City of Powder Springs - File #: PZ 24-029

Date	Ver.	Action By	Action	Result	Action Details	Meeting Details	Video
12/2/2024	1	City Council	tabled	Pass	Action details	Meeting details	Not available
11/25/2024	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available
11/14/2024	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available
11/4/2024	1	City Council	tabled	Pass	Action details	Meeting details	Not available
10/28/2024	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available
10/7/2024	1	City Council	tabled	Pass	Action details	Meeting details	Not available
9/30/2024	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available
9/12/2024	1	Planning & Zoning Commission			Not available	Meeting details	Not available

PZ 24-029

APPLICANT: Mike Nelson

REZONING REQUEST: Rezone from R-20 to PUD-R.

LOCATION: 3720 and 3716 Powder Springs Road.

ZONING: R-20 Cobb ACRES: 4.9 ac. PINs: 19087000010, 19087000150.

Staff Recommendation: Planning and Zoning Recommendation:

BACKGROUND: The proposed site is approximately 4.9 acres, and currently includes two single-family homes and accessory structures, but the rear of the site is primarily wooded and undeveloped. The 2.26-acre parcel has a 1,1,34 SF home built in 2000. The 2.73-acre parcel has a 1,772 SF home built in 1950. The applicant seeks to rezone the property from R-20 (Single-Family Residential) to PUD-R (Planned Unit Development - Residential) for the development of a 36-unit townhome subdivision.

The property’s location amidst ongoing residential growth, positions it as a candidate for thoughtful redevelopment adequate buffers are necessary to ensure integration into the surrounding community. Additionally, the ongoing growth in the area poses concerns related to traffic impacts.

The applicant proposes a Craftsman-style townhome subdivision, offering open space, walking trails, a gazebo green space, and green courtyards. The site’s configuration features alley access and open green spaces where the rows of townhomes front each other. The proposed layout incorporates modern planning principles, with private alleys and garages in the rear to improve aesthetics, provide usable open green spaces, and essentially eliminate vehicular impacts at the fronts of the homes for most units. However, the configuration features dead end alleys, which pose vehicular circulation concerns and code compliance issues.

This rezoning request reflects the city’s goals of diversifying housing options and accommodating growth while preserving neighborhood character and promoting cohesive site design. TSW’s feedback inspired the final site plan presented. The proposal aims to creatively utilize the narrowness of the site. However, the technical site plan proposed has several non-compliance concerns.

Development Proposal Summary

§ Total Site Area: 4.90 acres

§ Current Zoning: R-20 | Proposed Zoning: PUD-R.

§ Total Units: 36 townhomes | Density: 7.35 units/acre.

§ Unit Size: 28' x 44' with 2-car garages.

§ Open Space: 23% provided (1.15 acres), exceeding the 20% requirement.

§ Amenities: Perimeter walking trails and central gazebo area. Open green spaces between fronting rows.

§ Access: Internal private streets, including alleys serving rear-loaded garages.

§ Parking: Street facing units around drive circle have driveway depths averaging 22.8' for lots 25-27 and 34-36 | Request to vary alley driveways to 20’ | Guest parking: 18 spaces.

Requested Variances

1. Landscape Buffer:

• Reduction on the north side from 25' to 20'.

• Reduction on the east side from 25' to 15'.

• 5' encroachment of sidewalk into the 25' buffer on the west side.

2. Driveway Depths and Alley Widths:

• Driveway depths reduced to 20’.

• Alley Width reduced to 16’.

3. Use of Buffers as Open Space:

• Where walking trail encroaches - portions of the 25' buffer are counted as open space to meet the 20% open space requirement.

4. Building Setbacks:

• Reduction of exterior building setback from 35' to 20' on the north side.

• Reduction of exterior building setback from 35' to 15' on the east side.

Agency and Departmental Comments

1. Cobb Fire Marshall’s Office:

• Dead-end access roads more than 150 feet shall be provided with a turn-around (IFC Chapter 5, 120-3-3 Rules and Regulations, CCDS Section-401 & 402).

2. City Police Department:

• Concerns about dead-end alleys impacting emergency response access.

3. Cobb DOT:

• Recommend maintaining shared access onto Powder Springs Road instead of additional curb cuts.

4. Cobb School District:

• No anticipated impact on student enrollment.

5. City Civil Engineering:

• Confirmed International Fire Code (IFC) 503.2.5 states: “Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus.”

• IFC 2021 IFC Appendix D Table D103.4 also lists the width for dead-end roads to be 20 feet.

• The traffic study and our regulations recommend/require a right turn lane (deceleration lane), and the zoning site plan does not show one nor does there appear to be sufficient room for one.

• The curb radius of the road encroaches on the western adjacent property’s road frontage by approx. 15 feet, not allowed.

