Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Frontage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regent Street 111‑unit proposal referred after commissioners, alder raise ground‑floor retail concerns
Summary
The Plan Commission referred a six‑story, 111‑unit mixed‑use proposal at 1111–1135 Regent Street to the April 27 meeting after staff urged a minimum 35% ground‑floor commercial frontage and the applicant argued engineering and accessibility constraints made additional storefronts difficult.
Commissioners on April 13 voted to refer to April 27 a contested proposal for a six‑story mixed‑use building with 111 units at 1111–1135 Regent Street and 2 South Mill Street after an extended hearing and back‑and‑forth between staff, the applicant, and community stakeholders.
Planner Lisa summarized the staff analysis: the Regent Street South Campus plan recommends ground‑floor activation, stepbacks and setbacks along South Mill and Regent, and generally calls for a commercial frontage that supports a neighborhood shopping district. The applicant’s initial design proposed about 11% ground‑floor commercial frontage (roughly 36 ft of storefront), which staff said would remove approximately 7,000 sq ft of existing commercial space on the block; staff recommended a minimum of 35% commercial frontage (roughly 118 ft) to align with the plan and maintain retail activation on Regent Street.
Applicant design architect Matt Tills and peerless development representatives said design and engineering constraints complicate adding mid‑block commercial entrances. They noted the project must raise the finished floor roughly 24 inches to meet an engineer‑prescribed flood‑protection elevation; that elevation creates long ramps to achieve ADA access and, combined with the shallow lot depth, makes providing multiple accessible storefront entrances technically difficult. "If we start to have commercial space that is long...each of those would need to have its own exterior entrance...therein lies the challenge," the applicant told commissioners, asking for flexibility and offering to modestly increase commercial frontage in a revised layout.
Alder Evers and several neighborhood stakeholders urged the commission to hold the line on retail frontage: Regent Street has been the focus of years of planning to strengthen retail activation, they said, and losing longtime businesses on the block should be compensated by substantial new storefronts. "The 35% first‑floor retail the staff have recommended is the compromise that I accept," Alder Evers said, noting that two local businesses account for roughly 35% of the frontage that would be removed.
Given the disagreement, commissioners voted to refer the conditional‑use and CSM package to the next meeting (April 27) and also voted to reopen the public hearing at that meeting, so the applicant can present revisions and the public can provide further testimony. The commission and staff asked the applicant to work with city engineers and explore design solutions that preserve storefront access while addressing the flood‑elevation constraints.
