C AS E
S TUD I ES
MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
OV E RV I E W
FAC T S H E E T
C OS T S U M M A RY E S T I M AT E
EXISTING CONDITIONS
E X I S T I N G R E QU I R E M E N T S
C A S E S T U DY # 8 P C C O - C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
72
City of Charlotte Cost Analysis
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
C AOVERVIEW
S E S T U DY # 7
PC C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
The project example for the multi-family analysis is an approximately 6-acre site
and volume control is not provided with the approved, constructed site. For the
located on a wooded parcel bounded on three sides by existing development with
implementation of the PCCO-Central Catawba provisions, bioretention facilities
no opportunity for external roadway connectivity. The site is not encumbered by
were incorporated into the project storm water management to provide for water
floodplain, wetlands, or S.W.I.M. buffer requirements, nor is it within a watershed
quality treatment, while above ground, dry detention facilities were maintained for
overlay district. Planned use of the site is for-sale townhomes with associated
the peak flow detention and volume attenuation requirements. A retaining wall was
access and parking.
incorporated into the site design to maximize project yield. An off-site drainage
analysis was performed, and the elimination of the 25-year detention requirement
One case study is provided with this analysis. The Post Construction Controls
was realized for a portion of the site. Undisturbed open space requirements were
Ordinance-Central Catawba requirements are incorporated into the desired program
provided for on-site by mitigated landscape areas allowed for by ordinance. The
for this project to be compared with the regulations incorporated through the
site development cost associated with the PCCO-Central Catawba provisions is
original approval process. A cost comparison of site development improvements is
$1.52 million compared to $1.28 million for the approved site, refer to cost
provided. The USDGs are not analyzed with this project as current improvements
estimates enclosed.
meet the standards of that ordinance. Minimum Permit Requirements are also
not analyzed singularly as the PCCO-Central requirements introduce only slight
Staff reviewed the project development in relation t o t h e d r a f t
additional measures, namely an increase in undisturbed open space.
Environmental Chapter of the City of Charlotte’s G e n e r a l D e v e l o p m e n t
Policies (GDP-E). The combination of undisturbe d o p e n s p a c e , m i t i g a t e d
In summary, the existing project adhered to current detention requirements by use
open space and water quality protection provided b y t h e P C C O w o u l d s e r v e
of above-ground, dry detention facilities centrally located on site. Water quality
to meet the intent of the GDP-E.
73
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
SHEET
CFACT
ASE ST
U DY # 7
P C C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
DESIGN CRITERIA
ELEMENTS
E X I S T I N G R E G U L AT I O N S
P C C O - C E N T R A L C ATAW B A
PA R K I N G
1.5 SP/UNIT
1.5 SP/UNIT
EXTERNAL CONNECTIONS
1 D R I V E WAY
1 D R I V E WAY
N/A
N/A
O P E N S PA C E *
3.08 AC (50%)
3.08 AC (50%)
T R E E S AV E *
NOT REQUIRED
NOT REQUIRED
U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E *
NOT REQUIRED
1.08 (17.5%)
BUFFERS
NOT REQUIRED
PCCO
8 5 % T S S R E M O VA L *
NOT REQUIRED
X
7 0 % T P R E M O VA L *
NOT REQUIRED
NOT REQUIRED
X
X
NOT REQUIRED
X
BIKE / PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
DETENTION
VOLUME CONTROL
* See Appendix for definitions.
74
City of Charlotte Cost Analysis
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
SHEET
CFACT
ASE ST
U DY # 7
P C C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
EXISTING
R E G U L AT I O N S
P C C O - C E N T R A L C ATAW B A
R-8MF-CD
R-8MF-CD
6.16
6.16
44
40
7.14
6.49
2,813
2,538
49%
42.1%
66 (1.5 SP/UNIT)
60 (1.5 SP/UNIT)
PA R K I N G P R O V I D E D
113
95
O P E N S PA C E R E Q U I R E D * *
50%
50%
O P E N S PA C E P R O V I D E D
3.14 AC (51%)
3.57 AC (57.9%)
T R E E S AV E A R E A R E Q U I R E D * *
NOT REQUIRED
NOT REQUIRED
0.77 AC
0.77 AC
U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E R E Q U I R E D * *
NOT REQUIRED
1.08 AC (17.5%)
U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E P R O V I D E D
NOT REQUIRED
0.77 AC
M I T I G AT E D U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E
NOT REQUIRED
0.47 AC
YES
YES
NOT REQUIRED
YES
YES***
YES***
ELEMENTS
ZONING
SITE ACREAGE
UNITS
DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE (DUA)**
P R I VAT E R O A D S ( L I N E A R F E E T ) * *
% I M P E RV I O U S
PA R K I N G R E Q U I R E D * *
T R E E S AV E A R E A P R O V I D E D
B M P * * - D RY D E T E N T I O N
BMP** - BIORETENTION
OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
* All site design elements are applied as required to meet conditions of draft ordinance/ordinances based on specific
conditions of site and are subject to change with changing site conditions.
