The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMiscellaneousSTAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 3 Project`. DROZD 2 D HOMES (SP)-SITE PLAN (99-200) PLANNING 1. All previous comments satisfied. Reviewed by: Shauna A. Laauwe Date: 10/18/00 ENGINEERING 1. All previous comments satisfied., New drainage plan and report approved. Reviewed by: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Dater 10/17/00 ELECTRICAL 1. Reviewed by: Jennifer Reeves Date: 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 Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1 ridgette George - Re: 2D Homes- Site Plan From: Thomas Vennochi To: Brandon Boatcallie Date: 9/29/00 11OOAM Subject: Re: 2D Homes- Site Plan Page 1 ~ ~~"` j~~ Hello Brandon, To drain your runoff across another property, a drainage easement is required. I believe your effort shown by angling your proposed outlet #2 in an easterly direction is an attempt to keep your runoff from the pumps, pedestrians and convenience store of the Texaco. This is good effort, but your concentrated runoff will spread into a wide swath of sheef flow across the concrete parking lot. This would make it impossible for us to identify a drainage easement. DevelopmentEngineering stronglyxecommends that draining across another property be discouraged and used as a last resort. You have mentioned thatyou performed a model for fhe option of bringing your runoff down the access road and out falling it into the south drainage ditch on Barron Road. That would be the preferred method of drainage for thaf north portion of the property.. Thanks Tom V. »> "Brandon Boatcallie" <brandonb@udgcs.com> 09/28/00 02:02PM »> Howdy Thomas! We were reviewing the Staff Review Comments. No. 2 for the Drozd 2D .Homes Site Plan (97-421) and have a question about comment 9. Are you requiring an easement across the Exxon property oi• requiring an easement to cover the outlet on the Drozd property? Thanks for your help! Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Development Services P.O. Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842 (979) 764=3756 FAX(979) 764=3496 CC: Bridgette George; Spencer Thompson; Ted Mayo INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: DROZD FILE FROM: Jessica Jirnmerson SUBJECT: SITE PLAN DATE: 08/06/01 CC: Files 97-421 & 01-150, applicant - UDG There are two sets of site plans that have been approved for this property, one set in October 1997 and the other in August 2000. In July of 2001, the applicant submitted another. set for approval that in effect reverted to the previously approved set in 1997. At this time, the City's ordinances do not include a time limit or expiration date for. site plans. However, the ordinance requirements for site plans`have recently changed. If the applicant's recent submittal is processed as a new site plan, all the new ordinance requirements must be met. Given the above information, staff understands that the applicant would like to proceed using the site plan approved in 1997. Based on the summary of changes submitted, which states only a couple of minor changes, staff may be able to' consider the recently submittedplans a revision of the 1997 site plan. !i! CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I `~ Mr. Victor Drozd 2D Homes 2702 Wildflower Dr., Suite A Bryan, Texas 77805 RE: Drainage Impact of Living Hope Baptist Church grade adjustment on Drozd Subdivision Dear Mr. Drozd: A few weeks ago it was brought to my attention by Deborah Keating that the grades for the northwest corner of the Living Hope Baptist Church were considerable higher than the approved Drozd Subdivision construction documents show for common points of interface with the church property. I contacted Bill Hutton ,engineer for the