|
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Regular Agenda -Public Hearing Item
|
ITEM NO. 6B: PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR OREAD INN; 618 W 12TH ST (SLD)
PDP-07-03-07: Preliminary Development Plan for Oread Inn, located at 618 W 12th Street. Submitted by Paul Werner Architects, for Triple T, LLC, property owner of record.
|
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Development Plan for Oread Inn based on the findings presented in the staff report and forwarding it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval subject to the following conditions:
|
|
Reason for Request: |
Proposed mixed use residential and commercial development. |
|
|
KEY POINT · Project is proposed as a redevelopment of existing commercial and multi-family development within the Oread Neighborhood. · Oread Neighborhood has demonstrated support of the project through multiple neighborhood meetings. · Issues identified to consider as part of the September Planning Commission Hearing: o Off-street parking requirements and provision; applicant uses a mix of old and new code standards o Use restrictions; None are proposed, some uses may be inappropriate for site such as drive-through o Waivers for reduction in area requirements; subject property is less than the minimum 2-acre requirement o Waivers for reduction in setback requirements; setback reductions are needed based on the size of the proposed building limited by the size of the property o Waivers for location of PUD not adjacent to a collector or arterial; subject property is located in high traffic area with proximity to collector and arterial access, both 12th Street and Indiana Street are local streets. o Determination of appropriateness for height; additional 8 feet of setback is required for each story over three stories of building height. Maximum building height is not specified. o Waiver for reduction in open space requirements; building size maximizes the site and does not provide the required open space. [Determined that open space terraces may be applied toward requirements.] o Public Improvement Plans related to the development; site shows off-site improvements to public street and the addition of pedestrian crossings in the area. o Impact/benefit for Oread Neighborhood; public comment required to address this issue. [Public Comment received establishes support for concept of plan with concerns regarding height] o Impact/benefit for Community; public comment required to address this issue.
|
||
|
FACTORS TO CONSIDER · Compliance with zoning code prior to July 2006. · Appropriate uses and restrictions per 20-1004 (b)(2) · Use of terrace areas to be applied toward required 20% open space standards per 20-1006 (g) and 20-1008 (B) · Request includes reductions and waivers for the following: o Minimum area required for PUD is 2 acres per 20-1003 (b) o direct access to a major thoroughfare or collector as shown on the City’s comprehensive plan per 20-1006 o Yard and peripheral setback reductions on all sides per 20-1006 (i) o Maximum height and additional setback of 8’ per each floor above three stories per 20-1008
|
||
|
ASSOCIATED CASES/OTHER ACTION REQUIRED · Z-07-13-07; CN1 and RM32 to PCD-2 · DR-07-93-07; HRC considered the project on August 16 and September 20, 2007; Request Appeal forwarded to the City Commission to be scheduled. · Final Development Plan · Final Plat (dedication of easements for access and utility) · Public improvement plans for off-site improvements. |
||
|
PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED PRIOR TO PRINTING Refer to rezoning report for list of communications
|
||
|
General information |
|
|
Current Zoning and Land Use: |
CN1 (Inner Neighborhood Commercial) & RM32 (Multi-Dwelling Residential); existing commercial establishments and apartment dwellings |
|
|
Surrounding Zoning: |
The subject property is comprised of several properties. The immediate area is surrounding by RM32 (Multi-Dwelling Residential) in all directions. Uses include apartments, single-family homes as well as a church and university property to the west and south.
