3804 Wilson Blvd - Arlingtonva
11
3804 Wilson Boulevard (Staples Site) Special General Land Use Plan Study Long Range Committee of the Planning Commission Meeting May 16, 2018 Department of Community Planning, Housing and Development
22
Overview
33
Purpose of Tonight’s Meeting • Briefly review what was covered at the last LRPC meeting • Evaluate the new requested GLUP and Zoning categories • Review the transportation analysis • Receive input from the LRPC on the appropriateness of the requested GLUP amendment
44
Amendment Request •Initial GLUP amendment request from “LowMedium” Residential to “Medium” Residential or “Low” Office-Apartment-Hotel • Associated rezoning request from C-2 and RA8-18 to C-O-1.5 •Applicant now requesting “Service Commercial” • Associated rezoning request to C-TH
55
3804 Wilson in Context
STAPLES SITE
Bird’s-eye from South
Oakland Apartments Staples 730 N. Oakland St. 3804 Wilson Blvd.
6
77
Plan Guidance •GLUP – Adopted by County Board •Zoning Ordinance – Adopted by County Board •Virginia Square Sector Plan – Adopted by County Board •Neighborhood Conservation Plans – Accepted by County Board •Local Historic District – Designated by County Board
88
GLUP Designations Existing GLUP Category •“Low-Medium” Residential (16-36 units per acre) Proposed GLUP Categories • “Medium” Residential (36-72 units per acre) or •“Low” Office-Apartment-Hotel (up to 1.5 FAR for office, 72 units per acre for apartment and 110 hotel rooms per acre) or •“Service Commercial” (Personal and business services. Generally one to four stories.”)
99
General Land Use Plan (GLUP)
10 10
GLUP Development and Growth Goals 1. Concentrate high-density residential, commercial and office development within designated Metro Station Areas in the Rosslyn-Ballston and Route 1 Metrorail Transit Corridors. 2. Promote mixed-use development in Metro Station Areas to provide a balance of residential, shopping and employment opportunities. 3. Increase the supply of housing by encouraging construction of a variety of housing types and prices at a range of heights and densities in and near Metro Station Areas. 4. Preserve and enhance existing single-family and apartment neighborhoods. 5. Preserve and enhance neighborhood retail areas.
11 11
Zoning Designations Existing •RA8-18 (Multiple-family Dwelling District) •C-2 (Service Commercial-Community Business District) Initially Proposed C-O-1.5 (Mixed-Use District) Currently Proposed C-TH (Commercial Townhouse District)
12 12
Zoning Map
Current Zoning at 3804 Wilson: C-2 (Service Commercial Community Business District) and
RA8-18 (MultiFamily Dwelling District)
Zoning Designations Corresponding to Currently Proposed “Service Commercial” Zoning District
Use
Height
Density
C-TH
by-right: commercial, residential, hotel
by-right: 55’
residential: form based
(currently proposed) - also
13 13
hotel: 110 u/a
corresponds to “General Commercial”
commercial: form based site plan: N/A
C-2
residential
45’ max
residential - as in R-6
hotel
hotel – min. 600 sq. ft. lot area per room (72.6 u/a)
commercial; office; retail
other uses – max. 1.5 FAR
14 14
C-TH Overview • Purpose: “to encourage commercial development of structures with the physical characteristics of townhouses and to provide tapering of heights between higher density commercial development and lower density residential uses…” • GLUP Categories: Associated with “Service Commercial” and “General Commercial” • Height: Maximum height of 55’ (exclusive of penthouse) • Density: 110 u/a for hotel; form–based density for commercial and residential • Additional Information: • Never used outside of Clarendon • Proffer district for sites over 50,000 sf
15 15
C-TH Development
16 16
C-TH Development
ZOSO Flats – 141 residential units built in 2007 Gateway Extra Space Storage – self-storage built in 2001
17 17
C-TH Development
Garfield Park – 152 residential units built in 2012 Storage USA – self-storage built in 1995
18 18
C-TH Development
National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions – built in 1987
19 19
Sector Plan Guidance Virginia Square Sector Plan (2002) • The vision for Virginia Square is “a station area featuring cultural, educational, and recreational facilities in an attractive urban village setting which provides a quality of life to all who live, work, or visit there.” (p. 9) • “This plan seeks to preserve existing housing within the station area, especially those dwelling units that offer market-rate affordable units, such as the garden apartments along the south edge of Wilson Boulevard.” (p. 7) • This area is located in the “Transition Area” between the dense “Core Area” and the “Surrounding Neighborhood” (p. 21)
