Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-00500162- 00074509Appendix D FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS SECTION D101 GENERAL D10 1 Scope. Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accor- dan a with this appendix and all other applicable requirements of t International Fire Code. SECTION D102 REQUIRED ACCESS Access and loading. Facilities, buildings or portions of ,s hereafter constructed shall be accessible to fire de- it apparatus by way of an approved fire apparatus access th an asphalt, concrete or other approved driving sur- )able of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus tg at least 75,000 pounds (34 050 kg). SECTION D103 MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS 4 Access road width with a hydrant. Where a fire hy- is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum width shall be 26 feet (7925 mm). See Figure D103.1. _ — 95' —= 28'R TYP.' 26' -> E_ 95' DIAMETER CUL -DE -SAC 30' - > <- k­30' I 20' 28'R TYP.' 20' 60' HAMMERHEAD SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm. D103.2 Grade. Fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed 10 percent in grade. Exception: Grades steeper than 10 percent as approved by the fire chief. D103.3 Turning radius. The minimum turning radii shall be determined by the code official. D103.4 Dead ends. Dead -end fire apparatus access roads in excess of "feet (45 720 mm) shall be provided with width and turnaround provisions in accordance with Table D103.4. TABLE D103.4 REQUIREMENTS FOR DEAD -END FIRE AODA0ATIiC ACCESS ROADS 0 20' 70' 28'R - 28' —28'R TYP.' I= TYR' 20' 20' —, F— 20' -- 20' 70' DIAMETER ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM CLEARANCE CUL -DE -SAC T�0 120' HAMMERHEAD ARO RE HYDRANT r. 20' - J : TYP.' 120' HAMMERHEAD 28' R TYP.' 70'= _ 20' ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE TO 120' HAMMERHEAD DEAD -END FIVE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD TURNAROUND 361 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE® For 5I: I foot = 304.8 mm. January, 27, 2005 Bridgette George Development Coordinator City of College Station 1101 Texas Ave. CS. TX, 77842 Dear Ms. George: My house is located on 8600 Topaz Court adjacent to newly build office building (Emerald Pkwy Dentistry) in Emerald Plaza in Emerald Forest subdivision. Our back yard was used to face an open forest and we loved to watch deer to roam and enjoyed the beauty of the country and easy approach to city facilities. Few years back the owner prepared the land for commercial use and promised us he will see that in future, the buildings built facing our back yard to be low rising and nicely constructed. Last year they started to build Emerald Pkwy Dentistry adjacent to our back yard. Since we did not have any fence between us and new building I approached the architect and asked about the future fence. He showed me the maps and assured me that there will be very nice green wall or barrier of different types and size of trees, shrubs and bushes between us and the office building. Now that they are at the end of construction phase and ready to occupy the building they claim they do not have to build any greenery fence or any fence and in fact fencing is not required by city of College Station. But most importantly they have built their dumpster in sight of our living area windows and back yard porch that can easily be accessed by all children playing in our backyard. In Emerald Forest subdivision our backyard and number of our neighbor's backyards has no fences and our children use each other back yard to play freely. I on behalf of myself and our neighbors are very concerned about the location of this dumpster and the health hazard it may cause in future. We are afraid that health and safety of our children be affected by the waste products of this medical facility. Emerald Pkwy Dentistry may have applied properly the city code for dumpster distance from neighbor property, but the waste products of this office is for sure different from usual office buildings. I respectfully request that your office address our concerns with Emerald Pkwy Dentistry and ask them to move the dumpster from this location and install proper fencing. Please imagine what a deal we got compared to few years back. Our property value down the drain and aesthetically we now face a medical waste dumpster rather than serenity of the forest we used to have. The Dentistry building is built nicely but her ugly face with the dumpster faces our residential area. Regards, / /ice -- -- dam Shahandeh, PHD h- shahandeh @tamu.edu Concerned neighborhood Citizens 03 L C>+ , . 6r;3 (,5�� - Ala- WE ilk i . Ali Sit Ala- WE �-- -'�'_ -;:r.