Subject property located within proximity to Hancock Historic district, National Register of Historic Places, Oread Historic district, Register of Historic Kansas Places, and the Jane A. Snow Residence, National Register of Historic Places and the Lawrence Register of Historic Places. |
|
|
Project Summary: This proposed project is a redevelopment of multiple lots that include existing commercial buildings and residential apartment units that will be demolished. A new multi-story building that includes seven stories as viewed from the front on 12th Street to include 74 guest rooms, 11,000 SF of restaurant and retail space and two floors of condo units or extended stay suites. The hotel is scheduled to include reception rooms and other ancillary hotel amenities such as pool, weight rooms, and similar activities. Parking for the hotel is proposed by providing three and a half stories of below ground parking in a garage structure. Another significant feature of the project is the use of terraces and outdoor areas on most levels of the building. |
||
|
Site Summary |
|
|
Number of Lots: |
1144 Indiana [former Yellow Sub] .162 acres 618 W. 12 Street [Crossing] .204 acres 1142 Indiana [residence/apartment] .097 acres 1140 Indiana [apartment building] .269 acres Proposed to be re-platted as a single lot. |
|
Gross Area: |
.746 acres |
|
Rights-of-way: |
No new right-of-way proposed |
|
Easements: |
Proposed easement vacation through existing lots and new easements around peripheral of property to provide utility service. Cross access easements on abutting properties proposed for fire access as needed |
|
Building Size |
186,953 total gross square feet including terraces and a three and a half level parking garage below grade. |
|
Number of Buildings |
1 |
|
Number dwelling units |
Proposed 26 one and two bedroom condo units on floors 6 and 7 possible at maximum density of 35 units per acre. |
|
Hotel Space |
72,786 GSF 74 rooms and ancillary uses [54,589 NSF] |
|
Retail Space |
4,000 GSF [3,000 NSF] |
|
Restaurant Space |
7,000 GSF [4,900 NSF] [Estimated Occupancy per Fire 348 persons] |
|
Condo Units |
26 total units with 1 to 2 bedrooms [not to exceed total 30 bedrooms] |
|
Open Space Required |
20% per 20-1008 (B) pre 7/1/06 code 6,499 SF |
|
Open Space Provided |
4,493 SF excludes roof/terrace areas. |
|
Off-Street Parking Required |
320 spaces at 1/200 for non-residential uses and 1.5 spaces per unit for residential units. |
|
Off-Street Parking Provided |
165 spaces |
|
Off Street Parking Requirement |
||||
|
Proposed Use |
PCD Old Code |
Old Code Conventional |
New Code Conventional |
Proposed by applicant |
|
Hotel 74 rooms 30 employees (48,281 GSF)
|
241spaces 1/200 NSF per PCD
|
89 spaces 1/bedroom + 1 per 2 employees |
94 spaces 1/bedroom + 1 per 1.5 employees |
94 spaces 1/bedroom + 1 per 1.5 employees |
|
Retail Space (4,000 GSF) 3,000 NSF |
15 spaces 1/200 NSF per PCD
|
15 spaces 1/200 NSF |
20 spaces 1/200 GSF |
15 spaces 1/200 NSF |
|
Restaurant Space 348 occupancy est. 7 staff (est) (7,000 GSF) 4,900 NSF |
25 spaces 1/200 NSF per PCD
|
115 spaces 1/3 occupancy |
122 spaces 1/3 occupancy + 1 per employee |
13 spaces at 50% use 25 spaces appropriate to calculation |
|
Condo (26 units) (maximum 30 bedrooms) |
39 spaces 1.5 per unit for 2br units
|
39 spaces 1.5 per unit |
33 spaces 1 per bedroom plus 1 per 10 units |
30 spaces 1 per bedroom |
|
TOTAL |
320 |
258 |
269 |
165 |
STAFF ANALYSIS
The property is generally located on the north side of W. 12th Street and the east side of Indiana Street. The Preliminary Development Plan proposes a mixed use residential and commercial development. The Preliminary Development Plan has been evaluated based upon the following suggested findings of fact and conclusions outlined in Section 20-1010.1 of the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Lawrence (pre July 1, 2006).
1) In what respects the plan is or is not in general conformity with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
Staff Finding – The plan generally supports infill and redevelopment of properties within existing neighborhoods.