** See Appendix for definitions.
*** Drainage pipe under Elm Lane.
75
76
City of Charlotte Cost Analysis
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
COST SUMMARY
C AESTIMATE
S E S T U DY # 7
PC C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
ELEMENTS
E X I S T I N G R E G U L AT I O N S
P C C O - C E N T R A L C ATAW B A
$70,340.00
$70,340.00
SITE GRADING
$208,925.00
$182,247.50
STORM DRAINAGE
$237,661.83
$444,226.92
WAT E R & S A N I TA RY S E W E R
$300,207.72
$300,207.72
EROSION CONTROL PHASE I
$22,038.64
$22,038.64
EROSION CONTROL PHASE II
$16,124.50
$16,124.50
S T R E E T S ( PAV I N G )
$187,700.46
$177,885.94
LANDSCAPE
$232,685.56
$301,338.28
N/R
$8,602.60
$1,275,683.71
$1,523,012.09
A L L O WA N C E S
O P E N S PA C E M I T I G AT I O N
T O TA L
77
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING
C
A S E S T U DY # 7
CONDITIONS
P C C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
1
CONTEXT MAP
The site is located along a boulevard adjacent to
single-family residential and multi-family
residential development. A large commercial
development is west of the site.
2
eXISTING TREE COVER
Around 85% of the site has existing tree canopy
except for the house driveway and lawn areas.
78
City of Charlotte Cost Analysis
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
COST
EXISTING
SUMMARY
C
A
S
E
S T U DY # 7
CONDITIONS
ESTIMATE
PC C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
p
ZONING: N/R
p
SITE ACREAGE (AC): 6.16
p
U N I T S : 1 S I N G L E FA M I LY R E S I D E N T I A L
p
DUA: 0.16
p
P R I VAT E R O A D S ( L F ) : 0
p
P E R C E N T I M P E RV I O U S : 4 %
p
PA R K I N G R E Q U I R E D : N / R p
PA R K I N G P R O V I D E D : N / R p
O P E N S PA C E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
O P E N S PA C E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
T R E E S AV E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
T R E E S AV E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : 7 5 - 8 0 %
p
U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
M I T I G AT E D U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E ( A C ) : N / R
p
B M P - D RY D E T E N T I O N : N / R
p
BMP - BIORETENTION: N/R
p
OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: N/R
COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
p
N/R
p
N/R
p
N/R
p
N/R
p
N/R
p
N/R
p
N/R
p
N/R
p
N/R
NOTES
Prior to development the project site housed one single
family residence. The parcel was heavily vegetated and
contributed minimal to zero negative impact stemming
from its site runoff.
79
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING
C A S E S T U DY # 7
REGULATIONS
P C C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
1
OPEN SPACE
Total open space provided is 3.14 AC (51%).
50% open space was required for R-8 MF-CD
Zoning. Current zoning gives open space credit
for improved areas for active or passive recreation,
although the area has been disturbed or
is impervious.
2
UNDISTURBED OPEN SPACE
Undisturbed open space was not required under
current zoning. However the Existing Regulations
provided 0.77 AC of undisturbed open space.
80
City of Charlotte Cost Analysis
3
undisturbed open space
ON-SITE MITIGATION
No undisturbed open space on-site mitigation
was required.
4
BMP - DRY DETENTION
Only peak flow detention was required of the
approved development to meet current storm water
standards. The 2-year and 10-year storm events
were detained in at-grade, dry detention facilities
centrally located on site to meet pre-developed
release rates.
