Planning Commission
Regular MeetingFort Mill, SC · March 16, 2021
Minutes
TOWN OF FORT MILL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
March 16, 2021
112 Confederate Street
6:30 PM
Live Viewing Online: Request Access by emailing before 5:00 pm on Tuesday, March 16, 2021
to Penelope G. Karagounis, Planning Director at pkaragounis@fortmillsc.gov
Public Access by Phone: Dial (toll free) 1-877-309-2073
and use access code 861-822-317
Present: James Traynor, Dan Stout, Matthew Lucarelli, Andy Agrawal, Hynek Lettang, Chris
Wolfe, Planning Director Penelope Karagounis, Senior Planner Alex Moore, Assistant
Town Manager Chris Pettit, Amy Massey (Kimley-Horn), Dan Ballou (Attorney with
Morton and Gettys), Chris Micci (DR Horton), John Holcomb (Kimley-Horn), Lynn
Martin, Rob Logan, Fred and Ann Tanner, Andrew Gansner, Boyd Rogers, Trudie
Heemsoth, Chris Tinklenberg, and Denise Gordon
Absent: Ben Hudgins
Chairman James Traynor called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:30 PM on Tuesday
March 16th.
Chairman Traynor gave opportunity to the Planning Commission to review and comment on the
February 16, 2021 meeting minutes as presented with the meeting packet. There being no
comments from Commission members on these minutes, Chairman Traynor entertained a
motion to approve the minutes. Chris Wolfe made a motion to accept the minutes as submitted.
Dan Stout seconded the motion to accept the minutes as submitted. The Planning Commission
then voted 6-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. Ben Hudgins was absent at the March 16,
2021 Planning Commission meeting.
NEW BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Annexation Request: DR Horton
Chairman Traynor then noted that there was one new business item on the Planning Commission
agenda. He then turned the meeting over to Penelope Karagounis, Town of Fort Mill Planning Director
to make the opening presentation on the agenda item.
Ms. Karagounis stated that this agenda item consisted of an application submitted by DR Horton,
representing the current property owner, Robert Paul Snodgrass, to voluntarily annex 194.580 acres
of property. This parcel of land is located at 2601 S. Doby’s Bridge Road and is contiguous to the
existing Town of Fort Mill corporate limits.
The current York County zoning designation is Rural Development District (RUD) which allows one
dwelling unit per acre. Thus, along with the annexation request, DR Horton is asking for a Town of
Fort Mill zoning designation of R-10, One Family Residential. The R-10 zoning district is intended for
low to medium density, single-family development on lots of 10,000 square feet or more.
Upon annexation, it is the applicant’s intent to obtain Fort Mill subdivision approval for 267 single-
family detached units at a gross density of 1.37 DU/AC. The Town of Fort Mill’s 2040 Comprehensive
Plan indicates that the subject property is located within an area designated for low-to-moderate
density.
The low-to-moderate density land use category provides for densities of up to 3 dwelling units per
acre. The Comp Plan further indicates that developments within the low-to-moderate density
classification have lot sizes ranging from an average of 7,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet.
The proposed R-10 lot regime on this site fits within the scale of adjacent developments such as
Massey which includes many lots less than 8,000 square feet in size. In concept, this annexation
proposal represents the opportunity for an efficiently designed project which works within the
constraints of the site.
Such site limitations, including the Duke Power right-of-way, slopes, and floodplain, will require lots
to be clustered within more developable areas. With respect to traffic mitigation, the applicant has
agreed to off-site improvements as enumerated and illustrated within Exhibit D.
In addition to traffic, the improvements will also include much needed pedestrian and bicycle lanes
within the immediate area of development.
Planning Staff therefore recommends in favor of annexation with a zoning designation of R-10. Please
note that this recommendation is for annexation only and currently includes no recommendation on
subdivision approval or denial. Such a recommendation will occur within the future subdivision
review stage and only after final annexation action is taken by the Fort Mill Town Council.
Ms. Karagounis then noted that the town’s traffic engineering consultant, Amy Massey, PE, with
Kimley Horn was present at the meeting. Additionally, she indicated that Chris Micci with DR Horton
was in attendance along with the project’s design professional, John Holcomb, and DR Horton’s
attorney Dan Ballou.
Ms. Karagounis then shared an exhibit provided by DR Horton which consisted of an illustrative lotting
plan of the proposed project. She then turned the meeting over to the DR Horton team for them to
give a presentation to the Planning Commission.
Dan Ballou gave a general overview of the DR Horton annexation and project proposal. He indicated
that if approved this would be the first DR Horton development in the Town of Fort Mill. Mr. Ballou
highlighted the overall low, gross density of the project, the robust nature of the traffic
improvements, along with over 50% open space within the site.
The site design professional, John Holcomb of Kimley Horn then expounded on Mr. Ballou’s
information. Mr. Holcomb then went over some of the technical details of the DR Horton
development proposal. He noted the amenity center area along with anticipated trails and athletic
fields.
Mr. Holcomb then drew attention to the required traffic improvements as required by the traffic
impact analysis (TIA) which was performed by the town’s traffic engineer. These mandated upgrades
include the addition of approximately one-half mile of three-lane street section along S. Doby’s Bridge
Road, between Red Forest Way and Dryden Street.
