Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
OPEN RECORD REQUEST
t4 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY BUILDING OR PLANNING j DATE SUBMITTED: RECEIVED BY: J CITYOF COLLEGE STATION PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES • ` 3 — I d-D�rlapmrniSen'k 1101 TEXAS AVENUE - COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840 1 • (979) 764 =3570; (979) 764 -3496 FAX ' I 12-6[13 www.cstx.gov . . / . . 10: �-I 5 REQUEST FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION � � INFORMATION QUESTED BUILDING PLANS / PLANNING CASE FILE DRAINAGE REPORT • �/ SITE PLAN MINUTES OTHER (BE SPECIFIC) DETAILED REQUEST (PLEASE BE AS SPECIFIC AS POSSIBLE.) : YEAR BUILT /DATE OF MEETING: ADDRESS : L-11 0 1+ r. ( f Q, go( LOT # BLOCK # • REQUESTOR'S INFORMATION NAME: (i - C 0Ace • ctnot COn►si - inn ADDRESS : 1/1 2,00 peer e'-u n � Dr.. C.t Gt Q-- 5 4-i o N V( 1 N PHONE #: 017 o _.-- 4 tz , d cii I FAX # " EMAIL ADDRESS : t D K 0 CO teLl'A ACA • P.0 An . In making this request, I understand that the City is under no obligation to create a document to satisfy my request or to comply with a standing request for information. I further understand that the information will be released only in accordance with the Public Information Act, Government Code, Chapter 552, which may require a determination as to confidentiality by the Texas Attorney General prior to a release. I further understand that the City of College Station has 10 working days from the date of request in which to solicit such a determination. f, 964-P,t . REQUESTOR'S SIGNATURE b1 —ate - 2o r 3 DATE OF REQUEST • $$' ii$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Official use only • DATE COMPLETED: • COMPLETED BY: `" � L `� 11 NO. OF ORIGINAL PAGES: R3 COST: $ 04 • Kristen Hejny From: Kristen Hejny Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 10:18 AM To: 'jon @concretebcs.com' Subject: Open Record Request for 410 Harvey Rd. (Corrected) Attachments: 13- 195.pdf Jon, Please see attached documents regarding the building at 410 Harvey Rd. Because of the building's age, this will be all documentation we will have. Let me know if you have any additional questions. Kristen Hejny Staff Assistant City of College Station Planning and Development Services 1101 Texas Ave PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77840 khejny @cstx.gov 979 - 764 -3570 Phone 979 - 764 -3496 Fax 1 FROM PHONE N0. 5,,L. uwLwirim, ur ,- ,t 4w�. -..., Jun. 09 1998 0 P2 .......14-ma--4 wry. er.•N41 . 4, ... _ JN�� _ sv Dabs Rsasiwd 44. . -i r i 1 APPLICATION FOR FL i f REVIEW AND APPROVAL W ,, 4 (dock a* ! — 1I *sat _„ d rim ,.,. Ma Prelim. Plat Prelim Plat Rye NAMB OF USDMSIOP i. nst 1 a L r OWr1Ebt,,,,j,...._ t 7L' e '. eoI /z°t�t� tt-tit ARp..,„vi+�►QENT ,Far ►"�?P�(f; Tflf� r, Si l7C So a �` _ NaD�ss ADDRESS �z• S �� 3 • U r bN A 77 bfl 'w� .�..- pEr= _ j(11 d Z7-17Y0 PHONE ‘g )24p - 3[45' _ Li atisai sso PHONE 64) 1./.2/..319.r ADDRESSI r r+ L e : 7�C r---- YROJiC mow= PHONE ._ — ADDRESS - GPBc LOCATION or PRoPVSW s MLSIDN 1 " r"" g. - . eJ(aa[ ,) LOT H s id�sigo , 1I-041 ACREAGE , g TO'T'AL # Or LC'r8 �}_ TOTAL ACRES. OF SUBDIVISION • NUMBER or • BY ZONING DISTRICT • 4a1flitxa1/4i AVERA01 A = CE OF EA LOT Ey ZONING DISTRICT` FLOODPLA N CREAM • PARICLAIW DEDiCA'IION ACREAGE \ FEE REQUES4ED VARIANCE TO SUBDI SION REGULATIONS .. Is FILE , VAILABLE IN AUTOCAD s IPO & ANAL PLATS ONLY: TOTAL. LINBARFOOTAGBOF: • ! .i � BANLTAR'l 58W= LO 123 wA1ER LIME THE ` gpswiNED `: Y AEQUSSTS L OYAL BY THZ CITY OF COLLEGE STATION 01 TIM ili fr ' aid rate c,_ '& 447i___________--9 TOM P.O2 Scale= 1" = 50' 50 -0 50 100 150 Foist J Cr x s � o O a D CD {{ J z G $ ,- i6 4 0 u ~O O ' W w gz� ^ gi U z Q a-` w p q g °^ 8 3 YY4 .-- F. 4,, �` Z p O ' . 6 AM° 6F 9 P , H $a . 4 o s oN E� ' Q \ 0 ' Ca 1.11841,4 0 U h ! 4 zR y a:+xi ! yy? i d 4 @ E A di R 41 i 1 a! 2 is i Y 6 0 ir, 4 / < R + � / c � 9` . Z a rsrr V Z \� e k ! . _...„; ,..2.2 a ,.„,:.,„.. .. -,\N„-...1,7,,,, it `.ti 4 - � / _ ° „ �r O / .. ! 11 A .1 N 8 F.( N d N ° S' w \ 4 o ea � � Y - Nwo X U a ��0 r § S�a s g .- D v O _ e g� o o� lss --, ES' w 0 c p w F 'O w- W :zg`,1,,'='!, <wow 7 0 ~ > a 7 � �! o mmm 1( ` '� � ` ' ( ° o d zi \ _ �� 1� z o p (n o % _ vi- a °± Z °w :a p 5 m III WWWV vi U a .,,,,e- Q •" g53 -.Teo F',...-0 - f F_o.. Q Q J Q o 4 N,t,:, ' ' V , „ Ai \ J g 3' I/ _ i ii §§ USn �o FY 4? Yu; I ii� -_ 92R $ z 91 ,4 1 • r igb Yl " 2 � o .< � • ' e, S r6,' .iY do 1 \ � \ 8: . .. 1.' - z5n O 5 g 40 9 ti h ° t .,`" , ,,- ". y ai ` d w a , o 1� %I. & ° 1 \\ '''' , ' 3 Ri .%,,*:: \ AN g5 l',7 1 ' ,a, ,:-. qv t is € ,, % `•.. '�c� `4 4. :� '�� .. gi • F ee ° § N. \ \ 3 ' �� , ,Qy � igos goo € N ` a ' . \ i �� \ = e / 1/ // 6 \\ X ? O ■ \ ..- 3 y" . � / i'7 a, O U y 4 ' V , ... ° E , /,'/ / .k, //' �rT Oy 0,, ' h \ \ `"i \�? fi r. i ' /2 % / �}� }\ i 9 ' V": R - 3.Zz..,. oo< o Vn4 w o <� a V Y ? y e p$ uro n Win° ° ▪ oQ z �r r��r II o au� �� o rc g a , - ^ . Y U �,n o ' , i z3 °a.....0 iZH C> l�'��`�4 a 8 V r ow�WZO m .w tt tt if-04 co QZ wJl .6' -nueo"= 4 -, 06 > I a w a Uy c1 x a C�n o n ,n O U o = 0 o a w 3 1 z 6 iigt ; z „ 3 r N W N , R ▪ S W w W o � � w�Fi - 6 .lW• - ° v Y uo 3 ' '., z l° V O _ w t W n s . � 4 ?.- o -a ..o o I a o = o 0 o r `‘J o ©o m`< \ i 1 1 z / 0 1 '''..- • It ; 1 ill I 1- ,. ..__.,._,/,... . , t , ; n • , 03 III V 11 „., ■ -- - . 1; ,_ .., . I., 1-144fif ! , .5t. ril ti, .. .., , r i t a 't ' '3 1 ''' 1 1 1 A-2 . 1 'LII:4 ° .9, ' \ :fr...' 1 , ■ =- 9 N 1 •' t t Itgairl'21r IP. `, 4 ,, _ , f 1 1 r --, i ( f t '- I-v - — rI I! f t• I, / ft I Z ''''. ''' ' N I. 7 --- • - L \ .o &I -' g! %.) < 1 8 '.'-' 2 . E. VI 1 r 2 : a ` :fl 1 l'k 1 I 1 it A g 0 . _ . 1 A iL 4 1 1 . 1 r 1 i'• ' ',.. "i , .....z. ;1 t 1 z ,,., -. •:,, -,, t ,..- NI altirld ION ' 4' 1 31 ' t,.... N 7-- 1, 3 ' .'`,ogf ,:•7,1 al , Nkt--%•,, 1 \,,,/ • I , -,.t:-.., ,,,, .„ _.• h • j N, '-'-Aa. 9 -. 1 ; ; i 5 !'1,5 . I - - -,1' ; i :4 _ ... • - .' - - ARA ' - ' ' N.4 1 1 "%, .-‘, ' ' t; \,. \ .VI -W ' "-,--.----•---„ - ' / i'- t...- ` 'r ; IL . .'1_ -- ----aithaliik.-- . _ - 1 , i ._.....„ '4 4 , O, ', 2 t 1 • IliffitEn ° /I i * ■ 4 11 ' le . _ , -- t i0 , . '. 1 _ --‘- . t . I L - -- • I $1. LI \• ..,k • - . . \ -- •13 '‘. . \„,..,, , .., ,,, , 3 . * L51 , - .\ w cp>. ‘8 LI \ 3 , y i \ \ s, ..• . ' ' L ...,.. ,r..t.- 'T 11 ' . • .• r . ' 5 - ' L. _ _ I t !t itS1 adlillial • - V) ti ,- — ti ll it ..i N -•,'-',- • . , 1 ;;, i 1 4 - -- , • 1...Z--‘ g, — 1 ,,,_ ,,, ...- ,„- 1- - •Ii , . / -•,, . , C 1 -Th VINO .`‘fr . 'I 011 —$ 0 ''' '• 1 t \ ' A. 1 e.O'Z 1 1 • '- .1 Q C w 1 , 1 ° `L. 'Ds 8. .t 1 • • ••■ own: Imre ...... •••• - - %. 0 .5, ' 1 .< Z l 16 L Iya.m ... ' t •-_,, 6 1 1 1 t re — 1-1 ' il \ a .42em-m ' \ MP ASIIIIM:SAII, It; k .,_ - T • . <NIL •••••••• ..-.2.71%. .91101111.2. o J 1 1Z 6 Ct 6_ ■ .. ?, _,` . ,. , ,.... • , '---,-.--, -- • - •4• 1 ' ' ' - ie v. -. '', P.ST Ilk .. ,,,:'' ' - i '4.,' ' —fr. ' I '- - .• c , T 1 — ,. , \ _,- ,... z _,,,,,,,, -„, _ _ , .4 \_,% pi,:-=, •,ft !Ili> t _ - '•-•€- „ t7,,‘„, ;.: 'I:, \\ ‘‘,-,' L' t-'1=.,_ ix i -- ---.-r-- , ' - - - . ■,. - Et,' = .. ---- •<( .;; - I .. . III - ,-' fri---- A hs 1 1 1 \ I 5 - F - — K•3 'ct 2 \ - , - 1 _ . . - -, _ _ -- • .t N. — I. .1, a• s 1 i ' 9 '''' ,- . *1- ' vs -A '-‘, ,.... *. N., -:. t— -b• t. , \,,,,. ,:. - u- = - - ' '■n 4-1-,- - kt - s - , : ..;„_,,,.. l' i 1 ■n 0 i ; ' < --- ''' 'fr '"... ''',". `. -s. ____ __ ;.- ,''' ; --- < 7fr r, , , ■ -,,,, A . .,.. - -.,-...v- ____:1) - ' ' 's •V1 •A 1 .".- ' II _. - ‘1 ''''''.;": V ' -1,- - •4- '- V. •," ‘ - - - 2 =-. .• T 1 1 :P s • o - . , - --&- i&,. ! ir v t , , - - t-,. , - ,1•.., . i • F. -v . - t• '=... ...--_ -; .4 rmumiat 'Z\ . ' _ r . 1 . 4 .,.., 1 • , • -.... (4 2- ' --- - \ ''. 11 .i'4, .., i .‘ --- ,, — * ---' .'t - ... .elOV qga 4 ... CM Cril ,CIS) -.•., ..°- OISN3.1.X3 1S 1 1 3nN3AV 31),M - t .- - -4 - ', ..„ N %. 3an 2.1\ • s- Xt * i - : rt --. TiP. A . : .. _ ji---. —_ ....-. ___,____ _,- _ _ - , IIMIIMMII IM .,, I _ _ _---...._-'.