Planning Commission Agenda 09-2014

MEMORANDUM
TO:
Rock Hill Planning Commission
FROM:
Eric S. Hawkins, AICP, Planner III
RE:
Meeting Agenda
DATE:
August 27, 2014
The Rock Hill Planning Commission will hold its regularly scheduled monthly meeting
Tuesday, September 2, 7:00 PM, City Hall Council Chambers, 155 Johnston Street. The
public hearing portion of the meeting can be viewed online at
http://cityofrockhill.com/departments/office-of-management-budget/more/office-ofmanagement-budget-omb-/city-channel/live-stream. Please feel free to call me at
329.8763 regarding any item on the following agenda. Thank you.
AGENDA
Rock Hill Planning Commission
September 2, 2014
Pledge of Allegiance
1.
Approval of minutes of August 5, 2014, meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
2.
Hold public hearing and consider a recommendation to City Council on petition M2014-16 by Silver Rock Hill LLC to amend the Corporate Boulevard PUD Plan for
the purposes of allowing indoor recreation uses. The property is approximately
28.62 acres and is located at 774 Corporate Boulevard. Tax parcels 662-07-01-082
through -084.*
3.
Hold public hearing and consider a recommendation to City Council on petition M2014-17 by City of Rock Hill to rezone approximately 2.81 acres at 1602 Baylor
Drive from Residential Development-I (RD-I) to Single-Family Residential-3 (SF-3).
The subject property is proposed to be annexed into the City of Rock Hill. Tax
parcel 636-00-00-054.*
T:\PLNDEV\DEVSVC\WORKING FILES\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\P C\2014\2014_PC09\20140902_PCAGENDA.DOC
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
155 JOHNSTON STREET, P.O. BOX 11706
ROCK HILL, SC 29731-1706, 803/329-7080
Planning Commission Agenda
Page 2
September 2, 2014
NEW BUSINESS
4.
Consideration of a request by Wolverton & Associates, Inc., for Major Site Plan
approval for Wal-Mart Supercenter at Saluda/Mt. Holly. (Plan #20130916)**
5.
Consideration of a request by Flatiron Group for Major Site Plan approval for
Waterford Terrace Apartments. (Plan #20120798)**
6.
Consideration of a request by Assured Group for Preliminary Plat approval for an
extension of Herrons Ferry Road. (Plan #20140677)**
7.
Consideration of a request by Keck & Wood for Preliminary Plat approval for
Waterford Site D road. (Plan #20140505)**
8.
Other Business.
9.
Adjourn.
* The Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council on these items.
Recommendations made at this meeting are tentatively scheduled for consideration by
City Council at their September 22 meeting. City Council agendas are posted on the City
website (www.cityofrockhill.com) on the Friday prior to each meeting. Please contact Eric
Hawkins at 803.329.8763 or [email protected] with any questions.
** The Planning Commission makes the final decision on these items.
Planning Commission Agenda Items
rk
India
Old Yo
Ho o k
Hw
Mt Gallant
y 21
Sutton
City of Rock Hill, SC
Planning Commission
September 2, 2014
3
6
Celanese
Heckle
rlo
He
ng
C
Ma
in
r
he
I-77
York
2
ry
Dave Lyle
7
rs
Ande
on
5
lls
le
h
rig
Alb
t
4
n
n
rso
de
Og
e
And
I-77
ne
ck
He
n
Co
c
M
.H
Mt
y
oll
Legend
River
a
lud
Sa
¯
City Limits
#
Map Not Drawn To Scale
Agenda
Item
DR 8/27/14
Planning Commission
City of Rock Hill, South Carolina
August 5, 2014
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held Tuesday, August 5, 2014, at 7:00 P.M.
in City Council Chambers, City Hall, 155 Johnston Street, Rock Hill, South Carolina.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Tom Roper, Randy Graham, Georgia Thomas, Duane Christopher,
Sherry Easley, Gladys Robinson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Jeff Greene
STAFF PRESENT
Eric Hawkins, Leah Youngblood, Bill Meyer, Josh Reinhardt,
Brandon Wiggins, Janice Miller
1.
Approval of minutes of the July 8, 2014, meeting.
Mr. Christopher made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 8, 2014, meeting.
Dr. Robinson seconded and the motion passed by a vote of 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
2.
Hold public hearing and consider a recommendation to City Council on petition M2014-13 by Cynthia M. Bickel and Robert Hurst to rezone approximately 2.38 acres
at 1232, 1238, 1242, 1246, 1254, & 1258 E. White Street from Neighborhood Office
(NO) to Limited Commercial (LC). Tax parcels 626-04-01-020 & -021, 626-04-01027 & -028 and 626-04-01-029 & -030.
Mr. Hawkins presented the staff report.
The applicant, Cynthia M. Bickel, 310 Skyview Drive, Catawba, stated that since
commercial zoning was located on three sides, she felt that this property should also be
commercial. She has not been able to sell the house as residential.
There were no questions or comments from the audience.
Mrs. Easley presented the motion to recommend approval of the application as presented.
Mrs. Thomas seconded, and the motion carried by a vote of 6-0.
3.
Hold public hearing and consider a recommendation to City Council on petition M2014-14 by Virginia & Elias Properties, LLC to rezone approximately 5.9 acres at
2445 & 2429 Ebenezer Road from Industrial General (IG) to Limited Commercial
(LC). Tax parcels 589-01-01-047 & -048.
Mr. Hawkins presented the staff report.
There were no questions or comments from the applicant or the audience.
Dr. Robinson presented the motion to recommend approval of the application as
presented. Mrs. Easley seconded, and the motion carried by a vote of 6-0.
4.
Hold public hearing and consider a recommendation to City Council on petition M2014-15 by Waffle House, Inc. to rezone approximately 0.93 acres at 2553 Cherry
Road from Urban Development (UD) in York County to Community Commercial
(CC). This property is proposed to be annexed into the City of Rock Hill. Tax map
number 662-00-00-022.
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2
August 5, 2014
Mr. Hawkins presented the staff report.
Mr. Christopher asked if the redevelopment would create the need for shared parking
with adjacent property owners of if parking would be independent and if a road could be
created behind all the properties. Mr. Hawkins stated that parking was independent
currently, and that they had looked at the possibility of connecting the properties by a
road behind all the properties. He noted that when property where the Cookout restaurant
was redeveloped, the stub-out was constructed in order to allow for this connection. He
added that this would require the cooperation of all the property owners.
Brian Russell, applicant’s representative, 2553 Cherry Road, stated that this Waffle
House had been in place for over thirty years, and that a new one was needed in order to
meet current standards. He added that the request to build a road behind the building
could be presented to the Waffle House Corporation for consideration, but would also
require the cooperation of adjacent property owners.
