Referral to Planning Commission: Amendment to B.M.C. Section 23B Variance from Setback Requirements for Downtown Hotel Projects

Similar documents
Subject: Tenant Screening Fees Ordinance, Adding BMC Chapter 13.78

Tenant Buyout Ordinance; Amending Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 13.79

Amending BMC Section 23C , Short-Term Rental Regulations

Jesse Arreguín Councilmember, District 4 CONSENT CALENDAR October 7, 2014

Enacting BMC Chapter 13.79, Automatically Renewing Leases

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Submitted by: Eric Angstadt, Planning Director, Planning and Development

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Phil Kamlarz, City Manager. Restatement of Sanitary Sewer Easement at 1208 Milvia Street

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Submitted by: Eric Angstadt, Director, Planning and Development

1935 ADDISON STREET PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW

REVISED AGENDA MATERIAL

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

Office of the City Manager CONSENT CALENDAR February 23, 2016

Comparative chart on Berkeley proposed Downtown zoning initiative June 20, 2014

Page 1 of 17. Office of the City Manager ACTION CALENDAR March 28, 2017 (Continued from February 28, 2017)

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Sewer Easement Deed Agreement at 2705 Walker Street

SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MATERIAL

Submitted by: Timothy Burroughs, Director, Planning and Development

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Submitted by: Jane Micallef, Director, Department of Health, Housing & Community Services

Shattuck Avenue

LAND USE AND ZONING OVERVIEW

Item 9 September 7, 2016

Subject: 3095 Telegraph Avenue, Administrative Use Permit No

Honorable Members of the Rent Stabilization Board. IRA/AGA/Habitability Committee. Rent Control Status of Dwelling Units at 3240 Sacramento Street

ORDINANCE NO. 7,562 N.S. AMENDING BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION AFFORDABLE HOUSING MITIGATION FEE

ORDINANCE NO. 7,354 N.S.

Establishment of a Joint Subcommittee for the Implementation of Housing Laws

6)% wi/j ~ tm EYV'at«ntoi ~ tntuhua, ~/me,,

812 Page Street. Item 10 June 21, Staff Report

Submitted by: Lisa Caronna, Acting Director, Housing Department

Z O N I N G A D J U S T M E N T S B O A R D S t a f f R e p o r t FOR BOARD ACTION MARCH 31, Berkeley Way UC Press Building

2129 SHATTUCK Berkeley s Mixed-Use High-Rise Hotel

Item 10 Planning Commission February 21, 2018 STAFF REPORT. Members of the Planning Commission

THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Use Permit # to establish beer and wine service with meals within an existing quick-service restaurant space.

City of Piedmont COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

1708 Martin Luther King Jr. Way

(1) At least ten percent of the total units are designated for low income households.

Sale of Non-Processed Edibles in Residential Districts

ORDINANCE NO. 7,394 N.S.

2109 Martin Luther King, Jr. Way

Small Sites Acquisition Program and Tenant Opportunity to Purchase

Request. Recommendation. Recommended Motion. Planning Division Department of Community and Economic Development

Box Elder County Land Use Management & Development Code Article 3: Zoning Districts

D. Applicant: Muhammad A. Nadhiri, Axis Development Group, 580 California Street, 16 th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104

Accessory Dwelling Units

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NOVATO ORDINANCE NO. 1602

ORDINANCE NO

Submitted by: Phillip L. Harrington, Director, Department of Public Works

Item 10 September 21, 2011

Office of the City Manager ACTION CALENDAR March 10, 2009

The demolition required for the project came before the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) on November 3, 2016, where no action was taken.

And adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton on May 2, 2017 by the following vote:

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Submitted by: Michael J. Caplan, Economic Development Manager

DRAFT Value Capture Ordinance May 25, 2017 CPC CA ORDINANCE NO.

Submitted by: William Rogers, Acting Director, Parks Recreation & Waterfront. Fee Reduction And Retroactive Billing: Houseboats

ORDINANCE NO

CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO

ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER RE: INCLUSIONARY HOUSING

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LOTTERY AND CHARITABLE GAMES CONTROL BOARD NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING

Residences at Grove Park 425 Hillsborough St. Chapel Hill, NC

ORDINANCE NO

Memorandum TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. FROM: Planning Commission. DATE: September 28, 2015 SUBJECT: SEE BELOW COUNCIL DISTRICT: 3

STAFF REPORT. Meeting Date: April 25, 2017

A. Land Use Designations: General Plan: LDR Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1H Single Family Residential - Hillside Overlay

City of Lafayette Staff Report Design Review Commission

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT. Salt Lake City Code Maintenance Land Use Tables and Definitions PLNPCM September 26, 2012.

