faci · y 2: & ____ _
Are energy dissipation measures No Yes Describe type and
location:
For each, is spillway su es or no, and describe:
Facility 1:
Facility 2:
easures are taken to prevent erosion or scour at rec ·ving facility?
If berm are used give heights, slopes and surface treatments of sides.
Facili 1:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 18 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.10)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
W ithin Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
tru ctures comply with B-CS Specificati ons? Yes or no, and explain if "no":
Facility 1;
(fl Q) :;::;
:-=TI ~ Q) Facility 2: LL ::J c c:,.::::;
0 c ~ 0 c (..) Q) ~
For additional facilit~de all same information on a se~heet. Qi
0 ~to be used for detention? __ No _Yes ~ due to required design storm?
Roadside Ditches: Will culverts serve access driveways at roa dside ditches?
No x Yes If "yes", provide information in next two boxes. ----
Will 25-yr. flow pass without fl owing over driveway in all cases? x Yes No ----
Without causing flowing or standing water on public roadway? x Yes No ----
Designs & materials comply with B-CS Technical Specifications? __ x_ Yes --No
Explain any "no" answers:
C'·
(fl
Ol c
(fl Are culverts parallel to public roadway alignment? __ Yes x No Explain: (fl
0 --ti (fl Q)
2 >-! xi Creeks at Private Drives: Do private driveways, drives, or streets cross drainage
Cll wa~s that serve Above-Project areas or are in public easements/ ROW?
-0 0
Q) z __ No __ Yes If "yes" provide information below.
(fl
I
::J How many instances? Describe location and provide information below. (fl
t Q) Location 1: 2: ::J (..)
Q) Location 2: .<
Location 3:
For each location enter value for: 1 2 3
Design year passing without toping travelway?
Water depth on travelway at 25-year flow?
Water depth on travelway at 100-year flow?
For more instances descri be location and same information on separate sheet.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 19 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.11)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Named Regulato!)l Watercourses (&Tributaries}: Are culverts proposed on these
facilities? x No __ Yes, then provide full report documenting assumptions, --criteria, analysis, computer programs, and study findings that support proposed
design(s). Is report provided? __ Yes --No If "no", explain:
a; Arterial or Ma jor Collector Streets: Will cu lverts serve these types of roadways?
(!) x No Yes How many instances? For each identify the .c en ----
(!) location and provide the information below.
en rn Instance 1: (!) '-->-~ x i~ Instance 2:
Instance 3: c
.Q Yes or No for the 100-year design flow: a rn 1 2 3
z E I ~ Headwater WSE 1 foot below lowest curb top?
Spread of headwater within ROW or easement?
E ('-· C1l Is velocity lim ited per conditions (Table C-11 )? en en
gi "O Explain any "no" answer(s): ·-c ~ C1l
0 c '--0 u :p >-C1l C1l (.) 3 ..Q
"O (!)
C1l .0 0 ·-'--'--Minor Collector or Local Streets: W ill culverts serve these types of streets?
(.) (.) No x Yes How many instances? 2 for each identify the ·-en -(!) ----.g "O location and provide the information below: a. (!) ....., a. Instance 1: Cu l vert #1 on Chaco Canyon Dr ive C1lb
"O >-Instance 2: Culvert #2 on Halona Court (!) c ~ C1l -Instance 3: 2 0 ...._ en
(!) (!) For each instance enter value, or "yes" I "no" for:4 2'. (.) 1 2 3 ::Jc (.) C1l Design yr. headwater WSE 1 ft. below curb top? Yes (!) u; Yes '--c <l'. ·-100-yr. max. depth at street crown 2 feet or less? Yes ~ Yes
0 Product of velocity (fps) & depth at crown (ft)=? 0 E 0
'--Yes 0 Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11 )? Yes ~
Limit of down stream analys is (feet)? 50 ' 50 '
Explain any "no" answers:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 20 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH . DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Feb ruarv 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.12)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
All Proposed Culverts: For all proposed culvert facilities (except driveway/roadside
ditch intersects) provide information req uested in next eight boxes.
Do culverts and travelways intersect at 90 degrees? x Yes No If not, ----identify location(s) and intersect angle(s), and justify the design(s):
Does drainage way alignment change withi n or near limits of culvert and surfaced
approaches thereto? _x_ No --Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe
change(s), and justification :
Are flu mes or conduit to discharge into culvert barrel(s)? ____!:______No __ Yes If yes,
identify location(s) and provide justification:
-Are flumes or conduit to discharge into or near surfaced approaches to culvert ends?
"O x No Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe outfall design treatment(s): Q.) ----:::i c ~ 0 u
(/)
t Q.) Is scour/erosion protection provided to ensure long term stability of culvert structural .2: :::i components, and surfacing at culvert ends? x Yes No If "no" Identify u ----locations and provide justification(s):
Will 100-yr flow and spread of backwater be fully contained in street ROW, and/or
drainage easements/ ROW? _x_ Yes --No if not, why not?
Do appreciable hydraulic effects of any culvert extend downstream or upstream to
neighboring land(s) not encompassed in subject property? x No Yes If ----"yes" describe location(s) and mitigation measures:
Are all culvert designs and materials in compliance with B-CS Tech. Specifications? x Yes No If not, explain in Special Design Section of this Part. ----
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 21 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.13)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
.£
Cll
::i a ....
(l)
1il s
bridge included in plans for subject property project? No Yes
If "ye " rovide the following information.
A full report supporting al spects of the proposed bridge(s tructural, geotechnical,
hydrologic, and hydr 1c factors) must accompany this summa
provided? No If "no" explain:
Is a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention
Plan (SW3P)
established for
project construction?
No x Yes
Provide a general description of planned techniques:
Hay Bale Barriers and Rock Dams will serve as t he
main protection against stormwate r pollution. The
Contractor shall use any other means necessary
throughout construction .
Special Designs -Non-Traditional Methods
Are any non-traditional methods (aquatic echosystems, wetland-type detention, natural stream
repl ication, BMPs for water quality, etc.) proposed for any aspect of subject property project?
x No Yes If "yes" list general type and location below.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 22 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.14)
Stormwater Management Concept {continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property {Phase, or Site) {continued)
ecial Designs -Deviation From B-CS Technical Specifications
If a design(s) or material(s) of traditional runoff-handling facilities deviate from provisions of
8-CS chnical Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain by specific detail eleme .
De tion elements __ Drain system elements __ Channel features
Cu Ive Swales Ditches Inlets tfalls
__ Valley gu __ Bridges (explain in bridge report)
ntify specific element, justification for deviation(s).
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Have elements been co inated with the City Engineer or her/his des1 ee? For each item
above provide "yes" no", action date, and staff name:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Design Parameters
Hydrology
Is a map(s) showing all Design Drainage Areas provided? x Yes No
Briefly summarize the range of applications made of the Rational Formula:
For the Rational Formula we assumed residential areas had a
runoff coefficient of 0.5 for large residential or estate lots.
What is the size and location of largest Design Drainage Area to which the Rational Formula
has been applied? 4. oo acres Location (or identifier): Ditch Line Culvert #1
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 23 of 26 APPENDIX. D TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.15)
Design Parameters (continued)
Hydrology (continued)
In making determinations for time of concentration, was segment analysis used?
x No Yes In approximately what percent of Design Drainage Areas? %
As to intensity-duration-frequency and rain depth criteria for determining runoff flows, were any
criteria other than those provided in these Guideli nes used? _x_ No Yes If "yes" --identify type of data, source(s), and where applied:
For each of the stormwater management features listed below identify the storm return
frequencies (year) analyzed (or checked), and that used as the basis for design.
Feature Analysis Year(s) Design Year
~tern for arterial and collector streets -------Storm drain system for .-,ets -----------Open channels -~
Swale/buried condui~a"on in lieu of channel ---------~ --------Roadside ditches and culverts serving them 2,5,10 ,25,50,100 2 5 & 1 00
~ilities: spillway crest and its outfall
Detention facilitie~d conveyance structure(s) --------Detention facilities: volume when ~ed ------~
Culverts serving private drives or~ -----r--.
Culverts serving ~ ~ays --------~vide in bridge report. --------Hydraulics
What is the range of design flow velocities as outlined below?
Design flow velocities; 2 5 y ear Gutters Conduit Culverts Swales Channels
Highest (feet per second)
Lowest (feet per second)
Streets and Storm Drain Systems
Roughness coefficients used:
For conduit type(s) RC P 0 .014
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELI NES
Effective February 2007
10 .50
7 .81
Provide the summary information outlined below:
For street gutters:
Page 24 of 26
NA
Coefficients:
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.16)
Design Parameters (continued)
Hydraulics (continued)
eet and Storm Drain Systems (continued)
For th allowing, are assumptions other than allowable per Guidelines?
Inlet coe 1 · nts? No Yes Head and friction losses
Yes No
Yes No
Explain any "no" answers:
Yes No
s were assumed at outfall point(s) of the storm
each location and plain:
Open Channels If a HEC analysis is utilized, does it follow Sec Vl.F.5.a? Yes No
Outside of straight sections, is flow regime with in limits of sub-critical flow? _x_ Yes No
If "no" list locations and explain:
Culverts If plan sheets do not provide the following for each culvert, describe it here.
For each design discharge, will operation be outlet (barrel) control or inlet control?
All culverts will be inlet controlled.
Entrance, friction and exit losses:
A 0.5 entrance and exit loss coefficients are used for sloped end treatments
and square edged headwalls with wingwal ls .
Bridges Provide all in bridge report
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 25 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.17)
Design Parameters (continued)
Computer Software
What computer software has been used in the analysis and assessment of stormwater
management needs and/or the development of facility designs proposed for subject property
project? List them below, being sure to identify the software name and version, the date of the
version , any applicable patches and the publisher
Open Office Calculator Spreadsheet
Part 5 -Plans and S~ecifications
Requirements for submittal of construction drawings and specifications do not differ due to use of a
Technical Design Summary Report. See Section Ill, Paragraph C3.
Part 6 -Conclusions and Attestation
Conclusions
Add any concluding information here:
The Indian Lakes Subdi vision, Phase 19 will have no adverse impact to downstream
properties and conforms to the overall subdivision report.
Attestation
Provide attestation to the accuracy and complete ness of the foregoing 6 Parts of th is Technical
Desian Summarv Drai naae Report bv sianina and sealinq below.
"This report (plan) fo r the drainage design of the development named in Part B was prepared
by me (or under my supervision) in accordance with provisions of the Bryan/College Station
Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for the owners of the property. All licenses and permits
require d by any and all state and federal regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage
improvements have been issued or fall under applicable general permits." _,._ .............. ,,,, ' PL --·j;OF •• " ~f th (Affix Seal) ; ,,,_~}····:···'·~{ \) I ft~ ~It ,. ("~...-'~ ·:115' 1
\ ......_ f -· f' * ... ~{f ... ,, 1~ I t f ~ * : f/.\ "· *,. J Lice e fessional Engineer I"·· .. ~ ...................... : .... ~ ~J!:FFERY L. !=IOBERrSoN ;
State of Texas PE No. qq'EJ_t;
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 26 of 26
.,. ... :..· ........... ·;.~: ....... : ... ·j
t1 -o \ 9 4 7 .,. 5 /c .. ,
f -~ ...... t.1.-.,. -<'.."' .. ·.,~".;
--,-~' •• --C"~"'I'-~"" •• • ... -
'·
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2009
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBITB
Drainage Area Map
EXHIBIT C-1
Rational Method Calculations
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
<( ~ w 0 0 0:: w ...J ...J <( <( 0.. <( LL
w w 0 j:: t-0
(!) 0:: ...J z <( z
<( <( w z w () ~ i= > w ::E z ...J ...J <( w <( 0 w <( 0:: (!) ~ iii t-ow > t-Wz 0 zo:: w <( 0 >w 0 t-:::> <( 0:: 0.. t-0...J
NO. AC. 0.4 0.5 0.9 ft.
1.0 2.10 0.00 2.10 0.00 1.05 318.3
2.0 4.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 2.00 770.3
3.0 2.16 0.00 2.16 0.00 1.08 770.3
4.0 2.92 0.00 2.92 0.00 1.46 396.0
. EXHIBIT C-1
Rational Formula Drainage Area Calculations
Indian Lakes Phase 19
~
0 ~ ~ ...J LL 0 0
0 ...J ...J z LL LL >-~ 0:: J: 0:: t-u 0 0 w t-w t-0:: ...J t-(!) t-...J 0 t-0 w_, t-z t-...J ...J w > <( =>w :::> <( w iii C/l N Ill 0 LL (!) ...J (!)LL > () :::> N 0 Ill 0
ft. ft. ft. ftls min min In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs
6.4 496.8 6.0 1.5 9.1 10.0 6.33 6.6 7.7 8.08
11 .8 779.3 14.6 1.3 19.5 19.5 4.50 9.0 5.6 11 .12
11 .8 737.3 11. 7 1.3 19.6 19.6 4.48 4.8 5.5 5.98
5.6 402.4 4.3 1.2 11 .1 11.1 6.02 8.8 7.3 10.72
0 0 Ill 0 0 0 0 ..... Ill N :il Ill 0 0 ..... 0 N 0 0 .....
In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs
8.6 9.07 9.86 10.35 11.15 11.71 12.53 13.15
6.3 12.60 7.22 14.44 8.19 16.39 9.25 18.51
6.3 6.78 7.20 7.77 8.16 8.82 9.22 9.96
8.2 12.04 9.43 13.76 10.66 15.57 11 .99 17.50
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBIT C-2
Culvert Sizing Calculations
Culvert #1
Culvert Description
24" RCP
at Intersection
of Mesa Verde
Drive and Chaco
Canyon Drive
Culvert Design Criteria
Circular
Pipe No.
Dia. (ft.) Pipes
2.00 1
Culvert Analysis Calculations
Total Flow per Critical
Design Flow Pipe Depth(ft.)
Storm (cfs) (cfs) de
5 11 .12 11.12 1.20
10 12.60 12.60 1.30
25 14.44 14.44 1.35
50 16.39 16.39 1.45
100 16.51 18.51 1.55
n
0.014
Normal
Depth
(ft.)
0.82
0.87
0.95
1.02
1.10
EXHIBIT C-2
CULVERT ANALYSIS
Indian Lakes Phase 19 -Culvert #1
ELhi~
i HWi :-1 ;----~ Top of Road / ELho
~~ TW --- --
"'-ELo
_/----- - ---
ELi Proposed Culvert ~
Outfall Channel Design Criteria
Invert Outlet Culvert Top Lt. Side Rt. Side Bottom
Elev. (Eli) Elev. (Elo) Length Slope of Slope Slope Slope Width n
(ft.) (ft.) (ft.) (fVft) Road ke I (fVft) (?:1) (?:1) (ft)
280.75 279.50 55.00 0.0227 284.00 0.50 I 0.0100 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.024
HEADWATER CALCULATIONS Control Type Outlet
INLET CONTROL OUTLET CONTROL HW of Velocity Freeboard
HWi/D HWi ELhi TW de (de+ D)/2 ho H ELho Elev. Control (fps) (ft.)
0.91 1.82 282.57 0.88 1.20 1.60 1.60 0.45 281 .55 282.57 Inlet 9.23 1.43
0.96 1.93 262.68 0.92 1.30 1.65 1.65 0.57 281 .72 282.68 Inlet 9.54 1.32
1.04 2.07 262.82 0.97 1.35 1.68 1.68 0.75 281.93 282.82 Inlet 9.88 1.18
1.13 2.25 283.00 1.02 1.45 1.73 1.73 0.97 282.19 283.00 Inlet 10.19 1.00
1.24 2.47 283.22 1.07 1.55 1.78 1.78 1.23 282.51 283.22 Inlet 10.50 0.78
Culvert #2
Culvert Description
24" RCP
at Intersection
of Chaco Canyon
Drive and Halona
Court
Culvert Desiqn Criteria
Circular
Pipe No.
Dia. (ft.) Pipes
2.00 1
Culvert Analysis Calculations
Total Flow per Critical
Design Flow Pipe Depth(ft.)
Storm (cfs) (cfs) de
5 5.98 5.98 0.80
10 6.78 6.78 0.90
25 7.77 7.77 1.00
50 8.82 8.82 1.05
100 9.96 9.96 1.15
n
0.014
Normal
Depth
(ft )
0.59
0.62
0.67
0.72
0.77
Invert
Elev. (Eli)
(ft.)
