Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hotel Development Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables Live Smart by Hilton site plan after concerns about buffer, screening and amenities
Summary
A proposed 5-story Live Smart by Hilton extended-stay hotel was tabled after council members said the applicant's requested deviations from landscaping, screening and amenity requirements need further work with staff.
The Grand Prairie City Council on Feb. 11 voted to table a site plan for a proposed 5-story Live Smart by Hilton extended-stay hotel to allow the applicant and staff to resolve requested deviations from the city's Unified Development Code.
The hotel proposal would occupy a parcel within PD-217, a plan-development district where hotels are allowed by right. The applicant proposed a 5-story, approximately 120-room (transcript: "12 rooms" appears to be shorthand for unit configuration; applicant materials note extended-stay layout) upper mid-scale extended-stay hotel and requested variances to reduce a 30-foot street landscape buffer, to allow an existing wood fence instead of a new masonry screening wall adjacent to nearby apartments, and to waive a required pool from the amenity package.
Savannah (planning staff) told council that the Planning and Zoning Commission and Development Review Committee had both recommended approval. Staff also confirmed the property’s PD-217 zoning allows a hotel by right, which makes a specific-use permit unnecessary. Council members, however, raised concerns about the reduced landscaping buffer, the wooden fence’s effectiveness as a screen between hotel parking and adjacent apartments, and potential lighting impacts on residents. One council member said bluntly that, if the site were in the city’s other corridor, it likely would not be approved with the requested deviations.
On amenities, staff noted the applicant’s new Hilton brand does not provide a pool; council members said the ordinance requires a pool as part of the amenity package for this hotel classification and that omission merited further review.
After discussion the council voted to table the item to the March 4 meeting to allow the applicant to meet with staff and return without deviations or with clearer justification for them. The motion to table was made by a councilmember and seconded; the motion carried 6–0. Staff said they would coordinate with the applicant to return with a package addressing masonry screening, landscaping and the amenity requirements.
The item will return to council at the meeting set for March 4 unless the applicant requests another date or submits amended materials sooner.