Additionally, there will be bike-lanes and sidewalk installed on either side of S. Doby’s Road where
this three-lane section is built. A right-turn lane will be established at Dudley Drive along with a right-
turn lane from S. Doby’s Bridge Road onto the Fort Mill Parkway with a maximized storage lane from
the Doby’s Bridge Commercial Tract driveway.
Mr. Holcomb then stated that the DR Horton team had worked through multiple plan iterations until
the current design was deemed acceptable by town staff for consideration by Planning Commission.
He remarked that a new lift station would be needed as part of the future engineering design process.
Mr. Holcomb commented upon to site open space that the plan delivers along with the challenges of
site design due to the topographic fall toward the Catawba River. He noted that a good portion of the
lots do not share a rear property line with another lot. This along with the overall lower density of
the site can provide an enhanced, natural setting.
Mr. Holcomb then called attention to the southern portion of the site plan containing a one-hundred-
foot section of a future connector road to be constructed through this property at a later date. Such
a roadway would alleviate some of the traffic pressure from S. Doby’s Bridge Road.
Chris Micci with DR Horton then introduced himself and touched on several points including the
opportunity for the preservation of open space as proposed within the plan, project amenities, and
a targeted, home price point of $450,000. Mr. Micci stated that he anticipated this would inch up
above this toward $500,000 as the project comes to fruition.
Mr. Ballou then wrapped up the presentation by saying that they appreciated the Planning
Commission’s consideration of the annexation proposal. He stated that they believed the project
would fit within the town’s comprehensive plan.
Planning Commission Chairman James Traynor then asked three questions. His first question was
regarding the timing of the dedication of the future connector road right-of-way within this site. His
second question was regarding the trail system within the site and if this was being coordinated with
the Carolina Thread Trail. Thirdly, he stated that while the pool amenity area sounded good, he also
asked if there were going to be any park areas that contained active areas such as playground
equipment, etc.?
Mr. Holcomb responded that the collector road right-of-way would be publicly dedicated to the Town
of Fort Mill. Then he noted that the alignment of this collector is currently located in the general area
as depicted on the comprehensive plan map.
Mr. Micci then stated that DR Horton had not had the opportunity to engage with representatives of
the Carolina Thread Trail but that they were open to doing so. He then noted that in addition to the
main amenity area DR Horton did envision constructing pocket parks throughout the remainder of
the project.
Ms. Karagounis then interjected that the collector as shown on the concept plan does mirror the
comprehensive plan map which in turn was gleaned from the Rock Hill-Fort Mill Area Transportation
Study (RFATS) collector road study. She then indicated that the Carolina Thread Trail master plan in
fact does not have the trail near this property. Thus, this trail would be completely internal to this
project.
Chairman Traynor thanked Ms. Karagounis for her input and then noted that internal trails with views
of the Catawba River might be something that DR Horton could work toward within this project.
Chairman Traynor then noted the Duke Energy easement on the property with respect to open space.
He stated that he has observed instances in which such areas of neighborhoods have been utilized
for active open space such as soccer fields. This notwithstanding opinions regarding the perceived
harm of electromagnetic fields generated by such facilities. Chairman Traynor stated that he did not
know if Duke Energy currently allows this type of use within its easements. He asked if this had been
investigated by DR Horton.
Mr. Micci responded that DR Horton has indeed explored the possibility of having recreational fields
within this Duke Energy right-of-way. He stated that at this time, DR Horton did not have a
commitment from Duke Energy on letting them move forward with these recreational fields.
Chairman Traynor thanked Mr. Micci for this information and asked if anyone else had questions.
Planning Commission member Hynek Lettang then stated that it was his understanding that the
existing Duke Energy easement on the property contained 200,000-volt lines. He then stated that you
should limit exposure of residents to .5 milligauss on a sustained level. Mr. Lettang said that typically
for the power level of 200,000 volt lines this would be a distance of 700-feet. He then asked if the
potential of electromagnetic exposure had been investigated for this project.
Mr. Holcomb responded that they did not have the answer to this currently, but that an additional
buffer of 25-feet had been added parallel to each side of the existing Duke Energy easement. Thus,
the lots are not immediately against the easement. He indicated that they would look further into
the issue of electromagnetic exposure as related to this project.
Chairman Traynor responded that at one time, Duke Energy had the necessary equipment to measure
the strength of electromagnetic fields. He indicated that it was his experience with past projects that
Duke Energy was always willing to come out and provide measurements.
Planning Commissioner Dan Stout then asked about the property located to the west of the collector
road as shown on the DR Horton conceptual plan. His question was if the traffic impact analysis
included the area immediately to the west of the collector road as shown.
Ms. Karagounis indicated that the TIA did not include this area. She further noted that the property
that Mr. Stout referred to is known as the Springland, Inc. “Tract—7 McAlhaney” property which
consists of approximately 845 acres. This respective property already has a development agreement
which has been approved by the Town of Fort Mill. The RFATS collector road study indicates that a
roadway would traverse the Tract—7 McAlhaney parcel from White’s Road. At such time that the
Tract—7 McAlhaney property initiates the process to develop, they will have to design their plan to
align with the proposed collector road on the DR Horton property. This would ultimately connect in
with the DR Horton property where the collector road is depicted on their concept plan.