283.43
EXHIBIT C-2
CULVERT ANALYSIS
Indian Lakes Phase 19 -Culvert #2
ELhi ~ Top of Road / ELho
HWi ~1;---------~~ ~--__/------------~
ELi Proposed Culvert _=-> - - - --,
"-ELo
Outfall Channel Design Criteria
Outlet Culvert Top Lt. Side Rt. Side Bottom
Elev. (Elo) Length Slope of Slope Slope Slope Width n
(ft) (ft.) (ft/ft) Road ke I (ft/ft) (?:1) (?:1) (ft.)
283.13 58.00 0.0052 286.26 0.50 I 0.0100 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.024
HEADWATER CALCULATIONS Control Type Outlet
INLET CONTROL OUTLET CONTROL HW of Velocity Freeboard
HWi/D HWi ELhi TW de (de+ D)/2 ho H EL ho Elev. Control (fps) (ft.)
0.79 1.58 285.01 0.70 0.80 1.40 1.40 0.13 284.66 285.01 Inlet 7.81 1.25
0.81 1.61 285.04 0.73 0.90 1.45 1.45 0.17 284.75 285.04 Inlet 8.10 1.22
0.83 1.65 285.08 0.76 1.00 1.50 1.50 0.22 284.85 285.08 Inlet 8.38 1.18
0.85 1.71 285.14 0.80 1.05 1.53 1.53 0.29 284.94 285.14 Inlet 8.68 1.12
0.88 1.77 285.20 0.84 1.15 1.58 1.58 0.36 285.07 285.20 Inlet 8.98 1.06
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBIT C-3
Ditch Capacity Calculations
Area= 23.75 sf
Wetted Perimeter = 19.66 ft
Hyd. Radius = 1 .21 ft
12'
·-& •
I~~ 8' 11'
Ex. Groun
Salvage Topsoil
4" Thickness (min.)
PROPOSED ROADSIDE DITCH CAPACITY
NTS
Qcapacity = 1.49
0.035
l 23 75i2/3l )1h 23. 75 0.0068 = 94.6 cfs
Qactual = 18.51 cfs ( 100 year -Drainage Area /12 -Largest Runoff Rate Phase 19)
EXHIBIT C-3
Ditch Capacity
IND/AN LAKES, PHASE 19
COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
~ 1008 Woode~ on·..,, Sui~ 10J, Coll~~ stobon, TX 778-15 !NB u,cwRE • BROWN£ £NGtN££111NG/SUR""""-INC.
• (979) 69.J-.JBJB Fox: (979) 69.J-255~
firm R~. No. F--158
DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
INDIAN LAKES SUBDIVISION
PHASE 19
March 2015
PREPARED FOR:
SMILING MALLARD DEVELOPMENT, L TD .
3608 EAST 29TH STREET
BRYAN, TEXAS 77802
9 79-846-4384
MBESI No. 10620046
~ McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC. ~;II 1008 Woodcreek Dr., Suite 103 ·College Station, Tx .. 77845 · (979) 693-3838 Engineer Reg. No. F-458
. · Survey Reg. No. 101033-00
Indian Lakes Subdivision, Phase 19
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
MEES! No. 10620046
PART I -Executive Summary Report
Section 1 -Contact Information
Project Designer: McClure and Browne Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103
College Station, TX 77845
979-693-3838
Project Developer: Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd.
3608 East 29tb Street
Bryan, Texas 77802
Section 2 -General Information and Project Location
This development is the 19th phase of a multi-phase subdivision. Phase 19 consists of 16 lots. The
phase is located in the Indian Lakes Village which is down Arrington Rd. approximately 2 miles from
the Arrington Rd. William D. Fitch Pkwy intersection. Phase 19 lies in the northeast portion of the
subdivision near the intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Kachina Cove. The entire subdivision has
been analyzed in the initial drainage report submitted in September, 2000. The development is located
within the ETJ of College Station.
The project site is in the Peach Creek watershed. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for
Brazos County, Texas and incorporated area, Map Number 48041C0350E effective May 16, 2012; no
portion of this property is located in a 100-year flood hazard area.
Culvert pipe and ditch sizing calculations are shown with this submittal.
A small portion of this phase drains to the north into a tributary in the Deer Park Subdivision. This area
is identified as Drainage Area #1 on Exhibit B. -There is no planned detention of this drainage since it is
small in nature and discharges directly into an existing creek channel. The existing and proposed
conditions are as follows:
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
Drainage Area 1 Analysis
Storm Event Post Development Flow Pre Development Flow Difference
2-year 6.7 cfs 5.4 cfs 1.30 cfs
5-year 8.19 cfs 6.55 cfs 1.64 cfs
10-year 9.20 cfs 7.36 cfs 1.84 cfs
25-year 10.50 cfs 8.40 cfs 2.10 cfs
50-year 11.87 cfs 9.50 cfs 2.37 cfs
100-year 12.15 cfs 9.72 cfs 2.43 cfs
The culverts and ditches peak runoffs were found using the Rational Method. A runoff coefficient ( c) of
0.50 was used for residential areas since all the lots have an area greater than 1 acre. The ditches along
the proposed roadways are uniform throughout the project. The ditch profiles along all proposed
roadways were determined using the largest ditch drainage area found for Phase 19. The culverts and
ditches were analyzed using an Excel Spreadsheet which utilizes Manning's Equation for the analysis.
Section 3 -Reference
ExhibitA
Exhibit B
Exhibit C-1
Exhibit C-2
Exhibit C-3
Technical Design Summary
Drainage Area Map
Rational Method Calculations
Culvert Sizing Calculations
Ditch Capacity Calculations
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBITS
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBIT A
Technical Design Summary
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
The Cities of Bryan and College Station both require storm drainage design to follow these
Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. Paragraph C2 of Section Ill (Administration) requires
submittal of a drainage report in support of the drainage plan (stormwater management plan)
proposed in connection with land development projects, both site projects and subdivisions.
That report may be submitted as a traditional prose report, complete with applicable maps,
graphs, tables and drawings, or it may take the form of a "Technical Design Summary". The
format and content for such a summary report shall be in substantial conformance with the
description in this Appendix to those Guidelines. In either format the report must answer the
questions (affirmative or negative) and provide, at minimum, the information prescribed in the
'Technical Design Summary" in this Appendix.
The Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report shall include several parts
as listed below. The information called for in each part must be provided as applicable. In
addition to the requirements for the Executive Summary, this Appendix includes several
pages detailing the requirements for a Technical Design Summary Report as forms to be
completed. These are provided so that they may be copied and completed or scanned and
digitized. In addition, electronic versions of the report forms may be obtained from the City.
Requirements for the means (medium) of submittal are the same as for a conventional report
as detailed in Section Ill of these Guidelines.
Note: Part 1 -Executive Summary must accompany any drainage report
requi red to be provided in connection with any land development project,
regardless of the format chosen for said report.
Note: Parts 2 through 6 are to be provided via the forms provided in this
Appendix. Brief statements should be included in the forms as requested ,
but additional information should be attached as necessary.
Part 1 -Executive Summary Report
Part 2 -Project Administration
Part 3 -Project Characteristics
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Part 5 -Plans and Specifications
Part 6 -Conclusions and Attestation
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY REPORT
Part 1 -Executive Summary
This is to be a brief prose report that must address each of the seven areas listed below.
Ideally it will include one or more paragraphs about each item.
1. Name, address, and contact information of the engineer submitting the report, and
of the land owner and developer (or applicant if not the owner or developer). The
date of submittal should also be included.
2. Identification of the size and general nature of the proposed project, including any
proposed project phases. This paragraph should also include reference to
applications that are in process with either City: plat(s), site plans, zoning requests,
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 1 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
or clearing/grading permits, as well as reference to any application numbers or
codes assigned by the City to such request.
3. The location of the project should be described. This should identify the Named
Regulatory Watershed(s) in which it is located, how the entire project area is
situated therein, whether the property straddles a watershed or basin divide, the
approximate acreage in each basin, and whether its position in the Watershed
dictates use of detention design. The approximate proportion of the property in the
city limits and within the ET J is to be identified, including whether the property
straddles city jurisdictional lines. If any portion of the property is in floodplains as
described in Flood Insurance Rate Maps published by FEMA that should be
disclosed.
4. The hydrologic characteristics of the property are to be described in broad terms:
existing land cover; how and where stormwater drains to and from neighboring
properties; ponds or wetland areas that tend to detain or store stormwater; existing
creeks, channels, and swales crossing or serving the property; all existing drainage
easements (or ROW) on the property, or on neighboring properties if they service
runoff to or from the property.
5. The general plan for managing stormwater in the entire project area must be
outlined to include the approximate size, and extent of use, of any of the following
features: storm drains coupled with streets; detention I retention facilities; buried
conveyance conduit independent of streets; swales or channels; bridges or culverts;
outfalls to principal watercourses or their tributaries; and treatment(s) of existing
watercourses. Also , any plans for reclaiming land within floodplain areas must be
outlined.
6. Coordination and permitting of stormwater matters must be addressed. This is to
include any specialized coordination that has occurred or is planned with other
entities (local , state, or federal). This may include agencies such as Brazos County
government, the Brazos River Authority, the Texas A&M University System, the
Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Commission for Environmental
Quality, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Environmental Protection Agency,
et al. Mention must be made of any permits, agreements, or understandings that
pertain to the project.
7. Reference is to be made to the full drainage report (or the Technical Design
Summary Report) which the executive summary represents. The principal
elements of the main report (and its length), including any maps, drawings or
construction documents, should be itemized. An example statement might be:
"One __ -page drainage report dated one set of
construction drawings (_sheets) dated , and a
___ -page specifications document dated comprise
the drainage report for this project."
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 2 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration I Start (Page 2.1)
Engineering and Design Professionals Information
Engineering Firm Name and Address: Jurisdiction
City: Bryan
McC lure & Browne Engi neeri ng/Surveying, In c. x College Station 1008 Woodcr eek Drive, Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77845 Date of Submittal :
(979)693-3838
Lead Engineer's Name and Contact lnfo .(phone , e-mai l, fax): Other:
Jeffery L. Robertson, P .E .
Supporting Engineering I Consulting Firm(s): Other contacts:
Developer I Owner I Aoolicant Information
Developer I Applicant Name and Address: Phone and e-mail:
Smiling Ma l lar d Dev e l o p men t, Ltd. (979) 846-4384
3608 Ea s t 29th Str eet
Bryan, Texas 77802
Property Owner(s) if not Developer I Applicant (&address): Phone and e-mail :
Project Identification
Developmen t Name: I ndian Lakes, Phase 19
Is subject property a site proj ect, a single-phase su bdivision, or part of a multi-ph ase subdivision?
Multi-phase Su bdi vision If multi-phase, subject property is phase 19 of
Legal descripti on of subject property (phase) or Project Area:
(see Section II, Paragraph B-3a)
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
If subject property (phase) is second or later phase of a project, describe general status of all
earlier phases. For most recent earlier phase Include submittal and re view dates.
The project is the 19th phase of a multi phase subdivision. At this time the first phase has
been built . Phase 1 was submitted in September, 2000 and consisted of 58 lots. The most
recent phase submitted was Ph. 25 .
General Location of Project Area, or su bject property (phase):
Project site is located near the intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Sundance Drive
in College Station, Texas.
In City Limits? Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (acreage):
Bryan: acres. Bryan: College Station: 34 .48
College Station: acres. Acreage Outside ET J:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELIN ES
Effective February 2007
Page 3 of 26 APP ENDIX. D TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration I Continued (page 2.2)
Project Identification (continued)
Roadways abutting or within Project Area or Abutting tracts, platted land, or built
subject property: developments:
Mesa Verde Drive Indian Lakes, Phase 16 & Undeveloped Land
Named Regulatory W atercourse(s) & Watershed(s): Tributary Basin(s):
The nearest tributary is Peach Creek S. Phase 19 is located in the Peach Creek Watershed. Tributary 7.2 (See FEMA Map 48041C03SOE) .
Plat Information For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Preliminary Plat File#: Final Plat File#: Date:
Name: Pending Approval Status and Vol/Pg : Pending Approval
If two plats, second name: File#:
Status: Date:
Zoning Information For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Zoning Type: Existin g or Proposed? Case Code:
Case Date Status:
Zoning Type: Existing or Proposed? Case Code:
Case Date Status:
Stormwater Management Planning For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Pla nning Conference(s) & Date(s): Participants:
Preliminary Report Required? Submittal Date Review Date
Review Comments Addressed? Yes --No --In Writing? When?
Compliance With Preliminary Drainage Report. Briefly describe (or attach documentation
explai ning) any deviation(s) from provision s of Preliminary Dra inage Report, if any.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 4 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Pro ject Administration I Continued (page 2.3)
Coordination For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Note: For any Coordination of stormwater matters indicated below, attach documentation
describing and substantiating any agreements, understandings, contracts, or approvals.
Coordination Dept. Contact: Date: Subject:
With Other
Departments of
Jurisdiction
City (Bryan or
College Station )
Coordination With Summarize need(s) & actions taken (i nclude contacts & dates):
Non-jurisdiction
City Needed?
Yes No x ----
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (i nclude contacts & dates):
Brazos County
Needed?
Yes No x ----
Coordination with Summarize need{s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
TxDOT Needed?
Yes No x ----
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
TAMUS Needed?
Yes No x -- --
Perm its For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
As to stormwater management, are permits required for the proposed work from any of the entities
listed below? If so, summarize status of efforts toward that obiecti ve in spaces below.
Entity Permitted or Status of Actions (include dates) Approved?
US Army Crops of
Engineers
No x Yes ---
US Environmental
Protection Agency
No x Yes ---
Texas Commission on A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be
Environmental Quality implemented prior to the start of construction
No Yes x according to TPDES General Permit No . TXRlSOOOO . ----
Brazos River
Authority
No x Yes ---
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 5 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Pro~ert:i Characteristics I Start (Page 3.1)
Nature and Scope of Proposed Work
Existing: Land proposed for development currently used , including extent of impervious cover?
Existing undeveloped land (Dense tree cover) . Existing impervious cover is
approximately O sf.
Site __ Redevelopment of one platted lot, or two or more adjqining platted lots.
Development __ Building on a single platted lot of undeveloped land.
Project __ Building on two or more platted adjoining lots of undeveloped land.
(select all __ Building on a single lot, or adjoining lots, where proposed plat will not form applicable) a new street (but may include ROW dedication to existing streets).
__ Other (explain):
Subdivision _x_ Construction of streets and utilities to serve one or more platted lots.
Development __ Construction of streets and utilities to serve one or more proposed lots on
Project lands represented by pending plats.
Site projects: building use(s), approximate fl oor space , impervious cover ratio.
Describe Subdivisions: number of lots by general type of use, linear feet of streets and
Nature and drainage easements or ROW.
Size of This phase of the subdivision includes 16 lots. The development
Progosed consists of approximately 3 ,177 LF of streets with 16' PUE on each
Project side of the streets ROW.
Is any work planned on land that is not platted If yes , explain:
or on land for which platting is not pending?
x No Yes ----
FEMA Floodplains
Is any part of subject property abutting a Named Regulatory Watercourse I No_x_ Yes __ (Section II, Paragraph B1) or a tributary thereof?
Is any part of subject property in floodplain !No_ Yes x Rate Map 48041C0350E area of a FEMA-regulated watercourse? --
Encroachment(s) Encroachment purpose(s): __ Building site(s) __ Road crossing(s) into Floodplain
areas planned? __ Utility crossing(s) __ Other (explain):
No x --
Yes --
If floodplain areas not shown on Rate Maps, has work been done toward amending the FEMA-
approved Flood Study to define allowable encroachments in proposed areas? Explain.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 6 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Pro~ert~ Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.2)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase)
Has an earlier hydrologic analysis been done for larger area including subject property?
Yes Reference the study (&date) here, and attach copy if not already in City files.
Indian Lakes Subdivision; September, 2000 x --
Is the stormwater management plan for the property in substantial conformance with the
earlier study? Yes x No If not, explain how it differs.
No If subject property is not part of multi-phase project, describe stormwater management
pl an for the property in Part 4. --If property is part of multi-phase project, provide overview of stormwater management plan
for Project Area here. In Part 4 describe how plan for subject property will comply
therewith.
Do existing topographic features on subject property store or detain runoff? _x_ No --Yes
Describe them (include approximate size, volume, outfall, model, etc).
Any known drainage or flooding problems in areas near subject property? __ x_ No --Yes
Identify:
Based on location of study property in a watershed, is Type 1 Detention (flood control) needed?
(see Table B-1 in Appendix B)
__ Detention is required. x Need must be evaluated. __ Detention not required. --
What decision has been reached? By whom?
Det ention study during Phase 1 .
If the need for How was determination made?
