HomeMy WebLinkAboutMisc.Jun-11-99 04:10P KSA Architecture
TO : Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator
FROM: Gina Boozer email: gboozer@ksa-ad1.com
RE: Rudy's Site Plan
DATE: June 11, 1999
RECEIVING FAX: (409) 764-3496
NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING: 4
MESSAGE:
713 686 4900 P.01 I
Attached is the Site Plan Requirements Check List you'll need for Monday
morning. Mark Ferguson, the Landscape Engineer, will have 9 copies of the
Landscape Plan to you by 10:00 am Monday, June 14, 1999.
Thank you for the fax this morning. I think it is easier if we communicate by fax
or email. I would also like to be the primary contact on this project. I feel
things will flow smoother and more efficiently this way.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The Documents accompanying this fax transmission may contain information from
KSA/A+DI which is confidential or privileged. The information is intended for the use of
the individual or entity to whom it is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, be
aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of its contents is prohibited.
If not properly received please call. THANK YOU.
KSA ARCHITECTURE O:IRUDYS\COLLEOESTATION\DOCSt061l99NR.CKLST.DCC
2180 North Loop West, Suite 350, Houston, TX 77018
Phone, 713/686-4900 FAX- 71VARR-Al An WCO, L,-- ..a: -
developed out there has never been platted, but developed by metes and bounds back in the early
1960's.
Chairman Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Parker moved for approval, and Commissioner Horlen seconded.
The vote passed 7-0
Agenda Item No. 9: Discussion and possible action on a conceptual site plan for 504 Harvey
Road, Rudy's BarBQue.
Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report. This is the fourth restaurant to locate in the Wolfe
Pen Creek Corridor along Harvey Road. Unlike the other three restaurants, which were vacant, Rudy's
plans to develop an already-existing site. The Design Review Board (DRB)has met several times
regarding the Rudy's plans and has given strong opinions that the building should be oriented to the
creek. The Planning and Zoning Commission will be the approving body for the final site plan, although
that is not what is currently before the Commission. There are three site plans, Options A, B, and C
respectively, before the Commission so that the developer can get some clear direction on which
concept to prepare the final site plans for. The final site plans will then go before the DRB for
recommendation, and then before the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 17, 1999.
Concept A shows a circulation drive around the building. It shows the area between the creek and the
building as a landscaped area with a driveway of grasscrete, which is perforated concrete that allows
grass to grow through it. The hatched lines show a stamp-dyed concrete area, and the rest of the area
will be concrete. This concept would require a variance of 17 parking spaces, which would go to the
Zoning Board of Adjustments, and the ZBA is scheduled to hear that request on June 15, 1999. This
property will be going to the ZBA with a recommendation from the DRB.
Concept B shows a straight driveway with no turn-around for drivers. Between the creek and the
building would be a landscaped area with a patch of stamp-dyed concrete. There were concerns that
creating two dead-end parking rows could cause problems with multiple backing maneuvers, especially
during peak times. This concept would require a parking variance of 13 spaces.
Concept C was the least favored by the DRB. It shows a standard circulation aisle between the building
and the creek with parking on one side, which is a change from the original plan, which showed it
double-loaded. In order to soften the view from the back patio, where there will be an eating area, the
applicant would review an area of parking and replace it with landscaping, which would require a
variance of three parking spaces.
All of the parking variances would be considered by the ZBA-and the applicant would like to get some
feedback as to which of the three options the Commission prefers. Planner McCully pointed out that
the three new buildings did orient to the creek, and this would be a retrofit situation that the applicant is
trying to work with.
Commissioner Floyd asked if there were parking variances at the new buildings. Senior Planner stated
that they were not.
Commissioner Mooney asked how the driveways at the other restaurants were designed.
MZMinutes June 3, 1999 Page 13 of 15
Commissioner Kaiser answered that Sonic has a circular drive, and Kona's and Carino's were designed
to take advantage of the amenities of the Creek. The main concern was whether or not to put parking
lots along one of our most scenic amenities, and we moved away from the circular approach. There
was also a safety concern regarding the circular lot design.
Commissioner Mooney noted that there were some flaws in design "C". One was along the back line,
the parking spaces were compact. Another was that it was almost a straight shot toward the back of the
lot. The main problem with design "B" was where to go if you get to the end of the drive and cars are
behind you, as there was no place to turn around. Plan "A" was the most amenable to the Commission.
Commissioner Kaiser stated that there is a potential problem when the lot is filled and people have to
back out. Plan "A" attempts to remediate that, but the park-like setting is lost. City staff has indicated
that none of the plans pose problems with fire trucks servicing the area.
Commissioner Warren asked where staff anticipated overflow parking going, and Planner McCully
stated that the applicant has extra spaces on the Carino's site for employee parking.
Chairman Rife asked if protection of the natural trees existed and Planner McCully stated that she
believed so. She stated that that could be a condition when the Development Permit was issued.
Chairman Rife opened the public hearing.
Jim Basset, 303 West Dexter, has been a College Station resident for 36 years. One of his sons is an
officer of the Rudy's corporation and will be the oversight manager of the local operation. It was stated
that one of the applicants would have been present had they known what was going on.
Bill Davis, 1219 Boswell Street, suggested putting a "Y"-type configuration at the end of the lot with
no parking so drivers could maneuver a turn-around. Commissioner Kaiser stated that if that were
done, there would be a parking variance of 17 spaces.
Commissioner Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kaiser moved to adopt plan "B" with the recommendation that the applicant consider the
"U-shaped configuration. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion, with the condition that the
existing trees be protected, and for ZBA to approve the variance.
Commissioner Warren stated that she preferred plan "A as it was more aesthetically pleasing.
Commissioner Floyd agreed with plan "A", as did Chairman Rife.
Chairman Rife called for the vote of the approval of proposal "B". Motion fails 4-3.
Commissioner Mooney moved to accept proposal "A" and Commissioner Floyd seconded. Motion
carries 43.
Agenda Item No. 10:
Committee.
Appoint an alternate member to the Wolf Pen Creek Oversight
P&Z Minutes June 3, 1999 Page 14 of 15
w
W
z
C7
h
A
A
O
a
O
a
a
F
A
A
A
O
z
z
a
A
A
A
W
A
O
H
w
a
A
w
x
W
W
a
COD
w
a
F
0.
A
0
A
O U
s ~
a
d ~
H
a
w
w
O
~ H
a" -a
c
W
W
~ c
a~
as
H
a ~
~ -a
w
a
H ~
U ~
A ~
~ o
~ H
U ~
c
W
a
A ~
~ H
w
H
A
z
O
U
O
A
a
w
O
a
w
a
F
w
a
►~i
H
W
O
w
a
H
A
A
A
b
a~
0
C
s
O
ti
z
0
U
a
O
U
0
H
w
O
0
HI
0
0
w
O
z
W
Jun-11-99 04:10P KSA Architecture 713 686 4900
..v.ov V4vs 104 J496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS
P.02
® 002
strsaar ArruCAiton AND TICS
LOT CMCKZD err wrra 10
roLDEa corms or mnm PLAN Pon ugvmw
SITE PLAN MYNDR M REQUIREMENTS
(AXL CtIY ORDWANCES Must BE MM)
INCLUDING BUT NOT LU IIM TO THE FOLLOWING:
1. Shoat sine - 24" x 36" (miniwom).
2. A Iwy map (Dot amemarily to s ak).
3. Title bbek m bwju e:
W- Name, address. location, and lwd d %"Wdon
O- Name, address, AM teiepbatte Dntaba of applicant
i0' Natmr, address, and sclepl o w cumber of deveioper/owacc (if dif!ua fiom applicant)
W Nam address, sod lalcpltoae munber of arch.- xxte vioeet (if differs from applicant)
W Daw of aubmittal W. Pw T D ATS oN Tint$Lw-K -
dr, Total rite area
d. Noah arrow.
tf- S. Suede should be Largest standard cnpirtoerif)g sale pmstble oa Amm
W'- 6. Owac Wp and entreat cooing of Wcel Udall abutti a pamels. OWNER . KARTWSIT6 O 1P,L.f
2owwo. ALL PIKtOCe" wFt- ET AL_
it 7, xistin locations of dte f kowil+s on or sdjaa®t to time subject site:
W- Streets and *bwanos (ILO-W-).
0- Driveways (opposite and adjacent per Driveway Ordiamace 1961).
V*- Buildings.
it water amuw.
0- Slaw all sseseaxms dearly dcsomUng as adstmg and type (utility, nears, etc.).
Q' 100 yr. Boodplain and floodway (if applicable) on or adjacent to tfte proposed projam site, rote if them is
aoee an the site.
Utilities (noting sine and designate as existing) witUt or adjacent to the pmposied sift, including budding
bwsfi sorer btadoos, above smuod and uedeaground sovkc eonoectioat to buildings, and drainage inlem.
Kim Meat brad=-.
Tapopaphy (2' man or spot elevadom) and adYt valiamt *aimV iotorntiatioe_ (If
plan has loo much iofam atim show drainage an separate sboet.)
w, 8_ ra k0wom, type anti dimmions of the following.:
N/A O Phasing. Ea& pbaee must be able to stand alone to matt ordinane requiremcats.
The gross square footap of all buildings cad amca, and the proposed use of cacti. if diffnatt Uses arc
to ba located is s single building, show the location and sine of the usa within the buiidiutg_ Building
aepamdoo is a minimmta of 15 fad w/o additional fit* protocom
Setbaeb. Show buiidios mtbat l~ as outlined is Ordiaaeoe 1631 ZopimS OrdinanczC (Srction 7, Table A).
Off-Street parkmS areas with parking spaces drawn, tabalaa4, mad dkrmsioned Wu inumn pa&i ng space
is 9' x 20', or an a perimeter row 9' x 18' with a 2' ovCrb m& Dasigpate number of parking spaces
tcqubW by m innate and provided by pmposd.
tf handicap parlong spans.
arse PLAN CH=KUET 120
6"VC7CDOC 0345m
Jun-11-99 04:10P KSA Architecture 713 686 4900
- -I "%Vv (94 04h10 DEVELOPMENT Svcs
P.03
® 003
sr- Padck% Islands. Raiser! larhdgcape islands, (6" raised curb) a minimumc)f 180 sq. R- ate; wquired at both
rods of every pad== raw (grovhapacc area contiguous to The end island maybe applied toward ncc
required 190 sq. R). Additionally, 120 sq. B of 60&0 iog for every 15 interior
paridrg spa= mutt be
provided. ALl mquitod islands must be landxaped or set with decorative paver,, or stumped dyed tenor
or other decorative matcnala as approved.
lir DnVC5. MUMM drive aisle width is 23' with hmd-in panting "20' Wi&M paddag-
tff- Curb arts. For each proposed curb cur (wducl og driveways, streees, alkyl, etc.) {onto wasting curb curs
on the same opposite side of the street to determine separuioa dines bavAm txisdM and pmPosed
aab arts. IndieaM driveway throat length as mcasautd in the Driveway Ordinance. (See Ordin., 1961
NIR for driveway Wmtiaa and design requirements-)
S=nty ga= (show SWUV path and dMISA specs with colors).
I' Sidewalks (both pubGe and private). Sidewalks are requ;n d at Dyne of development if proporry has irontagc
on a street shown an the Sidewskk Mister Plan or if the review staff determine the nettle;ty, (ttefcr to
Section 10.2 of the &W%, OTtl rev").
Ceir MoJima. Show, any and all traffic medians to be caostmetod on site_
landscape Reserve. A twenty four foot setback fran JLO.W. to curb of puidng lot is required. l'avaument
may eocro,eb into this 24' r suvie by up to 1134 square feet if sucatscape regniremeat can Still be mot, La
0o cane may the pa wrrmt be, less thaa 6' from t1hC property lint. Common opm 3paora situ
fY Loading docks
Ala a Detention ponds
N
14 ar !reGuanbsib
taining walls
G-" All required and other types offiumu (a 6' privacy LVQc is requuW bowers iadustriaUeoehmereial and
rwidcsuial &Ndapnxivs as well as betwnm multi-family and single Emily devclopro ts).
0- Sits foe solid waste containers with screening. !.Cabana of dumpdm are aumsible but not visible from
st=eers a rpidCntial amts. Oates are discouragod and visual screening is rMuiM. (Minimum 12x 12 pad
required.)
Show an easements clearly des`W2240 g as proposed and type (unlit}', am=, eW-). Ifdad:mred by separate
iastrumeot lilt by volume and page.
[h 460 (noting s'tno sad dwipuc as proposed) within or 4aocat to the proposed site, including building
transformer leml iaas, above smund and uadergraued service eoonections to buildings.
Mwa locations (nuix be locaud in public R.O.W. or public utility =Qrimt.).
l~ Prvpowd grading (1' max for proposed at spot rdr.miom) and other pertinent drainage ir&ormation. (if
plan has too much inforando , show rlrairL' p an separime skeet.)
07- Show proposed and wisting fire bydraras. Fire hydrants must be located on *4 same side of a major street
as a project, and SW be in a location approved by the City Fagineer, Any structure in say zoning diWtr
other than EL 1, R-IA, or R-2 tux be within 300 SK of a fire hydrant as nwasuted along a public streek
lo9waY or designated fire lane.
L9~ Show fire depattnent cennersioos. FDC" s should be within 1 S0' of the fire hydrant. is no case shall they
be any further than 300' apart, and they shall be aooessiblg from the parking lot Witham being blodced by
Danced can or a structure.
Show dre lanes. Fire lanes a minimum of 20 feu in width'Kith a Minim m height c4aranoe of 14 feet must
be establishod if any portion of rite proposed structure is more than 150 feet fray the curb line of pavement
edge of a public arest or highway.
NOT& Fire hydrants must be operable and aaepted by The City, and drives must have an au wcadmc surface as
defined in the Zoning Ordinance Section 9 before a building permit can be iisnrod.
9. W ill building be SP&Jded? Yea 7 No O
If the dadsion w spri" is made aRrr the site PL-w has barn approved, then the plan must be resubmitted.
therem Whue ta y y be nortRic c0 be required w~ Wes ovchfuiuhg onto PmPrr not owryed by tlhc applicant or where
t with handicap atcasible routes or ahovc ground utilities, signs or other conflicts.
WIT PLAN C ZCXLI T
srh7=.&VW 03/1399 247
Jun-11-99 04:11P KSA Architecture 713 686 4900
vv.00 vyuv 104 J48e DEVELOPNENT SACS
P.04
®ooa
Ir 11. Show nub and pavWntat dessil. A 6" raised curb is required amund all edges of all parts of an pavd an;a
without aweptlm. (To iactudo Matti, planorlg areas. acooss ways. duVster locations, utility pWg, gic.)
Cut 6MAls may be Umd in dw TioU* Ortlia "Section 9 and airaaaaves to atone standards must be
approved by the City Bggumet. No exeTtion wili be made Sat areas designated as "reserved for f ftm
PKWW-
Or 12. 1 andseaae plans as toquiced in Section 11 of the Zoning Ordkam (See Orduwl= 6 163=.) Tbo
laude aping plan can be sbown on a sgWs o shoes if too mawh infonvatian is an the original site plwa.
If. requamgg praUMd tree po % rhea those v3+eas mcd to be shown aMWnaWy barricaded an
the landscape plan, Attetetpt to reduce or tdirn wft plandrip in easeumuts. Ud., C ialbmo ion on the plans
such as:
ISYrequired point oalaanlatiAOs
W additional samucape points required. Strestscape compliance is required on all street auger than a
resideaW sued.
U csleula ms for g of street trines requacd and proposed (proposed street tree points will accrue rowwd told
landscaping points-)
pt+cposW nvw planting! with points wood
R' proposed loouions of new piatidap
scn l:wg ofparuv loss
sm=ning of dumpsters, deteabion ponds, aans>httt►ets, A/C units, loading docks, propane teal. utility
4ccowration point on buildings, or other areas potewiaily vi=ally offensive.
t" ad9ft landsce iag to rmaain
show acisaing trees to be barricaded ad barri=& plan. Protected points will only be away" if
bani=dm are up beSote the Srst dereiopoeent pert alt is issued,
t~ 13. Sbuw irriguiaa gvft a pUL (or provide note on bow inigadoo cygum requitaamt will be rtes prior to
issuanoc of C.O.) All plans must include irr4afw tystam for landscaping. Irrigation meeets ate separate
from the regulu wder sytaertas for builih and wa71 be sized by city according to irrigpdbnn d mujds
submiud by applieaat and must include bad low prevention protection.
lt. Is thetz any lamUmpinS in TvDOT R.O.W. ? Yes a No
If yeas, then TxDOT pamit mut be submimed.