church, and asked him to meet with Deborah and. you to seek a favorable solution to thisproblem. Bill responded a few days later'and said he hadmet with you and Deborah and reachedan understanding as to grade adjustments. the church would make at the interface with. the Drozd Subdivision. I called and visited with Deborah and she co~rmed the grade adjustments. Bill has presented. Deborah said that you wanted written assurance from the City that you would not be responsible for the additional runoff from the approximately.'1500 square feet of surface area that will be rerouted from the church to the. Drozd Subdivision. Please. accept this letter as my assurance that no additional requirements will be imposed on the Drozd Subdivision as a result of the redirection ofdrainage-.from the 1500 square foot area. Yours truly, ~' ~~ TeddyD.~ ayo, P.E. Asst. City Engineer CC: Bridgette George Asst. Development Coordinator Dzd'~'Subdivisioi`file -~ -~' DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842-0960. (409) 764-3570 "Building a Berier City in Partnership with You" r . 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 September 27, 2000. TO: Victor Drozd, via fax 776-9688 FROM: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Drozd ZDHomes - Slte 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: Two (2) copies of the revised site and landscaping plans (additional copies will be required once the plans are approved) 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 764-3.570. Attachments: Staff review comments cc; Urban Design Group, Via fax 696-9752 Case file #97-241. Home of Texas A&M University y. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 2 Project: DROZD 2 D HOMES (SP)-SITE PLAN (97-421) PLANNING 1. Adjust the parking table to reflect the. changes in the site plan. 2. Landscaping shown on the plan needs to match what is shown in the landscaping calculations. 3. What is the area between parking space 90 & 91 going to be .used for? If it is going to be used for vehicle access to the building then end islands should be installed on either side. Reviewed by: J ESS I CA J f M M ERSON Date: 9/26/0.0 ENGINEERING 1. Label material type of proposed 4" sanitary sewer pipe at proposed manhole in TxDOT ROW on Site Plan. 2. Show and label existing 10" sanitary sewer in the 20' utility easement. on Site Plan. 3. Label material type of existing 24" waterline in the 20' utility easemenf on Waterline Profile. 4. Add a detail sheet showing: • Proposed manholes with their connections and elevations • Type 1 specific fire .hydrant • All necessary thrust blocking details • Tapping saddle detail • A detail showing ,the "Rotate 101.53 " • MJ gate valve and box. 5. Make. reference statements to the specific sections of the City of College Station Water and Sewer Specifications. for each utility connection. 6. Use the City of College Station Water and Sewer Specifications and Standard .Details as go-bys or use them directly by crossing out that which doesn't pertain. 7. Label the inlets and pipes on the Drainage Plan so they coincide with the Drainage Report. 8. Why are the .developed discharge values less. than the existing values? bo you have. detention and/or 'attentuation? What are all of the" other variables used in you Curve Number procedure? 9. Proposed Outlet #2 will require an easement. Reviewed by: THOMAS VENNOCHI Date: 09/22/00 J:\PZTEXT\PZ03673. DOC Page 1 of 2 . N ' ELECTRICAL 1. Please make sure easements cover all`electrical,changes. Reviewed by: JENNIFER REEVES Date: 9/27/00 NOTE: Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested bythe City of College Station, must be explained in your. next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes. on hese plans. that have not been pointed out to the City, will constitute a completely new review. J:\PZTEXT\PZ03673.DOC Page 2 of 2 ~f7-~f~, !