Staff Report. Variance

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS (Ordinance No.: 3036, 12/3/07; Repealed & Replaced by Ordinance No.: 4166, 10/15/12)

Goal 1 - Retain and enhance Cherry Creek North s unique physical character.

Project Information. Request. Required Attachments

The City Council makes the following findings:

Provide a diversity of housing types, responsive to household size, income and age needs.

Submitted by: Jordan Klein, Acting Manager, Office of Economic Development

Business Park District Zoning Text Amendment (PLNPCM ) ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT

MEETING DATE: 08/1/2017 ITEM NO: 16 TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT DATE: JULY 27, 2017 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL LAUREL PREVETTI, TOWN MANAGER

CITY OF COLD SPRING ORDINANCE NO. 304

Downtown Area Plan Development Feasibility Study

Item 11 March 5, 2014

Honorable Chairperson and Members of the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency

SUBJECT: PUBLIC Conditional Use for a Massage Establishment HEARING Sunshine Massage, 11 East Wilson Street (Yune Zhou, applicant)

ORDINANCE NO. 41. PRIVATE ROAD ORDINANCE As Amended Through April 10, 2008

Item 12 April 20, 2016

Sausalito City Council meeting. 5A- PPT Presentation Page 1 of 25

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT. QUEST ASSISTED LIVING CONDITIONAL USE PLNPCM West 800 North Hearing date: October 14, 2009

ORDINANCE NO. 04- NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA:

Ann Arbor Downtown Zoning Evaluation

INFORMATION SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF DOWNTOWN HIGH-RISE RESIDENTIAL INCENTIVE FOR THE GRADUATE AT 88 E. SAN CARLOS STREET


Z O N I N G A DJUSTMENTS B O A R D

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40R

A. Land Use Designations: General Plan: Downtown Zoning: Downtown Mixed Use (Core)/ Arts District Overlay C-DMU/ADO

BEAR CREEK TOWNSHIP EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN. PRIVATE ROAD ORDINANCE Ordinance No. 11A-99. (to replace prior Private Road Ordinance No.

Village of Glenview Zoning Board of Appeals

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Submitted by: Dan Marks, Director, Planning and Development

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND SUPPLEMENTING THE REVISED GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BAYONNE THE, CHAPTER 33 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NOVATO ORDINANCE NO. 1603

HOW TO APPLY FOR A USE PERMIT

310 CMR 9.00: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

City of Oakland Programs, Policies and New Initiatives for Housing

Submitted by: Scott Ferris, Director, Parks Recreation & Waterfront

Transcription:

Jesse Arreguín City Councilmember, District 4 ACTION CALENDAR July 8, 2014 To: From: Subject: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Councilmember Jesse Arreguín Referral to Planning Commission: Amendment to B.M.C. Section 23B.44.030 - Variance from Setback Requirements for Downtown Hotel Projects RECOMMENDATION Refer to the Planning Commission the proposed amendment to Berkeley Municipal Code (B.M.C.) Section 23B.44.030 ( Findings for Issuance or Denial [of Variances] ) to amend required findings for the issuance of a Variance to establish an exception from set back requirements for hotel projects exceeding 75 feet in height in the Commercial Downtown Mixed Use District (C-DMU). FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION The referral of the proposed amendment to the Planning Commission will require staff resources to analyze the proposal and to develop a staff report and zoning amendment text for Planning Commission consideration. Staff will also need to post a notice of public hearing if the Commission decides to initiate a public hearing on the zoning amendment. However there are significant economic benefits from a new hotel in the Downtown, which can be achieved in providing greater flexibility in existing zoning requirements. By amending the Zoning Ordinance to provide flexibility on setbacks and the maximum building width requirements, it will make a major hotel project economically feasible and a new hotel will not only revitalize the Downtown and attract new investment, but will also bring substantial sales tax and Transient Occupancy Tax revenue to the City. BACKGROUND Hotel projects are a significant economic stimulus, bringing visitors into Berkeley who patronize local restaurants and businesses, generating sales tax revenue, and bringing in Transient Occupancy Tax revenue to the City. Hotels also attract new investment of residential and commercial project into our community. Presently the limited number of hotels, particularly near the UC Berkeley campus, has resulted in visitors to the campus and the City patronizing hotels in other jurisdictions, which results in lost tax revenue to the City of Berkeley. The lack of available conference facilities also has resulted conferences and events being held in nearby cities. 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: (510) 981-7140 TDD: (510) 981-6903 Fax: (510) 981-7144 E-Mail: JArreguin@CityofBerkeley.info Website: www.jessearreguin.com

