HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes
~
'"
...
.11'
MINUTES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Planning · and. Zoning Commission
August 2,. .1990
7:00P.M.
. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Sawtelle, Vice Chairman Dresser, Members Michel and Hall
(Council.Liaison Gardner was in .the audience)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Members Colson,. Gentry, and Esmond
STAFF PRESENT: Senior Planner Kee, .Msistant to City Engineer Morgan,
Planning Technician Rosier, . (Dev. Rev. Coord. Volk,.Sr. Assist.
City Attomey.Oraham, andCityPlanner..Callaway were.in the
audience.)
AGENDA ITEM NC?l:Approva! of MInutes -meeting of July B. 1990 and July 19. 1990.
Mr. .Hall made a motion to approve the . minutes as. submitted. .. . Mr. ..Dresser seconded.. the motion
'after some clarification on Page 3 of the July 5,1990 minutes. (Mr. Esmond was referring to the
drainage and utility R.O.W. which Mr.Pullen.said served asa detention point.) The minutes
wereapproved~ unanimously in a.vote of 4-0.
AGENbAITEM NO.2: Hear VisitOIB.
~ 'i
t--;
/
No one came forward.
AGENDA ITEM ..NO. .3:.... ApuhJ1chearlng .on . the question .of grantlnga. CondWonalUse Pemdi
fora bowUng center to be located in the former Lowe'sbuBdingwhlch Is located in the Wolf
Pen Creek CoIrldor.AppUcant.18 MtkeWillkler. . .(90-708)
Senior Planner Keepresentedthestaffreport. She explained that this ltemproposes a cha~ge
in use to a recreation center. ... She identified the size anc!/dimensions . of th subject lot. Kee also
pointed out the s"Q.rrounding zoning classifications. She said that the subject lot is zoned WPC
(Wolf Pen Creek Corridor).
Ms.Kee said that . the following will be determinedbytheP&Z Commission:
1. Should the proposed be a permitted use in this location as a Conditional Use
Permit?
2. Establish the parking requirement.
3. Determine if the. standards set by the. Wolf Pen Creek Ordinance. are met.
Ms.Kee then showed slides.of the.site. .One slide.showed the back of the lot which is covered
with gravel containing some weeds. Another slide showed the detention area.
Senior Planner Kee noted that.thefront.of.the.building has a brick exterior while the.sides are
metal.
Ms. Keealso . presented slides of the . location. for. the . future ' planned Colgate extension.
Kee stated that the applicant now proposes 6 parking spaces per lane instead of 5.
Ms... Kee .proceeded. toexplain.the . Design ..Review Board's. responsibilities . when ... they reviewed
this project. She said that most of their comments were relative. to. landscaping the north side
which is visible from the Creek. They wanted trees to obstruct the view of the white, metal
siding . The applicant has. no plan to improve this side of the. buUding~
'It
.."
.'
.-
Kee noted that oneaf the slides. showed a stmctureon the site which may by developed for
another recreational use. in... the . future.
Kee also explained that a blue. awning is planned for the existing main entrance. She said that
a freestanding sign is planned as . well.
Kee pointedouf that the City will not require underground electrical service.
She concluded by saying that the Design Review Board is .in favor. of the project.
Mr. Dresser. said. he wanted details concerning. signage.
Chairman. Sawtelle wanted to make sur~that the trees would not be planted under power lines.
Mike Winkler, the applicant, came forward. He said that the other door on the front of the
building will be eliminated. ..He also.stated that the old Lowe's. sign will be replaced. He said
that an awning will be. added to the main entrance. Winkler explained.future plans to remove,
the hurricane. fence and lumber. rack.
Mr. Winkler's presentation.included several slides of the northside of the property and other
metal buildings in the area. .....He.. explained the phasing .. of construction planned . for the interior.
He said that the first proposaL for 5 parking spaces per lane has been changed to 6 spaces per
lane since the meeting of. the Project Review Committee.
Winldersaid. that the Committee asked for .someimprovementto the north. side. .. He said that
Mr. Brochu had suggested some types of trees which are .favorable to this climate. He said that
an entrance on the north. side may be desired in the future.
Ray Britton, the.architect.for this project, came.forward. .He said that the applicant.plans to
replace the space of the. other front doors. with v-groove pine.
~
Mr.Winldersaid that the bowling alley fits the recreational theme of the Wolf Pen Creek
project. ..He .also.. reminded . the Commission that future expansions of the bowlingjrecreational
facility must. come back before. the Commission.
Mr. Dresserasked.abouftheplans.for Colgate relative to this project. He also voiced concern
for providing electrical service .. to . the building.
Mr. Winldersaidthat. the poles are in a retention . pond and cannot. be buried.
Mr. Dresser clarified that. he.was talking about. changes where . service hits the building.
Ms. Keewho had the same question initially, read the Electrical Division's response.
Mr. MichelbelievedthatUperlane" was an inaccurate basis for parking requirements and that
16per.lane"seemedridiculous. . Oddly enough, he. pointed out, the .result would be the same if
the . calculations were .. based on squa.refootage. (Based on .36, 000 square feet - 240 spaces).
Mr.. Winkler saidthatif.theyfindoufthat240 spaces.is excessive, they may ask. the. Commission
to take this into consideration when determining parking requirements for future. expanded
uses.
Mr. Michel asked if plans are to keep the building its present blue and white colors.
Mr. Winkler said ..it.. is . his understanding that the colors . are . acceptable in · the absence . of any
guidelines.
The Commission inquired about the guidelines.