Planning Commissioner Andy Agrawal then asked Ms. Karagounis if we had any sense of this project’s
impact on Catawba Ridge High School.
Ms. Karagounis indicated that at this time there was no information available on this. However, she
stated that staff could get this information from the Fort Mill School District at a later date as the
project would need to come back to Planning Commission subsequent to annexation approval for
subdivision review and approval.
Planning Commissioner Chris Wolfe then made several statements about the annexation proposal.
He stated that he believed the R-10 designation was good, but that he believed R-15 would be better.
Mr. Wolfe stated that the green space, though much of it due to the Duke Energy easement and
topography, was a positive. He noted that the trails as contemplated were a positive, but he would
like to see more along with public access to the Catawba River if possible.
Mr. Wolfe then stated that his greatest misgivings about the project was the additional traffic that it
would generate in this part of Fort Mill. It was his understanding that even with the proposed road
improvements as noted within the TIA, traffic would still be an issue. Mr. Wolfe then called on Ms.
Amy Massey, Town of Fort Mill consulting traffic engineer, to further expound upon the TIA.
Ms. Amy Massey, PE with Kimley-Horn then introduced herself and noted that her firm had indeed
prepared the TIA of record for this proposed annexation. Ms. Massey reiterated that the study scope
of the TIA was determined with the Town of Fort Mill, York County, and SCDOT. The TIA along with
the transportation mitigation agreement (TMA) was then reviewed and approved by each of these
agencies along with the DR Horton.
Ms. Massey then directed everyone’s attention to an exhibit which illustrated the location and
parameters of the required road improvements that would result from this project. She noted that
the traffic volumes generated would not only include the existing volumes but also what was
incorporated as a 4.6% annual growth rate on top of the existing traffic annually compounded into
the future year of 2026. Also incorporated into this were the eight, off-site developments that were
determined to be included in the calculation. Finally, the proposed site traffic was then added in.
Ms. Massey continued with the numbers for the proposed DR Horton project alone. This site would
be expected to contribute 194 AM, peak hour trips and 261 PM, peak hour trips. These site, peak
hour numbers are during the highest, peak hour of the adjacent streets. All of this is then
compounded together. This results in the various levels of service as reported within the TIA.
Ms. Massey then stated that she could give a brief rundown of these operations if it would be helpful
to Planning Commission.
Mr. Wolfe indicated that it would be helpful for Ms. Massey to now provide this. He noted that the
TIA reflected that the Level-of-Service “F” in the AM peak hour and a Level-of-Service “D” in the PM
peak hour for background traffic would be exhibited at the intersection of Fort Mill Parkway and N.
Doby’s Bridge Road.
Ms. Massey stated that as for the Town of Fort Mill requirements, and essentially SCDOT’s
requirements as well, the mitigation that would be provided by the developer should be the “delta,”
or change, in the levels of service that occur once you add the proposed site traffic to the road
network. So, you are comparing the 2026 site traffic numbers with all the growth, with all the other
development, and with the change once you add the site traffic in.
Ms. Massey continued as she noted that the developer should only be responsible for the change in
site traffic due to their project. As an example, she used the point that Mr. Wolfe had noted on the
future level of service as reflected within the TIA at Fort Mill Parkway and N. Doby’s Bridge Road. This
location would indeed be a Level-of-Service “F” in the AM. However, there would only be a six-second
increase in wait time with the “build” scenario. In the PM peak we are seeing a Level-of-Service “D,”
which considering that N. Doby’s is an arterial roadway, this Level-of-Service would be meeting the
required standard. Therefore, no improvements were recommended at this intersection.
Ms. Massey then presented another example with Fort Mill Parkway and S. Doby’s Bridge Road. At
this respective intersection there are improvements that will be required. This includes a north-
bound right-turn lane that will be maximized back to the Doby’s Commercial Tract driveway, which is
about 250-feet. With the background condition in 2026, in the AM peak there will be a two-second
delay increase compared to the 2026 build-out with road improvements. Then in the PM peak, there
will be a five-second decrease in delay time from the 2026 background to the 2026 build-out with
road improvements. So, at this intersection, with improvements, you end up with a net improvement,
and better than background traffic only.
Ms. Massey also gave the example of the required improvement of the Dudley Drive right-turn-lane.
She noted that while this new turn lane does not improve the existing situation as much, but the
SCDOT does recommend for schools to have not only the south-bound left turn lane that is already
there, but also a north-bound right turn lane. In this case the north-bound, right turn lane would be
150-feet in length with the 40 MPH posted speed limit. Thus, this right-turn lane was recommended
as mitigation.
For this intersection, the AM peak traffic is controlled by school district personnel directing the
ingress/egress of vehicles. This skews the AM delay downward. Then, in the PM peak, the only way
to improve delay would be a traffic signal, or perhaps a roundabout. Ms. Massey indicated that her
team investigated both of these, and that neither would be helpful nor even warranted. Thus, the
north-bound right-turn lane is what they came up with for mitigation to satisfy the PM peak hour,
along with a spot-improvement by the developer.