~~ CITY OF CULL1/GE STA~'IOI'~I DEVELOPfVIENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Post Office Box 9960 1.101. Texas Avenue College Station,Texas 77842-0960 (409) 764-3570 Mr. Victor Drozd 2D Homes 2702 Wildflower Dr., Suite A Bryan, Texas 77805 RE:' Drainage.Impact of Living Hope Baptist. Church grade adjustment on Drozd Subdivision Dear Mr. Drozd: A few weeks ago it was brought to my attention by Deborah Keating that the grades for the northwest corner. of the Living Hope Baptist Church were considerable higher than the approved Drozd Subdivision construction documents show for common points of interface with the church property. I contacted Bill Hutton ,engineer for the church, and asked him to meet with Deborah and you to seek a favorable solution to this problem.. Bill'responded a few days later and said he'had met with you and Deborah and reached an understanding as to grade adjustments the church would make at the interface with the Drozd Subdivision. I called and visited with Deborah and she co~rmed the .grade adjustments Bill has presented. Deborah said that you wanted written assurance from the City that you would not be responsible.... for the additional runoff from the approximately 1500 square feet of surface area that will be rerouted from the church to he Drozd Subdivision. Please accept this letter as my assurance that no additional requirements will be imposed on the Drozd Subdivision as a result of the redirection of drainage from'the .1500 square foot area. Yours truly, ~~ Teddy D. ayo, P.E. Asst. City Engineer CC ~Brd~ette George' Asst. Development Coordinator Drozd Subdivision file "Building a Better City in Partnership. with You' STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 3 Project: DROZD 2 D HOMES (SP)-SITE .PLAN (99-200) PLANNING 1. All previous comments satisfied. Reviewed by: Shauna A. Laauwe Date: 10/18/00 ENGINEERLNG 1. All previous comments satisfied. New drainage plan and report approved. Reviewed by: Thomas V. Vennochi Jr. Date: 10/17/00 ELECTRICAL 1. N ~~-- Reviewed by: Jennifer Reeves Date: NOTE:. Any changes made to the plans, that have not been requested by the City of College Sta#ion, must be explained in your next transmittal letter and "bubbled" on your plans. Any additional changes on these plans that have not been pointed Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 1 A STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No, 2 Project: DROZD 2 D HOMES (SP)-SITE PLAN (97-421) PLANNING ~ld~l . Ad~ust the arkin table to reflect the Chan es in the site Ian... J p g g p ~. Landscaping shown on the plan needs to match what is shown in the landscaping calculations. !\~~3. ' What is the area between. parking space 90 & 91 going to be used for? If it is going to be used for vehicle .access. to the building then end islands should be installed on ~ r si Reviewed by: JESSICA JIMMERSON Date: 9/26/00 ENGINEERING ~1. Label material t e of ro osed 4" sanita sewer ipe at proposed Yp p p rY p manhole in TxDOT ROW on Site Plan. 2. Show. and label existing 10" sanitary sewer in the 20' utility easement on ..Site Plan. ~3. Label material ype of existing 24" waterline. in the 20' utility easement on Waterline Profile. 