Ms. Keesaid.that itis.her.understanding.that the colors. should. be .somewhat neutral or earth
tones. with possible accents 01 other . colors.
P&Z minutes 8-2-90 page 2
"V
t
Others consented that there should be no.morellWestern AutoOrangeJ'
Mr. Michel asked about the trees to be planted along the side of. the building.
Mr. Britton said that. the Bald Cypress was to. be planted closest.to the building.
Mr. Hall said that the applicant's comparison to other metal buildings in the area is misleading
because they have>a brick exterior. He also asked if the applicant had considered painting the
building a. tan color .. instead of white,to be. more. compatible. with, the brick.
Mr. Winkler said that they had not wanted to paint due to thepossiblefiakingof paint. He said
that theDesign~eviewBoard's suggestion for trees is to obstruct the view of the white, metal
siding.
Mr.. Hall expressed concemthatthesignagealongthe frontage road meets the. guidelines
relative to lighting.
Ms. Kee said that since this is the first project and yet not anew project,the Design Review
Board commented on the parking lot <lights which are in existence but did not get into the
details of the sign's lighting.
Mr. Hall also expressed concern for traffic c ire ulatioIl onto the access !oad which will
eventually be..one-way.
Mr.. Winkler suggested that the future planned,. one-way access road · should not be a problem
due to the planned extensions of Colgate and of Southwest Parkway to Raintree.
Mr . Michel. asked about. the <"timing".. of the . interior construction . phasing.
~.
Mr . Winkler said thatthe plans are to begin construction on one side just as soon as the other
side is. ready. There is no "phasing"planned.for..the.outside.
Mr. Hall. asked about the. Bradford Pears.
Mr. Britton said they would be used throughouttheiproject,justnotalon~the. north side.
Assistant to City. Engineer Morgan asked what . color they plan to paint the V-groove pine.
Mr. Britton said. they were undecided.
Morgan . also asked if the building sign is neon.
Mr. Britton said it would not be neon. He explained the sign materials and lighting.
Chairman. Sawtelle opened the public.. hearing... Seeing..noone.come..forward,she closed the
public. hearing.
Mr. Dresser said that he agrees with the proposed usage. He also agrees with the parking
requirementbased.on6spacesp~r lane because it does not matter if it is. excessive since the
surface is already paved. .Hesaid. that hetmsts. the Design.. Review Board that. the landscaping
will be sufficient.
Ms. Sawtelle agreedwithii:Mr.Dresser.
Mr. Michel doubted .the. "per lane II criteria, but agreed with the result.
There was general discussion.
Chairman Sawtelle agreed with Mr. Michel because the parking requirement would not take
into account the..restaurant or spectators during league play.
P&Z minutes 8-2-90 page 3
J.
)
There was discussion concerning the parking requirement.
Mr. Michel made amotion to II approve the permitted useofabowling alley as proposed. The
parking requirement. shall be 240 spaces for the proposed use of 36,000 square feet."
Ms. Kee clarified that th.e Commission is not. going to object to.the color.
Chairman · Sawtelle said that she prefers tan but did not feel she had grounds to enforce it.
Mr.. Hall . asked if theP&Z .canmake . that . determination. .He suggested that a compromise of
less . landscaping in . exchange for tan paint could be reached.
Mr. Winkler. listed .the . following . reasons for not wanting to repaint the building a tan. color:
1. White is a clean · color.
2. Beige is..unappealing.
3. Trees achieve the same. goal.
4. The metal siding isllfactory white".
5. Paint might flake causing more> maintenance.
Assistant. to City Engineer.Morganasked.the.estimated age of the.treesas.shown on the site
plan.
Mr. Britton said they were the estimated size of 2-3 year old trees. He said that the Willow and
Bald Cypress were . chosen. in . part . .becauseof. the.ir fast growth rate.
Mr. Dresser . seconded · the motion.. which carried in . a vote of 4-0.
~
AGENDAITBMNO.4:. .ColUdderationofaDeve1opment.Agreement between theCltyof
CoD.egeStatJon, SldpperHarrlsand . the owner of the property known as the IMudLotl. a
commercJal parklng lot located at Church and Nagle Streets.
Ms. Kee reviewed what had transpired at the last meeting. . She said that after lengthy
discussion the 'Commission. decided to include a deadline for compliance with City parking lot
standards. She stated that they asked for the finish product to be brought back for review. She
pointed out..that the. changes were made on page 4.
Mr. Dresser noted that.provisions .for.landscapingmaintenancewere.not included in the
document.
Ms. Keesaid. . that presently. an. landscaping . is alive and . being . maintained.
Mr. Harrls assured the Commission that he has every intention of continuing to maintain the
landscapillg. .He .alsoinf9nn.ed them. that .he. was still operating on a month to month lease. He
saidhewaslnno.betterpositionto make improvements than the last time his agreement was
up for. renewal.
Mr. Dresser said that the new agreement puts Mr. Harris out of the parking lot business on June
1, 1991.
Mr. .Hall. said ..that.. it.. is not · his . intention to.. drive. Mr. Harris. out of business but rather to be fair. to
everyone else who was forced to comply with City standards.
Mr. Dr(:lsserasked if his colleaQ"ues consideredth~consequences iHtfails to be brought up to
standards. .Hecitedthe lot's . condition previous to Mr.Harris'busines~. He also cited the
Commission's long running battle with parking on private . lots.
Ms... Keeexplained .an . upcoming ordinance which will empower the City in. terms of
enforcement against parking on private property .
P&Z.minutes 8-2-90 page 4