Referral to Planning Commission: Amendment to B.M.C. Section 23B.44.030 ACTION CALENDAR Variance from Setback requirements for Downtown Hotel Projects July 8, 2014 Throughout the Downtown Area Plan process, there was strong interest in the Berkeley community for a new hotel and conference facility in the Downtown because of the significant economic benefits it provides. The 2012 Downtown Area Plan (DAP) specially encourages new hotels in the Downtown, and Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23E.68.070 allows a new hotel project with conference facilities to exceed the maximum height limit of 75 feet in the Core Area of the Commercial Downtown Mixed Use (C-DMU) District. DAP Policy ED-1.11 talks about the importance of recruiting a major hotel in the heart of the Downtown DAP Policy LU-1.1 states: Encourage hotels in the Core Area through incentives and height exceptions. DAP Policy ED-1.11 also encourages a major hotel and states: a) Allow greater building height for major hotels than is generally allowed, if the hotel project delivers significant additional public benefits. b) Consider other incentives for major hotel projects, commensurate with the unique public benefits that hotels are likely to deliver. When the City developed the Downtown Area Plan it proposed a width restriction for upper floors above 120 feet above grade. The intent of this policy, which is codified in B.M.C. Section 23E.68.070.C.1, was to reduce the bulk and mass of high-rise projects to reduce shading and view impacts. However this policy was developed with an understanding that a hotel project with condominiums at upper stories would be a viable development scenario. Since the width restrictions were established, hotel-condominium projects have been shown to not be economically viable and the economics of hotel development have shown that the 120-foot width limit imposed by zoning will not be accepted by a worldclass hotelier that will operate the hotel, since modern hotel floors need 25 rooms for standard operations. The maximum building width requirements in B.M.C. Section 23E.68.070.C.1. make most major hotel projects economically infeasible. Given the City s strong interest in attracting a new hotel to the Downtown it is important to provide hotel projects flexibility in set back requirements. The 2012 Downtown Area Plan provides clear rationale for amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow for a variance for flexibility regarding building width on upper floors for a hotel project in the C-DMU Core Area. This item requests that the City Council refer to the Planning Commission a modification to the required findings for the issuance of a variance for high-rise hotel projects in the Page 2

Referral to Planning Commission: Amendment to B.M.C. Section 23B.44.030 ACTION CALENDAR Variance from Setback requirements for Downtown Hotel Projects July 8, 2014 C-DMU District. A hotel project would most likely be able to make three of the four required variance findings (B.M.C. Section 23B.44.030). However the second finding The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the subject property s owner; is extremely hard to make. The proposed zoning text amendment would modify Variance finding # 2 to state that hotel projects above 75 feet in height in the C-DMU District shall be granted a variance if the Zoning Adjustments Board finds that the strict application of the set back and maximum building width requirements in B.M.C. Section 23E.68.070.C would make the hotel project economically infeasible, and provided that the Board can make the other required variance findings. This will enable the Zoning Board to issue a variance for set back and the maximum building width requirements for Downtown hotel projects. The new language also states: For the purposes of this subsection, the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights since the strict application of set back and building width requirements could make a high-rise hotel project economically infeasible. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY The proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment would permit the Zoning Adjustments Board to grant a variance from the strict application of set back and maximum building width requirements for high-rise hotel projects in the Downtown. This would make Downtown hotel projects economically feasible and would encourage transit oriented development directly across the street from a major BART station and along a transit corridor. The new hotel project would also have to meet LEED Gold building requirements, pay into the Streets and Open Space Improvement Plan fund for new public open space, and must provide substantial community benefits to achieve greater height, which could include increased green building and environmental features. CONTACT PERSON Jesse Arreguin, Councilmember, District 4, 981-7140 Attachments: 1: Ordinance Page 3