- 1 OcrOL£ \3 I,LO.V lyt S - - - -- r-- , • : _ - . ^ - "Ogd : ,, ■-, ., 1 0 3,9 03NOZ 1 917, 0,1,9 03NOZ r•-• 6N ..0' 091 300d960 3h0109 0N1 oovisny ifr i: a amntu N011,110 ON 00 .11'15 00011319 3H1 11,1 A19131'160] SO .N A18310101 SO MON Z .1 LZ£ 39Vd 262 3vinion ■ 001 )412MO2208 3 H1 I 1 r • , i 4. ( 3lw Lvov n r a3uar 1em 1 i 9s, '.110.31 .010.1 .weal > / ° l SW C "'"' "m m'mpwy'� - — SYX W2Y11 .0 '11115 3031100 g g �, I S100 So 3a0V 1061 0 Q A ..� V 101 W n ., Z 1. ,w mem NIIIVISMOD Noisinlaens anoovi g 1 w E tts- 5...1, 03 , . a 1..g I .., ,� ..•- 1NVanVls3a s,nozV3 0 ° L_ O1YCL O'ea1Y1S.0311W " 1 W] Y O T✓+ 1Y m € Y 3tiM 'WI105 3013nY $Yx.l 1yYE ly , n - - - o=333 ` 3 8 dfIMNO .U311,1013101 7Yd1OINII _ I NVId NOLLVOIaaI 7 i' 3dVOSONVI V a - Na '. A o N E E E E ,, - m 2 9 a g aw ° 3 •8 2 z ,T : g a g a., - ° & k - - o f S a o € S 3s t g� g. g m 8 g o : w w w _ _ V.:: y i y _— 8 a 8 � °8 C s 8 ¢ L w R= 88 g3 as // / �• i,, 2 ._ < $ .. . Sa g8., § ' u Gm § kg d H is a 3 2 ' E s s` J = i"' ;g °''' X% o g 8 ? 1 dW 1 = m a rcr Vi i g d . O S - ° mo 8 h- a i s Y = m °. - o A tg — omz x. %k. La . i. Y z • .8 € _ -- - = _.. _•�.. g H8° V W...m gm m 1; &2 8 88 Q E Y p g o € f . ~ m u e1 ' r m ,g R t8 "= ° g ° P tee' I g- m 1 E 8 i i °t , W 8=' w .. __ o ° o ' ' ' 8' gN b qN 8 m _ ^ ° g? cc 1 m i ri�z ,. .. gt a Ld F, y 5 \ 1 i!,.. x > y w 9 _8 .o 1. .. `= c a= a „g 1 f Li3 8 $a •• C8 Smm � ma -, [ . b�. Vi i. • ■ n _ ouo - I Y °P AJo = w S ° b I terry _ ' - q C—:21:) il w. ___ V” g end •.L�. 6 /;y11 _ \\ , O. I : p 1 ' II � vy s 11 I , , t;i ce r ,,, _ •i . i . 1 8 F t. e N a" H ya P. IP — _ _ s Ali =t1f { , tg. °V06 A9 N -t 3 9C AMMWMI 3L VIS _ ' ` � ' u:.. ', ;j `'7 k • , . .I � ' •- j x i 1 x '- .bc .,,,t‘..:14- 7`F` -'" -0aa.suUe. .h ,i . wnwpuwKr -+S �e Zi I i 9*—, .30,30 730303 NVOVOK % ,._ II' 5,31 AINsios 503.3 '3401.e03 303,00 0 -- rti: 7: 'gg F, 0 ....•.sv.....,,t,•j swoons malummal v.,. -,— s t.v S380V t 06" l - , °' **Mr '= olgr.1. ..., =AM/ I '''''S,',:c.",J. V L 101 -, > cE gt f, i ' ,_ 6 I.N,,v,1 ..i... 1 , :ot.-...77 :„...... ,___ _ .0, ........, Noisintaans anoovi ii -:=C .-:z.' __ r - f 7 t '6L C:§ 1 i 1....Ivev.vv. -vvvu 1 , I 7 oaroloul . ar:ro n3 . 1Nvanv1s3a SPOZV3 e g ,, .F-rs. 0 L a ■,.. ■\ / O. 1 3 VO3 I Q . -6, ,^ E L 7,1faist-,:Y v kins ,Inos 30373/4 SVX31 13,3 ' I I _ NV d 311S V 4 ' ZZ."' 2 a anoso IN3Nd013A3G rridIDININI Q I - 0_ ;......Ageg.... ,:...A , A 4 , $::•f tir , ,1■13 r . :. ,, 4 ; . :: . ..p,, , ;s.,7, g, f1 Pi afq/ ',---' ‘'.•,i- t-,, s .,,E, 4 ^T, i, Eli ■'-••■■ • 4N a- i `i'E `1.11 z`iS,' ri,' 1 4 l'i 0 EiT;hig• • v 4 : ' , '' , T. /* =. 1:. , RE iipiq,, V..\ t ''. 4 i; i 1 Li ; — f 1 ._ N ;J; .,!,k ii4i .7- ! .-', Y.' 0 / 0 •40A. 41' : i if!ig .,. , , . a • , . A 0 ...„ ■,, s ipti**7 4: 7 4 , 4 fi: g :.1 , -I. :'t . _ . . ,-,,,.!,, sL, • ' „;',. 1 !a =. ;: ‘i="4311:1 .1 I ... K I 14 --, g i , ■ L , ' • — r r Ar ' `i .. ,,,, .• „, „ ,, - 1 . , - — —1 .1 . ? ', 'grs.q 1 , . - ' , ..01-•= ' , 1 ;.., — t gl ' 1 1 t 0.0 GO Lg ■ . n 3 g ■ r.... 1 N ,,,--- • i , • 5 g , "-`- g' \ n It 1 1 - .1 - 1 t , – — ._, .. I . a_ Z , . rc -r- I IIM 1 '-, r , -L .: ._ r . r 7,;,:liF :,., _ - ___- „ . . „ '''' ___ ,.. , 1 I ---- NI IIII .1. - -• .,.., ?„ ...__,.._ 25 ,05 I , i 1 , ■1 ,."1-- I I I ; 1 1 ■ ,,--,t;i '; ; 4 'l ■ : I ; , ; ., ,_. -- r ----- i - .______„ , . „..--2,• ; , , ' ..., 1 1 t •IPurn.....z.....4 - r ,, L [ : . s=-•',.___! r WI,. Opi pap, 1 P. ',..1 L ,1 I . _L__ .. ,, ; :4 ;, ; t ,q, ,. I ;. ",t ) •_, , - ■ ,I 1 : , i i■ ! '71 .----- ' 7 :' s , t :, L 13 ,• 1 I ' ' - `1.' L e.4 ; ''' • i _ li 7 il ! E 1 ; r ., I , " (' .: 6 I. • 9- — A ' .1. 1: fp' • 1 :1: ,1 4 v,' e ti I 1 , , ... 1,....„..-- ..._ . ._ - .7, 41 ,.- , ' 0 - 4.1 INI.. ,] I , 1 1 ,, _, 1 It 117 _ 1 • 1 - . 4 1 , 01 `.: - i iiprtMlit ----• .., li , ' 1 *2 , • - - . . . ..-----___ ..... 1 — I- , 0 E t• - =- - - . - ''' '' : iriall * '..7 ''''..,, .- - #•,..,, .44.1 -.. ' --' ..-'''' ' ''' c..• - ' - lik....---4--.-11■--4—=11- • .0 '... ' ...„ ' , ,- , - - ' --.4k :. ' • Riatt.-7r. . - '''''iri h. ','..i.'. - ' '-, .7 1 '. + 1 .1,.._ - . .• 's • , ' . 4 , ': , ...1 , . ,s; * ' PO( t; .i= -- . - 4---V4 , „- 1 :‘ Z . siA- • .t1 : , ';,,,S. : il tAV,-t q i,? tt i p7 );'; :=.,: , :`, ; •;:` 1 ,:;„...:'..z.-:._..._-„::::,...,....... '',.. ' e '' • ' ?,,---- :-. ' ' t ' -..:.''.., ,...„,.. ;.. - - '.:z:' • 1 . -- -.-.-!.--' 'r.. 45 . -.,- - Jig ' ..: t ' . I waii ' , 44 ■WO,'!f %:.}4:‘'IriV j - ' " '' '. *`''''''' "' ' '' '' ';' 1 ; '?-*'-- - 4 - '7 "'" , :-;- ' ''' , ' '''•■4,=:.-- ` ' - ' - ' - '..;-- '; -';-- - - * ,-'-i'0 - ' -. - • . ,,,- .. ," .'i i•= ' - 4,1,F,;:i: ' / : , t7,-. , "u•••)' ' '... t .-t• ii rv- f;" i- .4.:,,,, -,,,..‘'...'„, •- .. a ...*,c-,? - .__;: .. ._ „- -:,,, iti" 3 '; x I.. , - ■••, V 1 N R C)-- I yy Q Q goo ■j . €$ w a§ o m z pa a IR `42'••. yy K O h - ate O J N goffi iy :4 SQ 1 1; ' . Ni E _ H o w D Oti .&m ° po §,. I> � ` S fm a o` Q ° e � m a + � S =gag; ti / / Fa 8 /0/ Q$ Y Z I+� �� -�`:°. a m : - ,.... ._ ** 0 .., ,.„ , 8 51 0 ,., yy 9 } u" \ F R ? °or'rFSr � 0 og "s r s o n !I n c s \ \ - r Q \ \ n 4 / . QG \ 4 ` s@ Q ' \ ' R' - t. �� / '. '' . j ®/ � I f f Iv \ s ? ' .i„ ` spa 1 y ^ \. -. ( • .. / '. € €� +r w` r oy e L off^ b t Q 1 4' 1 PI `& ,e / .E § S9 fg ='a �\ o/ , p ' / /4'.h° F $I ci! 6 li PE a ax s ill n n € -le El If :: °0 X a'" R 9F $ e l Isshge ffi n E 6. Y 00g, @ I $ g e n n 1 } ii i 0000© s ! IS ~ e $ pi a$ r a Q ' I To kb I s c 5 W = 1 / aI i § y His' Fi Z I i / g i i. i 1, t : $ z 11. a %§ Rj g Q D I Q 0- 1451 °,, , i j � g -, ,. § N A 1 I E ra J � � m `� `�, € � I z" k { ' • 3G h $ '� . '; , . o ff ,, '��=r� 1 211 If EN, I z 3 'Q ���� t i vv � `a (/ .. r ,vv ` $ 5 • v � v ti 6 • ili F /co o 4.= i :JP Or 1 n $ • z is g il , ■ w I` 1 6 a- si a 2/ \ q 1 1 = n t i es Ii O $ •4 j. ie i i I / // ; @ ! c It z L. d..noT alr rt dai I .- i. 1: ,,,,_ r- co •q - f 1.i a 4 ' k u , l a 3 E1F„,i, gl : CC : 1\14i,:0\\ 411 lirr4;#.74.' ,94 2, : a: , :; 8 • , i ; ' I : i .: 5 : ' ° - .' 3 ) 1 N,,„ p° ' }nit '''''? / /:, ! ,...' 4 ZF ' 4"1.• .1 ' Ilt.'.' (::. ,.' ' - - 6 i.r0 8 A- 2 vCioo A. ,/ ■ ..L 1 f4' . 4 > ' 0 ,-. ii 1 Sg8s :. g \ RP s — ■ I§ \ T4 p ."./. ..................... qs, 4 ; \ '_6):: 11 •-..* • - ........ i • .... " . \ g, -,..., fk f \ • \ \ 4 1 \ I I k 1 \..... ..".:•-• 44 'z., 1,1 ig'- i ® - e • il ig- \ ,,,o' .1•2 54 \... 76 Ea VI ... 2V... / V \ , g Eg 1 ' 6 ' / 11 !t 1'11 \ IE 44. ,,,, 0,:", ' i / ,.-, jx, - ,P*, . ... '' 0 ' . ' / ') ig 11 1 2 1 1 1 .ig Ili I 4,,,,, o„ 0 . , '.; "*".", r, - s :.‘ 4 1 ; , / / / , / ' Ld \ 1 .,, \ - II , ~i" / it'' / i 41> / ‘ ,' ,,s / ., 4' , ,. // , / Y/ ,' v / / \ 1 4 T ? 'I ©1124:01"Mii / -It 11 Iti i 1[ L, ? 15P38 ..2 \ I LI') i 1 I 31• sa g f ;11 -`,,' i 00 i'i ? th 1 i g . 1 4 .1. L — ! 1 ig 1 tol ililyl. ' t _1 ig ''') v w p g e 4? n i p2 Et.lr H rg - LI 1 wt. & f,I it s ' L,T : !fl; eh egii. ppm it , ! F , 1 1.4 I I Li .. 41.1,„,10 ' A g _ ' A r 1 : C t . m 1., hot i 1 1 !Iiipp it 1 II e h. t' ipe t, so • ii:7 0 e §111 1 10 i gelyiliiipi - ,,, t - I 4 g 1 2 ¢ h h , '''. .g. i ..21W 14s kt - 1 --.1 • s 20 a 1 h 1.. .-. 1 : 8 -se ., •"",- "'..- „ I - Th" i- at i 1,g it : Y 1 g 1 i t tP , < ' le, I 11 1 oi V ' '' / 4 •'' ''' "-- \ .A 't - 1",,, y •..r., § 11' 40i , , .g It lil 1 N I i • ' ' / ' 9t.' 9 ', . +>,,Se., 11 Al ve i „/`-:` / • 25,..,4 . li ''''''',',' '4"..;° NI ! F.i•-:.,7 gaD :'0 • .?..? 1 • '' ,„ ,Si Wr: if .../.• \ „.••••• • .e.r 1 fig.t..1 i . § , ..,:,0 ,.. . . ,,,: :... . .. . : 4 „-. ; ,...: ....", i. ' ..\\•;:...... \ .: 1 i I ft, , ,“----= , . & t , /ii , .. , ,O . ‘ GO? 9 \,, ...11;:i7.......,;-',...... r li \ \ 1 • .<*/ , . .„ :„1, !,,,, , !. Li' ii '". -,< ' ,,'` :., .„ ,,„/ I 1 ,,, < \*-- 4, 5- ,,, \ -, „,;:;,,,, "Y ,2* " '-'-',,,,‘ 0 ''''. "\ .i, \,, *°, ,, -4,,,t.,,, K -°-, ' ' \ ' - _ 4 , iq h '•: t i I , 4i it A !I . - . .. .., b. 4 • , ..=. \\ F- \ 1 i il s i t i a. 5 jig! _.1 ? i/L1 • . ' s_• iz" p lasz g 1 4 i < z Is igggn 1s I i Ei sa 11 i E2 4 i!iiii :2 h * 1 i tadAatN 15 i 0 , , 1 51 I i Commissioner Maloney moved to recommend denial of the request based on staff's recommendation. