8B, Planning Case 12-009 - 1201 County Road E Reuse Proposal

Home Browse Search

uses for Lot 2 and then distributed throughout the system for results, although difficult to make a true assessment of what level of development the City wanted to assign. Chair Larson asked as it sits today with no development on the corner, compared to the previous use as a hotel, the increase or decrease impact. Mr. Manhart replied the hotel, with ancillary uses, would generate more than an apartment building. Chair Larson asked what the most intense use on that corner would be in the realm of development. Mr. Manhart replied a pharmacy was a more intense use, but it might not make sense because there is a similar use nearby. Chair Larson asked if the approval of Lexington Avenue access is conditional based on a bank on the corner. Mr. Manhart replied he believes that is correct. Chair Larson asked if a bank is low intensity use. Mr. Manhart replied that it depends on the size, that it has peaks, for example Friday payday. In terms of comparison, a typical drive thru has fewer trips than a pharmacy. Chair Larson asked if the use of a pharmacy is not a good use due to there being one across the street. He asked the impact of a combined bank use on the corner with apartment use compared to a hotel and ancillaries. Mr. Manhart replied he is not sure the figures are calculated at this time. Discussion on traffic ensued. Commissioner Scott asked if there was still another variable with the future development of the McGuire's site. Mr. Manhart replied he would have to check and see if that was included. Commissioner Zimmerman asked about a discussion with the County engineer regarding expansion of the Lexington Bridge over 694 and what impact that would have regarding access to the property. Mr. Manhart replied they have not had a conversation with the County engineer. Commissioner Zimmerman stated this is a discussion that needs to occur, how it's going to impact that or any other property. Mr. Manhart replied that he agreed, that the B-2 plan is the basis for analysis. Commissioner Hames noted in the original B-2 planning for the site, the City and engineers laid out a plan of business and apartment mix use and the traffic study worst case scenario still doesn't meet the anticipated traffic for the site in the B-2 plan. Mr. Manhart agreed. Commissioner Scott asked if the trips per PM peak hour were 237 previously and with a bank and 120 units they came up with 200. 1VIr. Manhart replied 237 previously and with a bank and 120 units the number is 221, which includes the health club and daycare. City Planner Beekman added that on Page 5 of the traffic study, it shows a full list of the build out — daycare, health club, apartment and pharmacy, for 336 PM peak trips. Commissioner Hames asked if that accounted for 900 trips a day. City Planner Beekman replied that is correct.