15. Will there be any utilities in TxDOT R.O.W. ? Yes 0 No
If yes, dm T:DOT permit must be submitta
er 16. Wall tbm be acocss from a TxDOT RO.W. ? Yes Q No 0
If yes, then TxDOT permit must be submitted.
WIA Q 17. -na total number of multifamily buildings wad units to be constructed on the proposed project site.
A#A O 1S. Mc darsiiy of duelling units per acre of the proposed project.
teJ' 19. Provide a water and sanitary s) ewer legend to include wmr donards (minimum maxirtuun and average
To dwkan& 'a
SF- ~ ~1C A I N ~ l~iW (~wtt dernmds an gwlton: per day).
20. Are there impact fim nsa= red with this devdopa mt? Yes U No I~
NOTE: SIVM am to be permitted separately.
srrg PLM C*MCR1ilt 3 era
3ffW -rAM o3aJM
# ~ G qIq
developed out there has never been platted, but developed by metes and bounds back in the early
1960's.
Chairman Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Parker moved for approval, and Commissioner Horlen seconded.
The vote passed 7-0
Azenda Item No. 9: Discussion and possible action on a conceptual site plan for 504 Harvey
Road, Rudy's BarBQue.
Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report. s ~s olte
Pen Creek Corridor along Harvey Road. Unlike the other three restaurants, which were vacant, Rudy's
plans to develop an already-existing site. The Design Review Board (DRB)has met several times
regarding the Rudy's plans and has given strong opinions that the building should be oriented to the
creek. The Planning and Zoning Commission will be the approving body for the final site plan, although
that is not what is currently before the Commission. There are three site plans, Options A, B, and C
respectively, before the Commission so that the developer can get some clear direction on which
concept to prepare the final site plans for. The final site plans will then go before the DRB for
recommendation, and then before the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 17, 1999.
Concept A shows a circulation drive around the building. It shows the area between the creek and the
building as a landscaped area with a driveway of grasscrete, which is perforated concrete that allows
grass to grow through it. The hatched lines show a stamp-dyed concrete area, and the rest of the area
will be concrete. This concept would require a variance of 17 parking spaces, which would go to the
Zoning Board of Adjustments, and the ZBA is scheduled to hear that request on June 15, 1999. This
property will be going to the ZBA with a recommendation from the DRB.
Concept B shows a straight driveway with no turn-around for drivers. Between the creek and the
building would be a landscaped area with a patch of stamp-dyed concrete. There were concerns that
creating two dead-end parking rows could cause problems with multiple backing maneuvers, especially
during peak times. This concept would require a parking variance of 13 spaces.
Concept C was the least favored by the DRB. It shows a standard circulation aisle between the building
and the creek with parking on one side, which is a change from the original plan, which showed it
double-loaded. In order to soften the view from the back patio, where there will be an eating area, the
applicant would review an area of parking and replace it with landscaping, which would require a
variance of three parking spaces.
All of the parking variances would be considered by the ZBA and the applicant would like to get some
feedback as to which of the three options the Commission prefers. Planner McCully pointed out that
the three new buildings did orient to the creek, and this would be a retrofit situation that the applicant is
trying to work with.
Commissioner Floyd asked if there were parking variances at the new buildings. Senior Planner stated
that they were not.
Commissioner Mooney asked how the driveways at the other restaurants were designed.
P&Z Minutes June 3, 1999 Page 13 of 15
0#11 "
Commissioner Kaiser answered that Sonic has a circular drive, and Kona's and Carino's were designed
to take advantage of the amenities of the Creek. The main concern was whether or not to put parking
lots along one of our most scenic amenities, and we moved away from the circular approach. There
was also a safety concern regarding the circular lot design.
Commissioner Mooney noted that there were some flaws in design "C". One was along the back line,
the parking spaces were compact. Another was that it was almost a straight shot toward the back of the
lot. The main problem with design "B" was where to go if you get to the end of the drive and cars are
behind you, as there was no place to turn around. Plan "A" was the most amenable to the Commission.
Commissioner Kaiser stated that there is a potential problem when the lot is filled and people have to
back out. Plan "A" attempts to remediate that, but the park-like setting is lost. City staff has indicated
that none of the plans pose problems with fire trucks servicing the area.
Commissioner Warren asked where staff anticipated overflow parking going, and Planner McCully
stated that the applicant has extra spaces on the Carino's site for employee parking.
Chairman Rife asked if protection of the natural trees existed and Planner McCully stated that she
believed so. She stated that that could be a condition when the Development Permit was issued.
Chairman Rife opened the public hearing.
Tim Basset, 303 West Dexter, has been a College Station resident for 36 years. One of his sons is an
officer of the Rudy's corporation and will be the oversight manager of the local operation. It was stated
that one of the applicants would have been present had they known what was going on.
Bill Davis, 1219 Boswell Street, suggested putting a "Y"-type configuration at the end of the lot with
no parking so drivers could maneuver a turn-around. Commissioner Kaiser stated that if that were
done, there would be a parking variance of 17 spaces.
Commissioner Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kaiser moved to adopt plan "B" with the recommendation that the applicant consider the
"U-shaped configuration. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion, with the condition that the
existing trees be protected, and for ZBA to approve the variance.
Commissioner Warren stated that she preferred plan "A as it was more aesthetically pleasing.
Commissioner Floyd agreed with plan "A", as did Chairman Rife.
Chairman Rife called for the vote of the approval of proposal "B". Motion fails 4-3.
Commissioner Mooney moved to accept proposal "A" and Commissioner Floyd seconded. Motion
carries 4-3.
Agenda Item No. 10:
Committee.
Appoint an alternate member to the Wolf Pen Creek Oversight
P&Z Minutes June 3, 1999 Page 14 of 15
•
q(9
pad C&vk~
Ix rx h-l"wI&
~ s
Ad,lj-d','1u
CcG '~1~ 7U 5r~? l~
G~Gc - l CG~ @ CAS p j 141L
drum Rd (Wns ~ 4,~,
5dvp~ ;
i
's
dab mp 1*1) l 7
*a&,az 9~~Citn/ 7+ Z -ILP
°~k~ - P&O? c C&~ /w ~Ocv,ds ire ct ~ y 5 m
5-1) glq 9
5 C A4)
-y N
klvo
60 iak)
n_/a dwlw
y
•
~U
Am P-te-
7e
• /fir ~~~d .~J'z~'~Z-C
tP - JCOO,-) [3to~d -7 - 0
AA1,c, 'h-`7 f"~lx /t"
• n r ~
t c
Ale
e l
ItL'o
04t 6 a Caws
LOo
, 1--e2 f
lj~ t~ 3 or~j Jule
T-4,~
Ace, AA-O-Z~ &-,I-
•
v
c rj
C,
U
S
~r
a AL ~
V ~-o n K~ _
j"Le °vc- q .
S a.~ 7 'i'lr2
p 0-1-14, La
vat c e .
IJj ~J
Li
street to connect with Faulkner Drive in the Foxfire Subdivision (which complies with the City's
Thoroughfare Plan). Staff recommended approval with the addition of a 10 foot public utility easement
along the backs of Lots 8-12, Block 34 and Lots 1-8, Block 33.
Commissioner Parker moved to approve the Final Plat with staff recommendations. Commissioner
Mooney seconded the motion which passed unopposed. (5-0).
4: Consideration of a proposed use on the site formerly known as
Sneakers in the Wolf Pen Creek District.
City Planner Kee explained the permitted uses for the Wolf Pen Creek District. The request is for a
country store and restaurant with gasoline pumps. The Design Review Board met October 14 and the
only concern they had was with the gasoline pumps. The DRB voted unanimously to approve the
restaurant and store request with elimination of the gasoline pumps. The applicant wanted the
Commission's direction before proceeding with the site plan. The request may come back as a
conditional use permit in the future to allow for the pumps.
Mr. Paul Clarke, Clarke & Wyndham, explained that the applicant agreed to use non-brand gas which
would allow the canopy to match the building. Mr. Blake Browne said that they would consider
eliminating the gas pumps if a conditional use permit was not approved. He said they would be willing
to do whatever the City requested behind the building (the part that backs up to the creek).
The Commission came to the consensus to allow the applicant to proceed with the site plan and return
with the site plan without the gasoline pumps.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing and consideration of a proposed amendment to Chapter
9, Section 10 of the College Station Code of Ordinances, updating the parkland dedication
requirements for residential developments. (98-818).
City Planner Kee explained that the original ordinance and dedication fees were adopted in 1981. She
explained that from talking to builders, developers, architects, engineers, and homeowners, there is a
high regard for the City's park system. The results of the 1998 Citizen Survey showed 94% of
respondents were satisfied with the cleanliness and maintenance of our parks and 73.5 percent would
favor a bond issue to pay for parks and recreation improvements. She said there was no set national
standard for parkland, but the newest publication of the National Recreation and Parks Association
(1996) emphasized that each community should establish its own standards to fit their needs. Currently
combined neighborhood and community parkland is approximately 7 acres per 1,000 population; with
about half of this acreage being neighborhood parkland. Staff felt the City was close to falling below
our current standard: The reasons for this decline is because our ordinance had not-been reviewed or
updated since 1981. The current dedication fee is $225 per dwelling unit (as established in 1981), but
applying the consumer price index to our current fee it would adjust to $418 per dwelling unit. The
current fee has not kept up with inflation, land costs, or construction costs since 1981.
A subcommittee was formed including staff of Parks Department, Development Services, and
representatives from the P&Z Commission and the Parks Board. This subcommittee formed initial
recommendations and met with a focus group of developers and builders. Those recommendations
were reflected in this proposed ordinance.
P&Z Minutes October 15, 1998 Page 3 of 6
STAFF REPORT
Item: Consideration of a site plan for Rudy's Barbeque located at 504 Harvey Road on the site
previously known as Sneakers in Wolf Pen Creek (99-34)
Applicant: Blake Brown
Item Summary: This is the fourth restaurant to locate in the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor along
Harvey Road. The three others, which have opened recently are Sonic, Konas Steakhouse and
Johnny Carinos. Unlike these other three, which were developed on vacant land, Rudy's plans to
redevelop the existing Sneakers site.
Item Background: Summary (for details see time line and minutes): The DRB has met several
times regarding the Rudy's plans and has given strong opinions that the building should be oriented
to the creek. The P&Z also met regarding the conceptual plan and gave the applicant direction to
orient the building to the creek. The applicant has modified the plan and a parking variance of 8
spaces was granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustments on July 20.
Budgetary & Financial Summary: N/A
Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval with the site plan review conditions as
attached.
Related Advisory Board Recommendations: The Design Review Board recommends approval
with Staff conditions.
Commission Action Options: The Commission has final authority over site plan. The options are
approval as submitted, approval with conditions, table, defer action to a specified date, or denial.
Supporting Materials:
1. Location Map
2. Application
3. Infrastructure and Facilities
4. Copy of Site Plan
5. Timeline
6. PNZ minutes October 15, 1998
7. DRB minutes meeting of May 19 and May 26
8. PNZ minutes June 3
9. DRB minutes June 16 and June 30
10. Staff review comments - to PNZ 8-5-99
JAPZTEXTTZ01677.D0C
INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES
Water: Water is provided to the site via a 6" waterline lead under Harvey Road.
Sewer: Sewer is provided through an 18" line along the Harvey Road frontage.
Streets: Harvey Road is a major arterial and the property will have one access drive
directly onto Harvey with internal access to the easement that extends across the front of
the Sonic property.
Off site Easements: None
Drainage: The applicant will be providing drainage information to assure compliance
with the City's Drainage Ordinance. Staff anticipates that the required Drainage Report
will likely show no or little net increase in impervious cover.
Flood Plain: Floodplain exists on the property due to its proximity to Wolf Pen Creek.
At the time the property was platted, the floodway and the 20' minimum reservation area
were dedicated to the City for the future park area per the Wolf Pen Creek Master Plan.
Oversize request: See Budgetary and Financial Summary Section.
Impact Fees: N/A
NOTIFICATION:
Not required
JAPZTEX1VZ01677.D0C
tK
o-
4Q' ~ ~ cy a, ~ z a`
~ pJ ~ GQ_ h~a O ~ Y a
oQQh`~'ti0 o tib~ ~ ~ a. o
Q P
1S
Q ~ ~oP 6 0
h
V R
n
~ ti
N ~ ~ v
Od, ~ z O ~~o~ h a w
10 0 ~O ~ m
7~by o W tiy~~ a v
J O 1, 3 iv ~c~ .zoe- E-o rnua.am ~j ~~A/ ]z o
~i
J
d cr
o ~l
21 m
RQ .4
O In 7C:: O 3¢ W Q
cr, b, O 4
°F
~~bO tis
~liS, Off,
X07 O
O
'e
® M1
X
Q ~
F N
V
~O o ^ QvQ m v A
a QZ ~a
7b N T ~ q ~ P ~ GL
J V p
Q ti ~ ~ a
Q 7b
COLLEGE STATION
R O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842
Tel. 409 764 3500
MEMORANDUM
June 29, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, via fax (512) 263-1942
FROM: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinat t
SUBJECT: Rudy's Bar-B-Q - Site Plan
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list
of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. This project is
scheduled for review by the Design Review Board on Wednesday, July 30, 8:30 a.m.,
those comments/conditions will be forwarded to you as soon as they are prepared, and
will be required in addition to the attached comments. Please address the comments
and submit the following information for further staff review:
Ten (10) copies of the revised site and landscape plans; and
The attached redlined site plan with staff comments.
Please submit the items requested by Monday, July 12, 10:00 a.m. to be considered for
scheduling at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for August
5, at 7:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue. Due to the
recent increase in development activity and the number of cases scheduled for the
Planning and Zoning Commission, staff will review the caseload and determine what
items will be scheduled for the Commission on August 5, 1999.
If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please
attach a letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call me at 764-3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
TxDOT Permit Application
cc: MoonDance Investments Ltd., via fax (512) 263-1942
W. Michael Steffey, via fax (713) 686-8180
Mark Ferguson, via fax (409) 846-6395
Home of Texas A&M University
I •
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 1
Project: Rudy's Bar-B-Q
1. Show ownership and zoning of adjacent parcels on the plan.
2. Show distances between opposite and adjacent driveways.
3. Provide 360 sq. ft. of interior islands in the parking rows #21-33, 7-20, 1-6,
and/or 90-93.
4. Show where the existing "benched" area is on OfficeMax with other facilities
including vegetation located in the southeast corner of the OfficeMax site.
5. Show Sonic's improvements and vegetation in this corner.
6. We need to know what these "catch basins" are and where they discharge. They
should be consolidated and there should be only one discharge point. The
discharge point must be all the way at the creek flow line.
7. The sidewalk must be 6' wide (if it is against back-of-curb) and line up with
Sonic's. It can be 4' wide if it is moved at least 6' behind the curb.
8. The pathway along the rear of the property appears to enter private property,
will there be an easement dedication here?
9. We need some technical information regarding the staining. It needs to be an
easily-maintained area and we need to know the color. We need specs on the
grass crete as well.
10. Note #3 should be modified/clarified to assure that all end islands will be
landscaped.
11. Need specs on the benches for the Design Review Board.
12. Show existing and proposed water lines, sewer lines, and electric lines.
13. Need to submit plans of topo/drainage.
14. Dimension the compact car spaces.
15. Make a note that the property owner is responsible for opening the dumpster
gates at the appropriate time. Also, widen the gate opening to 12 feet.
16. Concrete details: change #3 rebar to #4. Fire lane pavement must be 6".
17. You'll need a TxDOT Driveway Permit (see attachment).
18. Provide water and sewer demands.
19. Designate the front drive aisle as a fire lane and mark it on the plan. The rest of
the fire lane will be determined based on the FDC location.
20. Where is this? Are there any existing trees your are retaining?
21. Make a note that these trees will be planted at least 20' apart.
22. Add street tree count requirement for streetscape area.
23. Well need some shrubs in this area to screen utility connects.
Staff Review Comments
Page 1 of 2 06/30/99
24. Need to either set a fire hydrant or move the FDC to get the hydrant between
150' and 300'. The FDC needs to be on a designated fire lane. If the grass crete
area is part of the fire lane, it need to be approved by the Fire Department.
