CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY MINUTES

COMMUNITY DESIGN COMMISSION

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 2008, 7:00 P.M.

 

Chairperson Jonathan Whitney called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commission members present were Mark Broadwell, George Cianciolo, Chris Culbreth, Kathryn James, Gretchen MacNair, Glenn Parks, Amy Ryan, and Jonathan Whitney (Chair) Staff members present were Kay Pearlstein, Senior Planner and Kay Tapp Senior Planning Technician.

VILLAGE PLAZA OFFICE-RETAIL PROJECT at 141 SOUTH ELLIOTT ROAD
File No. 9799-14-8584

 

The Town has received a request from EFC Village Plaza Development LLC for review of the Village Plaza Office-Retail Project at 141 South Elliott Road. The Concept Plan proposes to redevelop portions of the Village Plaza Shopping Center. The 10.92-acre site is located at 141 S. Elliott Road and encumbers the Village Plaza Shopping complex and the former location of the Village Plaza Movie Theater. The Concept Plan proposes construction of three buildings including 58,193 square feet of floor area for office and retail use. Two of the three buildings are propose as outbuildings along Elliott Road. The proposal includes using existing parking spaces on the Village Plaza site. Some redesign of adjacent parking spaces on the Whole Foods site is also proposed. The 10.92-acre site is located in the Community Commercial (CC) zoning district and is identified as Orange County Parcel Identifier Numbers 9799-14-8584 and 9799-24-2361.

CONCEPT PLAN PRESENTATION

The applicants for the Village Plaza Shopping Center presented a power point presentation of the proposed buildings, access, and parking locations. A Concept Plan was presented for an office/retail building and two buildings proposed on outparcels.

 

CITIZEN COMMENTS

No citizens spoke on the Concept Plan.

 

COMMISSION COMMENTS

  1. Commissioner Amy Ryan liked the greenway connection from the proposed office/retail building though she wanted to see the building tied to the adjacent retail developments. She stated that it should read as a whole site rather than three different developments and that parking lots should appear unified as well. The appearance of the buildings should use similar materials and other unifying features to improve the appearance of the overall site.  She wanted the parking lots to flow together to improve internal circulation rather be disjointed.

    2. Commissioner Ryan stated that the two outbuildings should be within the same two Elliott Road driveways and not separated by driveways. 

  2. Commissioner Jonathan Whitney supported the close proximity of the outbuildings to each other and suggested that they be located within the same landscaped island along Elliott Road.
  3. Commissioner Glenn Parks wanted to understand why the applicant chose to located the buildings at the rear of the lot rather than pulled closer to Elliott Road. He recommended that parking be located at the rear of the new buildings rather than front. The applicant replied that the buildings were located to the rear of the lot in order to improve vehicular circulation throughout the entire Village Plaza site, since all parking lots are in the front of the existing buildings.

    4. Commissioner Parks stated that the infill development appeared “hostile” and not part of the overall development. He supported the relationship of the buildings to the greenway connection that was proposed.

    Commissioner Parks also wanted to know the applicant’s goals for energy management for the project. The applicant replied that he had not yet worked that out.

  4. Commissioner Kathryn James wanted the applicant to design longer parking bays rather than short rows. She liked the design of the buildings and the marking proposed between the office/retail building to the greenway.
  5. Commissioner Chris Culbreth thought that the layout of the office/retail building and parking areas would work well on the site; however he wanted to see the outbuildings connected and not separated as proposed.
  6. Commissioner Gretchen MacNair thought that a 3-story building, as proposed by the applicant, would be imposing if located along the Elliott Road frontage. She supported the location and design as proposed.
  7. Commissioner Mark Broadwell thought that the office/retail buildings should be brought closer to Elliott Road. He stated that the applicant’s reason for keeping the buildings to the rear of the site to allow for improved vehicular circulation does not work. He stated that when he visits the site, he always returns to Elliott Road to get to another part of Village Plaza and does not drive through the site because it is too difficult and faster to use Elliott Road.

SUMMARY COMMENTS

The Commission generally supported the applicant’s Concept Plan for Village Plaza Office/Retail building and outbuildings. There was disagreement concerning the layout of the site: 1) to bring the office/retail building closer to Elliott Road or to keep to the rear of the lot as proposed by the applicant. It was also recommended that the outbuildings be located closer to each other with a strong relationship to one another. The Commission believed that vehicular circulation within the site will be an issue.

 

Prepared by:

Jonathan Whitney, Chair

Kay Pearlstein, Staff