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Establishment of parking requirement for a new location for Signs Now at 305 Marion Pugh. (98 -810) Senior Planner McCully explained that the site location came before the Commission as the site of the proposed Traditions Night Club in the past. Signs Now will use this building for selling and manufacturing/assembly of signs. She stated that at the last Commission meeting, parking guidelines for manufacturing were established at one space per employee. Signs Now plans to initially have 10 employees. There is also 1575 square feet of office space in the building. The Zoning Ordinance requirement for office space is 1 per 250 square feet. This office area would therefore be required 6 parldng spaces. Combining these numbers the requirement would be 16 parking spaces for the business. Only one handicap space would be required. The Commission discussed whether the total parking would be enough for the proposed uses, especially if retail is also added. City Planner Kee replied that this office area could be retail as well because the parking requirement is the same. Ms. McCully responded that any increase in employees could be handled through code enforcement if needed. Commissioner Garner moved to set the requirement for this request at 16 spaces. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a Final Plat (Replat) for the Lacour Subdivision , Lot 1 located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Harvey Road and George Bush Drive East. (98 -222) Assistant City Engineer Morgan presented the staff report and stated that the final plat for this subdivision was approved in early 1996. This plat contained a single lot, Lot 1, along with a reserve tract, a small portion of future Kyle Street right -of -way dedication and a Wolf Pen Creek dedication area. This particular lot is located on Harvey Road near Taco Bell. The portion of George Bush Drive East extension is located within the access easement that was dedicated with this plat. The purpose of the replat is to take this single lot and subdivide it into 2 lots approximately 2 acres each. Lot 1A currently contains the Office Max development and Lot 2A is currently undeveloped. With this replat, there are some discrepancies as to the correct location of the floodway line. The original survey and the survey done with this replat do not agree on the floodway location. Staff worked with the original surveyor and the replat surveyor to understand the differences between the two interpretations. It was discovered that the original surveyor based his information on the 1988 Nathan D. Maier Study which was done for the City as part of the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor Study. The line shown on the replat is based on the 1992 FEMA FIRM maps which are the regulatory maps. The item has not been resolved yet but they are getting close to a resolution. Ms. Morgan explained that in the 1992 FIRM maps, FEMA noted that they had used the Nathan D. Maier Study to prepare the maps. The assumption was made that the floodway line in the NDM study was actually on the FIRM maps which is not the case. Staff has reason to believe that there may be an error in the FIRM maps for this particular location. This error may be caused by a graphical misinterpretation. Staff has contacted FEMA regarding this issue. FEMA said that this replat could be approved from the floodplain P&ZMinutes July 16, 1998 Page 3 of 8 management standpoint with the floodway line that runs through Office Max (as shown on the original plat). Staff would have to make sure that if this building is ever expanded or if any substantial damage occurred to it for any reason (fire, flood, or wind), mitigation efforts would have to correct any area of the building within the floodway. Staff felt certain that this would not happen. Ms. Morgan said that she believes this is a result from a graphical discrepancy on the FEMA map. The Developer will prepare and Staff will forward a letter of map amendment to FEMA to correct this situation, if this is what is found to be creating the problem. Staff recommended approval of the replat with the condition that all necessary paperwork be forwarded to FEMA for a Letter of Map Amendment and this issue resolved prior to filing the replat. Commissioner Mooney moved to approve the replat with staff conditions. Commissioner Maloney seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration of a Final Plat of the Devonshire Phase 1 -A Subdivision, consisting of 0.5023 acres, being subdivided into 7 non - buildable parcels. (98 -226) Road. Graduate Engineer Kaspar presented the staff report and stated that the City Council recently approved the abandonment of North Graham Road right -of -way from Wellborn to Victoria Avenue. That abandonment action merely abandoned the roadway and its use as a public roadway but did not express who would now own the property that was abandoned. For the most part the property will be properly platted with subsequent phases of the Edelweiss Subdivision, however this small portion of North Graham right -of- way adjacent to the Devonshire Subdivision would have been left as a remainder for the adjacent property owners to survey and own by metes and bounds. With this plat this property is "cleanly" subdivided and recorded to aid in the review and retrieval of property information. Each of these lot owners in Devonshire will now own a lot and a corresponding parcel, (i.e. Lot 1 and Parcel 1A). Because these parcels do not meet the minimum lot dimensions, have public access, or utilities, they cannot be sold off as individual stand alone lots. As such they are noted as non- buildable lots on the plat. This plat also retains the necessary easements for those pieces of infrastructure that are existing and used to be contained within the North Graham Road right -of -way. Staff recommended approval of the plat as submitted. Commissioner Maloney moved to approve the plat as submitted. Commissioner Garner seconded the motion which passed unopposed (5 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Reconsideration of a Master Development Plan for the Steeplechase Subdivision to be located along the east side of Wellborn Road, South of FM 2818 and adjacent to Southwood Valley Sections 23 & 24D. (98 -311) City Planner Kee explained that the proposed subdivision is located along the east side of Wellborn Road, south of FM 2818 and adjacent to Southwood Valley Sections 23 and 24D. This would be infill development containing 64 acres. The applicant is proposing 80 single family lots, 125 duplex lots, a small reserve tract for future residential development, 3 acres of commercial development fronting Wellborn Road, 7.23 acres of common space devoted partially to storm water management on the north side of the development and a small area for detention of the east side. P&Z Minutes July 16, 1998 Page 4 of 8 HEYNE CO. TEL :713- 850 Dec 09 98 15:55 No.003 P.01 j?Dale---0 • December 9, 1998 4 0 , l a " MUM /A: \ Fax to 409/7643496 Ms. Shirley Volk % City of College Station Dear Shirley, We will submit the as -built plans and the balance of the fee owed within the week. Any assistance that you can give us in sending the necessary information will be appreciated. Your assistance in this matter is very much appreciated. Very truly yours, Fred ieyne, III k / cr '. • \ O■ j to Y i" HEYNE CO. TEL :713- 850 -0545 Dec 09 98 15:55 No.003 P.02 Dec -07 -9B 09:58A P_01 NATHAN D. MAIE1 CoNsuLTtNO1•NGINffot5, FAX COVER SHEET • Twn odt+f`r1L.' A O f`nrk i,.. ! S iIw (!VI tntn., Yrsks 752,'11 121417394741 !FAX 12191739 DATE: 12107198 NU14i J0I3 NO.: 98.09.085 TIME: C %5R AM • T(); Sent! 1:icskIn PHONE: (713) 850.0540 • 'SCC t)evcbpmenl FAX: (713) 850 -0545 • *Rom; Mark W. ttnbcrls. P.E. PHONE (214) 739 -4741 • NA1 HHAN 1'' MAH R COW 1 :1'IN(i ENUINIilRS, Ind( VAX: (214) 739 -5961 NUMBER OF PAGES, iNcL(r)1N(; Tf 1iS CC)Vi i( SIIEET: 4 • • 1F THIS TRANSMISSION IS INCOMPLETE OR INTERRUPTED; PLEASE CONTACT US AT (214) 739.4741 ORIUINAI_. COPY ❑ 1ViLl- ( WILL NOT BE MAILED) Mere is a copy nfihe letter hack from )E.Mn We tried for the lower fee but since this one does involve a Floodwnv modification, they ere !requiring the additinnnl $ 1,400. You earl submit this directly per Illc instructions in the letter. Of the requested additional items of information listed in the letter, 1 believe all will need to conic from the City. You will probably have to keep on Veronica in order to get this done in the 90 day window. Item it5 "M-built plans" certified by a I'P may need to come from your original engineer, unless the City keeps these on file. Call if you have any questions, • • • • i HEYNE C O . TEL :713- 850 - 0545 Dec 09 98 15 56 No.003 P.03 Dec -07 -98 09:58A P02 Federal �• ederal Emergency M anagement Agency Ij Washington, D.C. 20472 �U� �a 4 4■010 OW p 7 1998 NATHAN D. MAIER December 1 1998 "+Tgl'if TTNC: FR (1!P "' . Ms. Veronica .1 R. Morgan, P.F. IN REPLY REFER '1'O: • Assistant City F,nglneer Caw No.: 9 U6 -332P City of College Station Community: City of College Station, Texas • 1101 'Texas Avenue Community No.: 480083 College Station. 