Mr. Christopher asked if the new building would be the same size or larger than the
current one. Mr. Russell stated that it would actually be slightly smaller than the current
building but provide the same level of service.
There were no further questions or comments from the audience.
Mrs. Thomas presented the motion to recommend approval of the application as
submitted. Dr. Robinson seconded, and the motion carried by a vote of 6-0.
NEW BUSINESS
5.
Consideration of a request by Keck & Wood, Inc. for Major Site Plan approval for
The Arbors at Manchester Village (Formerly “Apartments at Seven Oaks”). (Plan
#20140301)
Mr. Hawkins presented the staff report.
Mr. Christopher asked for details on what the legal determination would address. Mr.
Hawkins stated that it is to be determined if the 20% open space and tree save area would
be required for each of the three parcels or if it could be combined for the overall
development project.
Mr. Roper asked if the tree save area included the detention pond area. Mr. Hawkins
stated that it is included as part of the percentage.
The applicant, Tony Berry, 4701 Old Course Drive, Charlotte, was available to answer
questions and provide an overview of the proposed project. He noted that he had met
with the neighbors and that the plan presented took their concerns into consideration.
Mr. Roper asked if the access points would line up with the drives across Springsteen.
Mr. Berry stated that they lined up the drives as best they could in order to meet road
separation requirements since they are unable to access Seven Oaks Boulevard. He noted
the realignment of Evelyn Drive and the required left-turn lane that would be constructed.
Mr. Berry presented an overview of the proposed project, noting specifically the added
security measures that are planned including key-card building entrance access, interior
entry into apartments, and security cameras. He noted that the complex will be marketed
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3
August 5, 2014
more towards senior citizens, families, and single-parent families. In addition, he stated
that the architecture was designed to tie into that of the Manchester Village area with a
more urban feel. He stated that he hoped an agreement regarding the stormwater
easement could be reached, and added that the plan was to reduce stormwater drainage
going into the Seven Oaks system. With reference to the tree canopy and open space
calculation issue, if the three parcels are considered as a combined development site, the
tree canopy and open space provided exceeds the requirements. He provided overviews
of the floor plans, noting that the layouts are more like house plans.
Mr. Christopher asked if cisterns or pervious pavers had been considered during the
stormwater design phase. Mr. Berry stated that they had not.
John Gast, Keck & Wood (project engineer), 215 Hampton Street, Rock Hill, was present
to answer questions about the stormwater issues. He noted that they would have to do
some water quality measures depending upon the wetland jurisdiction determination of
the pond.
Mr. Roper asked about the wetlands determination. Mr. Gast explained that a wetlands
scientist would submit a package to the Army Corps of Engineers to determine if the
pond can be used as a detention pond site, or if they would have to take measures to send
only clean water to the pond.
Mr. Roper asked about the previous determination of the pond as it showed up on the
National Wetlands Inventory. Mr. Gast stated that a determination would still have to be
made.
Mr. Christopher asked if the elevations presented were final. Mr. Berry stated that it is
very close to what is required by the City’s design standards.
Mr. Roper allowed members of the audience to speak on this subject, providing the usual
guidelines.
Larry Soles, 1806 Springsteen Road, spoke in opposition of the plan, noting the increase
in traffic congestion during the Christmas holiday season. He added that the pond under
discussion had been deeded by Mr. Flint to Sturgis Estates for the community’s use.
Milton Delair, 1686 Essex Hall Drive, expressed his concern over the stormwater
calculations, noting that the detention pond in Seven Oaks is inadequate and unable to
contain stormwater overflow. He noted that the current building elevations were much
better than previous submittals. He also noted that since the apartments would back up to
Essex Hall Drive and Craven Hill Drive, a good buffer should be required to protect those
neighbors.
John Dattilio, 1670 Shetland Lane, noted his concern over decreased property values and
the increase in crime associated with apartment complexes. He also stated that he had
been told by the developer that the lots were to be developed as townhomes.
Kevin Sutton, 636 Atherton Way, spoke regarding the need to have planned
developments within the City in order to protect the interests of adjacent property owners.
He also stated that the pond on Evelyn Street had been purchased by the developer in
order to meet the tree canopy and open space requirements and that something doesn’t
seem right with that.
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 4
August 5, 2014
Irene Uhl, 1654 Essex Hall Drive, stated that she appreciated that the apartments would
not be accessed by Seven Oaks Boulevard but that she had concern that the apartments
would not be architecturally consistent with the Seven Oaks neighborhood.
Allen Wellmaker, 637 Wildwood Drive, noted his concern that the access points for the
apartment complex should all be from Springsteen Road, not from Evelyn Drive. Mr.
Roper stated that the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) would not
approve having all entrances off Springsteen Road.
Martha Hunsucker, 658 Charles Lane, stated her opposition noting the increase in traffic
and crime and decrease in property values.
John Cross, 1619 Essex Hall Drive, expressed concern over the treatment of the Seven
Oaks Boulevard entrance, especially in reference to the removal or destruction of existing
landscaping that may fall outside the Seven Oaks HOA ownership.
Mohammed Albaba, 1698 Hopalong, stated that he owned the Yorkmart Convenience
Store at Springsteen and Anderson Roads, and noted his concern over the increase in
crime. He stated that he owned property in Seven Oaks but that he was concerned about
constructing a house at this time due to crime and decrease in property values.
In response to these concerns, Mr. Berry reiterated the security measures that would be in
place as well as the requirement by potential residents to complete credit and reference
checks. He also stated that a unit would be offered to a City of Rock Hill police officer at
a reduced rate, provided the officer drove their vehicle on site and assisted in any