20 20
Sector Plan Guidance Virginia Square Sector Plan (2002) • “Locate the highest density uses nearest to the Virginia Square Metro station and along Fairfax Drive to promote greater use of public transit. Buffer higher density development from surrounding neighborhoods with moderate density and scaled development to preserve the neighborhoods’ character and scale.” (p. 43) • Concept Plan – “Low-Medium” Residential (16-36 u/a) (p. 46) • Building Envelope – 4 stories (p. 53)
Sector Plan Guidance – Concept Plan
Concept Plan Composite
21 21
Sector Plan Guidance – Use/Building Envelope
22 22
Land Use
Building Envelopes
23 23
NC Plan Guidance Ashton Heights Neighborhood Conservation Plan (2000) • “A greenway between residences and commercial lots of the south side of Wilson Boulevard.” (p. 7) (stated as key recommendation of earlier NC Plan) (NB: Sector Plan did not recommend a greenway travelway) • “Encourage development along Ashton Heights’ boundaries that results in a lively ‘urban village’ where:…Residents can walk to and/or between a variety of pedestrian-scale retail businesses and restaurants.” (p. 33) • “Minimize the impact (visual, noise, and light) of buildings on the neighborhood’s perimeter on the homes of Ashton Heights.” (p. 33) • “Ensure that the architecture of new buildings harmonizes with existing historic buildings such as the Maury School.” (p. 33) • “In areas immediately adjacent to Ashton Heights, only permit rezoning to higher density when it is consistent with the approved sector plans.” (p. 35)
24 24
NC Plan Guidance Ashton Heights Neighborhood Conservation Plan (2000) • “For site plan projects bordering residential properties, require tapering building heights that do not overwhelm existing homes and require appropriate buffering methods.” (p. 35) • “Require new developments to locate parking lots underground, on the street, or behind the buildings, not between the sidewalk and the building.” (p. 37) • “Require new developments to demonstrate that they will not increase traffic or parking in Ashton Heights.” (p. 37)
Ballston - Virginia Square Neighborhood Conservation Plan (1984) • The sector plan “should be faithfully followed in all land use decisions in that area. The essential character of Virginia Square as a residential neighborhood is to be encouraged and preserved.” (p. 7)
25
Historic Resources 1- Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) Rankings • Essential • Important (with a subcategory for top third) • Notable • Minor • Staples Building – constructed 1950; classified as Notable in the Historic Resources Inventory • Oakland Apartments – constructed 1954-1956; classified as being in the top third of the Important category in the Historic Resources Inventory 2 - National Register of Historic Places
26
Three-Dimensional Modeling Background Information
NB: The models are not intended to represent staff’s recommended development of the site, but to represent illustrative examples of a multitude of options.
27
Modeling Assumptions • • • • • • • •
Development consistent with GLUP and zoning Building envelopes modeled – approximate heights Residential floor heights = 10’ Hotel floor heights = 14', 12' above first No topography modeled Transitions to neighborhood Parking, garage, and access as required by zoning Use of alley for circulation if existing apartment building remains • Underground parking for site plans unless noted • Average residential unit size = 1,000 SF • Average hotel unit size = 750 SF
28
Bonus Requests • Bonus Categories •LEED • Silver .25 FAR Office/Res. • Gold .35 FAR Office/Res. • Platinum .50 FAR Office/Res. – And 2 Arlington priority credits for .05 FAR •Affordable Housing - .25 FAR max or 6 stories or 60’ for office; 25% for residential •Community Facilities - .25 FAR •Dedication of Streets or Easements •Open Space • 20% is the average recent site plan bonus. • While such bonuses may or may not be approved, they can potentially result in bulkier or taller buildings. • However, through the site plan process, developers may not be permitted to achieve the maximum allowed by zoning. Tapers, setbacks, etc. can be requested.
