Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes ~ Jo...J, L PRCReport WPC Recreation Case #93-708 Page 2 The Board suggested. that the applicant look<atsomealternatives to the dead end parking configuration. Once the .project is working. at full capacity, these dead end areas may cause a problem with traffic flow. The site plan .should include specific notes explaining what exactly will be dlone in each phase of the development. The applicant should submit the following information prior to the Planning and Zoning ..Commissionmeeting: _ colored landscape plan; ____ color samples of the pedestrian walkways; _ colored elevation..drawings; ~ colored site plan; _ brick sample; ___ color. sample of the existing blue m.ansard roof .andproposed building stripe; _ rationale of the proposed parking with the variety of uses; and, _ any proposed signage attached or detached fromthe~building. The detention area on the north side.of the building is in need of maintenance. Coordinate any future changes pertaining to the detention area wit]h City Engineer David Pullen at (409) 764-3570. ELECfRICAL: Submit load data including proposed size and type of service. . Load data should include. information. for the entire.project upon complete development. Once the existing electrical service is updated, all of the overhead utility lirles will be.buried.. Coordinate details and > associated costs with Electrical .Operations Coordinator Tony Michalsky at (409)764-3660. Show the utility easement that coversithe existing electrical lines located alc)ng the south side of the property. FIRE: The building cannot be more than 150' away from a paved driving surface. The drive located on the west side of the building is over 100' long and would require an 80' turnaround... If this turnaround cannot be provided and there are no other alternative~,coordinateavariance request through Fire Inspector George Spain at (409)764-3781. .., 'Iii. .,. . , ~. 1. PRe Report WPCRecreation Case #93-708 Page 3 WATER/WASTEWATER: Distinguishbetwe.enexistingandprop.osed utility lines. Show the existing and proposed water and sanitary sewer taps and any adclitional water meters. SubmitnlihitnUtl1>axxdmaximumwater demands. and s~nitary <sewer loading information for .. the entire . development. . Coordinate.. details with Engineering Assistant Samantha Smith at (409) 764-3660. WNESTARGAS: SubmitloaddatR iI1fornmtiort forth~entiredevelopment. Coordinate details with Lone Star Gas Representative Mike Brune>at (409)776-0627. G.T.E.: Coordinate telephone service with G.T.E.Representative Laverne Akin at (409) 821-4723. TeA CABLE: Coordinateifuturecable.. service . with TCA...Cable .Representative.Mike. Lavender at (409)846-2044. SUBMIT 10 COPIES Op THE REVISED SITE PLAN BY FRIDAY, JUNE. 25, 1993 TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PLANNING AND. ZONING COMMISSION PACKETS FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 1,1993. , DRB Report Case #93-708 Wolf Pen. Bowling Page 2 The facade ort the .11orth . sicle of the building should. include archi~estpral and screening elements that will help tie.. the .. project. together. The pr~posed blue band ., around ... the entire building clqes not effectively. unify the . pr(1)j~et. The applicant should look at the existing mansard roqf and the possibil~~ pf tieing togetherthe two vertical pieces on either end of the building. If,allll.ef1~rance is de sire cl along the north . side of the, ... building, provide elevation dfa~ings.. of the proposed. entrance. > .'Fhe mechanicGlI equipment needs to be . scre~n~9: from the creek.Onc~thelake is installed, the trees that screen this:iptoject from Holleman' Drive and Post Oak Mall will be removed. ' The detention area on the north side of the building is in need of maiIlte~ance. Suggested additional vegetation alongthe west side of the buildi~g~.~~~gi,ally near the proposed batting cages. Landscaping .shouldbecreative and !n9'1~~l1otonous. The west elevation drawing is not detailed enough. tq. see. what it I,~H! i~8~:Rally look like . with the proposed expansion. Architectural and screeni*g!'S~ll~~~erations should be given to the west elevation since it will be visible frqm:!,~]j~! ii~teek and the proposed Colgate Drive extension. " , There is a lack of screening along the south side of the building. Concerned with the COllditionof the existing parking islands and ~anqseaping. The proposedgo~cart area to be located in the northwest corner of' ,~J1e [property is acceptable; however, screening and visibility from the creek shoul~l :1~e lpoked at carefully. The track should be appealing. Glnd incllldeelements ~rO~I~he! site and the park area instead of past go-cart facilities tnat used tires tOI~wr~und the track. .. ... I If the existing electrical. service needs to be updated, the city will look at the possibility of requiring the entire service underground at the develoI?er's lexpense. Utility details will be addressed. during. the technical review. Submit the video tapes of both vertical wind tunne~ facilities located in Pigeon Ford,....Tennessee...and.Macafee,. New. Jersey. SUBMIT 15 COPIES OF . THE REVISED SITE . PLAN TO BEREVIEWE:D BY STAFF PRIOR TO SCHEDULING A, TECHNICAL. REVIEW. M IN UTE S Planning & ..Zoning Commission CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS July 1, 1993 7:00P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Hawthorne, Commissioners Mariott, Lane, Gribou, Herrmg and Hall. MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner . Smith. STAFF PRESENT: City Planner Kee,CityEngineer Pullen, Planning Technician Thomas, Staff Planner Kuenzel and Planning Intern o o lev. (Councilman Schneider was in the audience.) AGENDA ITEM NO.. 1: Approval of minutes from the. meeting of June 17, 1993. Commissioner Gribou moved .. to.. approve the minutes from the meeting of June 17, 1993 as written. Commissioner Mariottseconded. the . motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. .2: Public hearing to consider a conditional use permit by the Wolf ]Pen Recreation Center to expand their existing facilities at 7500 East Bypass in the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor. (93..708) . I .