incidents. He also noted that the way the property will be managed would create a
quality product.
Mr. Berry stated that the SCDOT and the City required that only one access point was
allowed off Springsteen with the other being off Evelyn. He noted that he would prefer
to see only one access point off Springsteen but that with the number of units proposed,
two accesses were required. He stated he was willing to work with the neighborhood to
address the landscaping plans, and that they were not intending to make any changes to
the existing landscaping along Seven Oaks Boulevard. He also noted that it was rumored
the pond would be drained and stated that this was not so, that he believed it would be
used for stormwater retention purposes.
Dr. Robinson asked if the design proposed was a standard design and how this would
blend in with the surrounding community. Mr. Berry stated that in order for the
apartments to blend in, it would require the addition of a hipped roof which would add 810 feet to the height of the buildings. He also noted that since the buildings will be
located closer to Springsteen and Evelyn, this would create a more imposing structure.
Mrs. Thomas asked where the entrances to each unit would be located. Mr. Berry stated
that each apartment will be accessed from an internal hallway and that the balconies will
be provided along the outside only as an amenity, not an entrance.
Mrs. Thomas asked about the unit sizes. Mr. Berry stated that the one bedroom units will
be 768 square feet, the two bedroom will be 1172 square feet, and the three bedroom will
be 1274 square feet.
Dr. Robinson asked Mr. Berry to address the concern about buffers for the homes that
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 5
August 5, 2014
back up to the proposed apartments. Mr. Berry stated that one of the buildings that backs
up to the homes will be two stories due to its proximity to the single-family lots, the
garage buildings will serve as a buffer, the landscaping will meet City standards, and a
solid vinyl or wood fence will surround the property.
Mr. Christopher asked about the possibility of the complex becoming condos in the
future. Mr. Berry stated that they could become condos in the future and will be built to
specifications that will allow the conversion.
Dr. Robinson asked why condos weren’t considered for this proposal. Mr. Berry stated
that there was no market for condos at this time and that financing is difficult to attain for
condos.
Mrs. Easley asked for clarification on the Planning Commission’s responsibility for this
review. Mr. Roper stated it was mainly to determine if the plans met the zoning
requirements.
Mr. Graham stated that the main issues he heard from the neighbors were traffic,
stormwater, buffers, building design, and crime. He noted that the main issues that could
be addressed by the Commission were the provision of adequate buffers and traffic. He
asked Mr. Hawkins if a traffic study had been performed, and Mr. Hawkins stated that it
had not. Mr. Berry added that in meeting with the SCDOT and the City, the SCDOT
determined that not enough traffic was generated by the proposed development to require
a traffic study.
Mr. Graham noted that the portion of the site south of Seven Oaks Boulevard is elevated
above Seven Oaks and encouraged the applicant to preserve some natural tree canopy in
that area if there is an opportunity to do so.
Mrs. Easley stated that she thinks as much as possible is being done to minimize the
negative impact the development would have, including the security features and the
building materials.
Mrs. Easley presented a motion to approve the major site plan subject to the outcome of
the wetlands determination for the pond, the legal review by the City attorney, resolution
of the stormwater easement issue, and staff comments. Mr. Christopher seconded the
motion.
Mr. Christopher encouraged the design of adequate screening and addressing the
stormwater issue.
Mr. Roper called for a vote, and the motion carried by a vote of 6-0.
6.
Other Business
Mr. Graham asked that staff consider moving the August meeting date for future years in
order to accommodate attendance at Neighborhood Night Out events.
7.
Adjourn
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:58PM.
Staff Report to Planning Commission
M-2014-16
Meeting Date: September 2, 2014
E
Petition by Silver Rock Hill, LLC to amend the Corporate Boulevard PUD Master Plan. The property
is approximately 28.62 acres and is located at 774 Corporate Boulevard.
Reason for Request: The applicant is requesting the amendment to allow indoor recreation uses
and to create parking standards for that use.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments.
SEE ATTACHED REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATION
Case No. M-2014-16
Rezoning Analysis-Report to Planning Commission
Meeting Date: September 2, 2014
Location:
Corporate Blvd. PUD
Site Area:
Approximately 28.62 acres
Request:
Amend existing PUD
Proposed Change:
Allow for commercial indoor recreation uses
Applicant:
Dawan Feely
Bounce Planet, USA
235 E. Main St., Ste. 130
Rock Hill, SC 29730
Proposal
The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Corporate Blvd. PUD to allow for
commercial indoor recreation uses and to create parking standards for that use. He is
interested in opening a “bounce house” with after-school mentoring of children within the
PUD at 774 Corporate Blvd. Ste. C-103 (a suite in a multi-tenant building). The PUD does
not currently allow commercial indoor recreation uses.
Please note that if this amendment were approved, all types of commercial indoor
recreation could be allowed within the PUD, not just the applicant’s proposed “bounce
house.” The Zoning Ordinance describes commercial indoor recreation as follows.
Additionally, this request involves removing the commercial indoor parking measure of 1
space per every 400 square feet so that the use reverts back to the regular Ordinance
measure, which is the greater of 1 per every 200 square feet or 1 per every 4 persons of
occupant load. This measure appears to be a more realistic determination of parking need
for indoor recreation uses. (For example, this particular tenant space is 3,300 square feet. If
the parking measure currently in the PUD were used, that would mean that only 8 spaces
would be allocated for this use. With an occupant load of 67, which is the occupant load of
Rezoning Analysis-Report to Planning Commission
M-2014-16
Page 2
the space for a commercial indoor recreation use, a more realistic number is the 16 that
would be required under the regular ordinance standards.)
The proposed amendments are shown in the attached PD Terms & Conditions document.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Staff hereby certifies that the required public notification actions have been completed as
follows:

