Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00070400s~ (oil DEVELOPMENT SERVICES L&VA TRANSMITTAL LETTER Name/Firm: Urban Design Group Date: January 17, 2001 696_9653 Address: 2700 Earl Rudder Frwy S. Ste 4300 Phone: (979) College Station, Texas 77845 Fax: (979) 696-9752 We are transmitting the Following for Development Services to review and comment: (Check all that apply.): ❑ Master Development Plan w/❑ ❑ Preliminary Plat w/❑ ❑ Final Plat w/❑ ❑ FEMA CLOMA/CLOMP,/LOMA/LOMR w/❑ X Site Plan w/❑ ❑ Grading Plan W/❑ ❑ Landscape Plan w/❑ ❑ Irrigation Plan w/❑ ❑ Building Construction Documents w/❑ Redlines ❑ Development Permit App. Redlines ❑ Conditional Use Permit Redlines ❑ Rezoning Application Redlines ❑ Variance Request Redlines X Other-Please Specify Redlines Letter Attached Redlines Redlines Redlines INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMEN'T'S All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set. The following are included in the complete set- U Waterline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Sewerline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Drainage Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Street Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Easement application with metes & bounds description ❑ Drainage Letter or Report w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Fire Flow Analysis w/ ❑ Redlines Special Instructions: PROJECT: University Park Proiect ❑ TxDOT Driveway Permit ❑ TxDOT Utility Permit ❑ Other - Please Specify TRANSMITAL LETTER TRANSMIT.DOC 03/23/99 o Urban Design Group January 17, 2001 Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator Department of Development Services City of College Station PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842-9960 Re: University Park Section II, Block T, Lot 15 Dear Natalie, Attached are revised plans on the University Park Project that we discussed yesterday. The revisions include requests by the Contractor and/or the Architect, and are noted below as well as highlighted on the plans. The vacating and plat is underway. We would like to stay on schedule with the building plans so that the contractor can begin as soon as possible, even with only a grading permit if there are remaining comments. We have not heard from TxDOT or received comments from them through the City. Please let us know if you need any thing from us on that approval. Revisions this submittal: Relocated fire hydrant in median (C 1) Added light pole locations in parking lot medians (C 1) Added steps and landings at proposed entries to Bldg A (C1), step details (C7) Added AC unit locations at rear of Bldgs A, B, and C (C 1) Re-graded area between Bldg B and C (0) Added sign location on University Drive (C 1) Added fence note on detail (C7) Revised HC ramp per ADA requirements (C 1) Re-defined limits of sawcut (0) Added HC ramp and note along University Drive (0) Added TxDOT HC ramp detail sheet (RAMP-0013) Added callouts for storm sewer crossings (0) Added callouts for utility crossings (C5) Deleted asphalt paving option (C7) If the staff has any questions, or wants to meet, we are available. When the PRC is scheduled for the building, let me know. Thanks for all your help. Sincerely, URBAN DESIGN GROUP Deborah L. Keating, P.E., Partner C:Aruiz2.doc Post Office Box 10153 . College Station, Texas 77842 • 409 • 69 6 . 9653 University Park ! PROBABLE COST ESTIMATE (Public Improvements Only) PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS .~16 • 1 DESCRIPTION Standard Fire Hydrant UNIT EA • 1 UNIT COST $2,500.0 - TOTAL COST $2,5007 2 Reinforced Concrete Handicap Ramps, EA 4 $500.00 $2,000.00 3 6" Reinforced Concrete Paving SY 193 $45.00 5 x$8,685.00 4 Reinforced Concrete Curb & Gutter' LF 400 , $20.00 $8,000.00 5 12"X6" MJ Tapping Sleeve & Valve , i4f EA 1 ;'$2,500.00 $2,500.00 6 6"X6" MJ Tapping Sleeve & Valve EA 1 ' $2,000.00 $2,000.00 7 18" RCP Storm Sewer LF 3 $40.00 $520.00 9 6" 450 MJ Bend w/ thrust blockin EA 1 . $400.0 $400.00 10 6" MJ Gate Valve W/ Box EA 2 $600.0 $1,200.00 11 6" PVC C900,CL200 Waterline Structural Fill LF 64 $60.00 JAL (,$9,840.00 12 Reinforced Concrete Junction Box " n . EA o t:- -1 , $3,000.00 $3,000.00 13 1 1/2" Water Meter EA 3 $4,000.00 $12,000.00 14 6" x 2" Reducer EA 2 $375.00 $750.00 15 Sidewalk SF 1287 ; i $50m00 $64,350.00 16 1 6'x 6' Transfor PAD EA 2 ; $180.00 $360.00 17 3-4" PVC Conduits LF 391 $6.00 $2,346.00 / Irv ~r u W ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $16,276.00 Contingency (15%) $2,441.40 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $18,717.40 /-i7.:n I NOTES CONCERNING OPINIONS OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST Urban Design Group's (UDG) opinions of probable construction cost provided for herein are made on the basis of our experience and qualifications and represent our best judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineering firm generally familiar with the construction industry and applicable development regulations. However, since UDG has not obtained approval from the appropriate jurisdiction and UDG has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the Contractor's methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, UDG cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual construction cost will not vary from opinions of probable construction cost prepared by UDG. CostEst2 1 University Park PROBABLE COST ESTIMATE (Public Improvements Only) PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION NO. 1 Standard Fire Hydrant EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.60- 2 Reinforced Concrete Handicap Ramps EA 4 $500.00 $2,000.00 3 6" Reinforced Concrete Paving SY 193 $45.00 $8,685.00 4 Reinforced Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 400 $20.00 $8,000.00 5 12"X6" MJ Tapping Sleeve & Valve EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 6 6"X6" MJ Tapping Sleeve & Valve EA 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 7 18" RCP Storm Sewer LF 13 40.00 $520.00 9 6" 450 MJ Bend w/ thrust blocking EA 1 $400.00 $400.00 10 6" MI Gate Valve W/ Box EA 2 $600.00 $1,200.00 11 6" PVC C900,CL200 Waterline Structural Fill LF 164 $60.00 $9,840.00 12 Reinforced Concrete Junction Box EA 1 3,000.00 $3,000.00 13 1 1/2" Water Meter EA 3 $4,000.00 $12,000.00 14 6" x 2" Reducer EA 2 $375.00 $750.00 15 Sidewalk SF 1287 $50.00 $64,350.00 16 6'x 6' Transformer PAD 1 EA 2 $180.00 $360.00 17 3-4" PVC Conduits LF 391 $6.00 $2,346.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $16,276.00 Contingency (15%) $2,441.40 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $18,717.40 i..7.d1 NOTES CONCERNING OPINIONS OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST Urban Design Group's (UDG) opinions of probable construction cost provided for herein are made on the basis of our experience and qualifications and represent our best judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineering firm generally familiar with the construction industry and applicable development regulations. However, since UDG has not obtained approval from the appropriate jurisdiction and UDG has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the Contractor's methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, UDG cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual construction cost will not vary from opinions of probable construction cost prepared by UDG. CostEst2 ~r FACSIMILE COVER SHEET CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (979)764-3570 / Fax (979)764-3496 Date: December 11, 2000 # of pages including cover: 5 If you didnotreceive a complete fax, please call our office rmmediatelyfora new transmittal, TO: UDG, Steve Ross FAX: 696-9752, 846-8596 COMPANY: RE: University Park FROM: Bridgette George PHONE: (979) 764-3570 COMPANY: City of College Station REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review ❑ Replay ASAP ® FYI The following are comments from our Electrical and W/WW Divisions that I received today. Please call if you have any guestions Thank you, Bridgette m FT Mr AWA it Ac PARK/AV 81L~ A Tax z~ ma wmw bow. 1 ! 1' 11 ! I I 1 p PR i8" TORM RAIN DE r r V A RK r n~, A i - _ - - "i PROP 6" GAS to f ; ;r i' Sr hn ow f-'ARK ING Cl .1 71 i r J 1 ,j \1 1} f f y- 1 _ t ' ~ t { .J. t.: ~ •r ~ I :J C L. ~ , li' u { j ~A ~ :x ~ 'it' ~K' ~ ~ y~~+f~ C Z' ,i: L' s♦ , l fJ . t ♦ i r ' i -v1fi i c t ~4 W f. J , a ! ' ~ I ~ J ~ J - ~ ' ~ 1• ,f Tl ~ ~ ~ 'ax. 4 14 T ..1. ~y 'Y c'A -A,ryyP,xi~r~AtT~ ; J )f ~r , ) - now k SII Ni PWJJ AN i r rl ~ ' A ~ 1 _ m; 713' t. is+1 ~ 11_..t 9,040 SO FT L _ J i "1 i r' . SCALE 1" = 29 AA •M ~ , y ~ ` i ra 5 SPRIR! I~IQftS J , LTD PARTIUMP t W1.K1 • 7f•1H. Ppt~AN ~ _ / . / it J , 1 )4 1 ~ r r ~oSe~ 40~IL ` } t r ei i 11 1` , :1 , a~JVO ~t f.kf 3, '~Ft t1'fi.l `rg ! r - j n~ t n , SMIC 12/13/00 17:41 V979 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS 14.1 001 ACTIVITY REPORT x TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 5634 CONNECTION TEL 96969752 CONNECTION ID START TIME 12/13 17:37 USAGE TIME 04'41 PAGES 4 RESULT OK 3'.Cyup% op DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TRANSMITTAL LETTER Name/Firm: Urban Design Group Date: January 9, 2001 Address: 2700 Earl Rudder Frwy S. Ste 4300 Phone: (979) 696-9653 College Station, Texas 77845 Fax: (979) 696-9752 We are transmitting the Following for Development Services to review and comment: (Check all that apply.): ❑ Master Development Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Preliminary Plat w/❑ Redlines ❑ Final Plat w/❑ Redlines ❑ FEMA CLOMA/CLOMP,/LOMA/LOMR w/❑ Redlines ❑ Site Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Grading Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Landscape Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Irrigation Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Building Construction Documents w/❑ Redlines INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set. The following are included in the complete set: ❑ Waterline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Sewerline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Drainage Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Street Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Easement application with metes & bounds description ❑ Drainage Letter or Report w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Fire Flow Analysis w/ ❑ Redlines Special Instructions: PROJECT: University Park Proiect ❑ Development Permit App. ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Rezoning Application ❑ Variance Request ❑ Other-Please Specify _Permit to Construct Access Driveway Facilities on HMW Right of Way ❑ TxDOT Driveway Permit ❑ TxDOT Utility Permit ❑ Other - Please Specify NATALIEBRIDGET - Attached Please find the requested extra copies of T%Dots' Permit to Construct Access Driveway Facilities on Highway Right of Wav Thanks. Travis Scott. TRANSMITAL LETTER TRANSMIT.DOC 03/23/99 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TRANSMITTAL LETTER Name/Firm: Address: ; _`~(~C~ / Date: X - 61 / C < 1 Phone: ~aCl(~ T(~ , Fax: We are transmitting the following for Development Services to review and comment: (Check all that apply.): ❑ Master Development Plan ❑ Preliminary Plat ❑ Final Plat ❑ FEMA CLOMA/CLOMR/LOMA/LOMR Site Plan ❑ Grading Plan ❑ Landscape Plan ❑ Irrigation Plan ❑ Building Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Development Permit App. w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Conditional Use Permit w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Rezoning Application w/ ❑ dlines ❑ Variance Request w/ 4_I Redlines ❑ Other - Please specify w/ ❑ Redlines w/ ❑ Redlines w/ ❑ Redlines w/ ❑ Redlines INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set. The following are included in the complete set: ❑ Waterline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Sewerline Construction Documents w/❑ Redlines ❑ Drainage Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Street Construction Documents W/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Easement application with metes & bo unds decsription ❑ Drainage Letter or Report w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Fire Flow Analysis w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ TxDOT Driveway Permit ❑ TxDOT Utility Permit ❑ Other - Please specify Special Instructions: r TRANSMrrrAL LETTER TRANSMITMOC 03/23/99 I Of I Bridgette George - University Park Page To ~ From: Bridgette George To: Deborah Keating Subject: University Park Good evening! I discovered some construction plans for this project that have redlines on them that I do not believe have been returned to you. There have been some personnel changes in the Utility Department and we are getting some of the plans back later than we used to, hence they were not returned with the original staff review comments. I wanted to make sure that you received these comments prior to you resubmitting the revised site plans. I apologize for any inconvenience. Please pick them up at your convenience at Development Services. When resubmitting the revised plans, please include the redlines. CC: Natalie Ruiz CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENIT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77542 Phon; (979) 764-35-70 / Fax (979) 764-3496 11U:MORAIND UM DccemL^er 5, 2000 TO: Urban Group, Via fax i;96)-975'' 6 FROM: Bridget e i ce ge, Asst. Deg°ele*_''1ne.It ~o `r~,[nator ~ S~ SUBJECT: Urrltiers:n-P.,-r{• - SileAw Staff reviewed the aoore-incnt:oned site plan as reouz~sted. The fo'-locking toma& is a list of staff t'evi; w conllnents dcta_llra itenis that need to be andr2ssea. Flease adlitc:,>s ih: Conin -.its a1W submit t.'ic tcllo-,A' ns inforn-Rion 101, fvxth?." S'a?I D'vo (2). Cctr.Plr.tr sets of cot 5-mLict:gin J:ocunients for the pro.~o.sec sic velepnient whit i is ttv!sc~d site and lal:dz~- pin, .:inns attached. If there are colnnients t_iat vo?i are not addrtssins the revised sire pbn, >>le:,~e attach a letter e?Cplalning th cL tails. If you have any questions or teed Wdhioral ult aso call me at 764-3570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc: Steve Ross and Fred Bayliss, Via fax 846-8596 Case file #00-219 1~~05!00 18:07 '$979 764 3496 I)FNTLOP3fGNT SLATS Home of Texas A&M University 01001 1205;'00 18;08 $979 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SN'CS Q0 002 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 1 Project: UNIVERSITY PARK (SP)-SITE PLAN (0-219) PLANNING 1. Please include in the title block the address and legal description of the project. 2. Please include the submittal date and any subsequent revision dates on the site plan. 3. On the site plan, please include the zoning of the subject property and all abutting parcels. 4. Please clarify the boundares of tf,e 10 -ft. utility easement that runs along the back of the property gone side is shovfn to be an OU line instead of the property line). 5. There are two 15 fl. easements ru ning parallel to each other. "15"' is called out but there is no description. 6. Add a note stating the 100-year flocdplain does not exist in this area. 7. Please describe the uses of the proposed buildings (e.g., Office Building). 8. Buildings B and C require 73 parking spaces (parking and landscaping are rounded up). Please make this adjustment. 9. Please call out the curb cut radii. 10.A 6-ft. privacy fence is required between commercial and residential developments. Please make this addition to the site plan. 11. Please provide a material and heia'-;t description of the dumpsters' screening fences. , 12. It is unclear how the buildings will receive electricity. Please clarify. 13. Please provide a note or add to the detail how the fire lanes will be striped (colors, lettering size, striping location, etc.). 14. Regarding Landscaping Planting Notes #3 and #4, please note: for the landscaping point calculations to remain valid, the numbers, sizes, and types of landscaping described on the plan will need to remain the same or exceed what will be shown. 15.The site area on the landscaping plan is not consistent with that on the site plan. Please make the appropriate adjustment(s). 16.The points required by streetscaping are added to the landscape points for the total points required. The additional points do not have to be made in the streetscape area, but may be scattered throughout the site. Landscaping in the streetscape area will count for points (this includes the required streetscape trees). 17.Although staff can not require it, the TXU Gas Distribution and Transmission Facility should be screened by landscaping from the Star Review Comments Page 1 of 2 2 '0S/00 18: 09 $979 704 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS proposed buildings. Please consider doing this. Other items that could be considered visually offensive may be required to be screened if they are added to revised plans and visible from the ROW. 18.lrrigation will not be evaluated with the site plan. Please include a note that irrigation will be approved prior to C.O. Reviewed by ENGINEERING Molly Hitchcock Date: December 4, 2000 1 We need to process the TXDOT Fcrm, 1,058 (Permit tc Construct Access Driveway Facilities on Highway R,a^t of Way) to TXDOT. VVe need two originally signed driveway permits (Fora, 1058) for our files from them. Please send three additional ccpies of the 'Site Plan' tc, Lis, so we can forward to TXDOT. 2_ Please develop a chart showin" sev.,er service demand (gcd) 2nd water service demand (gpm) on the Utility Plan. 3. Please clarify the note on the Utili'y Plan, "INSTALL:...v"re to connect to ex 6" waterline" (bottom, middle of cage). 4. t;Vhat is the intent of the note 07 the detention pond cet ins (Sheet C3, bottom right)? Who is going t:, b d t`-e junction box at the outfall of the pond? 5. Please send an additional co,-y n`'~,e &'e Plan' to US. enC what type of construction the buildings will be, so we can ~orvjard this in`or-iaJon tc t.'-e Fire Marshall. 6. Show detail showing the side sloes, depth and genera! -onstruction of the detention pond. Reviewed by: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Date: 12/5/00 ELECTRICAL 1. Developer responsible for installing conduit per city spec and design. 2. Developer responsible for providing easements to cover all primary electrical lines and equipment. 3. Developer needs to provide electrical load information as soon as possible. Staff Review comments Page 2 of 2 Z003 12 05x00 1&:10 '$979 764 ;1496 Reviewed by: Jennifer Reeves DEVELOI'll liNT !:VCS Date: 11/30J'00 MISCELLANEOUS 1. Irrigation system must be protected by either a Pressure Vacuum Breaker or Reduced Pressure Principle Back Flow Device and installed as per City Ordinance 2394. 2. Bank F•.c\v devises must be tested upon installation. ats per C:;ty Ordinance 2394. Reviewed by: Rob Werley i . 3. There is a prcblem with the erciosure on the east side of the c-mpi•-:x the detention pond. There is an island directly ir, front of the pad at n 30 foot distance, too close for a front end loader approach. There are tvio pcssible solutions. Either move tle enclosure 3" `eet make the vYest enclosure into a double unir VVit', a i by Reviewed by : Peter Caler Nnvemer NOTE: Anv chances made tc the plans, that, have not been requested by t ,e City of College Station, must be explained in your next transm;tta! letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that hav- not been pointed out to the City will constitute a completely new review. w 00; Staff Review Ccrn rerts Page 2 of ` P CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (979) 764-3570 / Fax (979) 764-3496 MEMORANDUM December 5, 2000 TO: Urban Design Group, Via fax 696-9752 p FROM: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinator J J SUBJECT: Urnr "vers&XFark - Site Plan Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the comments and submit the following information for further staff review: Two (2) complete sets of construction documents for the proposed development with the revised site and landscaping plans attached. If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 764-3570. Attachments: Staff review comments 9-56.1 cc: Steve Ross and Fred Bayliss, Via fax 846-8-5% Case file #00-219 Home of Texas A&M University STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 1 Project: UNIVERSITY PARK (SP)-SITE PLAN (0-219) PLANNING 1. Please include in the title block the address and legal description of the project. 2. Please include the submittal date and any subsequent revision dates on the site plan. 3. On the site plan, please include the zoning of the subject property and all abutting parcels. 4. Please clarify the boundaries of the 10 ft. utility easement that runs along the back of the property (one side is shown to be an OU line instead of the property line). 5. There are two 15 ft. easements running parallel to each other. "15"' is called out but there is no description. 6. Add a note stating the 100-year floodplain does not exist in this area. 7. Please describe the uses of the proposed buildings (e.g., Office Building). 