4. Add a etail sheet` showing: r ~ Proposed manholes with their connections. and elevations ~. Type 1 specific fire hydrant ~~ .All necessary thrust blocking details 3 `~ '" Tapping .saddle detail ~ ~ ~'" A detail showing the "Rotate 101.53 " MJ gate valve and box. \5. Make reference statements to the specific sections of the City of College Station Water and Sewer Specifications. for each. utility .connection. ~6. Use ..the Cit of Colle a Station Water and Sewer Specifications and Y g Standard Details as go-bys or use them directly by crossing out that which ..doesn't pertain. '7. Label the inlets and pipes on the Drainage Plan so they coincide with the Drainage Report. Why are the developed discharge values less than. the existing values? Do .you have detention and/or attentuation? What .are all of the other variables used in you Curve Number procedure? Proposed Outlet#2 will require an easement. Reviewed by: THOMAS VENNOCHI J:\PZTEXT\PZ03673. DOC Date: 09/22/00 Page 1 of 2 i ELECTRICAL 1. Please make sure easements cover all electrical changes. I ~' Reviewed: by: JENNIFER REEVES Date: 9/27/00 1 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. 'i J:\PZTEXT\PZ03673.DOC Page 2 of 2 1.~ ~~ °' TWZB~i 9i~c PZBZ r, , ~ - T/c 2s2 ~~ ~G ~i y~,: ~q~ ~~~~ ~,c, ~F~.~Z~~ `` ~~ Ol ~ NI r, ~, ~ ~ G~ `~ ~~~ TPZ , oZ / Z~~/ ~+ ~~.j ~ Y_ \ i~ ~ ?S~i~iB. \ ~ ~ m '~ ~ ~-' i ~ ~ d~ .~B PA ~ ~ \ ~Q ti ~ ~ 1~, ~' i •~ `~ `~! J ~ ;~ ~ - r ri ~ ~- oio ,~~ ~ n FG .;~,~ ~ 0 .~,G~~~~, ~ P 'r~F,~.Z .~8 ~G~/ ..._ ~'% ~-- ~e _-~_~ -- - _._ .' _ Z-~-g-. _--;~.. -z'~4~ -- __-_ ~~° /~ j ' ~/ , /~ III •~~ Tc~~,~ar~~T = Z~ ~ J ~G(~l Ul~ll~i'FQM f ~~' ~~ o~ = Z79 OD ,~-' - _- ,r. ~ _ ,~~,~~ ~- `~ khX ? ~ f' ~~ BBB Z ~l`f ~PZSZ. ~v ~, .,,,~, T/~=Z~/Ci7 -~ j L(V //i ,~ d ~I ,V+ ,~~ ~~ ' V ~f. 4 ~` 5' Z83. e .~ N ~~° 283, Z3 i '1 1` ~ '' «~ ~~,~; ~ 29.90 =. `~ O W ~~ ~~ ~i I ~~ ACL G~~I~iIT,2UCT/g^, /~1,~18/UZ~ED ~~/L k'~~.~..~ !~l/T~1 A~~ (N~ L/M~~TbN,~ ff,, ~/L ~ OIGLiD CRo~ ~=1.Di~/f~OG E ~4i~~~C.~T/oit/ /~~4N . ,:G.. ~C i - - -- --~---- I ~ ti I/~ - ~ ~ ~ fG~Np %Z "~%/Zf~N~oO ~_ ~~ _~ ,_ ~; _ ~ _ _-- _- _-?~- i ,' ,1 `1~ ~--i''l,4TCN ~Yj~/NG ToPoF `-/N ~' ~lA!-G SD L. G ~ I ~i A `` EX/GTIING PG's-Y~2 .~~ c . . ~ -~,.-~-r--..-. r,.1f P _~_ ~~~' __T ~~_ t¢ '~, :, ZOd ~' 1-- -~- -_ ~- -1. ~ ~ _ -..J ~a ti, ~~~~~ ^. -- 7 ' a~ ~~ s • ' ~~ ~ V - `1 j --__ 1 ~. ~ ~ y ~, __ ~_ ~8„ LSZT~LL60~' ~. _.~r..VI ~ /~ V/y!J ~~ e;~ c~rh~ t:nest f'wwy, 4ulle loll mtrnH, rEnns )JAc'2 N ~LZ~ c6' (~7" E -,~'~ 90'«cfital) {teg{+<$•~ce~ r a c i ' V •~ -1 ~ti ,~ a r•~ ~e {~ ~~,, V a ~ a' {n ~ X28. C1D '1tJ-rr~) # ,~V~ .,.', ~ :';' ~ ~ti v' ~ a ° + {/C~Z . !; 7 .~itr1? Trscf 1 ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~~ ~ • ~ , ~; ~4 ~ ~~.. ~N ~ ~~ .. l'nrf. i5 ' f, J? f ~ vJ ~rfl.r.net Y llr 8. {• ~' ~~ ~ft'~ 7i~~i°• ....._.. ~ i . -, , 2.5 7 ,4G~,eE' TR.4C T ., ~: ~ a . h'OB~"RT STEl~~NSpN LEQGU~' coLL~G~ s~~ r~o~v, ~~o~ ~~~~ r~ T"~X,IQS t . roe,,,:, l a! n • (7arr•,.1.1.. u,.. r,.,•1 t.t.~lr.l...+t Tea/',.y:~inu•.1 t,:.nA s'Inveyna'. No. +a• i l',V tiro°: a.5,r nlpwf !•L.l: l,a trar• .ynrl r•..rrroi, and nlSre~..s ri 4b lH•• 1?rnrrn•Jundrr• w. ` l2 d.a It..a,,.gy y R'IP~'r.isinn nn tA•Lnl:rvrl'i, 1'r97, n ngr•w~y mode' nn t 1 '1 ' ~ _ ~Od '8tt LSZT~LL60~ ~. From: To: Date: Subject: Kent Laza City of College Station.City Hall(SHomeyer, VMorga... 10/30/96 9:06am Combining site plan & plat -Reply -Forwarded -Reply I think this has alreadybeen decided that we cannot support the drive as shown. Pve akeady talked to Mike McClure about it and he agrees that there is no legitimate engineering reason for the drive to be located in uch close proximityto the adjoining driveway. It's just where Victor wants it. Mike was going to visit with his client and contact me again. If theywant to pursue the driveway location as shown, we will recommend against it and take it to P&Z. »> Shirley Volk 10/30/96 08:59am »> Have you all made a decision on this question yet? Also, as faz as the driveway, has it been determined that if Victor keeps the driveway where it was located.. on the plans we saw at predevelopment last week that he will DEFINITELY have to go to P&Z for a variance, or can this be decided in-house. (Ur maybe it HAS been decided. in-house, and