August 15: Rezoning notification signs posted on subject property.

August 15: Rezoning notification postcards sent to 21 property owners within 300’ of
the subject property.

August 16: Planning Commission public hearing advertisement published in The
Herald.
Neighborhood Meeting
A neighborhood meeting was held on August 7, 2014. Minutes of the meeting are attached.
Please note that at the time of the meeting, the applicants advised that they may rent the
facility to a religious institution, but that is no longer the case.
Public feedback
Anne Blake, 818 Wilkerson Road, called to express concerns about who received notices
and who did not. Staff explained that we generate a list of properties within 300 feet of the
property in question and notify those property owners. She also wanted to make sure that
the commercial indoor recreation use would allow for neither adult entertainment nor an
indoor firing range. Staff explained that it would not allow for either of those uses.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff Assessment
The proposed use of commercial indoor recreation, provided that parking for the use is
appropriately planned through the associated change in the parking measure, is compatible
with the existing and allowed uses in the PUD as well as with existing uses in the
surrounding area.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Corporate Boulevard PUD.
Attachments



Terms & Conditions Document
PD Master Plan
Neighborhood Meeting Minutes
To see the applications submitted for this case, go to: www.cityofrockhill.com/PlanInfo.
Staff Contact:
Leah Youngblood
[email protected]
803-329-5569
Corporate Boulevard PUD
Terms & Conditions
PERMITTED USES:
Within the PUD district, a building or premise requires site plan approval, and can only
be used for the following purposes:
1. Day Care
a. Adult day care center
b. Child day care center (7 or more persons)
2. Educational Facilities
a. Vocational or trade school
3. Health Care Facilities
a. Drug and alcohol treatment facility
b. Hospital
c. Medical and dental clinic
d. Medical treatment facility (20 or fewer)
4. Institutions
a. Assisted living facility
b. Nursing home
c. Religious institution, with seating capacity less than 300 in sanctuary or main
activity area
d. Religions institution with seating capacity of 300 or greater in sanctuary or main
activity area, or with accessory schools, day care centers with more than 50
children, or recreational facilities
5. Agricultural Support and Services
a. Nursery, commercial
6. Animal Care
a. Animal Grooming
b. Veterinary clinic without boarding
c. Veterinary clinic with boarding
7. Eating Establishments
a. Banquet Facilities, Dinner theatres
b. Restaurant
c. Restaurant with drive-through or drive-in service
d. Specialty eating establishment
8. Offices
a. Business office
b. Professional services, including medical and dental
9. Parking, Commercial
a. Parking lot
b. Parking structure
10. Retail Sales and Services
a. Business Services
Page 1 of 6 b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
Convenience store (with gasoline sales)
Drug store or pharmacy (with drive through)
Financial institution
Funeral home
Laundromat
Personal services establishment
Repair establishment
Retail sales establishment, indoor
Retail sales establishment, outdoor
11. Vehicle Sales and Services
a. Automobile painting/body shop
b. Automobile parts sales and installations
c. Automobile repair and servicing (without painting/bodywork) or small engine
repair
d. Car wash or auto detailing (full or self service)
12. Visitor Accommodation
a. Hotel or motel
13. Industrial Services
a. Building, heating, plumbing, or electrical contractor
b. General industrial service
c. Heavy equipment sales, rental, or repair
d. Dry Cleaning Plants and carpet cleaning facilities
e. Machine shop
f. Repair of scientific or professional instruments
g. Tool repair
14. Manufacturing and Production
a. Manufacturing, General
b. Manufacturing, Limited
c. Printing and publishing
15. Self-Service Storage
a. Mini-Warehouse
b. Climate-Controlled Self-Service Storage
16. Wholesaling, Warehouse and Freight Movement
a. Wholesale and Warehouse, Limited
17. Commercial Indoor Recreation
Planning Objective: to successfully attract distribution, light assembly, light
manufacturing, office-warehouse, and/or quasi-retail small businesses.
1. Existing zoning is PUD.
2. Flex space shall be defined as the combination of office, showroom, and storage
space for the purpose of the sale of goods and services to the general public. (i.e.
material and service contractors, storage uses, and service providers, etc.)
3. Storage space will vary dependent upon the tenant’s needs. The storage space is
not to exceed 85% of the total building area.
Page 2 of 6 4. The total area of the PUD is approximately 28.57 acres (including road right-of-way).
Parking Requirements:
5. All parking shall be as shown on this PUD plan.
All parking shall meet the following minimum requirements:
-1 space per 300 sf of office
-1 space per 900 sf of warehouse for buildings less than 5000 sf
-1 space per 1500 sf of warehouse for buildings greater than 5000 sf
-1 space per 400 sf of commercial recreation, indoor
-the total number of parking spaces is cumulative based on the variety of different
functions present in a single use.
-all other uses shall meet the requirements of Rock Hill Zoning Code.
Note:
6. Corporate Boulevard shall be extended from its current terminus to a point 75’ from
Wilkerson Road, as shown on the attached PUD Plan. This road construction shall
be completed prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for the existing 23,903
sq. ft. building.
7. At the same time as the extension of Corporate Boulevard by the developer, a
twelve inch (12”) diameter water line will be installed by the developer along the
extension of Corporate Boulevard to a point 75’ from Wilkerson Road, as shown on
the attached PUD Plan. The water line will be capped at this point until it is
extended by the City in the future to connect to the existing water line along Red
River Road. The future extension by the City will take place when the Wilkerson
Road/Corporate Boulevard intersection is re-aligned in conjunction with the CelRiver Road widening project. The costs of the initial 12” water line extension will be
shared between the developer and the City of Rock Hill as follows:

The City of Rock Hill will pay an amount equal to the cost of up-sizing the water
line from eight (8) inches to twelve (12) inches. The initial estimate of this
amount is $15,000 and is subject to change based on actual costs.

Silver Investments Limited (or its successors or assigns) will pay an amount
equal to one-half of the remaining cost of extending an eight inch (8”) water line
in this location. The initial estimate of this amount is $37,500 and is subject to
change based on actual costs.

The City of Rock Hill will pay an amount equal to one-half of the remaining cost
of extending an eight inch (8”) water line in this location. The initial estimate of
this amount is $37,500 and is subject to change based on actual costs.
The costs of the future extension to connect to the water line along Red River Road
will be paid by the City.
The developer is requesting City participation with this water line extension due to
several factors, including:

The proposed water line extension does not serve any other customers.
Page 3 of 6 
The developer’s site already has water; the water line extension is an
improvement that City requested to complete a “loop” for system redundancy.

The property that the developer is acquiring/developing is much smaller than that
of the original PUD developer, and it cannot support the same off-site
improvement costs.

