Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers scale back Esters Road apartment plan; council agrees to indefinite postponement
Summary
A proposed mixed‑use development at 4105 Esters Road was pulled from consideration after the applicant reduced unit counts and increased retail; the council voted unanimously for an indefinite postponement to allow further review and possible resubmittal to Planning & Zoning.
Get email alerts on the Development Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The City Council on Jan. 16 granted an indefinite postponement for a comprehensive plan amendment and associated zoning related to a proposed mixed‑use development at 4105 Esters Road.
Developer Robert Dye told the council the project had been revised since its April Planning & Zoning denial. The original scheme proposed about 575 residential units and roughly 15,000 square feet of retail in two podium buildings; the developer said the revised plan reduced the unit count to 406 and increased retail to “a little over 20,000 square feet.” Dye described the revised design as a single wrapped structure with a concealed garage and three‑story frontage on neighborhood streets to blend with surrounding development.
“Given the sentiment that that was too dense, and we needed more retail, we reduced the unit count from 575 to 406, which is a 30% reduction,” Dye said. He described the retail increase as roughly 33% more than the earlier proposal and said the design attempted to step down toward adjacent neighborhoods.
Council members raised concerns about retail demand and design. Some members said they preferred the original podium design but were willing to continue discussions. Planning staff advised that the revised plan exceeded the density noticed to Planning & Zoning and that a postponement or resubmittal would require restarting the P&Z process.
Councilman (unnamed in transcript) moved for an indefinite postponement; the motion passed unanimously. Staff and the applicant agreed the developer will consult with planning staff and consider returning with either the previous higher‑density podium plan or a further revised submission. The record shows P&Z had recommended denial of the earlier, higher‑density proposal; the current action records an indefinite postponement to allow the applicant to work with staff and potentially return through P&Z.
