Loading...
96SN0148 ~~ -~ -(;-' 4, . . No~y.cmbcr 20, 1995 ere December 13, 1995 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND ' RECOMMENDATION 96SN0148 Hill Development Assoc., LTD.' Bermuda Magisterial District Northeast quadrant of Ironbridge Parkway and Ironbridge Boulevard REQUEST: Amendment to previously granted Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 86S097, 875035, 88SN0061 and 89SN0329) to permit single family residences and exceptions to setback and lot frontage requirements in a Residential (R-7) District.. PROPOSED LAND USE: Specifically, a maximum of fifty-five (55) single family dwellings on a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet is planned, yielding a maximum density of 4..7 units per acre. However, with approval of this request, the property could still be developed for multi-family uses as allowed by the existing zoning. (NOTE: THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A DEFERRAL TO THE BOARD'S FEBRUARY MEETING.) PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPRO V AL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION ON PAGE 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed use complies with the Central Area Land Use and Transllortation Plan which designates the property for residential use of 4.01 to 7.0 units per acre.. B.. The development standards of the Zoning Ordinance and conditions of the existing zoning, along with the Textual Statement further insure land use compatibility with area residential development.. ' . (NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "ST AFF/~PC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "epe" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITION (ST AFF/CPC) The Textual Statement, titled Tract D Ironbridge/Arbor Landing, dated November 15, 1995, shall be considered the requirements for development of single family residential use. (P) (NOTE: This condition is in addition to all applicable conditions of Cases 868097, 87S035, 88SNOO61 and 89SN0329, which remain in effect.) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Ironbridge Parkway and Ironbridge Boulevard. Tax Map 114-6 (1) Part of Parcel 1 (Sheet 31)~ Existini Zoning: R-7 with Conditional Use Planned Development Size: 11.8 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - R-15 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Single family residential or vacant South - R-7 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Multi-family residential East - R-15 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Single family residential or vacant West - R-7 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Vqcant 2 96SN0148/WP/DEC13J l~~~ I~ e . , . . *'" .. ~. -, PUBLIC FACILITIES Utilities: Public Water System A twelve (12) inch water line is located along Ironbridge Boulevard and a sixteen (16) inch water line is located along Ironbridge Parkway. The use of the public water system is required by Ordinance and previous conditions of zoning. Sufficient flow and pressure should be available to meet the domestic and fife protection demands of the proposed use.. Fire flow requirements are established and coordinated through Fire Administration. Public Wastewater System An eight (8) inch wastewater line crosses Ironbridge Boulevard at the northwest corner of the request sit~ and crosses Ironbridge Parkway at the southeast comer. The use of the public wastewater system is required by Ordinance and previous conditions of zoning. Sufficient capacity should be available to support the proposed development.. Environmental: Drainal:e and Erosion Site drains into Ironbridge Lake, then to Great Branch and into Proctors Creek. There are no existing on- or off-site drainage or erosion problems.. . It should be noted that over the past few years, two (2) cluster/zero lot-line subdivisions have been approved and are currently under construction in the County" Within these developments, concerns have arisen relative to surface drainage flowing onto adjacent lots due to reduced side yard setbacks. With no side yard setbacks, there is no ability to retain the surface drainage on the same lot. In addition, the Building Code requires positive drainage away from the structure with a minimum difference in elevation of six (6) inches~ In situations where the lots are relatively shallow and the land is flat, adequate drainage should be provided down the property lines to the front and rear" In cases where there is relatively good relief and one lot drains to the adjacent lot, it is extremely difficult to obtain adequate drainage between homes without having an overall drainage and grading plan with the roof water directed to the front or rear of the home. At the time of tentative subdivision review, conditions will be recommended to address these concems~ Specifically, the following minimwn requirements will be recommended: 1. In conjunction with submission of road and drainage plans, an overall grading plan be submitted to Enviromnental Engineering for 3 96SN0148/WP/DEC13J review and approval~ At a minimum, these plans shall insure that runoff is directed to an adequate drainage channel located to the rear or front of the lot~ This requirement may be modified by Environmental Engineering if it is determined that such plans are not necessary to insure adequate drainage. 2. Privately maintained easements be recorded over all drainage swales located between properties. Fire Service: Chester Fire Station, Company #1. County water flows andfrre hydrants must be provided for fire protection purposes in compliance with nationally recognized standards (i~e~, National Fire Protection Association And Insurance Services Office). Schools: Approximately thirty-two (32) school age children will be generated by this development. The site lies in the Ecoff Elementary School attendance zone: capacity ~ 775, enrollment - 705; Salem Middle School zone: capacity - 1,235, enrollment - 1,175; and Bird High School zone: capacity - 1,575, enrollment - 1,820. The School Administration regularly reviews and revises the program capacities for all County schools. Program capacity is affected by the number of special programs in each school which require a different use of space and the program capacity may change from year to year. Any additional students at the high school level for this area will add to an. already critical situation. The high school attendance area is under extreme overcrowded conditions. Rapid growth is continuing in this area with other approved or planned subdivisions and continued building in existing subdivisions ~ A new high school site is needed, but has yet to be located or funded. However, under current zoning, eighty-eight (88) multi-family dwelliI)g units could be constructed. Approval of this request could decrease the potential impact on the public school system since a maximum of fifty-five (55) single family dwelling units could be constructed. Transportation: This development will have a minimal impact on the existing transportation network. 