CPC Agenda Page 83 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM NOS: 5.A, 5.B STAFF: MICHAEL SCHULTZ FILE NO(S): CPC DP 03-00259-A5MN11 QUASI-JUDICIAL AR NV 11-00538 QUASI-JUDICIAL PROJECT: BROADMOOR TEMPORARY TENT APPLICANT: NES, INC. OWNER: BROADMOOR HOTEL Appellant s Property SITE
Page 84 PROJECT SUMMARY: 1. Project Description: An appeal by Hannah Polmer of 1413 Mesa Avenue relating to administrative approvals involving a Minor Amendment to the Broadmoor Event Center Development Plan and a Non-Use Variance to allow non-paved parking where paving is required. The Minor Amendment to the Development Plan (FIGURE 1) involves the erection of a 40,364 square-foot temporary tent facility, primarily for the purpose of the Space Foundation Symposium; the addition of an asphalt pad; addition of pedestrian walkway; and on-site grading. It should be noted that the asphalt area will also be utilized for employee parking when the tent is not in use. Re-grading of the site was completed for a number of reasons: 1) to control site drainage around the pad site, 2) to re-level the overflow parking area (which is primarily the unpaved portion of the site), and 3) regrade a berm in the northwest corner of the site, which is also adjacent to the appellant s property. The Non-Use Variance request addressed the Broadmoor Hotel employee parking on an unpaved parking surface, which is otherwise prohibited by City Code. As mentioned above, the addition of the asphalt pad provides for an incremental improvement to the parking situation while the Non-Use Variance addresses the remainder of the site (which includes the western half and the north area adjacent to Hazel Ave.). The Non-Use Variance request is for the following section of City Code: Section 7.4.205.K: Paving The surface of all parking spaces, drives, aisles, maneuvering and automobile outdoor sale and/or rental display or storage areas shall be paved. For the purpose of this section, "paving" shall mean covered with semipermeables, asphalt, concrete, brick, pavers, or other similar surfaces which may be approved by the Manager. 2. Appeal Statement: FIGURE 2 3. Planning and Development Team s Recommendation: Deny the appeal, affirming the administrative approval of the applications. BACKGROUND: 1. Site Address: 3 Lake Circle (subject property can be accessed off of Holly Ave.) 2. Existing Zoning/Land Use: C-5 (Intermediate Business) / The subject lot itself does not contain any structures; however, the property is enclosed by a six-foot fence and wall, has provided for both employee and special event parking, contains a detention pond and provides for staging area for functions and operations relating to both the Broadmoor Event Center and the Hotel. The site was previously used for greenhouses, bus repair/maintenance facility, gas station and an office building; all being razed prior to the construction of the Event Center around 2003. 3. Surrounding Zoning/Land Use: North: R (Residential) / Single-family Residential South: C-5 (Intermediate Business) / Hotel East: C-5 / Broadmoor Event Center West: R / Single-family Residential 4. Comprehensive Plan/Designated 2020 Land Use: Employment Center 5. Annexation: Reannexation of Southwest Annexation Area, Oct. 1980. 6. Master Plan/Designated Master Plan Land Use: No master plan exists for this portion of the Broadmoor. 7. Subdivision: Broadmoor Campus Filing No 2 8. Zoning Enforcement Action: None
Page 85 9. Physical Characteristics: There are no structures located on the subject lot; however, the property has been graded to allow parking and use by the hotel. The property is essentially surrounded by a six-foot wood fence along the Lake Circle/Mesa Avenue intersection and a six-foot stucco wall around the north property line that abuts the residential neighborhood. The site slopes north toward a man-made detention facility, and there is a man-made berm along the northeast quadrant of the site. STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AND INVOLVEMENT: Postcards were sent to 37 property owners within 500 ft. of the site, and the site was posted for 10 days in conformance with standard procedure. Staff received three responses (FIGURE 3) as a result of the initial posting and suggested meeting with those specific property owners. City staff met with Mrs. Polmer and another property owner several times to discuss their concerns. Staff set up two follow-up meetings with the applicant (November 16 and December 2) to resolve their concerns. Neighbor concerns included: Noise and dust produced from the parking area; Use of tent expands the event center use closer to residential neighborhood; Potential noise generated from tent facility during events, including erection/deconstruction of the tent, music, loading/unloading, etc.; Conducting site work prior to approval of the amendment or non-use variance; and Approved brownstone housing not developed as anticipated (similar to housing located on the south side of Lake Ave.); neighbors saw the brownstone development as a transitional use from the Event Center to the existing neighborhood. ANALYSIS OF REVIEW CRITERIA / MAJOR ISSUES / COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MASTER PLAN CONFORMANCE: The appellant argues that the Minor Amendment and Non-Use Variance should be reviewed and approved by the City Planning Commission even though the City Code allows for the administrative review and approval of both applications. The appellant asserts the following within her appeal statement: 1. The Non-Use Variance criteria have not been properly met; 2. The proposed usage requires specific measures of screening, noise/fumes abatement and dust containment; and 3. Approval of the minor amendment removes the transitional use of the brownstones to the remainder of the neighborhood; it is felt the brownstones would provide a transition from the Event Center to the single-family portion of the neighborhood. Originally, staff discussed the temporary tent project with the applicant to clarify the options of filing