The developer will still bear the full expense of extending Corporate Boulevard,
and will also expedite this work so it is completed when the existing building is
ready for occupancy (i.e. prior to the current requirement).
8. Tax map numbers for this PUD are 662-07-01-082, 662-07-01-083, and 662-07-01084.
9. Project boundary was taken from Precision Surveying boundary dated April 3, 2006
and topographic data obtained from York County GIS data.
Building Requirements:
10. All buildings along I-77 shall orient their primary facades toward the interstate.
11. The front facade shall be brick, stucco, stone, or hardy plank, shingles, stone, or
wood. No metal, smooth-face cinder block, or vinyl will be allowed on the front
facade, side facade will vary.
12. Building facades facing I-77 shall incorporate windows, door, or openings on at least
30% (per linear foot) of the first floor and 20% on upper floors and first floors of other
sides visible from these two roads.
13. Roof lines will vary with the use of parapet wall or the roof line itself.
14. The maximum building height shall be 60 feet.
PUD Notes:
15. All pedestrian and bicycle trails, sidewalks and pathways are shown on plan. This
site is to be used for outdoor storage, and large trucks hauling heavy materials. This
site is not intended for pedestrian use. No sidewalks, pathways, or walkways are
required that are not shown on this plan.
16. If the property is subdivided in the future, the developer shall set up a property
owners association to ensure the maintenance of all open space, landscaping and
other privately owned common facilities serving the project. Developer will record
with the clerk of court a set of covenants and restrictions regarding use &
maintenance of the property, which covenants and restrictions will incorporate the
terms of this PUD. Property owners are jointly and severally liable for compliance
with City of Rock Hill standards and regulations regarding common area/open space
maintenance including, but not limited to, detention ponds, trees, and landscaping
17. All signage will be designed to meet the standards of the Rock Hill Zoning Ordinance
and will be the subject of subsequent approvals.
18. Landscaping for all development and/or redevelopment after April 8, 2013 (date of
approval of amended PUD Plan) will meet the current standards of the Rock Hill
Zoning Ordinance. The tree retention areas will meet all city landscaping
requirements. Required tree canopy retention is 3.04 ac. (15% of total tree canopy
Page 4 of 6 on site.) Approximate area of remaining tree canopy within the PUD is 2.62 acres.
The islands in front of the buildings on Tax Parcel 662-07-01-083 will be landscaped
and are approximately 0.45 acres. This will result in ultimate tree canopy area of
approximately 3.07 acres.
19. Required open space is 2.4 ac. (10% of total acreage). Approximately 3.07 acres of
open space is provided.
Architectural Design Standards:
20. Building architectural design will be as shown in the Building Design Examples
section at the end of this document. Minor deviations from this building design may
be approved by Planning Staff.
21. Lighting will comply with the standards of the Rock Hill Zoning Ordinance. The
lighting & wattage shall be designed in the future by the City of Rock Hill.
22. The following note applies only to the existing development on parcel 662-07-01-082
(Stock Building Supply): The opaque buffer shown on the original PUD Master Plan
approved April 10, 2006, as defined by the new code Article 6, screening, allows the
metal or concrete siding on the sides and rear and allows for the outside storage. At
the developers option, an 8' vinyl fence and landscaping, as allowed by code, is an
opaque buffer. Note: 30' buffer to the right of Stock building at the end of the vinyl
fence, is an opaque buffer. If requested by the adjoining land owner, an 8' vinyl
fence may replace the 30' buffer.
23. Selective retention of existing tree cover will be utilized. Supplemental plantings will
be used to meet landscaping standards.
Corporate Boulevard Extension Specifications:
Page 5 of 6 Building Design Examples: Conceptual Elevation for Proposed 36,000 Square Foot Building:
Page 6 of 6 Summary of Events on 8/15/2014
Neighborhood Meeting For “Bounce Planet USA”
5:30pm – Meeting was scheduled to begin. Business partners Wesley, Dawan, and Steffon arrived
promptly.
5:45pm – Meeting was started at this time due to waiting on individuals to show up from the community.
City Official Robin Joas and Residents Ann Blake and Chuck Grobusky showed up. Resident
Chuck Grobusky had concerns about safety due to recent break ins. Resident Ann Blake
expressed no immediate concerns.
5:50pm – Dawan Feely recited a general briefing to residents and city official Robin Joas of the
mission and plans for Bounce Planet USA. As a summary to what was mentioned, Dawan
expounded on how the center would be used for a indoor bounce facility during the day to the
public and open as a youth mentoring center after hours for under privileged children. Dawan
also mentioned how he and his staff would also like to sublease the facility to a local church for
Sunday services to assist with facility overhead.
6:05pm – After briefing everyone, Dawan and his staff opened the floor up to residents and city official to
ask questions about what was mentioned and to give their opinions. At that time neither
resident Anne Blake or Chuck Grobusky had any concerns except the aforementioned.
6:07pm – Meeting Ending
Staff Report to Planning Commission
M-2014-17
Meeting Date: September 2, 2014
E
Petition by City of Rock Hill to rezone approximately 2.81 acres at 1602 Baylor Drive from County
Residential Development-I (RD-I) to City Single-Family Residential-3 (SF-3). The subject property
is proposed to be annexed into the City of Rock Hill.
Reason for Request: The purpose of the annexation and rezoning is to bring a City-owned facility
into the City Limits.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed SF-3 zoning.
SEE ATTACHED REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATION
Case No. M-2014-17
Rezoning Analysis-Report to Planning Commission
Meeting Date: September 2, 2014
Location:
1602 Baylor Drive, Tax Map #636-00-00-054
Site Area:
Approximately 2.81 acres
Request:
Annex property into the City and rezone from
Residential Development-I (RD-I) in York County to
Single-Family Residential-3 (SF-3).
Proposed Development:
None- existing sewer lift station.
Owner/Applicant:
City of Rock Hill
Site Description
The subject property is the location of a City-owned sewer lift station. It is located on
the northeast side of the City and is surrounded by property that was recently annexed
into the City. Nearby uses include undeveloped property, single-family residential, and
multi-family residential in residential zoning districts.
Proposal
Since the property is now contiguous to the City Limits, staff is proposing the annexation
and rezoning. We believe it is important that the facilities and properties owned and
operated by the City be included within our corporate limits so we have the ability to
control or protect those properties and facilities.
Existing Zoning District Summary
Residential Development District I (RD-I)- The Residential Development I District is
designed to permit a variety of residential uses and variable densities, based on the
characteristics of the uses. Areas so designated are deemed suited to and with market
potential for the uses. This designation is applied principally to undeveloped areas
where unit and density flexibility will not adversely impact existing residential
subdivisions, and where the housing market can be sufficiently broad and flexible to
meet the various demands for housing. Permitted uses include single-family dwellings,
schools, horticulture and some agricultural interests, neighborhood and community
parks, churches, duplexes, multi-plexes, child care centers, and nursing homes.
Proposed Zoning District Summary
Single-Family Residential-3 (SF-3)- The SF-3 district is established as a district in which
the principal use of land is single-family detached residential development at a
moderate density. The regulations of this district are intended to discourage any use
that would substantially interfere with the development of single-family detached
dwellings and that would be detrimental to the quiet residential nature of the district.
Complementary uses customarily found in residential zone districts, such as community
facilities, religious institutions, parks and playgrounds, and elementary schools, are also
allowed. The minimum lot area for development is fourteen thousand (14,000) square
feet and the maximum density allowed is three (3) units per acre.
Rezoning Analysis-Report to Planning Commission
M-2014-17
Page 2
Zoning History of the Property and Previous Rezoning Cases in the Area
The surrounding property was annexed into the City in June of this year (rezoning case
#M-2014-08, Preserve at Catawba PD).
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Staff hereby certifies that the required public notification actions have been completed
as follows:

August 16: Rezoning notification signs posted on subject property.