8. Buildings B and C require 73 parking spaces (parking and landscaping are rounded up). Please make this adjustment. 9. Please call out the curb cut radii. 10.A 6-ft. privacy fence is required between commercial and residential developments. Please make this addition to the site plan. 11. Please provide a material and height description of the dumpsters' screening fences. 12. It is unclear how the buildings will receive electricity. Please clarify. 13. Please provide a note or add to the detail how the fire lanes will be striped (colors, lettering size, striping location, etc.). 14. Regarding Landscaping Planting Notes #3 and #4, please note: for the landscaping point calculations to remain valid, the numbers, sizes, and types of landscaping described on the plan will need to remain the same or exceed what will be shown. 15. The site area on the landscaping plan is not consistent with that on the site plan. Please make the appropriate adjustment(s). 16. The points required by streetscaping are added to the landscape points for the total points required. The additional points do not have to be made in the streetscape area, but may be scattered throughout the site. Landscaping in the streetscape area will count for points (this includes the required streetscape trees). 17.Although staff can not require it, the TXU Gas Distribution and Transmission Facility should be screened by landscaping from the Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 2 proposed buildings. Please consider doing this. Other items that could be considered visually offensive may be required to be screened if they are added to revised plans and visible from the ROW. 18. Irrigation will not be evaluated with the site plan. Please include a note that irrigation will be approved prior to C.O. Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock Date: December 4, 2000 ENGINEERING 1. We need to process the TXDOT Form 1058 (Permit to Construct Access Driveway Facilities on Highway Right of Way) to TXDOT. We need two originally signed driveway permits (Form 1058) for our files from them. Please send three additional copies of the 'Site Plan' to us, so we can forward to TXDOT. 2. Please develop a chart showing sewer service demand (gpd) and water service demand (gpm) on the Utility Plan. 3. Please clarify the note on the Utility Plan, "INSTALL:...wye to connect to ex 6" waterline" (bottom, middle of page). 4. What is the intent of the note on the detention pond details (Sheet C8, bottom right)? Who is going to build the junction box at the outfall of the pond? 5. Please send an additional copy of the `Site Plan' to us, and what type of construction the buildings will be, so we can forward this information to the Fire Marshall. 6. Show detail showing the side slopes, depth and general construction of the detention pond. Reviewed by: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Date: 12/5/00 ELECTRICAL 1. Developer responsible for installing conduit per city spec and design. 2. Developer responsible for providing easements to cover all primary electrical lines and equipment. 3. Developer needs to provide electrical load information as soon as possible. Staff Review Comments Page 2 of 2 Reviewed by: Jennifer Reeves Date: 11/30/00 MISCELLANEOUS 1. Irrigation system must be protected by either a Pressure Vacuum Breaker or Reduced Pressure Principle Back Flow Device and installed as per City Ordinance 2394. 2. Back Flow devises must be tested upon installation as per City Ordinance 2394. Reviewed by: Rob Werley 3. There is a problem with the enclosure on the east side of the complex by the detention pond. There is an island directly in front of the pad at a 30 foot distance, too close for a front end loader approach. There are two possible solutions. Either move the enclosure 30 feet to the north, or make the west enclosure into a double unit with a 12 by 24 foot pad Reviewed by: Peter Caler November 30, 2000 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City will constitute a completely new review. Staff Review Comments Page 3 of 2 x r<xc ACTIVITY REPORT ~x x TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 98468569 UNIVERSITY TOWER 12/06 09:36 01'51 .12/06/00 09:38 C^]979 764 3496 DF.VF.T.OPWTF.NT SVCS IA nn i * ACTIVITY REPORT xcs>z TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 12/05 18:07 04'01 4 OK . 12/05/00 18:11 ^ti979 764 3496 DF.VF.T.OPAfFNT SVC9 I.nnni DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TRANSMITTAL LETTER Name/Firm: Urban Design Group Date: February 7, 2001 Address: 2700 Earl Rudder Frwy S. Ste 4300 Phone: (979) 696-9653 College Station, Texas 77845 Fax: (979) 696-9752 We are transmitting the Following for Development Services to review and comment: (Check all that apply.): ❑ Master Development Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Development Permit App. ❑ Preliminary Plat w/❑ Redlines ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Final Plat w/❑ Redlines ❑ Rezoning Application ❑ FEMA CLOMA/CLOMP,/LOMA/LOMR w/❑ Redlines ❑ Variance Request X Site Plan w/❑ Redlines X Other-Please Specify ❑ Grading Plan w/❑ Redlines letter X Landscape Plan w/❑ Redlines check ❑ Irrigation Plan w/❑ Redlines comments # 3 ❑ Building Construction Documents w/❑ Redlines INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set. The following are included in the complete set: ❑ Waterline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ TxDOT Driveway Permit ❑ Sewerline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ TxDOT Utility Permit ❑ Drainage Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Other - Please Specify ❑ Street Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Easement application with metes & bounds descript ion ❑ Drainage Letter or Report w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Fire Flow Analysis w/ ❑ Redlines Special Instructions: PROJECT: University Park Project - per staff comments # 3, attached please find two copies of revised site, and two conies of revised landscapine Also attached Please find the originals for approval. Please let me know if you have any questions Thank you TRANSMITAL LETTER TRANSMIT.DOC 03/23/99 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (979) 764-3570 / Fax (979) 764-3496 MEMORANDUM January 23, 2001 TO: Urban Design Group, Via fax 696-9752 FROM: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Review Manager opt SUBJECT: UnlversltyPark - Site Plan Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. The next submittal will be the third and final review by staff for this round of reviews. If all items have not been addressed on the next submittal, another $100 processing fee will need to be submitted for the subsequent set of three (3) reviews. Please address the comments and submit the following information for further staff review: Five (5) revised site plans; and, Two (2) landscaping plans If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 764-3570. Attachments: Staff review comments 24 ~ 401 cc: SSRS Steve Ross and Fred Bayliss, Via fax 846-85RU Case file # 0 Home of Texas A&M University STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 2 Project: UNIVERSITY PARK (SP)-SITE PLAN (0-219) PLANNING 1. Please change the zoning of the lot to A-P to reflect the recently approved rezoning. 2. There are two 15-ft. easements that run parallel to each other but are not labeled. Please identify these easements that run NE to SW across the property. 3. To adequately screen a dumpster, an 8-ft. fence is needed. Please make this adjustment. 4. Please note: Signage will be permitted separately. 5. Unless the proposed gravel drive will be screened or gated, the drive to the gas facility needs to be paved. 6. Building A is not showing any handicap-accessible entry into the building. 7. The project's streetscaping tree requirement is being met with 8 canopy trees and 6 non-canopy trees. The "Streetscape Provided" section may remain on the plan if it is desired to keep the point calculations separate (this is not required by the City), or all landscaping point calculations may be shown together; but it should be made clear that the streetscaping tree requirement is being met through 8 canopy and 6 non-canopy trees. 8. Is the transformer on the parking island in the public access easement proposed or existing? If it is proposed, it needs to be screened with landscaping from the ROW. Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock Date: January 22, 2001 ENGINEERING 1. Please send three additional copies of the `Site Plan' sheet only to us, so we can forward the driveway permit to TXDOT. 2. Please show water service demand (gpm) per each of the three buildings. Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1 3. Please review and revise your cost estimate. Items 2-5 are not annotated on the plans. Item 11 has an incorrect quantity. And several items from the utility plan are not listed on the cost estimate. Reviewed by: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Date: January 22, 2001 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City will constitute a completely new review. Staff Review Comments Page 2 of 1 W ACTIVITY REPORT* TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 98468569 UNIVERSITY TOWER 01/24 11:23 01'25 01/24/01 11:25 'x979 764 3496 DF.VF.LOPMFNT SVCS Imnni ask:k:k:k%~sk~Ns~kXs~k:k~k~~~Ns~k~~sk:k:k~:~xc ~k~k k ACTIVITY REPORT xexcsk TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 01/23 16:24 03'03 3 OK 01/23/01 16:27 '&979 764 3496 DF.VFT.OPMF.NT RWR IAinni CU-?,Iq DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TRANSMITTAL LETTER I ~ D~~)o ~ ~~-_C;0 fty-Y Name/Firm: Urban Design Group Date: January 25, 2001 Address: 2700 Earl Rudder Frwy S. Ste 4300 Phone: (979) 696-9653 College Station, Texas 77845 Fax: (979) 696-9752 We are transmitting the Following for Development Services to review and comment: (Check all that apply.): ❑ Master Development Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Preliminary Plat w/❑ Redlines ❑ Final Plat w/❑ Redlines ❑ FEMA CLOMA/CLOMP,/LOMA/LOMR w/❑ Redlines X Site Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Grading Plan w/❑ Redlines X Landscape Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Irrigation Plan w/❑ Redlines ❑ Building Construction Documents w/❑ Redlines UNFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS All infrastructure documents must be submitted as a complete set. The following are included in the complete set: ❑ Waterline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Sewerline Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Drainage Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Street Construction Documents w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Easement application with metes & bounds description ❑ Drainage Letter or Report w/ ❑ Redlines ❑ Fire Flow Analysis w/ ❑ Redlines Special Instructions: PROJECT: University Park Proiect ❑ Development Permit App. ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Rezoning Application ❑ Variance Request X Other-Please Specify Letter Attached Revised Estimate ❑ TxDOT Driveway Permit ❑ TxDOT Utility Permit ❑ Other - Please Specify Third Submittal University Park PROBABLE COST ESTIMATE (Public Improvements Only) PUB • 1 LIC IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY. UNIT COST T71-AL COST Standard Fire Hydrant EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 2 Reinforced Concrete Handicap Ramps EA 4 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 3 6" Reinforced Concrete Paving SY 193 $45.00 $8,685.00 4 Reinforced Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 400 $10.00 $4,000.00 5 12"X6" MJ Tapping Sleeve & Valve EA 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 6 6"W' MJ Tapping Sleeve & Valve EA 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 7 18" RCP Storm Sewer LF 13 $45.00 $585.00 8 6" 450 MJ Bend w/ thrust blocking EA 1 $400.00 $400.00 9 6" 11.250 MJ Bend w/thrust blocking EA 1 $400.00 $400.00 10 2" 451 MJ WYE w/thrust blocking EA 1 $300.00 $300.00 11 6" MJ Gate Valve W/ Box EA 1 $600.00 $600.00 12 6" PVC (C900,CL200 Waterline Structural Fill LF 150 $65.00 $9,750.00 13 2" PVC C900, CL200 Waterline Sturctural Fill LF 147 $25.00 $3,675.00 14 Reinforced Concrete Junction Box EA 1 $3,500.0 0 $3,500.00 15 1 1/2" MJ Water Meter EA 3 $500.00 $1,500.00 16 6" x 2" MJ Reducer EA 2 $375.00 $750.00 17 4" Reinforced Concrete Sidewalk SF 1287 $3.00 $3,861.00 18 6'x 6' Transformer PAD EA 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 19 3-4" PVC Conduits LF 340 $6.00 $2,040.00 20 12" MJ Gate Valve EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 21 22 23 2" MJ Gate Valve 2" MJ Plug Back Flow Prevention Device EA EA EA 3 2 1 $300.00 $50.00 $500.00 $900.00 $100.00 $500.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $58,546.00 Contingency (15%) $8,781.90 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $67,327.90 NOTES CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION COST Urban Design Group's (UDG) opinions of probable construction cost provided for herein are made on the basis of our experience and qualifications and represent our best judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineering firm generally familiar with the construction industry and applicable development regulations. However, since UDG has not obtained approval from the appropriate jurisdiction and UDG has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the Contractor's methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, UDG cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual construction cost will not vary from opinions of probable construction cost prepared by UDG. CostEst3 ~ o Urban Design Group January 25, 2001 Natalie Ruiz or Bridgette George Development Coordinator Department of Development Services City of College Station PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842-9960 Re: University Park Section II, Block T, Lot 15 Dear Bridgette, Attached please find our third submittal on the University Park project with revisions as per staff comments # 2 received January 23`d via fax. We have addressed the comments as requested. Please note the callout on the site plan for the 15' easements covering the gas lines are described verbatim from the surveyor's research of the property, and include the recording information on the easement itself. We are concerned for the delay in forwarding the driveway permit to TxDOT for their review. With our first submittal to staff in November, we included an original signed TxDOT application and additional plans for TxDOT's review. The first set of comments from staff requested two additional original signed TxDOT applications. We obtained those documents and submitted again. The comments received yesterday indicate the plans still haven't been forwarded to TxDOT for their review. Our conversation with TxDOT confirmed this. We have submitted additional separate site plan sheets (requested by staff) and additional full sets of plans (which TxDOT will need) on previous submittals. What can be done to expedite this review? As per page one of the fax, we are submitting five revised site plans, and two landscape plans. As per engineering comment number 1, we are submitting three additional site plan only sheets. However, as we discussed with TxDOT representatives, they will need full sets of plans for their review of the drives and the grading/drainage. Therefore, please find three additional sets for TxDOT review. Sincerely, URBAN DESIGN GROUP Deborah L. Keating, P.E., Partner cc: Steve Ross, Fred Bayliss CAruiA.doc Post Office Box 10153 • College Station, Texas 77842 • 409 • 69 6 • 9653 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO 130x 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (979) 764-3370 1 Fax (979) 764-3496 MEMORANDUM l February 1, 2001 TO: Urban Design Group, Via fax 696-9752 Bridgette George. Asst. Development Revicw .Manager FROM: SUBJECT: UrriyersityFart - .WeAV1 the list attached Staff reviewed the above-mcntionedhat needatorbc~addressed fPl'.ase 1 adcllss is review comments detailing items comments and submit the following information for further staff review: iwo (2) revised site and landscaping plans (additional sets will be required once the plans have been approved); $100 processing fee for the nest round of three (3) staff reviews; essing with the revised site plan, please If there are comments that YOU are have any qix scions or need additional i11 rnl t onaplease I:.tter explaining the details. y call me at 764-3570. Attachments: Staff review comments eggs Ste - ss Fred Bayliss, Via fax 846-8596 cc: Case f' e # Home of Texas A&M U_niversily 0 STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 3 Project: UNIVERSITY PARK (SP)-SITE PLAN (0-219) 1. The proposed gravel drive needs to be screened from view, gated, or paved. 2. The *Land scape/Streetscape Requirements" states that 11 trees are required for streetscape. To meet this requirement, 11 canopy trees, 22 non-canopy trees, or a combination thereof, are required to be planted in the first 50 feet behind the property line along the street. Please make this adjustment. PLANNING Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock ENGINEERING 1. No comments. Reviewed by: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. r~ Date: January 30, 2001 Date: February 1, 2001 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City will constitute a completely new review. Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (979) 764-3570 / Fax (979) 764-3496 MEMORANDUM February 1, 2001 TO: Urban Design Group, Via fax 696-9752 1 FROM: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Review Manager SUBJECT: Un 'versityPark - Site Plan Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the attached comments and submit the following information for further staff review: Two (2) revised site and landscaping plans (additional sets will be required once the plans have been approved); $100 processing fee for the next round of three (3) staff reviews; If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please attach a letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 764-3570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc: SSRS Steve Ross and Fred Bayliss, Via fax 846-85C Case file #00-219 Home of Texas A&M University STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 3 Project: UNIVERSITY PARK (SP)-SITE PLAN (0-219) PLANNING 1. The proposed gravel drive needs to be screened from view, gated, or paved. 2. The "Landscape/Streetscape Requirements" states that 11 trees are required for streetscape. To meet this requirement, 11 canopy trees, 22 non-canopy trees, or a combination thereof, are required to be planted in the first 50 feet behind the property line along the street. Please make this adjustment. Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock ENGINEERING 1. No comments. Reviewed by: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr Date: January 30, 2001 Date: February 1, 2001 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Station, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed out to the City will constitute a completely new review. Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1 ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX N0. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 02/02 12:07 02'02 ngin2ini 12.09 ^979 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS 10001 x ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX N0. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 9PS468569 UNIVERSITY TOWER 02/02 14:24 01'47 4 OK 02/02/01 14:25 '$979 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS 10001 PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE (PRC) MEETING October 19, 2000 TO: Debbie Keating, Urban Design Group, Via fax 696-9752 Fred Bayliss, Via fax 846-8569 FROM: PRC Review Subcommittee: Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner Ray Harris, P&Z Commissioner Carolyn Williams, P&Z Commissioner Staff Attending: Natalie Ruiz, Development Review Manager Ted Mayo, Assistant City Engineer Tammy Macik, Secretary SUBJECT: Driveway Variance for property located at University Park, Section II -The proposal of a driveway variance for a planned commercial development on the north side of University Drive west of the intersection of University Drive and Spring Loop. The PRC held a meeting on Wednesday, October 11, 2000 to review the above-mentioned project. Assistant City Engineer Ted Mayo opened the discussion and said that the staff denied the request for the driveway variance because University Drive is a major arterial. Mr. Mayo stated that another reason for denial is the nature of University Drive and the fact traffic is increasing. Mr. Mayo said that TXdot is planning to widen University Drive to include raised medians. The west driveway would be located in a proposed median cut by TXdot which means the additional access would only be right turn in and right turn out which is adjacent to Holiday Inn Express. Applicant Debbie Keating stated that they needed the driveway for the safety of their customers. Commissioner Harris motioned to grant a total of 2 access points for both the subject property and the adjacent property to the west contingent upon one of the 3 driveways shown on the plan being closed. Commissioner Williams seconded and the motion passed 3-0. Cedar Creek Condominlu , Bert Wheeler:_ lY';v .r VR ,1 a t Splrlt Development t - _ ~ :,--•ti-"'=•,-~" !