'Texas 77842 316-ACK.FRQ . •: Dear Ms. Morgan: • .This responds to your request dated November 19, 1998, that the Federal Emergency Management Agency • •', • (FEMA) issue a revision to the Flood lnrurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Brazos County, Texas and .. Incorporated Areas. Pertinent information about the request is listed below. Identifier: • Lacour Subdivision • Wolf Pen Creek Flooding Source: • Wolf Pen Creek • FIRM Panel(s) Affected: 4804100144 C Effective October 1, 1996, FEMA revised the fee schedule for reviewing and processing requests for conditional and final nicxlificati n s to published flood information and maps, FEMA established flat review and processing fees for most types of requests. Effective March 10. 1997, FEMA modified the fee schedule that became effective on October 1. A copy of the notice published in the Federal Register is enclosed for your information. The fee for your request is 53,700. The amount you submitted, S2.300. is not sufficient. The balance, 51.400. mist he submitted before we can continue processing your request. Payment of this fee must be made in the form of a check or money order, payable in 11.S. furxds to the • National ..floodJntsurartMEcogram (NEAP). or a credit card payment. For identification purposes, the case number referenced above must be included on the check or money order. We will not perform a detailed •• tcchnicel review of your request until we receive this payment. • Payment must be forwarded to one of the addresses listed below_ • Using U.S. Postal Service: using overnight service: r " • • Federal Emergency Management Agency Fee- Collection System Administrator Fee- Collection System Administrator efo Dewberry & Davis. METS Division P.O. Rox 3173 8401 Arlington Boulevard Mertifield, VA 22116 -3173 Fairfax. VA 22031 • • • • • . HEYNE CO. TEL :713 -850 -0545 Dec 09 98 15:56 No.003 P.04 Dec -07 -98 09:59A P.03 • 2 We have completed an inventory of the items that pm submitted. The items identified below are required before we can begin a detailed review of your request. 1. In a letter slated November 19, 1998, you stated that the City of College Station is currently reviewing this revision request. Please be advised that we cannot issue a Letter of Map Revision (LOMB) until we receive community acknowledgment in the form of a letter stating that the City of College Station has reviewed the revision request anti understands the effects of the revision on flooding conditions in the community, or Application /Certification Form 1, entitled "Revision Requester and Community Official Form." , signed by a comnnutity official from the City. 2. Please su1 ►sit a ropy of the public notice distributed by the community stating its intent to revise • the flomlway. or a statement by the community that it has notitie.d ail affected property owners. 3. Please submit a letter stating that the community will adopt and enforce the modified floodway. • 4_ Our preliminary review indicates that the elevations of the flood having a 1- percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (base thxxl) will increase as a result of placement of fill In the efTeetive flnndway at Civics Section 160.2. Please provide evidence that the community has adopted florxiplain management ordinances that incorporate the increased base flood elevations at Cross Section 160.7 and the revised floodway boundary delineation to reflect post - project conditinns, as stated in Paragraph 65.12(h) of the N17P regulations. • S_ Please provide as -built plans, certified by a registered professional engineer, of all project elements. If alt required items ate not submitted within 90 days of the date of this letter, we will treat any subsequent request as an original submittal, and it will he subject to all submittal /payment procedures. if you are unable to meet the 90 -day deadline for submittal of required items, and would like FEMA ter continue processing your request, you must request an extension of the deadline. This request must be • submitted to our Technical Evaluation Contractor in writing and must provide (1) the reason why the data cannot be submitted within the requested timcframe, and (2) a new date for the submittal of the data. We receive a very large volume of requests and cannot maintain inactive requests for an indefinite period of tune. Therefore. the fees will be forfeited for any request for which neither the requested data nor a written extension request is received within 90 days, Please direct all required items (except the required fee) and questions concerning your request to our Technical Evaluation Contractor at the following address: Michael Iiaker Jr., Inc. 3601 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite 600 • Alexandria, Virginia 22304 Attention; Ms. i.Mure D. Bitlncr (703) 317-6292 When you write us about your request. you must include. the case number referenced above in your Letter. • i • HEYNE CO. TEL :713 -850 - 0545 Dec 09 98 15:57 No.003 P.05 Dec -07 -98 09:59A P.04 3 If you have any slucstions concerning FEMA polity. or the NPIP in general. please contact Mr. An • Johnson of our staff in Washington. DC. either by telephone at (202) 646 - 3403 or by facsimile at (202) 646.4596. Sincerely. Matthew R. Miller, P.E., Chief Hazards Stttdy RrAUCI! Mitigation Directorate Enclosures cc: Mr. Mark Roberts. P.E. v' Nathan D. Maier Consulting Engineers, Inc. • • • • •,• • •••• V - Re : F red Fie ne ,,. -Vs ..vv,.�, V,,:_.., :.�..N .,. ••••e •••• x,,,.,,w .:r , ti.�:...:.. �.. n ,. ,,,...NH: ...N ... e, .. 1 From: Veronica Morgan To: SVOLK @Cityof College Station.City Hall Date: 12/2/98 8 :19AM Subject: Re: Fred Heyne yes, the community acceptance letter went out already. »> Shirley Volk 12/01/98 02:39PM »> Just talked to Fred and his understanding is that FEMA is waiting for a "community acceptance letter", and if that hasn't gone out, he asks that someone here call him back so everybody has the same understanding of what's supposed to be happening. If that's what we sent out, then no one needs to call him. His number is (713)850 -0540 and he answered the phone himself - his secretary was out! Last time 1 talked to him he was in Mexico where he has 2 subdivisions under construction. Anyway, V, either please call him or tell me what to say to him if you want me to make the call. Thanks. CC: Jeff Tondre, Jim Callaway, Natalie Ruiz } Shine Volk - Re Fred Heyne ...........w ..,r..,,,. M:.... ....:......,: MNh...:...,,.v,,:... r, .....t .w„ ��v,:... , k,A 1 .......... ... From: Veronica Morgan To: SVOLK@City of College Station.City Hall Date: 12/10/98 12:38PM Subject: Re: Fred Heyne I just got off the phone with mark roberts (ndm) and told mark that of the six items (2 which fred will be sending) that I have already done 1 and mark is responsible for another one (which puts us at 4) and the other 2 i cannot answer until i have the additional data re: the floodway which mark submitted directly to fema and i dont have a copy of. mark said he will fed ex me the floodway data so i can answer the remaining 2 questions. mark sent it directly to fema as a response to femas earlier request...1 was ok with this and he was going to get it to me once he was sure that was the final change but i cant answer two of femas questions now without it..._..my goal is to send this off to fema before i leave on the 18th. mark knows that.and i have called scott deskins re: this as well. v »> Shirley Volk 12/09/98 04:56PM >» Fred sent a fax today saying they will be submitting the as-built plans and the balance of the fee owed (to FEMA) within the week and has asked how soon you will be able to get the necessary information sent in for his project. Will you be able to submit them within the required 90 day period if they get here this week? CC: Jim Callaway, Natalie Ruiz ' - ■ `! P eu _�� � � ~~.