Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers present phased plan to convert Kimball Junction outlet center into mixed-use ‘village core’
Summary
Developers and county planners on Tuesday outlined a multi‑phase redevelopment of the Junction Commons (formerly the outlets) at Kimball Junction that would add market-rate and affordable housing above new retail, create a walkable village core, and phase construction of parking structures and multimodal connections.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers and county planners on Tuesday outlined a multi‑phase redevelopment of the Junction Commons (formerly the outlets) at Kimball Junction that would add market-rate and affordable housing above new retail, create a walkable village core, and phase construction of parking structures and multimodal connections.
The plan, presented by Craig Elliott, principal of Elliott Work Group, and Adam Greenbaum of Singerman, would convert portions of the existing shopping center to residential above retail, reorient and add townhomes, and build stacked flat multifamily buildings with surface and structured parking in later phases. “Our ownership group has made over $10,000,000 of investment since we’ve owned it into the property,” Adam Greenbaum said, pointing to recent façade upgrades and new tenants such as Ulta, Jersey Mike’s and Chipotle as part of a strategy to re‑merchandise the center while moving toward redevelopment.
The presentation emphasized three central issues that staff and the development team have worked through in prior work sessions: building massing and density under the NMU and MPD codes; affordable‑housing calculations; and multimodal transportation, circulation and parking. “These are going to be a little bit bigger, denser buildings,” Senior Planner Amir told the commission, linking the proposed pattern to the county’s codes for more urban areas.
Why it matters: The project would be one of the first major redevelopments on the west side of the Kimball Junction interchange and seeks to create a second “village core” to serve nearby neighborhoods that currently require driving to reach retail and services.
Key elements and phasing - Phasing: the team described an initial phase of tenant and façade upgrades already under way; later phases include demolition of upper level commercial, construction of multifamily and parking structures, townhouses and additional mixed‑use commercial. The development team said phasing would be tied to market conditions and a goal of delivering some phases in advance of major events such as the Olympics. - Housing: the developer reported the site design yields about 426 units (applicant figure), with a mix of market‑rate and affordable units. The team said one building in the scheme would contain primarily studios and one‑bedroom units, with a small share of two‑bedrooms. Planner Amir said the applicants and county staff were finalizing how the affordable unit count maps to the county’s AUE (affordable unit equivalent) requirements and would confirm numbers before the public hearing. - Site changes: the plan would “cut open” existing building fronts to create pedestrian connections to surrounding trails and neighborhoods, and add pedestrian and bike access points into the center to link nearby residential areas.
Transportation and parking The developers presented a multimodal plan that includes a new bus stop, dedicated two‑way bike lanes that would tie into the Millennium Trail, bike racks and e‑bike stations near key entrances, and improvements to pedestrian pathways. “There’s an existing great connection that I really wasn’t even aware of, that we have the opportunity to improve and sign and mark and dedicate to create a two‑way bikeway,” said Peter Tomei, advising Singerman, after describing on‑site observations as a habitual bike commuter.
On parking, the team provided shared‑use analyses based on Urban Land Institute (ULI) guidance. Key figures presented to the commission: - Existing stalls on site: 1,274 (presented by the applicant) - Stacked theoretical maximum if all uses were added: about 1,650 stalls - Peak shared‑use demand (weekend peak per ULI analysis): about 1,421 - The applicant applied a conservative 5% reduction for modal shift to reflect transit and bike access (producing ~1,331), but proposed a staged supply of 1,493 stalls in two parking structures phased with development.
Commissioners pressed the team on some of the assumptions. Commissioner Heather Peteroy asked whether the occupancy counts used in the engineering/parking analysis came from a July 10, 2021 weekend sample and whether more recent data were available; the developer said on‑site traffic counters and Placer.ai analytics are available and could be layered to update the numbers. Commissioners also questioned how holiday and December peaks would be handled and whether long‑term tenant changes (more restaurants, fewer big‑box retail tenants) would change demand; the team acknowledged December peaks but said the village‑core tenancy mix and internal capture of trips (people walking to lunch, etc.) should reduce off‑site trip generation.
Affordable housing, energy and sustainability The applicant said the affordable building will meet an Energy Star Plus level at minimum and that new construction will be “solar ready”; the developer and staff said building envelopes would exceed code and that parking garages are intended to support solar panels on their roofs. The team said some existing buildings will be retained and improved, which reduces embodied carbon compared with full demolition.
Questions and next steps Commissioners requested updated occupancy and trip data, details on the final affordable unit counts and AUE calculations, and finalized traffic study responses from county engineering; the applicant said they expected engineering review to be completed before the next public meeting. Craig Elliott and the applicant team indicated they will return to the commission when the application is ready to proceed to a public hearing and conditional use review for the submittal’s later phases.
For reference: the team cited the Kimball Junction neighborhood plan, Summit County NMU and MPD code sections, and ULI and ITE guidance for parking and trip generation analysis. The commission did not take formal action on the redevelopment at Tuesday’s meeting.
Ending: The commission reserved additional time at a future meeting to review finalized traffic, parking and AUE calculations before the project moves to a public hearing.