•wa~1.~ ` ` =1000 te . a... i t''•-~ -'~.-,tom _ l tld d y n ar $ank\ Tx -Rote) • Management - _ - _ - - µ ta• . - - - - - _ 1 - . _ . _ . ` ! Rossoo holdings ? - - . - - z ' - 21 ' r; •*1 -8aker_Explorm o F - r. 1r,t-'41 ,.<S'~ ,yt~' f _ i i ar.. . Y , i UM Urban Design Group February 8, 2001 Natalie Ruiz or Bridgette George Development Coordinator Department of Development Services City of College Station PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842-9960 Re: University Park Section II, Block T, Lot 15 Dear Bridgette, Attached please find final plans revised per staff comments # 3, received February 2nd via fax. We have addressed the two comments as requested. The owner of the project would like to start the site work as soon as possible. Would it be possible for us to obtain a development permit for the project excluding work in the right of way, since TxDOT has not issued a permit? Sincerely, URBAN DESIGN GROUP Deborah L. Keating, P.E., Partner cc: Steve Ross, Fred Bayliss C:Aruiz5.doc Post Office Box 10153 • College Station, Texas 77842 • 409 • 69 6 • 9653 Texas Department of Transportation 1300 N. TEXAS AVE. • BRYAN, TEXAS 77803-2760 • (409) 778-2165 February 23, 2001 Project: STP 2000(253)UM Highway: FM 60 CSJ: 0506-01-069 County: Brazos Mr. Thomas V. Vennochi, Jr. City of College Station P. O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Dear Mr. Vennochi: We have reviewed the driveway permit submitted for this property improvement. We agree with the driveway locations and geometrics as submitted. We have discussed with the design engineer, Ms. Deborah Keating of Urban Design Group, that the sequencing of our ongoing roadway improvement project with the private property improvement is critical. a. Our roadway contractor has initiated work along the front of this property and will be removing the existing (east) driveway to place the new driveway as roadway widening progresses. As they develop this driveway ahead of our contractor, I recommend placing only a temporary pavement structure on the State right of way rather than the expensive concrete driveway proposed. Our contractor will be paid to place the final concrete driveway after the roadway is widened. It is my recommendation that the new location (west) driveway not be built ahead of our roadway widening as it would have to be removed and reconstructed in our roadway widening efforts. If the property owner can wait, our contractor will construct the west driveway. Therefore, they will not pay the cost to construct it and we will not pay our contractor to remove it. I also discussed with Ms. Keating the need to submit a separate utility permit (TxDOT Form 1023) for the proposed drainage tie to the State's storm sewer system. Again I stressed the importance of the construction sequencing. She may elect to tie to an existing curb inlet until our contractor breaks the line to tie it into the proposed storm sewer system. All proposed details and hydraulic calculations will be submitted through your offices. If we can provide further assistance in this matter, please contact Karl Nelson at 778-6233. Sincerely, Catherine Hejl, PE Area Engineer KRN/bja cc: Project File Project Inspector District Construction An Equal Opportunity Employer FACSIMILE COVER SHEET CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (409)764-3570 / Fax (409)764-3496 Date: February 28; 2001 # of pages including cover: 7 If you did not receive a complete fax, please call our office immediately for a new transmittal. TO: Mike'Holser/may Lipsey FAX: 846-4725 COMPANY: 1021 Joint Venture RE: University Park FROM: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. PHONE: (409)764-3570 COMPANY: City of College Station REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review ❑ Replay ASAP ® FYI Page #1 is the cover letter for TxDOT's permit application response with their concerns in regards to the new driveways. Page #2. 3 & 4 are the permit documents themselves that we received from TxDOT. Page #5 is the minutes from the City's Project Review Committee Page #6 is a Preliminary Design Schematic from TxDOT. Please call if I could be of any further assistance. Texas Department of Transportation 1300 N. TEXAS AVE. • BRYAN, TEXAS 77803-2760 • (409) 778-2165 February 23, 2001 Project: STP 2000(253)UM Highway: FM 60 CSJ: 0506-01-069 County: Brazos Mr. Thomas V. Vennochi, Jr. City of College Station P. O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Dear Mr. Vennochi: We have reviewed the driveway permit submitted for this property improvement. We agree with the driveway locations and geometrics as submitted. We have discussed with the design engineer, Ms. Deborah Keating of Urban Design Group, that the sequencing of our ongoing roadway improvement project with the private property improvement is critical. Our roadway contractor has initiated work along the front of this property and will be removing the existing (east) driveway to place the new driveway as roadway widening progresses. As they develop this driveway ahead of our contractor, I recommend placing only a temporary pavement structure on the State right of way rather than the expensive concrete driveway proposed. Our contractor will be paid to place the final concrete driveway after the roadway is widened. It is my recommendation that the new location (west) driveway not be built ahead of our roadway widening as it would have to be removed and reconstructed in our roadway widening efforts. If the property owner can wait, our contractor will construct the west driveway. Therefore, they will not pay the cost to construct it and we will not pay our contractor to remove it. I also discussed with Ms. Keating the need to submit a separate utility permit (TxDOT Form 1023) for the proposed drainage tie to the State's storm sewer system. Again I stressed the importance of the construction sequencing. She may elect to tie to an existing curb inlet until our contractor breaks the line to tie it into the proposed storm sewer system. All proposed details and hydraulic calculations will be submitted through your offices. If we can provide further assistance in this matter, please contact Karl Nelson at 778-6233. Sincerely, Catherine Hejl, PE Area Engineer KRN/bja cc: Project File Project Inspector District Construction An Equal Opportunity Employer r. r~ Permit to Construct Access Driveway Facilities Form 1058 (Rev. 12-96) Previous versions are obsolete. To: Hwy. Permit No. Control OSo (o Section O/ D The Texas Department of Transportation, hereinafter called the State, hereby authorizes -.s S / ` ► . /V C_ hereinafter called a Grantee, to (re) construct an access driveway o the highway right of way butting highw nin v S Co ty, located ~ dLtj v T - lt*a4o e_~ ISI~ Ur~ Subject to the following: 1. The Grantee is responsible for all costs associated with the construction of this access driveway. 2. Design of facilities shall be as follows and/or as shown on sketch: One drive:entrance into property (30' wide.) One drive entrance on adjacent property (28' wide) All construction and materials shall be subject to inspection and approved by the State. 3. Maintenance of facilities constructed hereunder shall be the responsibility of the Grantee, and the State reserves the right to require any changes, maintenance, or repairs as may be necessary to provide protection of life or property on or adjacent to the highway. Changes in design will be made only with approval of the State. 4. The Grantee shall hold harmless the State and its duly appointed agents and employees against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of this permit. 5. Except for regulatory and guide signs at county roads and city streets, the Grantee shall not erect any sign on or extending over any portion of the highway right of way, and vehicle service fixtures such as service pumps, vendor stands, or tanks shall be located at least 3.6 meters (12 feet) from the right-of-way line to ensure that any vehicle services from these fixtures will be off the highway. 6. This permit will become null and void if the above-referenced driveway facilities are not constructed within six (6) months from the issuance date of this permit. 7. The Grantee will contact the State' repr s ntative Al Al , telephone (q !:L at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to beginning the work authorized by this permit. ;~3 I Date of I rice V Texas Department of Transportation E1iwWatEn ' eer The undersigned hereby agrees to comply with the terms and conditions set forth in this permit for construction of an access C driveway on the highway right-of-way. S~~ f /,J Signed: (Property owner or owner's representative) on Highway Right of Way /T /0 / Date: l VL A ,_e, 3 Foan 1058 (Rev. 12-96) Back Access Driveway Regulations The Texas Transportation Commission, in recognition of its responsibility for the safety and utility of public highways under its jurisdiction, has directed the adoption of rules and regulations to accomplish a coordinated development between highways and abutting property. For this purpose, the booklet entitled "Regulations for Access Driveways to State Highways" was published and adopted, setting out departmental policies to regulate construction and maintenance of access driveway facilities. Sketch of Installation See attached construction plans (q) Date: February 21, 2001 FM 60 - W. of Spring Loop University Park 11 Block T, Lot 15 1101 University Dr. College Station, Tx. Driveway Permit GENERAL SPECIAL PROVISIONS (Driveway Permit) : 1) Traffic Control plan is required per TMUTCD prior to start of construction work in the FM 60 right-of-way. 2) Areas within ROW disturbed by construction shall be restored to equal or better conditions than existing prior to construction. 3) Contractor shall be responsible for locating all utilities within the right-of-way construction site. Contacts with local utility companies and utility locators are required. 