2) In what respects the plan is or is not consistent with the Statement of Objectives of Planned Unit Development. [The statement of objectives of planned unit developments is found in Section 20-1002 of the Zoning Ordinance]
(1) To promote and permit flexibility that will encourage innovative and imaginative approaches in residential, commercial, and industrial development which will result in a more efficient, aesthetic, desirable and economic use of the land while maintaining density and intensity of use consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan for the City;
(2) To promote development within the City that can be conveniently, efficiently and economically served by existing municipal utilities and services or by their logical extension;
(3) To promote design flexibility including placement of buildings, and use of open space, pedestrian and vehicular circulation facilities to and through the site, and off-street parking areas in a manner that will best utilize potential on-site characteristics such as topography, geology, geography, size or proximity;
(4) To provide for the preservation of historic or natural features where they are shown to be in the public's best interest including but not limited to such features as: drainageways, floodplains, existing topography or rock outcroppings, unique areas of vegetation, historic landmarks or structures.
The development is proposed as a mixed use project that includes retail, hotel, and possibly a residential element. It is this mix of uses that provides the format for the proposed redevelopment. The applicant has requested that the residential element remain fluid in that a maximum range has been established, but depending upon the success of the hotel element that designated residential space may be added to the hotel inventory for either additional rooms or suites for extended stays.
The site is small and is maximized with development such that on-site vehicular circulation is limited to the underground parking garage element. Staff is continuing to assess the pedestrian circulation related to street crossings and pavement markings. The subject property is located within the environs of designated historic districts and properties: Hancock Historic district, National Register of Historic Places, Oread Historic district, Register of Historic Kansas Places, and the Jane A. Snow Residence, National Register of Historic Places and the Lawrence Register of Historic Places. A separate analysis of that impact is provided by the Historic Resources Administrator for consideration by the Historic Resources Commission.
Staff Finding – The PCD zoning provides the maximum flexibility to the developer in tailoring the uses and the project to community desires but also demands that waivers be granted to accommodate the size and scope of the project.
3) The nature and extent of the common open space in the Planned Unit Development, the reliability of the proposals for maintenance and conservation of the common open space, and the adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of the common open space in terms of the densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan.
Conventionally, open space is that area found at the ground level. It is typically comprised of required yard areas and designated areas for common accessibility within a particular development. Open space is provided around the boundary of the site. A total 6,499 SF is required to meet the minimum 20% standard set out in section 20-1008 (B). Open space is frequently considered to also be green space. However, paved areas are also allowed to be included in this requirement as a PCD such as courts and play yards and other hard surface areas. Included in the proposed development is the request to reduce the required yard building setbacks. An exhibit provided by the applicant details these reductions.
The proposed development includes a series of yard reductions, thus reducing the ground level open space. A total of 4,493 SF is shown on the plan. As part of the September public hearing discussion, staff sought input on the ability of the applicant to apply open terrace areas within the development toward the open space requirement. Direct comment was not included, but the overall discussion by the Planning Commission seemed to support the use of the terrace areas as part of the common open space. The open terrace areas represent approximately 13,505 SF of the building. This area would exceed the minimum requirement independently.
Staff Finding –The combination of the ground level open spaces and the proposed terrace areas within the building exceed the minimum requirements of the PCD. It should be noted that the terrace areas shall not be converted to enclosed space as a condition of approval.
The applicant has submitted an exhibit that details the dimensional reductions for the required yard areas that should be made part of the final document to demonstrate the reductions.
4) Whether the plan does or does not make adequate provisions for public services, provide adequate control over vehicular traffic, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment.
The applicant has submitted a traffic study for staff review. Key elements that concern staff address the predominant pedestrian nature of the area as well as timing of improvements. Changes to the Preliminary Development Plan and inclusion on the Final Development Plan address the sidewalk connection across the driveway and eliminating the angled pathway across 12th Street to direct pedestrians to the corner. Staff will continue to work with the applicant to address pedestrian connections in anticipation of the submittal of the Final Development Plan as well as applicable public improvement plans.
Additional documentation is recommended with the submission of the Final Development Plan. It should include a phasing schedule to address these elements as part of the demolition and construction phases as well as the ultimate development. Public improvement plans are required as part of the proposed development and shall be a condition of approval associated with the Final Development Plan.
