| |
Discussion:
Charles Goff, Director of Development Services, presented the Staff Report.
Commissioner Groce inquired about the dog park being available to the public, the multifamily occupancy rates, especially the impact on the recently developed AMLI complex, and the ramifications to the Town and property owner if the proposal is denied. Charles Goff responded that there is no requirement or expectation that the area be fenced off and designated specifically as a dog park, but the intent is to provide open space for pets, whether for residents only or open to the public. With regard to the occupancy rates, the nearby AMLI development is currently working on leasing out the units and is anticipated to complete within about a year, generally it is expected that occupancy rates may decrease around the time new developments come on line, but this usually stabilizes within 12-18 months. No significant occupancy decline is anticipated.
From Staff’s perspective, the biggest concern is that the center is currently still considered new but overtime, as the market continues to change, requiring the Town to compete with new mixed-use developments and the increased desire for live, work, play atmosphere, how does Addison continue to stay relevant? The Town needs to make sure that it adapts to meet consumer demand, which at the moment is reflective of the types of mixed-use developments like Legacy West.
Commissioner Souers inquired about the policy conversation with regard to density of future development. Charles Goff stated that the Comprehensive Plan provides such policy guidance by calling out two areas in the Town where future mixed-use development should be located, inclusive of the Village on the Parkway area, with the second being Addison Grove.
Commissioner Souers stated that the housing policy warrants special consideration toward exceptional projects that may not necessarily fully comply with the policy, but he does not fully perceive this proposal as exceptional given that although there are opportunities throughout the site to provide additional compliance, the applicant does not meet the 20% landscape requirement, does not meet the full requirements of the Master Transportation Plan, and does not provided safe and adequately landscaped pedestrian connectivity throughout the site.
Commissioner Souers inquired about the results of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) provided by the applicant. Charles Goff responded that the report indicates at buildout the new development would generate 88 new weekday AM peak hour one way vehicle trips and 125 new weekday PM peak hour one way trips, but the applicant’s consultant will provide a more detailed presentation on the TIA.
Commissioner Souers inquired about whether the parks in Addison Circle and Vitruvian park are public or private. Charles Goff responded that the parks in those neighborhoods are publicly owned, this proposal is for privately owned park areas that would be accessible to the public.
Commissioner Souers also inquired about whether the Comprehensive Plan gave consideration to the AMLI development and the apartment complexes located in Dallas, along Montfort, Charles Goff responded that the Comprehensive Plan took place before the AMLI project was proposed and that while he was not personally part of the Comprehensive Plan study, the assumption is that all existing and proposed apartment complexes within a certain proximity would have been considered, but the report does not reference this consideration specifically.
Commissioner Groce stated that she and Chair Wheeler were on the Planning and Zoning Commission at the time of the Comprehensive Plan study, and she recalls consideration for some of the older apartment Complexes along Montfort, but not the newer ones, like the one directly adjacent to the south of this proposal.
Commissioner Resnik recognizes that there is currently a parking problem on this site but does not believe that the proposal sufficiently mitigates the issue.
Commissioner Catalani inquired about the viability of any other uses in place of the residential proposed on the southwest corner of the site. Charles Goff indicated that while he could provide a general response the applicant would be able to better address the economic feasibility of any other uses versus residential.
Commissioner Souers inquired whether an approval of this proposal would allow the property to provide additional residential uses on other portions of the overall site. Charles Goff responded that an approval of this request for residential use would only be applicable to this portion of the site for the specifically allowed maximum number of residential dwelling units, and if the applicant were to propose additional residential use locations or increase in the number of residential units, they would have to come back through the zoning process.
Commissioner Souers inquired whether an approval of this request would result in a precedent where additional properties in the area will be able to request, and receive approval, for residential uses. Charles Goff responded that any future requests for a similar type of development will have to go through the zoning process and will be evaluated based on the comprehensive plan and any impacts from the proposed uses, especially additional traffic impacts.
Commissioner Catalani followed up with a question regarding the residential component being financially important for other properties, similarly as it is for this property. Charles Goff responded that the previous question was regarding setting a precedent, which he does not believe would be the case.
Jonathan Vinson with Jackson Walker LLP, representative of the property owner, presented the request and proposed site improvements, and answered questions from the Commission with regard to: parking garage expansion, circulation, and visibility; notifying all the property’s tenants about the proposed improvements; the significance of additional residential units and how they support the surrounding commercial uses; keeping the center relevant as the market evolves; proposed site improvements meeting walkability expectations and importance of landscaping; phasing plan of the project and how it will impact parking throughout the site; current retail and restaurant demand climate; and whether this is the right time for this type of a development.
Taylor Alvey with Vestar, the property owner, presented additional information regarding the request and proposed improvements, and answered questions regarding the necessity of residential use in order to support the shopping center and the impact on the existing residential community, the existing economic climate and tenant occupancy and stability for the site, market demand, how walkability affects the success of the site, feasibility of alternate locations for the residential component, feasibility of adding additional landscaped walkways between the existing buildings and throughout the site, and the total capital that will be going into this proposal.
Chair Kathryn Wheeler asked how many apartment units are currently under construction. Charles Goff estimated about 1,100 units.
Scott Johnson, traffic engineer with Kimley-Horn, presented the results of the Traffic Impact Analysis and additional details on the overall TIA the process, and answered questions from the Commission regarding the timing of the data obtained and whether it accounted for the school down the street, taken into account the surrounding development growth, how the commuter peak hours were calculated, and how are signalized and unsignalized waiting times calculated.
Chair Kathryn Wheeler opened the meeting as a public hearing.
There were 12 speakers on this item.
Eleven speakers in opposition:
Harsha Puttaswamy, residing at 3881 Asbury Lane
Jane Lenz, residing at 3942 Asbury Lane
Mary Reed, residing at 3778 Vitruvian Way
Richard Teza, residing at 14788 Lochinvar Drive
Gregg Sheppard, residing at 5313 Paladium Dr
Robert Goodfriend, residing at 14725 Celestial Place
Harriet Mellon, residing at 14840 Lochinvar Drive
Skip Robbins, residing at 14770 Maiden Court
John Price, residing at 4114 Leadville Place
Karen Hall, residing at 14761 Bedivere Court
Bob Heckman, residing at 14776 Maiden Court
One speaker spoke on the item, Jack Shisler, residing at 14917 Oaks North Drive
Additionally, there were 11 people who chose not to speak but expressed their opposition on the item:
Suzanne West, residing at 14782 Lochinvar Court
Bette Price, residing at 4114 Leadville Place
Gail Barth, residing at 14632 Dartmouth Court
William Hoppe, residing at 14792 Lochinvar Court
Karen Williams, residing at 14799 Buckingham Court
Alan Then, residing at 14905 Lake Forest Drive
Anupam Singhal, residing at 14678 Winnwood Road
Dorothy Singhal, residing at 14678 Winnwood Road
Charles Novick, residing at 14810 Lochinvar Drive
Morgan Rees, residing at 14818 Hampton Court
Lee Franklin, residing at 5309 Paladium Drive
Chair Kathryn Wheeler closed the public hearing.
Jonathan Vinson with Jackson Walker LLP, representative of the property owner, made closing remarks regarding the traffic concerns and the totality of the proposed improvements.
Motion: Recommend denial of the request. |