4) Lane closure allowed between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. only. 5) Reinforcing for concrete driveways shall consist of No.4 bars, 18" o.c.b.w. 6) Contractor shall notify Mr. Karl Nelson at TxDOT (778-6233) at least 48 hours in advance of any work to coordinate site improvement activities with ongoing FM 60 construction. C S PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE (PRC) MEETING October 19, 2000 TO: Debbie Keating, Urban Design Group, Via fax 696-9752 Fred Bayliss, Via fax 846-8569 FROM: PRC Review Subcommittee: Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner Ray Harris, P&Z Commissioner Carolyn Williams, P&Z Commissioner Staff Attending: Natalie Ruiz, Development Review Manager Ted Mayo, Assistant City Engineer Tammy Macik, Secretary SUBJECT: Driveway Variance for property located at University Park, Section II -The proposal of a driveway variance for a planned commercial development on the north side of University Drive west of the intersection of University Drive and Spring Loop. The PRC held a meeting on Wednesday, October 11, 2000 to review the above-mentioned project. Assistant City Engineer Ted Mayo opened the discussion and said that the staff denied the request for the driveway variance because University Drive is a major arterial. Mr. Mayo stated that another reason for denial is the nature of University Drive and the fact traffic is increasing. Mr. Mayo said that TXdot is planning to widen University Drive to include raised medians. The west driveway would be located in a proposed median cut by TXdot which means the additional access would only be right turn in and right turn out which is adjacent to Holiday Inn Express. Applicant Debbie Keating stated that they needed the driveway for the safety of their customers. Commissioner Harris motioned to grant a total of 2 access points for both the subject property and the adjacent property to the west contingent upon one of the 3 driveways shown on the plan being closed. Commissioner Williams seconded and the motion passed 3-0. 1 it 1 Q - - it 1 ' ~ :a.•-•'~ - i. . y I 1 c _1^ 1 it f., ! o , 1 I I ;I ' 1' t i Ck. II a,;' ; Q1 r f 1 I ~I lip 171 '4 IL ~ ~ _ _ I X11 l`~ .I . I ;iI N Z . ,I a o W N lit Lu _ ;11 W azo-'h _ _z_W 'VG F wQ w awe o F' c9 W O o•+rno $m tl 2~1- an 4,P vVi mW= f.. cr SN..., ....M W~.r 2 Hang '1 1 ` . CL 4 ° o ` CL c3 a d March 12, 2001 Fred Bayliss 410 South Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77840 RE: Driveway Variance for University Park II Mr. Fred Bayliss: It has come to our attention that an agreement might not have been reached between yourself and the property owners to the west of your proposed University Park Plaza (University Park Section II Subdivision, Block T, Lot 15) in regards to closing their existing driveway off of University Drive. We would like to remind you of the motion passed by the City of College Station Project Review Committee (PRC) in reference to your request for a variance to our `Driveway Access Location and Design Policy'. Please find attached the minutes from the PRC meeting of October 11, 2001. It was motioned by Commissioner Harris "...to grant a total of 2 access points for both the subject property and the adjacent property to the west contingent upon one of the 3 driveways shown on the plan being closed." If you are unable to meet this condition you would be required to resubmit your site plan. Also attached, for clarification, is an illustration depicting the 3 driveways of concern. We have recently been contacted by individuals involved with the properties west of your subject tract. Please consider this as soon as possible. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at 979-764-3570 Sincerely, Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Graduate Engineer xc: Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator Mike Hoelscher, 1021 Joint Venture Alfred Lehtonen, Lehtonen Investments, Ltd. encl. o:\group\dev_serv\txdot\Bayliss. doc FACSIMILE COVER SHEET CITY OF COLLEGE STATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone (409)764-3570 / Fax (409)764-3496 Date: March 13, 2001 # of pages including cover: 4 If you did not receive a complete fax, please call our office immediately for a new transmittal. TO: Fred Bayliss- FAX: 846-8569 COMPANY: Fred Bayliss/Steve Ross (Rosco Holdings, Inc.) RE: University Park Section II, Lot 15. Block T FROM: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. PHONE: 9764-3570 COMPANY: City of College Station REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review ❑ Replay ASAP ® FYI We are sending ordinal copy by_post mail COLLEGE STATION March 12, 2001 P. 0. Box Fred Byliss 410 South Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77840 RE: Driveway Variance for University Park 11 Mr. Fred Bayliss: Post-it" Fax Note 7671 Date pag'.. To r N From M Co./Dept. Co.e1 ril D' Cd 5 Phone # Phone 6 u - -35 0 7 Fax # G~ _ g Z Fax # '7 - _7Y76 Post-it" Fax Note 7671 Date 7 P*a0ges1- To From -7'0 Co./Dept. CIT-V o Colle , Phone # Phone # 7~ 8 Fax # ' 2_5 Fax # 6 6 3 '-1 It has come to our attention that an agreegient might not have been reached between yourself and the property owners to the west of your proposed University Park Plaza (University Park Section II Subdivision, Block T, Lot 15) in regards to closing their existing driveway off of University Drive. We would like to remind you of the motion passed by the City of College Station Project Review Committee (PRC) in reference to your request for a variance to our `Driveway Access Location and Design Policy'. Please find attached the minutes from the PRC meeting of October 11, 2001. It was motioned by Commissioner Harris "...to grant a total of 2 access points for both the subject property and the adjacent property to the west contingent upon one of the 3 driveways shown on the plan being closed." If you are unable to meet this condition you would be required to resubmit your site plan. Also attached, for clarification, is an illustration depicting the 3 driveways of concern. We have recently been contacted by individuals involved with the properties west of your subject tract. Please consider this as soon as possible. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at 979-764-3570 1 Sincere , o~ Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Graduate Engineer xc: Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator Mike Hoelscher, 1021 Joint Venture Alfred Lehtonen, Lehtonen Investments, Ltd. encl. o:\group\dev_serv\txdot\Bayliss.doc Home of Texas A&M University ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX N0. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 9p8468569 UNIVERSITY TOWER 03/13 09:03 01'43 niiieini no•nc; fx+474 7RA 3d9B DEVELOPMENT SVCS 1A 001 x~ ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 9P8464725 HOELSCHER LIPSEY 03/13 09:10 00'34 nsii~ini n9•ii rF979 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS 10001 * ACTIVITY REPORT x~~xx TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 03/13 09:14 00'28 1 OK ne i1 -2 ini nn • i n fA%070 79A 4d0R iIFVFi.nPMF.NT SVCS 14001 Q'4 1? " f 1 TO: File FROM: Tom Vennoc RE: Universityy Park Pha /1021 Joint Venture Lehtonen Investments, Ltd. 700 Dominik Drive, College station, Texas 77840 DA' eAUUen (409) 693-0261 General Managing Partner Fax 693-3828 General Info: Lehtonen Investments, Ltd. 700 Dominik Drive, College Station, Texas 77840 Alfred Lehtonen General Managing partner (409) 693-0261 Fax 693-3828 West of University Park Phase 2 (Block T, Lot 15)- Mike Hoelscher-Attorney 1021 University Drive 846-4726, FAX 846-4725 Block U, Lot 10 -Plat file 84-202 co owner of lot & building w/ Cully Lipsey-Attorney, and Celia ...University Title Relevant files - rt 00-219 SP 01-023 FP 00-201 REZ 00-184 VAR 71 .a r ti ! t, d : U It l i-~ A1.1 f Lehtonen Investments, Ltd. 700 Dominik Drive, College Station, Texas 77840 Alfred Lehtonen General Managing Partner Byb-`t171o ~e- . L07- E: J J e-!st v~ 4'-.r Loa, ( o c e e- s4L-;~99;L (409) 693-0261 Fax 693-3828 F a IX 0 540 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION March 14, 2001 Deborah Keating, P. E. Urban Design Group 2700 Earl Rudder Frwy. S. Ste. 4300 College Station, Texas 77845 RE: TXDOT Utility Line Permit- University Park Section II, Lot 15, Blk. T- Storm Sewer Tie-in Dear Ms. Keating: Attached is correspondence from TXDOT regarding resubmittal of the permit application for the storm sewer tie-in to the TXDOT System on University Drive. Please prepare the required response and resubmit 3 originals, i.e., Form 1023 with attachments thru me for submittal to TXDOT. No work is to be performed within the TXDOT ROW of University Drive until this permit is approved by TXDOT. Sincerely, Teddy D. ayo;P.E. Asst. City Engineer CC: Natalie Ruiz Fred Bayliss Project file Encl. PLANNING DIVISION / POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9960 (409) 764-3570 Thom7,s Vennochi - Re: help From: Jim Callaway To: Celia Goode-Haddock Date: 3/26/01 9:49AM Subject: Re: help Celia: The Project Review Committee recently heard a variance request related to the driveways in question. The PRC approved a variance request for the development east of your site. Part of the approval included granting a shared driveway that would align with TxDOT's proposed median break. The PRC required that the existing drive be closed as a condition for granting the new drive. I was not at that PRC meeting, but, it is my understanding that the PRC was advised that the property owners that used the existing drive were agreeable to closing it. Based on your email, it appears that this is not the case. I suggest that the developer of the site to the east of you get with our staff to take this item back to the PRC. I also suggest that he include representatives of all of the properties that use the existing drive in his request to the PRC. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance. Jim C. Celia Goode-Haddock <celia@UTITLE.com> 03/23/01 03:35PM Jim: I know you are probably not the person to ask, but I know you will direct me. On the expansion of University Drive East, according to the highway department, University Title Company will have two curb cuts. One of those currently exists and the other is to be built. The second cut will be at a median and our original curb cut will only allow traffic to exit west. Steve Ross owns property to our east and is building 3 office buildings. According to the highway department, that property will be allowed a curb cut to the front building and they will also share the cross over curb cut with University Title Company. Here's where I need your help. According to Thomas Vennochi, Jr. at the city, these two properties can only have 2 curb cuts. Because of the high volume of both employee traffic and customer traffic into University Title Company, Coventry Glen Realty and David Skinner, not to mention the other tenants, we wish to have this decision changed. Just at University Title Company we average 50 closings per week and that usually translates into four (4) extra cars per closing. We believe that the decision to only allow two curb cuts is unreasonable and would create a traffic nightmare and unsafe conditions. Please let me know who to talk to and where we need to bring our crowd of angry protestors. Celia celia@utitle.com <mailto:celia~a utitle com> Celia Goode-Haddock University Title Co. P. O. Box DT College Station, Texas 77841-5079 979.260.9818 Page Thom2sVennochi - Re: help www.utitle.com <http://www.utitle.com> CC: 'bexco@tca.net'; Billy Haddock (E-mail); 'Cully Lipsey'; J. Fred Bayliss (E-mail); 'joobin@tamu.edu'; 'jtcpa@aol.com'; 'lehtonen@tca.net'; Lynn Mcllhaney; 'Mike Caldwell'; 'Mike Hoelscher'; Tom Brymer; 'wls@tca.net' 17 k ('D CD rp. 0 o E,l.4 i i•~ 1 C') O C'1 O v O Q C all v O v Oo N r a Ci _x t 6 i 1 Lehtonen Investments, Ltd. March 29, 2001 Thomas V. Vennochi, Jr. City of College Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, TX 77842 Re: University Park Section II, Lot 15, Block T, 1101 University Drive East Dear Mr. Vennochi: I am writing to you as the General Partner of Lehtonen Investments II, Ltd., which owns the building situated on Lot 2, Blk. U, University Park Section H, locally known as 1003 University Drive, East, College Station, Texas. This building, occupied by Coventry Glen Realty, is in the office park immediately west of the above referenced development now under construction. On October 19, 2000 the Project Review Committee of the City of College Station considered a driveway variance for the above referenced development. The ruling was to allow a second shared access driveway into Lot 10 Blk. U that would align itself with TxDOT's proposed median break on University Drive. However, this ruling was subject to the existing driveway entrance into our office park being closed. This ruling was made without notice to the affected property owners or without there approval. Cutting to the chase of the matter, it is readily apparent that the City of College Station has approved a final plat for the referenced development without the applicant demonstrating verifiable legal access to the buildings shown on the plat. Accordingly, I strongly suggest that the current site plan be revoked and the applicant be required to resubmit a revised site plan. This matter should then be reconsidered by the Project Review Committee at a hearing to include representatives of the affected properties. Only in this manner can an informed ruling be forthcoming. Sincerely, Alfred Lehtonen, General Partner Lehtonen Investments II, Ltd. 700 Dominik Drive / College Station, Texas 77840 / (409) 693-0261 / Fax 693-3828 rt rt H 0 w m C lJ 1"d 0 0 • H. F- rt F- 0 k-11 fD • OP 0 tD ld s Cn X n rt 0 W, ID F-' rt %.0 F-j hr• ON m 0 oN 0 fD Cn C H rt fD M P rt 0 CO 0 r• ~ W n tJ a < b N Q' v a g 0 W 0 OC T 0 -i 0 b O 4 NJ Oro 00 A O 2 1 y i E. 4 'p k ~ y e vestments ,rive East, Suite 103 ~n, Texas 77845 +Z Fax (979) 846-3166 ,;uss the University Drive construction currently address and we are very concerned about closing ,Lny meetings or given our consent to Mr. Fred eject. ,t affects our property significantly. 07/03/01 11:12 %Y979 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS Lo 001 ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 8524 CONNECTION TEL 9p8467868 CONNECTION ID START TIME 07/03 11:10 USAGE TIME 01'58 PAGES 3 RESULT OK The Ci of e a Station, Texas `I Col g Embracing the Past Exploring the Future. P.O. Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue • College Station, TX 77842 (979) 764-3500 www.ci.college-station.tx.us July 3, 2001 Bo Miles 4090 Raymond Stotzer Parkway College Station, Texas 77845 RE: Detention Pond Fencing for University Park II Mr. Bo Miles: My immediate concern upon reading your facsimile addressed to Bridgette George (dtd. 06/22/01), is of health and safety. Per the detention pond details on sheet C7, the depth of the pond and vertical retaining wall will range from approximately 7' to 9'. My guidance would be to use a chain link fence at least 4' tall. There is a note stating that details can be found in the achitectural drawings, but I couldn't find that reference. Attached is a copy of requirements out of the 2001 International Building Code for fencing around a swimming pool that I suggest you follow. The City always encourages the positive aesthetics of extensive landscaping. A safety fence should supplement the landscaping and deter adventurous children attracted to a `hidden playground'. There should be a gate with a width of no less than 10' for access to the pond for maintenance purposes. Having concrete exposed should not present any problems of the pond is properly safeguarded with a fence. Absolutely no trees or bushes should be planted in the bottom of the pond. This would detract from the volume capacity the pond was designed to handle. Please consider this as soon as possible. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at 979-764-3570 Sincer ly, Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Graduate Engineer xc: Bridgette George, Assistant Development Coordinator Ted Mayo, Assistant City Engineer O:\group\dev_serv\TomV\DetFence.doc Home of Texas A&M University SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 3108.4 Loads. Towers shall be designed to resist wind loads in accordance with EIA/TIA 222-E. Consideration shall be given to conditions involving wind load on ice-covered sec- tions in localities subject to sustained freezing temperatures. 3108.4.1 Dead load. Towers shall be designed for the dead load plus the ice load in regions where ice formation occurs. 3108.4.2 Wind load. Adequate foundations and anchor- age shall be provided to resist two times the calculated wind load. 31085 Grounding. Towers shall be permanently and effec- tively grounded. SECTION 3109 SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES 3109.1 General. Swimming pools shall comply with the requirements of this section and other applicable sections of this code. 3109.2 Definition. The following word and term shall, for the purposes of this section and as used elsewhere in this code, have the meaning shown herein. SWIMMING POOLS. Any structure intended for swim- ming, recreational bathing or wading that contains water over 24 inches (610 mm) deep. This includes in-ground, aboveground and on-ground pools; hot tubs; spas and fixed- in-place wading pools. 31093 Public swimming pools. Public swimming pools shall be completely enclosed by a fence at least 4 feet (1290 mm) in height or a screen enclosure. Openings in the fence shall not permit the passage of a 4-inch (102 mm) diameter sphere. The fence or screen enclosure shall be equipped with self-closing and self-latching gates. 3109A Residential swimming pools. Residential swimming pools shall comply with Sections 3109.4.1 through 3109.4.3. Exception: A swimming pool with a power safety cover or a spa with a safety cover complying with ASTM F 1346. 3109.4.1 Barrier height and clearances The top of the barrier shall be at least 48 inches (1219 mm) above grade measured on the side of the barrier which faces away from the swimming pool. The maximum vertical clearance between grade and the bottom of the barrier shall be 2 inches (51 mm) measured on the side of the barrier which faces away from the swimming pool. Where the top of the pool structure is above grade the barrier is authorized to 3108.4 - 3109.4.1.7 be at ground level or mounted on top of the pool structure, the maximum vertical clearance between the top of the pool structure and the bottom of the barrier shall be 4 inches (102 mm). 3109.4.1.1 Openings. Openings in the barrier shall not allow passage of a 4-inch (102 mm) diameter sphere. 3109.4.1.2 Solid barrier surfaces. Solid barriers which do not have openings shall not contain indenta- tions or protrusions except for normal construction tol- erances and tooled masonry joints. 3109.4.13 Closely spaced horizontal members. Where the barrier is composed of horizontal and verti- cal members and the distance between the tops of the horizontal members is less than 45 inches (1143 mm), the horizontal members shall be located on the swim- ming pool side of the fence. Spacing between vertical members shall not exceed 1.75 inches (44 mm) in width. Where there are decorative cutouts within verti- cal members, spacing within the cutouts shall not exceed 1.75 inches (44 mm) in width. 3109.4.1.4 Widely spaced horizontal members. Where the barrier is composed of horizontal and verti- cal members and the distance between the tops of the horizontal members is 45 inches (1143 mm) or more, spacing between vertical members shall not exceed 4 inches (102 mm). Where there are decorative cutouts within vertical members, spacing within the cutouts shall not exceed 1.75 inches (44 mm) in width. 3109.4.15 Chain link dimensions Maximum mesh size for chain link fences shall be a 2.25 inch square (57 nun square) unless the fence is provided with slats fastened at the top or the bottom which reduce the openings to no more than 1.75 inches (44 mm). 3109.4.1.6 Diagonal members. Where the barrier is composed of diagonal members, the maximum open- ing formed by the diagonal members shall be no more than 1.75 inches (44 mm). 3109.4.1.7 Gates. Access gates shall comply with the requirements of Sections 3109.4.1.1 through 3109.4.1.6 and shall be equipped to accommodate a locking device. Pedestrian access gates shall open outwards away from the pool and shall be self-closing and have a self-latching device. Gates other than pedestrian access gates shall have a self-latching device. Where the release mecha- nism of the self-latching device is located less than 54 inches (1372 mm) from the bottom of the gate, the release mechanism shall be located on the pool side of the gate at least 3 inches (76 mm) below the top of the gate, and the gate and barrier shall have no opening 2000 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODED 653 3109.4.1.8 - 3109.4.3 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION greater than 0.5 inch (12.7 mm) within 18 inches (457 mm) of the release mechanism. 