With regard to Oread Avenue, the City Commission will need to comment and approve the following items: changes to the right-of-way, on-street parking along Oread Avenue, approval of lighting, and elements to be required/shown in the public improvement plans.
Staff Finding – No changes are required to the street configuration based on the Traffic Study recommendations. Staff identified several improvements to the pedestrian pathway that should be modified. The City Commission will need to act separately on the proposed improvements to Oread Avenue.
5) Whether the plan will or will not have a substantial adverse effect on adjacent property and the development or conservation of the neighborhood area.
The subject property is located within the Oread Neighborhood. This neighborhood group has been involved in multiple meetings with the applicant regarding the development project. It is a neighborhood identified in Horizon 2020 and a neighborhood plan for Oread was completed in the early 1980’s. Multiple development requests in the recent years and the conversion of apartment buildings to boarding houses have resulted in discussions regarding the need to revisit and update existing plans for the neighborhood.
Traffic, pedestrian flow, reinvestment in properties, and physical relationship of the subject property to the University are elements that support the proposed development within the neighborhood. The project less clearly provides neighborhood conservation. Therefore, some kind of neighborhood planning should be addressed in the near future to assure that similar projects are consistent with neighborhood goals. A key element of the development is the physical and visual orientation of the development to its surroundings that will impact the immediate area. The proposed development is located at a high intensity area within the neighborhood. The building orientation is toward the University entrance. Secondary building orientation is provided on the west side of the building toward the neighborhood. The north and east side elevations are tangent with interior lots and building development. The large scale of the development is compatible with University buildings. This project or similar large scale projects would not be appropriate in other portions of this neighborhood without or until updated plans for the neighborhood are completed and or revised.
Staff Finding –Few public comments were made in September. The comments received addressed specific elements of the project and not the qualitative question of neighborhood impact. Staff’s conclusion is that there is support for the project within the neighborhood.
6) In what respects the plan is or is not in conformance with the development standards and criteria of this article. [The general standards are found in Section 20-1006 and Preliminary Development Plan requirements are listed in Section 20-1010].
The general development standards pertaining to all planned unit developments are found in
Section 20-1006, "General Development Standards - Planned Unit Developments,"
Section 20-1008, "Development Standards - Planned Commercial Developments".
Section 20-1010, "The Preliminary Development Plan"
Specific waivers are associated with this proposed development including minimum area for a PCD, access to a collector street, reduction in minimum area, building setback reductions, and off-street parking reductions and.
Reductions Requested:
1. Waivers for location of PUD not adjacent to a collector or arterial; Subject property is located in high traffic area with proximity to collector and arterial access, both 12th Street and Indiana Street are local streets.
The subject property abuts local streets at the east entrance to campus. This is a high activity area within the neighborhood. The Development Code no longer requires Planned Developments to have direct access to collector or higher order streets and allows development to occur with access to local streets. Similarly conventional commercial zoning is recommended to be located at intersections with collector and arterial streets in many instances. The existing neighborhood commercial zoning, CN1, does not meet this standard. Previous development plans have been approved that do not have direct access to a collector or higher order street designation where the proposed development is determined to be suitably located.
· Subject property is located along KU transit route and City transit route.
· Subject property is located within a high activity area within the neighborhood with direct proximity to the University.
Staff recommendation on Waiver: Proximity to a transit route and the high traffic activity in this location are consistent with the behavior of a PCD located on a street other than a local street. Additionally, this requirement is not present in the new code as it is a limiting factor to utilize Planned Unit Developments in unique circumstances. Adequate traffic accommodations are provided including planned public improvements to the abutting street network.
2. Waivers for reduction in area requirements; subject property is less than the minimum 2-acre requirement.
Multiple waivers are associated with this proposed development with regard to minimum area and setback. The Planning Commission has the authority to waive this requirement when it is in the public interest and consistent with plans of the City and when such use would not impose an adverse impact on public facilities, utilities, transportation or storm drainage system or upon adjacent property. Approval of the reduction in the area requirement is directly related to other reductions because of the total size of the proposed development.