the PRC and then appeal to P&Z would follow.) Please let me know what to tell Victor and Mike so they can incorporate everything in their drawings the first time. Thanks. CC: City of College Station.City Hall(NThomas), From: Shirley Volk To: JKEE Subject: Combining site plan & plat-Reply -Reply No T-fazes and really don't think any other major utility issues because the site is right on the frontage road, justsouth of Buffs -all utilities aze right there! Pll wait to see what others. think before I give Mike the word. »> Jane Kee 10/22/96 01:47pm »> don't see why not as long as we aren't issuing any permitsbefore fmal plat. Are there arty major issues to eb resolved with the prelim. plat -like t-fares or other utility issues? »> Shirley Volk 10/22/96 12:17pm »> Mike McClure is the engineer who is doing the project to the south of both Wilson Plumbing & Bud's for Victor Drozd, He asked at the predev. mtg. whether he could combine the preliminary plat and site plan - if it is deterrr-ined after he: does some research that a prel. plat will be required. I can't really think of a reason why that wouldn't be possible; but maybe Pm riot thinking too cleazly. Please reply with an opinion asap so we can have an answer for Mike when he contacts us again on this project. Thanks. From:. Veronica Morgan ~ _ To: SVOLK r T Date: 10/31/96 5:40pm / / `'T Subject: Drozd project -Reply t' I f i've ~~ looked at the checklists and i dont see why you couldnt. the extra information would just be extraneous and for a small project wouldnt clutter it up too much where you couldnt read the plat information. »> Shirley Volk 10/30/96 01:49pm >» Did you & Steve ever make a determination as to whether or not you have a problem with prelplat/site plan on one sheet for this project - IF a prel. plat is required? i; __ . _ __ __ I ~/ ~¢~~ ~,1 / ~ ~. r i _~,_,...~ ~..,____. __. __ __,y._.- Reorder From Dav-Timers, Inc., Allentown, PA Style M537 • Prod #61304 ®1996, 1989 Blanchard Training & Development, Inc. Printed in SA -gip ~~~~yy dP ----- __~. __ _l~! __ _ - .~----- - ~Y__ _ _ ~ ,~~ -- ~--- - -- ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~``~; ~ F -- .__ .-- -__ _ __ _ _ _.__ ~ _~.~ _ _.e__-- -- - ` ~ - /.~°_ ~, - - ~» ~" i .3 ~~. _^~- --._.___.___. __._.__. ~._~ - - ---- ------ - - .~ F~ -~ : rr~, ~""~.;i~-_ .. ~.._._ -~-- e ---- _..._. ~., ~~ ~ ~ s^-~"(I Tm~__ ~` a ~~ :vim ,• ...~ ,` ~ ~. r" -, ` 1A. ~~ ,5 ~, .-,_ ~_~ ~- _ _- -- ~ ,~ , ~ R ;,~, ~. t - - ~- ~ ~ ~~ ~; f' 'fir ~ ~ ~" (_ __-- ___ __. -_-- __ __ ....::: Page 1 Shirley_Volk.. Drozd 2D Homes...DP#498 __... _,.. _.___,. ...... From: Paul Kaspar To: svolk Date:. 11/3/97 4:53PM I' Sub'ect: Drozd - 2D Homes DP#498 J i~ UDG has met all items for a dev. perm. for 2-D homes and 1 have returned approved plans to them. A development permit is prepared and in the folder, it only needs the owners signature to be valid. Debbie Keating informed me that she thinks she is considerably ahead of Mr. Drozd's time schedule so it may be a while before he comes in to pull a building permit. She was to inform him to drop by here first to sign and get a copy of the DP. I have also given her approved plans for the sanitary sewer extension for easfmark phase IL She needed them to go out for bids and she is awarethat she cannot start construction until a DP is issued. CC: vmorgan i I I i .. -:::.Pa~e~ 1-:. .Shirley.Volk:- PRC-2--D.:Homes-:-Reply ;:...... ...:.... - :.:..:.:... ~/ ine McCull From: Sab y To: SVOLK~CITY OF COLLEGE STATION:CITY HALL, Date:. 