3109.4.1.8 Dwelling unit wall as a barrier. Where a wall of a dwelling serves as part of the barrier, one of the following shall apply: Doors with direct access to the pool through that wall shall be equipped with an alarm which produces an audible warning when the door and its screen are opened. The alarm shall sound continuously for a minimum of 30 seconds immediately after the door is opened and be capable of being heard throughout the house during normal household activities. The alarm shall automatically reset under all con- ditions. The alarm shall be equipped with a manual means to temporarily deactivate the alarm for a single opening. Such deactivation shall last no more than 15 seconds. The deac- tivation switch shall be located at least 54 inches above the threshold of the door. The pool shall be equipped with a power safe- ty cover which complies with ASTM F 1346. Other means of protection, such as self-clos- ing doors with self-latching devices, which are approved by the administrative authority shall be accepted so long as the degree of pro- tection afforded is not less than the protection afforded by Section 3109.4.1.8, Item 1 or 2. 3109.4.1.9 Pool Structure as Barrier. Where an aboveground pool structure is used as a barrier or where the barrier is mounted on top of the pool struc- ture, and the means of access is a ladder or steps, then the ladder or steps either shall be capable of being secured locked or removed to prevent access, or the ladder or steps shall be surrounded by a barrier which meets the requirements of Sections 3109.4.1.1 through 3109.4.1.8. When the ladder or steps are secured, locked, or removed, any opening created shall not allow the passage of a 4 inch (102 mm) diameter sphere. 3109.4.2 Indoor swimming pools. Walls surrounding indoor swimming pools shall not be required to comply with Section 3109.4.1.8. 3109.43 Prohibited locations. Barriers shall be located so as to prohibit permanent structures, equipment or sim- ilar objects from being used to climb the barriers. 654 2000 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODED DRAFT June 27, 2001 Bo Miles 4090 Raymond Stotzer Parkway College Station, Texas 77845 RE: Detention Pond Fencing for University Park II Mr. Bo Miles: My immediate concern upon reading your facsimile addressed to Bridgette George (dtd. 06/22/01), is of health and safety. Per the detention pond details on sheet C7, the depth of the pond and vertical retaining wall will range from approximately 7' to 9'. My guidance would be to use a chain link fence at least 4' tall. There is a note stating that details can b found 'n th~ achitectural dr win~y7~s but cou dl1't f d tt reference. .S 4.~ s a.. c.oy 0 y~--~X „ The City always encourages the positive aesthetics of extensive landscaping. A safety fence should supplement the landscaping and deter adventurous children attracted to a `hidden playground'. There should be a gate with a width of no less than 10' for access to the pond for maintenance purposes. Having concrete exposed should not present any problems of the pond is properly safeguarded with a fence. Absolutely no trees or bushes should be planted in the bottom of the pond. This would detract from the volume capacity the pond was designed to handle. Please consider this as soon as possible. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at 979-764-3570 Sincerely, Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Graduate Engineer xc: Bridgette George, Assistant Development Coordinator Ted Mayo, Assistant City Engineer O:\group\dev_serv\Tom V\DetFence. doc 06!2212001 10:53 979-E46-786E W M KLUNKERT PAGE 01 , W.M KLUNKERT, INC. GENERAL CONTRACTORS 4090 Raymond Stotzer Parkway (979) 846-2717 College Station, Texas 77845 FAX (979) 846-7868 EAX TRANSMISSION DATE: Z-M QS FROM: ATTN: g2.\-Y'>e.t%= REF: ~H\~ ~r~ ~ ~ ~.a fax r\ 6 61C 4r 6 NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: HARD COPY TO FOLLOW: Y ( ) N ( ) MESSAGE: ~'.l~G SGuS U I - m t t KG m %Z lS G V\yp-__ ~ f tee! -.3P,t.-e> Semt.\aT~t►~ T L.~ws ~~ea C, 'p o ~5 ~t a ~t~o m UX S T'h'Q7 NA A> \VkWr + V-tT\l- 7-1Y-c Fi5xAC- TE S Ca~,aS t!i A- ~,x~T S 7 'NIX SYac.~ra t~ S ,.tu-e ~S~tw.•r,.~c r t_~ D~ s5 t~~ \ i v 1 ty '(tea irk? ZINC- L.me+•et;:.aTE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION The enclosed information IS Intended for the recipient named above, and unless otherwise expressly indicated, IS confidential, and privileged information. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of the enclosed material other than as intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this material in error, please notify sender immediately by telephone, at sender's expense, and destroy the enclosed material. Your cooperation Is appreciated. COLLEGE STATION P. O. Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842 Tel: 409 764 3500 June 27, 2001 Bo Miles 4090 Raymond Stotzer Parkway College Station, Texas 77845 RE: Detention Pond Fencing for University Park II Mr. Bo Miles: In response to Tom Vennochi's comments regarding the fencing for your detention pond, Planning would like to remind you that if fencing is used, and if it is visible from University Drive, it will need to be screened from the right-of-way with vegetation. Universitiy Park II already has an approved landscaping plan. Should landscaping above and beyond what was approved be added to the site for fence screening, no new plans will need to be submitted. If the planned landscaping is reconfigured on the site to screen the detention pond and count towards meeting the landscaping requirement, a new landscape plan will need to be submitted. Please call me at 764-3570 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Molly Hitchcock Staff Planner, Development Services O:\group\dev_serv\Molly\scrfence.dHOme of Texas A&M University COLLEGE STATION P. O. Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842 Tel: 409 764 3500 March 12, 2001 Fred Byliss 410 South Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77840 RE: Driveway Variance for University Park 11 Mr. Fred Bayliss: -~~o It has come to our attention that an agree4lent might not have been reached between yourself and the property owners to the west of your proposed University Park Plaza (University Park Section II Subdivision, Block T, Lot 15) in regards to closing their existing driveway off of University Drive. We would like to remind you of the motion passed by the City of College Station Project Review Committee (PRC) in reference to your request for a variance to our `Driveway Access Location and Design Policy'. Please find attached the minutes from the PRC meeting of October 11, 2001. It was motioned by Commissioner Harris "...to grant a total of 2 access points for both the subject property and the adjacent property to the west contingent upon one of the 3 driveways shown on the plan being closed." If you are unable to meet this condition you would be required to resubmit your site plan. Also attached, for clarification, is an illustration depicting the 3 driveways of concern. We have recently been contacted by individuals involved with the properties west of your subject tract. Please consider this as soon as possible. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at 979-764-3570 Sincere Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Graduate Engineer xc: Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator Mike Hoelscher, 1021 Joint Venture Alfred Lehtonen, Lehtonen Investments, Ltd. encl. o:\group\dev_serv\txdot\Bayliss. doc Home of Texas A&M University PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE (PRC) MEETING March 13, 2001 TO: Steve Ross and Fred Bayliss, SSRS, Inc., Via Fax 846-8596 Debbie Keating, Urban Design Group, Via Fax 696-9752 FROM: PRC Review Subcommittee: Rick Floyd, P&Z Commissioner Joe Horlen, P&Z. Commissioner Judy Warren, P&Z Commissioner Staff Attending: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Review Manager Sabine Kuenzel, Senior Planner Jessica Jimmerson, Staff Planner Molly Hitchcock, Staff Planner Tom Vennochi, Graduate Engineer, Development Services Donald Harmon, Graduate Engineer, Public Works Tammy Macik, Secretary SUBJECT: ' University Park Section II - Proposal of the architectural character and building signage for three office buildings located at 1101 University Drive East (00-219) The PRC held a meeting on Wednesday, February 7, 2001 to review the above mentioned project. Commissioner Floyd stated that the proposal seemed to be straightforward therefore they began with a motion. Commissioner Warren made the motion to approve the architectural character and building signage for the three office buildings. Commissioner Horlen seconded and it passed 3-0. TO: File FROM: Tom Vennochi RE: University Park Phase 2 - Driveway issues Relevant files - 00-219 SP 01-023 FP 00-201 REZ 00-184 VAR DATE: 2/23/01 Approved TxDOT Driveway Permit with cover letter. DATE: 3/2/01 General Info: West of University Park Phase 2 (Block T, Lot 15)- 1021 Joint Venture: Mike Hoelscher-Attorney 1021 University Drive (979) 846-4726, FAX 846-4725 Block U, Lot 10 - Plat file 84-202 co owner of lot & building w/ Cully Lipsey-Attorney, and Celia Goode-Haddock University Title Co. P.O. Box DT College Station, TX 77841-5079 (979) 260-9818 Lehtonen Investments, Ltd: Alfred Lehtonen 700 Dominik Drive College Station, TX 77840 (979) 693-0261, FAX 693-3828 LOT Investment Inc. Mike Laine (979) 846-2992 James Trotter Robbie Owens DATE: 3/12/01 Letter written to Fred Bayliss from Tom V. DATE: 3/14/01 Letter written to Diane Keaton from Ted M., regards TxDOT Utility (Storm Sewer) Permit. 0 Page 1 Bridgette George -TXU Gas Site P From: Edwin Hard To: Bridgette George; Natalie Ruiz Date: 911,9100 875 AM Subject: TXU Gas Site Last THurs. Debbie Keating and the developer of the undeveloped site on University Drive (with the TXU Gas facility on it) came in and talked to me about an additional curb cut on this site... a second one that we told them in the predevelopment meeting would not meet the driveway ordinance. I told then them that I would not approve the driveway b/c it would be a variance of about 100'. This is just a heads-up b/c I anticipate that they'll be submitting a letter (I told them to you Natalie) requesting a variance from the PRC. In light of the driveway concerns voiced at the last P&Z, it doesn't appear that their chances are good. If Debbie contacts any of you regarding this, be sure and let her know what P&Z did last week with the Harley plat. Edwin Hard, AICP Transportation Planner CC: Spencer Thompson; Ted Mayo