Planning Commission Minutes 2018 03 08

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 8, 2018 Page 10 of 14 commercial amusement and a studio for professional use) Resolution 07, Series 2018, (ZON-0115- 2017) & Resolution 08, Series 2018 (SRU-0116-2018) • Applicant and Representative: Andy Johnson, DAJ Design • Owner: Boulder Road, LLC • Case Manager: Lisa Ritchie, Associate Planner Brauneis asked for disclosures from the Commission. Howe read a statement disclosing that he is a local business owner in the community in which he assists many clients. A member of the applicant team is one of his clients, however he has no interest in or financial connection to this project or application. Their relationship will have no effect on his judgement within the scope of this Planning Commission. Public notice was posted on February 18 in the Boulder Daily Camera and all required locations on February 16. Ritchie stated that the area was on the northwest side of the City off South Boulder Road and just south of a water treatment reservoir. The property was annexed in 1981 and zoned as Office. In 1982 it was platted as Lot 1, Neodata subdivision. Part of the Plat included development scenarios that allowed Phase 1 construction. In 1984, the City repealed the Office Zone District and established the Administrative Office and Business Office Zone Districts. The property was not rezoned at that time. In the 1980s, the first phase was constructed. In 1997, a PUD allowed a second phase, which reflects the current development. In 2008, a PUD Amendment was requested and granted to allow an expansion to an existing building for video production. Due to the expansion of use currently requested, the applicant has to go through the Special Review Use process. The zone change is currently zoned Office, which has not existed since 1984 and has resulted in a property with no clear use or development standards. Staff was already aware of this issue, and Council added it to the City Council 2018 Plan to clean up these zoning issues. In the meantime, the applicant came forward with a use request and staff decided to take the opportunity to change the zoning. The proposed zoning is Business Office. This change was discussed as an option in 1984 and it was staff currently proposed. Business Office was intended for a broader range of uses than the Administrative Zone District, which this lot also exceeds. The second part of the application is the SRU. The applicant is requesting to allow an indoor event and theater space and video production space. There would be no additional changes to the exterior. Relevant regulations include the restriction that no more than 575 people occupy the development and that commercial uses shall not occupy more than 20% of the gross square footage in the development. Ritchie stated that according to LMC 17.44.050 the development needs to meet one of the following criteria: 1. The land to be rezoned was zoned in error and as presently zoned is inconsistent with the policies and goals of the city's comprehensive plan. Staff finds that there is evidence of an error in the zoning because the City repealed the Office zone district in 1984, resulting in a property with no clear use or development standards. Approving this zone change provides clarity for the property. Staff finds that the application complies with all 5 criteria of the SRU: 1. Comprehensive Plan 2. Economic Compatibility 3. Internal Efficiency 4. External Effects 5. Pedestrian Circulation Staff recommends approval of Resolution 7, Series 2018, a request for a zone change from Office to Business Office. Staff also recommends approval of Resolution 8, Series 2018, a request for a SRU to allow an indoor event/theater space and video production (indoor Commercial Amusement and a Studio for Professional Use.)