~ City Planner · Keepresented the proposed expansion of the Wolf Pen Family Recreation Center. . The expansions include,..inPhase . One, batting. cages, .a.gymnastics center and a vertical wind tunnel. Future additions . will include a skating center and go-cart track. <A main concern of the Design Review Board was how the wind tunnel and existing elevations of the structure would be tied together from an architectural and aesthetic standpoint. The applicant addresses this by matching roof line elevations at entrances . and by continuing the blue color. theme and brick around the building. The Design Review Board recommends that the north elevation ~ntrance be completed with phase one, although it need not bea functional entrance until the completion of Colgate < Street. The applicant has also submitted information relative to parking requirements which the staff has reviewed and feels comfortable with supporting. Other Design Review Board concerns were the condition of the existing landscape islands in the front parking area and. the condition of the detention area along the north side of the property. The Board ..did. recommend. approval of .the .project .expansion with the applicant's addressing of the issues pointed .out in the various reports. A representative of the applicantpresented a video tape of examples of the proposed vertical wind tunnel. The tape included demonstrations from the only other wind tunnel locations · in the United States in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee and Macafee,New Jersey. He stated that a.. noise study is currently being conducted; however, the findings are still not available. Chairperson Hawthorne opened . the pub lie hearing. Ray Britton, an architect representing the applicants, approached the Commission and explained one change to the proposed expansion. The owners recently discovered that the existing .. brick along the east elevation is no longer available. ... The difference in 'coloring. ofanewer. brick. placed. immediately. next to. the existing brick will be noticeable and not desired by the owners. <Thebrick>at the remaining entrances will not be a problem because the existing pattern can be matched closely enough in these areas. The owners would like to place a mural along the east elevation in place of the proposed brick. Commissioner Gribou questioned the applicant as to. the recommendation by the Design Review Board to consider some alternatives to the dead end parking configuration. \ /' Mr. Britton explained that the parking could be reconfigured with the loss of some parking spaces; however, the dead end parking area will not be used to capacity with the expansion in phase one. The owners would like to defer the reconfiguration and. possible redesign of the parking lot until the second phase of expansion. Mr. Britton also stated that theutility.department has required that.. the electricalsetvice be underground. The existing setvice isadeq uate for. phase one of the · expansion. . When ... th.e . skating. center is installed, the service will need to be upgraded. With > that upgrade, < the utility department is requiring the owners to pay $15,000 to bury the existing lines. . The owners would like to request that the City pay for the costs of burying thee.Iectricallines. Chairperson Hawthorne'closed the public hearing. Commissioner Mariott moved to grant a conditional use permit to allow the expansion of the Wolf Pen Family Recreation Center at 7500 East Bypass with. staff recommendations. . Commissioner. Gribou seconded the motion. Commissioner Herring expressed concern with the proposed mural to replace the brick along the east elevation. She suggested .that the motion. be conditioned upon the.DesignReviewBoard's approval of the mural. Commissioner Mariottmoved to amend the originaLmotion of approval to require the approval of the proposed mural by.theDesign .ReviewBoard. Commissioner.Gribou seconded the.amendment.which passed unopposed (6 - 0). Chairperson Hawthorne explained that the proposal will not come back before the Commission, the Design Review Board will make the final decision on the east elevation. The original motion to grant the conditional use permit as amended, passed unopposed (6 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Consideration. .ofa. final.plat for. the High Ridge. Su~division. (93-218) H City Engineer Pullen presented the staff report and recommended approval with the Project Review Committee comments. The..proposed..plat.corresponds .tothe.preliminary.platas submitted and approved by the Planning and. Zoniqg . Commission and City Council. Commissioner Gribou moved to recommend approval of the final plat of the High Ridge Subdivision with staff recommendations. . Commissioner Herring second~d the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Other business. There was no other business. AGENDA ITEM NO.5: Adjourn. Commissioner. Mariott moved to adjourn the meeting of. the. Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Hall seconded the motion whichpassedunopposed.{6 - 0). , 1'~1.... ...! , i'A f'J"rr'OOT/ ... If ... ......1 l I~UL~.\~ (~;;~~gT~C .. Ic~:n,~~~~ ~w~ P&.Z Commission Minutes June 1, 1993 Page 2