25. Show the median in the Sonic driveway.
26. Either remove the wheelstops or provide 20' parking spaces.
27. The electrical and park access easements don't match the plat; change to match
the plat. Also, how are you providing access to the park?
Reviewed by: Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
Staff Review Comments Page 2 of 2 06/30/99
Jul-01-99 05:25P KSA Architecture 713 686 4900 P.01
DATE: June 30,1999
TO: Bridgette George
City of College Station
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77840
(409) 764-3570
FROM: Gina Boozer for Mike Steffe
VIA: Facsmille (409) 764.3496
RE: Rudy's BBQ - College Station
PROJECT # : 98710.0001
Please address the following questions regarding the Staff Review Comments No.1 for Rudy's BBQ.
8. Please indicate what staining this is referring to.
17. Why is a TxDOT Permit required?
20. Please indicate what "Where is This" referring to.
21. Please indicate what trees this is referring to.
23. Please indicate what area you'll need shrubs in.
26. Please indicate what wheel stops need to be removed.
I will be out of the office Friday, July 2, 1999, please forward your response by fax to Mike Steffey.
Thank you.
GB
Imam
KSA ARCHITECTURE, INC. %tlKSA•NTHOATA_11RudyrstCdler..5tationO=o 070199bgeorge 1mAx
2180 North Loop West, Suite 350, Houston, Texas 77018
(713) 686-4900 FAX (713) 686.8180
w
FILE NOTE
Rudy's Barbecue & Country Store
Case #98-443
DRB Members Present: Kay Henryson, Chara Ragland, George McLean, James Massey, Jane Kee
and Veronica Morgan.
Staff Present: Natalie Ruiz and Shirley Volk.
Applicant: Blake Brown, Rudy's Barbecue & Country Store and Paul Clarke, Clarke & Wyndham.
On Wednesday, October 14, 1998 the Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board met to discuss the use
only of the property located along the south side of Harvey Road, just east of the Office Max
development (formerly known as Sneakers and the Christmas Store). Blake Brown with Rudy's BBQ
informed the Board that they are interested in purchasing the site for a restaurant and country store with
gas pumps The gas pumps will probably be placed adjacent to the Office Max building so they will be
less obtrusive from Harvey Road. They have chosen to use non-branded gasoline so that there are no
signage or trademark requirements for the awning over the pumps.
The Board expressed concern with the use of gas pumps in the Wolf Pen Creek zoning district. The
country store (or convenience store) seems to be an accessory use to the restaurant and is much smaller
in comparison to the restaurant. Chairman Henryson moved to recommend that a conditional use
permit not be issued for the use of gas pumps in the Wolf Pen Creek zoning district. Ms. Ragland
seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0).
The Board stated that the restaurant and small country store does fit within the uses listed in the WPC
zoning district and will be a nice addition to the area. City Planner Kee moved to recommend approval
of the use of Rudy's Barbecue and Country Store (the restaurant and small convenience store) without
the use of gas pumps. Chairman Henryson seconded the motion which passed unopposed (6 - 0).
The following is a list of concerns expressed by the Board with respect to the conceptual site plan:
The lack of throat depth for the proposed driveway on Harvey Road.
The DRB suggested that the row of parking along the creek be removed.
Antique pumps could be considered instead of active pumps.
The red pole on the freestanding sign should be changed. Colors suggested were black, green,
cream, etc.
IR
Rudy's BBQ
DRB 10/14/98
Case #98-443
Page 2 of 2
DRB Concerns/Comments (cont.
The bright red color of the building may not be allowed. The DRB would consider a maroon color.
(Recently the DRB denied the use of a bright red and yellow colors on the adjacent Sonic
development.)
The "Take Away" sign that is placed perpendicular to the building may not be allowed under the
City's sign ordinance.
The screening of the service/dumpster area is an area of concern. The applicant should incorporate
materials and colors of the building instead of a solid cedar fence.
The landscaping should be more natural with fewer straight lines. The goal is to blend with the
future park setting along the rear of the property.
Provide more plantings up towards the building to provide a smoother transition. (The photographs
provided show little to no landscaping between the parking lot and building.)
Address pedestrian access to the site and potential conflicts with vehicular traffic.
This item is scheduled for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission on Thursday, October
15, 1998.
Natalie Thomas Ruiz
Assistant Development Coordinator
October 22, 1998
R
street to connect with Faulkner Drive in the Foxfire Subdivision (which complies with the City's
Thoroughfare Plan). Staff recommended approval with the addition of a 10 foot public utility easement
along the backs of Lots 8-12, Block 34 and Lots 1-8, Block 33.
Commissioner Parker moved to approve the Final Plat with staff recommendations. Commissioner
Mooney seconded the motion which passed unopposed. (5-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consideration of a proposed use on the site formerly known as
Sneakers in the Wolf Pen Creek District.
City Planner Kee explained the permitted uses for the Wolf Pen Creek District. The request is for a
country store and restaurant with gasoline pumps. The Design Review Board met October 14 and the
only concern they had was with the gasoline pumps. The DRB voted unanimously to approve the
restaurant and store request with elimination of the gasoline pumps. The applicant wanted the
Commission's direction before proceeding with the site plan. The request may come back as a
conditional use permit in the future to allow for the pumps.
Mr. Paul Clarke, Clarke & Wyndham, explained that the applicant agreed to use non-brand gas which
would allow the canopy to match the building. Mr. Blake Browne said that they would consider
eliminating the gas pumps if a conditional use permit was not approved. He said they would be willing
to do whatever the City requested behind the building (the part that backs up to the creek).
The Commission carne to the consensus to allow the applicant to proceed with the site plan and return
with the site plan without the gasoline pumps.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing and consideration of a proposed amendment to Chapter
9, Section 10 of the College Station Code of Ordinances, updating the parkland dedication
requirements for residential developments. (98-818).
City Planner Kee explained that the original ordinance and dedication fees were adopted in 1981. She
explained that from talking to builders, developers, architects, engineers, and homeowners, there is a
high regard for the City's park system. The results of the 1998 Citizen Survey showed 94% of
respondents were satisfied with the cleanliness and maintenance of our parks and 73.5 percent would
favor a bond issue to pay for parks and recreation improvements. She said there was no set national
standard for parkland, but the newest publication of the National Recreation and Parks Association
(1996) emphasized that each community should establish its own standards to fit their needs. Currently
combined neighborhood and community parkland is approximately 7 acres per 1,000 population; with
about half of this acreage being neighborhood parkland. Staff felt the City was close to falling beiow
our current standard. The reasons for this decline is because our ordinance had not-been reviewed or
updated since 1981. The current dedication fee is $225 per dwelling unit (as established in 1981), but
applying the consumer price index to our current fee it would adjust to $418 per dwelling unit. The
current fee has not kept up with inflation, land costs, or construction costs since 1981.
A subcommittee was formed including staff of Parks Department, Development Services, and
representatives from the P&Z Commission and the Parks Board. This subcommittee formed initial
' recommendations and met with a focus group of developers and builders. Those recommendations
were reflected in this proposed ordinance.
P&Z Minutes October 15, 1998 . Page 3 of 6
Bridgette George - Rudy's BBQ......... Page
..1..
From: Natalie Ruiz
To: internet: msteffey@ksa-adi.com
Date: 5/13/99 6:51 PM
Subject: Rudy's BBQ
I just wanted to let you know that staff has performed a cursory review of your submittal on the new
Rudy's BBQ in College Station. We will have a list of review comments available at the DRB meeting;
however, there were several items that I thought you should know about before the meeting. The
following is a list of items that you should be prepared to address at the DRB meeting:
(1) Lighting details. Provide details/standards for all freestanding and any attached lighting.
(2) Pavement treatment. What type of pavement treatment is proposed in the cross-hatched areas?
Provide actual color/material samples to be reviewed by the Board.
(3) Are there existing trees on the site? The DRB will want to know what trees are existing and may
require some to be saved. (I wasn't able to tell if there were existing trees on this site or if they were on
the Office Max and creek properties.)
(4) Dumpster location. Where will your dumpster be located, how will it be screened from the public
rights-of-way? This area may be incorporated as an access to the park and for maintenance vehicles.
(5) Pedestrian access to the park (creek area in the rear). How will pedestrians move between the
restaurant and the creek?
(6) Utility connections to the buildings including the A/C units. Where are these connections located and
how will they be screened from all public rights-of-way?
(7) Signage. Is a freestanding sign proposed? All freestanding and attached signage must be reviewed
and approved by the DRB.
I just wanted to give you a "head's up" before Wednesday's meeting with the Board. The meeting is at
9:30, here at City Hall. I'll be out of the office on Friday; however, if you need additional information,
please contact Bridgette George at (409) 764-3570. I'll be back in the office on Monday.
Thanks & I'll see you Wednesday, 5/19.
CC: Bridgette George
Brid ette Geo a -New Develo ment - Week of 5-10-99 Pa e 1
From: "Kimberly Winn" <KWINN1Ctuelectric.com>
To: <nruiz@ci.college-station.tx.us>, <bgeorge@ci.coll...
Date: 5/14/99 7:48AM
Subject: New Development - Week of 5-10-99
Lone Star Gas has the following comments for the items received the week of
5-10-99:
Ray Cowart Division - No gas lines in this area, therefore no comments
Edelweiss Business Center - No comments
Rudy's Barbecue - If the customer plans to use gas I will need the following
information: total gas load, outlet pressure, service line and meter location
shown on the site plan. The customer can contact me directly at (409) 774-2506
to provide this information and discuss the meter location.
Sigma Alpha Epsilon - No gas lines in this area, therefore no comments
All Pets Medical Center - If the customer plans to use gas I will need the
following information: total gas load, outlet pressure, service line and meter
location shown on the site plan. The customer can contact me directly at (409)
774-2506 to provide this information c1nd discuss the meter location.
Bridgette George -New Develo ment - week 5/10/99 *Disre uard first memo :o Pa e 1
From: Jennifer Reeves
To: Bridgette George
Date: 5/12/99 4:26PM
Subject: New Development - week 5/10/99 *Disreguard first memo :o)
Ray Cowart Division: (99-216)
No Comment.
Edelweiss Business Center. (99-221)
No Comment.
Rud 's Ba ecue: (99-419)
Developer installs conduit per city spec and design. f
Developer pours transformer pad per city spec and design.
Developer is responsible for 20% of the cost of electric service.
Need electric load data.
Will need temporary blanket easement for construction purposes.
Will need to fill out a service request form.
Sigma Alpha Epsilon: (99-701)
Developer installs conduit per city spec and design.
Developer pours transformer pad per city spec and design.
Developer is responsible for 20% of tj a cost of electric service.
Need electric load data.
Will need temporary blanket easement fpr construction purposes.
Will need to fill out a service request form.
All Pets Medical Center: (99-705)
Developer installs conduit per city spec and design.
Developer pours transformer pad per city spec and design.
Developer is responsible for 20% of the cost of electric service.
Need electric load data.
Meter will be located on the building.
Will need temporary blanket easement for construction purposes.
Will need to fill out a service request form.
Jennifer Reeves
City of College Station
Planning/Projects Assistant
Office # (409)764-3502
Fax # (409) 764-3452
Mobile # (409) 777-1925
Pager # (409)696-9249 #1229
Jennifer Reeves
City of College Station
Planning/Projects Assistant
Office # (409)764-3502
Fax # (409) 764-3452
Mobile # (409) 777-1925
Pager # (409)696-9249 #1229
Bridgette Geo a -PRC - Wednesda Ma 19, 1999 Pa e 1
From: Jim Smith
To: PRC
Date: 5/12/99 1:17PM
Subject: PRC - Wednesday, May 19, 1999
Ray Cowart Division (99216): No problem.
Edelweiss Business Center (99-221): No problem.
Rudy's Barbecue (99-419): 1 do not see a container location noted on the site plan. I need a 12 x 12 pad
with screening fence for service.
Sigma Alpha Epsilon (99-701): No problem.
All Pets Medical Center (99-705): No problem.
ThankslI
~a-4jef
a6
? p ~f~//~~?r~am „lOw4,Lt~0
-~V CV,>JIrA~ t4Ae PZOr. jja~ qr-6
2a4o~e .w~,2~e r ra.Z~v~
g
4•
Lo.
_A~
AA4
-Al 1W ~A
- -~~Q
Lk Nea O-Xe Ole-,
d'+"~ 1- ti7' -Yew ~-c.~ • ~a1ovA
J -7
csJ~"
clwo Pfd io , J&- m6zp- /-vy4 tn ./JaiL
,i-0 1~4 o on t ~y ~i~
U
, y y ~a,,)d AW s , y 0-C-d '5&~
ce p . a ow ~rm, M&t(loy h'U
b•
y - , ou- a/)
y y d
Ct/) C, t~
i ~
•
;roams - rr,at ccl'wnlA .
-7.v~, /7, 0 ~haf fvw,
V: loth ('V)C~O~ te) cw
S
0OIr f? L
r~- 7646 S Y/t( ~o
ace.
P~
(ad Oil /AW
J
14j's- 0,
•
is
j UY1 S~ C6~,r~ S~ /771
d~--/2 f 7~b
p4l
O-fl- /no d
I
Am't 1 ~ apPoz)~ , ,(7
V
WOLF PEN CREEK DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
May 26, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, 1514 Ranch R., 620 South, Austin, Texas, 78734
W. Michael Steffey, 2180 North Loop West #350, Houston, Texas, 78734
FROM: Design Review Board
Kay Henryson, DRB Chair
Chara Ragland, DRB Member
Bill Trainor, DRB Member
George McLean, DRB Member
Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner
Ron Kaiser, P&Z Commissioner
Others Attending:
Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinator
Veronica Morgan, Assistant City Engineer
Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Rudy's Barbecue - A revised site plan for a restaurant located at 504 Harvey
Road, Lot 1, Wolf Pen Creek. (Case file 99-419)
A Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board meeting was held on Wednesday, May 26, 1999, to
review the above-mentioned project. Some discussion took place regarding the floodway and
floodplain area. Commissioner Mooney asked about terracing requirements for the site.
Veronica Morgan stated that there shouldn't be any necessary because there is already an
existing retaining wall that was constructed previously.
The DRB members concurred that the revised site plan scenario #2 was better than the
original plan except that the patio area extends over a utility easement. Commissioner Kaiser
suggested moving the building towards Harvey enough to move it off of the easement. Mr.
Steffey voiced concern about having to move the traffic aisle if the building was moved due to
access traffic with the adjacent property. The members suggested that the parking aisle be
slightly altered from the access point to prevent any possible hazards.
DRB Member Henryson suggested moving the seven parking spaces located at the front of the
building to each side of the building. This would provide six spaces rather than seven, but the
aisle serving them could be eliminated and the building could move forward of the electric
easement and allow room for additional landscaping at the front and rear of the building.
Mr. Steffey voiced his concern about having dead-end parking. Commissioner Mooney also
voiced his concern about not having a loop around the back of the building.
C
DRB Member Henryson motioned for Mr. Steffey to provide two site plans: one moving the
building off of the easement and moving the front parking spaces to each side of the building;
and, another one with the same site plan but including a traffic loop around the back of the
building. The Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) can determine which plan is best.
Commissioner Mooney seconded the motion which passed 6-0.
Mr. Steffey stated that the paving material for the traffic loop behind the building could be
concrete with grass in between that wouldn't look like a driveway, or, a patterned concrete or
other material which would handle traffic without the visual impact of concrete. It was noted
that it was important to designate the pedestrian path from the walkway system across this
drive so that traffic would recognize the pedestrian crossing and slow down.
DRB Member Ragland suggested angling all of the parking to help direct traffic flow. Mr.
Steffey stated that this would be confusing to patrons and not work with all of the parking on
site.
Commissioner Mooney motioned to recommend to the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA)
their support for the parking variance for a reduced number of spaces. It was suggested that
restaurant staff could park at the owner's other property on Harvey Road. The motion was
seconded by Bill Trainor and passed 6-0.
Commissioner Kaiser motioned to move three of the five handicap parking spaces to the east
side of the building near the entrance. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mooney
and passed 6-0.
