City of Powder Springs - File #: PZ 21--045

Date	Ver.	Action By	Action	Result	Action Details	Meeting Details	Video
1/18/2022	2	City Council	approved	Pass	Action details	Meeting details	Not available
12/20/2021	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available
12/9/2021	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available
10/25/2021	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available
10/14/2021	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available

STAFF REPORT: PZ 21 - 045

APPLICANT: Adam Baker, SA Land Group

PETITION: To rezone from NRC and R-20 to PUD-R

LOCATION: 3149, 3189, 3215, and New Macland Road, within land lots 725 and 682 of the 19th District, 2nd Section, and Cobb County, GA. PINs: 19072500020, 19072500090, 19068200030.

ZONING: NRC and R-20 ACRES: 6.2 Units: 41 Townhomes Proposed Density: 6.6 Units/AC

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval

BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes developing 41 residential units in a townhome development at the site. In September 2017, Council approved a Special Use Request to house a wireless communications tower on approximately a quarter acre of the southern parcel of the proposed site. That tower currently exists at the parcel cut-out area shown in Figure 1, at the southern boundary of the proposed development.

The PUD-R zoning district is intended to promote high quality residential developments. The PUD-R district is intended to allow flexible site planning and building arrangements under a unified plan of development so that innovative land planning methods may be utilized which foster natural resource conservation and neighborhood cohesiveness as well as neo-traditional developments. The proposed site plan submitted does not include a recreation area, nor a 35-foot perimeter buffer as prescribed by the UDC for PUD-R zoned districts.

Figure 1. Proposed Site Plan. New Macland Road.

SURROUNDING AREA: Residential zoning districts (R-20, MDR) are predominant in the surrounding area to the north, east, and west. Adjacent to the south is CRC zoning - the southern boundary proposed residential development would abut the commercial development at the corner of New Macland and Macedonia Roads.

A 170-foot wireless telecommunication tower and facility currently exists at the southern boundary of the site at 3215 New Macland Road. A Special Use Request was approved in September 2017 to allow the construction, operation and maintenance of the wireless telecommunications tower and related antennas and equipment on an approximate 0.23 acre leased area of a 4.3-acre overall tract. The 0.23-acre parcel-cut-out housing the wireless telecommunication tower is surrounded by a 7’ chain-link fence and will retain CRC zoning with the remainder of the tract included in the rezoning request. A variance request will be required as this will result in the remaining CRC site housing the wireless telecommunication tower not conforming to code provisions for lot size, frontage, setback, etc. requirements for CRC zoned districts.

Figure 2. Current Zoning Districts. Pink: CRC. Yellow: R-20.

ANALYSIS:

The application was reviewed against the following criteria:

1. Whether the proposed zoning district and uses within that district are compatible with the purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. The future development map and the

future land use plan map of the city’s comprehensive plan shall be used in decision making relative to amendments to the official zoning map, in accordance with Table 13-1:

The proposed zoning district is compatible with the designation from the Future Land Development Map. Figure 3 shows Village Center Residential (orange) for the future designation of the subject property. The comprehensive plan lists Townhomes as an appropriate use in Village Center Residential, and PUD-R as an appropriate zoning district. Village Center Residential in the UDC’s Table 13-1 is compatible with R-30, R-20, R-15, MDR, MXU Zoning Districts.

The 2017 Comprehensive Plan listed the proposed site as a redevelopment area, and the concept for the site shows town homes with a recreation area. Figure 4 provides a side by side comparison of the site concept and the applicant’s site plan.

Figure 3. Future Land Development Map. The proposed subject site is the southern portion of the orange area left of center.

Figure 4. Comparison of Development Concept Plan from 2017 Comprehensive Plan vs Proposed Site Plan.

2. Whether the proposed zoning district and uses permitted within that district are suitable in view of the zoning and development of adjacent and nearby property.

The proposed rezoning to PUD-R, at the density proposed, is compatible with the existing residential zoning districts that prevail in the area to the north, east and west of the proposed site. However, the proximity of wireless telecommunication tower that currently exists at the southern boundary in the parcel cut-out area is not compatible with the proposed development. Several residential units at the proposed development are in the failure zone of the tower, as demonstrated in Figure 4.

Figure 5. Potential Failure Zone of Tower. 170-foot radius demonstrated from tower location at southern boundary.

3. Whether the existing use or usability of adjacent or nearby property will be adversely affected by one or more uses permitted in the requested zoning district.

The proposed residential use at this CRC zoned site would not adversely affect the usability of other property in the area, however, the existing use of the southern parcel cut-out housing the wireless communication tower could potentially adversely affect the proposed development. The proposed development places 11 residential units (27% of the all units) in the failure zone of the 170-foot tower, as demonstrated in Figure 4.

4. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot or should not be used as currently zoned.

There is not substantial reason why the property cannot be used as currently zoned. The proposed site, by right, could be developed for a commercial use compatible with the current CRC zoning.

5. Whether public facilities such as roads, schools, water and sewer utilities, and police and fire protection will be adequate to serve the proposed zoning district and uses permitted.

Feedback has not yet been received and considered as it relates to the impact to schools, public safety capacity, and roads. The proposed development of 41 townhome units is of moderate size and staff is of the uncorroborated opinion that public service, utility, and public safety providers should have sufficient capacity to support this proposed rezoning and use for 41 townhomes.

6. Whether the proposed zoning district and uses permitted within that zoning district are supported by new or changing conditions not anticipated by the comprehensive plan or reflected in the existing zoning on the property or surrounding properties.

