Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers scale back affordability commitments for Redbarn Road cottage project; board reviews variances
Summary
County planning staff presented a variance request for a 1.38‑acre Redbarn Road site for a 16‑unit cottage development; the developer no longer plans deed‑restricted 80% AMI units but proposed a cap of no more than three rental units and a sales target in the low‑to‑mid $300,000s, prompting commissioner questions about enforceability and the role of the workforce housing ordinance.
Planning staff introduced a request to grant two variances for a small Redbarn Road parcel at the Cherokee County work session on Feb. 17: an exceptional variance to allow greater density for a parcel too small to meet mixed‑use requirements, and a waiver to allow an alternative tree plan for a lot under the overlay’s 20‑acre minimum.
The presenter identified the applicant as Fred Snell for the Linwood Group and described the proposal as a 16‑unit cottage‑court development with perimeter and street trees and a central parking area. Staff described the lot as a leftover R40 parcel nearly surrounded by townhomes and multifamily.
Commissioners asked whether the project would include enforceable affordability commitments. Staff and a commissioner said the developer had earlier considered an 80% AMI deed restriction and other reductions but removed those provisions, describing the change as ‘‘too complicated’’ to implement and enforce. The presenter said the developer still intends to keep the product relatively affordable and that the product type (small cottages) should result in lower prices.
On specific limits to rental use, planning staff said the developer offered a condition limiting rentals to no more than three of the 16 units. On price targets, staff and a commissioner referenced a goal for sales in the ‘‘300s’’ (low‑to‑mid $300,000s). Board members pressed staff on whether the county has mechanisms to require or enforce long‑term affordability; staff replied there is no current mechanism tied to this request and that some earlier fee waivers or incentives that could have supported deeper affordability are not part of this variance request.
No formal vote on the variances was recorded in the Feb. 17 discussion; the item remained under staff consideration pending the planning and zoning process and any required public hearing.
Next steps: staff will present the application in accordance with the county’s public hearing process for rezoning/variances; any conditions (such as the rental cap) would need to be formalized in that proceeding.