29
Existing Conditions 6 7 5-10
7
Oakland Park
2+ 2
2+
8
1
2 2
2+
4 Gumball Park
C-2 / RA8-18 split
existing GLUP + zoning existing buildings
# = approx. stories
30
Existing GLUP / Zoning Max 6 7 5-10
7
Oakland Park
2+ 2
2+
8
3 underground parking
2+
2 2
surface parking
4 Gumball Park
C-2 / RA8-18 split by-right
existing GLUP + zoning, Staples redeveloped, existing residential building retained
31
Scenarios Shown at Last Meeting
20% Bonus Density
Three-Dimensional Modeling Site Plan Base Density
Background Information By-Right
Site Plan Base Density with Preservation
NB: The models are not intended to represent staff’s recommended development of the to Res represent illustrative a “Med.” “Low”ofOAH “Service Comm.” / “Low-Med.” Res site, but “Low” OAH examples RA-H of options. C-O-1.0 C-O-1.5 multitude “Low-Med.” Res RA8-18 C-2 / RA8-18
32
Input from LRPC Meeting #2 • The LRPC expressed concerns about the potential precedent a change to the “Low-Medium” Residential GLUP category for this site might set • The LRPC asked if such a change should be contemplated outside of a reexamination of the sector plan or a small area plan • Staff will therefore focus on evaluating the applicant’s new request: • “Service Commercial” scenario corresponding to C-TH zoning
33
3-D Modeling Development Scenario Models “Service Commercial”/ C-TH Current Requested GLUP & Requested Zoning
C-TH
C-TH by-right - max height 55’, max density 110 u/a for hotel and form based density for commercial and residential
34
C-TH By-Right 5
4 5
Residential
C-TH
Hotel
Commercial / Office
corresponds to requested “Service Commercial” GLUP min. setbacks = 40’ from road centerlines, 15’ from side and rear lot lines
35
Similar to Applicant’s Current Proposal Oakland Park 5 4
Gumball Park
C-TH
corresponds to requested “Service Commercial” GLUP 92 residential units + ground floor retail
36
Similar to Applicant’s Current Proposal Oakland Park
Gumball Park
C-TH
corresponds to requested “Service Commercial” GLUP t 92 residential units + ground floor retail
37
Transportation Analysis
38
Transportation Analysis
Master Transportation Plan Street Typology Street Name Typology Travel Lanes
39
Bike OnAccommodations Street Parking Priority
Pedestrian Way
Wilson Blvd. (10th St. N. to N. Randolph St.)
Primarily Urban MixedUse Arterials
2 + turning (one-way) or 4 + turning (2 way)
Bike lane/shared lane
High
6-12’ sidewalk and 6’ furniture zone or tree pits
N. Oakland St. (Fairfax Dr. to 7th St. N.)
Urban Center Local
2 lanes
Bike lane/shared lane
High
6-8’ sidewalk and 4-6’ green strip
40
Scenarios Shown at Last Meeting
20% Bonus Density
Three-Dimensional Modeling Site Plan Base Density
Background Information By-Right
Site Plan Base Density with Preservation
NB: The models are not intended to represent staff’s recommended development of the to Res represent illustrative a “Med.” “Low”ofOAH “Service Comm.” / “Low-Med.” Res site, but “Low” OAH examples RA-H of options. C-O-1.0 C-O-1.5 multitude “Low-Med.” Res RA8-18 C-2 / RA8-18
Preliminary Trip Generation – All Scenarios
41
PM Total Trips Compared Across All Scenarios PM Peak Vehicle Trips
250 200 150 100 50 Scenario 1: RA8-18/C-2 By-Right SPLIT (EXISTING)
Scenario 2: All RA8-18 By-Right
Scenario 3: Scenario 3: Scenario 4: Scenario 4: Scenario 5: Scenario 5: Scenario 5: Scenario 6: RA-H Site C-O-1.5 Site C-O-1.5 Site C-O-1.0 Site C-O-1.0 Site C-O-1.0 Site C-TH Hotel RA-H Site Plan - Base Plan - Bonus Plan - Base Plan - Bonus Plan - Base Plan - Bonus Plan - Bonus (50%) (20%) (20%) (20%)
Scenario 6: Scenario 6: C-TH C-TH Residential Commercial
42
Preliminary Trip Generation – C-TH Scenario 6: C-TH By-Right 250
PM Peak Vehicle Trips
200
150
100
50
0 6.1: Hotel
6.1B Residential
6.1C Commercial
43
Conclusion and Next Steps
44
Conclusion
LRPC Discussion • Obtain feedback from LRPC on the appropriateness of the proposed amendment • Develop a recommendation to the County Board regarding this request and what GLUP category/categories may be appropriate
45
Next Steps 1.Objective is to analyze the site in the context of the surrounding area and obtain feedback from the LRPC on the appropriateness of the requested change – not to evaluate a specific project 2.A staff document containing study findings and staff’s recommendations will be presented to the PC as an action item, permitting public comment and a vote with recommendations 3.A request to advertise report recommending or not recommending a GLUP amendment would be brought to the County Board 4.Authorizing the advertisement would not imply that the County Board supports the proposed amendment, but that it is in the realm of consideration
3804 Wilson Boulevard (Staples Site) Special General Land Use Plan Study Long Range Committee of the Planning Commission Meeting May 16, 2018 Department of Community Planning, Housing and Development
22
Overview
33
Purpose of Tonight’s Meeting • Briefly review what was covered at the last LRPC meeting • Evaluate the new requested GLUP and Zoning categories • Review the transportation analysis • Receive input from the LRPC on the appropriateness of the requested GLUP amendment
44
Amendment Request •Initial GLUP amendment request from “LowMedium” Residential to “Medium” Residential or “Low” Office-Apartment-Hotel • Associated rezoning request from C-2 and RA8-18 to C-O-1.5 •Applicant now requesting “Service Commercial” • Associated rezoning request to C-TH
55
3804 Wilson in Context
STAPLES SITE
Bird’s-eye from South
Oakland Apartments Staples 730 N. Oakland St. 3804 Wilson Blvd.
