Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Zoning commission sets down McMillan Parcel 2 and 4 modifications for contested hearing, OP supports flexibility
Loading...
Summary
The commission set down Z.C. Case No. 13-14E, modifications for McMillan Parcels 2 and 4 (Reservoir District DC), as a contested case (5-0). Office of Planning said requested flexibility responds to market changes after delays and appeals and recommended set down for full public hearing.
The Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to set down zoning case no. 13-14E, a series of modifications for the McMillan Reservoir redevelopment (Parcel 2 and Parcel 4 consolidated PUD amendments), for a contested-case public hearing.
Maxine Brown Roberts of the Office of Planning summarized the requested changes: flexibility on the mix of retail and residential uses, parking and loading adjustments, minor deviations to height (an increase of up to 5 feet in some buildings), FAR and lot occupancy adjustments due to slight lot-area changes, and material substitutions when specified materials are unavailable or prohibitively delayed. The applicant seeks flexibility to reduce the total retail area, but if retail falls below proposed minimums some space could convert to residential; the applicant also proposes relocating senior affordable units and converting other spaces to market-rate units, with plus-or-minus 10% unit flexibility and up to 20% conversion of residential use to lodging if market conditions warrant.
Ms. Brown Roberts said the project originally included a large supermarket; delays, litigation and market shifts have reduced grocer interest. OP recommended set down, noting the project has lost grocers due to legal challenges and market changes and that the requested flexibility would allow the applicant to adapt to current market realities and move the long-delayed development forward. NC5E provided a letter of support, OP said.
Commissioners expressed support for setting the case down for hearing while asking the applicant to make a strong case on retail scale and supermarket commitments at the hearing. Commissioner Wright and Vice Chair Miller both voiced concern about reducing retail below levels that would provide a full-service grocery; both supported flexibility but asked the applicant to explain how the retail and grocery goals would be met.
Commissioner Miller moved to set the case down; the motion passed 5-0 to set down as a contested case.