Staff recommendation on Waiver: Other Planned Commercial Developments have been approved on less than 2 acres. The proposed reduction is consistent with previous Planning Commission decisions regarding infill and redevelopment of properties for commercial development.
3. Waivers for reduction in setback requirements; setback reductions are needed based on the size of the proposed building limited by the size of the property.
The proposed building is substantially taller than any other development application in the recent past. The proposed development observes a 2’ setback along the east and west sides of the development. A 23’ setback is provided along the south (front yard) and a 21’ setback is provided along the north which also serves as a fire lane access. Typical setbacks for a PCD include the following: Front Yard Setback 20’ (South property line); Periphery Boundary 30’ (All property lines);
Side Yard Setback 20’ (East property line); Rear Yard Setback 25’ (North property line)
In addition to these base setbacks, the building shall be setback an additional 8’ for each story over three stories. This would add an additional 24’ total to each setback. The old code does not specify a maximum height restriction for the PCD District. Approval of height is discretionary authority granted to the Planning Commission. The setbacks listed above assume that additional setback is applied as the overall height increases for any given development. The commission is also provided with discretionary authority to waive the setbacks for a PCD. There are no criteria for evaluation of these waivers. Past cases have included the consideration of the existing development pattern of the surrounding area in determining setback reductions.
· The proposed building is setback only partially from the front (12th Street frontage) and the rear (north side).
· The building pattern along Indiana Street is disrupted by the proposed project. However, the project is located at the end of the block rather than in the middle of a block face.
· The building setback along 12th Street seems to be similar (in distance) to the apartment building to the east.
· The proposed building desing does include setbacks on upper floors and open terraces which provides some mitigation to the overall height.
Staff recommendation on Waiver: The subject property is a portion of an existing urban block. The total area is relatively narrow. The size and scope of the proposed development requires setback reductions. As compensation, the building is proposed in a manner that steps back building in a manner to reduce the massing along a flat façade of any given elevation.
Likewise the overall height of the building is not specified as a maximum standard for the district. The authority to specify height and applicable setback requirements is granted to the Planning Commission. The overall setbacks are consistent with traditional commercial applications regarding interior situations (the east side). The front setback is similar in appearance to the east half of the block along W. 12th Street. The west and north side setback reductions are reflective of the proposed design. The north side has been provided with a greater setback than previous proposals to accommodate fire access.
The applicant has provided an exhibit to show the dimensions of the building from the respective property lines. Staff supports the proposed reductions with this exhibit as part of the development package.
4. Waivers for off-street parking requirements; Off-street parking requirements are based on a 1 space per 200 NSF ratio for PCDs.
The PCD calculation is generally 1 space per 200 NSF except that residential uses are calculated based on a given density and bedroom ratio. A summary of the off-street parking is provided at the beginning of the report. Assumptions are made for all scenarios regarding the net square footage, usage or intensity of the individual uses within the proposed development.
Provision of 320 parking spaces would require even more levels of parking and a much larger site to accommodate this proposed development.
Hotel Use: The proposed hotel use includes a total of 74 rooms (excluding undesignated space on the 6th and 7th floor for additional rooms, extended stay or condo units.) Ancillary uses include conference/ballrooms, meeting spaces, office, guest accommodations such as pool or exercise space. The parking requirement varies widely for this use based on the ratio used. At one space per 200 NSF as required for a PCD off-street parking is required at 241 spaces. Parking required at a ratio for the number of guestrooms plus employee parking reduces the parking requirement to 94 spaces.
Retail Use: The required off-street parking for the retail use is comparable across the different scenarios. The new code is based on gross square feet calculation where the other assessments are based on a net square feet calculation. Thus, 5 additional off-street parking spaces would be required for this use.
Restaurant Use: Restaurant use requirements are calculated on both a square foot basis and on an estimated occupancy load requirement.
