CITY OF FLOWERY BRANCH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR S REPORT

Transcription

1 CITY OF FLOWERY BRANCH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR S REPORT TO: Mayor and City Council, City of Flowery Branch DATE OF REPORT: March 31, 2017 SUBJECT REQUEST: MEETING DATES: APPLICANT: OWNER(S): PROPOSED USE: LOCATION: Rezoning from PUD Conditional to PUD Conditional (change of zoning conditions pertaining to POD Q) April 6, 2017 (hearing) and April 20, 6:00 p.m. NNP-Looper Lake LLC, by Jennifer Landers NNP-Looper Lake LLC Detached, single-family subdivision Capitola Farm Road (Sterling on the Lake Master Planned Community) PARCEL(S) #: Portion of tax identification number ACREAGE: EXISTING LAND USE: 1001 ( portion affected by rezoning request) Vacant/undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING (POD Q): North: East: South: West: RECOMMENDATION: Undeveloped (community association property) and Single-family residential (unincorporated Hall County), R-1 Undeveloped (POD P), PUD (Sterling on the Lake) Open space (Sterling on the Lake), PUD Open space (Sterling on the Lake), PUD Approval 1

2 PLANNING ANALYSIS The applicant has filed a complete application which seeks a change to development approved on POD Q within the Sterling on the Lake Planned Unit Development, originally annexed and rezoned by the City of Flowery Branch on November 16, 2001, per Ordinances 239 and 240, and which has been amended seven times (most recently via Ordinances 239-G and 240-G, approved February 18, This parcel is currently approved for 82 single-family units served by private streets and with alley access garages. The applicant seeks to change the street designation from private to neighborhood public, eliminate the alley access, and change the layout of the subdivision. The applicant does not seek an increase in the number of lots within the POD boundaries. Review of Site Plan For POD Q Aerial Photograph of Subject Property and Vicinity The applicant met with the Community Development Director and the city s planning consultant on March 15, 2017, to discuss the proposed application. The site plan shows lots are laid out with 40-foot lot widths with areas of 4,000 to 5,000 square feet. The original approval provided for 30-foot lot widths. The subdivision s access onto Capitola Farm will be basically in the same location as originally proposed, and the number of lots (82) is the same as that which was approved. The entrance was previously designed to be gated, but that design will no longer be needed since the streets are now proposed to be public. The streets would meet city standards with a 50-foot right of way and a pavement width of 22 feet. One of the streets would terminate into open space without a cul-de-sac; due to its short length this is not considered to be an issue but is subject to Fire Department approval. The other street also appears to terminate without a cul-de-sac, but the applicant indicates that POD P (which involves an extension of the street) will be developed simultaneously with POD Q; therefore, there will not be a dead-end street without a cul-de-sac. The lots within POD Q would not be subject to a strict set of setbacks, but are designed for 20 feet setbacks on the front, 20 feet on the rear, and zero to 8 feet on the sides. 2

3 The applicant has designed POD Q so that it has appropriate open space, as well as a pedestrian trail connection to open space and to POD M to the south. An architectural review committee is established in Sterling and will review all aesthetic aspects of the proposed POD, including architectural elevations of individual homes and the monument signage at the entrance. There is no change to the proposed fencing along the perimeter along Capital Farm Road. The proposed fence will ensure no access; driveways from the proposed lots onto Capitola Farm Road will not be permitted (10 no access easement recommended). Review of Criteria (Sec Flowery Branch Zoning Ordinance) (a) Whether the proposal will permit a use that is suitable in view of the use and development of adjacent and nearby property. Finding: The proposed change in PUD zoning conditions for POD Q is considered suitable in view of the single-family uses within the Sterling on the Lake planned unit development which abut the area proposed for revision (supports request). (b) Whether the proposal will adversely affect the existing use or usability of adjacent or nearby property. Finding: The proposed zoning amendment will not adversely affect adjacent property or the overall Sterling on the Lake master planned community, since the use (detached, singlefamily dwellings) remains unchanged, and the number of lots in the POD also remains unchanged (supports request). (c) Whether the property to be affected by the proposal can be used in accordance with the existing regulations and has a reasonable economic use as currently zoned. Finding: In staff s view the property could be developed in accordance with the existing approved lot layout without a change in layout or a change in zoning conditions. Further the existing zoning approval for POD Q provides for a reasonable economic use. However, the applicant is constantly evaluating the marketability of the remaining PODs in the master planned community and has determined that the private streets and alley-access lots are not in alignment with current market demands for residential development products in the community (does not support request in part, supports request in part). (d) Whether the proposal will result in a use which will or could cause an excessive or burdensome use of existing streets, transportation facilities, utilities, or schools. Finding: Because the overall Planned Unit Development is capped as to the total number of dwelling units, and because the number of lots and dwellings within POD Q will not change (82 proposed), there will no net impact on streets, transportation, utilities, or schools when compared with the approved lot layout (supports request). (e) Whether the proposal is in conformity with the policy and intent of the comprehensive plan including but not limited to the character area map and future land use plan map. 3