- January, 27, 2005 Bridgette George Development Coordinator City of College Station 1101 Texas Ave. CS. TX, 77842 Dear Ms. George: My house is located on 8600 Topaz Court adjacent to newly build office building (Emerald Pkwy Dentistry) in Emerald Plaza in Emerald Forest subdivision. Our back yard was used to face an open forest and we loved to watch deer to roam and enjoyed the beauty of the country and easy approach to city facilities. Few years back the owner prepared the land for commercial use and promised us he will see that in future, the buildings built facing our back yard to be low rising and nicely constructed. Last year they started to build Emerald Pkwy Dentistry adjacent to our back yard. Since we did not have any fence between us and new building I approached the architect and asked about the future fence. He showed me the maps and assured me that there will be very nice green wall or barrier of different types and size of trees, shrubs and bushes between us and the office building. Now that they are at the end of construction phase and ready to occupy the building they claim they do not have to build any greenery fence or any fence and in fact fencing is not required by city of College Station. But most importantly they have built their dumpster in sight of our living area windows and back yard porch that can easily be accessed by all children playing in our backyard. In Emerald Forest subdivision our backyard and number of our neighbor's backyards has no fences and our children use each other back yard to play freely. I on behalf of myself and our neighbors are very concerned about the location of this dumpster and the health hazard it may cause in future. We are afraid that health and safety of our children be affected by the waste products of this medical facility. Emerald Pkwy Dentistry may have applied properly the city code for dumpster distance from neighbor property, but the waste products of this office is for sure different from usual office buildings. I respectfully request that your office address our concerns with Emerald Pkwy Dentistry and ask them to move the dumpster from this location and install proper fencing. Please imagine what a deal we got compared to few years back. Our property value down the drain and aesthetically we now face a medical waste dumpster rather than serenity of the forest we used to have. The Dentistry building is built nicely but her ugly face with the dumpster faces our residential area. Regards, , 6�mid PHD h-shahandeh@tamu.edu Concerned neighborhood Citizens: X �c �Lc,� & (34- 1� � a l dt? b�3 1. a' IT (*t/ CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning d Development Services February 17, 2005 Mr. Hamid Shahandeh 8600 Topaz Court College Station, Texas 77845 Re: Property located at 1511 Emerald Park Plaza Dear Mr. Shahandeh, Thank you for your letter regarding the development of the Williams' Dentist Office building on the above referenced property. I would like to respond as best I can to the concerns expressed in your letter. The site plan for the office building was approved in September 2002. At that time, site plans remained valid indefinitely. In June 2003, the City adopted a new Ordinance that put an expiration period of one year on all site plans. For existing, previously approved site plans such as this one, this meant that they would expire one year from the effective date of the Ordinance. In order to keep a site plan valid, the Ordinance states that a building permit, consistent with the site plan, must be issued for the property. A valid building permit was issued in April 2004, before the site plan expiration date of June 2004. The property met all requirements at the time of site plan and building permit application. Today's buffer requirements do differ somewhat from what was required when the plans were approved in late 2002. However, even under today's standards, the developing property would not be required to build a fence because of the unique layout and zoning of the lots. In general, the developing use is required to buffer to either the zoning or the land use on the adjacent property, whichever is more restrictive. A developing use is never required to provide a buffer adjacent to a non - conforming use. If you have further questions about this, please feel free to contact me. We have relayed your concerns regarding both the placement of the dumpster and the buffer fence to the owner of the dentists' office. At this time, the property owner has declined to voluntarily make any changes to the site. While we regret that the dumpster is located is such close proximity to your property, the development has met all applicable regulations. P.O. BOX 9960 • 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION • TEXAS • 77842 979.764.3570 www.cstx.gov I hope that I have answered your questions. If you have any additional questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call me at 979.764.3570. Sincerely, r 16)1-� Jos A. Dunn, AICP ector of Planning & Development Services b j r f Al' J jt