HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/30/2008 - Regular Agenda Packet - Design Review Board1
AGENDA
Carts„ c:A„ s ;u]`"
W~rwuurp c` 1.krr1 prmewr.4rn.r,
I DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Monday, June 30, 2008, 11:00 a.m.
Administrative Conference Room
College Station City Hall
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
Call to Order
2. Consideration, discussion and possible action on Absence Requests.
• Nancy Sawtelle - May 23, 2008
3. Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting Minutes.
• May 14, 2008
• May 23, 2008
4. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding variances to Section 7.9 Non-
Residential Architectural Standards of the Unified Development Ordinance related to
building materials and architectural elements for Texas Roadhouse restaurant, located at
1601 University Drive East. Case #08-00500126 (LH)
Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding recruitment and appointment of
new Design Review Board members. (MH)
6. Possible action and discussion 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.
7. Adjourn.
Consultation with Attornev (Gov't Code Section 551.071; possible action.
The Design Review Board may seek advice from its attorney regarding a pending and
contemplated litigation subject or attorney-client privileged information. After executive
session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. If litigation or attorney-client
privileged information issues arise as to the posted subject matter of this Design Review Board
meeting, an executive session will be held.
Notice is hereby given that a Regular Meeting of the Design Review Board of the City
of College Station, Texas will be held on the Monday, June 30, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. at
the City Hall Administrative Conference Room, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station,
Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda
Posted this the day of , 2008 at p.m.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
Connie Hooks, City Secretary
By
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Design
Review Board of the City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said
Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at
City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City's website,
www.cstx.aov. The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at
all times. Said Notice and Agenda were posted on , 2008 and remained so
posted continuously for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of said
meeting.
This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station
City Hall on the following date and time: by
Dated this day of , 2008.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
By
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of 12008.
Notary Public- Brazos County, Texas
My commission expires:
This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any
request for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To
make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be
viewed on www.cstx.aov.
CITY 01 C01 .1 E[; P. S 1 A 1'10N
PGneaip~,' & Der dopmen[ Scrvicrr
Minutes
Design Review Board
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Administrative Conference Room
1101 Texas Avenue
11:00 AM
Board Members Present: Chairman John Nichols, Ward Wells, Hunter Goodwin, and
Alan King
Board Members Absent: Nancy Sawtelle
Staff Present: Planning Administrator Molly Hitchcock, Senior Planner
Jennifer Prochazka, Staff Assistant Nicole Padilla, and
Customer Service Representative Christina Court
Others Present: Tara Norsworthy, McCoAd Signs
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to order.
Chairman John Nichols called the meeting to order at 11:08 a.m.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Possible action and discussion to approve meeting minutes
for April 25, 2008.
Alan King motioned to approve the meeting minutes. The motion was seconded by Hunter
Goodwin and passed (4-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding
freestanding sign details for Washington Baptist Church, located at 1801 Texas Avenue
South in the Wolf Pen Creek Zoning District. Case # 08-00500081 (JP)
Jennifer Prochazka, Senior Planner, presented the item stating that the applicant would like to
install a freestanding sign that includes a maroon base and cabinet and a white sign with red
vinyl letters.
Tara Norsworthy, Applicant, stated that the sign proposed is very similar to the sign that was
originally erected for the church in the late 1950's.
3
Board Members expressed concerns with the color and materials of the sign and its relation
to Section 5.6.A.1 La of the Unified Development Ordinance stating that every sign must be
designed as an integral architectural element of its building.
Board Members also expressed concern with the Applicant's proposed use of the white sign
face with red vinyl letters.
Hunter Goodwin motioned to approve the item with the conditions that the face color of the
proposed sign be changed from white to ivory and that the face graphics be changed from red
vinyl to maroon vinyl to match the maroon cabinets and base of the sign. Ward Wells
seconded the motion; motion passed (4-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding
recruitment and appointment of new Design Review Board members. (MH)
Molly Hitchcock, Planning Administrator, answered questions in general from the Board
Members regarding the general requirements to become a Board member.
Ward Wells and Hunter Goodwin briefly discussed their search and recruitments for potential
applicants and their qualifications to the Board.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Possible action and discussion 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.
No items were discussed.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Adjourn
Alan King motioned for adjournment. The motion was seconded by Ward Wells; motion
passed (4-0).
Meeting adjourned at 11:35 a.m.
APPROVED:
John Nichols, Chairman
ATTEST:
Nicole Padilla, Staff Assistant
4
1
MINUTES
Cr,, ar[:Aui,,., siA iu DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Friday, May 23, 2008, 11:00 a.m.