4 Finding: Staff finds the proposed change of zoning conditions and revised development proposal are consistent with the character area map, future land use plan map ("suburban residential" and "Planned Unit Development") and applicable policies of the comprehensive plan (supports request). (f) Whether there are other existing or changing conditions affecting the use and development of the property which give supporting grounds for either approval or disapproval of the proposal. Finding: The original approval of the Sterling on the Lake master plan was given by City Council in More than a decade and a half later, and after a severe economic recession, the applicant contends that the originally approved design for POD Q, with private streets and alleyaccess lots is no longer in alignment with current market demands for residential development products in the community. This finding is reason enough to conclude that there are changing conditions between 2001 and 2017 which give supporting grounds for approval of the requested changes (supports request). (g) Existing use(s) and zoning of the subject property and nearby properties. Finding: All PODs within the Sterling on the Lake planned unit development are zoned PUD and are subject to an overall master set of conditions. The modifications requested do not change these overall conditions of approval. Therefore, the requested changes are considered consistent with the overall zoning for the PUD and compatible with existing and proposed land uses surrounding the POD (supports request). (h) Existing value of the property under the existing zoning district classification, the extent to which the property value of the subject property is diminished by the existing zoning district, and the value of the property under the proposed zoning district; if such information is provided by the applicant or can be discerned. This consideration may include the length of time the property has been vacant or unused as currently zoned and efforts taken by the property owner(s) to use the property or sell the property under the existing zoning district classification. Finding: The existing zoning as it pertains to POD Q, which allows for 82 lots, does not diminish the property value, nor will the proposed zoning significantly affect the value of property in POD Q. The land within POD Q has remained undeveloped for more than 15 years, and it is believed that the developer would have built the product approved within the POD if housing market conditions were supportive. The applicant has not tried to sell the property since it is a part of the overall master planned community controlled by the applicant (supports request). (i) Whether a proposed zoning map amendment or conditional use approval will be a deterrent to the value or improvement of development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Finding: In staff s view the proposed zoning changes will not deter value or improvement of development of adjacent property in accordance with existing zoning (supports request). (j) The possible creation of an isolated zoning district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. 4

5 Finding: The zoning classification of PUD will not change if this request is approved, but rather the conditions pertaining to POD Q will be the only change. Therefore, an isolated zoning district will not be created. The PUD zoning district with proposed conditions relates well to the overall PUD zoning district for property and is compatible with adjacent R-1 zoning in unincorporated Hall County (supports request). (k) Possible effects of the change in zoning district map, or change in use, on the character of a zoning district. Finding: No change in use is proposed. The character of the development will not change appreciably if this request is approved. Because POD Q will continue to be subject to the overall conditions of PUD approval applicable for the master planned community as a whole, there are no changes adverse effects or noticeable changes that will result if this request is approved (supports request). (l) The possible impact on the environment, including but not limited to, drainage, soil erosion and sedimentation, flooding, air quality and water quality. Finding: No impacts on the environment are anticipated if this change of rezoning conditions is approved, when compared with development that would result from the existing approval (supports request). (m) The relation that the proposed map amendment or conditional use bears to the purpose of the overall zoning scheme and the purposes of this Zoning Ordinance. Finding: The Flowery Branch zoning ordinance contemplates changes to planned unit development zoning, as necessary. Therefore, the request to modify zoning conditions on an existing PUD is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance. The changes are compatible with overall zoning purposes (supports request). RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Development of POD Q shall be in substantial accordance with the applicant s letter of intent (project narrative) and the rezoning exhibit for Sterling on the Lake POD Q prepared by Rochester & Associates, Inc. dated March 3, 2017, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. 2. POD Q will be continue to be subject to all other applicable conditions of PUD zoning approval as approved in Ordinances 239G and 240G, and prior ordinances as applicable except as specifically modified by this approval. 5