SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY DESIGN COMMISSION

CONCEPT PLAN PROPOSAL: COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS

Subject:                       The Homestead Road Property-Residential Development

Concept Plan Proposal

Meeting Date:                        April 21, 2004

Recommendation:      That the comments and questions from the Commission and the public be forwarded to the applicant and the Town Council.

Vote:   Unanimous to forward comments and questions by members present: Chris Culbreth, Thatcher Freund, Laura King Moore, Charlotte Newby (Chair), Scott Nilsen, Heidi Perry, John Runkle, Glenn Parks, Scott Radway, Polly Van de Velde 

Density

1. Several Commission members and neighbors expressed concerned with the proposed dwelling unit density noting that most neighborhoods in the area are single family developments without multi-family or duplex structures.  Other Commission members supported the proposed density.

2. Describing the proposal as a residential design that could “not build out more fully on a piece of property” a neighbor recommended that the applicant create a development with more open space around the buildings.

3. One Commission members suggested that the increase density may accelerate the arrival of bus service to this part of the community.  The Commissioner also noted that the proposed development is in an excellent location for walking to school.

Design

4. Several Commissioners did not support the proposed arrangement of buildings.  Some stated that the predicable elevations and “cookie cutter” design does not provide adequate open space between buildings, limits the variety of structures, and lacks interest.

Suggestions for revised building arrangement and design included: a) provide a diversity of building types and sizes; b) vary amount of open space between buildings; c) design buildings with a variety of building materials and colors; d) located more building frontage along the edge of the Resource Conservation District; e) provide larger front porches; f) provide different levels of housing affordability; and g) incorporate solar building design.

Access and Circulation

5. A citizen and Commissioner stated that the proposed design did not appear to provide adequate on-street parking.  Another citizen expressed concern with the potential traffic impacts on the surrounding street network.

6. Noting the absence of a sidewalk along the west side of Seawell School Road several neighbors and Commissioners supported a sidewalk along Seawell School Road.  Support for internal sidewalks and connectivity between the proposed site and the nearby schools was also mentioned. One neighbor recommended that the proposal include a pathway to the adjacent school through the Resource Conservation District.

7. A neighbor expressed a traffic safety concern noting that the proposed vehicular entrance to the development from Homestead Road is located at a crest in the road.

8. With the increased development in the Homestead Road area, one Commission member stated that the construction of sidewalk and bicycle lane improvements along Homestead Road should be accelerated.

Resource Conservation District

9. A citizen expressed some concern with the impact of the proposed development on the perennial stream located on the southern portion of the site.

10. One Commission member stated that some of the proposed lots adjacent to the Resource Conservation District did not provide adequate building area outside of the Resource Conservation District.  The Commissioner recommended that the applicant relocate building areas outside the Resource Conservation District.

Utilities

11. An adjoining property owner (along southwest property line) requested that the proposed design include the extension of utility easements to the western property line.

Views and Vistas

12. Describing the segment of Homestead Road along the frontage of this proposed development as a “rural gateway” to Dairyland Road, a citizen suggested that the applicant consider a greater building setback on Homestead Road and thereby preserve the existing view.  Examples of appropriate setbacks along Homestead Road included the Vineyard and Lake Hogan developments.

Stormwater Management

13. Stating that residential stormwater runoff from Homestead Village drains into the on-site   perennial stream, a citizen expressed a concern with the impact of said runoff upon the proposed recreation area in the Resource Conservation District.

Recreation and Open Space

14. One Commissioner recommended that the applicant increase the amount of recreation space and consider a redesign incorporating a central, urban park.  In order to compensate for diminished side and back yard areas, another Commissioner supported the larger central park.

15.  Other Commissioners suggested that the applicant provide additional public walkways into the southern open space (Resource Conservation District).

16. Creation of a wildlife corridor to the adjacent western property was also suggested.

Prepared for:                 Charlotte Newby, Chair

Prepared by:                 Gene Poveromo, Staff