ORDINANCE NO. -N.S. AMENDING BERKELEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 23B.44.030 TO AMEND REQUIRED VARIANCE FINDINGS TO ESTABLISH AN EXCEPTION FROM SET BACK REQUIREMENTS FOR HOTEL PROJECTS EXCEEDING 75 FEET IN HEIGHT IN THE COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN MIXED USE DISTRICT BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows: Section 1. Findings and Purposes A. Hotel projects are a significant economic stimulus, bringing visitors into Berkeley who patronize local restaurants and businesses, generating sales tax revenue, and bringing in Transient Occupancy Tax revenue to the City. Hotels also attract new investment of residential and commercial projects into our community. B. Presently the limited number of hotels, particularly near the UC Berkeley campus, has resulted in visitors to the campus and the City patronizing hotels in other jurisdictions, which results in lost tax revenue to the City of Berkeley. C. The lack of available conference facilities has also resulted conferences and events being held in nearby cities. D. Throughout the Downtown Area Plan process, there was strong interest in the Berkeley community for a new hotel and conference facility in the Downtown because of the significant economic benefit it provides. E. The 2012 Downtown Area Plan (DAP) specially encourages new hotels in the Downtown, and Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23E.68.070 allows a new hotel project with conference facilities to exceed the maximum height limit of 75 feet in the Core Area of the Commercial Downtown Mixed Use (C-DMU) District. F. DAP Policy LU-1.1 states: Encourage hotels in the Core Area through incentives and height exceptions. G. DAP Policy ED-1.11 also encourages a major hotel and states: a) Allow greater building height for major hotels than is generally allowed, if the hotel project delivers significant additional public benefits. b) Consider other incentives for major hotel projects, commensurate with the unique public benefits that hotels are likely to deliver. H. When the City developed the Downtown Area Plan it proposed a width restriction for upper floors above 120 feet above grade. The intent of this policy, which is codified in B.M.C. Section 23E.68.070.C.1, was to reduce the bulk and mass of high-rise projects to reduce shading and view impacts. However this policy was

developed with an understanding that a hotel project with condominiums at upper stories would be a viable development scenario. I. Since the width restrictions were established, hotel-condominium projects have been shown to not be economically viable, and the economics of hotel development have shown that the 120-foot width limit imposed by current zoning will not be accepted by hotel operator, since modern hotel floors need 25 rooms for standard operations. J. The maximum building width requirements in B.M.C. Section 23E.68.070.C.1. make most major hotel projects economically infeasible. Given the City s strong interest in attracting a new hotel to the Downtown, it is important to provide hotel projects flexibility in setback requirements. K. The 2012 Downtown Area Plan provides clear rationale for amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow for a variance for flexibility regarding building width on upper floors for a hotel project in the C-DMU Core Area. Section 2. That Berkeley Municipal Code Section 23B.44.030 is amended to read as follows: 23B.44.030 Findings for Issuance and Denial A. After the Board has conducted a public hearing, it shall act on the application. The Board may approve a Variance application, either as submitted or modified, only if it makes all of the following findings: 1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the land, building or use referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings and/or uses in the same District; 2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the subject property s owner. a. For hotel projects that exceed 75 feet in height in the Commercial Downtown Mixed Use (C-DMU) District, the Board shall grant a variance of the strict application of the set back requirements in Section 23E.68.070.C and maximum building width requirements in 23E.68.070.C.1., if the Board finds that the application of the set back requirements would make the project economically infeasible, and provided that the Board can make the other findings required in this Section. For the purposes of this subsection, the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights since the strict application of set back and building width requirements could make a high-rise hotel project economically infeasible; 3. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the use or the construction of a building, structure or addition thereof, to be approved will not, under the Page 2

circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in said neighborhood; and that the granting of the Variance will promote the municipal health, welfare and safety and benefit the City as a whole; 4. Any other variance findings required by the Section of the Ordinance applicable to that particular Variance. B. The Board shall deny an application for a Variance if it determines that it is unable to make any of the required findings, in which case it shall state the reasons for that determination. Section 3. Copies of this Ordinance shall be posted for two days prior to adoption in the display case located near the walkway in front of Council Chambers, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Within 15 days of adoption, copies of this Ordinance shall be filed at each branch of the Berkeley Public Library and the title shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation. Page 3