6
77
Plan Guidance •GLUP – Adopted by County Board •Zoning Ordinance – Adopted by County Board •Virginia Square Sector Plan – Adopted by County Board •Neighborhood Conservation Plans – Accepted by County Board •Local Historic District – Designated by County Board
88
GLUP Designations Existing GLUP Category •“Low-Medium” Residential (16-36 units per acre) Proposed GLUP Categories • “Medium” Residential (36-72 units per acre) or •“Low” Office-Apartment-Hotel (up to 1.5 FAR for office, 72 units per acre for apartment and 110 hotel rooms per acre) or •“Service Commercial” (Personal and business services. Generally one to four stories.”)
99
General Land Use Plan (GLUP)
10 10
GLUP Development and Growth Goals 1. Concentrate high-density residential, commercial and office development within designated Metro Station Areas in the Rosslyn-Ballston and Route 1 Metrorail Transit Corridors. 2. Promote mixed-use development in Metro Station Areas to provide a balance of residential, shopping and employment opportunities. 3. Increase the supply of housing by encouraging construction of a variety of housing types and prices at a range of heights and densities in and near Metro Station Areas. 4. Preserve and enhance existing single-family and apartment neighborhoods. 5. Preserve and enhance neighborhood retail areas.
11 11
Zoning Designations Existing •RA8-18 (Multiple-family Dwelling District) •C-2 (Service Commercial-Community Business District) Initially Proposed C-O-1.5 (Mixed-Use District) Currently Proposed C-TH (Commercial Townhouse District)
12 12
Zoning Map
Current Zoning at 3804 Wilson: C-2 (Service Commercial Community Business District) and
RA8-18 (MultiFamily Dwelling District)
Zoning Designations Corresponding to Currently Proposed “Service Commercial” Zoning District
Use
Height
Density
C-TH
by-right: commercial, residential, hotel
by-right: 55’
residential: form based
(currently proposed) - also
13 13
hotel: 110 u/a
corresponds to “General Commercial”
commercial: form based site plan: N/A
C-2
residential
45’ max
residential - as in R-6
hotel
hotel – min. 600 sq. ft. lot area per room (72.6 u/a)
commercial; office; retail
other uses – max. 1.5 FAR
14 14
C-TH Overview • Purpose: “to encourage commercial development of structures with the physical characteristics of townhouses and to provide tapering of heights between higher density commercial development and lower density residential uses…” • GLUP Categories: Associated with “Service Commercial” and “General Commercial” • Height: Maximum height of 55’ (exclusive of penthouse) • Density: 110 u/a for hotel; form–based density for commercial and residential • Additional Information: • Never used outside of Clarendon • Proffer district for sites over 50,000 sf
15 15
C-TH Development
16 16
C-TH Development
ZOSO Flats – 141 residential units built in 2007 Gateway Extra Space Storage – self-storage built in 2001
17 17
C-TH Development
Garfield Park – 152 residential units built in 2012 Storage USA – self-storage built in 1995
18 18
C-TH Development
National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions – built in 1987
19 19
Sector Plan Guidance Virginia Square Sector Plan (2002) • The vision for Virginia Square is “a station area featuring cultural, educational, and recreational facilities in an attractive urban village setting which provides a quality of life to all who live, work, or visit there.” (p. 9) • “This plan seeks to preserve existing housing within the station area, especially those dwelling units that offer market-rate affordable units, such as the garden apartments along the south edge of Wilson Boulevard.” (p. 7) • This area is located in the “Transition Area” between the dense “Core Area” and the “Surrounding Neighborhood” (p. 21)
20 20