Type 1 Detention Detention was required and is provided for the entire must be evaluated:
Indian Lakes Subdivision. However , Phase 19 does not require
any additional detention .
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 7 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Pro~ert~ Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.3)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
x No Yes Does subject property straddle a Watershed or Basin divide? ----If yes,
describe splits below. In Part 4 describe design concept for handlinQ this .
Watershed or Basin Larger acreage Lesser acreage
Above-Project Areas(Section II, Paragraph 83-a)
Does Project Area (project or phase) receive runoff from upland areas? x No --Yes
Size(s) of area(s) in acres: 1) 2) 3) 4)
Flow Characteristics (each instance) (overland sheet, shallow concentrated, recognizable
concentrated section(s), small creek (non-regulatory), regulatory Watercourse or tributary);
Overland flow to propos ed d i tch lines on Phas e 19 streets .
Flow determination: Outline hydrologic methods and assumptions:
The Rational Method was used for flow calculati ons and the post development
l and was treated as large acre residential t racts.
Does storm runoff drain from public easements or ROW onto or across subject property?
_x_ No __ Yes If yes, describe facilities in easement or ROW:
Are changes in runoff characteristics subject to change in future? Explain
No, upstream land is alr eady developed.
Conveyance Pathways (Section II , Paragraph C2)
Must runoff from study property drain across lower properties before reaching a Regulatory
Watercourse or tributary? No x Yes
Describe length and characteristics of each conveyance pathway(s). Include ownership of
property(ies).
Runoff from Ph. 19 will l eave the phase and be discharged into existing
t ributaries of Peach Cr e e k. The property is a future phase
o f the Indian Lakes Subdivision.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 8 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Pro~erty Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.4)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
Conveyance Pathways (continued)
Do drainage If yes, for what part of length? % Created by? __ plat, or easements instrument. If instrument(s), describe their provisions.
exist for any --
part of
pathway(s)?
x No --
Yes --
Where runoff must cross lower properties , describe characteristics of abutting lower
property(ies). (Existing watercourses? Easement or Consent aquired?)
Pathway
Areas
Describe any bui lt or improved drainage facilities existing near the property (culverts,
bridges, lined channels, buried conduit, swales, detention ponds, etc).
Nearby
Drainage Do any of these have hydrologic or hydraulic influence on proposed stormwater Facilities design? x No Yes If yes, explain: ----
STORMWATER DES IGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 9 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Start (Page 4.1)
Stormwater Management Concept
Discharge(s) From Upland Area(s)
If runoff is to be received from upland areas, what design drainage features will be used to
accommodate it and insure it is not blocked by future development? Describe for each area,
flow section , or discharge point.
Discharge(s) To Lower Property(ies) (Section 11, Paragraph E1)
Does project include drainage features (existing or future) proposed to become public via
platting? x No Yes Separate Instrument? x No Yes ----
Per Guidelines reference above, how will Establishing Easements (Scenario 1) runoff be discharged to neighboring --
property(ies)? --Pre-development Release (Scenario 2)
Combination of the two Scenarios --
Scenario 1: If easements are proposed, describe where needed, and provide status of actions
on each. (Attached Exhibit# )
Scenario 2: Provide general description of how release(s) will be managed to pre-development
conditions (detention, sheet flow, partially concentrated , etc.). (Attached Exhibit# )
Combination: If combination is proposed, explain how discharge will differ from pre-
development conditions at the property line for each area (or point) of release.
If Scenario 2, or Combination are to be used, has proposed design been coordinated with
owner(s) of receiving property(ies)? No --Yes Explain and provide
documentation.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 10 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH . DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.2)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project
Identify gaining Basins or Watersheds and acres shifting:
Will project result
in shifting runoff
between Basins or
between What design and mitigation is used to compensate for increased runoff
Watersheds? from gaining basin or watershed? x No --
Yes --
How will runoff from Project 1. __ With facility(ies) involving other development projects.
Area be mitigated to pre-2. __ Establishing features to serve overall Project Area. development conditions?
Select any or all of 1, 2, 3. _x_ On phase (or site) project basis within Project Area.
and/or 3, and explain below.
1. Shared facility (type & location of facility; design drainage area served; relationship to size of
Project Area): (Attached Exhibit# )
2. For Overall Project Area (type & location of facilities): (Attached Exhibit# )
3. By phase (or site) project: Describe planned mitigation measures for phases (or sites) in
subsequent questions of this Part.
Are aquatic echosystems proposed? __ No --Yes In which phase(s) or
project(s)?
C"-· " Q) rJ) c Q) Are other Best Management Practices for reducing stormwater pollutants proposed? c >-rn
Cl.. No Yes Summarize type of BMP and extent of use: -- --rJ) c
.!21 rJ)
Q) 0 0 z ro xi If design of any runoff-handling facilities deviate from provisions of B-CS Technical ·0
Q) Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain in later questions. a.
(/) Detention elements Conduit elements Channel features Q) ---- --.._
<t: Swales Ditches Inlets __ Valley gutters __ Outfalls -- -- --
--Culvert features __ Bridges Other
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 11 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH . DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.3)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project (continued)
Will Project Area include bridge(s) or culvert(s)? __ No _x_ Yes Identify type and
general size and In which phase(s).
Culvert #1 -24" RCP Pipe on Chaco Canyon Drive
Culvert #2 -18" RCP Pipe on Halona Court
If detention/retention serves (will serve) overall Project Area, describe how it relates to subject
phase or site project (physical location, conveyance pathway(s), construction sequence):
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site)
If property part of larger Project Area, is design in substantial conformance with earlier analysis
and report for larger area? __ Yes No, then summarize the difference(s):
Identify whether each of the types of drainage features listed below are included , extent of use,
and general characteristics.
Typical shape? I Surfaces?
C'· V-Shape Grass
"O a.> CJ) Steepest side slopes: Usual front slopes: Usual back slopes: CJ)
::i a.>
CJ) >-4 :1 4:1 4 :1 a.> xi .c Flow line slopes: least 0 .68% Typical distance from travelway: 11' ~
"O Varies (Attached Exhibit# )
a.> typical greatest 2.93%
~ 0
CJ) z
"O
I
C1l 0 Are longitudinal culvert ends in compliance with B-CS Standard Specifications? .....
a.> x Yes No, then explain: ~
CJ) At intersections or otherwise, do va lley gutters cross arterial or collector streets?
..0 a.> No Yes If yes explain: ::; ('· >---0 "O
I
.c a.> ...... CJ) ·-::i 3: ..... Are valley gutters proposed to cross any street away from an intersection? CJ) a.> ............ a.> :; 0 No Yes Explain: (number of locations?) ~ oi z ----
~~x i ..... C1l
<(
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELI NES
Effective February 2007
Page 12 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESI GN SUMMAR Y
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.4)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
C'-·
-0 ClJ (/) (/)
:::::s ClJ
E >-
i I (/)
c
Gutter line slopes: Least Usual Greatest
Are inlets recessed on arterial and collector streets? __ Yes
identify where and why.
__ No If "no",
Will inlets capture 10-year design stormflow to prevent flooding of intersections (arterial
with arterial or collector)? __ Yes __ No If no, explain where and why not.
Will inlet size and placement prevent exceeding allowable water spread for 10-year
design storm throughout site (or phase)? __ Yes __ No If no, explain.
Sag curves: Are inlets placed at low points? __ Yes __ No Are inlets and
conduit sized to prevent 100-year stormflow from ponding at greater than 24 inches?
__ Yes __ No Explain "no" answers.
Will 100-yr stormflow be contained in combination of ROW and buried conduit on
whole length of all streets? __ Yes __ No If no, describe where and why.
Do designs for curb, gutter, and inlets comply with B-CS Technical Specifications?
___ Yes __ No If not, describe difference(s) and attach justification.
Are any 12-inch laterals used?
used.
No __ Yes Identify length(s) and where
Pipe runs between system I Typical Longest
access points (feet): ----------
Are junction boxes used at each bend?
and why.
Yes No If not, explain where
ro o i ~, r-----------------------,--------------i en Are downstream soffits at or below upstream soffits? Least amount that hydraulic
.!!!. Yes __ No __ If not, explain where and why: grade line is below gutter line
(system-wide):
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 13 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH . DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.5)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
<ii' QJ () c
C1l u; c
QJ .._
~ 0 al E :::J .._
.!: .E c .
0 .E ~-~
E <llE QJ
-C1l ~rJ)
rJl QJ c~ ·-> ~ e "O a.
E m 0 QJ
-..c CJ) rJl
Describe watercourse(s), or system(s) receiving system discharge(s) below
(include design discharge velocity, and angle between converging flow lines).
1) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
2) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
3) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
For each outfall above, what measures are taken to prevent erosion or scour of
receiving and all facilities at juncture?
QJ 1) (ii .._
C1l g-2)
rJl
c ~ 3)
C'-· rJl Qi
~ rJl
-QJ rJl >-~ I .8
al 0
rJl z :::J
~x i
rJl
QJ
.:x:
A re swale(s) situated along property lines between properties? __ No __ Yes
Number of instances: For each instance answer the following questions.
Surface treatments (including low-flow flumes if any):
Flow line slopes (minimum and maximum):
Outfall characteristics for each (velocity, convergent angle, & end treatment).
Will 100-year design storm runoff be contained within easement(s) or platted drainage
ROW in all instances? __ Yes __ No If "no" explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 14 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH . DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters / Continued (Page 4.6)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Are roadside ditches used? --No _x_ Yes If so, provide the following:
rJ) Is 25-year flow contained with 6 inches of freeboard throughout? _x_ Yes No Ql ..c --
.B Are top of banks separated from road shoulders 2 feet or more? _x_ Yes No Ci --
Are all ditch sections trapezoidal and at least 1.5 feet deep? Yes x No Ql ----"O For any "no" answers provide location(s) and explain: '(ii
"O All Ditches are V-shaped and at least 2 ' deep C1l 0 0:::
If conduit is beneath a swale, provide the following information (each instance).
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length:
rJ)
Ql >-Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? --Yes --No
I Vi' If "no" explain:
Ql u c Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width 0 C1l z u; Swale Surface type, minimum Conduit Type and size , minimum and maximum xJ c
(ii and maximum slopes: slopes, design storm: c
0
~· :E "O rJ) "O Qi C1l Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type): c :>. c C1l c
..c C1l
u ..__
c E
Ql c Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit): a. 0 0 -~ .... 0 E :J ..__
.~ E -c c ·-Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length: Ql
"O E Ql C1l rJ) rJ) :J
rJ) Ql Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? c :2 --Yes --No
0 > If "no" explain: ~ 0 ..__
c a.
..0 Q) E Ql Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width
0 ..c u rJ) Swale Surface type, minimum Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum ~ Ql
:J ro and maximum slopes: slopes, design storm: "O ..__
c C1l 0 a.
~ Ql Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type): rJ) ~ c C1l ~ $:
rJ)
Ql Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit): ..__
<(
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 15 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters J Continued (Page 4. 7)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
If "yes" provide the following information for each instance:
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
c
.!!!
E 0.. x
0 w ~
~ vi Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? --Yes --No Is swale wholly 0 Q) within drainage ROW? Yes No Explain "no" answers: c >---2
I
--
Q) > 'Qi Access Describe how maintenance access is provide: ()
Q)
'-0 ~ z :::J
1 x I Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
Q) ·;:: C'· :::J rJl .a c
:J Q)
0 E
£ Q)
rJl Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? Yes No Is swale wholly '3: C1l -- --Q) within drainage ROW? __ Yes No Explain "no" answers: rJl '---Q) 0 ro s $:
rJl 0 -0:: Access Describe how maintenance access is provided: -s: .~
2.i :::J 0..
Instance 3, 4, etc. If swales are used in more than two instances, attach sheet
providing all above information for each instance.
"New" channels: Will any area(s) of concentrated flow be channelized (deepened,
widened, or straightened) or otherwise altered? --No --Yes If only slightly
shaped, see "Swales" in this Part. If creating side banks, provide information below.
C'·
"O c Will design replicate natural channel? Yes No If "no", for each instance Q) ~ ----rJl describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.), surfaces, and 100-year 0 0.. 0.. x design flow, and amount of freeboard: e w
0.. Instance 1: rJl rJl c Q)
Q) >-
E I Q) > Instance 2: 0 0.. E 0 ·-z -
xi
Q) c Instance 3: c
C1l ..c: u
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 16 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.8)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Existing channels {small creeks}: Are these used? --No --Yes
If "yes" provide the information below.
Will sm all creeks and their floodplains remain undisturbed? __ Yes --No How
many disturbance instances? Identify each planned location:
For each location, describe length and general type of proposed improvement
(including floodpla in changes):
For each location, describe section shape & area , flow line slope (min. & max.),
surfaces, and 100-year design flow.
'O Q)
::J c ~ Watercourses {and tributaries}: Aside from fringe changes, are Regulatory
0 Watercourses proposed to be altered? __ No Yes Explain below. ~ --
IJl c Subm it full report describing proposed changes to Regulatory Watercourses. Address
Q) existing and proposed section size and shape, surfaces, alignment, fl ow line changes, E Q) length affected, and capacity, and provide full documentation of analysis procedures > 0 and data. Is full report submitted? Yes No If "no" explain: a. --
E --Q) c c C1l All Proposed Channel Work: For all pro posed channel work, provide information .r::.
0 requested in next three boxes.
If design is to replicate natural channel , identify location and length here, and describe
design in Special Design section of this Part of Report.
Will 100-year flow be contained with one foot of freeboard? --Yes --No If
not, identify location and explain :
Are ROW I easements sized to contain channel and required maintenance space?
--Yes --No If not, identify location(s) and explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELIN ES
Effective Febru ary 2007
Page 17 of 26 APPE NDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.9)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
How many facilities for subject property project? For each provide info. below.
For each dry-type facilitiy: Facility 1 Facility 2
Acres served & design volume + 10%
100-yr volume: free flow & plugged
Design discharge (1 0 yr & 25 yr)
Spillway crest at 100-yr WSE? __ yes --no __ yes --no
Berms 6 inches above plugged WSE? __ yes --no __ yes --no
Explain any "no" answers:
rJl
Q) >-
I For each facility what is 25-yr design Q, and design of outlet structure?
Facility 1:
0 z Facility 2:
xi Do outlets and spillways discharge into a public facility in easement or ROW?
Facility 1: __ Yes No Facility 2: Yes No ------C'-· If "no" explain : -a Q)
rJl 0 a. 0 .._
0.. For each, what is velocity of 25-yr design discharge at outlet? & at spillway? rJl Q) Facility 1: & Facility 2: & ~
'l) Are energy dissipati on measures used? No Yes Describe type and C1l ----
LL location: c 0 ~ Q)
al
0
Q) For each, is spillway surface treatment other than concrete? Yes or no, and describe: .._
<{ Facility 1:
Facility 2:
For each, what measures are taken to prevent erosion or scour at receiving facility?
Facility 1:
Facility 2:
If berms are used give heights, slopes and surface treatments of sides.
Facility 1:
Facility 2:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 18 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.10)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Do structures comply with B-CS Specifications? Yes or no, and expl ain if "no":
Facility 1;
Vl Q) :;:;
=~ ~ Q) Facility 2: LL :J c c:.;:::; 0 c :.;:::; 0 c () Q) ~
Q) For additional facilities provide all same information on a separate sheet. 0
Are parking areas to be used for detention? __ No --Yes What is
maximum depth due to required design storm?
Roadside Ditches: Will culverts serve access driveways at roadside ditches?
No x Yes If "yes", provide information in next two boxes. ----
Will 25-yr. flow pass without flowing over driveway in all cases? x Yes No ----
Without causing flowing or standing water on public roadway? x Yes No ----
Designs & materials comply with B-CS Technical Specificati ons? _x_ Yes --No
Explain any "no" answers:
C'-· Vl O"> c ·u; Are culverts parallel to public roadway alignment? __ Yes x No Explain: Vl 0 --..._
Vl ()
Q) Q) ...... >-! xj Creeks at Private Drives: Do private driveways, drives, or streets cross drainage
rn wa~s that serve Above-Project areas or are in public easements/ ROW?
""O 0
Q) z __ No __ Yes If "yes" provide information below.
Vl
I :J How many instances? Describe location and provide information below. Vl t::: Q) Location 1: ~ :J ()
Q) Location 2: ..._
<(
Location 3:
For each location enter value for: 1 2 3
Design year passing without toping travelway?
Water depth on travelway at 25-year flow?
Water depth on travelway at 100-year flow?