Some discussion took place regarding the building colors. The DRB approved the dark red
sample per the rendering, in addition to the colors approved at the previous meeting. They
also agreed that a light yellow as the sign background and the canopy "pick-up" sign would
be acceptable, but postponed making a formal motion and approval until such time that a
sample is provided.
Mr. Steffey stated that he would provide staff with revised conceptual site plans the following
day for the P&Z meeting scheduled for June 3. The parking variance will be presented to the
ZBA on June 15. The final site and landscape plan will then go to the P&Z for approval on
June 17.
WPC Design Review Bond 29-Mar-99 Page 2 of 2
°r 1 <lI 1
COLLEGE STATION
P. O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842
Tel. 409 764 3500
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gena Boozer, KSA Architecture
Via fax (713) 686-8180 _
FROM: Natalie Ruiz, Development Coorc~ nato
DATE: June 10, 1999
RE: Rudy's Site Plan Review.
I just wanted to let you know that I did receive your site plan submittal. Attached is a copy of our
review checklist that staff uses when reviewing a site plan. Please make sure that all items on the
checklist are addressed and submit the following by Monday, June 14, 1999 at 10:00 a.m. so that
we can schedule a Design Review Board meeting as soon as possible:
_ The attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they
are not.
- 9 copies of the landscape plan.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (409) 764-3570 or e-mail me at
"nruiz@ci. college-station. tx.us".
Attachment: Site Plan Checklist
Home of Texas A&M University
10
Rudy's Barbecue & Country Store
Case #99-419
Timeline:
10/14/98 - The DRB met to discuss the use only of the property (a restaurant and
country store with gas pumps). The DRB recommended denial of the use of gas
pumps but supported the use of a restaurant and small convenience store without gas
pumps. At this meeting, the DRB listed several concerns about the conceptual plan
which included the parking along the rear of the creek, colors and signage.
• 10/15/98 -The P&Z agreed with the DRB's recommendation to not allow gas pumps
and encouraged the applicant to proceed with the development with a restaurant and
small convenience store.
• 5/19/99 - A site plan was submitted with many items missing especially with respect
to the technical requirements listed on the site plan checklist. Since the DRB meeting
was already scheduled and the numerous discretionary items, staff decided to take the
site plan forward with a list of discretionary and technical items to be addressed. The
DRB was concerned about several issues and requested that the applicant look at the
possibility of moving the patio area closer to the creek and remove the parking
between the patio and the creek. Blake was concerned about not having a continuous
drive through the rear of the property but agreed to let the architect look at the
possibility.
5/26/99 - The architect presented three scenarios. The DRB recommended that the
architect provide two site plans to the P&Z (one moving the building off of the PUE
and another one with the same site plan but including a traffic loop around the back of
the building). They also recommended that the ZBA support the parking variance
request. (Since there were still conceptual issues to resolve, staff agreed to accept a
site plan that did not meet all of the technical requirements until the conceptual items
were resolved. They were informed that staff would not perform a formal review of
the site plan until all items on the site plan checklist were addressed.)
• 6/3/99 -The P&Z accepted conceptual plan "A" that allowed a continuous drive
around the rear of the building.
• 6/15/99 - The ZBA tabled the parking variance request. At the meeting, the applicant
informed the Board that he did not want the variance. After the meeting, Sabine
spoke with Blake and he encouraged her not to review the most recent site plan
submitted since they could not live with the total number of parking spaces. Paul
Clarke also informed the ZBA that the City was relocating the creek several hundred
yards away from it's existing location; so, the parking along the creek should be
allowed.
6/16/99 - Blake informed the DRB that because of the attendance records at Kona's
& Carino's, they decided that they cannot live with the number of parking spaces on
the proposed plan. Staff informed the DRB and Blake that they had not reviewed the
plan before them. The DRB worked with Blake on a compromise that would allow a
total of 96 parking spaces. (The architect was not present at this meeting, only Blake
Brown and Paul Clarke.) This is the first fully dimensioned site plan submitted;
however, there were still technical items missing. Blake was given the redlined site
plan to give to his architect. Due to workload, the minutes for this meeting would not
be available for several weeks. Blake stated that they had decided to slow down on
the project and make sure that they end up with something that works for everyone.
• 6/18/99 - Revised site plan submitted. (This is the first official review of a fully
dimensioned site plan.)
6/30/99 - DRB meeting to review the 6/18/99 submittal. DRB recommended
approval with all staff comments. However, there were still many technical
requirements that were listed on the site plan checklist not addressed. Blake was
faxed a memo from Bridgette on 6/29/99 with the staff comments to give them a
"heads up" as well as the deadline of 7/12/99 to resubmit for the 8/5/99 P&Z meeting.
• 7/8/99 - The architect contacted us concerned about the interior island requirement.
They felt like the DRB had already agreed on the 96 spaces and that issue was
resolved. We informed them that the interior island requirement is a ratio and is
separate from the total number of spaces. It's up to the designer to provide a plan that
meets all ordinance requirements or request a variance. They are currently applying
for a variance & staff is exploring the possibility of allowing it to go with the parking
variance on 7/20/99.
9 7/12/99 - Only the site plan was submitted (no landscape or drainage plan).
Jul-22-99 01:23P KSA Architecture
Y%`'Ja1
713 686 4900 P.01
A
DATE:
T0:
FAX:/~D9~ 14P
RE:
at c,,ce rte. ,tee k~. h1X vAz aee4mA&y*
0
c.X2) ~1x, ,tc,QP,o~`Q,e s~o~ Ce~rr~n~~,ln /Sow ~l~, ~a ~c~i ax
P'w 4-haJ Yoxd
.~C~-fC1d fC' '1~~!/~l9. ~mad-roh. 7
jAl~ /
-JAI
1&4x~ vat ed a4
KSA ARCHITECTURE, INC.
2180 North Loop West, Suite 350, Houston, Texas 77018
(713) 686-4900 FAX (713) 686-8180
6A Ud
U~
Jul-22-99 01:24P KSA Architecture
713 686 4900
N51.54V'W 213.18_~r
,r 3.18FT• ~r
41
1, ,y II 4i `I 69 68 I
-72 i 101
4 1 \
P.02
14I
r
. II.
ANDSCAPE
64
241 L
RESEI?vE EASE
#=N
2
v \N
f
...._-13
6
I N
-EN
I
ST
Cs S.S.
I u1
M
NN
LE
l
I E
PS'T'
G B.S.
L I LI
NS
61
.
I
AB
60 ~2
Z
'PU
LIC UTIL_
:
5
MENT
vINCs.
r~..
59
I I
-.__...18
58
I` PRO I
O
to
r:
D
WAT
R'
INE
- 20
5b
(z
o o
23 i22 _
-
21
-
~
til
----------il
!I I w
Jul-22-99 01:24P KSA Architecture 713 686 4900 P.03
- v.i.v VZvLLvrjwl JMLb
®007
Lot
Mr- Mw-
boo.
I _ (Ter, p o ra.ry
4 '
r tw QT---
GRAS I a
IW~ 00
d4w
N
LA N •
w 00,
! a
3 now
VIM-
~s« aeon.)
G S maW
jp.
r-7r .40 w
e. (Temporary
staffb w di ! w
Comr*W I •c4AM
34omples 5~ rot aP h
,oT+~ ob t to 51 Far LGpfn
! RASS ;
with t? to appraab
ALAMO
a
vim-
HwdkMD Rani 3 rte,, ee.
'S AS rr
Ese/tlnv F.
to
Cu!
i
si
I Ed a £:ism pr^'t.
prdpel Water tine
8e in a 'n Tee
11. Pty on.
(S~e
Ko of S eokt,ouse) THIS SITE AND ALL SUR
r
f BUI
I JI
1 .y
r
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 3
Project: Rudys BBQ Site Plan
THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS RELATE TO THE LAST REQUESTED
REVISIONS WHEN THE SITE PLAN WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON 8-5-99:
1. We still need to be assured through calculations that no water will leave the
site through the curb leaveout to be used for maintenance access. Also, are
there going to be safety bollards in this area? Specify their color (they will
need to meet streetscape standards because they will be visible to the creek.
2. In the earlier review we asked for a note stating the property owner is
responsible for opening the dumpster gates at the appropriate time. It was
added to a subsequent revised plan, but is now missing again. Add that note
back to the site plan.
3. You'll need to apply for a TxDOT permit for the driveway and sidewalk.
4. Provide water and sewer demands.
5. Provide more detail of the proposed headwall. We will need full calculations
on the sizing of the pipe and plan and profile views of the pipe.
6. ok
7. ok
8. ok. We will forward the specs to engineering for review to assure the area
will handle the traffic loading.
9. ok
10. ok
11. ok *(see review comment 13)
12. ok *(see review comment 13)
13. You are showing the utility information on the grading plan. This information
is normally required on the site plan. It is acceptable to have information on
separate sheets, however, all of the sheets containing site plan requirements
per our checklist will need to be a part of the final approved site plan.
14. Add the fire hydrant information back to the site plan so that we can assure
the following comment was met: The distance measurement that you used
for the distance between the fire hydrant and FDC is not measure correctly.
It must be measured as the hose lays and not across parking spaces. You
can either move the FDC to the front of the building (which will allow you to
remove the fire lane designation from the rear drive and use the existing fire
Staff Review Comments
Page 1 of 3
a
hydrant.) OR you can add another fire hydrant interior to the site to meet the
ordinance requirement. By adding another fire hydrant, there is a good
chance that your engineering calculations will show that the line will need to
be looped with the one in front of Office Max or Sonic, which will add cost to
the project. Also, now that we know where your fire lanes will be, we have
determined they will be acceptable with the condition that the fire hydrant is
located as per the last site plan submitted prior to this revision and with the
condition that the driveway on the Sonic site is to scale (if it is, then the fire
trucks can leave using this driveway). Either note that the adjoining driveway
and distances are to scale, or redraw that area to scale.
15. Assure that all references to the fire lane include the 6" pavement note.
(Your note #14 should apply to the fire lane as well as to the dumpster area).
Landscape Plan
16. ok
17. Assure that wherever the FDC is located that it is not block by shrubs that
may grow tall and cover the connection.
18. ok
19. ok
WE'VE NOTED THAT THIS LATEST SUBMITTAL OF THE SITE PLAN IS
DIFFERENT FROM THE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION. THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS RELATE TO
INFORMATION THAT WAS ADDED, DELETED, OR CHANGED FROM THE
LAST REVISION:
20. Where is the "new concrete" parking in your note 22 used on the site plan?
21. Add the note back to either the site plan or the demolition plan that the
existing curb is to be closed.
22. The dumpster enclosure needs to be 12'X 12' between the bollards.
23. Why was your prior note #27 removed? Is there a 3' stone wall? Where? If
not, why was it removed?
24. A previous note that all AC units would be roof mounted and screened was
removed. Either place this note back on the site plan or show where the units
will be and how they will be screened.
25. What happened to the benches that were shown on previous submittals
(prior note #34)? They need to be put back on the site plan.
26. Add easement information back to the site plan.
Staff Review Comments
Page 2 of 3
27. Add ownership information of surrounding sites back to site plan.
28. Add parking space and circulation aisle dimensions back to the site plan.
Reviewed by: Sabine McCully Date: 11/18-22/99
Staff Review Comments Page 3 of 3
V
d
Q
's
~ U
i
1 ~
D~
o~ ~
U
v ~
3
r
~a 0
o ~
EXISTING
ROCK
WALLS
EXISTING TREES --Z
DO NOT DISTURB P
PROPERTY LINE
NO.
INLET
. of
v
a
~ h
. 1'
i -a
S ✓
0
v L
rr
i
t
r = r fir)
s
t
-Ira
VI ✓ i -0
G~ C+ -
3 s i ~ ~ z
c~ + OFFICE MAX
WPC
Natalie Ruiz - rudy's review Page 1
1
f
From: Sabine McCully _ C
To: Bridgette George; Natalie Ruiz
Date: 12/1/99 2:40PM
Subject: rudy's review
also note to file:
here's apparently what happened with this review. gina boozer had revised the site plan that went to pnz
not only to answer the first 3 items that were critical to keep the item on the agenda, but also to meet the
rest of the review comments. from what i can tell we missed this, but her comments back to us along with
the site plan dated July 26 met all of the requirements with the exception of the engineering items, which
were not site plan requirements anyway.
another point of confusion came in because gina submitted a different site plan with the building plans. i
mentioned to her that we cannot have two separate site plans.
so, the option was to either 1) tweek the July 26 plan to revise two new island configurations or 2) add the
review comments no. 3 revisions to the building plans site plan. today she told me that she will go with
the second option and will return the site plan separately because it's ready to send and revisions (if any)
can be added and submitted with the final round of building plans.
thanks.
CC: Jeff Tondre
WOLF PEN CREEK DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
June 16, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, 1514 Ranch R., 620 South, Austin, Texas, 78734
FROM: Design Review Board
Kay Henryson, DRB Chair
Bill Trainor, DRB Member
George McLean, DRB Member
Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner
Richard Floyd, P&Z Commissioner
Steve Parker, P&Z Commissioner
Others Attending:
Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator
Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinator
Veronica Morgan, Assistant City Engineer
Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
Charles Wood, Senior Economic Development Analyst
Jessica Jimmerson, Staff Planner
Paul Clarke
SUBJECT: Rudy's Barbecue A revised site plan for a restaurant located at 504 Harvey
Road, Lot 1, Wolf Pen Creek. (Case file 99-419)
A Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board meeting was held on Wednesday, June 16, 1999, to
review the above-mentioned project. Sabine McCully began the meeting by reviewing the
action taken at the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) meeting the previous night. She stated
that they tabled their decision on the parking variance due to the applicant not wanting the
variance. Blake Brown stated that they have decided they want as much parking as possible
on the site and would like the DRB and Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) to reconsider
the site plan. Mr. Brown stated that originally workers from Rudy's were going to park at
Kona's to help with the reduced parking. But, Kona's has had record sales and does not desire
to have their parking taken up by Rudy's employees.
Jane Kee informed Mr. Brown that new restaurants typically go through a 11/2-year
"honeymoon" period where parking is a problem, and then when the newness wears off,
parking is adequate. Sabine McCully stated that Mr. Bown should be planning for long-term
parking and not short-term parking.
Veronica Morgan stated that she attended the Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee meeting
the previous week, where they looked at several different concepts for the design of the creek.
One of the concepts being considered is relocating the creek to the south, downstream of the
planned George Bush Drive Bridge, filling in the natural creek and making it a natural trail
tr
October 25, 1999
Mr. Carl Warren
City of College Station
Building Department
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77840
RE: Rudy's BBQ - College Station, TX Via Hand Delivery
98710.0001
Dear Mr. Warren:
Planning and Zoning approved our site with conditions. The following is our response to the Staff Review
Conditions which have all been met.
Please relocate the Transformer back to it's original spot or call to work out another location that is
acceptable to the electrical department staff and the guidance and values expressed by the Design
Review Board.
Response: The transformer has been relocated as per your request and approval of the electrical
department. See note #4 on attached DD1 sheet.
Please see if you can relocate items to put this island back to it's original configuration that was
reviewed by the DRB.
Response: Per your request, the island has been changed to it's original configuration. See attached
DD1 sheet.
3. To avoid returning to the DRB for additional review, remove the compact car space by the dumpster
and put it back in its original location at the rear of the building.
Response: The compact car space has been moved per your request. See car row #90-93 on
attached DD1 sheet.
4. Catch Basins - note #23 points to the opening in the curb as a "catch basin". Please remove this note
as that area is not a catch basin.
Response: Note has been removed please see park access area on attached DD1 sheet.
5. In the earlier review we asked for a note stating the property owner is responsible for opening the
dumpster gates at the appropriate time. Please add that note to the site pan.
Response: Done see note #37 on attached DD1 sheet.
V
City of College Station
Building Department
Rudy's BBQ Permit Submittal
Page 2 of 3
6. You'll need to apply for a TxDot permit for the driveway and sidewalk.
Response: Application is in progress.
7. Provide water and sewer demands.
Response: Civil Engineer, Joe Schultz will provide to the City.
8. We will need full calculations on the sizing of the pipe and plan and profile views of the pipe.
Response: Done, see attached Civil Drawings.
9. The pathway needs to be 10 feet wide by ordinance. Please show where it can be located in the future
and attempt to remove all site elements from that future path if you can.