either a Minor Amendment to the approved Event Center Development Plan to show the use or a Temporary Use Permit process that would need to be filed each time the tent facility would be utilized. Either process was permissible, but the decision to use the Minor Amendment process would eliminate the need to file a Temporary Use Permit application each time the tent was needed. The temporary use permit process seldom requires neighborhood notification or site improvements that need to be called out on the development plan. Although staff was concerned that the tent may be constructed, and ultimately remain as a permanent fixture, the applicant has indicated to staff that the intent is to erect and deconstruct the tent on an as-needed basis with the primary event being the Space Foundation Symposium. The applicant agreed to Note 4 on page 2 of the development plan dictating the use of the tent to be erected and deconstructed on an as-needed basis (refer to FIGURE 4 for a complete list of the development plan notes relating to the temporary tent). The note also clarifies that if the
Page 86 tent is to become permanent that an amendment would have to be filed and staff will evaluate if other site improvements are necessary. Although the Minor Amendment process was utilized for the review, which typically takes into account permanent structures and uses, staff took into consideration the temporary nature of the tent and existing site improvements, which includes a six-foot fence/wall around a majority of the property, landscape improvements along street frontages (including Lake Circle, Mesa Rd. and Holly St.) and existing landscaping around the Event Center. Thus, staff determined it was unnecessary to impose strict site improvements. Even though additional landscaping was not required for the temporary tent facility, staff requested the applicant create an additional six-foot landscaped berm (pines were transplanted from the site to atop the berm) adjacent to the Mrs. Polmer s property (northeast quadrant of the site) to provide additional screening and a distance buffer from the property. The berm will be seeded in the spring to establish vegetation and maintain the berm from erosion. After determining that a Non-Use Variance had not been previously approved for the unpaved parking, staff required a Non-Use Variance application to address the unpaved parking surface. During the Broadmoor Event Center and brownstone review a parking plan outlined the parking needs of the hotel campus including designated hotel employee parking in the new 940-stall underground parking structure of the Event Center. During certain events employees would be bused in from designated off-site parking areas. After the site had been razed and the slated brownstones never materialized, the area essentially had transformed into an employee parking lot. It is staff s determination that both the Development Plan and Non-Use Variance review criteria have been met. The property already had provided some of the necessary buffering and screening in the form of the existing six-foot screen fence/wall around a majority of the property along with the existing landscaping. Staff also took into consideration the other incremental site improvements with the addition of the landscaped berm, re-grading of the site for better drainage, and the addition of the asphalt pad that doubles for use as employee parking. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Item No: 5.A CPC DP 03-00259-A5MN11 Development Plan Amendment Deny the appeal of the administratively approved Minor Amendment to the Broadmoor Event Center Development Plan, based upon the finding that the request complies with the Development Plan review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.502.E and fails to substantiate the criteria for an appeal of an administrative decision found in City Code Section 7.5.906.A.3. Item No: 5.B AR NV 11-00538 Non-Use Variance Deny the appeal of the administratively approved Non-Use Variance for 3 Lake Circle, based upon the finding that the request complies with the Non-Use Variance review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.802 and fails to substantiate the criteria for an appeal of an administrative decision found in City Code Section 7.5.906.A.3.
Page 87 FIGURE 1
Page 88 FIGURE 1
Page 89 FIGURE 2
Page 90 FIGURE 2
Page 91 FIGURE 2
Page 92 FIGURE 2
Page 93 FIGURE 2
Page 94 FIGURE 2
Page 95 FIGURE 3
Page 96 FIGURE 3
Page 97 FIGURE 3
Page 98 FIGURE 3
Page 99 NOTES: 1. NO LIVE BAND WILL PERFORM IN 1l-lIS SPACE. 2. POWER WILL BE PROVIDED BY GENERATORS. MOBILE GENERl;TORS V,1LL BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE TENT PAD, PRO\1DED BY TENT USER. 3. SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE AN ASPH.l;l T PAD AND SITE GRADING TO DIRECT DRAINAGE AWAY FROM TENT PAD AND TO EXISTING WATER QUAUTY POND. 4. 1l-lIS AlIoENDII.ENT (A5rloN11 ) DEMONSTRATES THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR A TEMPO?ARYTE1-.'T FACIUTY WHICH IS INTENDED TO BE ERECTED AND DECONSTRUCTED ON AN '~ NEEDED' B.6.SIS ~E TEI\'T IS PRIMARILY FOR THE USE DURING THE SPACE FOUNDATION SYMPOSIUr/o).1l-lETENT IS NOT TO BE PERMANENIL Y ERECTED AND r/oaintalned ON A YEAR-AROUND BASIS; A MINOR AlIoEI~DMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN VvlLL BE REQUIRED IF THE TENT STRUCTURE IS 1NT8~DED TO BE PERMANENILY ERECTED IN ORDER TO EVALUATE IF OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSARY DUE TO THE POTENTIAL OVERALL INCREASE OF EVENT SPACE, TRAFAC, NOISE, PARKING DISPLACEI/OENT AND OTHER I! /;PACTS TO THE SURROUNDING N8GHBORHOOD. 5. NON USE VARIANCE TO CITY CODE SECTION 7.4.202. G TO ALLOW FOR UNPAVED PARKING FOR EMPLOYEE AND EVENT PARKING FOR THE AREA NOTED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAI~. 6. PAVED TEMPORARY TENT AREA WILL BE USED FOR EMPLOYEE AND EVENT PA!::!Klr~G WHEN A TENT IS NOT IN USE. 7. ALL FUTURE ~D USE CHANGES FOR THE PROPERTY WEST OF THE EVENT CENTER Sf-'.Al...L BE SU3JECT TO P~ REVIEW BY CITY PLAI~NtNG. FIGURE 4