For more instances describe location and same information on separate sheet.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 19 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.11)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Named Regulatorv Watercourses {&Tributaries): Are culverts proposed on these
facilities? x No __ Yes, then provide full report documenting assumptions, --criteria, analysis, computer programs, and study findings that support proposed
design(s). Is report provided? __ Yes --No If "no'', explain:
~ Arterial or Major Collector Streets: Will culverts serve these types of roadways? Q)
(]) No Yes How many instances? For each identify the .c _x_ 2 en --
(]) location and provide the information below.
en rn Instance 1: 24 11 Mesa Verde Drive and Chaco Canyon Drive (]) '-RCP at >-~
xJ ~ Instance 2: 18 11 RCP at Chaco Canyon Drive and Halona Court
Instance 3: c 0
0 :g Yes or No for the 100-year design flow: 1 2 3 z E
I .... Headwater WSE 1 foot below lowest curb top? ..E Yes Yes ·~ Spread of headwater within ROW or easement? Yes Yes E C'-· rn Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11 )? Yes Yes en en g>-o Explain any "no" answer(s): ·-c ~ rn
0 c '-0 (.) +=' >-rn rn u
$: .Q
-0 (]) rn .o Minor Collector or Local Streets: Will culverts serve these types of streets? 0 ·-'-'-(.) (.) x No Yes How many instances? for each identify the ·-en ---(]) .g -0 location and provide the information below:
Q. (])
.... Q. Instance 1: rn ]:;>
-0 >-Instance 2: (]) c ~ rn -Instance 3: en o t en (]) (])
For each instance enter value, or "yes" I "no" for: .!:'. (.) 1 2 3 :J c u rn Design yr. headwater WSE 1 ft. below curb top? (]) Cii '-c <( ·-100-yr. max. depth at street crown 2 feet or less? (]) '-0 Product of velocity (fps) & depth at crown (ft) = ? E
'-0 Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11 )? ~
Limit of down stream analysis (feet)?
Explain any "no" answers:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 20 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTIO N IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.12)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
All Proposed Culverts: For all proposed culvert facilities (except driveway/roadside
ditch intersects) provide information requested in next eight boxes.
Do cu lverts and travelways intersect at 90 degrees? x Yes No If not, ----identify location(s) and intersect angle(s), and justify the design(s):
Does drainage way alignment change within or near lim its of culvert and surfaced
approaches thereto? _x_ No --Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe
change(s), and justification :
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into culvert barrel (s)? x No Yes If yes, ----identify location(s) and provide justification:
:0 Are flumes or conduit to discharge into or near surfaced approaches to culvert ends?
x No Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe outfall design treatment(s): QJ ----::i c:
~
0 ~
en t::'. QJ Is scour/erosion protection provided to ensure long term stability of culvert structural ..?: ::i components, and surfacing at culvert ends? x Yes No If "no" Identify 0 ----locations and provide justification(s):
Will 100-yr flow and spread of backwater be fu lly contained in street ROW, and/or
drainage easements/ ROW? _x_ Yes --No if not, why not?
Do appreciable hydraulic effects of any culvert extend downstream or upstream to
neighboring land(s) not encompassed in subject property? x No Yes If -- --"yes" describe location(s) and mitigation measures :
Are all cu lvert designs and materials in compliance with B-CS Tech. Specifications? x Yes No If not, explain in Special Design Section of this Part. ----
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 21 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH . DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.13)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Is a bridge included in plans for subject property project? --No --Yes
If "yes" provide the following information.
Name(s) and functional classification of the roadway(s)?
What drainage way(s) is to be crossed?
U> Q)
OJ "O ·;::
CD
A full report supporting all aspects of the proposed bridge(s) (structural, geotechnical,
hydrologic, and hydraulic factors) must accompany this summary report. Is the report
provided? --Yes --No If "no" explain:
Is a Stormwater Provide a general description of planned techniques:
~ Pollution Prevention Hay Bale Barriers and Rock Dams will serve as the ro Plan (SW3P) main protection against stormwater pollution. The ::J a established for Contractor shall use any other mean s necessary ..... project construction? Q) throughout construction. ro s No x Yes ----
Special Designs -Non-Traditional Methods
Are any non-traditional methods (aquatic echosystems, wetland-type detention, natural stream
replication , BMPs for water quality, etc.) proposed for any aspect of subject property project?
x No Yes If "yes" list general type and location below. ----
Provide full report about the proposed special design (s) including rationale for use and
expected benefits. Report must substantiate that stormwater management objectives will not
be compromised , and that maintenance cost will not exceed those of traditional design
solution(s). Is report provided?
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Yes ----
Page 22 of 26
No If "no" explain:
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Re vised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.1 4)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Special Designs -Deviation From 8-CS Technical Specifications
If any design(s) or material(s) of traditional runoff-handling facilities deviate from provisions of
B-CS Technical Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain by specific detail element.
--Detention elements __ Drain system elements --Channel features
Culvert features Swales Ditches Inlets Outfalls ---- ------
__ Valley gutters __ Bridges (explain in bridge report)
In table below briefly identify specific element, justification for deviation(s).
Specific Detail Element Justification for Deviation (attach additional sheets if needed)
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Have elements been coordinated with the City Engineer or her/hi s designee? For each item
above provide "yes" or "no", action date, and staff name:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Design Parameters
Hydrology
Is a map(s) showing all Design Drainage Areas provided? x Yes No ----
Briefly summarize the range of applications made of the Rational Formula:
For the Rational Formula we assumed residential areas had a
runoff coefficient of 0.5 for large residential or estate lots.
What is the size and location of largest Design Drainage Area to which the Rational Formula
has been applied? 4.00 acres Location (or identifier): Ditch Line Culvert #1
STORMWATER DESIG N GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 23 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage ConceQt and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.15)
Design Parameters (continued)
Hydrology (continued)
In making determinations for time of concentration, was segment analysis used?
x No Yes In approximately what percent of Design Drainage Areas? %
As to intensity-duration-frequency and rain depth criteria for determining runoff flows, were any
criteria other than those provided in these Guidelines used? _x_ No --Yes If "yes"
identify type of data, source(s), and where applied:
For each of the stormwater management features listed below identify the storm return
frequencies (year) analyzed (or checked), and that used as the basis for design.
Feature Analysis Year(s) Design Year
Storm drain system for arterial and collector streets
Storm drain system for local streets
Open channels
Swale/buried conduit combination in lieu of channel
Swales
Roadside ditches and culverts serving them 2,5,10,25 ,50,100 2 5 & 1 00
Detention facilities: spillway crest and its outfall
Detention facilities : outlet and conveyance structure(s)
Detention facilities: volume when outlet plugged
Culverts serving private drives or streets
Culverts serving public roadways
Bridges: provide in bridge report.
Hydraulics
What is the range of design flow velocities as outlined below?
Design flow velocities; 25 year Gutters Conduit Culverts Swales Channels
Highest (feet per second) 9 .88
Lowest (feet per second) 8 .38
Streets and Storm Drain Systems Provide the summary information outlined below:
Roughness coefficients used:
For conduit type(s) RC P 0.014
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
For street gutters:
Page 24 of 26
NA
Coefficients:
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.16)
Design Parameters (continued)
Hydraulics (continued)
Street and Storm Drain Systems (continued)
For the following, are assumptions other than allowable per Guidelines?
Inlet coefficients? No Yes Head and fricti on losses No Yes -- ---- --
Explain any "yes" answer:
In conduit is vel ocity generally increased in the downstream direction? Yes No ----
Are elevation drops provided at in lets , manholes, and junction boxes? --Yes --No
Explain any "no" answers:
Are hydraulic grade lines calculated and shown for design storm? --Yes --No
For 100-year fl ow conditions? --Yes --No Explain any "no" answers:
What tailwater conditions were assumed at outfall point(s) of the storm drain system? Identify
each location and explain:
Open Channels If a HEC analysis is utilized, does it follow Sec Vl.F.5.a? --Yes --No
Outside of straight sections, is flow regime within limits of sub-critical flow? _x _ Yes __ No
If "no" list locations and explain:
Culverts If plan sheets do not provide the following for each culvert, describe it here.
For each design discharge, will operation be outlet (barrel) control or inlet control?
All culverts will be inlet controlled.
Entrance, friction and exit losses:
A 0 .5 entrance and exit loss coefficients are
and square edged headwalls with wingwalls.
Bridges Provide all in bridge report
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 25 of 26
used f or sloped end treatments
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.17)
Design Parameters (continued)
Computer Software
What computer software has been used in the analysis and assessment of stormwater
management needs and/or the development of facility designs proposed for subject property
project? List them below, being sure to identify the software name and version, the date of the
version, any applicable patches and the publisher
Open Office Calculator Spreadsheet
Part 5 -Plans and S12ecifications
Requirements for submittal of construction drawings and specifications do not differ due to use of a
Technical Design Summary Report. See Section 111, Paragraph C3.
Part 6 -Conclusions and Attestation
Conclusions
Add any concluding information here:
The Indian Lakes Subdivision, Phase 19 will have no adverse impact to downstream
properties and conforms to the overall subdivision r eport.
Attestation
Provide attestation to the accuracy and completeness of the foregoing 6 Parts of this Technical
Design Summary Drainage Report by signing and seali ng below.
"This report (plan) for the drainage design of the development named in Part B was prepared
by me (or under my supervision) in accordance with provisions of the Bryan/College Station
Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for the owners of the property. All licenses and permits
required by any and all state and federal regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage
improvements have been issued or fall under applicable general permits." __ .... , ,,.._, e '~ . ---<.OF 1i;-'' ' ~ (Affix Seal) ; ,.. ~ ~ ............. i~ l } l,; ,,.. C., ~·" I ·.;'{ · I
"'*: . ··""J ~ """ , ;-* .... ~ ;,".,. ··f '•
Licer e~rofessional Engineer ~··:·: .. }J.1 ..... :7::!?.'. .. :.~ ~
State of Texas PE No. ~~1~S
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 26 of 26
r ,ltffc. · .Y L. R0i3EF\. SOil I r···:··· ....................... ~
't ·0.... 9 ·1 7 4 5 /!k 1 f -f-t-J:'. (/,-.,. ,r<:~ ,.•:.~ .:. . .. • ••... 1 .......... ,~
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2009
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBITB
Drainage Area Map
EXHIBIT C-1
Rational Method Calculations
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
<( s w Cl 0 a:: w -I -I
<( <( ll. <( LL
w w 0 i== I-Cl a:: -I 2 <( 2 Cl <( Ill 2 Ill (.) :) I <( > Ill 2 z -I Cl -I a:: I-
~ <( Ill <( Vi Ill ~ w Cl I-Cl Ill > >2 0 2 a:: Ill <( 0 Cl I-::::> <( a:: ll. I-o~
NO. AC. 0.4 0.5 0.9 ft.
1-Prop 2.13 0.00 2.13 0.00 1.07 338.9
2.0 4.23 0.00 4.23 0.00 2.12 339.9
3.0 2.16 0.00 2.16 0.00 1.08 340.9
4.0 2.13 0.00 2.13 0.00 1.07 341.9
1-Ex 2.13 2.13 0.00 0.00 0.85 343.9
EXHIBIT C-1
Rational Formula Drainage Area Calculations
Indian Lakes Phase 19
s 0 s s -I LL 0 0 Cl -I -I z LL LL t :) a:: I a:: Ill I-(.) 0 0 Ill I-I-a:: -I I-Cl I= -I 0 ti w -I I-2 ::::> -I -I Ill > <( ::::> w Ill iii (/) IN Lt> 0 LL Cl -I Cl ;'t > (.) ::::> £;! a !!? cr
ft. ft. ft. ft/s min min In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs
6.8 525.0 5.6 1.4 9.9 10.0 6.33 6.7 7.7 8.19
7.8 526.0 6.6 1.6 9.3 10.0 6.33 13.4 7.7 16.27
8.8 527.0 7.6 1.7 8.7 10.0 6.33 6.8 7.7 8.31
9.8 528.0 8.6 1.8 8.3 10.0 6.33 6.7 7.7 8.19
11 .8 530.0 10.6 1.9 7.5 10.0 6.33 5.4 7.7 6.55
0 0 Lt> 0 0 0 0 .,... Lt> IN 0 Lt> 0 .,...
!:: 0 £;! 0 !!? cr !:: cr
In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs
8.6 9.20 9.86 10.50 11.15 11 .87 11.41 12.15
8.6 18.26 9.86 20.86 11 .15 23.58 11.41 24.13
8.6 9.33 9.86 10.65 11 .15 12.04 11.41 12.32
8.6 9.20 9.86 10.50 11 .15 11 .87 11.41 12.15
8.6 7.36 9.86 8.40 11 .15 9.50 11.41 9.72
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBIT C-2
Culvert Sizing Calculations
Culvert #1
Culvert Description
24" RCP
at Intersection
of Mesa Verde
Drive and Chaco
Canyon Drive
Culvert Deslan Criteria
Circular
Pipe No.
Dia. (ft.\ Pioes
2.00 1
Culvert Analvsis Calculations
Total Flow per Critical
Design Flow Pipe Depth{ft .}
Storm lcfs\ lcfs\ de
5 16.27 16.27 1.45
10 18.26 18.26 1.53
25 20.86 20.86 1.65
50 23.58 23.58 1.75
100 24 .13 24.13 1.75
Elhi = Hwi + Eli
ho= TW or (de+ 0)/2 (Whichever is Greater)
n
0.012
Normal
Depth
(ft.\
1.01
1.09
1.18
1.28
1.31
EXHIBIT C-2
CULVERT ANALYSIS
Indian Lakes Phase 19 -Culvert #1
EL hi .V----Top of Road / ELho
HWi :?::""""t; ------~~
~--,,---------:::.--TW ___/' _.,,.....-----
ELi Proposed Culvert
Outfa I Channe Des1an Cntena
Invert Outlet Culvert Top Lt. Side Rt. Side
Elev. (Eli) Elev. (ELo) Length Slope of Slope Slope Slope
(ft.\ (ft.) (ft.) (ft/ft) Road ke I (ft/ft\ (?:1) (?:1)
280.50 279.50 60.00 0.0167 284.26 0.50 I 0.0100 4.00 4.00
HEADWATER CALCULATIONS
INLET CONTROL
HWi/D HWi ELhi
1.12 2.25 282.75
1.23 2.45 282.95
1.38 2.75 283.25
1.56 3.11 283.61
1.59 3.19 283.69
H = [1 +ke+((29'(n'2tl)/R'1.33)]'((v'2)/2g)
Elho = Ela + H + ho
TW de
1.01 1.45
1.06 1.53
1.11 1.65
1.17 1.75
1.18 1.75
OUTLET CONTROL
(de+ D\/2 ho H EL ho
1.73 1.73 0.89 282.11
1.77 1.77 1.12 282.38
1.83 1.83 1.46 282.78
1.88 1.88 1.87 283.24
1.88 1.88 1.95 283.33
ELo
Bottom
Width n
(ft.)
0.00 0.024
Control Type Outlet
HW of Velocity Freeboard
Elev. Control (fps) (ft.)
282.75 Inlet 10.17 1.51
282.95 Inlet 10.46 1.31
283.25 Inlet 10.78 1.01
283.61 Inlet 11 .06 0.65
283.69 Inlet 11.11 0.57
Culvert #2
Culvert Description
18" RCP
at Intersection
of Chaco Canyon
Drive and Halona
Court
Cu vert Des1Qn Cntena
Circular
Pipe No.
Dia. lft.l Pioes
1.50 1
I . I . Cu vert Anaivs1s Ca cu at1ons
Total Flow per Critical
Design Flow Pipe Depth(ft.)
Storm (cfs) (cfs) de
5 8.31 8.31 1.10
10 9.33 9.33 1.15
25 10.65 10.65 1.25
50 12.04 12.04 1.30
100 12.32 12.32 1.30
Elhi = Hwi + Eli
ho = TW or (de + D)/2 (Whichever is Greater)
n
0.012
Normal
Depth
(fl.)
0.70
0.74
0.80
0.85
0.86
EXHIBIT C-2
CU LVERT ANALYSIS
Indian Lakes Phase 19 -Culvert #2
~ Top of Road / ELho '"'J::-z1 ;;--------~ ll H
ELI
. _/---- - - - -_:::.? - - - - ---TW
Proposed Culvert
Outfall Channel Desi n Criteria
Invert Outlet Culvert Top Lt. Side Rt. Side Bottom
Elev. (ELQ Elev. (ELo) Length Slope of Slope Slope Slope Width
!ft.) !ft.) !ft.) (ft/ft) Road ke I ft/ft 7:1 7:1 ft.