Mr. Wolfe thanked Ms. Massey for her input and clarified that he was not suggesting that developers
fix all the traffic issues in Fort Mill. Rather, he noted that while the road improvements that were
recommended by the TIA do help, there is simply the bigger problem of traffic in this area which
affects those residents already there. Mr. Wolfe stated that at some point the overall issue of traffic
is going to have to be dealt with because we cannot just continue to add traffic to roads that already
have problems. He went on to say that if we know that we are going to be in a Level-of-Service “F”
and we know that there is other development continuing, then we can never get ahead of the traffic
issue.
Mr. Wolfe acknowledged that the development as proposed was good on its own, but in that Doby’s
Bridge Road is a two-lane, farm-to-market road, it is his opinion that the transportation infrastructure
in this section of town simply cannot support more growth.
Chairman Traynor then thanked Mr. Wolfe for his input. He then asked the DR Horton team if they
had any response to this.
Mr. Micci responded that they spend a good deal of time working on the TIA with Kimley-Horn and
SCDOT. He noted that they would like to think that the mitigation proposals put forward by both, and
that DR Horton was agreeable to, will help be part of a solution. Mr. Micci stated that they understand
that the town has existing traffic issues. He noted that they wanted to be part of the community and
part of the solution. While they may not be all of the solution, they certainly want to do their best in
putting their best foot forward.
Chairman Traynor then noted that there would certainly be time to go into more detail on this issue
when and if the subdivision review submittal occurs.
Senior Planner Alex Moore then noted to the DR Horton team that one of the adjacent landowners
had concerns about the status of their existing residential driveway as it may be affected by this
development. He asked if they had engaged in any conversations with this landowner and if DR
Horton would be amenable to working with this landowner to maintain his driveway.
Mr. Micci responded that they were indeed agreeable to working with this landowner on this issue.
He noted that DR Horton had some conversation with the landowner regarding this driveway and
that there were also ongoing conversations with SCDOT on what this may look like. They want to help
him keep his driveway at its current location. SCDOT seems to initially be very positive and open
about this.
Ms. Karagounis responded that from her understanding from SCDOT, since DR Horton is asking for
an encroachment permit, they will have to meet agency requirements in terms of spacing from the
already established driveway. If DR Horton cannot meet SCDOT distance requirements, then there
are waivers that SCDOT processes with the encroachment permit.
Chairman Traynor then asked if there were any other Planning Commission questions. There being
none, he noted that he did like the lower density of the project. He agreed that the site conditions
certainly played a role in the lower density. He noted that there would be more opportunity to
examine the development plan later during the subdivision review phase if the town council agreed
to annex the property.
Chairman Traynor then entertained a motion.
Mr. Lucarelli made a motion to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning designation of R-
10. and Mr. Agrawal seconded the motion.
Chairman Traynor then asked if there were any other questions or comments before the vote. There
being none, Chairman Traynor began the role call voting.
Chairman Traynor voted in favor of the motion to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning
designation of R-10. With this, he also noted that some very good questions were raised about the
potential project during the meeting. He indicated that if the subdivision came back before Planning
Commission, that the commission members would certainly look for progress on the issues that were
talked about during the meeting.
Chris Wolfe then voted against the motion to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning
designation of R-10.
Matt Lucarelli voted in favor of the motion to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning
designation of R-10.
Andy Agrawal voted in favor of the motion to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning
designation of R-10.
Hynek Lettang voted against the motion to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning
designation of R-10.
Dan Stout voted in favor of the motion to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning
designation of R-10.
Thus, Planning Director Karagounis then noted that the motion will go forward to town council as a
recommendation by Planning Commission to approve the annexation ordinance with the zoning
designation of R-10 by a vote of 4-2. The public hearing at town council will be held on April 12th.
Chairman Traynor then reiterated that it was the role of Planning Commission in this process is to
make a recommendation to the Fort Mill Town council. The Fort Mill Town Council then has the
authority to either say yes or no to all recommendations from the Planning Commission.
Chairman Traynor then thanked everyone for attending the Planning Commission meeting. Mr.
Ballou, legal counsel for DR Horton, thanked Chairman Traynor and the Planning Commission for the
opportunity to appear before them. He stated that it had been very helpful for the DR Horton team
to hear the concerns of the Planning Commission.
Chairman Traynor thanked Mr. Ballou for his comments. There being no further business, the meeting
was adjourned at 7:10 pm.
Agenda
TOWN OF FORT MILL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
March 16, 2021
112 Confederate Street
6:30 PM
Live Viewing Online: Request Access by emailing before 5:00 pm on Tuesday, March 16, 2021 to
Penelope G. Karagounis, Planning Director at pkaragounis@fortmillsc.gov
Public Access by Phone: Dial (toll free) 1-877-309-2073
and use access code 861-822-317
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Regular Meeting: February 15, 2021 [Pages 2-3]
NEW BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Annexation Request: DR Horton [Pages 4-34]
An ordinance annexing York County Tax Map Number 742-00-00-001 containing
approximately 194.580 +/- acres located on S. Doby’s Bridge Road.
ADJOURN
The following press was notified of the meeting by email or fax in accordance of the Freedom of Information Act: The
Herald; CN2; WRHI; Fort Mill Sun; Fort Mill Times and WBTV. The agenda was also posted at the entrance to Town
Hall the required length of time and on the Town website.