4 96SN0148IWP/DEC13J r.,.~.; I' . . ~.. .," . . Fiscal Impacts: The Textual Statement limits development to a maximum of fifty-five (55) single family units. This is less than the eighty-eight (88) units that could be developed under the current zoning. Consequently, the proposed amendment will not have a fiscal impact on capital facilities" LAND USE General Plan: Lies within the boundaries of the Central Area Land Use and Transportation Plan which designates the property for residential use of 4.01 to 7.0 units per acre.. Area Development Trends: The request site is part of the Ironbridge mixed use development. Area properties are zoned Residential (R-7 and R-15) and Neighborhood Business (C-2) and are occupied by single family and multi-family residences or remain vacant. Zoning History: On September 10, 1986, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved detached and attached residential units on the subject property, as part of the Ironbridge mixed use development (Case 86S097). A 5,000 square foot minimum lot size was required. On May 27, 1987, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved an amendment to Case 868097 which adjusted the acreage of the subject property. (Case 875035) On July 27, 1988, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved an amendq1ent to Cases 86S0~7 and 87S035 which allowed the development of multi-family residential units on the request site instead of single family residences. (Case 88SN0061) Subsequently, on October 25, 1989, the Board of Supervisors, again upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved an amendment to permit an incre~e in the number of ~ulti-family dwelling units per building and a reduction in the number of buildings on the subject property. (Case 89SN0329) 5 96SNO 148/WP IDEe 13J Site Desi~: The applicant intends to develop detached single family houses on lots having a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. It should be noted that the Zoning Ordinance will require that permanent open space or land, in an amount equivalent to that by which each lot is reduced from the required 9,000 square feet, be provided in common recreational areas within the development.. Existing open space within the Ironbridgel Arbor Landing Development which has not previously been used to count toward required open space may be used toward the requirement for the subject development. Since Ironbridge Parkway and Ironbridge Boulevard are collector roads, lots should not front these roads~ - At time of tentative plan consideration, staff will make recommendations relative to setbacks and buffers along these roads so as to minimize the impact of traffic on residences and minimize the view of rear yards from these roads. Conclusions: The proposed use complies with the C.entral Area Land Use and Transportation Plan which designates the property for residential use of 4~Ol to 7.0 units per acre.. In addition, the development standards of the Zoning Ordinance and conditions of zoning along with the Textual Statement further insure land use compatibility with area residential development. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this request. CASE HISTORY Applicant (11/14/95): The applicant submitted a revised Textual Statement which corrected information that had been inadvertently changed~ The revised Textual Statement establishes side yard setback requirements. In addition, the "Request Analysis" contains an error on page 1 under Proposed Land Use. The applicant proposes to develop a "maximum" of fifty-five (55) single family dwellings instead of the "minimum" of fifty-five (55). Planning Commission Meeting (11/20/95): The applicant accepted the recommendation. There were a number of area residents present who had questions relating to provision of open space, setbacks adjacent to the lake and the type of development proposed. 6 96SN0148/WP/DEC13J . . e . On motion of Mr ~ Cunningham, seconded by Mr ~ Miller, the Commission recommended approval of this req~est, subject to the condition on page 2. . AYES: Messrs. Cunningham, Easter and Miller.. ABSENT: Messrs. ~arsh and Gulley.. Applicant (12/5/95): The applicant requested a deferral to the Board's February meeting. The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, December 13, 1995, beginning at 7:00 p ~m~, will take under consideration this request. 7 96SNO 148/WP /D Ee 13J . . TRACT D. IRONBRIDGE/ARBOR LANDING TEXTUAL STATEMENT November 15, 1995 REQUIRED CONDITIONS Lot Area: Each building, together with its accessory buildings, hereafter erected shall be located on a lot having not less than 5,000 square feet and a front width of not less than forty (40) feet on non-cul-de- sac lots and a front width of not less than twenty (20) feet on cul- de-sac lots with ~ fifty (50) foot width at the building line. Lot Coverage: All buildings including accessory buildings shall not cover more than sixty-five percent (65 %) of the area of such lot. Front Yard: Each lot shall have a front yard depth of not less, than eight (8) feet. Side Yard: Each lot shall have one (1) side yard not less than ten (10) feet in width and one (1) side yard not less than zero (0) feet in width~ Rear Yard: Each lot shall have a rear yard of not less than twenty (20) feet measured from the rear main building line. This may be reduced to fifteen (15) feet if adjacent to . open space that is at least twenty (20) feet wide. Derisity: No more than fifty-five (55) single family units shall be constnIcted. This allowed use shall be in addition to the presently allowed uses on the parcel_ ARBOR/jab ~MF zc . ~ .~ ~~. . R_";'/~o' · t " ." A 'lo.\ sr-- ':-5 ---- 96SNOl48 AMEND C.U. f? D. Ie O~2 ann:SH. 31 ie-sIN ze C~5 v