HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondenceMolly Hitc - Wate Co Page 1
From: Ken Fogle
To: Hitchcock, Molly
Date: 4/16/03 11:06AM
Subject: Waterwood Condominiums
Molly,
I reviewed the site plan for Waterwood Condominiums. I think the stacking distance that they have shown
for the visitor lane is adequate. It looks like about 45 -50 feet of stacking distance is provided. This includes
the 32 feet shown from the push button box to the curb radius, an additional ten feet to the edge of Krenek
Tap pavement, and about five feet in front of the push button box. This should be enough for 2 -3 cars.
This distance exceeds our driveway throat depth requirement. I also believe that there will be very few
times when this many cars are waiting to enter the site. My experience is that when there are a lot of
arrivals to a gated complex such as this, there is a mix of residents and visitors, and the visitors will
usually just follow the residents in rather than wait for the gate to be activated by their host.
What are your thoughts on this ... would you like to see something different?
Ken
�G ZZ<-�
ll - L/ -G'V—)
tee.,
Quo
L v m :N
v
i ucnLn
� � c
H g
U 0 c
Q,C6 rn
oZS o,
i � •� L
�
C c'd orn c
.� LU .
C >},� r
W U MC6a_
Li
a: ui
a
M� =
a tf
16 .5 a
^a ri
O
.o r'
L
CL
V
N
—J
2
00
�
3 n
O
K
> Q M
M
N O
Lu
N
�U)
I
K
ri Q
U
M U.
City of College atation
Development Services
P.O. Box 9960
College Station, TX 77840
Attn. Bridgett George
Re: Waterwood Condos Site Plan
Dear Bridgett,
October 4, 2002
Attached please find ten copies of theWaterwood site plan for your review.
Please note that the site plan that we are submitting does not include a
landscape plan, grading plan, nor irrigation plan. Therefore the site plan
will be deemed incomplete. We are submitting this site plan in this fashion
in an effort for staff to review the basic layout in concert with the final plat
for lot one which will proceed to the planning and zoning commission this
week. With the final plat we are requesting that lot 1 & lot 2 of the E. & M.
Jones Farm Place Subdivision be considered as a building plot. This will
allow our layout to disregard the setbacks associated with the interior lot
lines. We understand that you will not be able to provide us with a
complete review of the site plan, but we believe that there is enough
information on the plan to provide us comments for the following items:
• Building locations which respect property lines and
setbacks
• Phase plan for buildings and parking areas
• Fire hydrant locations for building fire protection services
• Relocation of 10' inch sanitary sewer line through the
property
• Lack of handicapped parking spaces, we understand from
building code that this project will not require any
handicapped spaces
• Number of parking spaces in relationship to the number
of bedrooms
• Location of curb cuts
• Location of security gates
• Location of fire lanes
• Location of solid waste containers
• Geometry of gated entrances
We appreciate your help in this matter. We see this review as beneficial to
the City and to our client given the final platting which is in our final
review.
Sincerely,
U� �
YJ wl t� CQ
eronic J.B. Morgan P.
anagi Partner
3:s5
- c/ -o.
j_JL�'
November 4, 2002
g �
2 c .9
T >_
v
n M
L
C a Cn
O
CA
L � 'C Ln
c= a5
C r _ .- r _
� c
�C+ w _ _
W UD'o2Sd
ui
c. ui
w d
� C
Ch t
Oa t v
^� ri
O �
L
City of College Station
Development Services
P.O. Box 9960
College Station, TX 77840
Attn: Bridgette George
Re: Waterwood Condos Site Plan
Dear Bridgette,
Attached please find ten copies of the Waterwood site plan for your review.
Please note that the site plan that we are submitting does not include a
landscape plan, grading plan, nor irrigation plan. Therefore the site plan
will be deemed incomplete. We are submitting this site plan in this fashion
in an effort for staff to review the basic layout in concert with the final plat
for Lot 1 which will proceed to the Planning and Zoning Commission this
next week. With the final plat we are requesting that Lot 1 & Lot 2 of the
E. & M. Jones Farm Place Subdivision be considered as a single building
plot. This will allow our layout to disregard the setbacks associated with
the interior lot lines. We understand that you will not be able to provide us
with a complete review of the site plan, but we believe that there is enough
information on the plan to provide us comments for the following items:
• Building locations which respect property lines and
setbacks
• Phase plan for buildings and parking areas
• Fire hydrant locations for building fire protection services
• Relocation of 10 inch sanitary sewer line through the
property
• Lack of handicap parking spaces, we understand from
building code that this project will not require any
handicapped spaces
• Number of parking spaces in relationship to the number
of bedrooms
• Location of curb cuts
• Location of security gates
• Location of fire lanes
• Location of solid waste containers
• Geometry of gated entrances
N O
_J
2
*;
�
� n
O
K
J
O0M
N O
W
O
(V at
~
U K
ri O
1A �
U
City of College Station
Development Services
P.O. Box 9960
College Station, TX 77840
Attn: Bridgette George
Re: Waterwood Condos Site Plan
Dear Bridgette,
Attached please find ten copies of the Waterwood site plan for your review.