August 16: Rezoning notification postcards sent to two property owners within
300’ of the subject property.

August 17: Planning Commission public hearing advertisement published in The
Herald.
Public Feedback
No comments received to date.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff Assessment
The proposed annexation and rezoning will prevent jurisdictional issues and bring a
City-owned facility into the City Limits.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Single-family Residential-3 (SF-3) zoning.
Attachments


Annexation Map
Rezoning Map
To see the applications submitted for this case, go to: www.cityofrockhill.com/PlanInfo.
Staff Contact:
Eric S. Hawkins, AICP, Planner III
[email protected]
803.329.8763
MF -15
O
PUD
SF-5
GE RUN
SA NDY RID
LN
NORW AY
SW
EE
TB
R IA
R
LN
E
GA T
ERS
ALD
SF-5
M
T
GA
LL
RD-I
R
OR D
L
Y
BA
SF-5
2
1
D
ALE
D
R
RIVE
R
DY D
HAR
E RD
TA T
PD-R
OUTSIDE CITY
ROSEWELL DR
PD-C
MF -15
A
N
TR
D
A
ALL
MT G
HIL
LT
R
W
FLINT
PR
D
wb
aR
iv
er
PUD
ADJACENT PROPERTY OW NERS
2. 6360000053
MG R Acquistion Co, LLC
ANNEXATION O WNERS
G1.C6360000054
City of Rock Hill
Ca
ta
Single-Family-5 (SF-5)
Single-Family-4 (SF-4)
Planned Unit
Development (PUD)
Planned DevelopmentResidential (PD-R)
Planned DevelopmentCommercial (PD-C)
Multi-Family-15 (MF-15)
General
Commercial (GC)
Legend
650
1,300
77
¦
¨
§
GIS AD MINISTR ATOR
DATE
THIS MAP WAS COMPILED F ROM PLAT S AN D
OT HER AVAILABLE INF ORMATION.
NO AC TU AL FIELD SU RVEY WAS PER FORMED .
0
Feet
Subject Property
PROPOSED ZONING: SF-3
WARD:
WARD 2
ACREAGE:
2.81
CELANESE RD
OR DR
BAY L
Ê
ANNEXATION TO THE
CITY OF ROCK HILL
Mt Gallant Road/
Preserve at Catawba Area II
ANNEXATION MAP
A
MT
G
t
B
R
I
S
TOL
PKW
Y
RD
LL
AN
T
SF-4
CRESTDALE RD
FI
E
LD
C
N ST
KEATO
CI
R
ON
GT
R
R
E
ST
IN
LEX
SD
ON
M
M
CO
R
OOD D
D
NT R
RD
N
NO
R
WA
YL
SW
EE
TB
RI
AR
LN
SF-5
MT
G
AL
L
A
NT
RD
GE RU N
S AN D Y RID
SF-5
OR
AR B
CT
E
RIV
A
RD
DR
LE
CIR
AX
R DR
ST
PD-C
LE N
LO
BAY
E RD
TAT
R
DY D
HA R
PD-R
OUTSIDE CITY
E
DC R
FIE L
SF-5
RO SEWELL DR
MF -15
NO RWOO D RIDGE DR
BRISTO L PKWY
PUD
CRESTDA LE RD
HAZE L DOW NE WAY
Ca
ta
wb
GC
aR
iv e
AS E
BLV D
r
PUD
G AV
LA N DIN
DR
PA CE S
R
E
DR
ILL
W
FL INT
FA
M
E TU
RIV E
RCH
N ST
KE AT O
RA
V
ET
T
HS
SET
PA
C
ES
RIV
E
NS
SU
G
ID
LN
WA
DR
T
GE
EC
D
T
I
A
R
ER
NG
SD
R
GL
ON
IR O
KD
EA
M
E
M
E
CO
CR
EN
ON
T
D
G
HID
X IN
LE
H
UT
OO D
V
RM
DR
IE W
PL
RIVE R VIEW
RD
RD
RD
ATE
RS G
E
D
AL
0
8/27/14
Development S ervices
Department
City of Rock Hill
Feet
500
µ
Proposed:
SF-3 (City)
1,000
Current:
RD-I (County)
Zoning Data
Area of Interest
Single-Family-5 (SF-5)
Single-Family-4 (SF-4)
Planned Unit
Development (PUD)
Planned DevelopmentResidential (PD-R)
Planned DevelopmentCommercial (PD-C)
Multi-Family-15 (MF-15)
General
Commercial (GC)
Legend
M-2014-17
Planning Commission
Staff Report
September 2, 2014 ~ Agenda Item #4
Project Name:
Wal-Mart Supercenter
Plan Type:
Major Site Plan
Plan Number:
20130916
Tax Map Numbers:
602-07-01-025, -042, and -044
Location:
South of the Saluda Street Mt. Holly Road intersection.
Property Owner:
FBSA 1 LLC
215 North Pine Street
Spartanburg, SC
Project Contact:
Wolverton & Associates, Inc. (Chris Manes)
6745 Sugarloaf Parkway, Duluth, Ga 30097
(770) 447-8999
Site Info:
The site is currently undeveloped and largely wooded. It is
located on a portion of the former Stonegate Development
which was last approved by Planning Commission in May of
2007.
Land Use Information:
Type:
Zoning:
Land Area:
Commercial/Retail
General Commercial (GC) and Limited
Commercial (LC)
26.64 acres
Parking:
Required: 758 spaces (1/250 s.f.)
Proposed: 758 spaces
Streets:
The site is bordered by SCDOT roads on both sides. Saluda
Street (Hwy 72/121) is classified as a principal arterial and
Mt. Holly Road (Hwy 901) is classified as minor arterial.
Vehicle access to the site will come from both streets with
four access points, two of which will be full-access.
Pedestrian Access:
Sidewalks currently exist along Mt. Holly Road and the
developer will install sidewalks along Saluda Street.
Pedestrian access will be provided from the storefront to
both streets.
Open Space:
Required: 3.15 acres (15%)
Provided: 3.37 acres
Landscaping:
A landscape plan is currently under revision by the applicant.
The plan will need to demonstrate compliance with
landscape requirements including streetscape, building
foundation and buffers.
Traffic Impact:
A traffic study was completed by Wolverton & Associates for
the proposed development and the conclusions are attached
Walmart Supercenter
page two
September 2, 2014
to this report. Other than some minor road improvements
that are proposed, no immediate roadway or intersection
improvements are expected to be needed to accommodate
the proposed development.
Design Standards
All of the required Design Standards will be met. Elevations
of the proposed store are attached to this report.
Special Notes:
There are no major comments concerning the Major Site
Plan. However, there are some detailed comments that will
need to be addressed with the civil plans for the site. While
these comments will need to be addressed with the civil
submittal, they are editorial in nature and not likely to result
in substantial changes to the proposed layout.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Walmart Supercenter
Major Site Plan, subject to staff comments.
Attachments:
Plan Review Comments
Walmart Supercenter – Major Site Plan
Proposed Building Elevations
TIA Conclusions
Walmart Supercenter - Plan Review Comments
Review of:
Status:
Project:
P. 1 of 1
Major Site Plan
Conditional
Walmart Supercenter
Plan #20130916
Review Comments
Inspections: Conditional
Work with the architect to provide the location of the FDC on the front wall between the two main
entrances.
Zoning: Conditional
Show current property lines on the site plan. As currently depicted, the development appears to cross over
into parcel #6020701044 and a little into the apartment parcel #604-0601113.
As previously mentioned, the smaller parcel currently located at the corner of Mt. Holly and Saluda (TM#
6020701025) will need to be combined with the parent parcel and a subdivision plat showing all of the
current and proposed property lines will need to be provided for review and approval. Also, please include
all cross access agreements granting cross access to the 5 outparcels and the remainder of parcel
#6020701044.
Please be sure to address any updated SCDOT comments regarding the TIA and site with the revision of
