3465 buckhead loop – jared third visit
Project Scope: The applicant is returning to the DRC for a first look at resubmitted plans for a jewelry store on the site of the now demolished Wells Fargo bank branch location. The existing building was demolished without required approvals which triggers the application of all code requirements as it exceeds the 60% development threshold.
The plan set contained minimal changes to the original proposal approved August 2024 but represented an opening for a conversation on what might need to change about the proposal to meet current SPI-12 code requirements. The committee expressed displeasure with the suburban style development proposed and offered many suggestions for improvements more consistent with the urban, walkable development pattern desired by the community and supported in the code.
Click on the image below to download all documents.
Applicant: Tim Goering
Also with the Applicant: — John Kranyak, Signet; Craig Nichols, Signet; Ali Azadi, property owner; Sue
Variation Requested: Unable to be determined at this time.
Assessment of compliance with the SPI-12 zoning code:. The proposed plans do not meet at least fourteen different sections of SPI-12 code. Those sections are outlined below. It is the desire of the committee for the applicant to return with revised plans that specifically address these requirements to the extent possible.
Sec. 16-18L.008. – Open space requirements – 15% of gross floor area or net lot area, whichever is less.
Based on a 6000 square foot structure, this would most likely be an absolute minimum of 900 square feet.
Sec. 16-18L.009. – Sidewalks. (There are multiple requirements that need to be met in this section. These differ for both types of street frontages present on this corner lot: Lenox Road and Buckhead Loop)
For Lenox, the requirement is 5’ wide amenity zone, a 10’ walk zone and a 10’ supplemental zone with tree planting and lighting requirements. Given that Lenox is a GDOT road, it is not clear if they would approve for trees within the amenity zone this close to the intersection, however the applicant should make the effort to widen the sidewalks from the current 5’ width.
For Tower Place Drive (which is a private street) there are no amenity or a supplemental zones required. There is a requirement to maintain a 6-foot walk zone. However, this street alignment already has a five-foot amenity zone with appropriate tree and lighting fixtures present between the walk zone and the back of the curb. Additionally, PATH400 is planned to come into the Tower Place development on the western side of Tower Place Drive adjacent to the property and the applicant should make accommodations for this community priority project.
Sec. 16-18L.011. – Relationship of building to street
Sec. 16-18L.011.1. a – All buildings shall have a minimum of one building façade meeting the major sidewalk-level building façade requirements of this section. All other building façades shall be considered as minor sidewalk-level building façades.
Following this provision, the Lenox Street would need to meet the major sidewalk level building façade requirements. Given the utility easements parallel to that street, this requirement does not appear to be feasible. The committee prefers that the applicant redesign the proposal to face Tower Place drive instead. This private street offers a stronger pedestrian connection to the rest of the development and PATH400 and is a more logical “primary frontage” for the proposed store while dealing with the very difficult nature of the site itself.
Sec. 16-18L.011.2.a.ii.The length of façade without intervening fenestration or entryways shall not exceed 20 feet.
The proposed project has many stretches of façade that exceed 20’ in length. The applicant should add windows or window display cases to a greater extent than currently proposed. If fenestration is a challenge due to the business model, the applicant should consider exterior applications, such as artwork, that provide an inviting pedestrian experience.
Sec. 16-18L.011.2.a.iii.Fenestration shall be provided for the horizontal length of the primary sidewalk-level façade as listed below for the following street types:
Sec. 16-18L.011.a.Peachtree Road and primary streets: A minimum of 65 percent.b.All other streets (including pedestrian ways): A minimum of 50 percent.
The project should meet the 50 percent fenestration requirements along Tower Place frontage to reflect its role as the primary street and with the most pedestrian activity.
Sec. 16-18L.011.2.b – Major sidewalk-level entrances.
There should be an entrance facing Tower Place. Multiple committee members and city staff expressed a desire that an entrance be present there to better activate the pedestrian frontage for those approaching or passing by on the sidewalk side of the store.
2.c.ii.Minimum sidewalk-level floor to ceiling height for primary sidewalk-levels fronting Peachtree Road and primary streets shall be 18 feet, as measured vertically from the ground floor to the structural ceiling, not including drop ceilings or other interior ceiling treatments within the sidewalk-level floor space.
The applicant should ensure the floor to ceiling height along the Tower Place side meet this code.
3.ii.All other streets (including pedestrian ways): A minimum of 25 percent.
The southwest frontage along the sidewalk and drive between Buckhead Church and the store should also meet the 25% fenestration requirement.
4.Additional fenestration provisions. Where sidewalk-level fenestration is required, the following additional provisions shall apply:
4.c.Fenestration for all other non-residential storefront windows shall allow visibility into the building for a minimum depth of ten feet when located along Peachtree Road and primary streets, and five feet along all other streets, measured from the interior windowpane and shall be internally illuminated
Aside from the parking lot portion, this is not met. The addition of a additional window openings and an entrance along Tower Place would satisfy this requirement.
6.Additional active use provisions. Where sidewalk-level active uses are required, the following additional provisions shall apply:
6.a.Sidewalk-level active uses shall not include parking, non-residential storage areas, driveways, or queuing lanes parallel to the adjacent street.
The proposed project includes retaining parking area in front of the entrance along Lenox and a driveway from the former drive-through for the bank. This is not permitted in SPI-12
Sec. 16-18L.016.3. Location. With the exception of regional shopping centers, accessory off-street surface parking lots shall not be located between a building and an adjacent street without an intervening building.
Sec. 16-18L.016.4.Screening. Off-street surface parking lots shall be screened from adjacent streets and sidewalks.
The proposed jewelry store parking lot is situated between the building and Lenox Road.