Please note that the site plan that we are submitting does not include a
landscape plan, grading plan, nor irrigation plan. Therefore the site plan
will be deemed incomplete. We are submitting this site plan in this fashion
in an effort for staff to review the basic layout in concert with the final plat
for Lot 1 which will proceed to the Planning and Zoning Commission this
next week. With the final plat we are requesting that Lot 1 & Lot 2 of the
E. & M. Jones Farm Place Subdivision be considered as a single building
plot. This will allow our layout to disregard the setbacks associated with
the interior lot lines. We understand that you will not be able to provide us
with a complete review of the site plan, but we believe that there is enough
information on the plan to provide us comments for the following items:
• Building locations which respect property lines and
setbacks
• Phase plan for buildings and parking areas
• Fire hydrant locations for building fire protection services
• Relocation of 10 inch sanitary sewer line through the
property
• Lack of handicap parking spaces, we understand from
building code that this project will not require any
handicapped spaces
• Number of parking spaces in relationship to the number
of bedrooms
• Location of curb cuts
• Location of security gates
• Location of fire lanes
• Location of solid waste containers
• Geometry of gated entrances
We appreciate your help in this matter. We see this review as beneficial to
the City and to our client given the final platting which is in for review.
_
Q c
� o
L :�
v
� U U1
Ln
G >v
U = U c
m C6
d1 = CM
N � 41
L �j
c dS
C _m
rn C
'r w c
C
W U � C6
W
a. ui
c�
a
O a t a�
x rn c
C
m 'M a
a ri
a C n
O
d
CL
Wt
N
-j
0
Z
(U QO
3 n
0
X
> G� M
o O M
J
{A ENO
..J
M �p
�N
W
01
�C
U
ch a+ n
4 at
K
Ln V
LL
0
i cerely,
Ver"J.B. rg P.
Managing Partner
April 8, 2003
E- c
Q c o
LA -� as
O =a.Z
O �`
V p,Cd Crn
� c
C C
E
c c . aS
CWav��
•� c
=c
ch
WU9o?Sa
idgette George
,st. Development Manager
. JCS Development Services
1101 Texas Ave.
College Station, TX 77840
RE: Staff Review Comments No. 2 — Waterwood Condominiums
SP 02 -239
Dear Bridgette:
Mitchell & Morgan, LLP received and addressed Staff Review Comments No. 2 for
the Waterwood Condominium project. The following is a list of each question
proposed by the Development Services and the response by M &M.
Planning
Q 1. Please show the site plan at a larger scale so the details may be
better reviewed.
ui
a
C
mt ch
f �
m �
c
ME
�C
O
CL
J
J
Z
DG
IX
Z:?
J
J
W
H
ui
a
ri
n
C
N
N y
W
D
Z . -0
U
� Vin
B e
.� a B e
n 89°
A1. We have separated our original site plan into two sheets. The first,
the overall site plan (OSP), is from the submittal prior to the review
comments. The second, the site plan sheet (SP), is the site plan at a
larger scale, as requested.
Q2. The number of units described in Site Plan Note #9 does not
match those in the phase descriptions.
A2. Corrected.
Q3. Please identify the ownership and current zoning of all abutted
parcels on the site plan sheet.
A3. Added.
Q4. Please show distances to opposite and adjacent driveways.
EXIS 41,41
Q5. NOTE: Additional fire protection will be necessary for the
buildings along Krenek Tap unless they are at least 15 feet apart.
A5. M &M checked the distances with Carl Warren, COCS Building
Department, regarding the 10 -foot building separation. Mr. Warren
indicated that given the type of construction, a 10 -foot separation was
acceptable.
Q6. Because each phrase will be reviewed separately, please identify
the parking required and provided in each phase.
A6. Added.
Q7. The parking spaces by the dumpsters need at least three feet
towards the dumpsters for backing maneuvers.
AT Corrected.
Q8. Please identify the entry system in more detail (i.e., key pad
location, knox box.). The Knox Key System will have to located on the
first median by Krenek Tap so a fire truck can enter in the exit lane, be
fully out of the ROW to retrieve the key, and be out of the swing page
of the gates.
A8. Added.
Q9. Please show FDCs if sprinklers are required.
A9. Sprinklers are not required.
Q 10. It appears there may be a sidewalk/planting conflict in the
parking island by the dumpsters. Please show the sidewalk on the
landscaping plan if it exists.
A10. Corrected.
Q 11. The Bradford pears will not be counted as canopy trees.
A11. Corrected.
Q 12. The bald cypresses at 2.5 -inch caliper are worth 150 points each.
Al2. Corrected
Engineering
Q 1. The street hydrant shown "to be relocated" was installed by the
City. If it is in the way, please relocate the hydrant along Krenek Tap
at a location that is out of the way but still serves the original intended
purpose.