Condo Unit: 17,767 SF of area located on the 6th and 7th floors of the proposed development are un-designated. The applicant has indicated a desire to leave this area flexible to respond to market demand for -- additional hotel rooms, extended stay suites, or condo units. A total of 30 rooms would be planned for this area as a hotel and a maximum of 26 units per density could be developed as described in the application. This parking calculation assumes that units would be 1 and 2 bedroom units and ranges from 30 to 39 off-street parking spaces. Spaces are intended to accommodate the total number of rooms or units (old code) and any guest parking for the residents at a rate of 1 space per each 10 units (new code).
· The applicant has mixed the parking requirements between the old and new code resulting in a hybrid calculation.
· The Planning Commission has the expressed authority to consider reductions in off-street parking.
Staff recommendation on Waiver: The review of this proposed Preliminary Development Plan is based on the specific provisions of the zoning code prior to the adoption of the Land Development Code in 2006. Staff recommends that the off-street parking summary be revised to show required parking for the development as required in Section 20-1008. Staff concurs with a proposed reduction of off-street parking. Additionally, the applicant is working on a revision to extend the underground parking to the north creating a 4th level to increase the off-street parking to an estimated 190 spaces. Careful monitoring of the commercial area will be required to assure that changes in the use over time do not expand to a level that cannot be supported by the off-street parking provided within the development and that which can be found in the immediate area including the university parking.
Staff Finding – Staff has noted several elements the Planning Commission must act on waivers to allow the project to proceed. Without approval of these waivers, the project must be redesigned to comply with the existing standards of the PCD (old code) or seek some other alternative provision in the new code. At present there is not a zoning district that would allow for the development as proposed. Staff recommends conditions be added to the approval that restrict the use of the terrace areas from being enclosed in the future. With conditions and approval of the proposed waivers the proposed Preliminary Development Plan is in conformance with the provisions of a Planned Unit Development.
7) In what respects the plan is or is not in compliance with the requirements for application for tentative approval of the Planned Unit Development. [This finding refers to Section 20-1005 of the Zoning Ordinance.]
Staff Finding –As noted the proposed development includes physical elements that do not comply with minimum design requirements but are generally in the purview of the Commission to consider or alter. The development request is accompanied by a rezoning request. [Z-07-13-07].
8) The sufficiency of the terms and conditions proposed to protect the interest of the public and the residents of the Planned Unit Development in the case of a plan that proposes development over a period of years.
It is expected that the development will take a period of time to construct and includes considerable excavation for three to four levels of below ground parking. However, the project is not a “phased” development that includes multiple buildings over a large area. Staff recommends that the submission of a Final Development Plan include a phasing plan that provides a schedule for development accompanied by public improvement plans specifying specific improvements to public infrastructure as part of that scheduling.
Additionally, staff recommends that use limitations be added to the development. Some land uses are not appropriate for the location and should not be allowed. Uses associated with the proposed development are described in the Zoning Code that predate July 2006. Section 20-1004 establishes the permitted uses for the proposed development. While it is not staff’s intention to address the arrangement of uses within the proposed development some limitations are appropriate. The intent of uses is stated as: to encourage commercial development in a planned manner consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan of the City and compatible with nearby or adjacent residential area (20-1004(b)).
Uses permitted in the requested district (PCD-2) may include but shall be limited to:
Residential dwelling units (attached, detached, or mixed). And any use permitted in:
Use Group 7 - Community Facilities-Public Utilities;
Use Group 8 -Temporary Uses;
Use Group 9 - Professional Offices;
Use Group 9A - Limited Services;
Use Group 11 - Inner Neighborhood Commercial Uses;
Use Group 12 - Retail Stores - Personal Services.; (this Use Group includes restaurants)
Use Group 13 - Automotive Services; Retail Sales; other; (thhis Use Group includes hotels)
Use Group 14 - Retail-Wholesale Sales and Services;
Use Group 15 - Amusement, Recreational and Cultural Facilities.
