CC_Minutes_2007_1217 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 17, 2007 Page 22 b. Request by Cent Ventures for General Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD), Rezoning and Preliminary Plat Approval allowing the Redevelop- ment of 2700 Cleveland Avenue into a 123-unit Hotel (PF07-021) City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed the history of this request, originally for a hotel and restaurant, as detailed in the staff report dated December 17, 2007. Mr. Paschke reviewed revisions to the original plan, that would now only be for a four-story, 120 unit hotel, and no restaurant; repositioning of the building; and review by staff in plan sheet form by various City departments. Mr. Paschke ad- vised that, with the recommendations and conditions of Section 10.a - n, built into the proposal following their review, staff could support this application as pre- sented. Mr. Paschke noted the number of checklist items and recommendations by staff from the Design Review Committee (DRC) review, for this concept de- velopment to be crafted into a final development proposal for City Council re- view. John Livingston, owner and developer of Cent Ventures Mr. Livingston advised that he and his team had reviewed staff recommendations, and that they would continue to work closely with staff to put forward a plan that all parties could work with and meet design principals of the hotel brand. Mr. Livingston alluded to the very compressed period of time he and his team had to accomplish a very extensive redraw of the site plan, including coordination of engineering details, such as a stormwater analysis. Discussion included specific entrances related to interior space requirements; sidewalk easements; the applicant's willingness to consider the overall and vari- ous recommendations for the ultimate redevelopment of the Twin Lakes area, Twin Lakes Parkway, and other items specific to this development and future de- velopments; entrance locations of the building; and setback requirements. Mr. Livingston assured Councilmembers that he had reviewed the list of condi- tions and recommendations, and had talked about most of them and, to the best of his ability, was supportive of them. Mr. Livingston questioned the request for moving the hotel closer to the property line, and advised that at this point, without a commitment from the City for development of the Parkway, the hotel brand would only approve the current setback. Mr. Livingston noted, however, that his firm was working with the adjacent property owner, and prospective developers, to achieve the overall design requirements, and expressed his intent for ongoing collaboration, with current weekly meetings occurring. Mr. Livingston advised that, given traffic issues remaining undefined and unresolved, but given the total- ity of current interest in the area, he was open to staff's suggestions. Further discussion included the PUD process, and whether another Public Hearing process would be required if compliance was not achieved; and clarifying that, if