Jun 252012
 

The argument of whether the DTC apartments should be built continued on June 18, with many residents from the surrounding apartments and neighborhoods showing up to the council meeting. The site is located at 5455 S. Valentia Way and the plans of construction at the site sparked discontent with the city council and with the neighboring population during previous city council meetings. One problem that concerned the neighboring apartment complex is that the DTC Apartments would obstruct the view of their residents. Another concern was that the neighboring complex’s view would also be hurt as residents would be able to see the newly constructed DTC apartments, which concerned the apartment residents and the Planning and Zoning commision. The Council was also concerned with the length of Building E and with the amount of green space on the apartment complex. Along with all the concerns about the appearance of the apartments, there were also worries about the amount of parking space and how the DTC apartments would not hinder the ability of the residents from the other apartments to reach places such as the Orchard Light Rail Station.

The applicants for the DTC apartment complex, made many changes to accomodate the demands of the city council. They made Building E shorter, along with cutting a story off the building so the neighbor’s views would not be obstructed. The applicants also planted a row of trees to hide the view of their apartment from the neighboring apartment. The amount of green space was increased generously, far exceeding the demands of the zoning laws. Parking space was also increased along with a path that was made through the DTC apartment complex, allowing neighboring residents to travel throught the DTC apartment complex to reach their destinations without having to walk around the entire complex.

The city council voted unanimously for the applicants, allowing the DTC apartments to be constructed. While some residents were still worried about the high density of residents in the apartment complex, most were satisfied by the applicant’s adjustments. I agree with the council’s decision as the applicant went far beyond the demands of the Planning and Zoning commission, and the local community will benefit from the construction of the DTC Apartments.

  •  Posted by on June 25, 2012 at 1:31 pm
  •   Comments Off on DTC Apartments Continued
Jun 102012
 

During the city council meeting on June 4, a rather controversial issue was raised–that of the DTC Apartments. While one does not usually imagine the construction of an apartment complex as being an extraordinarily contentious issue, the unique set of circumstances in which this case arose makes it particularly interesting.

The site in question for the complex is at 5455 S. Valentia Way, bordering that of The Georgetown–a group of townhouses built by the proposers of DTC Apartments, across a street from One Cherry Lane, and short walk from the Orchard Light Rail Station. When the property was first purchased by the applicant, a restriction was placed on the deed such that the land could only be used for multifamily housing. At the time, zoning in the area allowed this use; however, the Comprehensive Plan passed by the council in 2011 stated an intent to limit residential use of properties in this area, making a new multifamily residential area less viable.

The applicant first submitted a plan to the city of Greenwood Village last August. A concept review of the 368-unit proposal warned against high density, and, even after changes, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the resolution in early May of this year. This recommendation was based on several issues, most of which were resolved in later revisions and the judgement of the commission that the current zoning restrictions mustn’t affect the site in this case. These included density–which was reduced to 272 units from 368–and the labeling of the development as “luxury,” which was removed. The new plan also addresses the commission’s earlier concerns that Building E was too long and that the main entrance too narrow by splitting the Building E in two and widening the entrance. Requests that views from neighboring properties not be blocked were met with the removal of one floor from all building plans. While a traffic study found that the complex would have an impact locally, it seemed minimal. Only two nearby intersections would be at or over capacity within twenty years, and they would overflow with or without the development’s completion. The singular facet of the plan for the development not in compliance with the technical requirements set by Greenwood Village was the absence of loading zones; however, loading zones are not present in most multifamily housing complexes, and, despite this fault, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the resolution and the plan.

While the only technical problem with the plan was the absence of loading zones,  many concerns were raised by both the council and citizens living near the site. The majority of these concerns centered around the development’s impact on the area, including traffic and dropping neighboring property values. Some council members were dissatisfied with the green space in the plan, for while it met the technical requirements, it was largely on the perimeter or the site leaving many units with views of only the interior parking lots. In my opinion, however, this layout of the open areas is the best option, as it makes the exterior of the property and the view from neighboring properties more scenic. It would be a renter’s choice to live in an apartment with a view of pavement, but this view would not be imposed on others who were not given the choice. Another major concern was that property values in the area would decrease as a result of the development; however, I believe the opposite to be true. As a high end development with easy access to public transportation, it will be an uniquely attractive place for people to live, even when renting becomes less popular. The notion that it is not up to the standards of this neighborhood is absurd, seeing as the site borders that of the Pinnacle of DTC–a multifamily housing complex that is far more dense, less physically attractive, and has fewer high end services and amenities than the proposal.

The site in question may only be used for multifamily housing, and the inevitable construction of a complex there will be far better than an empty lot. While the council was split in their decision and ultimately decided to continue discussion at their next meeting, I am of the opinion that the resolution should pass. This is, to me, clearly the best option for all parties involved, and I am confident that, should the resolution pass, the development of the DTC Apartments will prove successful and beneficial to the area and the city of Greenwood Village.

  •  Posted by on June 10, 2012 at 10:05 pm
  •   Comments Off on DTC Apartments