The Comprehensive Plan supports the proposed residential rezoning and designates that site as Village Center Residential, which is in the Medium Density Residential category. The comprehensive plan lists Townhomes as an appropriate use in Village Center Residential, and PUD-R as an appropriate zoning district.

7. Whether the proposed zoning district and uses permitted within that zoning district reflect a reasonable balance between the promotion of the public health, safety, morality or general welfare and the right to unrestricted use of property.

The proposed zoning district, and the proposed site plan that places residential units within the potential failure zone of the wireless communication tower does not promote public health and safety.

There exists prevailing perception that the radio frequency waves from wireless communication towers pose a health risk. The American Cancer Society’s Report on Cell Towers <https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/CRC/PDF/Public/6645.00.pdf> states that:

At this time, there’s no strong evidence that exposure to RF waves from cell phone towers causes any noticeable health effects. However, this does not mean that the RF waves from cell phone towers have been proven to be absolutely safe. Most expert organizations agree that more research is needed to help clarify this, especially for any possible long-term effects.

The full report is available from the highlighted link above - Report on Cell Towers. It is also attached to the agenda.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with the following conditions:

1. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan compliant with these stipulations for Administrative Review. Site Plan must be consistent with PUD-R regulations and all other applicable regulations identified in the Unified Development Code.

2. No housing units shall be constructed within the potential failure zone of the adjacent wireless communication tower. The specific distance for the radius of the “failure zone” shall be determined by and reported to staff by a structural engineer or other qualified expert.

3. A recreation area shall be provided at a ratio of 1 acre per 50 units (or a proportional percentage thereof) with a minimum of 10,000 square feet provided. Such area shall be developed with at least one recreational feature, such as a walking trail, pavilion, gazebo, picnic area, swimming pool, playground or tennis courts. Recreational areas must be outside of any floodplain area. Any recreation area must be located in an area with a slope of less than 15%; however, all recreation areas or applicable green space must meet ADA requirements for accessibility.

4. All residential units shall have two-car garages, and the parking pads/driveway in

front of the garage shall be a minimum of 22 feet in length.

5. The setback are as follows:

Front: 15 feet from right-of-way

Perimeter: 35 feet setback

Between buildings: Minimum of 10 feet

Design Review shall be conducted via Administrative Review.

6. Units must be staggered to the extent required by code, they must provide some staggering or variation as approved by an Administrative Design Review.

7. Materials to be used on exterior facades of all buildings shall include no less than 50% brick or stone, on the front and side facades. If the rear of the building faces the main right-of-way, 50% brick on the rear façade that is visible to the main road will be required. The architectural style and composition of the homes shall consist of traditional architecture on all sides. Variety in the neighborhood will be provided using stone and different shades of brick. An administrative design review will be required.

8. The creation of a mandatory Homeowners' Association ("HOA") and the submission of Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("CCRs") during the Plan Review process, which shall include, among other components, strict architectural controls. The mandatory HOA shall be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of fencing, landscaping, open space areas, sidewalks, community areas, stormwater detention and/or water quality ponds, lighting, the entrance to the Residential Community and any amenities.

9. The submission of a landscape plan during the Plan Review process which shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. Additionally, the landscape plan shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:

a. Detention pond landscaping and screening plan for around the proposed detention and water quality areas with Cryptomeria, Arborvitae and/or other evergreen trees.

b. Compliance with landscape section renderings/elevations which will be submitted under separate cover during the Plan Review process.

c. The landscape plan, which shall be prepared, stamped and signed by a Georgia Registered Landscape Architect or a degreed Horticulturist and shall identify open space areas; landscaped common areas; and other components of the proposed Residential Community which will be further identified during the Plan Review process.

d. The installation of underground utilities and the utilization of decorative lighting themed to the architectural style and composition as above mentioned.

e. All HVAC, mechanical systems and home utilities within the community shall be screened by way of fencing and/or landscaping.

f. Entry signage for the proposed Residential Community shall be ground-based, monument-style, landscaped, lighted and irrigated.

g. The installation of landscaped front, side, and rear yards.

h. Compliance with the City's current Tree Preservation & Replacement Ordinance and substantial conformity to all tree protection measures and the adherence to same during the construction and build out of the Residential Community.

10. A third-party management company shall be hired to manage the day-to-day operations of the HOA and shall also be responsible for the management of all Association monies as well as insuring that the Association is properly insured until such time as the HOA makes a determination that it can undertake such responsibilities.

11. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to approve minor modifications to these stipulations, the architectural renderings/elevations, the site plan and the overall proposal as it proceeds through the Plan Review process and thereafter except for those that:

a) Increase the density of the Residential Community.

b) Relocate a structure closer to the property line of adjacent property which is zoned the same or in a more restrictive zoning district.

c) Increase the height of a building which is adjacent to property which is zoned in the same or more restrictive zoning district.

d) Change access locations to different rights-of-way.

12. Road frontages will be heavily and professionally landscaped which may include the use of berms, fencing, and substantial plant material to provide for visual screening. All perimeter and roadway buffer areas will either be owned by the HOA or deed restricted with maintenance easements in favor of the HOA.

13. Sidewalk and gutter shall be developed along the New Macland Road frontage.

If the development on the site stalls for a period of 6 months or more, the site be replanted per a plan approved by the Community Development Director showing compliance with minimum tree canopy, street trees and buffer