Commission denies Mews retail site plan over entry-corridor and layout concerns

The Planning & Zoning Commission voted to deny the site-plan and entry-corridor application for The Mews (SP-2412), a multi-building retail development on lots 1 and 2 of the previously approved PUD. Staff and several commissioners said the submission contained too many unresolved conflicts between the site plan and the entry-corridor design guidelines and that it did not accurately reflect the previously approved conceptual exhibit.

The applicant (DC Partners, represented by Nick and an architect team) presented a master-plan-style site plan showing a mix of in-line retail buildings, single-tenant buildings and a preserved historic Sunday House on Lot 2, with a total of seven buildings, proposed three-story building footprints and an overall parking provision of 369 spaces. The submission emphasized a village-style interior with buildings oriented toward internal courtyards; the applicant requested flexibility on materials and colors to negotiate tenant requirements as leases are executed.

City staff reviewed the submission against the entry-corridor design guidelines and the site-plan review criteria (Section 7.131). Staff identified numerous areas of noncompliance, including: - Renderings and entry-corridor elevations that do not reflect the three-story building heights shown in the site plan (discrepancy between plan and elevations). - An interior-village layout that turns back-of-house functions (loading, trash) toward the entry corridors (Highways 290/87) rather than orienting active frontages to the corridor, contrary to the guidelines. - Significant replacement of previously-proposed open green space with parking, reducing the park-like character shown in the prior PUD exhibit.

Staff therefore recommended denial and suggested the applicant consider a master-plan approach that the commission could approve conceptually and then allow individual tenant designs to come forward under that master plan. Commissioners and staff discussed whether the original PUD exhibit had been legally approved as a final site plan or remained conceptual; staff clarified the PUD includes conceptual building zones but that the site plan must still meet entry-corridor standards.

Developers and their design team said they wished to preserve flexibility for tenant leases and to provide a coherent village experience with pedestrian connections and a green space anchored by the Sunday House; they also explained some site constraints, including topography and an on-site stream, that limited parking placement. Commissioners replied that the conceptual issues must be resolved before formal site-plan approval: the commission pointed to sections 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 11 of the entry-corridor standards as not met in the current submission.

A motion to deny the site-plan application carried on a voice vote. Staff recommended the applicant return with a plan that better aligns elevations with the site plan, reduces back-of-house exposure to the corridors, and addresses landscaping and parking layout to comply with entry-corridor standards; staff and commissioners indicated a PUD amendment or a clearer master-plan submittal could be options.