2401 Wilson Boulevard General Land Use Plan Amendment Study Long Range Planning Committee Meeting Presentation Compendium March 29, 2011 Department of Community Planning, Housing and Development GLUP Amendment Request •GLUP amendment request from “Service Commercial” (Personal and business services, generally 1- 4 stories) and to “High -Medium Residential Mixed- Use” (up to 3.24 FAR including associated office and retail activities) •Height note on GLUP limiting site to 75’ •Associated rezoning request from “C - 2” (Service Commercial – Community Business Districts) to “R - C” (Apartment Dwelling and Residential Districts) • Pending site plan application for hotel 1
Site Location Court House Station Aerial Photo of Site 2
Site Photos GLUP Amendment Policy •“Policy for Consideration of General Land Use Plan Amendments Unanticipated by Previous Planning Efforts” adopted in 2008 •Policy states that “…a proposed GLUP amendment for any site not identified in a County Board adopted planning study as appropriate for such a GLUP amendment will not be considered until such a planning study or analysis has been completed…” 3
Study Process OBJECTIVE: Analyze the site in the context of the surrounding area and obtain feedback from LRPC on the appropriateness of the proposed amendment. Develop a recommendation to the County Board. SCOPE: • History of GLUP and Zoning designations • Existing GLUP and Zoning designations • Recommendations of the Courthouse Sector Plan Addendum • Recommendations of other relevant plans and policies • Proposed GLUP amendment request – uses, density, heights, etc. • 3-D modeling of existing conditions and what the proposed GLUP designation would allow • Preliminary transportation analysis Staff Recommendation from Previous Study • Staff recommended not to advertise proposed GLUP amendment from “Service Commercial” and “Low” Residential (1-10 u/a) to “Medium” Office -Apartment-Hotel. •“Medium” OAH is not an appropriate designation for the entire site. • Staff continues to support the guidance of the Courthouse Sector Plan Addendum and the County’s adopted policies regarding the preservation of existing single-family neighborhoods. • Only in rare instances has the County changed the GLUP designation of “Low” Residential properties to a higher designation. • Addendum calls for a transition and landscaped buffer on this site, not open space as proposed by applicant. Likewise, the Public Spaces Master Plan does not call for a park in this location. •2 of 3 houses on subject site are considered “contributing” to the Lyon Village National Historic District. 4
Overview of Proposed Change GLUP History of Site 1961 - “General Business” along Wilson Boulevard and “Unplanned Uses” north of the site along 16th Street North 1975 - “Service Commercial” (Personal and business services, generally 1-3 stories, maximum 1.0 FAR) along Wilson Boulevard and “Low” Residential (1 -10 u/a) north of the site along 16th Street North 1987 - “Service Commercial” redefined as “Personal and business services, generally 1-4 stories, maximum of 1.5 FAR” No subsequent changes to GLUP designation for site except minor changes to definition of “Service Commercial” 5
GLUP Map with Orientation Labels GLUP Height Note Question •Applicant’s Proposed Note: “Within the area shown as “High -Medium Residential Mixed-Use, building heights shall be limited to a maximum of 75’, measured from average site elevation to the surface of the main roof of the building, stepping down to less than 60’ at the northern end of the building adjacent to residential neighborhoods for the block west of N. Adams Street.” 6
Zoning Designations Existing •“C - 2” (Service Commercial – Community Business Districts) Proposed • “R - C” (Apartment Dwelling and Residential Districts) Zoning Map R-6 R-6 7
Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations Zoning Use Height Density District 45’ C-2 residential residential - as permitted in R-6 max hotel – min. 600 sq. ft. lot area hotel per room (72.6 u/a) other uses – max. 1.5 FAR commercial; office; retail 45’ C-2 commercial; retail; max. 2.0 FAR commercial/retail residential max with residential or max. 1.5 FAR UC/MUD commercial only 95’ R-C residential max 3.24 FAR residential max residential; office max 1.24 FAR office for every 2.0 FAR of residential ground floor retail Development Potential of Site Zoning Site Area Maximum Potential Development District C-2 19,126 square commercial: 28,689 square feet (1.5 feet FAR) UC/ same commercial/retail with residential: MUD 38,252 square feet (2.0 FAR) R-C same residential : 61,968 square feet (3.24 FAR) mixed-use: 23,716 square feet of office (1.24 FAR office); 38,252 square feet of residential (2.0 FAR residential) 8
R-C Use Height Density By-Right single-family residential 3.5 stories or 8 u/a 35’; 6 stories RA14-26 or 60’ for two-family dwelling 6 u/a sites with 5+ acres townhouse 24 u/a apartment 24 u/a 65’ with Site residential max 3.24 FAR residential Plan 95’ max by modification residential; office max 1.24 FAR office for every 2.0 FAR of residential ground floor retail (max 3.5 FAR on sites which are 50,000sf or more; have 200’ of frontage on a primary or secondary arterial; and are across from C-O-A) Analysis of Relevant Planning Documents andPolicies 9
Courthouse Sector Plan Addendum Concept Plan - calls for “Service Commercial” adjacent to a “Transition” zone towards the “Neighborhood Conservation” area Illustrative Plan - shows building along Wilson Boulevard and a landscaped transition between commercial and residential properties Concept Plan Illustrative Plan Courthouse Sector Plan Addendum Site Design •“Development on these sites should be located at the back of the sidewalk respecting a build- to line along Wilson Blvd..” •“Building heights and mass should be consolidated along main street and should taper down towards Lyon Village.” •“Open space should be consolidated at the back of the properties providing a linear open space feature as a transition to the single- family residential areas abutting directly to the site.” 10
Master Transportation Plan Wilson Boulevard - Type A Primary Retail Oriented Mixed-Use 2 to 4 travel lanes; bike lane; restrict/limit driveway access; on-street parking priority High; 10- 16’ sidewalks; 6’ furniture zone or tree pits 16th Street North - Non Arterial - Neighborhood 2 travel lanes; shared lane: no driveway access restriction; on-street parking priority High; 4- 6’ sidewalk; 2 - 4’ green strip North Adams Street - Non Arterial - Urban Center Local 2 travel lanes; bike lane/shared lane; no driveway access restriction; on-street parking priority High; 6- 8’ sidewalk; 5 - 6’ green strip North Barton Street - Non Arterial - Urban Center Local 2 travel lanes; bike lane/shared lane; no driveway access restriction; on-street parking priority High; 6- 8’ sidewalk; 5 - 6’ green strip Three-Dimensional Modeling of Existing (Service Commercial), Proposed (High- Medium Residential Mixed-Use) and Alternate (Medium Office-Apartment-Hotel) GLUP Designations NB: The following models are not intended to represent staff’s recommended development of the site, but to represent illustrative examples of a multitude of options. 11
Context: Existing Conditions/GLUP Build-Out Transportation Analysis Context: Proposed GLUP Scenario 1 12
Site: Proposed GLUP – Scenario 1 Site: Proposed GLUP – Scenario 2 13
Context: Proposed GLUP – Scenario 2 Context: Existing Conditions/GLUP Build-Out 14
Context: Existing Conditions/GLUP Build-Out Context: Existing Conditions/GLUP Build-Out 15
Context: Existing Conditions/GLUP Build-Out Preliminary Transportation Analysis 16
Transportation Findings •Site located approximately 500’ from Courthouse Metro Station and is well-served by Metrobus and ART Bus • Number of trips generated by this site if redeveloped at proposed GLUP level would be relatively low • Even with build-out of the western Courthouse Station at current GLUP levels, impacts to the transportation system should be manageable Transportation Impacts of Hotel Development • Fewer vehicular and Metro trips generated by hotel development than office development, but more than residential development • Loading/operations intensity for hotels is generally on par with that for office and residential development • Transportation impacts can be mitigated by proximity to Metro and other mass transit facilities 17
Transportation Impacts of R-C Development Hotel Use Analysis 18
Recommend
More recommend