Response: The pathway has been widen to 10 feet according to ordinance. See attached DD1 sheet.
10. Please crosshatch grasscrete area again as on the previous submittal.
Response: Done, see attached DD1 sheet.
11. In accordance with the spec that you submitted on the grass paving material, the city will need
engineering design calcs/drawings showing the paving section under the grass pave material. Per
the specs, that will need to be designed to meet the max traffic loading expected on that area.
Response: Done, see paving section as indicated on Civil Drawings.
12. Sonic and Office Max are zoned WPC.
Response: Done, see attached DD1 sheet.
13. Please assure that handicap ramps are located at the driveway on SH30.
Response: Done, see attached DD1 sheet.
14. Label the sanitary sewer line entering the property from SH30 as a private line.
Response: Done, see attached DD1 sheet.
15. The waterline parallel to SH30 appears to be a private service line. If so, please label as such and
place outside the public utility easement.
Response: Done, see attached DD1 sheet
16. You show an existing water line tee. Are you sure it exists?.
Response: Yes, see attached Civil Drawings.
17. You can either move the FDC to the front of the building or add another fire hydrant.
Response: The FDC and firelane have been relocated. See attached DD1 sheet.
18. On detail DD1.02 change the note to read the paving must be 6" thick in all firelanes.
Response: Done, see detail DD1.02.
KSA ARCHITECTURE, Inc. \\KSA-NT1\DATA 1\Rudys\Co11egeStation\Docs\102599CWresp.con.appr.doc
2180 North Loop West, Suite 350, Houston, TX 77018 (713) 686-4900 FAX (713) 686-8180
City of College Station
Building Department
Rudy's BBQ Permit Submittal
Page 3 of 3
19. Assure that the base site plan being used for the landscape plan is the same as the site plan being
submitted.
Response: Done, see corresponding Landscape plan.
20. Assure that where ever the FDC is located that it is not blocked by shrubs that may grow tall and cover
the connection.
Response: The shrubs have been changed to Dwarf Yaupon, which will not grow tall enough to cover
the connection.
21. Show screening around the transformer.
Response: Redistributed shrubs to adjusted transformer location.
22. Assure that the two elms nearest Office Max are at least 20' apart.
Response: Done, see noted dimension on Landscape plan.
End of Response.
Mike Steffey
Architect
KSA ARCHITECTURE, Inc. 11KSA-NTIVDATA_11RudyslCollegeStation\Docs1102599CWrespconapprdoc
2180 North Loop West, Suite 350, Houston, TX 77018 (713) 686-4900 FAX (713) 686-8180
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 2
Project: Rudys BBQ Site Plan
The following comments are critical to allow the site plan to proceed to P&Z and
not have to be reviewed again by DRB.
1. The transformer as shown did not appear at this location on earlier reviews.
Please relocate the transformer back to it's original spot or call to work out
another location that is acceptable to the electrical department staff and the
guidance and values expressed by the Design Review Board. If we cannot
find a location that staff feels can meet both requirements then the site plan
may have to be reviewed again by the Design Review Board.
2. The island containing the one tree that is being saved has been reduced in
size from the site plan reviewed by the DRB. The DRB was very concerned
about having this island as a "green area" to be viewed from the creek.
Please see if you can relocate items to put this island back to it's original
configuration that was reviewed by the DRB. If we cannot meet DRB's intent
for this island, the site plan may have to be reviewed again by that body.
3. To avoid returning to DRB for additional review, remove the compact car
space by the dumpster and put it back in it's original location at the rear of
the building. If you wish to retain the space, you will need to provide an end
island between it and the dumpster and the site plan will have to proceed to
the DRB.
The following comments will be added to the staff report as conditions of
approval. They do not have to be addressed prior to proceeding to P&Z unless
you desire to do so.
4. Catch Basins - note # 23 points to the opening in the curb as a "catch basin".
Please remove this note as that area is not a catch basin. We will need spot
elevations throughout the site to assure the drainage path and minimum
grades are met. We will need to be assured through calculations that no
water will leave the site through the curb leavout to be used for maintenance
access.
5. In the earlier review we asked for a note stating the property owner is
responsible for opening the dumpster gates at the appropriate time. Please
add that note to the site plan.
6. You'll need to apply for a TxDOT permit for the driveway and sidewalk.
Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 3
7. Provide water and sewer demands.
8. The headwall on the discharge pipe will have to go through the retaining wall
and to the flowline of the creek. We will need full calculations on the sizing of
the pipe and plan and profile views of the pipe.
9. The pathway needs to be 10 feet wide by ordinance. Please show where it
can be located in the future and attempt to remove all site elements from that
future path if you can. Due to the existing retaining wall constraints and ADA
accessibility, this pathway access on this property may have to enter private
property. When designed and installed by the City, if it enters private
property, the appropriate access easements will have to be negotiated. Our
concern at this time is to provide an area for that future pathway free from
improvements, if at all possible.
10. Please crosshatch the grasscrete area again as on the previous submittal.
That was very easy to discern the extents of that material.
11. In accordance with the spec that you submitted on the grass paving material,
the city will need engineering design calcs/drawings showing the paving
section under the grass pave material. Per the specs, that will need to be
designed to meet the max traffic loading expected on that area.
12. Sonic and Office Max are zoned WPC and not C-1. Please delete the C-1
designation from the site plan.
13. Please assure that handicap ramps are located at the driveway on SH30 (on
both sides of the drive and the sidewalk is constructed from property line to
property line).
14. Label the sanitary sewer line entering the property from SH30 as a private
line.
15. The waterline parallel to SH30 appears to be a private service line. If so,
please label as such and place outside the public utility easement.
16. You show an existing water line tee. Are you sure this exists? My maps show
that the fire hydrant is the end of the dead-end line coming under SH30 and
there is not a tee there. Please verify.
17. The distance measurement that you used for the distance between the fire
hydrant and FDC is not measure correctly. It must be measured as the hose
lays and not across parking spaces. You can either move the FDC to the
front of the building (which will allow you to remove the fire lane designation
from the rear drive and use the existing fire hydrant.) OR you can add
another fire hydrant interior to the site to meet the ordinance requirement. By
adding another fire hydrant, there is a good chance that your engineering
calculations will show that the line will need to be looped with the one in front
of Office Max or Sonic, which will add cost to the project.
18. On detail DD1.02 change the note to read the paving must be 6" thick in all
fire lanes, not "along" the fire lanes.
Staff Review Comments Page 2 of 3
Landscape Plan
19. Assure that the base site plan being used for the landscape plan is the same
as the site plan being submitted. (they currently don't match where the
existing tree is located)
20. Assure that whereever the FDC is located that it is not block by shrubs that
may grow tall and cover the connection.
21. Show screening around the transformer. (see comment above regarding
relocating the transformer)
22. Assure that the two elms nearest Office Max are at least 20' apart.
Please submit 10 copies of the revised site and landscape plans by Monday,
July 26, 1999 at 10 am. It is at your discretion to address comments 4-22, within
this revision. However, comments 1-3 must be addressed.
Reviewed by: Veronica JB Morgan Date:July 19, 1999
Staff Review Comments Page 3 of 3
WOLF PEN CREEK DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
May 25, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, 1514 Ranch R., 620 South, Austin, Texas, 78734
W. Michael Steffey, 2180 North Loop West #350, Houston, Texas, 78734
Mark Ferguson, 3709 South College Avenue, Bryan, Texas, 77801
FROM: Design Review Board
Kay Henryson, DRB Chair
Phillip Kelby, DRB Member
Chara Ragland, DRB Member
Bill Trainor, DRB Member
George McLean, DRB Member
Wayne Rife, P&Z Chairman
Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner
Ron Kaiser, P&Z Commissioner
Others Attending:
Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator
Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinator
Veronica Morgan, Assistant City Engineer
Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Rudy's Barbecue - A site and landscaping plan for a restaurant located at 504
Harvey Road, Lot 1, Wolf Pen Creek. (Case file 99-419)
A Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board meeting was held on Wednesday, May 19, 1999, to
review the above-mentioned project. The applicants were provided with a list of staff review
comments and discretionary items that were reviewed during the meeting. Mr. Steffey
informed the members that they would be tearing down the existing building and leaving 3/4
of the building slab. All of the parking lot surface will remain and they will be adding
additional concrete.
After some discussion regarding parking issues and the throat depth of the west access, DRB
Member Trainor motioned to lose parking spaces No. 49 and 50 on the site plan, and adjust
the ends to allow compact spaces. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Rife and passed
6-0.
Commissioner Kaiser suggested moving the building further towards the creek and moving
the parking towards the front of the building. He stated that he would like to have the patio
areas overlooking the creek and not the parking lot. Mr. Steffey stated that would be difficult
to do because of the parking requirements and needed turnarounds. Commissioner Kaiser
stated that he would support a request to ZBA for fewer parking spaces if moving the building
to the creek would cause that. DRB Chair Henryson offered an alternative, suggesting moving
the building back slightly and moving the rear parking adjacent to the building, to the front of
the building.
~I 1
lee
1
dQ
COLLEGE STATION
R O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842
Tel: 409 764 3500
MEMORANDUM
May 20, 1999
TO: Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board
FROM: Bridgette George, Assistant Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: Rudy's Barbecue - Revised Site Plan
Attached is the agenda and revised site plan for the meeting scheduled for
Wednesday, May 26, 1999, at 8:30 a.m. to review the revised plan.
Please call me at 764-3570 if you will be unable to attend the meeting.
Thank youi
Home of Texas A&M University
MEMORANDUM
June 29, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, via fax (512) 263-1942
FROM: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinat t
SUBJECT: Rudy's Bar-B-Q - Site Plan
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned site plan as requested. The following page is a list
of staff review comments detailing items that need to be addressed. This project is
scheduled for review by the Design Review Board on Wednesday, July 30, 8:30 a.m.,
those comments/conditions will be forwarded to you as soon as they are prepared, and
will be required in addition to the attached comments. Please address the comments
and submit the following information for further staff review:
Ten (10) copies of the revised site and landscape plans; and
The attached redlined site plan with staff comments.
Please submit the items requested by Monday, July 12, 10:00 a.m. to be considered for
scheduling at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for August
5, at 7:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue. Due to the
recent increase in development activity and the number of cases scheduled for the
Planning and Zoning Commission, staff will review the caseload and determine what
items will be scheduled for the Commission on August 5, 1999.
If there are comments that you are not addressing with the revised site plan, please
attach a letter explaining the details. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call me at 764-3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
TxDOT Permit Application
cc: MoonDance Investments Ltd., via fax (512) 263-1942
W. Michael Steffey, via fax (713) 686-8180
Mark Ferguson, via fax (409) 846-6395
STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
No. 1
Project: Rudy's Bar-B-Q
1. Show ownership and zoning of adjacent parcels on the plan.
2. Show distances between opposite and adjacent driveways.
3. Provide 360 sq. ft. of interior islands in the parking rows #21-33, 7-20, 1-6,
and/or 90-93.
4. Show where the existing "benched" area is on OfficeMax with other facilities
including vegetation located in the southeast corner of the OfficeMax site.
5. Show Sonic's improvements and vegetation in this corner.
6. We need to know what these "catch basins" are and where they discharge. They
should be consolidated and there should be only one discharge point. The
discharge point must be all the way at the creek flow line.
7. The sidewalk must be 6' wide (if it is against back-of-curb) and line up with
Sonic's. It can be 4' wide if it is moved at least 6' behind the curb.
8. The pathway along the rear of the property appears to enter private property,
will there be an easement dedication here?
9. We need some technical information regarding the staining. It needs to be an
easily-maintained area and we need to know the color. We need specs on the
grass crete as well.
10. Note #3 should be modified/clarified to assure that all end islands will be
landscaped
11. Need specs on the benches for the Design Review Board
12. Show existing and proposed water lines, sewer lines, and electric lines.
13. Need to submit plans of topo/drainage.
14. Dimension the compact car spaces.
15. Make a note that the property owner is responsible for opening the dumpster
gates at the appropriate time. Also, widen the gate opening to 12 feet.
16. Concrete details: change #3 rebar to #4. Fire lane pavement must be 6".
17. You'll need a TxDOT Driveway Permit (see attachment).
18. Provide water and sewer demands.
19. Designate the front drive aisle as a fire lane and mark it on the plan. The rest of
the fire lane will be determined based on the FDC location.
20. Where is this? Are there any existing trees your are retaining?
21. Make a note that these trees will be planted at least 20' apart.
22. Add street tree count requirement for streetscape area.
23. We'll need some shrubs in this area to screen utility connects.
Staff Review Comments Page 1 of 2 06129199
24. Need to either set a fire hydrant or move the FDC to get the hydrant between
150' and 300'. The FDC needs to be on a designated fire lane. If the grass crete
area is part of the fire lane, it need to be approved by the Fire Department.
25. Show the median in the Sonic driveway.
26. Either remove the wheelstops or provide 20' parking spaces.
27. The electrical and park access easements don't match the plat; change to match
the plat. Also, how are you providing access to the park?
Reviewed by: Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
Staff Review ComrtieMs Page 2 of 2 0629199
DRB Member Ragland arrived.
Commissioner Rife motioned to eliminate the parking spaces that the patio overlooks and
landscape that area, or, explore moving the building back to the creek. The motion was
seconded by DRB Member Kelby and passed 7-0.
The DRB voiced their concern about the protection and barricading of trees prior to any
construction. Mr. Steffey was informed that "protected" trees must be protected in the field
and that must be shown on the site/landscape plan.
DRB Chair Henryson motioned to relocate the tree, in the island at the entrance adjacent to
parking space no. 103, to the No. 49 and 50 parking spaces to provide additional screening at
that location. The motion was seconded by DRB Member Ragland and passed 7-0.
DRB Chair Henryson suggested increasing the island at the No. 1 parking space and removing
or decreasing the island at No. 7.
DRB Member Ragland stated that she would like to see more variety of plants in the rear of the
site, like that at the front of the site.
DRB Member Kelby left the meeting.
Mr. Steffey stated that the building would have a metal roof, natural stones, wood-stained
clear cedar, and a wood picket fence, stained and sealed. The wood surrounding the fireplace
on the left elevation will be a dark brownish-red. He also stated that all AC/fans would be
screened by parapet. He also stated that they would be proposing a freestanding sign at a later
time.
Commissioner Rife left the meeting.
After some discussion about the colors red and yellow, DRB Member Ragland motioned that
they use the darker red color for the building, dark brown for the upper windows, a white or
cream background on the round sign, and a white or cream background on the take out sign.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kaiser and passed 6-0
Commissioner Mooney motioned for the freestanding sign to have dark red or maroon letters
on a white or cream background, with the pole being black, cream, green, or brown; and for
the freestanding sign's arrow be white or cream instead of yellow. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Kaiser and passed 6-0. A marquee will be allowed as long as it meets the
district's ordinance requirements.
After further discussion, the DRB and applicants agreed to meet the following Wednesday,
May 26, 1999, at 8:30 a.m. to review revised site plans that Mr. Steffey stated would be
turned in by Friday, May 21. The revised plans would include conceptual layouts; one that
would include moving the building closer to the creek, and another one that would remove
the parking spaces adjacent to the patio area.
WPC Design Review 9oani 25-Max-99 Page 2 of 2
July 12, 1999
Mrs. Natalie Ruiz
City of College Station
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77840
RE: Rudy's Bar-B-Q VIA: FAX
College Station, TX
Dear Mrs. Ruiz:
The following is our response to Staff Review Comments dated June 29, 1999.
2. Show distances between opposite and adjacent driveways.
Response: Instructed to disregard question. (fax) - Per Bridgette George
3. Provide 360 sq. ft. of interior islands in the parking rows #21-33, 7-20, 1-6 and/or
90-93.
Response: Mr. Blake Brown is applying for Variance.
8. The pathway along the rear of the property appears to enter private property, will
there be an easement dedication here?
Response: Pathway changed to meet existing. - No easement dedication should
be needed.
9. We need some technical information regarding the staining. It needs to be an
easily maintained area and we need to know the color. We need specs on the
grass crete as well.
Response: Specs for grass pavers follows. Specs for Bomanite imprinted concrete
follow - Color is similar to the color of natural limestone - it could be described as
dark cream or light tan.