• We are not allowing center islands in cul-de-sacs anymore as they restrict turn around capabilities of the garbage trucks.

• It would take some coordination with the eastern development’s owners, but it is recommended that this development uses the existing access on Shelleydale Drive (Creekwood has private roads).

• The entrance does not meet driveway spacing requirements per GDOT Table 3-1. The driveway as shown on the zoning plan only has about 130 feet of space from Shelleydale Drive and if you factor in the 15-foot encroachment, they will be left with 115 feet, which is less than the minimum of 230 feet GDOT requirement (45 MPH posted speed, min. spacing 230 feet, measured from end of driveway radius).

Traffic Impact Analysis Summary

1. Trip Generation:

• AM Peak: 18 trips.

• PM Peak: 22 trips

2. Findings:

• Future “Build” conditions indicate minimal impact on existing traffic levels.

• A deceleration lane is warranted at the site driveway to improve traffic flow.

Fiscal Impact Analysis

Summary of Key Findings

1. Projected Taxable Value at Build-Out:

• The 36 townhomes are estimated to have a total taxable real estate value of $13,535,000 upon project completion.

• The average taxable value per unit is approximately $355,000 (2024 dollars).

2. Municipal Revenues:

• Estimated Annual Revenues: $93,828, including property taxes and other non-tax revenue sources.

• Property taxes account for the largest share of revenue, followed by sanitation, stormwater, and street lighting fees.

3. Municipal Service Costs:

• Estimated Annual Service Costs: $68,700, covering general government, public safety, public works, and other services.

• The cost per unit is projected at approximately $1,900, reflecting the anticipated demand for municipal services from the 36 new households.

4. Net Fiscal Impact:

• Annual Surplus at Build-Out: $25,128, representing a 27% margin of revenues over costs.

• 20-Year Net Present Value (NPV): $131,300, reflecting the long-term positive impact of the development, even as municipal costs increase over time.

5. Phasing and Timeline:

• Construction is anticipated to begin in mid-2025, with full build-out and property tax assessment by 2028.

• Delays in individual unit sales could slightly affect the timing of property tax revenue collection.

Implications for City Finances

1. Positive Short- and Long-Term Fiscal Impact:

• The development is expected to generate a consistent net surplus, enhancing city revenues while requiring manageable increases in municipal service costs.

2. Support for Capital Needs:

• The projected fiscal surplus can be allocated toward city-wide needs, including capital improvements, debt servicing, and other priorities.

3. Growth Management Considerations:

• As the development ages, homestead exemptions and slower property appreciation may erode the net fiscal impact. However, higher turnover rates and investor purchases could offset some of these effects.

4. Minimal Impact on School District and County Finances:

• The analysis assumes that any growth-related impacts on schools or county services will be managed by their respective entities.

SURROUNDING AREA. The property is situated in a rapidly growing area along Powder Springs Road, characterized by a mix of residential development types. To the east, the site is adjacent to the Creekwood subdivision, an active adult quadplex neighborhood. Further east, new construction is underway at Preston development, which includes both detached single-family homes and townhomes. To the south and west, across Powder Springs Road, lies the recently completed Tapp Farm subdivision, which features attached and detached single family units. To the south and west is Light Industrial (LI) zoning where a new climate-controlled storage facility is being developed. The proximity of these developments highlights the area's transition from large-lot residential zoning to a more diverse range of housing densities and types, consistent with the goals of the city's Comprehensive Plan.

Figure 1. Surrounding Area - Zoning Districts.

Figure 2. Aerial Map.

Figure 3. Future Land Use - Suburban Residential Development

Figure 4. Site Plan

Figure 5. Proposed front elevations of single-family units.

Figure 6. Site Plan Revisions.

REZONING REQUEST ANALYSIS:

The application was reviewed against the following criteria:

a. 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.

The rezoning to PUD-R is compatible with the purpose and intent of the Powder Springs Comprehensive Plan, however, the property is designated as Suburban Residential Neighborhood on the city’s Future Land Use Map. This designation prioritizes single-family detached housing as the primary use, with the intent of maintaining a lower-density, family-oriented character.

Furthermore, the requested variances to reduce wooded buffers encroach nature trails into buffers and deviate from minimum building and landscape buffer setbacks undermine the separation and transition principles crucial for preserving neighborhood character in residential areas where densities and use types vary.