284.00 283.73 47.00 0.0057 287.54 0.50 I 0.0100 4.00 4.00 0.00
HEADWATER CALCULATIONS Control
INLET CONTROL
HWi/D HWi ELhi
1.17 1.75 285.75
1.28 1.92 285.92
1.44 2.17 286.17
1.64 2.46 286.46
1.68 2.53 286.53
H = [1 +ke+((29.(n'2)'L)/R'1.33)r((v•2)/2g)
Elho=Elo+H+ho
TW de
0.78 1.10
0.82 1.15
0.86 1.25
0.91 1.30
0.91 1.30
OUTLET CONTROL HW
(de+ Dl/2 ho H EL ho Elev.
1.30 1.30 0.76 285.79 285.79
1.33 1.33 0.96 286.02 286.02
1.38 1.38 1.26 286.36 286.36
1.40 1.40 1.60 286.73 286.73
1.40 1.40 1.68 286.81 286.81
n
0.024
Type
of
Control
Outlet
Outlet
Outlet
Outlet
Outlet
Outlet
Velocity
(fosl
5.98
6.42
6.77
7.40
7.57
ELo
Freeboard
!ft.)
1.75
1.52
1.18
0.81
0.73
3/17/2015
cul-p.xls
Exhibit C-2
Drainage Report
Indian Lakes, Phase 19
EXHIBIT C-3
Ditch Capacity Calculations
Area= 23. 75 sf
Wetted Perimeter = 19.66 ft
Hyd. Radius = 1.21 ft
Salvage Topsoil
4" Thickness (min.)
PROPOSED ROADSIDE DITCH CAPACITY
NTS
Q 'ty 1.49 capac1 = 0.035
( 1 s aothr )1h 16.80 \ 0.0068 = 57 .9 cfs
Qactual = 18.51 cfs (100 year -Drainage Area #2 -Largest Runoff Rate Phase 19)
EXHIBIT C-3
Ditch Capacity
IND/AN LAKES, PHASE 19
COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
~ 1008 _,_ Orfvrl, Sult• 10.J. Col. Station, TX 771U5 ~ M<CLURE ~ BROWN£ ENGIN££RHKJ/SVfM>1NG. ""
• (979) 6!J.J-J8J8 Fox: (979) 69.J-2554
Fnn ~· No. F--1511
WATER REPORT
FOR
Indian Lakes Subdivision
Phase XIX & XXI
Brazos Coµnty, Texas
JANUARY 2015
MBESI# 1062-0046
IMm M cCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEER ING/SURVEYING, INC. ~ ;H 1008 Woodcreek Dr., Suite 103 · College Station, Tx. 77845 · (979) 693-3838 Engineer Reg. No. F-458
Survey Reg. No. 101033--00
WATER SYSTEM ANALYSIS
for
INDIAN LAKES PHASE XIX & XXI
General Information
Anticipated land use: Residential
Anticipated number of lots: 28 lots
Notes on surrounding development: This development is located near the existing Phase
16 oflndian Lakes in South Brazos County.
Water System Analysis
Primary water supply line: Existing 12" line on Indian Lakes Drive
& 8" line on Mesa Verde Drive
Software model:
Average daily flow:
PIPE2 000 (Kentucky Pipe etwork Model)
1.5 gpd per lot
Estimated fire demand: 1,000 gpm (at Junction J-31)
PVC (C 909) Pipe material:
Conclusion:
Applicable Exhibits:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
The proposed water system exceeds the requirements of TCEQ
and the City of College Station
Schematic Water System Layout
Static Flow Analysis
Fire Flow Analysis
Indian Lakes, Phase XIX & XXI
MBESI #10620046
Exhibit B
Static Flow Results
Indian Lakes, Phase XIX & XXI
MBESI #10620046
Exhibit B
Static Flow Results
* * * * * * * * * * K Y P I P E 5 * * * * * * * * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Pipe Network Modeling Software
Copyrighted by KYPIPE LLC
Version 5 -February 2010
*
*
*
*
*
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Date & Time : Wed Jan 21 15:49 :44 2015
Master File : f :\1062 -clarke & wyndham inc\0046 -indian lakes phase
xix\docs\static .KYP\static .P2K
************************************************
S U M M A R Y 0 F 0 R I G I N A L D A T A
************************************************
u N I T s s p E C I F I E D
FLOWRATE ............ gallons/minute
HEAD (HGL) .......... feet
PRESSURE ............ psig
p I p E L I N E D A T A
STATUS CODE : xx -CLOSED PIPE CV -CHECK VALVE
p I p E NODE NAMES LENGTH DIAMETER ROUGHNESS MINOR
N A M E lll #2 (ft) (in) COEFF . LOSS COEFF .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P-1 VP-2 J -1 7830 .00 8 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-2 J -1 J -7 2199 .52 12.00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-3 J -2 J-3 3660 .00 12 .00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-4 J-3 J-18 1196 .76 12.00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-5 J-4 J-2 1590 .00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-6 J-5 J-4 5614.00 6.00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-7 J-6 J-5 220 .00 6.00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-8 J -3 J -6 3088 .00 6.00 138.9145 0 .00
P-9 J-7 J-2 4360 .48 12.00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-10 J-7 J-8 3387 .00 8 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-11 J-8 J-9 621 .00 8 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-12 J-8 J-10 356 .00 6 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-13 J-9 J-11 322 .00 6.00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-14 J-3 J-12 635 .00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-15 J -12 J-13 656 .00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-16 J-12 J-19 66 .16 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-17 J-13 J-17 565 .00 6.00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-18 J-13 J-14 807 .00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-19 J-14 J-15 182 .00 4 .00 123 .9145 0 .00
P-20 J-14 J-16 302 .00 4 .00 123 .9145 0 .00
P-21 VP-1 J-18 156 .66 12 .00 140.0000 0 .00
P-22 J -18 J-20 120 .00 6 .00 140.0000 0 .00
P-23 J-20 J-21 400 .00 4.00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-24 J-9 J-22 224 .75 8 .00 138.9145 0 .00
P-25 J -22 J-23 325 .00 4.00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-26 J-22 J-24 67 6 . 00 8.00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-27 J-24 J-26 244 .00 8.00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-28 J-26 J -28
P-29 J-26 J-31
P-30 J -28 J -25
P-31 J-28 J-29
P-32 J -29 J -27
P-33 J -31 J -30
P U M P/L 0 S S E L E M E N T D A
THERE IS A DEVICE AT NODE VP-1
HEAD FLOWRATE
(ft) (gpm)
219.23 0 .00
180.00 1500.00
77 .61 3000 .00
THERE IS A DEVICE AT NODE VP-2
HEAD FLOW RATE
(ft) (gpm)
219 .23 0 .00
180 .00 1500.00
77 . 61 3000 .00
N 0 D E D A T A
NODE
NAME
NODE
TITLE
EXTERNAL
DEMAND
(gpm)
J -1 0 .00
J-2 0 .00
J -3 0 .00
J-4 0 .00
J-5 15 .00
J -6 0 .00
J-7 0 .00
J -8 0 .00
J -9 0 .00
J-10 6.00
J-11 6.00
J -12 4 .50
J -13 7 .50
J -14 4 .50
J -15 6.00
J -16 4 .50
J -17 4 .50
J -18 0 .00
J-19 0.00
J -20 3 .00
J-21 6 .00
J-22 0 .00
J -23 6 .00
J-24 0 .00
J -25 0 .00
J-26 0 .00
J -27 6 .00
J-28 0 .00
J -29 9 .00
J -30 6 .00
J -31 9 .00
VP-1
VP-2
562 .00
124 .12
342 .00
114 . 45
119 .78
102 .63
T A
DESCRIBED BY
EFFICIENCY
(%)
75 .00
75 .00
75 .00
DESCRIBED BY
EFFICIENCY
(%)
75 .00
75 .00
75 .00
JUNCTION
ELEVATION
(ft)
287 .00
278 .00
263 .00
266.00
247 .00
246.00
285 .00
294 .00
292.00
296 .00
294 .00
253.00
250 .00
242.00
240 .00
252 .00
240 .00
241.00
251. 00
247 .00
240 .00
295 .00
291.00
283 .00
278 .00
286 .00
291. 00
281 .00
295.00
293 .00
296 . 00
239 .00
285 .00
8 .00 138 .9145
6 .00 138 .9145
8 .00 138 .9145
6 .00 138 . 9145
6 .00 138 .9145
6 .00 138.9145
THE FOLLOWING DATA :
THE FOLLOWING DATA :
EXTERNAL
GRADE
(ft)
239 .00
285 .00
0 .00
0 .00
0 .00
0.00
0 .00
0 .00
(ID= 1)
(ID= 2)
0 U T P U T 0 P T I 0 N D A T A
OUTPUT SELECTION : ALL RESULTS ARE I NCLUDED IN
MAXIMUM AND MI NI MUM PRESSURES
THE TABULATED OUTPUT
5
MAXIMUM AND MI NI MUM VELOCITIES 5
MAXIMUM AND MI NI MUM HEAD LOSS /1000 5
S Y S T E M C 0 N F I G U R A T I 0 N
NUMBER OF PI PES ................... (p) 33
NUMBER OF END NODES ............... (j) 31
NUMBER OF PRIMARY LOOPS ........... (1) 1
NUMBER OF SUPPLY NODES ............ (f) 2
NUMBER OF SUPPLY ZONES ............ (z) 1
Case : 0
RESULTS OBTAINED AFTER 20 TRIALS : ACCURACY 0 .00006
S I M U L A T I 0 N D E S C R I P T I 0 N (L A B E L)
p I p E L I N E R E s u L T s
STATUS CODE: xx -CLOSED PIPE CV -CHECK VALVE
p I p E NODE NUMBERS FLOW RATE HEAD MINOR LINE
N A M E #1 #2 LOSS LOSS VELO .
(gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft/s)
HL+ML/ HL/
1000 1000
(f t/ft) (ft/ft )
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P-1 VP-2 J-1 103 .50 1 .90 0 .00 0 .66 0 .24 0 .24
P-2 J -1 J-7 103 .50 0 .07 0 .00 0 .29 0.03 0 .03
P-3 J -2 J-3 47 .51 0 .03 0 .00 0 .13 0 .01 0 .01
P-4 J-3 J -18 9 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .03 0.00 0 .00
P-5 J -4 J-2 -7 .99 0 .00 0 .00 0 .05 0 .00 0 .00
P-6 J -5 J -4 -7 .99 0 .05 0 .00 0 .09 0 .01 0 .01
P-7 J -6 J -5 7 .01 0 .00 0 .00 0 .08 0 .01 0 .01
P-8 J -3 J -6 7 .01 0 .02 0 .00 0 .08 0 .01 0 .01
P-9 J -7 J -2 55 .50 0 .05 0 .00 0 .16 0 .01 0 .01
P-10 J -7 J-8 48 .00 0 .20 0 .00 0 .31 0 .06 0 .06
P-11 J -8 J -9 42 .00 0 .03 0 .00 0 .27 0 .05 0 .05
P-12 J -8 J -10 6 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .07 0 .01 0 .01
P-13 J -9 J -11 6 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .07 0 .01 0 .01
P-14 J -3 J -12 31 .50 0 .02 0 .00 0 .20 0 .03 0 .03
P-15 J -12 J -13 27 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .17 0 .02 0 .02
P-16 J -12 J -19 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00
P-17 J -13 J -17 4 .50 0 .00 0 .00 0 .05 0 .00 0 .00
P-18 J -13 J -14 15 .00 0 .01 0 .0 0 0 .10 0 .01 0 .01
P-19 J -14 J -15 6 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .15 0 .04 0 .04
P-20 J -14 J -16 4 .50 0 .01 0 .00 0 .11 0 .03 0 .03
P-21 VP-1 J -18 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00
P-22 J -18 J -20 9 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .10 0 .01 0 .01
P-23 J -20 J -21 6 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .15 0 .0 4 0 .04
P-24 J -9 J -22 36 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .23 0 .03 0 .03
P-25 J -22 J -23 6 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .15 0 .04 0 .04
P-26 J-22 J -24 30.00 0 .02 0 .00 0 .19 0 .02 0 .02
P-27 J -24 J -26 30.00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .19 0 .02 0 .02
P-28 J -26 J -28 15.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .10 0 .01 0 .01
P-29 J -26 J-31 15.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .17 0 .03 0 .03
P-30 J-28 J-25 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00
P-31 J-28 J-29 15 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .17 0.03 0 .03
P-32 J -29 J -27 6.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .07 0.01 0 .01
P-33 J -31 J -30 6.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.07 0.01 0 .01
p u M P/L 0 s s E L E M E N T R E s u L T s
INLET OUTLET PUMP EFFIC-USEFUL INCREMTL TOTAL #PUMPS #PUMPS
NPSH
NAME FLOWRATE HEAD HEAD HEAD ENCY POWER COST COST PARALLEL SERIES
Avail.
(gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (Hp) ($) ($)
(ft)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Device "VP-1" is closed
VP-1 0 .00 0 .00 262 .91 0 .0 75 .00 0 . 0 .0 0 .0 ** **
33 .2
VP-2 103 .50 0 .00 218 .95 219 .0 75 .00 0. 0 .0 0 .0 ** **
33 .2
N 0 D E R E S U L T S
NODE NODE EXTERNAL HYDRAULIC NODE PRESSURE NODE
NAME TITLE DEMAND GRADE ELEVATION HEAD PRESSURE
(gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft) (psi)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J -1 0 .00 502 .06 287 .00 215 .06 93 .19
J -2 0 .00 501 .94 278 .00 223 .94 97 .04
J -3 0 .00 501 .91 263.00 238 .91 103 .53
J -4 0 .00 501 .93 266 .00 235 .93 102 .24
J -5 15 .00 501.89 247 .00 254 .89 llO . 45
J -6 0 .00 501.89 246 .00 255 .89 l10 . 88
J -7 0 .00 501 .98 285 .00 216 .98 94.03
J -8 0 .00 501 .79 294 .00 207 .79 90 .04
J -9 0 .00 501 .76 292.00 209 .76 90 .90
J -10 6 .00 501 .78 296.00 205 .78 89 .17
J -11 6 .00 501 .76 294 .00 207 .76 90 .03
J -12 4 .50 501 .89 253 .00 248 .89 107 .85
J-13 7 .50 501 .88 250 .00 251 .88 109 .15
J-14 4.50 501 .87 242 .00 259 .87 l12 . 61
J-15 6 .00 501 .87 240 .00 261 .87 113 .47
J-16 4 .50 501 .87 252 .00 249 .87 108 .27
J-17 4 .50 501. 88 240 .00 261 .88 113 .48
J-18 0 .00 501 .91 241 .00 260 .91 l13 .06
J-19 0 .00 501.89 251 .00 250 .89 108 . 72
J-20 3 .00 501 .91 247 .00 254 .91 110 .46
J-21 6 .00 501.89 240.00 261 .89 l13 .49
J-22 0 .00 501 .75 295 .00 206 .75 89 .59
J-23 6 .00 501 .74 291 .00 210 .74 91. 32
J -24 0 .00 501 .73 283 .00 218 .73 94 .78
J-25 0 .00 501 . 72 278 .00 223. 72 96 . 95
J -26 0 .00 501 .73 286.00 215 .73 93 .48
J -27 6.00 501 . 72 291 .00 210 . 72 91 . 31
J -28 0 .00 501 . 72 281.00 220 . 72 95 .65
J -29 9.00 501 . 72 295 .00 206 . 72 89 .58
J -30 6.00 501 . 72 293 .00 208 . 72 90 .45
J -31 9.00 501 . 72 296. 00 205 . 72 89 .15
VP-1 501 .91 239 .00 262 .91 113 .93
VP-2 503 .95 285 .00 218 .95 94 .88
M A X I M U M A N D M I N I M U M V A L U E S
p R E s s u R E s
JUNCTION MAXIMUM JUNCTION MINIMUM
NUMBER PRESSURES NUMBER PRESSURES
(psi) (psi)
------------------------------------------
VP-1 113 . 93 J-31 89 .15
J-21 113 .49 J -10 89 .17
J-17 113 . 48 J -29 89 .58
J -15 113 .47 J -22 89 .59
J -18 113 .06 J-11 90 .03
v E L 0 c I T I E s
PIPE MAXIMUM PIPE MINIMUM
NUMBER VELOCITY NUMBER VELOCITY
(ft/s) (ft/s)
------------------------------------------
P-1 0 .66 P-4 0 .03
P-10 0 .31 P-5 0 .05
P-2 0 .29 P-17 0 .05
P-11 0 .27 P-12 0 .07
P-24 0 .23 P-13 0 .07
H L + M L I 1 0 0 0
PIPE MAXIMUM PIPE MINIMUM
NUMBER HL+ML/1000 NUMBER HL+ML/1000
(ft/ft) (ft/ft)
------------------------------------------
P-1 0 .24 P-4 0 .00
P-10 0 .06 P-5 0 .00
P-11 0 .05 P-17 0 .00
P-19 0 .04 P-33 0 .01
P-25 0 .04 P-12 0 .01
H L I 1 0 0 0
PIPE MAXIMUM PIPE MINIMUM
NUMBER HL/1000 NUMBER HL/1000
(ft/ft) (ft/ft)
------------------------------------------
P-1 0 .24 P-4 0 .00
P-10 0 .06 P-5 0 .00
P-11 0 .05 P-17 0 .00
P-19 0 .04 P-33 0 .01
P-25 0 .04 P-12 0 .01
S U M M A R Y 0 F I N F L 0 W S A N D 0 U T F L 0 W S
(+) INFLOWS INTO THE SYSTEM FROM SUPPLY NODES
(-) OUTFLOWS FROM THE SYSTEM INTO SUPPLY NODES
NODE
NAME
VP-2
NET SYSTEM INFLOW
NET SYSTEM OUTFLOW
NET SYSTEM DEMAND
FLOW RATE
(gpm)
103 .50
103 .50
0 .00
103 .50
NODE
TITLE
***** HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS COMPLETED *****
Exhibit C
Fire Flow Results
Indian Lakes, Phase XIX & XXI
MB ES I# I 0620046
Exhibit C
Fire Flow Results
* * * * * * * * * * K Y P I P E 5 * * * * * * * * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Pipe Network Modeling Software
Copyrighted by KYPIPE LLC
Version 5 -February 2010
*
*
*
*
*
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Date & Time: Wed Jan 21 16:07 :01 2015
Master File : f :\1062 -clarke & wyndham inc\0046 -indian lakes phase xix\docs\fire.KYP\fire .P2K
************************************************
S U M M A R Y 0 F 0 R I G I N A L D A T A
************************************************
u N I T s s p E c I F I E D
FLOWRATE ............ gallons/minute
HEAD (HGL) .......... feet
PRESSURE ............ psig
p I p E L I N E D A T A
STATUS CODE : xx -CLOSED PIPE CV -CHECK VALVE
p I p E NODE NAMES LENGTH DIAMETER ROUGHNESS MINOR
N A M E #1 #2 (ft) (in) COEFF. LOSS COEFF.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P-1 VP-2 J-1 7830 .00 8 .00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-2 J -1 J -7 2199.52 12.00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-3 J -2 J-3 3660.00 12 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-4 J -3 J-18 1196. 76 12 .00 140 .0000 0.00
P-5 J -4 J -2 1590.00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-6 J -5 J -4 5614 .00 6 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-7 J -6 J -5 220 .00 6 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-8 J -3 J -6 3088 .00 6 .00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-9 J-7 J -2 4360 . 48 12 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-10 J -7 J -8 3387 .00 8 .00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-11 J -8 J-9 621 .00 8 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-12 J-8 J-10 356.00 6 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-13 J -9 J-11 322 .00 6 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-14 J-3 J-12 635 .00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-15 J-12 J-13 656 .00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-16 J-12 J-19 66 .16 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-17 J -13 J-17 565 .00 6 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-18 J-13 J-14 807 .00 8 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-19 J-14 J-15 182 .00 4 .00 123 .9145 0 .00
P-20 J-14 J -16 302 .00 4 .00 123 .9145 0 .00
P-21 VP -1 J-18 156 .66 12.00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-22 J-18 J-20 120 .00 6.00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-23 J -20 J-21 400 .00 4 .00 140 .0000 0 .00
P-24 J-9 J-22 224 .75 8 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-25 J-22 J -23 325 .00 4 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-26 J -22 J -24 67 6 . 00 8 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-27 J-24 J-26 244 .00 8 .00 138 .9145 0 .00
P-28 J -26 J-28 562 .00 8 .00 138 . 9145 0 .00
P-29 J -26 J -31
P-30 J -28 J -25
P-31 J -28 J -29
P-32 J -29 J -27
P-33 J -31 J -30
P U M P/L 0 S S E L E M E N T D A
THERE IS A DEVICE AT NODE VP-1
HEAD FLOWRATE
(ft) (gpm)
219 .23 0 .00
180.00 1500.00
77 .61 3000 .00
THERE I S A DEVICE AT NODE VP-2
HEAD FLOWRATE
(ft) (gpm)
219 .23 0 .00
180 .00 1500.00
77 .61 3000 .00
N 0 D E D A T A
NODE
NAME
NODE
TITLE
EXTERNAL
DEMAND
(gpm)
J -1 0 .00
J -2 0 .00
J -3 0 .00
J -4 0 .00
J -5 15 .00
J -6 0 .00
J -7 0 .00
J -8 0 .00
J -9 0 .00
J -10 6 .00
J -11 6 .00
J -12 4 .50
J -13 7 .50
J -14 4 .50
J -15 6 .00
J -16 4 .50
J -17 4 .50
J -18 0 .00
J -19 0 .00
J -20 3 .00
J -21 6 .00
J -22 0 .00
J -23 6.00
J -24 0 .00
J -25 0 .00
J -26 0 .00
J -27 6.00
J -28 0 .00
J -29 9 .00
J -30 6 .00
J -31 1009 .00
VP-1
VP-2
124 .12
342 .00
114 .96
119 .29
102 .63
T A
DESCRIBED BY
EFFI CIENCY
(%)
75 .00
75 .00
75 .00
DESCRIBED BY
EFFICIENCY
(%)
75 .00
75 .00
75 .00
JUNCTION
ELEVATION
(ft)
287 .00
278 .00
263 .00
266 .00
247 .00
246 .00
285 .00
294 .00
292 .00
296 . 00
294 .00
253 .00
250 .00
242 .00
240 .00
252 .00
240 .00
241 .00
251 .00
247 .00
240 .00
295 .00
291 .00
283 .00
278 .00
286 .00
291 .00
281 .00
295 .00
293 .00
296 .00
239 .00
285 .00
6.00 138 .91 45
8 .00 138 .9145
6 .00 138 .9145
6 .00 138 . 91 45
6 .00 138 .9145
THE FOLLOWING DATA :
THE FOLLOWING DATA :
EXTERNAL
GRADE
(f t )
239 .00
285 .00
0 .00
0 .00
0 .00
0 .00
0 .00
(ID= 1)
(ID= 2)
0 U T P U T 0 P T I 0 N D A T A
OUTPUT SELECTION : ALL RESULTS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TABULATED OUTPUT
MAX IMUM AND MI NI MUM PRESSURES 5
MAX IMUM AND MINI MUM VELOCIT IES 5
MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM HEAD LOSS/1000 5
S Y S T E M C 0 N F I G U R A T I 0 N
NUMBER OF PIPES ................... (p) 33
NUMBER OF END NODES ............... (j) 31
NUMBER OF PRIMARY LOOPS ........... (1) 1
NUMBER OF SUPPLY NODES ............ (f) 2
NUMBER OF SUPPLY ZONES ............ (z) 1
Case : 0
RESULTS OBTAINED AFTER 6 TRIALS : ACCURACY 0 .00001
S I M U L A T I 0 N D E S C R I P T I 0 N (L A B E L)
p I p E L I N E R E s u L T s
STATUS CODE: xx -CLOSED PIPE CV -CHECK VALVE
p I p E NODE NUMBERS FLOW RATE HEAD MINOR LINE HL+ML/ HL/
N A M E #1 #2 LOSS LOSS VELO . 1000 1000
(gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/ft ) (ft/f t)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P-1 VP-2 J-1 588.90 47 .45 0 .00 3 .76 6 .06 6 .06
P-2 J -1 J-7 588.90 1. 85 0 .00 1. 67 0 .84 0 .84
P-3 J -2 J-3 -423 .61 1. 67 0 .00 1.20 0 . 46 0 . 4 6
P-4 J -3 J -18 -505.60 0 .75 0 .00 1. 43 0 .63 0 .63
P-5 J-4 J-2 35.49 0 .05 0 .00 0 .23 0 .03 0 .03
P-6 J -5 J -4 35.49 0 .76 0 .00 0 .40 0 .1 4 0 .14
P-7 J -6 J -5 50.49 0 .06 0 .00 0 .57 0 .26 0 .26
P-8 J -3 J -6 50.49 0 .80 0 .00 0 .57 0 .26 0 .26
P-9 J -7 J-2 -459 .10 2 .31 0 .00 1. 30 0 .53 0 .53
P-10 J-7 J -8 1048 .00 59 .69 0 .00 6 .69 17 . 62 17 . 62
P-11 J -8 J -9 1042 .00 10 .83 0 .00 6 .65 17 .44 17 .44
P-12 J -8 J -10 6.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .07 0 .01 0 .01
P-13 J -9 J -11 6.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .07 0 .01 0 .01
P-14 J-3 J-12 31. 50 0 .02 0 .00 0 .20 0 .03 0 .03
P-15 J -12 J-13 27 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .17 0 .02 0 .02
P-16 J-12 J -19 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00
P-17 J -13 J-17 4 .50 0 .00 0 .00 0 .05 0 .00 0 .00
P-18 J-13 J-14 15 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .10 0 .01 0 .01
P-19 J -14 J -15 6.00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .15 0 .04 0 .04
P-20 J -14 J -16 4 .50 0 .01 0 .00 0 .11 0 .03 0 .03
P-21 VP-1 J-18 514 .60 0 .10 0 .00 1 .46 0 .65 0 .65
P-22 J-18 J -20 9 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .10 0 .01 0 .01
P-23 J -20 J -21 6 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .15 0 .04 0 .04
P-24 J-9 J-22 1036.00 3 .88 0 .00 6 .61 17 .25 17 .25
P-25 J-22 J -23 6 .00 0 .01 0 .00 0 .15 0 .04 0 .04
P-26 J -22 J -24 1030 .00 11 .54 0 .00 6 .57 17 .07 17 .07
P-27 J -24 J -26 1030 .00 4 .16 0 .00 6 .57 17 .07 17 .07
P-28 J -26 J -28 15 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .10 0 .01 0 .01
P-29 J -26 J-31 1015 .00 8 .37 0 .00 11 . 52 67 .42 67 .42
P-30 J-28 J -25 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00
P-31 J -28 J -29 15 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .17 0 .03 0 .03
P-32 J -29 J -27 6 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .07 0 .01 0 .01
P-33 J -31 J -30 6 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .07 0 .01 0 .01
p u M P/L 0 s s E L E M E N T R E s u L T s
INLET OUTLET PUMP EFFIC-USEFUL INCREMTL TOTAL #PUMPS #PUMPS
NPSH
NAME FLOWRATE HEAD HEAD HEAD ENCY POWER COST COST PARALLEL SERIES
Avail .
(gpm) (ft) (f t) (ft) ( % ) (Hp ) ($) ( $)
(ft)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VP-1 514 .60 0 .00 213 .82 213 . 8 75 .00 0 . 0 .0 0 .0 ** **
33 .2
VP-2 588 .90 0 .00 212 .29 212 .3 75 .00 0 . 0 .0 0 .0 ** **
33 .2
N 0 D E R E S U L T S
NODE NODE EXTERNAL HYDRAULIC NODE PRESSURE NODE
NAME TITLE DEMAND GRADE ELEVATION HEAD PRESSURE
(gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft) (psi)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J -1 0 .00 449 .84 287 .00 162.84 70 .56
J -2 0 .00 450 .30 278 .00 172. 30 74.66
J -3 0 .00 451 .97 263 .00 188 .97 81. 89
J -4 0 .00 450 .35 266 .00 184 .35 79 .89
J -5 15 .00 451 .11 247 .00 204 . 11 88 .45
J -6 0 .00 451 .17 246 .00 205 . 17 88 .91
J -7 0 .00 447 .99 285 .00 162 .99 70 .63
J -8 0 .00 388 .30 294 .00 94 .30 40 .86
J -9 0 .00 377 .47 292 .00 85 .47 37 .04
J -10 6 .00 388 .30 296 .00 92 .30 40 .00
J -11 6 .00 377 .47 294 .00 83 .47 36.17
J -12 4 .50 451 .96 253 .00 198 .96 86. 21
J -13 7 .50 451 .94 250 .00 201 .94 87 .51
J -14 4 .50 451 .94 242 .00 209 .94 90 .97
J -15 6 .00 451 .93 240 .00 211. 93 91 .84
J -16 4 .50 451 .93 252 .00 199 .93 86 .64
J -17 4.50 451 .94 240 .00 211 .94 91. 84
J -18 0 .00 452 . 72 241 .00 211.72 91 .75
J -19 0 .00 451 .96 251 .00 200 . 96 87 .08
J -20 3 .00 4 52 . 72 247 .00 205 . 72 89 .14
J -21 6.00 452 .70 240 .00 212 .70 92 .17
J -22 0 .00 373 .60 295 .00 78 .60 34 .06
J -23 6.00 373 .58 291. 00 82 .58 35 .79
J -24 0 .00 362 .06 283 .00 79.06 34 .26
J -25 0 .00 357 .89 278 .00 79.89 34 . 62
J -26 0 .00 357 .90 286 .00 71 .90 31.15
J -27 6 .00 357 .89 291 .00 66.89 28 .98
J -28 0 .00 357 .89 281.00 76. 89 33 .32
J -29 9 .00 357 .89 295 .00 62 .89 27 .25
J -30 6 .00 349 .53 293 .00 56.53 24 .50
J -31 1009 .00 349 .53 296 .00 53 .53 23.20
VP-1 452 .82 239 .00 213 .82 92 .66
VP-2 497 .29 285 .00 212 .29 91 .99
M A X I M U M A N D M I N I M U M V A L U E S
P R E S S U R E S
JUNCTION MAXIMUM JUNCTION MINIMUM
NUMBER PRESSURES NUMBER PRESSURES
(psi) (psi)
------------------------------------------
VP-1 92 .66 J-31 23 .20
J -21 92 .17 J -30 24 .50
VP-2 91 .99 J -29 27 .25
J -17 91 .84 J-27 28.98
J -15 91 .84 J -26 31 .15
v E L 0 c I T I E s
PIPE MAXIMUM PIPE MINIMUM
NUMBER VELOCITY NUMBER VELOCITY
(ft/s) (ft/s)
------------------------------------------
P-29 11. 52 P-17 0 .05
P-10 6.69 P-12 0 .07
P-11 6.65 P-13 0 .07
P-24 6 .61 P-32 0 .07
P-26 6 .57 P-33 0 .07
H L + M L I 1 0 0 0
PI PE MAXIMUM PIPE MINIMUM
NUMBER HL+ML/1000 NUMBER HL+ML/1000
(ft/ft) (ft/ft)
------------------------------------------
P-29 67 .42 P-17 0 .00
P-10 17 . 62 P-33 0 .01
P-11 17 .44 P-12 0 .01
P-24 17 .25 P-13 0 .01
P-26 17 .07 P-32 0 .01
H L I 1 0 0 0
PIPE MAXIMUM PIPE MINIMUM
NUMBER HL/1000 NUMBER HL/1000
(ft/ft) (ft/ft)
------------------------------------------
P-29 67 .42 P-17 0 .00
P-10 17 . 62 P-33 0 .01
P-11 17 .44 P-12 0 .01
P-24 17 . 25 P-13 0 .01
P-26 17 .07 P-32 0 .01
S U M M A R Y 0 F I N F L 0 W S A N D 0 U T F L 0 W S
(+) INFLOWS INTO THE SYSTEM FROM SUPPLY NODES
(-) OUTFLOWS FROM THE SYSTEM INTO SUPPLY NODES
NET
NET
NET
NODE
NAME
VP -1
VP -2
SYSTEM
SYSTEM
SYSTEM
INFLOW
OUTFLOW
DEMAND
FLOWRATE
(gpm)
514 .60
588 .90
1103 .50
0 .00
1103 . 50
NODE
TITLE
***** HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS COMPLETED *****
SANITATION
1 . Sanitation is ok with this project.
Reviewed by: Wally Urrutia Date: January 28, 2015
COUNTY
Overall Comments:
1. Access concerns are considerable with the development of these phases.
Previous commitments need to be executed so that work by others in completing
Mesa Verde extension to SH 6 can commence . Please provide detailed estimate
of total number of lots to be developed.
2. Provide all approvals from City of College Station
Plat Comments:
3. Provide for Private Drainage Easement across back of Lots 11 -6.
Construction Plan Comments
4. Page C 1.1-Typical Section 1 (re: 75' ROW) -Provide 8" Flex Base ; Show
Section as 34' Primed Base with 38 ' Subgrade Crown . Indicate Typical Section-
Chaco Canyon Drive.