Administrative Conference Room
College Station City Hall
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
Members Present: Chairman John Nichols, Hunter Goodwin, Alan King, and Ward Wells
Members Absent: Nancy Sawtelle
Staff Present: Jason Schubert, Staff Planner; Molly Hitchcock, Planning
Administrator; Bridgette George, Development Coordinator
Visitors Present: Mark Lindley, Keith Malone, Natalie Ruiz
1. Call to Order
Chairman Nichols called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m.
2. Consideration, discussion and possible action on Absence Requests.
Nancy Sawtelle - May 14, 2008 meeting
Ward Wells motioned to approve the absence request. The motion was seconded by
Alan King and passed unopposed 4-0.
3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a revised site plan, landscape plan,
and building elevations for The Lofts at Wolf Pen Creek, a mixed-use development
consisting of 8.34 acres, located at 614 Holleman Drive East in the Wolf Pen Creek
District. Case #07-00500247 (JS)
Jason Schubert, Staff Planner, informed the Board that the applicant was proposing
some revisions to the site plan conditionally approved by the DRB in November. He
stated that one proposed change was moving the retaining wall further south, just
north of Manuel Drive with a 4-foot wrought iron fence on top. The new proposal will
have the buildings all on one level instead of having a retaining wall step up in the
middle of the site. The second proposed modification includes several changes to the
building design. The applicant is proposing to change the flat roof to a pitched roof
for all but Building 3; changing a portion of the brick veneer to stucco and changing
some of the brick veneer and stucco to fiber cement siding; and the final building
design modification includes changing the parking garage from steel construction
with stucco panels to concrete construction painted like stucco. The third proposed
5
modification is changing the brick pavers to a stamped dyed concrete that would
match the brick pavers that were originally proposed and approved.
Mark Lindley, project developer, informed the Board about some of the challenges he
has encountered in developing the property and that the project was nine million
dollars over budget, and hence, the request for the proposed changes to the
approved site plan. He then reviewed the requested changes to the site. Mr. Lindley
was asked about the landscaping and informed the Board that no changes were
being proposed to the landscaping.
Keith Malone, Architect, also reviewed the proposed changes to the site plan stating
that some of the amenities will remain as originally proposed, but that the changes
being requested will look similar to the original design but will help reduce the cost of
the project.
Hunter Goodwin motioned for approval of the retaining wall being moved
further south just north of Manuel Drive. Alan King proposed an amendment
to the motion to include the 6-foot wrought iron fence on top of the
retaining wall.
Mr. King voiced his concern over the small amount of room between the fence and
building and the possible drainage issues. Mr. Lindley stated that there would be
sufficient drainage on the site.
Chairman Nichols asked if all the units were one story or multi-stories. Mr. Lindley
stated that there were a few multi-story units, but that most of them were one story.
Mr. Goodwin amended his motion to include the 6-foot wrought iron fence if
the fence was also serving as the security fence for the project. Ward Wells
seconded the motion, which passed unopposed 4-0.
Mr. Schubert clarified that the main body of Building 3, the building facing the
Dartmouth Street and Holleman Drive intersection, as well as the townhome-style
units south of Manuel Drive, will remain with brick and stucco as previously
approved. Buildings 2, 5, and 7, and the portions of Building 1 facing Holleman Drive
and Building 6 facing Manuel Drive are being proposed to change from brick to
stucco. Building 4 and the portions of Buildings 1 and 6 that are not facing a ROW,
are being proposed to change from brick and stucco to fiber cement siding.
Mr. King motioned to approve the facade materials as proposed, including
the material changes to the garage. Mr. Wells seconded the motion which
passed unopposed 4-0.
Mr. King voiced his concern of allowing the modification from brick pavers to
stamped concrete in the Wolf Pen Creek District since there is such a difference in
the two materials. He stated that he understood the economic issues dealing with
the project, but still wanted to voice his concerns. Mr. King also voiced his concern
regarding setting the precedent in the area for stamped concrete instead of brick
pavers.
Chairman Nichols commented that the subject area is a signature corner in Wolf Pen
Creek and that the Board does not have to approve the modification request on this
item.
6
Hunter Goodwin stated that he did not feel that allowing this modification would set
the precedent for other development in Wolf Pen Creek.
Ward Wells and the rest of the Board discussed their concern of approving this
modification request without having any type of color samples or patterns to review.
Mr. King motioned to approve the modification of brick pavers to stamped
dyed concrete in the pedestrian plaza area and sidewalks, with the
condition that no permits be issued for construction of the plaza area or
sidewalks until the color samples and pattern details are brought back to
the Design Review Board for approval. Mr. Wells seconded the motion,
which passed unopposed, 4-0.
4. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding recruitment and appointment
of new Design Review Board members. (MH)
Molly Hitchcock, Planning Administrator, distributed a list of recommendations which
suggested changes discussed by Councilman James Massey and the local AIA
Chapter of the proposed ordinance amendment regarding membership of the Design
Review Board. Ms. Hitchcock asked for further guidance on the recommendations.