KSA ARCHITECTURE
2180 North Loop West, Suite 350, Houston, TX 77018 (713) 686-4900 FAX (713) 686-8180
7- 1-99: 0;36PM;1 nvlsible Structures
I
nvisible Str
uctures-St
andard Prod
uct Roll Siz
es
Model
m
ft
m
ft
m
ft
W
ft'
kg
N
1010
1
3.3
10
32.8
0.5
1.7
10
108
19
41
1020
1
3.3
20
65.6
0.8
2.7
20
215
37
82
1050
1
3.3
50
164
1.2
4
50
538
93
205
1520
1.5
4.9
20
65.6
0.8
2.7
30
323
56
123
1550*
1.5
4.9
50
164
1.2
4
75
807
139
308
2020
2
6.6
20
65.6
0.8
2.7
40
430
75
164
2050i`
2
6.6
50
164
1.2
4
100
1076
186
410
2520
2.5
8.2
20
65.6
0.8
2.7
50
538
93
205
2550*
2.5
8.2
50
164
1.2
4
125
1346
233
513
-Roll sizes marked with asterisks should be installed by lifting machines only. All other rolls cube installed manually (2 people advised).
Rolls apply to Grasspave? Gravelpave?
Draiomre? and SlopetsrI
Custom roll sizes available by request
o~
structures. inc.
20100 E. 35th Drive, Aurora, CO 80011-8160
TO Free USA and Canada: 800.233-1510
Fax: 800-233-1522
Overseas and Locally.
Country Code +303.373-1234
Fax: 303-373-1223
httpYiwww.invisiblesmctures. com
U.S. Patent No. 5,Z50,340
1996 Invisible Stauctnns, Inc.
:3033731234
Grasspave$ Large Rolls
New WOO roll covers 1,076 square
feet! Shorten your installation labor
time with the largest grass paving
pieces ever sold. The peg and bole
connections that are child's play to
assemble have been fastened for you.
Vertical flexibility over natural terrain
has always been a Grasspave2 bonus
for designers and installers. Now you
can visualize the lateral flexibility too.
Lay the roll straight or introduce some
slight curves. Shape for tighter radii
by cutting out pie-shaped wedges.
Maintain loading strength by keeping
rings whole and cutting the back-
ground grid with pruning shears.
The 50-meter-length rolls (Models 1550,
2050, 2550) are too heavy for two work-
ers to M. We recommend using a small
tractor with a bucket. See the diagram
with two rods and chain used to aid in
lifting. Start at the far end so the trac-
tor will reverse over the base course as
the roll is laid down. 40' and 48' sod
rolls will also save time on large jobs.
Post-ir Fax Note 7671
Date 7, l .
► -7
To
From
Co.
Phone S
Phone b
F /
Fax a
The Paving Choice That Protects and Enhances the Environment
Model 2050-2 meters wide by 50 meters long took just two minutes to unroll!
tructur
C~aE3~3pavY`~
1 he Paving choice Thar Protects and Enhances the Environment
C,rmpegisam Mme.pcmnpavingtecfieedogy FeelummdReneft
*wtwenbineateecycle =wtnateeiala,aerdatas&uvl • Allows 100%
rateadofaspk&*
~B , - fi _ paodudiM%dU*FWs, ardprMW • Made ftam100r%posl rW=gdWpW&
tweti are w& to 8M t=a living besdgma • H%hattag0 to
albematatoaRAukiwtuffic-b ~ p apdappbmham * 9%T" vd*ularand tre
Graosps 9 pub*and
exibuxstheervim una tin
dues ways PA*made fscat
100%n gdedplastir,
cm==wand hWkzttW
pao&Kbf um swginto,
bnd8fls swand, grow
dina*bpsww the
aaftmandbysedw&g
wafer tables on sle (n during
8oodirtgha=K%da .
mdt$*%soutoes of ale and
sdvsebfi=&Vh*
a bsotbingcatbon&=de, anal
ME&WOMPi MR41t
aehatwes ft beauty lead
gm1bydt abutlt
-app hot
asphaINw edaeonswi@rcool,
g eenlawrrow
100% PosMordus r Recycled HOPE /Bdrt Comer
-dnmch/wq6yw
pari* g
- overflow and evert
A"M pukkig
CHWIX -gdfcsrtpadeo
sldtivewaYs
arm
nos -
--Ems 0
-lawb
.hwma/wdw
neoveenent
7 cm/ t;.6' e p man snare teem
' -caaaetaile
-g oecygeyn
now -tffitumairpoaettueb
_4Mp1e9erveadB ft
lases
irff2 ..o.. cae~ereee<!or
s 23 Clre /1'
Rlb NoWd s 33 clop / 0.140
PtododDescaption
Gmaparethas&n-war eldaetplasticri ffs=meded
by an kftbckii% geogrid atrladw r,, whidt, bwwwitis icoMWA
below 4wradom is i rAulple in the aampletsd project. Wba the
nnjp ale dg4 the grid itself is &xbk whigh oW m itesesy 60
instalgaolerstigtade%andnducesummicutacdBQ _
nqwremmbl~
MW r(W W L4 6P loads begat the autfage W ere gale atnechm and
ergjereaeIbowamsenasadalbebw,thusp: waft
=nVedim,of eevpparoot,, ofibeymm 9onailloackotmh
asshoes,aremn mrtsdbya*goering;ureaandlargeloadsare
A .lad *byseuerat*gpL
lhemgs ablo act to cim tm the loot cone me (usteally sand)
and prrrert late dnugnabm away k nn beak real; ar odw bads.
Thbp mlKh the p=rootsy wn, suMlingrods to gc m deep
i do erepaumbase cotuse. The result is healery, green turf at the
suthm
One pesos can es* onstall the Grarpave2 tolls at a cafe of 7D m2
950 O perhaw, pha time far base coupe pmpum m lead grass
kestallat m *Min& so4 or sptiggi step-bratcp Wirucbgrm
are i tcluded 'lei oerr fifallaiim huttucdosea, which amornpany
eaciloaia:
1lsdps6uareet'~C,am
C 'coves
• Fast low oastwetallatian
• Caonpeftinaodwith
aspluekpavbg
-nog+tger and deem
system needed
-nvadded1wdta"edfor deter ionfaa7&w
rydemsts
Uh&Seae-20'SQD► r(5D,,,m 2scw)
Ekdveigjet-18ozpo )
~ poi (1021~/eac2) uerec rcz a
tarfc
laesin-UMmecycWHDPE
S14pidinRolb-10n>2 (108sk
2D ne2,30ng,4Dm2,50ut2,1Wirik 125 m?
Choose UPs or tnldc d4whomt
OpOp
etttrtue a. Inc.
Office Hours - 9 am to 5 pm Mountain rme
20100 East 35th Delve, Aurora, CO 80011-5160
USA/CAN Tree Ph: HOEI.233-1510 Fax: 800-233-1522
Overseas Ph: (USA) 303-373-1234 Pa); 303-373.1223
www-invisiblesh uctyres,com
CM U5 Patent #5,2M,340
7- 1-99: 8:36PM;1MV1 s1O1e Structures
:3033731234 0 3/ 7
(aGKDQ3pave~
The Paving Choice That Protects and Enhances the Environment
Ga"ve2Installs in Five Easy Steps Ordeeng
llaeC>~ave2systemc mbeiwied inns Faranswers to Ymw led nwd or fora quote an
appliratiaas at a1P t~Y 30 m2 M5 0 perman Yotuproject; call us ersend a fax please indude p
bout uskg these irwWW n steps. ~ are available VOID dis-
1. Pmpate porous base
Emmv* depth ofbasecourmasdetaariried by
Er ghm,pussandeonc,poctsurdygtaveibase course
materiel lbewm the is run a hose and
dS Kk fut the wala flows into bmadd drains
away. Add sieu dame dmhup asneomary to lmv
2 Spread Hydrogrowmix
AP'Afthis iwtrM= and soil mix 01,17 the
~ by hand or use a small ~~otia set at
2 kg 100w?-(5IIas. per 1000 A2) P dcL-hghtlyto
to the mircifneeded.
Lbtntput"bp9ad gteruelbr+sedad
3. by Gmsspave2 units
rbmGtasgw&2 unit-wi& dnpup-directly over
fhewrAygmWbam Use pepandbolm provided to
k*dodcunAL WorkawayfiunliDie/HbW
of f tstpaves Untscm be eardly shaped with pzla°g
dmaor krde tocuttbe Vddbetmm ring
4 Seed crsod Grasspave2units
-lws ~ of rirW with Glom dump
malmal is
best. Ka p sad suufaae durst until grass is nuft . We
donotmmnww rdAmwan kh bwm=itadow w l to
dry ourioo test
• Farthmmd-Oringswithdeanahaapsand,then
laythri 13 mrn (1/7) sod over areL Waterregubdy
until grass is rnafine and well rooted.
S. b%ak feltlim and maintain
Alter zd allab.q, the grave from traffic until its
root sys m a we~tablishea. Mus% simply maintain
the gmpavingasy+ou wrouid a grass lawn. ln*dm is
nea wary. Mau nut femlimus should be at
least anoe- per gnwmg wagon, in additim to regular
fertilizAXL
t"tlTSod Turf. or 'N
V Shwp Sand FM and
oeeveturvs. Inc.
= to be -ined by
Offeoe Hours - 9 am to 5 pm Mountain rune
20200 East 35th Drive, Aurora, CO 80012-8160
LISA/CAN Free Pir 800-233-1510 Fax 800-233.1522
Overseas Ph: (USA) 3(k3,373-1234 Fax: 30f1-373-I223
t;►fSI, U5 Patent 115,250,340
-stabte and tn%M nrek,.d sum
p
The Paving Choice That Protects and Enhances the Environment
TBaWWAL SPECIFICATION
511: ION W%- Porous Paving
PART 1-GENERAL
LM Gener-A Provisions
A. The Conditions of the Contract and all
Sectioc~
of %isi 1 are hereby wade a pact of ifiis Section.
LM Desaaption of Wodc
A. Work indudak
oe 1 sandy gravel vwfixne as
per
ardor as shown on drawk g k toprovide adequate
support for project desagn loads. See 2A2
Mabaials.
Z Provide PavftSy~nprvd
hisling units. HYdtvgxvw soul
onnditiona, and installation per the manufachster's
m*uctions furnished under this section.
3. Provide and install dean sharp sand fo fly the
Ckwpave z units,, when needed.
L Pnwide and install grass by uaft sod or
R Related Work
1. Subgr preparation tinder Section tYL200
Fatthwvork
Z Subawfi ee drainage materials - Section aMO
Subsurface Drdkmgr, when needed
3. Irrigation instaDat m -Sectiaru 03810
inipbon when needed
IM Qualify Assurance
A. FaalowvSec lion 01390 reTw estr°nts.
R kwbbati= Perboamed only by skilled work
people with satisfactory record of perfonnance an.
lacrscaping or paving projects of comparable size
and quality.
L04 Submittals
A. Submit manufacluner's product data and
installation ores.
R Submit a 10" x 10" section of Grampavel
mateaal for review. Reviewed and aooepbed samples
wMbe netumed to the contractor.
C Subadt niebwW cett6cates for base amine and
sand fill maberials.
LOS Delivery, SWraM and Handling
. A. Protect CrasRxve2 units fioaa damtuge during
to. =under tarp wt~~ time tom deRvecy
atD ad =under
one week Keep HY~w in a
dry wattion,
106 Ptoject Coneditions
A. Review i ubgationp~~ res and coon dinabe
Ca~av~woticwith athaworkatiecbExi Ger,~y,
Graffi a e2isinstalledatthesametimeaspmkagraw
atimcl, n=Jy due last site oa"tn,cti4n activity.
R An a ~ avez _
&"a ixudmg=epe =andaaphalMMing,
nustbe °conVieted prior to installatimi ofCj .
C Coldwmfiw.
L Dionotusefiomennnatm alsorn detiabnxixed
or cvabad with ice or fiost.
2 Do notbutld an fir 7, Pr work or wet; saturated c r
muddyakigrade.
M"Y emwedh Fwhet►aml Lair
D: Protect partially aonMAded paving against
damage fia n othesaototrucdontrafkwhen work isin
progrem 3 8weehaj Auntil grass nyber~c~ea~uctedoustshill( bye
ac oessable by wagenicy and fine eT%wvw t during and
atfieiimtallation. .
E. Pmtect adjacent wodk and a nfaoes from damage
duringGrasrspav kniallatim
PART 2-PRODUCTS
ZOL Avaflabrgity
A. Manufacturer. (Gtasspave2, Hy& ogrow)
tsiWe Strudues, inc., 20100Fast35th Drive Aurop,
orado SOML Callfnoar M and Canada
800-2331510 toll f M lnbetnadmml 303-373.1234, Fax
Grasspave2 Page 1
11 LOW Sales Repcv~ntati~
(CmWdMwufbd arr)
2.M Mab mials
A. BaseG,mw Sandygravelerabmialtenonlocal
m cm neo dy need for road base omutruckn
pose r%.theMowingsiegeacealyd&
%an&
Im
Skye
31,r
85
3/8"
60
y4
30
#40
<3
11200
L Sources of the materiel mn aeduede either'pit
nWcr"crusleernue Cmdwrmnaatmdwell
8WOMAy nxmmdvwp sand to be added bDaeirb, QD
bX%byvoobm e) to e' wmiorgiump xomty.
Z Sdociedaesb®adsAwuldbe=mdynec> Wm
mpliieed~evWdopfim a+e65fo 7.4 tD pca+ideadequateroot
3 Alta:~ven~a~aialsauchasavehedstd~,
Iinnmxk and/orcmmhed lavanWbeamddewd for
baseamweuse; pwvided dwy aremi;aedvritle sharp
sandRD'3096 and hMM& tDproperao yacftL
(CrerafierlAWw dlinrenorkat momsr uph*eana *
WwmdwwaddddJ
EL xydc+ogn wCcnditbxm AdcyaynOreticczystal
made of poly.yi n*k (<Q1%) 'this
polymwisnm4oodeaaed =ilynwA&ndw.'Ah mt>
SOWS0tiumitsweotinwaber a~osttap
soumm Hydwgwwisanon4m*foanof
whide alieiws abeorpW~ort of Iwtilheea seed
vv~rtdegs
-adatioct A>beaeaepolytceaa of
ionic a anwni,foraes
v~n7tttotbeallowed b be
subsBtuted.
C Cusqwvex Grass Paving Units L*Mweod
inocfa cu 0-505oaoMm
"te",~L//rd>`'' mli fro t
P recycled P~ n~ =565WIMR;UMIL lie pL,5w.,M be
1lca ostL
ICY F DM nlbtfiauan3%c moon black
oaeaenhabeadded for UVprobactiaee.
Lood g isend b902Wcv* WpsQ
wfmfiHedwMmr4 over dep&of
roachm SMrKlarda imisW c. thtitweigh#=Slog
(18oe), vd knm = 8%solid. Units wil be shipped in
poe-amesrbled roils from 1 meter( M b2Smeters
(&Z)wide. CosetactIVlanufade MfnrsiaeoptK9M
D Send: Obtain dem sharp sand (washed cmm*
mnagb fill the 25 mm.(omimc h) hig hrings and spaces
between the when seeding or uft 13 mm
inch thick sod tieidaeess).
S Grass: Use ~eaies MAW to weir tr~c
y a mw/Kyt/rescue n= uised bcra*Jetw &&s
types 9oudum d ambes s► . or l nida
lC7w&with hm dsod sWi!r ~
~*m amraeesarneSUndwe
saw* a!dybyasada►s~ri~o~gJ
trfnaearaevc¢thr/6lloty~~~ msudp~
1. So& Use 13mm@OS)d**(soil
maedsodf ama=badg~ e~ ,owev. and m >t
Speoesshotdd
aorr iftL Sod al+all be .
givann is sand a sandy tam
mik ardy, cr tmpphod fim a re°g6 ad "vy ,10d Sod"
p mums Sodgro nninso8s of day Bk orhigha gage
anabecials salt m pest; wgl not be am"mi
2 Seed: Useseedmatudakoftheprefored
for toad ernes and Pml tafC
fimaar66ed sorrow. Seedaln$bepwvidedm
oxftmns deWybbdod b d%ow seed nanw, lot
ne z*mnety %weedseed om*ontyand
-beed%ofpsityand d PureUve
Seed "wand anwtuet beasdxmnanpbm
F Mtddc o ndad°not'I~6rap ~SuRbeofwoodar
papa'°eflulose"cf mujdtmftwials
ofimundinconondimi M*hesofsbaw °
aaoepbblebemuseoftheniowmo guwbddi g
G. Fetb"Law A with
GuarantwdAn*doof 17,23.k-oraszeoDuwwxW by
toecap d Smmfw n and root
dm*pnenE
K FadaneSkpW do Ddeftc Rtehmmustbe
their
withthepl<io ofSe m P14 1 e ct
40dk rage wordieg and Odw deW9 nwdbe
e IMresbedwithandappwmdbyleastgmaudu* s.
