pf07-021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� • JL indicated his willingness to address shared parking. He expressed concern over uncertainty as to how the parcel to the north will be developed. He noted that the hotel brand won't support a"hard corner" placement of the hotel however the restaurant does want the hard corner placement to increase their economic impact. JL also had concerns over providing space for pedestrian connections along Twin Lakes Parkway; setbacks, R.O.W., etc. JS brought up the issue of integration of hotel and restaurant into the greater Twin Lakes development. He noted that city staff has not defined "piecemeal development" but that JL might anticipate a response from City Council regarding that issue. JL summarized the issues that he needs to resolve on his conceptual plan: • Future sidewalks/setbacks. • Drive connections. • Siting of hotel. • Integration of hotel and restaurant. TP noted that in a PUD there are no setbacks. He indicated that the design principles are guidelines that don't include specifics. TP indicated that the goal is to create a "gateway" parcel to Twin Lakes with this development and, without a traffic analysis, staff can't support or deny the right in/right out access on Cleveland Ave. TP also noted that he was uncertain whether Planning Commission or City Council would support the large parking surface as it is presented on the current plan. JL inquired about different scenarios i.e., aspects of the plan that would have support? TP responded that the developer must address the principles laid out in the design guidelines. JL noted that he was unsure if it was possible to meet all the principles laid out in the design guidelines. TH wondered if the L-shaped hotel footprint shown on the current plan is final. JL replied that the hotel brands have specific design "modules" for their buildings; any changes must undergo an extensive approval process by the brand. He also noted that changes to the building design introduce an unknown cost and can negatively impact the economic viability of the site. JS noted that this is a function of developing a 3-acre parcel vs. a 40-acre master planned parcel. TH noted that, in his past experience with similar projects, hotel brands have modified their building designs to accommodate different sites. He noted that there had been "give and take" between the brands and municipalities to adapt a standard prototype to a specific site. JL indicated that hotel brands are becoming more prescriptive with building designs to preserve uniformity. TH suggested that uniformity can be achieved through brand signage, materials and finishes vs. standard footprint and building dimensions. JL stated that changes aren't received well by the hotel brand.