Developer seeks council OK to swap three‑story townhomes for two‑story units with larger garages

A developer representative presented updated townhome plans for Bridal Farms Phase B and asked the council whether it would support a second amendment to the development agreement to allow two‑story units with larger, deeper garages in place of the previously required three‑story units.

The presenter said the new garage design is 24 feet deep and about 496 square feet, adding: “This new design, is 24 feet deep, on the garage.” He told the council architects had tested several vehicle types and garbage cans to ensure the space is usable rather than too tight. The requested change would result in 21 of the larger‑garage units rather than the 40 three‑story units initially required under the agreement; the developer said the net would be 41 larger garages versus the 40 originally anticipated and that a plat amendment would be needed for formal changes.

Council members pressed for specifics. One member summarized the proposed trade: “From 3‑story to 2‑story, and the garage from 600 to 500,” and asked which remaining units could be adjusted in exchange. Members expressed recurring concerns about garage width (the proposed design keeps the same width at about 20.08 feet) and the loss of storage space behind garages in three‑story models. Several councilmembers said they would be open to the change if the developer could demonstrate additional neighborhood benefit—examples cited were enlarging some two‑car garages elsewhere, adding overflow guest parking, or otherwise increasing off‑street parking to offset the reduced garage square footage.

Taylor Keys of Element Homes (introduced during discussion) said staff advised a plat amendment rather than a lot line adjustment for speed and clarity, and that some foundations and footings are already poured on certain units, which would limit what can be changed without reengineering. Staff and the developer agreed to confer with structural engineers, the surveyor and planning staff and return with a clear schedule and options that would identify which unbuilt buildings might be changed without losing parking supply.

Councilmembers asked the developer to evaluate whether enlarging some outside perimeter garages could be paired with the proposed reduction elsewhere; the developer agreed to get timelines and feasibility and return with a refined plan. The conversation ended with staff noting required permit timelines and that any formal amendment would return to the council for approval.

What’s next: staff and the developer will meet with structural engineers and the planning department to determine which units are feasible to replat and reengineer; the developer will return with a timeline and a formal amendment request if warranted.