Mr. Wells suggested removing the word "registered" because a person cannot call
themselves an "architect" unless they are registered.
Mr. King commented that landscape architects have licensing requirements similar to
architects; therefore this position should mirror the wording for architects.
Mr. Hunter asked whether members had to live in the City limits to serve on the
Board. Ms. Hitchcock informed the Board that it was preferred, but not required.
The Board discussed the importance of broadening the language regarding
developers or land owners in design districts to include business owners.
Ms. Hitchcock informed the Board that she would propose broadening the architect
member to include a previously registered architect, architect registered in another
state or Emeritus Architect. She stated that the developer/land owner member will
be broadened to include a business owner, resident, or individual employed within a
design district. Ms. Hitchcock also mentioned that she will be proposing to change
the language requiring that at least two members be owners of property or a
business within a design district to requiring that just one member being associated
with a business within a design district.
Possible action and discussion 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.
No future agenda items were proposed.
Adjourn.
The meeting adjourned at 12:37 p.m. with no opposition.
APPROVED:
John Nichols, Chairman
ATTEST:
Nicole Padilla, Staff Assistant
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
STAFF REPORT
Project Manager: Lauren Hovde, Staff Planner Report Date: June 20, 2008
Email: Meeting Date: June 27, 2008
For
TEXAS ROADHOUSE ADDITION (08-00500126)
Item: Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding building materials and
alternative architectural elements for Texas Roadhouse Restaurant, located at 1601
University Drive in the Overlay District.
Zoning District: C-1 General Commercial and OV Overlay Corridor District
Location: 1601 University Drive East
Applicant: Angel Robinson, Greenberg Farrow
Item Summary: The applicant has proposed a 433-square foot addition to the
southeast corner of the existing Texas Roadhouse building. The proposed addition
continues the existing architectural style and building theme, which requires several
variances to Section 7.9 Non-Residential Architectural Standards of the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO). The original building was approved in 1999, prior to
the adoption of non-residential architectural standards.
Section 7.9.B.3 Materials limits the use of cedar siding to 30% of any fagade and
requires a minimum of 10% of each fagade to consist of brick or stone. The applicant
has requested to use only cedar siding in order to continue the theme of the existing
restaurant.
Additionally, the applicant has requested to vary from Section 7.9.B.2 Building Mass
and Design, which requires a minimum of two different design elements on each of the
two fagades of the addition. The UDO allows the Design Review Board (DRB) to
consider alternatives to the elements listed in Section 7.9.B.2, but does allow the DRB
to waive the requirement in its entirety. The applicant has presented the following
architectural relief elements for the Board's consideration:
East facing Elevation:
1. A roof overhang of 18 inches
2. A building projection greater than 4 feet (from the existing structure)
University Drive Elevation:
1. A roof overhang of 18 inches
2. A metal hip roof
The items for review include:
1. Architectural character
Materials- cedar siding
Architectural elements- alternative elements suggested
Supporting Materials:
1. Location Map
2. Application
3. Copy of elevations
4. Variance Request Letter
5. Alternative Elements Letter
6. Photos of the existing structure (available at the meeting)
10
CI'I'l (lk C01 -11G F S_I_ FION
Pkin ing & Df wlofiueni Strwrti
FOR OF ICE USE ONLY
CASE WO.:
DATE SUBMITTED: tJ
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
APPEALS & WAIVERS APPLICATION
4
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
$150 Application Fee
Application completed in full.
Additional materials may be required of the applicant such as site plans, elevation
drawings, sign details and floor plans. The Zoning Official shall inform the applicant of
any extra materials required.
Date of Preapplication Conference:
APPLICAN /PROJECT AGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project):
f ~G^ t
Name 14~ 9W21
Street Address it ~ L~ 7D- City a!
State Zip Code ~ E-Mail Address h
Phone Number Fax Number d111- i5 - ?~V
PROPE
NameR , ! WNER'SFINFORMATIO 00, 0A) t 'e
&f~~
Street Ad ess 5o ~
City
State 1b Zip Code E-Mail Address
Phone Number Fax
Number
LOCATION F PROPERTY:
'1 tim
1A
e 6fth OK TK vt✓
7
Addes W at 1 1
Lot Block Subdivision~ffit
-
Description if there is no Lot, Block and Subdivision k d I'-
Ti
CURRENT ZONING OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
APPEAL/WAIVER REQUESTED: (Circle One)
RA Requiremen Northgate Requirements
Buffer Requirements
Driveways WPC Parking
Site Plan Review Criteria
Krenek Tap Corridor Overlay District
Other:
Explanation of appeal/waiver request:
Applicable Ordinance Section: -11
Page 1 of 2
11
GENERAL APPEALSMAIVER REQUEST
The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested:
C7/
1 L 7, % pv
The unnecessary hardship (s} involve by meeting the provisions of the ordinance of r than
financial hardship is/are:
/Yk)
The following alternatives to the requested vari'ce are possible:
Of
4XV1, 47,
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits
attached hereto are true, correct and complete.