Al. Corrected.
Q2. An 8" tap is not permitted on an 8" line. Please show installation
of tee.
A2. Corrected.
Q3. Please state which TCEQ separation requirement you are
intending to meet where waterline #2 crosses the existing sewer line. It
does not appear the detail provided will work in this instance.
A3. Please see additional notes on WSU sheet.
Q4. Please shift water line 2 if possible. It appears to be only 5 ft off
Building #3.
A4. Corrected.
Q5. Water meters are required to be in easements.
A5. Corrected.
Q6. End waterline construction with blowoff.
A6. Blowoff added.
Q7. It appears the sewer is to be private. Please not private sewer
design is approved by Building Official per Plumbing Code.
AT Noted.
Q8. Concerning the Drainage Report, the requirements concern up to
and include the 25 -yr storm. Please present a chart or graph depicting
pre - development and post - development flows of these storms to
demonstrate compliance with the DP &DS.
A8. Will be submitted under a separate cover.
Q9. It appears the pond outlet requires energy dissipation.
A9. Added.
Q 10. Please show curve radii for driveway.
A 10. Added.
Electrical
Q 1. Developer installs conduit per city specs and design.
Al. Noted.
Q2. Developer provides 30' of #4 rigid conduit for riser poles.
Developer installs first 10'. City installs remainder.
A2. Noted.
Q3. Developer pours transformer pad(s) per city specs and design.
A3. Noted.
Q4. Developer installs pull boxes as per city specs and design. (pull
boxes proved by the city.)
A4. Noted.
Q5. Developer provides digital AutoCad 2000i version of plat and/or
site plan. Email to rbolin (a),ci.college - station.tx.us
A5. Noted.
Q6. Developer provides temporary blanket easement for construction
purposes.
A6. See attached easement sheet and title policy.
Q7. Developer provides easements for electric infrastructure as
installed for electric lines (including street lights).
AT Will be provided after construction of utilities is complete.
Q8. Developer installs street lighting per city specs and design.
A8. These are not required for this phase.
Miscellaneous
Q1. Please renumber buildings from A1, B1, etc. to 1 -29 for
addressing purposes. If you have questions regarding this, please
contact Melissa Rogers.
Al. Corrected.
Q2. Sanitation is OK with this project, but could not get an exact
measurement on the enclosures. They need to have a 12 foot by 12 foot
inside dimension.
A2. Provided.
If u have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
S' erely., ,
Veronica J.B. orga P.
Managing Partner
Enclosure: Waterwood Condominiums Plans
Title Insurance Policy
Easement Dedication Sheet
Cc: file
S:\Proj \0229- stewartcondos \docs\no2 staff review comments.doc
9:sq
g� c
Quo
Q =a z
C v.4'rn
U
C Cd CA
H ` C ++ p
C N als
C'�a
UJ Z .
C '> 5 �a
W U :D Cd a
ui
a
C�
O
f �
c
m �
ri c
c
d
W
IV
a
BE
�a
A
n
IL
J
J
Z
CC
J
WJ
W
V
N
U
R
W
Zr 0 6M
> U
v
Ln V W
idgette George
sistant Development Manager
)CS Development Services
O 1 Texas Ave.
College Station, TX 77840
RE: WATERWOOD CONDOMINIUMS (SP) — Site Plan
Dear Bridgette:
Af4 21t2QO3
Mitchell & Morgan, LLP received and addressed Staff Review Comments No. 3 for
the Waterwood Condominium project. The following is a list of each question posed
by the Development Services and the response by M &M.
Planning
Q1. Without full site and landscaping plans for the other phases, only phase one
will be able to be approved when the following comments have been met.
Al. Acknowledged
Q2. On the site plan, some 6 -ft. board fences are shown in inappropriate locations.
Please remove these from the plan, or identify them as fences that will be
removed.
A2. Old barbed wire fences are now labeled and shown to be removed.
Q3. Please show a fence around three sides of the dumpsters.
A3. Done
Engineering
Q 1. Locate meters outside fenced area.
Al. Done
Q2. The 4 -inch public lines need to end with a blow off or terminate at the water
meter.
A2. The 4 -inch public lines terminate at a water meter.
Q3. Change pavement detail on Sheet D2 from #3 Bars to #4 Bars at 18" OCEW.
A3. Done.
We have attached the original vellum of the construction plans for you to stamp
"Reviewed for Compliance ". We appreciate your approval of these as expeditiously
as possible. Once the vellums have been stamped, we will return six copies of the
complete set of construction plans, two copies of the revised site plan, and one copy of
the landscaping plan for your records.
As always, please thank everyone for their help in expediting this project through the
revipV process. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
Y ,
Veronica J.B.Iorg n, II.E.
Managing Partner
Enclosure: Vellums
Cc: file
S:\Proj \0229- stewartcondos\docs\no3 response to comments.doc