The remaining parking area not located between the building and the street should be better screened from Lenox Road. Additionally, by moving the building closer to Tower Place Drive, the remaining parking lot should have sufficient room for fire trucks to approach and leave the store or the adjacent hotel.
Additional Design Recommendations: The committee made the following site design recommendations to the applicant for the next iteration of their design.
Additional Utility relocations and screening – There are several utility boxes and equipment located at the corner. The committee believes some of these can be relocated and/or buried and the applicant should take the opportunity to do so to improve the look and flow of that area. The equipment that cannot be easily moved should better screened or painted in a visually interesting manner.
Sidewalk Repair. The existing sidewalk which is proposed to be widened to meet code also suffers from paver buckling due to tree growth. The replacement sidewalk system should correct this and reduce its risk of reoccurrence in the future.
Sidewalk light repair – Several lights have been damaged or knocked over. These should be repaired or replaced.
Design finishes – Make the appearance less suburban and imposing with more varied exterior and fenestration.
Environmental Considerations – while not officially in the code yet, the district has new regulations in the works to address embodied carbon and has provided the applicant with draft language. The DRC recommends the applicant take actions to follow the suggested requirements.
Public Art – The new plaza area should include public art.
DRC Recommendations Part 2
The SPI-12 DRC submits the following recommendations to the city and developer for consideration for what we see as ideal aspects to include in any future plan for review.
Building Location and Charcteristics
Relocate the building to front Tower Place Drive (a private street) which functions as a public street. Due to the sewer drain line (marked SS on the underlying diagram) it is not possible to move the building any closer to Lenox without fully relocating that line. The new building location pushes the building up to front Tower place which features far more pedestrian activity anyway. The building would need to be brough level with this street, which is less challenging than elevating it to meet Lenox. The building would meet the 50% fenestration, proper floor-ceiling ratios and 24’ building height along this street. Finally, the orientation should parallel the street as Buckhead Church immediately south does. This hides the parking behind the building. The displayed building footprint is 6000sf which is slightly larger than the applicant’s 5600 proposal, indicating sufficient space. The only potential issue might be with the easement (triangular shaped hash lines under the SE corner of the building. In either case Option 1 or 2 would be a significant improvement on the current layout based on the former location of the Wells Fargo Building.
Entry Facing Tower Place
The building should have one main entrance facing the sidewalk and street. Due to the difficulties with Lenox and how Tower Place is significantly more pedestrian friendly, the entrance should engage with that street frontage. This does not preclude having a rear parking lot entrance as well and that could be located behind the building on the side facing the hotel. But “main entrance” still faces a pedestrian activated street.
Widen the sidewalk / PATH400 opportunities
The sidewalk on Tower Place Drive should be significantly widened. The current sidewalk has just a 4’ walk zone. The sidewalk already contains a 4-5 foot wide amenity zone which is good. What the applicant should do is widen the walk zone is a minimum of 10 feet in width and ideally as wide as the sidewalk in front of Buckhead Church, immediately to the south. It can be wider though, there is no reason why the 25’ sidewalk configuration (amenity/walk/supplemental zone) could not be met. This would provide sufficient space for pedestrian traffic and PATH400 marking / gateway indicators.
A formal sidewalk connection between the parking lot and Tower Place Drive would be made along the Lenox side of the building. Ideally there is some fenestration on this side as well.
Landscaping
Due to easements along and under the current sidewalk, there is a limit how close the building can be pulled towards the street. The rest of the distance should be landscaped. Given the applicant will likely still want to use stone / imposing materials, greenery in front should soften that up. Same goes for the area fronting the driveway between the church and the store.
Close off the drive through curb cut.
This should be closed off, a curb placed and the sidewalk made continuous. It is not necessary to retain.
Plaza area
This area is difficult to work with given utilities and conflicting requirements but also presents an opportunity for a more welcoming entry to the complex for pedestrians and PATH400 users. The area between the sidewalk and the building should have a mix of landscaping but could also house seating, public art and function as a pedestrian gateway to the Tower Place complex. This is an area placeholder for a landscape architect to do something more innovative. It also will align better with the intent of the code by eliminating cars between the street and the building, even if this is not the “front” of the building anymore.
Whenever possible, the applicant should bury, relocate or screen utilities here.
Revise the parking area.
A good chunk of this property remains for parking. The architect should re-work this. Code maximum for a 6K sf retail building is 30 spaces. A smaller building would need less and ideally the applicant would not try and max out parking. There are no minimum parking requirements for this site. The parking along Lenox should be screened better but making that wider plaza area #6, there is no need for a cross-lot walkway for pedestrians. A wider parking lot from moving the building closer to Tower Place would also allow emergency vehicles to turn around easier.
Improve the current development sign, landscaping and utilities.
This request is difficult to determine what part of the current greenspace the applicant can modify. A visionary plan would renovate both areas 6 and 8 together but the applicant isn’t proposing any changes in this area like they are with 6, it isn’t clear if it can be mandated to be done. Like with number six, the applicant should focus on minimizing the impact of the utility features in that space.
Bring the rest of Lenox Frontage up to code
Ideally the entire sidewalk is brought up to code (create an amenity and walk zone that meets code-5’ and 10’ respectively). The pedestrian area in 6 would count as the supplemental zone and the parking area would receive better screening. Please consult with the attached conceptual plan from the Buckhead Community Improvement District (BCID) and contact them for more information in regards to a Lenox-related frontage improvement they are currently planning.
Additionally, the applicant should be aware of BCID’s conceptual Lenox improvements and contact the district for more information.
The Development Committee DOES expect to see this applicant again as significant changes need to be made to the proposed plans that will necessitate additional variations, and the City staff and/or Neighborhood Association requests additional input from the DRC