• For PUD-R, the building setback abutting any zoning district must be 35' along the perimeter of the site. Per Sec. 2-15 (c)

• For PUD-R, the minimum landscape buffer width abutting any zoning district shall be 25' for the entire perimeter of the site. Per Sec. 2-15 (d)

Applicant’s Response: The Subject Property is located in the City of Powder Springs as is noted as being in the LD Residential land use category on the City’s Future Land Use Map (“FLUM”). The City of Powder Springs FLUM indicates nearby properties in the City of Powder Springs along this section of the north side of Powder Springs Road are delineated as being in the MD Residential, Office Commercial, Mixed Use and Retail Commercial land use categories. The proposed PUD-R zoning district and the proposed use contained and embodied within the Application will allow the Subject Property to be developed on a tract of land that is between attached residential to the east (also zoned PUD-R) and detached residential to the west.

b. 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 zoning district and uses permitted within the PUD-R district are suitable in view of the zoning and development of the nearby properties. A mix of attached and detached single family residential prevails on all sides of the proposed site. However, the proposed development does not incorporate sufficient buffers and uses buffer space toward required open space. As proposed, the development does not mitigate visual and functional impacts on adjacent residential properties.

Applicant’s Response: The zoning proposal will permit a use of the property which is suitable in the context of development and existing zonings which are in direct contiguity or adjacent to the

Subject Property and along this area of Powder Springs Road.

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

The encroachment of nature trails and reductions in wooded buffers diminish the effectiveness of these areas as visual and physical barriers, likely leading to perceived and actual encroachment on adjacent property owners' sense of space and privacy.

The increased traffic generated by 36 townhome units, combined with deficient site circulation and non-compliance with driveway spacing standards, could create adverse impacts on local traffic patterns. This is particularly true given Cobb DOT’s concerns about shared access and insufficient spacing between driveways along Powder Springs Road.

The front stormwater pond’s visibility from Powder Springs Road detracts from the area’s aesthetic character and could negatively influence the perception of nearby properties.

Applicant’s Response: The zoning proposal will have no adverse effect or impact upon the existing uses or usability of adjacent or nearby properties, the preponderance of which are residentially zoned and which transition to commercial westward on the north and south sides of Powder Springs Road. Nearby properties within the City of Powder Springs have varying densities for MDR and LDR residential zonings.

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

The existing zoning is R-20, and the site is currently used as zoned. The current zoning would restrict the number of units. The density proposed by the applicant is 7.35 u/a. The immediate adjacency to the Creekwood subdivision, an active adult quadplex neighborhood, amplifies the need for effective separation and buffering to ensure compatibility. Reducing buffer standards and introducing trail encroachments diminishes the separation essential for preserving the usability and privacy of adjacent properties.

Applicant’s Response: The Subject Property to be affected by the Rezoning proposal has limited reasonable economic use as currently zoned in that the fair market value of same falls below the

range of values of similarly zoned and situated properties with equivalent utility. Additionally, the present owners of the Subject Property are suffering a significant economic detriment by virtue of the continuation of the present R-20 zoning classification. Additionally, the Rezoning of the Subject Property for single-family, attached townhomes will present a unique and appropriately positioned use that brings a combination of two long, rectangular parcels into one residential development.

e. 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.

The site’s dead-end alleys create significant challenges for emergency response, particularly for maneuvering and exiting the area. Dead-end alleys longer than 150 feet lack required turnarounds per fire code, and alleys are only 16 feet wide, failing to meet the 20-foot width requirement. Center islands in cul-de-sacs also obstruct vehicular maneuverability, further exacerbating circulation issues. The proposed development does not meet driveway spacing requirements along Powder Springs Road. The site plan shows only 130 feet of spacing from Shelleydale Drive, falling short of the 230-foot requirement for a 45 MPH posted speed. Additionally, the curb radius of the proposed road encroaches on adjacent property, which is not allowed. The traffic impact study recommends a right-turn (deceleration) lane for safe access to the development. However, the current site plan lacks the space or provisions for implementing this required infrastructure improvement.

Applicant’s Response: The zoning proposal will have no adverse impact upon the existing infrastructure

including, but not limited to, existing streets, fire and police protection, transportation facilities, utilities or schools.

f. 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 proposed rezoning advances the goal of the comprehensive plan related to developing quality housing units. Ther are no conditions being considered that have not been anticipated.

Applicant’s Response: The proposed use will occupy a section of Powder Springs Road that is in an area

developed with attached and detached residential, retail, office, industrial and parks uses.

g. 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 development does not reflect a reasonable balance between the promotion of public health, safety, and general welfare and the property owner’s right to unrestricted use. The deficiencies in safety, traffic circulation, and compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan result in a proposal that prioritizes property use at the expense of community welfare and established planning objectives.

Applicant’s Response: The single-family townhome proposal is balanced between the proposed zoning classification and the uses of the Subject Property and the proposed uses’ impact to the public’s health, safety, and general welfare, all of which are beneficial from a land use perspective.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL. Table, per the request of the applicant’s attorney.

APPENDIX. Cobb County and City Department Comments.

I. Cobb County FMO.

II. Cobb County DOT.

III. School District. Responding in reference to PZ24-029 and PZ24-032

IV. Civil engineering - Croy.

V. Powder Springs Police Department.