5. Page C1 .1-Typical Section 2 (re: 70' ROW) -Provide 6" Flex Base in Roadway
and 8" Flex Base at Cul-de-Sac; Show Section as 30' Primed Base with 34'
Subgrade Crown. Indicate Typical Section-Catori Cove and Halona Court.
6. Page C1 .1-Typical Section 3 (re: 100' ROW) -Provide 8" Flex Base; Show
Section as 30' Primed Base with 34' Subgrade Crown. Add 6' Earthen Shoulder,
then 8' Front Slope and 19' Back Slope. Indicate Typical Section-Mesa Verde
Drive.
7. Page C1 .1-Modify Typical Shoulder Detail to be reflective of previous 3
comments.
8. Page C1 .2-Correct spelling of "Hay Bail" to "Hay Bale".
9. Page C2 .1-Show existing 6" Water Line and Rock Riprap near Kochina Cove
(from Phase 16).
10 . Page C2.1-Indicate Ditch Slope from Sta. 10+100 to Sta. 10+35/ Indicate Limits
of Rock Riprap
11 . Page C2 .1-C/L elevation at Sta. 10+100 and Profile Grade of Mesa Verde Drive
do not match plans provided from Phase 16-Please verify that grades match and
that profile grade matches field conditions ...
12. Provide Construction Details.
Drainage Report Comments:
13. Page 7-There are flows from Phase 19 (depicted in Drainage Area 1) which flow
off property. Please analyze Post-Development Flows against Pre-Development
Flows for potential effect to adjacent property owner(s).
14. Exhibit B-Drainage Area 1 is incorrectly sized (should be larger).
15. Page 20-Culverts in this phase do serve arterial or Major Collector Streets. Mesa
Verde and Chaco Canyon are both functionally classified as such .
16. Page 26-Conclusion should clarify any effects to downstream properties along
Deer Park (from Drainage Area 1 ).
Reviewed by: Alan Munger Date: 02-09-2015
ENGINEERING COMMENTS NO. 1
1. Show a Private drainage easement on the common area between lots 10 & 11.
2. Add a note stating whose responsibility it is to maintain and stating that fences, grading,
and landscape cannot impede the flow of the private drainage easement.
3. Add a note regarding requirement for compaction of fill or engineered slab for affected
lots that have greater than 2 feet of fill on final plat and construction documents. Also list
the lots that would require this.
4. Show the future 1 O' PUE along the rear of the PUE of Lot 11-16 totaling 20' PUE.
5. Please make sure that all lot numbers are labeled on the construction sheets.
6. Move WS4.01 to the common lot boundary.
7. Provide a gate valve at the tee with the fire hydrant on Halona Court. Also please
confirm that the gate valve spacing between Catori Cove & Kachina Cove does not
exceed 800'.
8. Relocate WA-2 in such a way that the clearance between waterline's center line & the
PUE's boundary is at least 6' or provide additional easement.
9. It appears another drainage area (south of Holona Court) needs to be taken into
accounted for.
10. Please provide calculations showing that the water surface elevation in the ditches are
at least 6 "below the top ditch during a 25-year storm.
11 . Culvert #1 requires a freeboard of at least 1' during a 100-year storm event.
12. Does the culvert analysis take into account the flow hindrance of the Rock Rip Rap at
the discharge location?
13. Specify the length type, and grade on profile for culvert 1 on C3.1
14. Provide Cost Estimate, and B/CS Standard details.
Reviewed by: Kevin Ferrer Date: February 5, 2015
Do·: Bk Vol
01237847 OF.'. 12835
Easement Agreement for Utilities & Infrastructure
Notice of confidentiality rights: If you are a natural person, you may remove or strike any or all of
the following information from any instrument that transfers an interest in real property before it
is filed for record in the public records: your Social Security number or yo ur driver's license
number.
Date: July g 2015
Grantor: SMILING MALLARD DEVELOPMENT, LTD., a Texas limited partnership, and
PAUL CLARKE, individually
Grantor's Mailing Address: 3608 East 29th Street, Suite 100, Bryan, Brazos County, TX 77802
Grantee (individually and collectively) and Grantee's Mailing Addresses:
BRYAN TEXAS UTILITIES
205 E. 28th Street
Bryan, Texas 77803
WELLBORN SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT
41 I 8 Greens Prairie Road
College Station, Texas 77845
VERIZON
301 Industrial Boulevard
Bryan, Texas 77803
ATMOS ENERGY
297 N. Earl Rudder Freeway
Bryan, Texas 77802
SUDDEN LINK
4114 E. 29th Street
Bryan, Texas 77802
COUNTY OF BRAZOS, TEXAS -ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT
261 7 Highway 2 I West
Bryan, Texas 77803
Easement Property: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Easement Purpose: For the installation, construction, operation, maintenance, replacement, repair,
upgrade, and removal of the following utility infrastructure and related facilities thereto
(collectively, the "Facilities"): Electric transmission and distribution lines; Water lines, Gas
lines, connecting Jines , access facilities, and related equipment; Television, telephone, and
{00334498}
F's
1E:6
Doc Bk Vol pg
01237847 OR 128Z5 187
communications lines; Drainage ditches, drainage pipes and all other drainage structures.
Consideration: Good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged
by Grantor.
Reservations from Conveyance: As provided in Paragraph 3 below.
Exceptions to Warranty: This conveyance is made by Grantor and accepted by Grantee subject to any
and all existing easements, covenants, rights-of-way, conditions, restrictions, outstanding mineral
interests and royalty interests, if any, relating to the Easement Property, to the extent, and only to
the extent, that the same shall be in force and effect, and either shown of record in the Office of
the County Clerk of Brazos County or that may be apparent on the Easement Property.
Grant of Easement'. Grantor, for the Consideration and subject to the Reservations from Conveyance and
Exceptions to Warranty, grants, sells, and conveys to Grantee and Grantee's successors and
assigns an easement under and across the Easement Property for the Easement Purpose, together
with all and singular the rights and appurtenances thereto in any way belonging (collectively, the
"Easement"), to have and to hold the Easement to Grantee and Grantee's successors and assigns
forever. Grantor binds Grantor and Grantor's successors and assigns to warrant and forever
defend the title to the Easement in Grantee and Grantee's successors and assigns against every
person whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim the Easement or any part of the Easement,
except as to the Reservations from Conveyance and Exceptions to Warranty, to the extent that
such claim arises by, through, or under Granter but not otherwise.
Terms and Conditions: The following terms and conditions apply to the Easement granted by this
agreement:
1. Character of Easement. The Easement is nonexclusive and irrevocable. The Easement is
for the benefit of Grantee and Grantee's successors, and assigns (as applicable, the "Holder''). The
Easement granted herein is "in gross" in that there is no benefited property. Nevertheless, the Easement
rights granted herein shall pass to Grantee's successors and assigns, subject to all of the terms hereof.
The Easement shall not be construed in any manner to create or grant any rights to the public generally, to
any other person or entity, or to the owner of any other property to use or enter upon the Easement
Property.
2. Duration of Easement. The term of the Easement will expire when Easement and
Facilities provided for herein are dedicated to the public pursuant to a recorded subdivision plat of the
Easement Property.
3. Reservation of Rights. Holder's right to use the Easement Property is nonexclusive, and
Grantor reserves for Grantor and Grantor's heirs, successors, and assigns the right to use all or part of the
Easement Property in conjunction with Holder as long as such use by Grantor and Grantor's heirs,
successors, and assigns does not reasonably interfere with the use of the Easement Property by Holder for
the Easement Purpose, and the right to convey to others the right to use all or part of the Easement
Property in conjunction with Holder, as long as such further conveyance is subject to the terms of this
agreement
{00334498} 2
Do1: Bk \iol i)123 7~47 OR 12835
4. Improvement and Maintenance of Easement Property. Improvement and maintenance
of the Easement Property and the Facilities will be at the sole expense of Holder. Holder has the
reasonable right to cut, trim and control the growth of trees and other vegetation on and in the Easement
Property. Holder must maintain the Easement Property in a neat and clean condition. Holder has the right
to construct, install, maintain, replace, and remove the Facilities under or across any portion of the
Easement Property. All matters concerning the Facilities and their configuration, construction,
installation, maintenance, replacement, and removal are at Holder's reasonable discretion, subject to
performance of Holder's obligations under this agreement.
S. Equitable Rights of Enforcement. This Easement may be enforced by restraining orders
and injunctions (temporary or pennanent) prohibiting interference and commanding compliance.
Restraining orders and injunctions will be obtainable on proof of the existence of interference or
threatened interference, without the necessity of proof of inadequacy of legal remedies or irreparable
hann, and will be obtainable only by the parties to or those benefited by this agreement; provided,
however, that the act of obtaining an injunction or restraining order will not be deemed to be an election
of remedies or a waiver of any other rights or remedies available at law or in equity.
6. Dedication to the Public. Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is agreed that Grantor or the
owner of any part of Grantor's property adjacent to the Easement Property have the right to dedicate any
and all of the Easement Property to a public entity or public utility service provider and/or to convey any
or all of the improvements and facilities constructed within the Easement Property to a public entity or
public utility service provider; provided any such dedication or conveyance shall be subject to the
reservations, terms, conditions and exceptions set forth herein.
7. Attorney's Fees. If any party retains an attorney to enforce this agreement, the party
prevailing in litigation is entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees and court and other costs.
8. Binding Effect. This agreement binds and inures to the benefit of the parties and their
respective successors and permitted assigns.
9. Choice of Law. This agreement will be construed under the laws of the state of Texas,
without regard to choice-of-law rules of any jurisdiction. Venue is in the county or counties in which the
Easement Property is located.
I 0. Waiver of Default. It is not a waiver of or consent to default if the nondefaulting party
fails to declare immediately a default or delays in taking any action. Pursuit of any remedies set forth in
this agreement does not preclude pursuit of other remedies in this agreement or provided by law.
11 . Entire Agreement. This agreement and any exhibits are the entire agreement of the
parties concerning the Easement Property and the grant of the Easement by Grantor to Grantee. There are
no representations, agreements, warranties, or promises, and neither party is relying on any statements or
representations of any agent of the other party, that are not expressly set forth in this agreement and any
exhibits.
12 . Legal Construction. If any provision in this agreement is for any reason unenforceable,
to the extent the unenforceability does not destroy the basis of the bargain among the parties, the
unenforceability will not affect any other provision hereof, and this agreement will be construed as if the
{00334498} 3
....... I.:'
188
Doc Bk Vol Ps 1:!1237347 OR 12835 189
unenforceable provision had never been a part of the agreement. Whenever context requires, the singular
will include the plural and neuter include the masculine or feminine gender, and vice versa. Article and
section headings in this agreement are for reference only and are not intended to restrict or define the text
of any section. This agreement will not be consfrued more or less favorably between the parties by reason
of authorship or origin of language.
13. Notices. Any notice required or pennitted under this agreement must be in writing. Any
notice required by this agreement will be deemed to be delivered (whether actually received or not) when
deposited with the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested,
and addressed to the intended recipient at the address shown in this agreement. Notice may also be given
by regular mail, personal delivery, courier delivery, facsimile transmission, or other commercially
reasonable means and will be effective when actually received. Any address for notice may be changed
by written notice delivered as provided herein.
14. Recitals. Any recitals in this agreement are represented by the parties to be accurate,
and constitute a part of the substantive agreement.
15 . Time. Time is of the essence. Unless otherwise specified, all references to "days" mean
calendar days. Business days exclude Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays. If the date for
performance of any obligation falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal public holiday, the date for
performance will be the next following regular business day.
{00334498}
SMILING MALLARD DEVELOPMENT, LTD.
a Texas limited partnership
By: Smiling Mallard Management, LLC
a Texas limited liability company,
its general partner
By: lf/~
4
THE ST A TE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF BRAZOS §
(ACKNOWLEDGMENT)
Doc Bk Vol p9 01237847 OR 12835 190
This instrument was acknowledged before me on thecMl'\dday of July, 2015, by Paul Clarke,
individually and as Manager of Smiling Mallard Management, LLC, General Partner of SMILING
MALLARD DEVELOPMENT, LTD., on behalf of the partnership. ~~·......,...,.... IL 4'-'.!~ ,g.~,, Angela Mncle ----------------~'~ _;,: ~Y cemm1saoon Ex.eire• Notary Public, State of Texas ~or#... 0&101m1s
{00334498 } 5
Colt~ 17.~I Ac.
Trod I of Tract Four
Smiling Maflorcl O•ve!opment. Ltd .
• V.8765. P. 176
18.3<>f Acre
Pav/ etorf<• V.12330. P.214-
LEGEND cUfNt oaT,.. !WJIUS
Cl 5·0126" 4-1-4.00·
450.00'
CURVE rABL£
LEtl<lll1 T~ cHOllD BRC.
30.11· 19.87' s ()'09°15" Vf
41 .14' 20.56' H aoo·1s· E
L9 L8 c+
I
I __ J
f6. 725 Acres (rrocl Thre•)
sm;/ing Mofford o.velopment Ltd.
V.8765. P.176
----------------------
UNE rABLE
~E aEAAlHC o!STl'ICE
LI S 2'24'28" E 55.62'
l1 s 8733'12" 'II 1.2.51
1..3 s 2'17'03" E 29.80'
L4 H 8734'37" E 1.32'
S 2'24'28" E 128.26'
ctlORD DIST· u;
s 8859°4&0 'II 1e.oo'
39.691
41 .12'
33.53'
L6
L7 H 2'24°28" 'II 214.88'
LB S 1•45•47" E 1s.01"
S X42'6B• W 1Jj8.07'
C2 5·07"26"
C3 8._-14·25" 1Jj.00' 36.76" 22.61' H 44"50'11" E
C4 81·sr~· 9.00' 1:z.87' 7.821 s 4;r4f61" 'II 11.eo' ,~---~· . pag< t of 3 McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC • 1008 Woodcreek OriY•, Sd;te 103 • Coffege station, rexa• 77845 • (979) 693-3838
The record t>eor\ng" and octuol m~red
d\,\onc•' to U.. tound tron f')d!I o1onQ \h• od}o1n109 pho!iH of 1nd10t'I to\te9 SUbdtvb\OO
were u•ed os th• bowl• of the beor\ng
'Y'\em sho'«T' on \h\9 plo\.
0 -1/2" """ Rod found
p,o.a. -eundlng setback Liile
P .Q.C. -Potnl of eommench"il p.O.E. -put>'\c oromoge Ememenl
P.U.E. -public UURty to-emerA
l-9
~·-t ... :• .:.~J
· .. l C:· . ~ () . .;. ,-,
·..J
..... ,,)
(<:)<:.. (~J 0
(}1 ~ ..
