Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/13/2006 - Regular Minutes - Design Review Board CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning &, Development Services Minutes Design Review Board Friday, January 13, 2006 Administrative Conference Room City Council Office 1101 Texas Avenue 11:00 AM Board Members Present: Acting Chairperson Nancy Sawtelle, Ward Wells, Hunter Goodwin, and Rick Heaney Board Members Absent: Scott Shafer and Alan King Staff Present: Planning Administrator Molly Hitchcock, Assistant Director Lance Simms, Staff Planners Jennifer Reeves, Lindsay Boyer and Crissy Hartl, and Staff Assistant Mandi Alford Others Present: Benjamin Knox, Fred Patterson and Todd McIllhaney AGENDA ITEM NO.1: Call to order. Nancy Sawtelle (acting chairperson) called the meeting to order at 11:01 a.m. AGENDA ITEM NO.2: Consider absence requests. - Scott Shafer - Alan King Ward wells motioned to approve the absence requests, Mr. Heaney seconded the motion which passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO.3: Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting minutes for November 11,2005 and December 9, 2005. Mr. Heaney motioned to approve the meeting minutes, Mr. Wells seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO.4:. Presentation, possible action and discussion on proposed fa~ades, colors, and materials for the Wolf Pen Creek Amphitheater addition, located on Colgate Drive in Wolf Pen Creek (JP 05-220). Staff Planner Lindsay Boyer presented the staff report for Senior Planner Jennifer Prochazka stating that the applicant is proposing an expansion to the Wolf Pen Amphitheater that includes offices, a permanent concession area and a Green Room. Ms. Boyer stated that the Unified Development Ordinance provides the Board with information related to elevations, colors, and materials to aid in the Board's decision. The information is as follows: Elevations: · The height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing (or anticipated) adjoining buildings. · Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is required. Monotony shall be avoided. · Architectural style is not restricted. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and relationship to surroundings · Buildings should have good scale and be in harmonious conformance with permanent neighboring development. · Building components, such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets, shall have good proportions and relationship to one another. · Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects shall be avoided. Variation of detail and form shall be used to provide visual interest. Colors: · Colors shall be harmonious and shall use only compatible accents. Materials: · Materials shall be selected for harmony of the building with adjoining buildings. · Materials shall be selected for suitability to the type of buildings and the design in which they are used. Buildings shall use the same materials, or those that are architecturally harmonious, for all building walls and other exterior buildings components wholly or partly visible from public ways. · Materials shall be of durable quality. Fred Patterson went over the proposal with the Board. Mr. Wells questioned the roof color not being green like the others and Mr. Patterson stated that the green color, presented at the meeting, was not liked by the Parks & Recreation staff members and was not to be used. Mr. Wells motioned to approve the item as proposed, Mr. Goodwin seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (4-0). AGENDA ITEM NO.5: Presentation, possible action and discussion on a Planned Development District Concept Plan for Benjamin Knox Gallery located at 405 University Drive (JP 05-225). Staff Planner Jennifer Reeves presented the staff report to the Board on behalf of Senior Planner Jennifer Prochazka stating that the proposal included a mix of uses on the property including an art gallery and associated storage, specialty retail, limited restaurant, studio space, and private living quarters. P-MUD zoning requires that both the residential component and non-residential component makes up at least 20 percent of the overall land uses within the development. The total square footage of the development is 6,990 square feet. The residential component must consist of at least 1,398 square feet to meet this requirement. No dimensional variations are being sought. Ms. Reeves gave the Board some background information stating that the Comprehensive Plan designates the area for redevelopment and recommends a mixed-use redevelopment pattern in areas in close proximity to the University. Both Nimitz and Macarthur are local area streets with residential properties along them. She stated that the College Heights area was platted as a residential subdivision prior to annexation. This area was originally zoned for single-family use. Over time, the lots fronting on University Drive became commercial, larger lots became general commercial and smaller lots became less intense commercial districts. The property was rezoned A-P and R-2 many years ago to allow for redevelopment to a higher density residential and to allow limited commercial uses. Lot lA was again rezoned in 2000 to PDD-B for The Benjamin Knox Gallery. In 2003, lot lA was rezoned to amend the approved concept plan and other PDD elements. The property was zoned P-MUD in 2005 to allow for expansion of the Gallery, which includes a mix of uses. Staff recommended approval of the Concept Plan. Because of the proximity to existing single-family residential development, the Design Review Board must ensure that the approved Concept Plan is sensitive to the existing housing in the area. Review Criteria: 1. The proposal will constitute an environment of sustained stability and will be on harmony with the character of the surrounding area; 2. The proposal is in conformity with the policies, goals, and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, and any subsequently adopted Plans, and will be consistent with the intent and purpose of this section; 3. The proposal is compatible with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites and will not adversely affect adjacent development; 4. Every dwelling unit need not to front on a public street but shall have access to a public street directly or via a court, walkway, public area, or area owned by a homeowners association; 5. The development includes provision of adequate public improvements, including, but not limited to, parks, schools, and other public facilities; 6. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 7. The development will not adversely affect the safety and convenience of vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian circulation in the vicinity, including traffic reasonably anticipated on the area considering existing zoning and land uses in the area. Unless otherwise indicated in the approved Concept Plan, the minimum requirements for the development shall be those stated in the Unified Development Ordinance for C-l General Commercial. Benjamin Knox changed his proposal to the Board. The changes included flipping the building and parking lot. There were questions concerning the building height requirements, parking, and alley way by the Board as well as staff. Therefore, it was agreed upon by the Board to table the item until the next Design Review Board meeting so staff could research the questions and concerns. AGENDA ITEM NO 6: Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A Design Review Board Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. Mr. Wells asked for clarification of the time for the next meeting. The time for the January 27,2006 meeting is setfor 10:00 am. AGENDA ITEM NO 7: Adjourn Mr. Wells motioned to adjourn the meeting, Mr. Heaney seconded the motion, which passed unopposed (4-0). ATTEST: AI. [V;~ED: jj,J ' ,U; Scott Shafer, Al.wK:I~