The Town of Fort Mill is committed to assuring accessibility with reasonable accommodation, of Town services and
facilities for all individuals, in compliance with federal law. Please contact the Town Manager’s Office at 803-547
2116 if you need assistance.
1
TOWN OF FORT MILL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
February 16, 2021
112 Confederate Street
6:30 PM
Live Viewing Online: Request Access by emailing before 5:00 pm on Tuesday, February 16, 2021
to Penelope G. Karagounis, Planning Director at pkaragounis@fortmillsc.gov
Public Access by Phone: Dial (toll free) 1-866-899-4679
and use access code 976-549-053
Present: James Traynor, Dan Stout, Matthew Lucarelli, Andy Agrawal, Hynek Lettang, Chris
Wolfe, Ben Hudgins, Planning Director Penelope Karagounis, Planner II Nick Cauthen,
Donna Brown (Chick-fil-A), Sean Hickman (Chick-fil-A), Travis Reynolds (Chick-fil-A)
Absent: N/A
Chairman Traynor gave opportunity to the Planning Commission to review and comment on
the January 19, 2021 meeting minutes as presented with the meeting packet. Chris Wolfe
made a motion to approve the minutes. Andy Agrawal seconded the motion. By a vote of 6-0,
the Planning Commission approved the January 19, 2021 meeting minutes. *Ben Hudgins was
not logged into the meeting when the vote was held.
NEW BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Appearance Review – Chick-fil-A Addition: Mr. Cauthen provided a brief
overview of the request, the purpose of which was to review and consider granting
commercial appearance review approval for a new addition, dual lane drive thru
lanes/canopies, and the relocation of the dumpster enclosure at the existing Chick-fil-A
located on Highway 160 W. The Planning Department recommended approval of the new
updated request with the condition for staff to be able to approve minor adjustments.
The Commission asked for more details regarding the scope of the building addition. The
applicant stated the entirety of the addition was in the rear and would extend beyond and
encompass a previous addition.
The applicant described the dual canopy orientation which included separate coverings for
order and pick-up, outside seating was also added, and parking spaces were eliminated as
part of the project to allow space for the new dual lane drive-thru.
Chairman Traynor asked for a description of the canopy materials. The applicant stated the
canopies were metal with drainage systems on top.
Mr. Wolfe asked if all the tree removals were necessary. The applicant detailed the
2
landscaping plan and showed the location of the newly planted trees.
The Commissioners noted concern over the durability of fabric awnings. The applicant
stated Chick-fil-A is adamant regarding building maintenance and they could be assured
these awnings were durable and have been used with success in the past by Chick-fil-A.
Discussions between the Commissioners, staff, and the applicant were had pertaining to
the need of more drive-thru space at the expense of less parking. Mr. Lucarelli asked if it
was short sighted to make the trade-off at this time. The applicant stated parking is always
a concern, but this retrofit was in the works prior to the pandemic and has already been
implemented at other locations.
Mr. Hudgins and Mr. Stout noted concerns regarding the traffic flow internally and
externally related to the site. The applicant stated that cones or a staff member are often
used along with pavement markings to ensure traffic patterns are enforced but that
concern is certainly something that can be taken into consideration.
After no further questions or comments Chairman Traynor asked for a motion.
Mr. Wolfe made a motion to grant commercial appearance review approval with the
condition for staff to have the ability to approve minor modifications to the site plan and
elevations if needed. Mr. Traynor asked if it was agreeable to add a condition for staff to
have discussions with ownership regarding traffic direction concepts. Mr. Wolfe agreed.
Mr. Lettang seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-0.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 pm.
3
Meeting Information
Meeting Type Planning Commission
Meeting Date March 16th, 2021
Request Summary
Action (Old Bus.) X Action (New Bus.) Info/Discussion
Request Type
Public Hearing Executive Session Other
Case Summary
X Annexation Rezoning Text Amendment
Case Type
Subdivision Plat Appearance Review Other
Property Information
Applicant DR Horton
Property Owner Robert Paul Snodgrass
Property Location 2601 S. Doby’s Bridge Road
Tax Map Number Currently or formerly known as 742-00-00-001
Acreage 194.580 +/- acres
Current Zoning RUD (York County)
Proposed Zoning R-10
Existing Use Large, forested tract
Title
An ordinance annexing York County Tax Map Number 742-00-00-001 containing approximately
194.580 +/- acres located on S. Doby’s Bridge Road.
Background Information
Site The Town has received an annexation petition for York County Tax Map Number
Characteristics 742-00-00-001. The subject property consists of 194.580 +/- acres and is located
at 2601 S. Doby’s Bridge Road. This property is a large, forested tract between S.
Doby’s Bridge Road and the Catawba River. There is a circa 1840 home with
associated agricultural-related structures on the parcel. It appears that this home
and other structures are generally in poor condition due to age. A 405’ wide Duke-
Energy powerline easement bisects the property. This is shown on the attached
property survey.
4
Neighboring Direction Zoning Existing Use
Uses North R-15, LC, Single-Family Residential & Church
PND
South RUD (YC) Single-Family Residential / Undeveloped
MXU
East RUD-I, Single-Family Residential
PND,
West MXU Single-Family Residential / Undeveloped
Zoning The property is currently zoned Rural Development District (RUD) per York County
Summary and GIS. The County’s RUD designation allows up to one dwelling unit per acre. The
Relation to district also allows farming, religious uses, manufactured homes, and accessory
Comprehensive dwelling units.