EXHIBIT "A"
FIELD NOTES
PUBLIC UTILITY EASE!vffiNT
0.4244 ACRES
Page 2 of3
Being all that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in the J.M. BARRERA SURVEY,
Abstract No. 69, Brazos County, Texas and being part of the called 1·6.66 acre Tract 1 of Tract Two, part
of the called 16. 725 acre Tract Three, and part of the called 17.41 acre Tract 1 of Tract Four all
described in the deed from Partners in Habitat Preservation, LLC to Smiling Mallard Development Ltd.
recorded in Volume 8765, Page 176 of the Official Records of Brazos County, Texas (O.R.B.C.), and
part of the 18.304 acre tract described in the deed from Brierpatch, Ltd. to Paul Clarke recorded in
Volume 12330, Page 214 (O.R.B.C.), and being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING: at a found 112-incb iron rod marking the northeast corner of the called 16.66 acre
tract, the southeast corner of the called 16.725 acre tract, said iron rod also being in the west line of a 30-
foot wide Easement described in Volume 296, Page 248 of the Brazos County Deed Record (B.C.D.R.),
from whence a found 1/2-incb iron rod marking the southeast corner of the called 16.66 acre tract bears
S 04° 16' 49" Wat a distance of713.62 feet for reference;
THENCE: N 87° 35' 26" E along the common line of the called 16.66 and 16.725 acre tracts for a .
distance of286.05 feet to the POINT OF BEGINN1NG;
THENCE: S 02° 42' 58" W into the interior of the said 16.66 acre tract for a distance of 619.68 feet to
the Point of Curvature of a curve to the left;
THENCE: 39 .71 feet along the arc of said curve having a central angle of 05° 07' 26", a radius of 444.00
feet, a tangent of 19.87 feet and a long chord bearing S 00° 09' 15" Wat a distance of 39.69 feet to the
Point of Tangency;
THENCE: S 02° 24' 28" E for a distance of 56.62 feet for corner in the south line of the called 16.66
acre tract and the north line of the before-mentioned 30-foot wide easement (296/248);
THENCE: S 87° 33' 12" W along the co=on line of the called 16.66 acre tract and the said easement
for a distance of 1.25 feet to a found 112-inch iron rod marking the northeast corner of the called 17.41
acre tract and the lower northwest comer of the said easement (2961248);
THENCE: S 02° 17' 03 " E along the east line of the called 17.41 acre tract and the west line of said
easement (296/248) for a distance of 29.80 feet to a found 112-inch iron rod marking the northwest
corner of the said 18.304 acre Clarke tract and the lower southwest corner of the before-mentioned 30-
foot wide easement (296/248);
THENCE: N 87° 34' 37" E along the north line of the said 18.304 acre tract and the south line of the said
easement (296/248) for a distance of 1.32 feet for comer;
THENCE: S 02° 24' 28" E into the interior of the said 18.304 acre tract for a distance of 128.26 feet for
corner;
THENCE: S 86° 59' 48" W, 1.29 feet cross the west line of the said 18.304 acre tract and continue into
the said 17.41 acre tract for a total distance of 16.00 feet for comer;
THENCE: N 02° 24' 28" W through the said 17.41 acre tract and into the before-said 16.66 acre tract for
a distance of214.86 feet to the Point of Curvature ofa curve to the right;
THENCE: 41.14 feet along the arc of said curve having a central angle of 05° 07' 26", a radius of 460.00
feet, a tangent of 20.58 feet and a long chord bearing N 00° 09' 15" Eat a distance of 41.12 feet to the
Point of Tangency;
THENCE: N 02° 42' 58" E continuing through the said 16.66 acre tract and into the said 16.725 acre
tract for a distance of 877 .76 feet to the Point of Curvature of a curve to the right;
THENCE: 36.76 feet along the arc of said curve having a central angle of 84° 14' 26", a radius of 25 .00
feet, a tangent of 22:61 feet and a long chord bearing N 44° 50' 11" E at a distance of 33.53 feet for
corner;
E>k Vol
0~'. 12835
EXHIBIT "A"
TIIENCE: S 01° 45' 47" E for a distance of 16.01 feet for comer;
Page3 of3
Bk Vol
%: 1'.![3:0
THENCE: 12.87 feet in a counter-clockwise direction along the arc of a curve having a central angle of
81° 57' 46", a radius of9.00 feet, a tangent of7.82 feet and a long chord bearing S 43° 41' 5l"W at a .
distance of 11.80 feet to the Point of Tangency;
For further information see survey
plat prepared with this description.
Fil"d r -or ~·,,,-ord ei;:AZos COUNTY in:
On: Jul 27,·;nF t --·-' a 08:.58A
As (\ ~
Doi:umen t Number:
Amount 48 .0(i
f.f\AZOS COIJHTY
as stamPed hereon b~ m•~.
Karen M•:Quei=n' Brazos Counb Clerk
P.f.:l\ZOS CO!JrlTY
f'g
193
CASE NO.:
DATE SUBMITTED: -t-..__...__.__..._.'---
TIME: t?/; ( 0
CITY OP COLIEGE STATION
Home o/Texas A&M University•
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION
STAFF:~
(Check one) 0 Minor
($700)
0 Amending
($700)
~Final
($932)
0 Vacating
($932)
0Replat
($932)
Is this plat in the ET J? [81 Yes D No Is this plat Commercial D or Residential ~
. / MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
't8J $700-$932 Final Plat Application Fee (see above).
D $233 Waiver Request to Subdivision Regulations Fee (if applicable).
D $600 (minimum) Development Permit Application I Public Infrastructure Review and Inspection Fee. Fee is
1 % of acceptable Engineer's Estimate for public infrastructure, $600 minimum (if fee is > $600, the balance is
due prior to the issuance of any plans or development permit). ~Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and
may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided.
~Six (6) folded copies of plat. (A signed mylar original must be submitted after approval.)
[g] Two (2) copies of the grading, drainage, and erosion control plans with supporting drainage report.
[g] Two (2) copies of the Public infrastructure plans and supporting documents (if applicable).
D Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (if applicable). ~ Title report for property current within ninety (90) days or accompanied by a Nothing Further Certificate
current within ninety (90) days. The report must include applicable information such as ownership, liens,
ncumbrances, etc.
Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station l.S.D.
The attached Final Plat checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not.
NOTE: A mylar of the approved preliminary plan must be on file before a final plat application will be considered
complete. If the mylar is submitted with the final plat application, it shall be considered a submittal for the
preliminary plan project and processed and reviewed as such. Until the mylar has been confirmed by staff
to be correct, the final plat application will be considered incomplete.
Date of Optional Preapplication or Stormwater Management Conference _N_YA ______________ _
NAME OF PROJECT Indian Lakes -Phase 19
ADDRESS Near intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Kachina Cove
SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLAT:
Near intersection of Mesa Verde Drive and Kachina Cove
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project):
Name Travis Martinek E-mail travis@clarkewyndham.com
Street Address 3608 East 29th Street, Suite 100
City Bryan State Texas Zip Code 77802 ------
Phone Number (979) 846-4384 Fax Number (979) 846-1461 ----------------
Revised 4/14 Page 1 of 9
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMAl ION (All owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple
owners):
Name Smiling Mallard Development, Ltd. E-mail travis@clarkewyndham.com
Street Address 3608 East 29th Street, Suite 100
City Bryan state Texas Zip Code 77802 -------
Phone Number (979) 846-4384 Fax Number (979) 846-1461 -----------------
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION:
Name McClure & Browne Engineering/Surveying, Inc. E-mail Jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com
Street Address 1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103
City College Station State Texas Zip Code 77845 -------
Phone Number (979) 693-3838 Fax Number (979) 693-2554
----------------~
Do any deed restrictions or covenants exist for this property? [g] Yes D No
Is there a temporary blanket easement on this property? If so, please provide the Volume __ N_l"._:4 __ and Page No. _N_YA_
Total Acreage _34_._4_80 _______ _ Total No . of Lots 16 ------R-0-W Acreage _6._2_2_8 ____ _
Existing Use _V_a_ca_n_t ___________ _ Proposed Use Single-Family Residential
Number of Lots By Zon ing District NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA I NIA
Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District:
NIA I NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA
Floodplain Acreage _o._o_o_o _______________________________ _
Is there Special Flood Hazard Area (Zone A or Zone AE on FEMA FIRM panels) on the property? I Yes l°X No
This information is necessary to help staff identify the appropriate standards to review the application and will be used to
help determine if the application qualifies for vesting to a previous ordinance. Notwithstanding any assertion made,
vesting is limited to that which is provided in Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code or other applicable law.
Is this application a continuation of a project that has received prior City platting approval(s) and you are requesting the
application be reviewed under previous ordinance as applicable?
l°X Yes
I No
If yes, provide information regarding the first approved application and any related subsequent applications (provide
additional sheets if necessary):
Project Name: Indian Lakes Subdivision
City Project Number (if known): Unknown
Date I Timeframe when submitted: 2000
Revised 4/14 Page 2 of 9
A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and Preliminary Plan (if applicable):
NIA
Requested waiver to subdivision regulations and reason for same (if applicable):
NIA
Regarding the waiver request, explain how:
1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that strict application of th e
subd ivision regulations will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
NIA
2. The waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
NIA
3. The granting of the waiver will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other
property in the area, or to the City in administering subdivision regulations.
Nia
4. The granting of the waiver will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in
accordance with the provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance.
NIA
Fee in lieu of sidewalk construction is being requested because of the following condition (if applicable):
1. r; An alternative pedestrian way or multi-use path has been or will be provided outside the right-of-way;
2. I The presence of unique or unusual topographic, vegetative, or other natural cond itions exist so that strict
adherence to the sidewalk requirements of the UDO is not physically feasible or is not in keeping with the
purposes and goals of the UDO or the City's comprehensive Plan;
3. I · A capital improvement project is imminent that will include construction of the required sidewalk. Imminent shall
mean the project is funded or projected to commence within twelve (12) months;
4. I Existing streets constructed to rural section that are not identified on the Thoroughfare Plan with an estate I
rural context;
5. I When a sidewalk is required along a street where a multi-use path is shown on the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Master Plan;
Revised 4/14 Page 3 of 9
6. r The proposed development is within an older residential subdivision meeting the criteria in Platting and
Replatting within Older Residential Subdivisions Section of the UDO; or
7. r The proposed development co ntains frontage on a Freeway I Expressway as designated by Map 6.6,
Thoroughfare Plan -Functional Classification, in the City's Comprehensive Plan .
Detailed explanation of condition identified above:
N/A
NOTE: A waiver to the sidewalk requirements and fee in lieu of sidewalk construction shall not be considered at the
same time by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Total Linear Footage of
Proposed Public:
NIA Streets
NIA Sidewalks
NIA Sanitary Sewer Lines
NIA Water Lines
NIA Channels
NIA Storm Sewers
NIA Bike Lanes I Paths
Parkland Dedication due prior to fil ing the Final Plat:
ACREAGE:
NIA
NIA
NIA
No. of acres to be dedicated+$ __ N_'!._:4 __ development fee
No. of acres in floodplain
No. of acres in detention
_N_'!._:4_ No. of acres in greenways
OR
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND:
NIA No . of SF Dwelling Units X $ NIA = $ NIA
NIA (date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FILING.
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are
true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPL/CAT/ON JS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more
than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application
must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf LIEN
HOLDERS identified in the title report are also considered owners and the appropriate signatures must be provided as
described above.
Signature an~ Date
Revised 4/14 Page 4 of 9
Existing
[8]
FINAL PLAT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(ALL CITY ORDINANCES MUST BE MET)
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING:
(Requirements based on field survey and marked by monuments and markers.)
[8] Drawn on 24" x 36" sheet to scale of 100' per inch.
[8] Vicinity map which includes enough of surrounding area to show general location of subject property in
relationship to College Station and its City Limits. No scale required but include north arrow.
[8] Title Block with the following information:
[8] Name and address of subdivider, recorded owner, planner, engineer and surveyor.
[8] Proposed name of subdivision. (Subdivision name & street names will be approved through Brazos
County911 .)
[8] Date of preparation.
[8] Engineer's scale in feet.
[8] Total area intended to be developed.
[8] North Arrow.
[8] Subdivision boundary indicated by heavy lines.
[8] If more than 1 sheet, an index sheet showing entire subdivision at a scale of 500 feet per inch or
larger.
[8] All applicable certifications based on the type of final plat.
[8] Ownership and Dedication
[8] Surveyor and/or Engineer
[8] City Engineer (and City Planner, if a minor plat)
[8] Planning and Zoning Commission (delete if minor plat)
[8] Brazos County Clerk
[8] Brazos County Commissioners Court Approval (ET J Plats only)
[8] If submitting a replat where there are existing improvements, submit a survey of the subject property
showing the improvements to ensure that no encroachments will be created.
[8] If using private septic systems, add a general note on the plat that no private sewage facility may be
installed on any lot in this subdivision without the issuance of a license by the Brazos County
Health Unit under the provisions of the private facility regulations adopted by the Commissioner's
Court of Brazos County, pursuant to the provisions of Section 21 .084 of the Texas Water Code.
[8] Location of the 100-Year Floodplain and floodway, if applicable, according to the most recent available
data.
[8] Lot corner markers and survey monuments (by symbol) and clearly tied to basic survey data .
[8] Matches the approved preliminary plan or qualifies as minor amendments (UDO Section 3.3.E.2).
The location and description with accurate dimensions, bearings or deflection angles and radii, area, center
angle, degree of curvature, tangent distance and length of all curves for all of the
following: (Show existing items that are intersecting or contiguous with the boundary of or forming a
boundary with the subdivision , as well as, those within the subdivision).
Proposed
[8] Streets. Continuous or end in a cul-de-sac, stubbed out streets must end into a temp
turn around unless they are shorter than 100 feet.
Public and private R.O .W. locations and widths. (All existing and proposed R.O .W.'s
sufficient to meet Thoroughfare Plan.)
Street offsets and/or intersection angles meet ordinance.
Revised 4/14 Page 8 of 9
Existing
~
~
~
~
Proposed
~
~
~
~
Alleys.
Easements.
A number or letter to identify each lot or site and each block (numbered sequentially).
Parkland dedication/greenbelt area/park linkages. All proposed dedications must be
reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and documentation of their
recommendation provided prior to being scheduled for P&Z Commission consideration.
~-Construction documents for all public infrastructure drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and properly
sealed by a Licensed Texas Professional Engineer that include the following:
~ Street, alley and sidewalk plans, profiles and sections. One sheet must show the overall
street, alley and/or sidewalk layout of the subdivision. (may be combined with other
utilities).
~ Sewer Design Report.
~ Sanitary sewer plan and profile showing depth and grades. One sheet must show the
overall sewer layout of the subdivision . (Utilities of sufficient size/depth to meet the utility
master plan and any future growth areas.)
~ Water Design Report and/or Fire Flow Report.
~ Water line plan showing fire hydrants, valves, etc. with plan and profile lines showing
depth and grades. One sheet must show the overall water layout of the subd ivision.
(Utilities of sufficient size/depth to meet the utility master plan and any future growth
areas.)
~ Storm drainage system plan with contours, street profile, inlets, storm sewer and
drainage channels, with profiles and sections. Drainage and runoff areas, and runoff
based on 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100 year rain intensity. Detailed drainage structure design ,
channel lining design & detention if used . One sheet must show the overall drainage
layout of the subdivision.
~ Detailed cost estimates for all public infrastructure listed above sealed by Texas P.E.
~ Letter of completion for public infrastructure or guarantee I surety in accordance with UDO
Section 8.6.
~ Drainage Report with a Technical Design Summary.
~ Erosion Control Plan (must be included in construction plans).
~ All off-site easements necessary for infrastructure construction must be shown on the final plat with a
volume and page listed to indicate where the separate instrument easements were filed .
Separate instrument easements must be provided in recordable form to the City prior to being sched uled
for P&Z Commission consideration .
~ Are there impact fees associated with this development? D Yes [g] No
Impact fees must be paid prior to building permit.
~ Will any construction occur in TxDOT rights-of-way? D Yes ~ No
If yes, TxDOT permit must be submitted along with the construction documents.
NOTE: 1. We will be requesting the corrected Final Plat to be submitted in digital form if available prior to filing
the plat at the Courthouse.
2. If the construction area is greater than 5 acres, EPA Notice of Intent (NOi) must be submitted prior to
issuance of a development permit.
_ Print f()rrn
Revised 4/14 Page 9 of 9
CITY OF COTJ.EGE STATTO~
Homt: of Texas A&M U11ivmiry"
CASE :O~:R OFFICE 15~
DATE SUBMITTED: 6ij aj 15
TIME: 2:00
STAFF: ~K!--+'~-------
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
Please check one of the options below to clearly define the purpose of your submittal.
New Project Submittal D
D Incomplete Pro1ect Submittal -documents needed to comolete an application. P&DS Project no.:
( Existing Project Submittal. P&DS Project no.: ,. -
ProjectName \ryli0v(1 LA.~ Ph \Cj
Contact Name Phone Number _____________ _
We are transmitting the following for Planning & Development Services to review and comment (check all that apply):
D Comprehensive Plan Amendment D Non-Residential Architectural Standards
D Rezoning Application D Irrigation Plan
D Conditional Use Permit D Variance Request
D Preliminary Plan D Development Permit
D Final Plat D Development Exaction Appeal
D Development Plat D FEMA CLOMNCLOMR/LOMNLOMR
D Site Plan D Grading Plan
D Special District Site Plan D Other -Please specify below
D Special District Building I Sign
D Landscape Plan
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS
All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set.
The following are included in the complete set:
O Comprehensive Plan Amendment D Waterline Construction Documents
D TxDOT Driveway Permit 0 Sewerline Construction Documents
O TxDOT Utility Permit 0 Street Construction Documents
O Drainage Letter or Report 0 Easement Application
O Fire Flow Analysis ~ Other -Please specify
Special Instructions:
10/10
TO:
CLARKE & WYNDHAM
REAL EST ATE 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
DATE:
Jason Schubert 1/22/2015
COMPANY: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER:
See below
FAX NUMBER: PHONE NUMBER:
RE :
Indian Lakes-Phases 19 & 21
0 URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY 0 PLEASE RECYCLE
NOTES/COMMENTS:
Jason,
Attached is the water report for Indian Lakes Phases 19 and 21 . Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Travis