Signature and Title
Page 2 of 2
Date
12
2611 Internet Boulevard
Suite 125
Frisco, TX 75034
t: 214 975 3200
f: 214 975 3198
Greenberghrrow
May 30, 2008
Design Review Board
Planning & Development Services
City of College Station
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77842
Re Design Review Board Valiance request- Existing Texas Roadhouse
Dear Design Review Board Members:
ANANrA
NfW YORK
C V qC AGO
105 ANGFU%
80';MN
DALLAS
NEW it ii'+er
ST F'f rk N`•ti~iRi
I respectfully ask for your consideration of a variance request to Section 7.9, NRA Requirements. The owners of Texas
Roadhouse would like to increase the dining room by approximately 395 square feet. The desired addition would require
exterior alterations to the existing building. Per Unified Development Ordinance regulations for Non-Residential Articulation,
the NRA plan review was denied by city staff because the proposed addition does not currently meet the following Non-
Residential Architectural Standards:
1. No more than 30% of the addition may be covered by cedar siding (The entire existing building is cedar siding and
cedar trim)
2. There needs to be at least 10% stone or brick material on the addition (No brick was used on the existing building)
3. There must be at least two architectural elements (Section 7.9.B.2) per 45 linear feet of facade facing University
Drive, and two elements for every 60 linear feet (or less) of the facade
a. Eastern elevation- Texas Roadhouse requests consideration of the bump-out in the addition as a projection
of the total eastern elevation. Additionally, the windows that accompany the projection could be considered
the second element
b. University Drive elevation (front elevation) - Texas Roadhouse has designed the expansion of the dining
room to match the existing structure. Further revisions to the elevation would draw attention to this part of
the building. The intent of the structural alterations is to create a blend with the existing structure.
It should also be noted that Texas Roadhouse is a chain restaurant. Furthermore, the original building was constructed in
2000 using colors/materials that are part of its corporate branding. I have included photos of existing buildings built during the
same time to demonstrate the national prototype image and theme, as well as colors and materials.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. If you need additional information, please advise.
Sincerely,
r
Angelina Robinson
01 Formal Leller 07.41.05 P 4'"Dd812008 009 1 212 1 3 DD PermittingkDesign RevRw Board Vaiance Request June 2 2008UHer of Request to DRB.doc
13
Jennifer,
On behalf of Texas Roadhouse, we respectfully request a variance to the required architectural
design elements as part of the City's UDO. The following two design elements per building
elevation are proposed for the scope of the addition to the existing restaurant:
The Front Elevation, facing University Drive East, is approximately 29'-8" long. The proposed
design elements for the Front Elevation (South) are:
1) Windows accompanied by overhang - see A3 (one window) with a typical roof/eave
projection of 18".
2) Hip, metal roof - see A3, provides a change in roof profile due to roof slope.
The Side Elevation, facing east and a parking field, is approximately 15-8" long. The proposed
design elements for the Side Elevation (East) are:
1) Windows accompanied by overhang - see A3 (two windows) with a typical roof/eave
projection of 18".
2) Wall plane projections or recessions with a minimum of four foot (4') depth - see Al,
addition proposes 6'-4" plane projection.
Please confirm your receipt of this message and placement on the DRB agenda for 06/27. Thank
you again for your help in this matter.
Sincerely,
Kurt E. Overmyer. RA
Sr. Site Development Coordinator
Greenberg Farrow
2611 Internet Boulevard. Suite 125
Frisco. TX 75034
t: 214 975 3200
f: 214 975 3198
c: 214 676 5670
www. g re e n b e rg fa rrow. co m
kovermyer(a).greenbergfarrow.com
14
O
w c O
mo
p - _~o "zc w~
t
dm
_ _
~8
F:
e
'mg °a
yo
a
W 2W C~9~ o ~
O_F ~
M
h=
6g ~Exc w
'ea~'g ='s
Ca M`
2E
eo
e
e
°
e
a o
e
4
W0
HC
O W $2 a°o
V ~e Sa
uxi l~il w
Q
a
n n
«
n~ q
PH
l9lll
III
0
g. 4 ma8 § m384 M h
5c- .1 9 - HIT
;g e C.) ¢ sa$°ge
a
U. m
oe = ~ ~
~m
x
{L a (S o o ac
F
W
4
~11
- Icy
Ir'~
\
-111
p y~ s' a a~~ W@4
'm i T a § NS
a o as