Community Issues - Special Laws

Bill 46-21, Residential Development in BL adjacent to Honeygo Overlay District

Sponsor: Marks
Benefits: 3.62a parcel at 4300 Forge Rd owned by The Shops of Perry Hall

This Bill allows age restricted single-family attached dwelling units if:

• tract is adjacent to the H overlay district
• any portion of tract is part of planned shopping center approved prior to Jan 1, 2021
• maximum density will be 16 dwelling units per acre (the adjacent residential area is 3.5 density units per acre.)
• maximun development is 4 acres (strange thing to include when the obvious intended parcel is 3.62 acres.)

• 0.5 for an efficiency apartment
• .75 for a 1-bedroom dwelling unit
• 1.0 for a 2-bedroon dwelling unit
• 1.5 for each dwelling unit of 3 or more bedrooms.

However, the table in 1B02.2 that specifies the allowed density in each DR zone states, in the heading to the table, "Maximum Gross Residential Density (in dwelling or density units per acre)" but, every entry in the table says "dwelling units", except for DR16 which says just "density". It would be an easy argument that DR 16 is 16 "density units", and that the allowance in this Bill should mean that. That could result in 115 dwelling units total if all are "efficiency" units (for "seniors") if a judge decides that's what it really means.

There is only one parcel found that meets the criteria of this Bill and it was confirmed as the intention - shown on MyNeighborhood as 4300 Forge Rd. It has a 185 ft adjacency with the Honeygo Overlay District. This Bill dictates that such a tract is approved as a limited exemption under 32-4-106(B)(2) - rather than letting the DRC do its job by making the decision, which can be appealed. (Note, a B2 Exemption is for "Amendments to an approved Development Plan or plat that do not materially alter the proposed development" - which cannot be honestly argued in this case.) It also exempts the parcel from BCC §32-6-111 (Development Impact Fee).

The proper way to do achieve this goal is to put this parcel into the next CZMP to change the zoning from BL to DR16.

This Bill is seriously faulty by basing the usage allowance of a parcel on a nearby district designation. This results in text being added in §259.9 (H District) that applies to the adjacent property. This is so wrong, it's kind of hard to describe the problem.

See article here.