Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tri State Mixed Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission grants large parking waiver and advances Tri State sketch plan amid concerns over sidewalks and rezoning sequencing
Summary
The Planning Commission approved a waiver cutting required parking for the Tri State mixed‑use project from the ordinance estimate to 114 spaces (with 24 set aside for residents) and advanced the sketch plan, but commissioners raised unresolved concerns about sidewalk waivers, parking calculations and the order of rezoning and final‑plan approvals.
CHARLES TOWN — On July 22, 2024 the Charles Town Planning Commission approved a substantial parking waiver and advanced a sketch plan for the Tri State mixed‑use proposal, while several commissioners cautioned that remaining technical issues — notably sidewalks, parking‑stall layout and the sequence of rezoning and plan approvals — still need to be resolved.
Staff member James told the commission the mixed‑use proposal would place a multi‑purpose recreational facility, 20 apartments and five commercial spaces on two parcels near a city gateway. Using ordinance formulas, staff calculated about 276 required parking spaces; the applicant requested a reduction to 114 spaces to make the project financially feasible. James recommended approval on condition that 24 spaces be designated and signed for resident parking only.
Commissioners pressed staff and the applicant for clarity on the math. One commissioner recast the arithmetic as a reduction of roughly 162 spaces (276 required vs. 114 provided), while James said the final tally depends on the exact commercial uses and how the commercial parking is calculated. "How many spaces are required for this entire project?" one commissioner asked; staff replied "276, give or take, depending on the exact nature of the commercial use."
The applicant (addressed in the meeting as Chris) defended the waiver, citing engineering review and examples of indoor recreational facilities with much smaller parking needs. "If they follow the same parking standard...they would be required by 570 parking spaces" was offered as a comparative example for a different facility type, and the applicant urged commissioners to consider shared parking, differing peak hours and industry practice.
Several commissioners expressed concern that the site plan as sketched lacks required parking‑lot islands, sidewalk continuity and clearly designated resident parking, flagging those as items that must be resolved at the preliminary and final plan stages. Staff noted that some waivers (sidewalks and lot size) were filed and would come back to the commission.
The commission voted to approve the parking waiver as amended to require 24 resident‑only spaces be visibly marked. The motion passed with multiple 'ayes' and at least one recorded 'no' during the final tally. Commissioners also removed the Tri State sketch plan from the table, deemed it complete and ultimately voted to advance the sketch plan to city council with the understanding that substantial design and technical details remain to be addressed in later submissions.
Next steps: staff will follow up on pending sidewalk and lot‑size waiver applications and the applicant must reconcile parking‑layout, landscaping islands and sidewalk requirements in the preliminary plan; city council will see related rezoning and ordinance changes next month.