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING
C A S E S T U DY # 7
REGULATIONS
PC C O C E N T R A L C ATAW BA
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
p
ZONING: R-8 MF-CD
p
SITE ACREAGE (AC): 6.16
p
UNITS: 44
p
DUA: 7.14
p
P R I VAT E R O A D S ( L F ) : 2 . 8 1 3
p
P E R C E N T I M P E RV I O U S : 4 9 %
p
PA R K I N G R E Q U I R E D : 6 6 ( 1 . 5 S PA C E / U N I T ) p
PA R K I N G P R O V I D E D : 1 1 3
p
O P E N S PA C E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : 3 . 0 8 ( 5 0 % )
p
O P E N S PA C E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : 3 . 1 4 ( 5 1 % )
p
T R E E S AV E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
T R E E S AV E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : 0 . 7 7 ( 1 2 . 5 % )
p
U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : 0 . 7 7
p
M I T I G AT E D U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E ( A C ) : N / R
p
B M P - D RY D E T E N T I O N : Y E S
p
BMP - BIORETENTION: N/R
p
OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: YES
COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
p
A L L O WA N C E S : $ 7 0 , 3 4 0 . 0 0
p
SITE GRADING: $208,925.00
p
STORM DRAINAGE: $237,661.83
p
WAT E R & S A N I TA RY S E W E R : $ 3 0 0 , 2 0 7 . 7 2
p
EROSION CONTROL PHASE I: $22,038.64
p
EROSION CONTROL PHASE II: $16,124.50
p
S T R E E T S ( PAV I N G ) : $ 1 8 7 , 7 0 0 . 4 6
p
LANDSCAPE: $232,685.56
p
O P E N S PA C E M I T I G AT I O N : N / R
p
T O TA L : $ 1 , 2 7 5 , 6 8 3 . 7 1
NOTES
The project was mass graded to provide for 44 attached
townhome units. Dry detention was provided on-site to meet
existing detention regulations. No water quality standards
were a condition of site approval.
81
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
CASE STUDY #8
PCCO-CENTRAL
C A S E S T U DY # 7
P C C O CCATAWBA
E N T R A L C ATAW BA
1
82
City of Charlotte Cost Analysis
3
open space
undisturbed open space
ON-SITE MITIGATION
Total open space provided is 3.62 AC (58%). The
amount of open space increased 0.5 acre
compared with the Existing Regulations to provide
for additional BMP area.
0.44 AC of on-site mitigation is required to meet
undisturbed open space requirements. On-site
mitigation is provided at a rate of 150% in areas
that will not be disturbed in the future
2
undisturbed open space
4
Total undisturbed open space provided is 0.77
AC. The PPCO-Central Plan was unable to
provide all required open space without a large
reduction in units. All undisturbed open space
was found in buffers.
Bioretention facilities were incorporated into the
storm water management for the project to provide
for water quality treatment. Above ground, dry
detention was maintained to provide for peak flow
and volume control .
BMP - DRY DETENTION AND BIORETENTION
M U LT I - FA M I LY
RESIDENTIAL
CASE STUDY #8
PCCO-CENTRAL
C A S E S T U DY # 7
PC C O CCATAWBA
E N T R A L C ATAW BA
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
p
ZONING: R-8 MF-CD
p
SITE ACREAGE (AC): 6.16
p
UNITS: 40
p
DUA: 6.49
p
P R I VAT E R O A D S ( L F ) : 2 , 5 3 8
p
P E R C E N T I M P E RV I O U S : 4 2 . 1 %
p
PA R K I N G R E Q U I R E D : 6 0 ( 1 . 5 S PA C E / U N I T )
p
PA R K I N G P R O V I D E D : 9 5
p
O P E N S PA C E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : 3 . 0 8 ( 5 0 % )
p
O P E N S PA C E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : 3 . 5 7 ( 5 7 . 9 % )
p
T R E E S AV E R E Q U I R E D ( A C ) : N / R
p
T R E E S AV E P R O V I D E D ( A C ) : 0 . 7 7 ( 1 2 . 5 % )
p
UNDISTURBED OPEN SPACE REQUIRED (AC): 1.08 (17.5%)
p
UNDISTURBED OPEN SPACE PROVIDED (AC): 0.77 (12.5%)
p
M I T I G AT E D U N D I S T U R B E D O P E N S PA C E ( A C ) : 0 . 4 7
p
B M P - D RY D E T E N T I O N : Y E S
p
BMP - BIORETENTION: YES
p
OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: YES
COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
p
A L L O WA N C E S : $ 7 0 , 3 4 0 . 0 0
p
SITE GRADING: $182,247.50
p
STORM DRAINAGE: $444,226.92
p
WAT E R & S A N I TA RY S E W E R : $ 3 0 0 , 2 0 7 . 7 2
p
EROSION CONTROL PHASE I: $22,038.64
p
EROSION CONTROL PHASE II: $16,124.50
p
S T R E E T S ( PAV I N G ) : $ 1 7 7 , 8 8 5 . 9 4
p
LANDSCAPE: $301,338.28
p
O P E N S PA C E M I T I G AT I O N : $ 8 , 6 0 2 . 6 0
p
T O TA L : $ 1 , 5 2 3 , 0 1 2 . 0 9
NOTES
This analysis realized a 4-unit decrease in townhome
units as required to incorporate BMPs sufficient to meet
water quality standards. USDG were not analyzed as the
Existing Regulations provides streetscape in conformance
with USDA standards.
83
84
City of Charlotte Cost Analysis