L
Pam 3" d0tspecial Is
regeneed wjth theMaz Wg phom number; and
p mod. ~eposuteshalibe
midedand
Grasspave2 Page 2
7- 1-99; 8:36PM;Invl31ble Structures
PAR EXEC.T MON
3ml gWdiore
ilimmmo tJn ttm
ali heart mspace~s fee
F-- NORM %4mwwllmfmf
nAll,m a f ~ Mad Nowprgiea% am
aa~nA►aodate dratoteptactia~dtan ~eamna' d* verify
rahrft Dgwbwd ¢ b cf*CW -&Mam nydn atl
A Examine afto de and beeaoinse by tall®d
amn&avL DonotstutQasspave2insb bdmuntil
tuwbfi ctoayconditbm weaoaect A Cbeckfw
POw ityolfmimdke4obnoeofmA*L nfamduhvW(if
gam yeonnpa*dt dw4debef4 and
I ~~esaaoep~anoeofedstgng
oatrdtb'ans and na~atwbifkylorsatisfac~ory
penio~ lfe~stgcaditionsatelaund
taantisfacbory, ~ farregoh~ian.
3.02 Pnpm=doa
lF.nmaK flint stibttaae n~iniP meabraaaallyade~ate tv
Ald*C bawamm ~vw camadda rid
taak EmNaa 11, 1 aom,RgandwirPaRvifbj j%ffsdbrae=10
A. Pbmbweaoumea overpnpmmdsubbaw
tog~radeashorovttan. inlii~mttoemeedl5t)anm
(6"~aornpac~Beadililt eo99%
Pl+octor.Ixave2in (1D for
unhand
send/sod SH toles Grade:
~a=p'ua ff~Ci m~(io lbniKpe w~ oo ~
thesudaoeofthebaseeaaaewithahatidWmKoe
whed4ratwyqxeadw. TheHydwg ow ric should
beplacedrelybetas theGnasapaveZ
tiau'isbs9snuefhdllte doeanotbeooQtewet
andexpandedwhenmvft theumbL
3M LshNabm of GmspaiveZ Units
A k"theGr&wp veZuaibbyplacitgur"with
~ bdn&'v and uw4 pegs and holes pwvWed to
ma pniper anvdinbalod-Aeunib. thins
Cmbe
ar hu shaped with p mmk% shears
(Dbel, Fender Washer
[hrits planed on curves and slopes shaft
r d+aedbthebasea naw,usingEa
Andwmor l6dCommonnailswith
washer, as to se me units inp1~oe. Tops of
rings shag with the sunfaoe of a*vtt
budvidam pavements.
B. k" sand in m p by Ikfkumpine directly from
a d►nnp truck or ttombudoets n ymatied on tractions,,
whkchdtienexitthesiteby over
mpah"
fiN dwith sand. The sand isthm spread
the pie using Bat b for wide
"asphfte% rkW tOSll t~ rings. Astiffbdo6d bmarn
shousesedi orfaml" m "of themxi The
sand awstbe"
e or min fs, wwAh dw &*h ~ no less
above! Wp andnommethem6mmM25j
am Ins4ilLtdon of Gores
K1,omeane b&w JJ SmmvwwWiaa
A.1 vUlgrassseedandmukhovermnd-fled .
"MMFI Wd eq+Rilea
t
~beuni5ormand
t~t~ of8teseed,ant3as
ouddv4 fQtitiaed
of the turf Pbwm(6 tD 8 w"i4
& btsbS thnsod (oe'washed sody diteetly ova
sand plied mwO&d no bighwffim dw" f the
~ ~~eharidbeplaoe+dwith
joi~dla Sodded ae~s muatbe~rtr3srsdasy
alum
dumSodded MgroOesbbfidunmtOrAdmwmof3irime4
fivmanytaffirodw
~ *waperlWof34D4wadw oar
wenbelaw and
thZ~Xurjj~tL
C
. tig~tt josfs between sodd at dps.
into Emp with tdlw r arpbk with so d bi a nw ist
oath ion, unig theboNoa►ofsodtxdhesbaresofpaver
(ueuepy3e4paeeeswfthv . Fhohm1humi
traffic for n paW of ! week
3A6 Cla jag
~ of GmeqwvLa
urilswheie flneeor
gffi > srdence f
iepiaoementtrs so evfde+aeo
appaea
and Won, °m*fio of the Walk Famove al a,=
a
dwmV tatm&k deli and Repair any
toa*cmtam m*mid
fimnins anof thiswo&
ENDOF.SBCMN
ad b le Sbudu>Q ba: I-800-233-IMO, ml
3D3373-1234
Grasspave2 Page 3
r0 CM v s-71
5F'ECIFICATION6
UNIT SIZE - 50 CM X 50 CM X 2.5 CM
(20"x 20"x 11)
AVAILABLE t4 9 STANDARD ROLL
SIZES
WIT WEIG:14T - 465 GRAMS (16.4 OZ)
OR 1.86 KG (4.1 POUNDS/M2)
STRENGTH - 402 KG/CM (5720 PSd
COLOR - BLACK (STANDARD)
RESIN - loo% pO6T-CONSUMER
RECYCLED WDPE/LDPE
FLAN
GRASSPAVE2 SG7UARE5
ADJACENT GcR,ASSPAVE2 SCXL4.RES
HTDROGROW MD< BELOW RING
SUPPLIED FREE BY MANUFACTURER
83 CM 031
2.3 cm (0.Cil/~
6 CM (2-41 I
SAND (CLEAN, SHARP SAND)
COMPACTED SANDY GRAVEL,
ROAD BASE
(DEPTH OF BASE C LYME TO BE
DETERMINED BY ON-SITE ENGINEEi
COMPACTED St03RADE,
95% MODIFIED PROCTOR DENSITI-
SECTION
TOP OF GR485 ROOT MASS 6 MM
(1/4') ABOVE TOP OF RING
GRASG P-G pADVE2 AT AC" UTW HOLE
ii
ROOT MASS TO FILL
GRASSPAVE2
ENLARGEMENT
COMPAISTECOUD <1NDY GRAVEL
BASE NOTE GRASS/PLANT TYPES SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR
LANDSCAPE DESICsNER_
TYF ICAL GRA56F''AV E2 DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE cwoosE TN5 RRO=T FOR REWORGNCs GRASS UE.ARM SUWACES~
(mom 20100 EASr 35th oRfvE
mm AURORA COLORADO a0011
~a111~
soft 900,9&*,* on 3cxlwsmm
CVFMTDWG wa DMW37a
~EE ENLARC-EMNT BELOW
DRB Member Henryson motioned for Mr. Steffey to provide two site plans: one moving the
building off of the easement and moving the front parking spaces to each side of the building;
and, another one with the same site plan but including a traffic loop around the back of the
building. The Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) can determine which plan is best.
Commissioner Mooney seconded the motion which passed 6-0.
Mr. Steffey stated that the paving material for the traffic loop behind the building could be
concrete with grass in between that wouldn't look like a driveway, or, a patterned concrete or
other material which would handle traffic without the visual impact of concrete. It was noted
that it was important to designate the pedestrian path from the walkway system across this
drive so that traffic would recognize the pedestrian crossing and slow down.
DRB Member Ragland suggested angling all of the parking to help direct traffic flow. Mr.
Steffey stated that this would be confusing to patrons and not work with all of the parking on
site.
Commissioner Mooney motioned to recommend to the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA)
their support for the parking variance for a reduced number of spaces. It was suggested that
restaurant staff could park at the owner's other property on Harvey Road. The motion was
seconded by Bill Trainor and passed 6-0.
Commissioner Kaiser motioned to move three of the five handicap parking spaces to the east
side of the building near the entrance. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mooney
and passed 6-0.
Some discussion took place regarding the building colors. The DRB approved the dark red
sample per the rendering, in addition to the colors approved at the previous meeting. They
also agreed that a light yellow as the sign background and the canopy "pick-up" sign would
be acceptable, but postponed making a formal motion and approval until such time that a
sample is provided.
Mr. Steffey stated that he would provide staff with revised conceptual site plans the following
day for the P&Z meeting scheduled for June 3. The parking variance will be presented to the
ZBA on June 15. The final site and landscape plan will then go to the P&Z for approval on
June 17.
WPC Design Review Board 26-Mar-99 Page 2 of 2
development but did not feel that the proposed use would be what the City would want for this area
since this area is the oldest commercial area in College Station.
Mr. Ron Miller, P.O. Box 9875 (owner of the property), explained that he has had a hard time selling
this tract with the existing zoning. He said that the potential buyer is planning to develop an extended
stay type of apartment complex (similar to the existing one across the street). He felt this development
is the best possible for the site. He thought the development would generate less traffic than permitted
uses in the existing zoning.
Chairman Rife closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Floyd moved to recommend approval of the rezoning request with staff conditions.
Commissioner Parker seconded the motion.
Commissioner Warren did not feel this was what the City wants to see in this area since it is an area of
historic value to the City.
Chairman Rife said that there is already multi-family in the area. He said that he would support the
motion because the tract has been to the Commission with proposed C-N uses and they were denied.
Commissioner Kaiser said that he would also support this request.
Commissioner Floyd felt the proposed development would be a better neighbor to the existing
residential area than uses stated in the C-N district.
Chairman Rife called for the vote, and the motion to recommend approval of the request passed 5-1;
Commissioner Warren voted in opposition to the motion.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing and consideration of a rezoning of Fairfield Residential,
Inc. for property located on University Drive west and adjacent to the Gateway Subdivision from
C-B Business Commercial to R-5 Apartments/Medium Density. (99-120)
Commissioner Kaiser moved to table this item at the request of the applicant. Commissioner Horlen
seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (6-0).
Agenda Item No. 6: Consideration of a site plan for Rudy's Barbecue located at 504 Harvey
Road on the site previously known as Sneakers in Wolf Pen Creek. (99-419)
Senior Planner McCully presented the staff report and explained the history of the Rudy's site plan
consideration. She said that Rudy's chains typically include gas pumps, which are not allowed in the
Wolf Pen Creek District. In October, 1998, the applicant requested an exception to allow the gas
pumps, but the Commission denied the request. In May 1999, the applicant submitted a new site plan
without the pumps. The original 'site plan was rejected due to incomplete information, and because it
did not show DRB's recommendation to orient the building to the creek and not to Harvey Road alone.
The request of the DRB was consistent with the other three restaurants that were built in the corridor
recently. The applicant returned with three separate site plans and concept layouts and presented them
to the Commission and DRB before proceeding with the final site plan. The option that was chosen
required a parking variance, which was granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustments. The preferred
P&ZMinutes August S, 1999 Page 7 of 13
option is what is being presented at this time. This plan shows the front of the building oriented to
Harvey Road with a patio in the back of the building overlooking the landscape area between the patio
and the creek. There was some discussion of allowing a driveway across the rear portion of the
property (because of the view), but it was agreed between the applicant and the DRB that this would be
a grass crete driveway so there would not be two dead-end rows, to avoid traffic backing up the drive in
peak times. Staff and the DRB recommend approval with staff conditions as included in the packet.
Commissioner Kaiser asked if additional parking was included on this plan. Ms. McCully did not
believe there was any additional parking included, other than what was discussed between the DRB and
the applicant to help with the variance needed. It does include more spaces than the first conceptual
plan considered by the Commission.
Chairman Rife asked if the color difference had been resolved, the color originally approved was a
darker earth tone red but there was a color sample brought in that was a brighter red (not what was
approved). Ms. McCully said that her understanding was that if the color is the same as on the
elevation drawing, the DRB recommended approval, the color sample brought in was in error.
Commissioner Parker moved to approve the site plan with staff conditions. Commissioner Warren
seconded the motion, which passed 5-1; Commissioner Kaiser voted in opposition to the motion.
Agenda Item No. 7: Public hearing and consideration of amending the Wolf Pen Creek Zoning
District in the City's adopted Zoning Ordinance. (98-812)
City Planner Kee presented the staff report and explained that the original Wolf Pen Creek Master Plan
was adopted in 1988, and the current district regulations were adopted in 1989. In July 1998, the
Council adopted a revised master plan for the corridor. The proposed amendment would take care of
several items that were approved by Council as part of the Wolf Pen Creek Master Plan revision
process. One of the recommendations that came from the review process dealt with the Design Review
Board (DRB). The DRB is an eight-member panel of staff and council appointment members that
review all projects in the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor. Another recommendation was to look at the
permitted uses currently allowed in the corridor and deal with the fact that there were more multi-family
developments than originally envisioned in the plan, and to add language to discourage the typical "big-
box" retail and to encourage the smaller retail as originally envisioned in the plan. This proposed
amendment defines "big-box" retail, clarifies retail uses permitted, allows apartments built prior to July
1998, and clarifies the role of the DRB. She explained that there was a housekeeping item also included
in this amendment to insert verbiage into Section 17.6 EFFECT OF PROTEST TO PROPOSED
AMENDMENT to clarify that a 3/4 vote of Council is forced when a petition is signed by owners of a
certain area of land affected by a proposed change. Previously, it was unclear that the owners were
representing an area of land and not simply a number of lots. This language would track the state
statute.
She explained that several sources were used to try to define "big box retail". She said that the City may
choose to avoid using the term "big box". Developments the City wants to avoid in the Corridor are big
boxes, which are stores that are very large. However, size is only one part that the City is trying to
define. The types of retail that are desired in the corridor are retail uses that offer products and services
that fit in with the corridor that are oriented to pedestrian traffic. The design of the buildings in the
corridor and how they relate to surrounding land uses is also a major issue.
She read the definition of "big box" retail as defined in the proposed ordinance, which reads as follows:
P&ZAlinutes August S, 1999 Page 8 of 13
I n ~ " ^ ~ ~ l.'~}±~Y1✓1
l " Technical Revie /Staff Coneet"ns (co-Cnt.)
V
XS&ho(w- the Fire De artment Connection (FDO on the building;
Show fire lanes (we are concerned that there is not enough room for the radii
required);
What is this dimension (19)? If it is closer than 2' to property line provide
wheels stops;
Provide pavement and curbing details;
Provide water and sewer legend with appropriates demands;
Show how the vertical retaining wall relates to the parking; and
Show the 100-year floodplain and floodway line per the 1998 Iii DM study.
C1c ~%t^rc, eta
I
'
'0 6~- M-1
U
00-r~ , "Q
T fie,
f
49
;j 0,
(rat
zy~-
c
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
(409) ~e+-~5]0
MEMORANDUM
\ / POST PLANNING DIVISION
\ / PLANNING POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE
TOFfiCE EG~E STATION, »ea2 TEXAS AVENUE
9960
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-g960
764-3570
TO: Planning & Zoning Commiss n
PROM: Jane R. Kee, City Planner
RE: Wolf Pen Creek Uses
DATE: October 7, 1998
Mr. Paul Clarke will be discussing a particular restaurant use with the Design Review
Board on October 14. The restaurant has a novelty shop and two working gasoline
pumps as part of its theme. Mr. Clarke would like some assurance before incurring
architectural and site design costs, that the incidental use of the gas pumps will be
acceptable to the Commission in Wolf Pen Creek. Restaurants are listed as a permitted
use but gasoline service is not. Other uses may be allowed upon consideration by the
Commission.
Additional information and the recommendation of the Design review Board will be
presented at the P&Z meeting on Thursday.
