Loading...
Coppell Rd BP-CS 940614MEMORANDUM To: From: Greg Jones, Chief Building Official Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., Assistant City Manager/City Engineer Coppell Road Business Park Date: June 14, 1994 On June 6th, plans were received from Travis Cramp concerning a site plan for Lot 1 of the Coppell Road Business Park. I am unclear as to what this is being submitted for. Has it been submitted to Building Inspections for building permits or is it being submitted to be routed through the DRC process, etc.? Regardless of why it was submitted, I have the following comments to offer: According to our newest floodplain maps, the general location of the floodplain is as shown on the attached plan. It appears as though two buildings, various parts of the parking and access easement are within the floodplain as shown on our maps. The floodplain should be tied down on the site plan and it should be noted that no construction is allowed in the floodplain. This includes fill, buildings, parking lots, etc. 2. Does this applicant need to plat this property? By platting the property we can gain necessary right-of-way and escrow for the construction of Coppell Road. 3. The applicant should comment as to how he arrived at the estimated 100-year floodplain elevation of 504. As per the Albert Halff, City-Wide Stormwater Management Study, the fully developed water surface in this area ranges from 507.5 to 508. The minimum finish floor requirement for any structure is 1 foot above that elevation or 2 foot above the existing floodplain. If the 504 is a correct existing elevation, it appears as though the fully developed water surface elevation will control. Therefore, the minimum finish floors on this site should range from 508.5 to 509. It appears as though Building 1 and Building 3 need to have the f'mished floor elevated. Again, please note that fill in the floodplain is not allowed. 5. Drainage plans should be submitted for this site. There is an existing 8 inch sewer line shown on the plan. However, no easement is shown for that sewer line. An easement should be dedicated for that sewer line or if an easement is existing it should be shown on this plan. /7. It appears as though they are proposing a 20 foot access and fire lane easement. Should this not be larger? Again, I am unclear as to why this was submitted. However, I do have some problems basically surrounding floodplain and drainage on this site. file/kgriffin/copprdpk