Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves revised standalone event space on East 13th with condition for rear lighting
Summary
The University District Review Board approved a redesigned, smaller standalone event space on East 13th with a staff‑approval condition to add lighting on the rear elevation for safety.
The University District Review Board on Jan. 23 approved a revised design for a standalone event space on East 13th Avenue, requiring the applicant to add lighting to the rear elevation and accept staff approval of that condition.
Staff described the project as a redesign of a previously approved 2023 proposal: the applicant reduced the building footprint substantially, eliminated a rooftop patio and the two‑building connection, and presented revised elevations, materials, and floor plans. Staff recommended approval with conditions that the main entrance be recessed or covered and that additional rear lighting be added for safety.
At the hearing the applicant said increased construction costs drove the redesign and reduced the gross area “from about 68,100 square feet to 3,300 square feet” and reduced occupancy from previously higher counts to a single enclosed level, though the numeric reduction was discussed in the hearing as presented by the applicant. The applicant described the new one‑story masonry design as a restrained, warehouse‑like building with a curved metal roof cap intended to reference surrounding industrial forms, and confirmed the operable garage‑style doors on the front elevation would remain sectional and could be closed to limit noise.
Board members asked about recessing the main entrance and overhangs; the applicant said an awning would be the preferred approach if a recess was impractical. One board member said they preferred the clean facade and did not want an awning that would detract from the design, while others focused on enlivening the rear elevation and on safety lighting.
Motion and vote: Board member Fleming moved to approve the application with the condition that the applicant add lighting on the rear elevation and that the lighting detail receive staff approval; Reeves seconded. Voting recorded: Fleming — yes; Mather — yes; Reeves — yes; Sutliff — yes. The motion carried.
Staff will confirm lighting details and exercise staff‑approval authority for that element; the applicant indicated willingness to provide the required rear lighting specification.
The board’s approval allows the project to proceed with the condition; the applicant will finalize details needed for staff signoff.