==---_ \� ----------'----�-------- | --� --------- - '- ' _ -__' -_- _ - _ _ _-- I a. _fro paSel (MU cited 4. re. r does 4„..-t 5-40, 5440.4,--e 4 2 1,r0"4 1 3 P rookie 40?-11 4.6 74.02, Sra o ite74,4.1., q 5 0 4.0(.4 -fle,a514). Oki p/a,i 147 4.6 0 1 14,0144 toe "e 349041 f le, '� ~� �~=~- __^~�__ - _��� ' ' . - '7 «��/«�u� t��@� ��^ -- =--�^^- �---- »� ' ` � ~ _ ~` �� _ _ �" __- -- '=���-=_~_.__-_ _ ~ ' _� "�' ��) - -^-- - - �� v _ ���_ ' - --' � -�="�=~~^~-^~�' --�/ | ` ` _--_- _ | _____--___---- - ---- - - -- -- - } ------- -- | ------�--- --' - - \i _- ---- -- ---- --- __ - :... _ ..... ..... . .... '. :.... ..,� . .. . :;� -: •- w�:i. +r.�a'b" .s..e..w: ;• „.e .>.: :._. -.s _vaa�u� i- �5ui :1 0688516 Fi ed tbr in: 0 On: Jun 16,1999 at 03:47PM Name of Plat: Rs a Plats Document Number: X688516 - 1 v mount �:r. Receipt hither - 132980 00 el BJ Endle aY, Owner(s): 0 ME I e� certify that this r was 1 filed on the date and the staaped hereon by oe 9 and was duly recorded in the velum and page 1 of the Wooed records of: Ci lltiTY, Block Lots thru as stained hereon by oe, Block thru Jun 16, 1999 Block thru acres out of abstract ECM WY NM WD, MTV CLOY abstract B 1OS DUTY, • • • . . fam............ . F. . ( --.: , ,• , . , t , • • , ... „..„ 1 . , , 1 •__..1 , — , . c i , , • , g 1 ..:., , 1 . ., . .. . ,, . • ! . 1.,;..„.,..,..i.:,. P . I 4",,--";, ri • , ...•:, ,4.. : r • 1 i „,z41,-, ',,,, ,..,. ''' I i? C3 - hEiiI[z.•.cff ......,:::,:.r.,... . . .........4 [ I 47 '' ' '..".:"..::•.., pc;,'..; v 1 . ■ % -. -*" 11 :$ int, - -..---,• ••••■• • ••••••••■••.. i ,-; , - -`,- ‘ --:-.: N • -, ..:.:..s4 1 ' •:: ' ;•-,.- - I - • 1 I. ' At ; It to tre 8 = . . .. , , -, *--:,.; - • by .1.4 .4% (r) .. 01 - . . .1,.. g•-i`s•-',••• . ,4,, ..,,,, ,. . iii. l i ' F" l • I : • 1 ,4,',X,..';.• 7 '.; ' -.... . i I 4 ' 1- `' — .6"'=" eC. Ns. 16.411■ _ ■ . -' R ... ",'," '1.4' I, .,.;• . • ; , - - ...1"i• I .;:::',:t - -------- ------ ---- -- - k .4 .. ..„ .. • _ , ... KERR SURVEYING CO. P.O. BOX 269 505 CHURCH STREET COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77841 Brad Kerr Telephone: Registered Professional (409) 268 -3195 Land Surveyor #4502 (409) 691 -8904 FAX May 17, 1999 To: Bridgette George Development Services City of College Station Re: LaCour Subdivision Dear Bridgette, Scott Deskins, of SCC College Station Parteners, Ltd, (owner) and Mark Roberts, of Nathan D. Maier, contacted me this morning and requested a few minor cosmetic changes in the Replat we have submitted. These changes include trimming the "base flood elevation" line crossing lot 1A and making the labeling of the flood plain lines clearer. These changes are for clarification only and do not affect anything else on the plat. Please contact me ASAP when this has been reviewed and is ready for a final signed mylar to be submitted. If you have any question, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Louise Barker CITY OF COLLEGE STATION J Development Services L,Gf STA, ION 1101 South Texas Avenue, P. 0. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 -9960 (409) 764 -3570 Date: April 21, 1999 No. of pages including cover 2 If you did not receive a complete fax, please call our office immediately for a new transmittal. To: Brad Kerr Fax No. 691 -8904 Company: Kerr Surveying From: Bridgette George Phone No. 764 -3570 Remarks: ❑ Urgent El For your review ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comment: Staff looked at the Lacour revised final Plat and has two comments regarding the floodplain lines. On the attachment, the portion drawn and hatch-marked is where staff believes the location of the floodplain should be. Please call Jeff Tondre if you have any questions regarding this issue. Please submit one Mvlar and one copy of the revised final plat for filing at the courthouse. Thank you! i31'31" E 2.1432. Acres ".-, • 12.02 FLOOD ZONE • X • 1 • • • St s• T t Ts, UN • D , - , • c\_,) ,,,,,,,, c9,./ c . 9.92 i c y •••.•. f / . 4. ....... V. ••.f . I i p ' 45‘ / • It' t ° cres 2 • ■ • , • . FLOppNyAY OF .0.* �� • O' FLOOD ZONE Ar p f �y ••• 5 . 1 00 ACRE TRACT � LACOUR SUBDMSION • , , �7 •.• • V % • 0 ••. PHASE 1 /. • • is "� APPROXIMATE • ON c . MY OF COLLEGE OF FLOOD • UNE 'Pd., DEDICATED PER PLA • Ilk tio� a • • (3)1 ; ' lo .. • -,. 4 >E • 1aN 4 4 OF Fl • uNE FL( • • • E • ..4.- : \imiloot,if • • •FLC • • • FLC j ( „ 1/04) /**" AID ( i - - ARE • • • • • • • • • • •' 1/2 RNCH Nom .••..• ••• - R D FOUND t.. •.•....... •a +f 3 r° \A/ NHA. MAIER CONSUATLiIIVG N ENGDINEERS FAX COVER SHEET Two NorthPark 1 SOSO Park Lane / Suite 606 Dallas, Texas 75231 (214► 7394741 / FAX 1214) 739 -5961 DATE: 04/21/99 NDM JOB NO.: 98-09 -085 TIME: 4:23 PM TO: VERONICA MORGAN PHONE: (409) 764 -3570 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION FAX: (409) 764 -3496 FROM: Mark W. Roberts, P.E. PHONE: (214) 739 -4741 NATI IAN D. MAIER CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. FAX: (214) 739 - 5961 NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: 4 IF THIS TRANSMISSION IS INCOMPLETE OR INTERRUPTED, PLEASE CONTACT US AT (214) 739 -4741 ORIGINAL COPY ® WILL ❑ WILL NOT BE MAILED Veronica: Attached is a copy of a report that we did regarding the floodplain delineation on the Pooh Park tract. In summary, we took the HEC -2 model we did for the LaCour LOMR and mopdified sections 171.80 and 175.30 to reflect the new topo by Kerr Surveying on the Pooh Park tract. The changes had only a minor effect on the hydraulics with a maxcimum change of +0.16 feet at section 175.30. Please call if you have any questions. Mark Roberts NATHAN D. MAIER CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. April 21, 1999 Mr. Bill Pembroke Kimley -Hom and Associates 12700 Park Central Drive, Suite 1800 Dallas, Texas 75251 RE: Pooh Park Flood Study; College Station, Texas NDMCE Project No. 98- 09 -085.0 Dear Mr. Pembroke: Pursuant to your request we have made some modifications to our approved HEC -2 model of Wolf Pen Creek in College Station, Texas to reflect the more detailed topographic information obtained from Kerr Surveying Co. The modifications were made to cross - sections 171.80 and 175.30 both of which cross the Pooh Park tract as shown on the accompanying exhibit. The changes made were to the southeast bank of the sections only as the Kerr survey did not include the opposite bank. The new topography was only slightly different from that used for the original study sections. Consequently, the results of the revised hydraulic model are similar to the approved model. Table 1 below shows the comparison of the original approved model results to the revised model results. The maximum change occurs at cross - section 175.30 and is a rise of 0.16 feet. This change does not significantly change the position of the "Limits of 100 -Year Flood Plain" line that we defined on the copy of the Kerr survey that we transmitted to Brad Kerr on March 23, 1999. The change has no effect on the position of the Floodway tine that we defined on that same survey copy. TABLE 1 CROSS ORIGINAL REVISED CHANGE SECTION 100 YR 100 YR CWSEL CWSEL *171.80 283.73 283.75 0.02 *175.30 286.27 286.43 0.16 179.40 287.19 287.30 0.11 180.40 287.49 287.58 0.09 181.12 286.89 286.96 0.07 182.40 287.84 287.89 0.05 185.50 288.91 288.94 0.03 188.00 290.15 290.16 0.01 190.80 290.74 290.75 0.01 193.50 291.13 291.13 0.00 195.50 292.10 292.11 0.01 197.50 292.43 292.43 0.00 199.50 292.47 292.47 0.00 203.50 293.17 293.17 0.00 * Section through Pooh Park Site Two NorthPark / 8080 Park Lane / Suite 600 / Dallas, Texas 75231 / (214) 739 -4741 anc-:cn Mr. Bill Pembroke April 21, 1998 Page 2 We hope that this brief report answers the questions that the City had regarding our delineation of the floodplain on the Pooh Park tract. Please call if you have any additional questions. Sincerely, NATHAN D. MAIER CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 4 g / 1 141 (911rf - Mark W. Roberts, P.E. MWR/mwr attachment { Cc: Veronica Morgan, City of College Station Brian Becker, Trust Becker Law Firm �., ,,roc 2 cn ==- T --Idle./ _' 1.11 L F Scale: 1' • 200' A 00 (� % o / A N 4t' { 4. s 0 T,• �.t LIMITS OF J h 100 YEAR `�i. FLOODNIAY PER 4 NATHAN MAZER � �O ss s�s 1 s 9r co N i 4 100 YR FLOOD PLAIN LIMITS OF � ■ � •o 1/gi 'q <i ZONE AE PER .q:/s.. • q'q eg ti ? (FIRM MAP) �'= s rog ,� LIMITS OF N � .0 it Ix 1 ' • + 1 f Y$ , 100 YEAR i . W W ,P FLOOD PLAIN °C -O PER NATHAN MAZER 4, • + ,. i6 Z x cS • ) + • � ; i, . ,P .ti \ ` � s 'g c �� 4.. � \ �� s OMITS OF PLAIN 0 q � � . � • � : J *; , 100 YEAR Ok � � ,� ' ER NATHAN MAIER 1( 4_ �. ,� ,P � 448 + ►� . � ' OMITS OF �., 100 YEAR - - t ? 