The applicant voluntarily agrees to prohibit Use Group 14. They also agree to prohibit use groups 1,2,3 and 6. These use groups are not part of the allowed uses within the PCD and relate to agricultural and single-dwelling detached and mobile home park residential uses.
The proposed development is described as a mixed use development. The primary use is a hotel with a small retail element. The proposed PCD-2 District allows both residential and commercial uses. The proposed density for the condo use is 35 dwelling units per acre or a total of 26 units. The current residential zoning for this area is RM32 for the surrounding multi-family district. The overall residential portion of the proposed development represents only about 20% of the total proposed development.
|
|
SF |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
Hotel Space |
48,281 |
53.31% |
|
Terrace Space |
13,505 |
14.91% |
|
Condo Space |
17778 |
19.63% |
|
Restaurant |
7000 |
7.73% |
|
Retail |
4000 |
4.42% |
|
Total |
90,564 |
100.00% |
The retail element is less than 5% of the total project. It is assumed that the space would be hotel related uses. The current commercial zoning is CN1 a neighborhood commercial district. There has not been a discussion with staff regarding any neighborhood associated retail commercial uses for this development. This is a discussion that needs to occur in the public forum to discern the concerns and goals of the Oread Neighborhood as well as the larger community. Both retail and restaurant uses are commonly found associated with hotels or in close proximity.
The proposed development also includes terrace spaces that include covered “outdoor dining” options/receptions, public assembly space, performances, and similar activities beyond what a typical room balcony would provide. These spaces are located on the east, west and north sides of the building. The Commission should consider any use restrictions on these spaces such as live or amplified music and entertainment.
Restrictions of uses will result in a finite list. Future changes to the use groups would require the development to be reconsidered under the current regulations (new development code). This topic has not been fully discussed with the applicant. The project review has focused on the proposed uses only and the discussion about providing flexibility to schedule or program the space on the 6th and 7th floors dependent upon the “market response”.
The Applicant proposes the following:
· Use Group Restrictions: [1]
Remove use groups: 1, 2, 3, 6, 14, 17
· Revise Uses:
Guest Rooms: 110[2] (Types: Hotel room / suite / extended stay / condo)
Commercial space: 20,000 NSF (For public use. i.e. Retail areas, restaurants / Bars, Meeting spaces, Banquet Rooms, etc)
Terraces: 10,305 sq ft (All public spaces)
Hotel Support: Ancillary Uses (laundry, lobby, storage, offices, break rooms, etc)
In this description, the dedicated commercial area increases because of the addition of the meeting and banquet facilities associated with the hotel. Ancillary uses would not typically be factored into use or for off-street parking calculations.
Staff further recommends that the use restrictions be more articulated. Uses that are allowed in Use Group 13 include automotive sales and repair. The example is extreme to demonstrate the range of individual uses that are allowed within the PCD as a base district. The applicant has expressed a desire to carefully limit uses to allow for the greatest flexibility of use of the building. Staff recommends that the uses be further restricted within the use groups and made a part of the Final Development Plan. If prohibited uses are sought in the future, a new public hearing would be required. Staff has prepared an attachment to provide a detailed recommendation of uses for this development. It should be noted that special events such as an art show in the lobby can be addressed as temporary events rather than floating commercial uses for which assigned parking is not provided.
Staff Finding –Staff recommends that the submission of a Final Development Plan include a phasing plan that provides a schedule for development accompanied by public improvement plans specifying specific improvements to public infrastructure as part of that scheduling. Staff recommends that specific uses be restricted and shown on the Final Development Plan to ensure continued protection of residents of the neighborhood and the community.
9) Stormwater detention calculations and storage of excess stormwater drainage as per City Policy.
Staff Finding – A stormwater drainage documentation was submitted to staff for review. The applicant will be required to provide additional plans and documents to the City Stormwater Engineer throughout the project as part of the review and approval cycle. There is no on-site detention associated with the proposed development. The City Stormwater Engineer indicated several notations that needed to be added to the development plan and to the related public improvement plans when submitted.