Plan
The applicant has requested a Town of Fort Mill zoning designation of R-10 upon
annexation into the corporate limits. The R-10 zoning district is designed for low
to medium density, single-family development on lots of 10,000 square feet or
more. The R-10 minimum lot width is 75-feet, with a front setback requirement
of 35-feet, a side-yard setback of 10-feet, and a rear-yard setback of 35-feet.
Upon annexation, it is the applicant’s intent to obtain Town of Fort Mill
subdivision approval for 267 single-family, detached dwelling units on 194.580
acres for an overall gross density of 1.37 dwelling units per acre.
The town’s R-10 zoning district requirements does not stipulate minimum open
space mandates. However, planning staff discussed the importance of open space
within Fort Mill with the applicant and suggested that a minimum of 20% be
included within this project. To that end, the applicant’s current conceptual site
plan indicates that 52% of the site is comprised of active and passive open space.
It should be noted that a portion of this open space does include the Duke Energy
right-of-way and flood plain.
The Town of Fort Mill 2040 Comprehensive Plan indicates that this property is
located within an area designated for low-to-moderate density. This land use
category provides for densities of up to 3 dwelling units to the acre. The
comprehensive plan suggests that these neighborhoods are generally developed
as subdivisions with relatively uniform housing types. Such development will be
oriented interior to the site and typically buffered from surrounding development
by topography, natural, and landscaped areas.
While moderate density developments may have typical lot sizes of 15,000 square
feet, when a cluster design is used in the formulation of such neighborhoods,
average lot sizes may be reduced to an average of 7,000 square feet.
5
Please note the attached pages in Exhibit ‘A’ which are from the comprehensive
plan and include a description of low to moderate density, the overall future land
use map, and the subject property outlined vis-à-vis the future land use map.
Traffic Impact In this instance, the annexation development application required the completion
of a traffic impact analysis (TIA). Preparation of this TIA was completed by the
town’s traffic engineering consultant and included coordination with SCDOT.
Completion of this TIA indicated the necessity of off-site transportation
improvements to mitigate the development’s impact to the transportation
network. Construction of these off-site transportation improvements will be the
responsibility of the developer.
Please find within this Planning Commissioner’s packet a copy of the TIA along
with the transportation mitigation agreement (TMA). The TMA summarizes the
development plan, site access and points of ingress/egress, along with on and off-
site improvement requirements.
Fire Impact The property is located approximately 1.8 miles (3 Minutes) ordinary driving
distance from the town’s fire station at 1245 Fort Mill Parkway.
Utility Impact Town of Fort Mill water is available along S. Doby’s Bridge Road via a 12-inch line.
Town sewer will require the installation of a pump station to tie into the sewer
line, which is also available along S. Doby’s Bridge Road. The applicant would be
required to work with the Town of Fort Mill Utilities Department to determine all
improvements necessary to serve the property.
Nothing in this report shall be deemed a guarantee that water and/or sewer
service/capacity will be available at the time of development.
School Impact The applicant’s request would provide additional impact to the Fort Mill School
District (FMSD) A new elementary school for this area, River Trail Elementary,
opened in January 2021. This school is located at 1016 Fort Mill Parkway. A new
middle school is now being constructed at 2212 Whites Road. This school will be
known as Forest Creek Middle and is scheduled to open for the 2021-2022 school
year. The new area high school, Catawba Ridge, opened in 2019.
At this time, all future homes within this project will be subject to the FMSD
impact fee of $18,158 per house.
Discussion The property is contiguous to the town limits and is, therefore, eligible for
annexation.
The conceptual plan represents an efficient design based on environmental
constraints of the site, e.g., the Duke Energy power easement, slopes, and
floodplain, which in a sense necessitate a clustering lots within the most suitable
6
terrain. The more undevelopable areas will be devoted to active and passive open
space for the enjoyment of future residents.
Additionally, an R-10 lot regime would be well suited to adjacent developments
such as Massey (zoned PND) and the Forest at Fort Mill (zoned R-15). The portions
of Massey that are closest to the subject property contain many lots that are 8,000
square feet or less.
With respect to traffic mitigation, the applicant has agreed to off-site
improvements as enumerated and illustrated within Exhibit ‘E.’ Importantly, the
improvements are holistic in approach, with traffic, along with area pedestrian
and bicycle improvements required.
Planning staff, therefore, recommends in favor of annexation with a zoning
designation of R-10. Please note that this recommendation is for annexation only
and is heavily based upon required area transportation improvements due to the
scope of this project. No recommendation on subdivision approval or denial is
being made at this time. Such recommendation will occur within the future
subdivision review stage, and only after successful annexation of York County Tax
Map Number 742-00-00-001 into the Town of Fort Mill.
Alternatives
1. Recommend approval of the annexation ordinance with a zoning designation of R-10
2. Recommend approval of the annexation ordinance with an alternate zoning designation
3. Recommend denial of the annexation request.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends in favor of APPROVAL for the annexation with a zoning
Recommendation
designation of R-10.
