Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Hotel Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission recommends approval of Holiday Inn Express PAD amendment with 10‑foot landscape setback reduction

2656343 · March 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commission recommended approval (7–0) of Z24‑18 to amend a PAD for a proposed five‑story Holiday Inn Express and allow a 10‑foot reduction to the southern non‑street landscape setback; staff recommended approval subject to conditions.

The Planning Commission voted 7–0 to recommend approval of Z24‑18, a PAD amendment for a proposed five‑story, 98‑room Holiday Inn Express on a roughly 2.6‑acre site, to the Town Council.

Senior planner Nicole Russell summarized the request: the applicant seeks to amend an existing PAD to reduce the required southern non‑street landscape setback from 20 feet to 10 feet adjacent to a multi‑use path and an existing 30‑foot easement that contains an equestrian trail. Russell said staff supported the deviation because the applicant justified that when the equestrian trail easement to the south is developed in the future with landscaping, the overall buffer would meet code.

The site has a history of prior zoning actions: it was rezoned from PF‑I to General Commercial with a PAD in 2022, and an earlier Planning Commission approval (DR 2131) had supported a four‑story, 84‑room hotel. The current proposal replaces that design with a different hotel brand and a five‑story scheme; as a result the applicant pursued a PAD amendment rather than administrative modifications. The proposed development would place the building with parking surrounding it and amenities near Pecos Road.

Applicant representative Ralph Pugh (Cougar Development) told commissioners the request is limited to the southern landscape setback deviation tied to the existing 30‑foot trail easement and that the separation between the trail easement and the required 10‑foot landscape area would be maintained; staff and the applicant said they did not intend to construct a hard wall between the hotel and the easement.

After questions about ownership and future activation of the easement (staff stated Mercy Gilbert Medical Complex is the likely owner/beneficiary and that trail improvements would occur when the campus expands), the commission voted to recommend approval to council, subject to the conditions in the staff report.