Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Elmore Corners Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Davenport board approves retail‑infill classification for new consignment store, orders façade improvements

Davenport Design Review Board · March 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Davenport Design Review Board agreed to evaluate a proposed 27,000 sq ft consignment store as "retail infill" in the Elmore Corners area, approving the front and rear facades and directing the applicant to work with staff on higher‑quality north and south elevations (lighting, brick wrap or similar). The decision aims to balance design standards with the applicant's timeline.

The Davenport Design Review Board voted to consider a proposed 27,000‑square‑foot consignment retailer under the Elmore Corners "retail infill" standards and approved the project's front and rear facades while directing the applicant to return to staff with higher‑quality treatments for the north and south elevations.

Planning staff and the applicant presented site plans showing a standalone building north of the Walmart site within the Elmore Corners area. The petitioner said the lot is shallow and the proposed use and parking pattern fit the retail‑infill subarea; the applicant described the store as a corporate‑developed franchisee moving from its Brady Street location and said construction deadlines are tight.

Board members focused on whether the parcel should be judged under the master‑plan mixed‑use criteria (which carry stricter bulk and material standards) or retail‑infill rules (which permit more flexibility, including parking in front). Staff noted the choice matters for facade materials, building orientation and parking placement. Several members said they were open to retail‑infill classification "with the right design," but pressed the applicant for stronger treatments on elevations visible from neighboring properties.

Jake of Hawkeye Commercial Realty, representing the applicant, said the proposal would "cover up those storage units for everybody; you won't see those from the street," arguing the project could improve corridor appearance and help spur future development. Staff highlighted Elmore Corners guidelines that require higher‑quality, long‑lasting primary materials on publicly visible facades and 40 percent transparency at pedestrian level.

The board approved a motion to accept retail‑infill designation, to approve the front and rear facades as presented, and to require the applicant to work with staff on north/south façade upgrades (options discussed included extending brick, higher‑quality finishes, and improved lighting). The board allowed staff to administratively review changes that meet the spirit of its direction so the applicant could meet the client's timeline; the record shows a unanimous roll call in favor.

The approval clears the path for the applicant to proceed with final design and permitting, subject to the agreed facade adjustments and any necessary administrative checks.

The board emphasized that the decision balances design expectations for Elmore Corners with practical site constraints and the applicant's construction schedule.