Name & Title Penelope Karagounis, Planning Director
Department Planning Department
Date of Request March 16th, 2021
Legislative History
Planning Commission 03/16/2021: Scheduled
First Reading TBD
Public Hearing TBD
Second Reading TBD
Effective Date Upon adoption
7
Attachments
• Exhibit ‘A’: Annexation Application & Agent Authorization
• Exhibit ‘B’: Draft Annexation Ordinance
• Exhibit ‘C’: Conceptual Site Plan
• Exhibit ‘D’: Traffic Mitigation Agreement
• Exhibit ‘E’: Zoning Map
• Exhibit ‘F’: Pages from Town of Fort Mill Comprehensive Plan
8
Exhibit ‘A’
Annexation Application & Agent Authorization
9
10
11
dotloop signature verification: dtlp.us/Ymnm-QhzU-HHea
Robert Paul Snodgrass
dotloop verified
01/16/21 11:38 AM EST
KSOJ-0XBG-BQAU-GUCS
12
Exhibit ‘B’
Draft Annexation Ordinance
13
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
TOWN COUNCIL FOR THE TOWN OF FORT MILL
ORDINANCE NO. 2021-___
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY OR FORMELY KNOWN AS YORK COUNTY TAX
MAP NUMBER 742-00-00-001 CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 194.580 +/- ACRES LOCATED AT 2601
S. DOBY’S BRIDGE ROAD
WHEREAS, a proper petition was submitted to the Fort Mill Town Council on _____2021, by
Marty Davis of DR Horton, agent for Robert Paul Snodgrass, property owner, requesting the property
currently or formerly known as York County Tax Map Number 742-00-00-001 be annexed to and
included within the corporate limits of the Town of Fort Mill under the provisions of S.C. Code Section
5-3-150(3); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the Town of Fort Mill, in a duly called meeting on
March 16th, 2021, reviewed the request and forwarded their recommendation to Town Council; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was advertised and held on TBD, during a duly called regular
meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Fort Mill; and
WHEREAS, Section 5-3-150(3) of the Code of Laws of the State of South Carolina, as amended,
provides that any area or property which is contiguous to a municipality may be annexed to the
municipality by filing with the municipal governing body a petition signed by all persons owning real
estate in the area requesting annexation. Upon the agreement of the governing body to accept the
petition and annex the area, and the enactment of an ordinance declaring the area annexed to the
municipality, the annexation is complete; and
WHEREAS, using the definition of “contiguous” as outlined in S.C. Code Section 5-3-305, the
Town Council has determined that the above referenced property is contiguous to property that was
previously annexed into the corporate limits of the Town of Fort Mill; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that annexation would be in the best interest
of both the property owner and the Town of Fort Mill;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Fort Mill in Council
assembled:
SECTION I. Annexation. It is hereby declared by the Town Council of the Town of Fort Mill,
in Council assembled, that the incorporated limits of the Town of Fort Mill shall be extended so as to
include, annex and make a part of said Town, the described area of territory above referred to, being
more or less 194.580 +/- acres, the same being fully described in the Property Description attached
hereto, and contiguous to land already within the Town of Fort Mill. Pursuant to S.C. Code Section 5-
3-110, this annexation shall include the whole or any part of any street, roadway, or highway abutting
the above referenced property, not exceeding the width thereof, provided such street, roadway or
highway has been accepted for and is under permanent public maintenance by the Town of Fort Mill,
York County, or the South Carolina Department of Transportation.
14
SECTION II. Zoning Classification of Annexed Property. The above-described property, upon
annexation into the corporate limits of the Town of Fort Mill, shall be zoned, as follows: R-10, one-
family residential .
SECTION III. Voting District. For the purpose of municipal elections, the above-described
property, upon annexation into the incorporated limits of the Town of Fort Mill, shall be assigned to
and made a part of Ward Two (2).
SECTION IV. Notification. Notice of the annexation of the above-described area and the
inclusion thereof within the incorporated limits of the Town of Fort Mill shall forthwith be filed with
the Secretary of State of South Carolina (SCSOS), the South Carolina Department of Public Safety
(SCDPS), and the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT), pursuant to S.C. Code § 5-3-
90(E).
SECTION V. Severability. If any section, subsection, or clause of this ordinance shall be
deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections,
subsections, and clauses shall not be affected thereby.
SECTION VI. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of
adoption.
SIGNED AND SEALED this _____ day of ___________________, 2021, having been duly
adopted by the Town Council for the Town of Fort Mill on the _____ day of ___________________,
2021.
First Reading: TOWN OF FORT MILL
Public Hearing:
Second Reading: ______________________________
Guynn H. Savage, Mayor
LEGAL REVIEW ATTEST
______________________________ ______________________________
Barron B. Mack, Jr, Town Attorney Virginia Burgess, Town Clerk
15
Property Description
All those certain pieces, parcels or tracts of land lying, being and situate in Fort Mill Township, County
of York, State of South Carolina, containing 194.580 acres, more or less, containing the property
shown in the survey map attached, and being more particularly described as a portion of York County
Tax Map Number 742-00-00-001.
Pursuant to S.C. Code Section 5-3-110, this annexation shall include the whole or any part of any
street, roadway, or highway abutting the above referenced property, not exceeding the width
thereof, provided such street, roadway or highway has been accepted for and is under permanent
public maintenance by the Town of Fort Mill, York County, or the South Carolina Department of
Transportation
16
17
Exhibit ‘C’
Conceptual Site Plan
18
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOTES
1. THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO INCORPORATE MATERIAL/COMPONENTS OF
THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WITHIN THE PROPOSED AMENITY CENTER.
2. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE MEASURED FROM THE FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB, UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED. DIMENSIONS LABELED "EOP" ARE MEASURED FROM LIP OF GUTTER TO LIP
OF GUTTER.
3. BEARINGS, DIMENSIONS AND EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE. REFER TO RECORDED
PLATS AND SURVEYS FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY INFORMATION.
SITE
SITE DATA TABLE
DEVELOPMENT DATA:
TAX PARCEL ID YORK COUNTY PARCEL 7 20000001
LEGAL DESCRIPTION BK 0 177, PG 000 1
LAND USE RESIDENTIAL
TOTAL SITE AREA +/-19 .92 ACRES
TOTAL R.O.W. AREA +/-21. 9 ACRES
TOTAL RECREATIONAL AREA RE UIRED 27.29 ACRES
TOTAL RECREATIONAL AREA PROVIDED +/-62.50 ACRES
TOTAL NUMBER OF DETACHED RESIDENTIAL LOTS 267
SITE LOCATION MAP ZONING DATA:
FEMA FLOOD PANEL 5091C0333F
NOT TO SCALE WATERSHED SUGAR CREEK
AMENITY
+/-2.75 ACRES ONING DISTRICT CURRENT YORK COUNTY, RUD
PROPOSED TOWN OF FORT MILL, R-10
30' PERIMETER BOUNDARY SETBACK
(TYPICAL) MIN. LOT SI E RE UIRED 10,000 SF
MIN. LOT SI E PROVIDED 10,125 SF
MIN. LOT WIDTH RE UIRED 75'
MIN. LOT WIDTH PROVIDED 75'
MAILBOX CLUSTER UNITS MAX. HEIGHT 0'
(TYP.) DENSITY 1.37 DUA
WETLANDS
(TYP.) SETBACKS:
FRONT YARD 35'
SIDE YARD INTERIOR 10'
REAR YARD 35'
25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG
POWER EASEMENT (TYPICAL)
OPEN SPACE
PROVIDED +/-102. AC ©
RE UIRED 6 .22 AC
NATURE TRAIL & 30' ESMT
(TYP.)
A
RE
NA
TIO
EA
CR
E RE
TIV
AC
OVERALL SITE PLAN
COMMON 30' PERIMETER BOUNDARY SETBACK
OPEN SPACE
(+/-0.96 AC.)
TYPICAL 75 FOOT WIDE SINGLE FAMILY LOT DETAIL
NTS
PROPOSED TOWN COLLECTOR
STREET & 100' ROW
COMMON
OPEN SPACE
(+/-1.95 AC.)
COMMON
OPEN SPACE
(+/-1.57 AC.)
DOBYS BRIDGE
PREPARED FOR
DR HORTON
TH
NOR
C301
19
Exhibit ‘D’
Traffic Mitigation Agreement (TMA)
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Exhibit ‘E’
Zoning Map
29
30
Exhibit ‘F’
Pages from Town of Fort Mill Comprehensive Plan
31
CHAPTER 4 | LAND USE
RESIDENTIAL
LOW - MODERATE DENSITY (RES-LM)
Purpose and Definition
This land use category is for single family detached neighborhoods with up to three dwellings units per acre. Neighborhoods
are generally formed as subdivisions with a relatively uniform housing type and density. Buildings are oriented interior to the
site and are typically buffered from surrounding development by topography or vegetative areas.
The neighborhood’s character is not simply limited to the number of allowed dwelling units per acre. Moderate density
residential developments will have average lot sizes of 15,000 square feet, many have off-street pedestrian facilities, and
average setbacks. Some existing developments in this land use category have smaller lot sizes but are still under three
dwelling units per acre. This development pattern clusters homes, closer leaving large areas undeveloped because of power
lines, steep slopes, floodplain, or other similar hindrances within the development. These developments may have average lot
sizes around 7,000 square feet, contain sidewalks, and smaller setbacks.
Blocks are typically smaller in length but still maintain a suburban character. A modified grid pattern or internal
connectivity is common in this land use category.
Primary Land Uses
• Single-family detached homes Table 4.4 RES-LM Form and Pattern
General Development Pattern Separated Uses
Secondary Land Uses Typical Lot Coverage 40 - 75%
• Duplexes Residential Density 2 to 3 DU’s/Acre
• Townhomes Average Lot Size* 15,000 SF or greater
• Churches Non-Residential Intensity N/A
• Schools Prevailing Building Height 1 - 3 Stories
• Community centers
Transportation Choices Auto/Walking
• Pool and amenities
• Natural areas Typical Block Length 600 - 1,200 Linear Feet
Setback or Build-To Line Setback Requirements
Open Space Elements Greenway, Natural Areas
Street Pattern Curvilinear
Street Connectivity Medium
Parking Provisions Private Driveway
*Average lot size may be smaller in cluster style developments
32 FORT MILL | COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 39
39
CHAPTER 4 | LAND USE
Figure 4.2 Future Land Use Plan
33 FORT MILL | COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 313 1
34
Get email alerts for Fort Mill
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.