Sector Plan Guidance Virginia Square Sector Plan (2002) • “Locate the highest density uses nearest to the Virginia Square Metro station and along Fairfax Drive to promote greater use of public transit. Buffer higher density development from surrounding neighborhoods with moderate density and scaled development to preserve the neighborhoods’ character and scale.” (p. 43) • Concept Plan – “Low-Medium” Residential (16-36 u/a) (p. 46) • Building Envelope – 4 stories (p. 53)
Sector Plan Guidance – Concept Plan
Concept Plan Composite
21 21
Sector Plan Guidance – Use/Building Envelope
22 22
Land Use
Building Envelopes
23 23
NC Plan Guidance Ashton Heights Neighborhood Conservation Plan (2000) • “A greenway between residences and commercial lots of the south side of Wilson Boulevard.” (p. 7) (stated as key recommendation of earlier NC Plan) (NB: Sector Plan did not recommend a greenway travelway) • “Encourage development along Ashton Heights’ boundaries that results in a lively ‘urban village’ where:…Residents can walk to and/or between a variety of pedestrian-scale retail businesses and restaurants.” (p. 33) • “Minimize the impact (visual, noise, and light) of buildings on the neighborhood’s perimeter on the homes of Ashton Heights.” (p. 33) • “Ensure that the architecture of new buildings harmonizes with existing historic buildings such as the Maury School.” (p. 33) • “In areas immediately adjacent to Ashton Heights, only permit rezoning to higher density when it is consistent with the approved sector plans.” (p. 35)
24 24
NC Plan Guidance Ashton Heights Neighborhood Conservation Plan (2000) • “For site plan projects bordering residential properties, require tapering building heights that do not overwhelm existing homes and require appropriate buffering methods.” (p. 35) • “Require new developments to locate parking lots underground, on the street, or behind the buildings, not between the sidewalk and the building.” (p. 37) • “Require new developments to demonstrate that they will not increase traffic or parking in Ashton Heights.” (p. 37)
Ballston - Virginia Square Neighborhood Conservation Plan (1984) • The sector plan “should be faithfully followed in all land use decisions in that area. The essential character of Virginia Square as a residential neighborhood is to be encouraged and preserved.” (p. 7)
25
Historic Resources 1- Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) Rankings • Essential • Important (with a subcategory for top third) • Notable • Minor • Staples Building – constructed 1950; classified as Notable in the Historic Resources Inventory • Oakland Apartments – constructed 1954-1956; classified as being in the top third of the Important category in the Historic Resources Inventory 2 - National Register of Historic Places
26
Three-Dimensional Modeling Background Information
NB: The models are not intended to represent staff’s recommended development of the site, but to represent illustrative examples of a multitude of options.
27
Modeling Assumptions • • • • • • • •
Development consistent with GLUP and zoning Building envelopes modeled – approximate heights Residential floor heights = 10’ Hotel floor heights = 14', 12' above first No topography modeled Transitions to neighborhood Parking, garage, and access as required by zoning Use of alley for circulation if existing apartment building remains • Underground parking for site plans unless noted • Average residential unit size = 1,000 SF • Average hotel unit size = 750 SF
28
Bonus Requests • Bonus Categories •LEED • Silver .25 FAR Office/Res. • Gold .35 FAR Office/Res. • Platinum .50 FAR Office/Res. – And 2 Arlington priority credits for .05 FAR •Affordable Housing - .25 FAR max or 6 stories or 60’ for office; 25% for residential •Community Facilities - .25 FAR •Dedication of Streets or Easements •Open Space • 20% is the average recent site plan bonus. • While such bonuses may or may not be approved, they can potentially result in bulkier or taller buildings. • However, through the site plan process, developers may not be permitted to achieve the maximum allowed by zoning. Tapers, setbacks, etc. can be requested.
