Commission presses developer on parking study, density and shared-use risks at Valley Square apartments plan

The Planning Commission heard a sketch-plan presentation for the Shops at Valley Square apartments and spent most of the discussion on parking, shared-use assumptions and density. Applicant teams described revisions intended to improve pedestrian connectivity to the shops and to increase parking near retail by relocating residential units from the north elevation to the south; designers showed about 6,400 sq ft of interior amenity space and a roughly 10,400 sq ft podium amenity area with pool.

The applicant presented a parking study performed by Horner that counted utilization on several days in May and concluded the center could accommodate the residential addition with shared parking. Several commissioners including the Chair disputed the study’s basis. "Four days in May is not the parking design condition," the Chair said. "Two weeks in December is the parking design condition." The Chair urged the applicant to produce an authoritative parking study that uses peak-season or modeled worst-case demand, explicitly documents hourly distributions by day of week, and accounts for the 80 structured spaces designated for residents that will not be generally available to retail customers.

Residents and commissioners raised practical concerns about park-and-walk behavior, asking whether patrons would walk from overflow lots in winter or during high-demand periods, and whether spaces next to the building would be appropriated by residents and thereby displace retail customers. The applicant said a portion of the structured parking would be access-controlled and reserved for residents and that surface lots would remain for retail and overflow; the team also said they would pursue traffic engineering and coordination with Valley Square ownership and PennDOT as required.

Commissioners also raised building-code issues: whether the proposed building composition and podium garage details complied with Type 5A construction requirements and whether stair towers discharge to an acceptable public way (some stairs were shown discharging into the parking area). Staff warned that egress details could alter garage layout and affect net parking counts.

The commission did not approve the sketch plan. The directive to the applicant was clear: return with a revised parking study that reflects peak or design conditions required by the zoning ordinance, document how restricted and public spaces will be enforced, show egress and stair discharge details consistent with code, and address pedestrian access and security concerns.