Title
Rezoning: GW Investments/ Rea Ventures Group, Abbington Trail Phase II LL 804, 805, 824, 825
Request a change in zoning conditions / Site Plan
Body
Background:
GW Investments/Rea Ventures Group have requested an amendment to the stipulations and approved site plan for the subject property located at Richard D. Sailors Parkway, Florence Road and C.H. James Parkway (Zoning Map and Aerial View attached). The site is zoned MXU and has been considered for a number of stipulation amendments; the last being denied by Mayor and Council. The most current stipulations and site plan applying to the property are attached (July 21, 2014). The current proposal for stipulation and site plan amendment is summarized as follows:
• 80 units of senior housing over 5,000 square feet of ground level medical office space These additional residential units are exceeding the “60-unit tax credit maximum established for the southern parcel” via the July 21, 2014 stipulations.
• Unit mix will consist of 8 1-bedroom units; 64 2-bedroom units and 8 3-bedroom units. 20 % of the 80 units are proposed as market rate apartments.
• 80 units of senior housing and ground level retail to be located in a single 3 story building with architectural features and EarthCraft development standards to match Phase 1 of the project. Applicant proposes interior building amenities such as library space, computer center, on site laundering and exercise/fitness room.
• Applicant also proposes pedestrian streetscape amenities, community garden and Porte Cochere and outdoor public green area.
• Remainder of site will be developed with a 6,600 square foot retail restaurant site, 4 story 65,200 square foot hotel and 3 story 30,000 square foot free standing office building (which appear to be consistent with the July 21, 2014 stipulations).
Applicable Unified Development Code and Staff Analysis:
Section 11-2 of the UDC establishes the following standards the Planning and Zoning Commission and Mayor and City Council to consider in evaluating zoning petitions:
1. Is the proposed use compatible with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan? It is staff’s opinion that the applicant’s proposed use is compatible with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The Future Development Map adopted in the Comprehensive Plan 2005-2025 designate the property as Community Activity Center, which accommodates a “mix of commercial, professional, civic, public and in some areas higher density residential uses.” The Community Activity Center “should include a retail commercial component consistent with the city’s mixed-use zoning designation.” The proposed development complies with the use distribution in Table 2-5 “Distribution of Residential and Commercial/Office Portions of a Mixed-Use Development” as more than 40 percent of the development is comprised of residential and open spaces uses. However, it does not comply with the Total Density Allowed, as the UDC allows 12 du/acre while the development proposes 20 du/acre. The proposed MXU district is also compatible with Table 4-Future Land Use and Zoning Comparison found in the Community Agenda section of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development provides a housing mix that advances Housing goals via the comprehensive plan and somewhat addresses open space preservation espoused in the Natural and Cultural Resources Element of the plan.
2. Is the proposed use consistent with the stated purpose of the zoning district? It is staff’s opinion that the applicant’s proposal provides a suitable mix of residential and non-residential space, including a vertical integration of medical office and senior living space as well as nonresidential uses oriented to arterial roadways and public green space.
3. Is the proposed use suitable in view of the zoning and development of adjacent and nearby property? It is staff’s opinion the proposed use is suitable in view of the zoning and development of adjacent and nearby property. As shown on the attached zoning map, adjoining properties are zoned LI, CRC and MXU.
4. Will the existing use or usability of adjacent or nearby property be adversely affected by the proposed use? It is staff’s opinion that adjacent and nearby properties are being used for multifamily, commercial and light industrial use; thus no adverse effect is anticipated.
5. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot or should not be used as currently zoned? The property has been zoned MXU, subject to stipulations and a site plan (July 21, 2014). These stipulations were intended to allow development of a motel, office condos, housing over retail and 60 senior independent living units eligible for Department of Community Affairs tax credits. The applicant contends that the market has changed so that the originally approved plan is long longer feasible.
6. Are or will public facilities such as schools, water or sewer utilities and police or fire protection be adequate to serve the proposed use? It is staff’s opinion that there are adequate infrastructure utilities and public services existing to accommodate the applicant’s proposed use. Given the target age group for the proposed residential uses, it is staff’s opinion that there will be little to no impact on the public school system.
7. Is the proposed use supported by new or changing conditions not anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan or reflected in the existing zoning on the property or surrounding properties? As previously stated, the applicant contends that the market has changed so that the previously approved plan is no longer viable.
8. Does the proposed use reflect a reasonable balance between the promotion of public health, safety, morality or general welfare and the right to unrestricted use of the property? It is staff’s opinion that the proposed use with the attenuate stipulations and certain modifications could provide a reasonable balance between protecting the health, safety and welfare of the community and the rights of the property owner.
Staff Recommendation:
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends approval subject to the following:
• All previous stipulations except those modified herein remain in effect. The development shall comply with all standards of the Unified Development Code unless specifically varied from site plan submitted. Additionally, unless otherwise varied by the current action, all previous conditions and stipulations assigned to the property shall be re-adopted and assigned to the development.
• 80 units of senior housing proposed must be vertically integrated with ground level medical office space in a single structure and in substantial compliance with site plan submitted.
• Applicant to submit proposed leasing agreements to demonstrate that occupants of the project will be limited to age 62 and older in accordance with Fair Housing Act, prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit.
• Proposed hotel site must be permitted concurrently with proposed senior housing to maintain a suitable land use mix per the MXU standards. Vertical construction of hotel site must be substantially complete prior to proposed senior housing and medical office space receiving a Certificate of Occupancy.
• Applicant to contribute to streetscaping initiatives along Richard Sailors Parkway (2 landscaped medians instead of traffic circle) including potential installation of curb and gutter along all adjacent roadways.
• Applicant to comply with Cobb County Department of Transportation recommendations and comments including limiting access along Dallas-Powder Springs Road to “right in, right out” or providing left turn storage into the site. Applicant to submit traffic study including all proposed uses which addresses project and system impacts and improvements to the Cobb County Department of Transportation prior to issuance of a land disturbance permit, if required.
• Within 60 days of approval, developers for this and property adjacent to the east prepare and submit a stormwater management agreement that provides for the appropriate retention and detention facility operation and maintenance.
• Within 6 months of this approval or prior to the issuance of a land disturbance permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant/owner shall submit a third party market analysis in support of the proposal and to support the assertion that the original proposal for a greater mix of uses is not feasible in Powder Springs, subject to review and approval by the City of Powder Springs.
• Applicant/Owner shall provide inter-parcel pedestrian and vehicular access between all
• properties.
• Parking plan to be submitted, reviewed and approved by Community Development Department prior to issuance of land disturbance permit. Parking plan to demonstrate that no parking areas will be adjacent to public roadways; rather oriented behind the structures as depicted on site plan submitted.
• Additional restaurant space (in excess of amount depicted on site plan submitted) may be considered as part of parking plan to be considered by Community Development Department.