the site plan. Some of these comments may include the elimination of the triangle shaped traffic islands at
some of the access drives.
All signage will be reviewed and permitted separately.
Planning Commission
Staff Report
September 2, 2014 – Agenda Item #5
Project Name:
Waterford Terrace Apartments
Plan Type:
Major Site Plan
Plan Number:
20120798
Tax Map Number:
700-01-01-100
Location:
The site for the Waterford Terrace Apartments is located at
the southwest corner of the intersection of Dave Lyle
Boulevard and Waterford Park Drive. The proposed
development site is situated directly across Waterford Park
Drive from Transaxle Manufacturing of America.
Owner/Developer:
Waterford Terrace Apartments, LLC
1511 Shopton Road, Charlotte, NC 28217
(704) 335-9114
Background:
Waterford Terrace Apartments, LLC would like to obtain site
plan approval on approximately 17.96 acres for the
development of an 8-building, 226-unit multi-family
apartment project.
The general design concept includes three-story apartment
buildings situated primarily around a large open space
feature on the site. A centrally located amenity (mall,
gazebo, clubhouse and pool) will provide a social and
recreational benefit to the residents of the complex
Site Info:
The property is currently largely wooded and undeveloped
with some severe slopes on the property. It is situated
directly southwest corner of the intersection of Dave Lyle
Boulevard and Waterford Park Drive. The site will be
accessed from a shared access road to the south that is to
be constructed with the development.
Land Use Information:
Type:
Zoning:
Land Area:
Total Lots:
Overall Density:
Streets:
Pedestrian Access:
Residential
MF-15 (Multi-Family-15)
17.96 acres
1
12.58 units per acre
All drives shown on the plan are to be private. The main
drive off of Waterford Park Drive is proposed to be a shared
access with the parcels located to the immediate south and
to the west. Vehicle access into the complex will be from the
three access points shown on the site plan.
Sidewalks would be provided throughout the development
site. Pedestrian access to the external network would be
Waterford Terrace Apartments
page two
September 2, 2014
provided by connecting the sidewalk along the main drive
aisle into the site out to Waterford Park Drive.
Open Space:
A centrally located clubhouse, pool, and mall area with a
gazebo are proposed. Open space will also be incorporated
within the parking areas and around the buildings.
Landscaping:
An initial landscape plan has been provided. However this
plan will need to be revised to demonstrate compliance with
landscape requirements including streetscape, building
foundation and buffers. Landscaping will also need to be
provided within all internal open space areas.
Parking:
The project requires 351 parking spaces. The site plan
shows that 432 spaces would be provided within the
apartment complex, including 40 garage spaces that would
be available for an additional fee.
Special Notes:
The Zoning, Inspections, Landscaping, Addressing, and
E911 Departments have outstanding comments that need to
be addressed (attached). The comments are either editorial
or of a technical nature and we do not expect them to result
in substantial changes to the proposed layout.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Waterford Terrace Major
Site Plan, subject to staff comments.
Attachments:
Waterford Terrace Apartments – Major Site Plan
Proposed Building Elevations
Plan Review Comments
Waterford Terrace Apartments - Plan Review Comments
Review of:
Status:
Project:
P. 1 of 1
Major Site Plan
Not Approved
Waterford Terrace Apartments
Plan #20120789
Review Comments
Inspections: Conditional
Separate engineered plans must be submitted for all retaining walls and a separate permit is required.
Zoning: Not Approved
The one-way drive aisle around the mall area needs to be reconfigured to handle two-way traffic
(preferably with a 22’ wide drive aisle) from the main shared access road into the site to the first “curb-cut”
located between the pool and mall and from this same “curb-cut” on the drive aisle exiting the site to the
main shared access road. The drive aisle around the mall area can remain one-way, however it should be
reduced to not give the appearance that two-way travel would be permissible. Adding some additional
landscaping at the beginning of the one-way portion of the street may help achieve this effect as well.
In order for pedestrians to have a safe way to get to the mall and swimming pool area, provide crosswalks
across the “loop road” from the 4 different drive aisle (rows of 10 and 9 parking spaces) to the mall area.
A lighting plan and photometric study is required for review. Please coordinate the lighting plan with the
landscape plan to ensure that there are minimal conflicts with light poles, trees, etc.
According to table 6-100(K) of the zoning code, loading areas should be provided at a rate of 1 per first 50
units plus 1 per each 200 units or major fraction thereof. Therefore, some type of loading/unloading areas
(2 or 3) for tenants moving in/out of the buildings should be provided. One loading area on each side of the
mall should sufficiently meet this requirement, or by utilizing some of the area in front of the garages as
loading/unloading zones.
Infrastructure-Landscape: Not Approved
Some additional planting could be employed...especially at building corners and entrances as stated in the
zoning ordinance. Tenants may appreciate some screening around the pool.
Typically the landscape plan is submitted for review previous to full civil set for construction. Please
review the landscaping standards set forth in the zoning ordinance.
GIS/Addressing: Not Approved
Please see provided sketch showing roads that need naming. Please contact me with a list of potential
names so I can review them.
E911: Not Approved
Concerns about the on road parking that takes place around what will be the main entrance that circles all
the way around the mall. Will emergency vehicles have the ability to maneuver in what appears to already
be a tight parking situation? I agree that 6 road names should be submitted for this project to eliminate
confusion and to allow for proper flow throughout the project.
Please see GIS/Addressing comments regarding naming the roads.
Planning Commission
Staff Report
September 2, 2014 ~ Agenda Item #6
Project Name:
Herrons Ferry Road Extension