29
Existing Conditions 6 7 5-10
7
Oakland Park
2+ 2
2+
8
1
2 2
2+
4 Gumball Park
C-2 / RA8-18 split
existing GLUP + zoning existing buildings
# = approx. stories
30
Existing GLUP / Zoning Max 6 7 5-10
7
Oakland Park
2+ 2
2+
8
3 underground parking
2+
2 2
surface parking
4 Gumball Park
C-2 / RA8-18 split by-right
existing GLUP + zoning, Staples redeveloped, existing residential building retained
31
Scenarios Shown at Last Meeting
20% Bonus Density
Three-Dimensional Modeling Site Plan Base Density
Background Information By-Right
Site Plan Base Density with Preservation
NB: The models are not intended to represent staff’s recommended development of the to Res represent illustrative a “Med.” “Low”ofOAH “Service Comm.” / “Low-Med.” Res site, but “Low” OAH examples RA-H of options. C-O-1.0 C-O-1.5 multitude “Low-Med.” Res RA8-18 C-2 / RA8-18
32
Input from LRPC Meeting #2 • The LRPC expressed concerns about the potential precedent a change to the “Low-Medium” Residential GLUP category for this site might set • The LRPC asked if such a change should be contemplated outside of a reexamination of the sector plan or a small area plan • Staff will therefore focus on evaluating the applicant’s new request: • “Service Commercial” scenario corresponding to C-TH zoning
33
3-D Modeling Development Scenario Models “Service Commercial”/ C-TH Current Requested GLUP & Requested Zoning
C-TH
C-TH by-right - max height 55’, max density 110 u/a for hotel and form based density for commercial and residential
34
C-TH By-Right 5
4 5
Residential
C-TH
Hotel
Commercial / Office
corresponds to requested “Service Commercial” GLUP min. setbacks = 40’ from road centerlines, 15’ from side and rear lot lines
35
Similar to Applicant’s Current Proposal Oakland Park 5 4
Gumball Park
C-TH
corresponds to requested “Service Commercial” GLUP 92 residential units + ground floor retail
36
Similar to Applicant’s Current Proposal Oakland Park
Gumball Park
C-TH
corresponds to requested “Service Commercial” GLUP t 92 residential units + ground floor retail
37
Transportation Analysis
38
Transportation Analysis
Master Transportation Plan Street Typology Street Name Typology Travel Lanes
39
Bike OnAccommodations Street Parking Priority
Pedestrian Way
Wilson Blvd. (10th St. N. to N. Randolph St.)
Primarily Urban MixedUse Arterials
2 + turning (one-way) or 4 + turning (2 way)
Bike lane/shared lane
High
6-12’ sidewalk and 6’ furniture zone or tree pits
N. Oakland St. (Fairfax Dr. to 7th St. N.)
Urban Center Local
2 lanes
Bike lane/shared lane
High
6-8’ sidewalk and 4-6’ green strip
40
Scenarios Shown at Last Meeting
20% Bonus Density
Three-Dimensional Modeling Site Plan Base Density
Background Information By-Right
Site Plan Base Density with Preservation
NB: The models are not intended to represent staff’s recommended development of the to Res represent illustrative a “Med.” “Low”ofOAH “Service Comm.” / “Low-Med.” Res site, but “Low” OAH examples RA-H of options. C-O-1.0 C-O-1.5 multitude “Low-Med.” Res RA8-18 C-2 / RA8-18
Preliminary Trip Generation – All Scenarios
41
PM Total Trips Compared Across All Scenarios PM Peak Vehicle Trips
250 200 150 100 50 Scenario 1: RA8-18/C-2 By-Right SPLIT (EXISTING)
Scenario 2: All RA8-18 By-Right
Scenario 3: Scenario 3: Scenario 4: Scenario 4: Scenario 5: Scenario 5: Scenario 5: Scenario 6: RA-H Site C-O-1.5 Site C-O-1.5 Site C-O-1.0 Site C-O-1.0 Site C-O-1.0 Site C-TH Hotel RA-H Site Plan - Base Plan - Bonus Plan - Base Plan - Bonus Plan - Base Plan - Bonus Plan - Bonus (50%) (20%) (20%) (20%)
Scenario 6: Scenario 6: C-TH C-TH Residential Commercial
42
Preliminary Trip Generation – C-TH Scenario 6: C-TH By-Right 250
PM Peak Vehicle Trips
200
150
100
50
0 6.1: Hotel
6.1B Residential
6.1C Commercial
43
Conclusion and Next Steps
44
Conclusion
LRPC Discussion • Obtain feedback from LRPC on the appropriateness of the proposed amendment • Develop a recommendation to the County Board regarding this request and what GLUP category/categories may be appropriate
45
Next Steps 1.Objective is to analyze the site in the context of the surrounding area and obtain feedback from the LRPC on the appropriateness of the requested change – not to evaluate a specific project 2.A staff document containing study findings and staff’s recommendations will be presented to the PC as an action item, permitting public comment and a vote with recommendations 3.A request to advertise report recommending or not recommending a GLUP amendment would be brought to the County Board 4.Authorizing the advertisement would not imply that the County Board supports the proposed amendment, but that it is in the realm of consideration
