Developer and staff present Uplands PAA‑8 concept plan for village amenity center; council raises parking, water and activation questions

Westminster’s City Council on Feb. 2 reviewed a concept plan for the Uplands Planning Area 8, a 1.23‑acre parcel along Federal Boulevard envisioned as the village amenity center for the Uplands community.

Reb Batesville, the city’s senior planner, told council the concept is a nonbinding review under the Westminster Municipal Code: the purpose is to give the applicant early feedback prior to any official development plan (ODP) or technical review. Batesville said the staff’s preliminary analysis found the proposed uses compatible with the comprehensive plan but noted architecture and master planned development (MODP) compliance issues that will need to be addressed in later reviews.

Applicant representatives Marcus Pachner and Brad Haig presented the proposal: two clubhouse buildings totaling about 3,170 square feet, and an approximately 3,200 square‑foot pool and splash pad, plus a public plaza and outdoor amenities. Haig said the design is conceptual and that the applicant will meet engineering and architectural standards in subsequent applications.

Councilors questioned parking, upkeep and water use. The applicant requested two limited exceptions to parking and build‑to‑line requirements: 14 head‑in parking spaces on the east of the parcel and 30 on‑street stalls, and a minor deviation from a 10‑foot build‑to line because of a utility easement. Haig said parking on adjacent parcels and shared parking strategies would be used when the mixed‑use parcels are developed.

Councilor questions included whether the amenity center would serve single‑family and multifamily residents, how the center would be maintained (applicant said Metro District and HOA responsibility), projected service populations (applicant referenced capacity tied to buildout timing), and whether the pool/splash pad had been assessed for water use (applicant and staff said the splash pad would share the pool water system and that water use had been budgeted and considered in planning).

Batesville reminded council that comments during a concept review are gratuitous and not binding on the applicant or the council. The applicant and staff said they will return in subsequent technical reviews (ODP/PDP) to resolve parking, architectural compliance and other MODP issues.

Next steps: staff said the concept move forward to technical review if the applicant chooses to proceed; notices for the concept review were posted and mailed to affected addresses; staff and the applicant committed to returning with detailed engineering, architecture and parking solutions.