10/2/97 42:38PM Subject: PRC 2-D Homes-Reply i ok, here's the deal on this fence thing: we will accept for the time being only that the fence does not have to go in. however, it is ultimately the responsibility of the commercial user to-install a screening fence. if we get a complaint in the future, we will go into code enforcement to require the fence at the time that all or a portion of the existing screening is removed. »> Shirley Volk 09/05/97 04:58pm »> Just a reminder that during PRC this week Sabine said she would be checking to see how the required fencing was handled with S&W when it was adjacent to single family homes, but the homes already had fences up. Also whether or not fencing along the detention pond would be required. Then V said she would be checking on how to address the offsite drainage questions. Also the PRC report says that staff will work with Jim Smith to see if both types of trash. recepticles will be acceptable. er site Ian. re to et that info back to D.Keatin in time for her to use. as she revises h p We want to be su g 9 Thanks! CC: nruz From: Jim Smith To: City Ha11.Smccully Date: 9/4/97 8:13am Subject: dumpster at 2D .homes -Reply That should work for me. Thanks. for. taking care of the problem. »> Sabine McCully 09/03/97 05sA7pm »> fyi: last week you emailed me regarding the dumpster location and that it needed to be angled. i mentioned the 'at prc that at a 90' angle, we could not service that dumpster. i gave them-the choice of drive sides to relocate that dumpster. i think they are going to keep it on the south side and angle it to the rear. notice also that the drive along the western boundary will not be installed at this time. we worked out afire truck turn-around in the southwest corner of the site. your trucks can use. that area as well because it will not be gated off and will meet fire lane standards. ..__...~ ~.... ~ _ _ ._. .. w_ __ Page 1 Brid ette George NEW DEVEL®PMENT 12/09/99, F r ,.. ,,.~.,._..~ ..._,...,. ,~~rr ...._,. ~~ .. ._ ~, From: R®nnie Horcica T®; Bridgette George Date: 12/13/99 3:25PM Subject:. NEW DEVELOPMENT 12/09/99 Texaldelphia - o.k. Campus Park Phase 1 S - o.k. Woodlake Subdivision Phase 1 Sec 2 - o.k. 2D Homes - o.k. Ordonez Residence = o,ko Sweetwater Phase 2 - o.k. Chimney: Hi11 Townhomes - o.k. Thanks f3ridgette!!!! :> CC: Carl Warren; .Nanette Manhart; Scott McCollum (~I~EDEYELOf MENT MEET(NCa The purpose of a predevelopment meeting i5 to meet the Gity staff that .will be involved with your development and identify general issues. that need further analysis, Along with the discussion of these. major issues, Staff will talk about the development process, distribute necessary information and discuss what permits will be required for your particular development. This meeting is in no way a complete review of your project. Staff will perform. a formal thorough review once the minimum requirements are Submitted for your particular development. Date of Meeting: ~ (Q ~ S ~ C Applicant(s):. ~K~~-~~G~ ~ ~-- ~ " ~~ i ~ F' City stafF present: ~~` °~a' ~ ~" °~--- f Proposal: ~~~ ~. ~ ~~-°~- ~ Miscellaneous: A Utlllty 155LIe5: Water Availability/Capacity: Sanitary Sewer Availability/Capacity: Impact Fees: v Electrical ` ~' i L~:~'--~ cam-, `~,e ,~-~ ~-~-~' . C~-~ Fire Hydrant ~, MiSCellaneou5: Landscaping/Street cape: ®ump5ter Location: Sign: Screen ing/P>uf~ering: Variance i2e~ue5t5: FILE NOTE Drozd Site Plan Case #97-421 Staff completed it's final review and did not identify any changes that needed to be made. I called Debbie Keating on Friday, February 25, 2000 and told her to submit the following for a full site plan review: Revised TxDOT permit. The original permit expired after 6 months and needs to be renewed. _ A letter for the D.P. file stating that no changes were made to the site plan that will impact the original drainage report that was approved in 1997. Once we receive these items, we will need additional copies. of the site plan for building permit and file copies. uiz Development Coordinator February 28, 2000