Daybridge LC/PP-CS 850926 (2) STAFF REPORT
September 26, 1985
CASE NUMBER
#85-08-26 - Daybridge Learning Center #220
APPLICANT/OWNER
Daybridge Learning Center, Inc.
15415 Katy Freeway Suite 600
Houston, Texas 77094
REPRESENTED BY
Threadgill-Dowdy and Associates
16250 Dallas Parkway Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75248
Larry Frassinelli, P.E.
LOCATION
Southwest corner of Parkway and Samuel Boulevards
EqUEST
Preliminary plat approval for a Day Care Center in an M F-2 zoned area
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The applicant is proposing to build a day care center in MF-2 zoning
with a Specific Use Permit (which has already been approved). The lot
is approximately 0.872 acres in size. Surrounding zoning is shown on
the enclosed zoning map. Single Family zoning is to the north and east
with multi-family to the south and west,
REMARKS
The off-street loading and unloading space appears adequate. The
Commission should inquire as to the number of students the establishment
will care for during the day to help determine if the parking space is,
indeed, adequate. In reviewing the plans, the City Engineers have
questioned the following items:
1. Make provisions for a sidewalk along Samuel Boulevard.
2. Samuel Boulevard should be a sixty foot (60') right-of-way.
Provision needs to be made to dedicate 7.5' of right-of-way
along the east property line. This will effect the building
setback lines and, possibly, the entire site plan.
3. The agreement between Daybridge Learning Center and the
adjacent downstream land owner concerning drainage should be
a part of the requirements of the Specific Use Permit and
should be incorporated into the Specific Use Permit.
4. The proposed sign for the Center should conform to the City
of Coppell sign ordinance or a request for a variance should
be made. It appears from the plans we received, that it is
not in compliance with this ordinance.
5. The screening wall is only five feet (5') in height; whereas,
it should be a minimum of six feet (6') high.
6. Other minor items on the plans should be addressed prior to
final plat approval.
STAFF EVALUATION
Since the applicant submitted his request after the deadline, and in
view of the above concerns, the City Engineers have no objection to
approving the preliminary plat, but prior to Council approval, the above
items should be addressed.
Ir~'NTi~d CO~T¥
DA~.~A$ COUNTY
.~~. SF-O
/
TC / ~.u.,.
~i~11~111~1
TC $F-12
ORD.
¢
~:'~ TC C
SF-12
SF-9