A K
COUNTRY STORE"
AND VAR-$-W
The City of College Station, Texas
Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board
Planning and Zoning Commission
C/O Jane Key, City Planner
1101 Texas Ave. South
College Station, Texas 77840
RE: Wolf Pen Creek, "Land Use - Fit" Request
Via: fax 409-764-3496 and Airborne Express
Dear DRB and P&Z:
Rudy's Country Store & Bar-B-Q, hereinafter "Rudy's" has a site formerly known as "Sneakers" located
next to Office Max on Harvey Road under Contract for the future location of a Rudy's. We are seeking to
know if our concept is acceptable prior to moving forward with the planned development. Rudy's is a
regional restaurant concept, which typically has two fuel pumps and country store, which are incidental
uses to the primary restaurant. The Country Store stocks items that fit the market location of the specific
store. The store envisioned as part of the College Station restaurant would carry such items, but not limited
to: breakfast tacos, hand dipped ice cream, picnic supplies and novelty items. Rudy's will chose to install
unbranded fuel; this will allow a custom fuel canopy, which will harmonize with the building and Park
environment. Rudy's Bar-B-Q comes out of the pit, is craved to order, for dining on the premises or
packaged for "Rudy's TakeAway". Rudy's will have an "on-off premises" beer and wine license. We are
planning a large "L" shaped porch for outdoor dining, which would face Wolf Pen Creek and the future
Sonic.
We are requesting to know if our intended operation as outlined above is acceptable. We believe that our
proposed operation both "Fits" the vision of the District and will be an asset to the community. Thanking
you in advance for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Lynn Ford
Cc: Paul Clarke
Rudy's Texas Bar-B-Q, L.L.C.
3555 RR 620 South AUSTIN, TEXAS 78734 512-263-0800 fax 512-263-8145
r ~
COLLEGE STATION
P. O. Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842
Tel: 409 764 3500
WOLF PEN CREEK DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
June 16, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, 1514 Ranch R., 620 South, Austin, Texas, 78734
FROM: Design Review Board
Kay Henryson, DRB Chair
Bill Trainor, DRB Member
George McLean, DRB Member
Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner
Richard Floyd, P&Z Commissioner
Steve Parker, P&Z Commissioner
Others Attending:
Natalie Ruiz, Development Coordinator
Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinato 4ST
Veronica Morgan, Assistant City Engineer
Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
Charles Wood, Senior Economic Development Analyst
Jessica Jimmerson, Staff Planner
Paul Clarke
SUBJECT: Rudy's Barbecue - A revised site plan for a restaurant located at 504 Harvey
Road, Lot 1, Wolf Pen Creek. (Case file 99-419)
A Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board meeting was held on Wednesday, June 16, 1999, to
review the above-mentioned project. Sabine McCully began the meeting by reviewing the
action taken at the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) meeting the previous night. She stated
that they tabled their decision on the parking variance due to the applicant not wanting the
variance. Blake Brown stated that they have decided they want as much parking as possible
on the site and would like the DRB and Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) to reconsider
the site plan. Mr. Brown stated that originally workers from Rudy's were going to park at
Kona's to help with the reduced parking. But, Kona's has had record sales and does not desire
to have their parking taken up by Rudy's employees.
Jane Kee informed Mr. Brown that new restaurants typically go through a 11/2-year
"honeymoon" period where parking is a problem, and then when the newness wears off,
parking is adequate. Sabine McCully stated that Mr. Bown should be planning for long-term
parking and not short-term parking.
Veronica Morgan stated that she attended the Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee meeting
the previous week, where they looked at several different concepts for the design of the creek.
One of the concepts being considered is relocating the creek to the south, downstream of the
planned George Bush Drive Bridge, filling in the natural creek and making it a natural trail
Home of Texas A&M University
system. She reiterated that it was a concept only, and that the committee gave their approval
to look at the feasibility of doing that. No decision was made at the meeting on which concept
would be approved.
Paul Clarke stated that he saw plans that showed that the new creek bed would be constructed
about 100-200 yards south of the natural creek and that it would have trails constructed on
each side of it. Veronica Morgan stated that she has not seen any plans that depict that, and
stated that the committee is still supporting the trail system to be located adjacent to the
restaurants along the creek.
After some discussion regarding the parking, Mr. Brown stated that they would like 104
parking spaces, and no less than 95.
Ms. Morgan suggested adding parking on the east side of the rear property line, because of the
existing retaining wall and the tight space in that immediate area.
Commissioner Mooney motioned to approve the revised site plan with 96 parking spaces:
including adding three along the creek on the southwest property line (east of the retaining
wall), adding four along the rear of the building (west of the patio area), changing the island
along the west property line to a parking space, adding one parking space to the southeast
corner parking row and moving the tree to the extreme southeast corner property line,
removing the tree on the north property line on the east side of the west entrance; construct
seating along the back property line behind the three parking spaces extending over beyond
the turn around drive with scored stained concrete walkway; and, to continue the grass crete
from the sidewalk to the end of the turn around.
Natalie Ruiz informed Mr. Brown that by Friday, June 18, 10:00 a.m., he would need to turn
in a letter explaining what happened at the previous ZBA meeting and why they are asking
for a change; along with the $75 application fee, so that he can be scheduled for the July 20
meeting. She also stated that he needs to turn in the revised site and landscaping plans by
Friday, June 18, at 10:00 a.m. to be scheduled for another DRB meeting.
WPC Design Review Bond 25-Mar-88 Page 2 of 2
WOLF PEN CREEK DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
June 30, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, 1514 Ranch R, 620 South, Austin, Texas, 78734
FROM: Design Review Board
Bill Trainor, DRB Member
George McLean, DRB Member
Chara Ragland, DRB Member
Wayne Rife, P&Z Commissioner
Steve Parker, P&Z Commissioner
Staff Attending:
Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinator
Sabine McCully, Senior Planner 401
SUBJECT: Rudy's Barbecue - A revised site and landscape plan for a restaurant
located at 504 Harvey Road, Lot 1, Wolf Pen Creek. (Case file 99-419)
A Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board meeting was held on Wednesday, June 30,
1999, to review the above-mentioned project. Sabine McCully began the meeting by
reviewing the staff review comments.
Some discussion took place regarding the existing 5" caliper tree located on the site.
The landscape legend showed that it was unprotected, even though they are going to
protect it. The DRB requested that the legend be changed to read that the existing tree
is a "protected tree" with "unprotected" points.
The Board discussed the Park Maintenance Access Easement and discussed the
possibility of a ramp being constructed at the rear property line to provide access to the
park. Ms. McCully stated that she was not sure what would be necessary, but
suggested that Mr. Brown coordinate that with the appropriate City staff.
Some discussion took place regarding the red color for the building. A color sample
was previously submitted, but could not be located for the meeting. Commissioner Rife
asked staff to compare the color sample with the color rendition on the building
elevations, if it does not match, the red color sample would need to be reviewed by the
DRB.
BOMANITE PATTERNS
Bomanite patterns are the original cast-in-place, colored and imprinted architectural concrete paving. This product provides the client with an
imprinted pattern that has a smooth surface between the joint lines (deep joint lines).
Brick Patterns
Basketweave Brick
00=00
000= 24-
00=00 -S hl
24" t8-1
Also available in 8omacron style
Herringbone Brick
Zr5 OZ 23
/000
Also available in 8omacron style
Stone and Rock Patterns
Fieldstone
21 1Y.'
Running Bond Brick
Soldier Course Brick
Stacked Bond Brick
i
000 l
0000
L 24
-11
I I-A
24
NN
TA-,
r
I==
I
Also available in 4'x 12",
1,--24' t a"'
Also available as 9'x 18" and in
12' x 3" and in Bomacron
Bomacron style 1" x 8" and 4" x 8" style 4" x 8"
Fishscale Cobblestone
Individual stones vary in size from
4"x5'/,"to 514"x6"
Random Stone
c 27"
27-
River Rock
J~U:2--
2 C 4'
F ~fI
24- -t -
Individual stones vary in size from 3%," x 5'/"
to 5%," x 8'/,". Also available in 6"x 12"
Flagstone
r~
EDE 2a"
~Ci~C
Individual stones vary in size from
4"x7"to5%,'x1%,'
2 1,-
a~C
~00~ + ~f .
000 Si I
rile Patterns
12" x 12" Tile with Circles
6" CIA a8'
I ,
Hex Tile
27'6"
i 1 1
1-s
24"
Also available in 9" x 11",
ITV x 19'
Moorish rile
2a
" 3"
r
I---23z" ~
Design Considerations
Bomanite and Bomacran are not usually intended to be an exact simulation of natural materials, but are
sometimes utilized to achieve a similar feeling or appearance. Bomanite and 8omacron tend to have a
rustic feel and certain variations in color, texture and geometric precision are expected. Both are
handcrafted from a large mass of concrete under varying jobsite conditions and, therefore, do not have
perfect uniformity. If you are unfamiliar with the appearance of Bomanite or Bomacron, we recommend
that you contact your local Bomanite licensee to view actual installations or samples.
Custom Patterns
The patterns depicted on these pages are currently available from your local Bomanite contractor and
Bomanite Corporation. If you are unable to find a pattern that fits your particular project needs, consult
your local Bomanite licensee regarding the design and production of custom patterns.
Running Bond Tile
_7
I
r
Also available in 6" x 6", 61/4' x 6'/,
12" x 12", 24" x 24" and in
8omacron style 6" x 6", 6'/" x 6%",
12" x 12", 14" x 20%,"
Tile
I-12"-I
12"
24
Ell
" --i
Also available in 6" x 6", 6'/" x 6'/",
6" x 11', 9" x 9", 18" x 18",
21"In' x 21"/n" and in Bomacran style
4'x4',8"x8",12"x 12",2'x2'
•.'0
CORPORATION
P.O. Box 599
Madera, CA 93639-0599
PHONE: (559) 673-2411
FAX: (559) 673-3246
http://www.bomanite.com
3omanitel and Bomacron- are registerea traaemorks and servicemarks with the
U.S. Patent Office and otner countries.
'copyright 1998 Bomanite t:orooration. All Bomanite' concrete Graphics' patterns
are the property of Bomanite corporation and cannot be roared for any purpose.
Printed in U.S.A. 25MI298
and
A ; Mode! CD 112
'IIIt t?rlis1:(TiTiW,GTir 90 1
J4i^+P.,l rN4 GoNVw\ 'r-
C*\o r & l
F W~ 0 -
CAD
i L-01-1999 '10." 53 CAMBRIDGE DESIGNS P.01
0 E S I G N S
~1~' ~N1TA
No. 464* Seating Bench 6' (Portable)
No. Seating Bench 8' (Portable)
No. * Seating Bench 6' (Permanent)
No. Seating Bench 8' (Permanent)
Cubic
Model No. Weight Measure
464• Seatinst Bench 6' Portable 176 tbs. (79 ke) 3.4 cu. it.
4M* Seating Bench SrPortable 21u pos. (95 kT) 43 cu.-it
Seatine Bench 6' Permanent 176 lbs. (79 ksl 3.4 cu. ft.
Ground
Area
2' x 6' (.6m x 1.9m)
2'x 8' (.6m x 2.5m)
2' x 6' (.6m x 1.9m)
4W* Seating Bench 8-Permanent 210 tbs. (95 k,) 4.4 cu. ft.
wood type and finish PX =Pine, no finish
PL =Pine. linseed finish
PP =Pine, polyurethane finish
RX -Redwood, no finish
RL -Redwood. linseed finish
RP -Redwood. polyurethane finish
OX -Oak, no finish
OL =Oak, linseed finish
OP =Oak, polyurethane finish
2'x8'(. mom)
-SPECIFICATIONS-
FRAME ASSEMBLY. Shall be 3" Square Steel Tubing with x 3" steel on top for mounting to bench and
x 4" x 18" steel foot for portable model. The frame assembly shall be all welded construction, primed and
painted black.
WOOD TOP ASSEMBLY: The 8 interior slats shall be 2 " x 3 " enclosed by 3 " x 6 " face slats. The interior slats
are separated by nylon spacers or'/„" steel rod, capped with wooden plugs. TOP ASSEMBLY can be Oak, Pine
or Redwood. Finish shall be Na Finish, Linseed Oil, or Poh•urethane.
GENERAL: Over diameter shall be 181/:" high x 231,t" wide x 6' or 8'.
MOTE: We reserve the right to change specifications wilhout notice.
5/89
i ,
JLL-01-1999 10:53 CAMBRIDCe DESIGNS
P. 02
/2"
TOP VIEW
ELEVATION
No. 464 - Page
18 1/2°
JUL-01-1999 10:54 CAMBRIDGE DESIGNS
48' (MODEL 466)K)
72' (MODEL 467A)
BENCH FRAME
I FOOTING LAYOUT i
FOR PERMANENT INSTALLATION
No. 464 - Pace 3
LEVEL
P.03
i
12" DIA. X 12-DEEP
4 REQ-D,
14
NOTE: To convert inches to centimeters,
multiply inches by 234.
TOTAL P.03
ANCHOR BOLT DETAIL
Response to Comments Page 2
Rudy's - College Station
07/12/99
11. Need specs on the benches for the Design Review Board.
Response: Specs for benches follow.
13. Need to submit plans of topo/drainage.
Response: The site grading will not change. New paving will be at the same
elevation and slope as the existing. Slope and the relationship of existing slab and
existing paving are shown on drawings.
18. Provide water and sewer demands.
Response: Water and Sewer demands cannot be calculated until Construction
Drawings are completed.
20. Where is this? Are there any existing trees you are retaining?
Response: Yes, one existing fenced Live Oak is being retained. - See Landscape
Drawings.
21. Make a note that these trees will be planted at least 20' apart.
Response: Done. - See Landscape Drawings.
22. Add street tree count requirement for streetscape area.
Response: See legend on Landscape Drawings.
23. We'll need some shrubs in this area to screen utility connects.
Response: Done. - See Landscape Drawings.
24. Need to either set a fire hydrant or move FDC to get the hydrant between 150' and
300'. The FDC need to be on a designated fire lane. If the grass crete area is part
of the fire lane, it needs to be approved by the Fire Department.
Response: FDC moved and a line is drawn on Plan between fire hydrant and FDC
- distance is 270 feet. Grass pavers are designed to be used in fire lanes. They
have a strength of 5,720 psi (see technical information attached) which should pass
Fire Department standards.
Sincerely,
00~0
Anita Dover
Project Manager
G:\Rudys\CollegeStation\Docs\071299nruiz.ltr.doc
KSA ARCHITECTURE
2180 North Loop West, Suite 350, Houston, TX 77018 (713) 686-4900 FAX (713) 686-8180
s
COLLEGE STATION
R O. Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842
Tet 409 764 3500
WOLF PEN CREEK DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
May 26, 1999
TO: Blake Brown, 1514 Ranch R., 620 South, Austin, Texas, 78734
W. Michael Steffey, 2180 North Loop West #350, Houston, Texas, 78734
FROM: Design Review Board
Kay Henryson, DRB Chair
Chara Ragland, DRB Member
Bill Trainor, DRB Member
George McLean, DRB Member
Karl Mooney, P&Z Commissioner
Ron Kaiser, P&Z Commissioner
Others Attending:
Bridgette George, Asst. Development Coordinato
Veronica Morgan, Assistant City Engineer
Sabine McCully, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Kudy's Barbecue - A revised site plan for a restaurant located at 504 Harvey
Road, Lot 1, Wolf Pen Creek. (Case file 99-419)
A Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board meeting was held on Wednesday, May 26, 1999, to
review the above-mentioned project. Some discussion took place regarding the floodway and
floodplain area. Commissioner Mooney asked about terracing requirements for the site.
Veronica Morgan stated that there shouldn't be any necessary because there is already an
existing retaining wall that was constructed previously.
The DRB members concurred that the revised site plan scenario #2 was better than the
original plan except that the patio area extends over a utility easement. Commissioner Kaiser
suggested moving the building towards Harvey enough to move it off of the easement. Mr.
Steffey voiced concern about having to move the traffic aisle if the building was moved due to
access traffic with the adjacent property. The members suggested that the parking aisle be
slightly altered from the access point to prevent any possible hazards.
DRB Member Henryson suggested moving the seven parking spaces located at the front of the
building to each side of the building. This would provide six spaces rather than seven, but the
aisle serving them could be eliminated and the building could move forward of the electric
easement and allow room for additional landscaping at the front and rear of the building.
Mr. Steffey voiced his concern about having dead-end parking. Commissioner Mooney also
voiced his concern about not having a loop around the back of the building.
Home of Texas A&M University
0
0
KOM-
ri
0
w.
vt-
0 0
3~w
rc
•
y
0
Y:Yr
t
t
• •
-
-,r..._
0
0
,111