4 FLOOD PLAIN �Q � � ,�• � PER NATHAN MAIER o UMITS OF 4 ^ry � � �k'� 100 YEAR n_. �c , 4 2 FL000 A �• 2 + � 3 1 0 . '` g. 17 $7.3 EXHIBIT UMITS OF 100 2 YR. FLOOD PLAIN COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS • (FIRM MAP) NATHAN D. MAIER CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 8080 PARK LANE. STE 600 DALLAS, TEXAS 75231 -- - I 4-,r -1 dTE :GO 66- t2 -„idd Npv NATHAN D. MAIER CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC FAX COVER SHEET Two NortliPark ! 8080 Park lane 1 Suite 600 Dallas, Texas 75231 (214) 7394741 / FAX (214) 739.5961 DATE: 04/27/99 NDM. JOB NO.: 98 -09 -085 TIME: 10:30 AM TO VERONICA MORGAN PHONE: (409) 764 -3570 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION FAX: (409) 764-3496 FROM: Mark W. Roberts, P.E. PHONE: (214) 739 -4741 NATHAN 1. MAIER CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. FAX: (214) 739 -5961 NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: # 1 IF THIS TRANSMISSION IS INCOMPLETE OR INTERRUPTED, PLEASE CONTACT US AT (214) 739 -4741 ORIGINAL COPY ® WILL ❑ WILL NOT BE MAILED • Veronica: The previous report we sent to you on 4/21/989 regarding the Pooh's Park site being developed by the Seitz Group had an exhibit drawing attached. We have found an error in that drawing. What was labeled "Limits of 100 Year Floodway per Nathan Maier" on that drawing was actually our revised 100 year floodplain. What was labeled "Limits of 100 Year Floodplain per Nathan Maier" on that drawing was actually the 100 year floodplain elevation from our orignal City of College Station study. The attached corrected drawing should be substituted for the original and the original discarded. If you would like an electronic copy of the drawing please send me you r email address and I will forward it to you. My address is mroberts @ndmce.com. Thank you for your assistance. TA.A tir�z :rnr ��- i� -.4dtf i i Scale: 1' .. 200' { Ak \ A t< 4 f ccs,if l ir oil A / y FLOOD RAIN PER 3i • rr NDMCE(1999 SIM) , e O ss� iv y s r 4 1 \\ � 4 b � 4,1 lir,4 'g, ,� 4 � � Hi d N I 4 } a 5 1 'et g 4 1 �1 ,f : , ti � ph.o. ` , ` '.Y ■1 • �i s r • • e 4 r ir,\. 4: 4+ 4 4 : 4 k w a �� r �� p Yp. ti i. I � �� % • �, �' c LEGEND � -j - � eb ��. 4 ,'^ Arti � � w tr % + 4 4 ‘ , , .- A A UMITS OF 'ti � O • i` 2 PER O NDMCE V , /9 AO i 2 g� • FLOOD PL,4fN EXHIBIT 100 , POOH'S PARK DEVELOPMENT OF FLOOD PLAIN '" APRIL. 1999 PER NDMCE II NATHAN D. MAIER CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 8080 PARK LANE. STE 600 DALLAS, TEXAS 75231 — LAZota' 1111F . 1 max[ - a s 0 A a . ' S ( w t- , s.d . b 3 ' iir Ai' %lb 0 0,0 , . • Veronica Morgan Re: Development agreement with LaCour and SCC r r � m r vA =rr Pa e 1 4 From: Carta Robinson Ny 48, " To: Natalie Ruiz, Veronica Morgan Date: 6/25/98 11:27AM Subject: Re: Development agreement with LaCour and SCC This is in response to your question conceming whether the City can require a dedication of the ROW on Lot 1 rather than purchase the ROW pursuant to the Development Agreement, now that the owner is planning to subdivide Lot 1 and sell the front portion. It is my opinion that if we were to require the dedication rather than purchase the ROW, the City would be in breach of the agreement, as long as the other parties to the agreement have continued to comply with those terms that apply to them. The Development Agreement has the effect of waiving any applicable ordinance requirements and replacing them with the terms of the agreement. Paragraph 12 of the Agreement expressly requires the City to acquire the Kyle Street South ROW at the contemporary F.M.V. The December 6, 1996, amendment to the agreement modifies the terms under which the City can acquire the ROW by providing some express discounts. The requirement that the City purchase the ROW rather than acquire it by dedication is not expressly contingent upon the owner maintaining Lot 1 in any certain way. Paragraph 14 of the Agreement does require LaCour and SCC to comply with all other applicable ordinances and state and federal laws. So, as long as SCC can legally subdivide Lot 1, SCC's decision to do so does not violate the terms of the Agreement. The only "loophole" I see is contained in Paragraph 16 of the Agreement. The failure of any party to meet the terms and conditions of the Agreement has the effect of terminating the Agreement. If that happens, the City no longer has any obligation to waive or defer any ordinance requirements or comply with any other provisions of the Agreement (i.e. the City could acquire the ROW by dedication as the Kyle Street South extension is now reflected on the Thoroughfare Plan). Has Lacier or SCC complied with all terms of the Agreement? As we talked about Tuesday, even if the City could legally get out of the agreement to purchase the ROW, there is a policy issue of whether or not the City wants to do that and face the potential fallout. If you need a more formal written opinion regarding this matter let me know and I'II get one to you. Shirle Volk - Re: Re • • at of SCC /LaCour re • . lat . v..a.'Xr. Page 1 From: Carla Robinson To: Jim Callaway, Natalie Ruiz, Paul Kaspar, Shirle... Date: 7/1/98 4 :25PM Subject: Re: Replat of SCC/LaCour replat I had an opportunity to talk with Harvey and Roxanne about this and there aren't as many legal issues as thought. First, it's probably a good idea to contact both surveyors and let them know there is a discrepancy. Whenever the two disparate plats are harmonized, MDG should submit a revised plat (if the original plat is incorrect). It would be a good idea to let MDG know that the City will note on the revised plat that its purpose is to correct mistakes on the original plat. As far as staff's potential recommendation to P &Z to deny the plat if it's not pulled before July 16, what would be the basis for denial? Unless the replat fails to comply with the requirements in the Local Govemment Code, the plat must be approved. And as far as I could tell from our meeting, the replat meets all statutory requirements. Finally, while I certainly see your concem with the dedication requirements in the ordinance and the building encroachment in the flood way, there is nothing that the City need do or can do at this point. We can't require dedication of property after it's already been developed with a parking lot and building. Though the building's construction in the flood way is a problem for the owner, that is something the City is neither required to remedy or can remedy. The only potential negative impact to the City is the fact that the building is in the flood way and, as you said in the meeting, if and when FEMA audits us, that could be a negative mark on our "report card." If I haven't answered all of your concerns just let me know. Good Luck! CC: Harvey Cargill, Roxanne Nemcik _ _ _ • f COLLEGEE STATIO P. 0. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue • College Station, TX 77842 \ / Tel 409 764 3500 MEMORANDUM TO: Brad Kerr, Kerr Surveying Co. j FROM: Natalie Ruiz, Assistant Development Coord' . tor 0' DATE: June 16, 1998 RE: Lacour Subdivision, Replat of Lot 1. Attached is a copy of the above mentioned final plat with staff comments. Please address the staff comments on the final plat and submit the following information by noon on Tuesday, June 23, 1998: 10 copies of the revised final plat; and, _ the revised mylar original. If there are comments that you are not able to address, please submit a letter stating why you were not able to make the necessary changes. This letter will be included in the Planning and Zoning Commission packets for their consideration. The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting will be at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 2, 1998 in the City Hall Council Room, 1101 Texas Avenue South. Recently, the City Council held a retreat and established their strategic issues for the next year. One of the issues adopted by the Council was the extension of George Bush Drive East (previously Kyle Avenue) from Harvey Road to Holleman. Staff will be working on this issue over the next year in hopes of accomplishing this extension. Due to this action by the Council and the existing development agreement that exists on this property, the City would like to explore the option of purchasing the George Bush Drive Fast right -of -way at this time with your client. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 764-3570. Thank you. Attachment cc: I SE College Station Partners, Ltd., 2121 Sage Road, Ste 380, Houston, TX 77056 file #98 -222 Home of Texas A&M University s Shirley Volk Re Development agreement with LaCour and SCC Page From: Carla Robinson To: Natalie Ruiz, Veronica Morgan Date: 6/25/98 11 :27AM Subject: Re: Development agreement with LaCour and SCC This is in response to your question concerning whether the City can require a dedication of the ROW on Lot 1 rather than purchase the ROW pursuant to the Development Agreement, now that the owner is planning to subdivide Lot 1 and sell the front portion. It is my opinion that if we were to require the dedication rather than purchase the ROW, the City would be in breach of the agreement, as long as the other parties to the agreement have continued to comply with those terms that apply to them. The Development Agreement has the effect of waiving any applicable ordinance requirements and replacing them with the terms of the agreement. Paragraph 12 of the Agreement expressly requires the City to acquire the Kyle Street South ROW at the contemporary F.M.V. The December 6, 1996, amendment to the agreement modifies the terms under which the City can acquire the ROW by providing some express discounts. The requirement that the City purchase the ROW rather than acquire it by dedication is not expressly contingent upon the owner maintaining Lot 1 in any certain way. Paragraph 14 of the Agreement does require LaCour and SCC to comply with all other applicable ordinances and state and federal laws. So, as long as SCC can legally subdivide Lot 1, SCC's decision to do so does not violate the terms of the Agreement. The only "loophole" I see is contained in Paragraph 16 of the Agreement. The failure of any party to meet the terms and conditions of the Agreement has the effect of terminating the Agreement. If that happens, the City no longer has any obligation to waive or defer any ordinance requirements or comply with any other provisions of the Agreement (i.e. the City could acquire the ROW by dedication as the Kyle Street South extension is now reflected on the Thoroughfare Plan). Has Lacier or SCC complied with all terms of the Agreement? As we talked about Tuesday, even if the City could legally get out of the agreement to purchase the ROW, there is a policy issue of whether or not the City wants to do that and face the potential fallout. If you need a more formal written opinion regarding this matter let me know and I'll get one to you. i N • ;Shirley Volk - Fwd:Re: Development a greement with LaCour and SCC From: Veronica Morgan To: Jim Callaway, Mark Smith, Skip Noe Date: 6/25/98 2:09PM Subject: Fwd: Re: Development agreement with LaCour and SCC here is legal's answer to the question posed in the strategic issue #5 meeting the other day. we will proceed with the staff report taking this replat to p&z at the July 16th meeting. mark, do you want to talk to them about purchase now or just forget it and you can do it later on during your street project? let me know if you want us to help facilitate any of the discussions at this time with this replat. thanks v CC: Edwin Hard, Frank Simoneaux, Jane Kee, Paul Kas... Shirley Volk Re Scc/Lacour Develo men A reement (Office Maxj h �w., ...: . Y rp ..v. Pa e 1 t A.....:.m��.,,,.w,.:. µ._, .ar ,.v �Px.,..._,,. , �.,, .v..: ,,..:, . , .x.:.v. .,,.,.. ....;.�,:,..w...v:.. M.,.,.....�.,. -.: ,,.: N. :�,:.- :.,.:.,Y.:x:.,,.9..v:.v: From: Veronica Morgan To: Deborah Grace, Debra Charanza, Edwin Hard, Jane... Date: 6/19/98 5:28PM Subject: Re: Scc/Lacour Development Agreement (Office Max) no, that hasnt changed.... we will still pay him that money...i'll call him and remind him to invoice us. the thing that i am going to try and find out from our atty's Monday is if we can now require him to dedicate the r.o.w. for gbush east since he is subdividing (which wasnt the original intent in the development agreement - in there it was going to stay as one lot)....in a mtg i attended, skip has requested i research this idea. so i'Il research and update all on the answer once i find it. »> Shirley Volk 06/19/98 03:36PM »> Fred Heyne called today from Mexico, where he is currently developing a single family subdivision about 200 miles outside of Mexico City, somewhere in the mountains. His phone and fax number is 001 -52- 415- 20796. He said the 001 Is Long Distance Operator, the 52 is the country (Mexico), 415 is the area code and his phone number there is 20796. He was retuming a call Nat made to him. Well, we chatted for a long time with him telling me that the message from Nat was that we are getting ready to extend E.Geo Bush (Kyle South), and his reply is "go for it and just use the steps outlined in the development agreement ". I actually forgot to tell him to submit an invoice for the half of the cost of the grade study like you told me to, Veronica, but Paul said that's a good thing! Anyway, I didn't give him any info about that, and I didn't know why Nat had called, so I really didn't TELL him anything! For once poor memory was a good thing, I guess. Anyway, if anyone needs to talk to him, you now have both his phone & fax number. Also, since you called me from your car the other night with the message about the money for the grade study and 1 sent out the e-mail to everyone, if that's really changed, perhaps someone should tell us all so we won't make a blooper! >» Shirley Volk 06/18/98 09:11AM »> Veronica was reviewing the da for this project, and noticed that the City agreed to pay 50% of the grade study for the extension of Kyle. SCC never invoiced us for that amount and she has had a P.O. cut and it's still outstanding, but she needs an invoice or at least a letter asking for the funds in order to complete processing it. If anyone talks to Fred Heyne about his replat, please pass this information on to him, or at least refer him to Veronica so she can explain what happened. Thanks. � • u v Y o MM Zoe- Fy mc�aaw ,v * 1 • 47# ��l` N , „e„.., ;,,e ci ...., . , ":9 4111 1.4 .1 +c-- - ,# R. "43 „ilk "t-41004V •■' ' * ittb * ' -o- h. '-.44.fe> '.- „*„. _, , 4 cc 1 S'' a■ 7 40 0 00, V. :‘,44 N , ' ' ' . ' Wcril 00 1 4 1110 0 ‘ ci• CZ 41 4, - .t.- N. ,_,,,*. 4$4 0‘ , .� tip' 44:13„44-es.-4 z m.J o t 4 '6 1 +, 4 /Y,s, r,..) f� Y O .. 0 w40 t ,.,.. ic 4,-0 , , 0 5.°1- 1 f 4 (4. 4, -- .„.... ..„ ..,,,-..,6,,,,,,,,,,, --::: zs s r ., .,J S Cl._ J U ' .i' r h�„ 1 ' - .'" C. * 4 41 ,-, ,. 's . a 4 W A a : 4 0P 4 ' C. ro - L 44 e C9 o tt Ai - 44...■ .41 u n , 0 .-\--''' 11 ..N. ...7'4' (5 40 01,s ; .. ot b 11°'.-- $111P ..,,,,., / r- Q:z. h.4:1 ., i g c„,,,A c.) 1:14 i 4 • . '''4-, 6 4,,,,N.. ,,, <4, . It Ir. f jib.. ,_ re A: i t -..4. 1 t f #j . 4 cko ,„,i, . ,,,,_ ,,,t...-,_ 1, ,,, s 9. . . ,.„ , ---,. 0 .. _.....,. # ,,,_ \c 4,,,,, ,..., ,,,„ ,.. 