Plan Type:
Preliminary Plat
Plan Number:
201410677
Tax Map Number:
662-07-01-123 (portion)
Location:
2850 Cherry Rd.
Owner/Developer:
Greens of Rock Hill, LLC (Dave Williams)
Rock Hill, SC
803.324.7762
Background:
This preliminary plat is the road right-of-way for a portion of
Herrons Ferry Road that will extend from the existing rightof-way to access the parcel where the pump house building
currently sits.
Land Use Information:
Type:
Zoning:
New Public Street
PD-C
Streets:
Type:
Number:
Total Length:
Right-of-Way:
Pavement Width:
Public
One
450 linear feet
45 feet
The proposed road will have a 22’ wide
travel-way that consists of two 11’ wide
vehicle travel lanes.
Pedestrian Access:
Sidewalks will be provided on both sides of the roads. All
sidewalks are 5’ wide. The Piedmont Medical Center Trail
will extend for approximately 160’ to the north of Herrons
Ferry Road.
Landscaping:
Streetscape landscaping will be provided although it may be
deferred in some areas and installed in conjunction with
future construction.
Special Notes:
There are outstanding Inspections, Zoning, Utilities,
Roadway, Water & Sewer, and Stormwater comments that
need to be addressed (attached). None of these comments
will affect the proposed road layout.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval subject to resolution of the
outstanding review comments.
Attachments:
Preliminary Plat
Plan Review Comments
Herrons Ferry Road Extension - Plan Review Comments
Review of:
Status:
Project:
P. 1 of 1
Preliminary Plat
Not Approved
Pump House Drive (Herrons Ferry Road) Extension
Plan #20140677
Review Comments
Inspections: Not Approved
Show fire hydrant locations and Fire Apparatus turn around.
All intersections must have curb ramps that comply with SCDOT and ADA standards.
Zoning: Conditional
The proposed road extension will have to go through the preliminary plat process and at this time is
scheduled to go before the City of Rock Hill Planning Commission at their September 2, 2014 meeting.
The ghosted area of the temporary gravel/future parking lot does not appear to be correct as it does not
show the existing canoe/kayak launch.
Infrastructure-Roadway: Conditional
A common access easement will need to be provided along the stretch between the Pump House parking
and the kayak parking.
Provide a temporary turnaround for emergency vehicles.
Show the kayak launch and associated walkways in conjunction with the kayak parking.
Infrastructure-Water & Sewer: Conditional
The water main will need to be extended with the road.
Infrastructure-Stormwater: Conditional
Water quality will need to be provided for the road.
Easements will need to be provided for any storm drains that extends outside of the ROW and coordinated
with City Electrical and street tree locations.
Profiles for the storm drain and along the existing culvert will be required.
Utilities-Electrical: Not Approved
A 10' PUE must be provided behind the road r/w, with no more than 10% slope across the easement.
GIS/Addressing: Approved
According to the plans, this is an extension of Herron's Ferry road not a new street named Pump House
Drive Extension. If developer wants to create this as a new named road, please submit proposed road name
to Dawn Helms for review/approval.
Planning Commission
Staff Report
September 2, 2014 ~ Agenda Item #7
Project Name:
Waterford Site D
Plan Type:
Preliminary Plat
Plan Number:
20140505
Tax Map Number:
700-01-01-094
Location:
2853 Dave Lyle Blvd.
Owner/Developer:
Rock Hill Economic Development Corp.
Rock Hill, SC
803.325.2095
Background:
This preliminary plat is the road right-of-way for a new road
that is to be constructed off of Dave Lyle Boulevard. The
road will eventually become a portion of the frontage road
that is envisioned to be constructed when Dave Lyle
Boulevard is extended. During the extension of Dave Lyle
Boulevard, this road and the driveway to the east will be
closed and access to the parcels will come from the
proposed frontage road. The frontage road will access Dave
Lyle from the east of the Vista Hill Properties, LLC site.
Land Use Information:
Type:
Zoning:
New public street
Industry General (IG)
Streets:
Type:
Number:
Total Length:
Right-of-Way:
Pavement Width:
Public
One
934 linear feet
60 feet
The road will have a 27’ wide travel-way
that consists of two 13’6” wide vehicle
travel lanes.
Pedestrian Access:
A 5’ sidewalk will be provided on the western side of the
proposed road.
Landscaping:
Streetscape landscaping will be provided although it may be
deferred and installed in conjunction with building
construction.
Special Notes:
There are outstanding Inspections, Zoning, Roadway, Water
& Sewer, and Addressing comments that need to be
addressed (attached). None of these comments will affect
the proposed road layout.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval subject to resolution of the
outstanding review comments.
Attachments:
Preliminary Plat
Plan Review Comments
Waterford Business Park Site D - Plan Review Comments
Review of:
Status:
Project:
P. 1 of 1
Preliminary Plat
Not Approved
Waterford Business Park Site D
Plan #20140505
Review Comments
Zoning: Not Approved
The proposed road will have to go through the preliminary plat process and at this time is scheduled to go
before the City of Rock Hill Planning Commission at their September 2, 2014 meeting.
The proposed road will need to be named.
As previously discussed, the private access easement located in front of the Vista Hill Properties site will
need to be updated to a be a public right-of-way. This is to allow for the future frontage road to be located
here once Dave Lyle is extended.
A note should be added to the preliminary plat stating that both the current and future access drives (for the
Spec site and Vista Hill site) off of Dave Lyle will be closed and the Frontage Road will be constructed
once Dave Lyle is extended.
Infrastructure-Roadway: Not Approved
The agreement with the Vista Hill Properties needs to be updated such that they agree to grant a 60' public
right of way as opposed to the 50' private access easement at the time of an extension to Dave Lyle.
Infrastructure-Water & Sewer: Not Approved
Show existing water mains and hydrants on Dave Lyle, Waterford Park Drive and Waterford Glen Way.
GIS/Addressing: Not Approved
The proposed road needs to be named and in place for addressing since it is the only entrance/exit. Please
contact Dawn Helms to get street name approval.