1 STAFF REPORT Item: Consideration of a Final Plat (Replat) for the.LaCour Subdivision, Lot 1 located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Harvey Road and George Bush Drive East. (Planning Case No. 98 - 222) Item Summary: This replat divides the current single 4.34 acre lot into 2 lots of approximately 2 acres 1' each. Lot lA currently contains the Office Max development and Lot 2A is currently undeveloped. Both lots are zoned for WPC. This plat will provide for cross access and parking between both lots. The plat also dedicates the Wolf Pen Creek 20' minimum reservation area on these lots. This dedication was to have taken place with the previous plat but deed record research did not show that the additional dedication had occurred. Given that, the developer is showing that dedication with this plat. There is some question as to the correct location of the floodway line. The original survey and the survey done with this replat do not agree on the floodway location. As noted in the engineering comments on floodplains, staff is working with the original surveyor and the replat surveyor to understand the differences between the two interpretations. We will have further information on this subject at the meeting. Policy Issue Statement: Civic Pride Citizens benefit from well - planned, attractive residential and commercial areas, and from preserving historic areas. Item Background: A final plat for this subdivision was approved in early 1996. This plat contained a single lot, Lot 1, along with a reserve tract, a small portion of Kyle Street right -of - -way dedication and a Wolf Pen Creek dedication area. This single lot, Lot 1 was then subsequently developed as the Office Max site with a small pad site that was cleared and prepared for construction but was never developed. The parking area that is currently constructed was to serve both pad sites. The parking was contained on the single lot so that parking and access was to be shared. With this new replat, that intent should remain, therefore a note has been placed on the plat requiring cross access and parking between Lot lA and 1B. Budgetary & Financial Summary: NA Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the final plat. If additional conditions are warranted as a result of the floodway resolution, those will be presented at the meeting. Related Advisory Board Recommendations: NA City Attorney Recommendation/Comments: NA Commission Action Options: Approve, approve with conditions, or deny the final plat. Supporting Materials: 1. Location Map 2. Application 3. Engineering Information and Notification Information o:\ group \deve_ser\stfrpt \98- 222.doc ENGINEERING Water: Water is provided to both lots through an 8" line along Harvey Road and an 8" line along George Bush Drive East. Sewer: Sewer is provided to both lots through an 18" line along the Harvey Road frontage. Streets: The lots have access provided to both Harvey Road and George Bush Drive East. Off-site Easements: N/A Sidewalks: Sidewalks are existing along Harvey Road and George Bush Drive East. Drainage: The drainage design for the improvements on the property were met during the development of the Office Max site. Flood Plain: The latest Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps show that a portion of this property is located within the 100 year floodplain. As shown on the replat, the floodway location is also different from that shown by Municipal Development Group on the original plat. This is due to each firm using different sources for their floodway information. Kerr Surveying has used the 1992 FEMA FIRM map while MDG used the 1988 Nathan D. Maier "Revised Existing" Study. The Maier Study was performed specifically for the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor and was to have been adopted by FEMA with their 1992 FIRM maps. Apparently FEMA did not fully adopt the Maier Study or there is an error in the FIRM mapping or perhaps surveyor's interpretation a difference in sure or's inte retation of the location of the floodway line. At the time of this writing, discussions are being held with FEMA to understand if the difference is an error in the FEMA mapping, a problem that FEMA had with the Maier Study in this particular area or differences in interpretation. Oversize request: None Parkland Dedication: Parkland dedication is not required for commercial property. Wolf Pen Creek dedication has partially been met with the previous plat and the remainder is being met with this plat. Impact Fees: N/A NOTIFICATION: Legal Notice Publication(s): NA Advertised Commission Hearing Dates(s): July 2, 1998 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: NA Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 200': NA Response Received: None o:\ group\deve_ser\stfrpt \98- 222.doc STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS No. 1 Project: FAZOLI'S RESTAURANT (SP) (00 -68) 1. Please show the side street setback. 2. The parking legend needs to show the shared parking of Lots 1A and 1 B. { Parking requirements: Retail 1 per 250 ft. @ 30,000 ft. = 120 spaces Restaurant w /drive thru 1 per 100 ft. @ 3,862 ft. = 39 spaces Total required 159 Total provided 198 3. In the predevelopment meeting, it was discussed that the parking spaces along Harvey Road next to the drive thru entrance would be removed due to potential conflict with the drive thru. 4. The drive thru measures 11'. Please make sure the width is at least 12' as called out. 5. Consider increasing the width of the drive thru and the turning radius. As it is, a passenger car can negotiate the drive thru, but vehicles with a longer wheel base will be running over curbs. 6. What are the spurs off the drive thru? 7. The dumpster needs to be gated as it faces a ROW. 8. In a development agreement regarding this property, a park access easement was to be provided south of the parking lot. Please show this easement on the site plan. 9. The water line next to George Bush Drive needs to be in an easement. 10. The public electrical lines need to be within an easement. 11. Since the building will be sprinkled, fire department connections need to be shown. 12. Indicate fire lanes. 13. Wheelstops are shown on the handicapped parking detail but not on the site plan. Please adjust accordingly. Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 2 14. Indicate the use of #4 bar on the curb details. 15. Provide a water and sanitary sewer legend to include water demands (minimum, maximum, and average demands in gallons per minute) and sewer loadings (maximum demands in gallons per day). 16. Show the landscape reserve line on the site plan. 17. Please show dimensions of development and easements on landscape plan. 18. Please show frontage dimensions. Calculate streetscape requirements using frontage minus visibility triangles and driveway. 19. Transformers and meters need to be screened from the ROW. 20. The number of plants on the landscape plan and the number in the landscape table are not the same. Please reconcile and adjust the total landscape points provided, if necessary. 21. The 1" double check valve is unacceptable as per water works. 22. It would be beneficial to have an elevation of the building from Wolf Pen Creek at the Design Review Board meeting. 23. Where will the menu board be? Will there be a canopy over the menu board? This information will be needed for the Design Review Board meeting. Reviewed by: Molly Hitchcock Date: 18- Apr -00 Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 2 Q FAZOLI'S DRB REVIEW ❑ Conformance with codes /ordinances ❑ Logic of design ❑ Exterior space utilization ❑ Architectural character ❑ Attractiveness ❑ Materials selection ❑ Harmony and compatibility ❑ Circulation ❑ Maintenance I '. ❑ Lighting — harmonious with building; no sodium; reduce glare (exterior lighting ?) ❑ Garbage - screen with live plants from creek; ROW's; parking; trails ❑ Relationship of building to site - transitions; pedestrian safety; exceed setbacks; decorative parking areas; height/scale ❑ Relationship to adjoining areas — screens; materials ❑ Landscape transition — (tree preservation) ❑ Harmonious, but not monotonous, textures, lines, and masses ❑ Park access easements — (build as per approved office max) ❑ Materials - durable; suitable; harmonious ❑ Colors — harmonious with only compatible accents (bldg., h -cap ramp, islands, red — too much ?) ❑ Landscaping — unity of design; protected from traffic; screening ❑ Signs - colors, materials and lighting restrained Ii