Density a factor for PTC annexations

Thu, 08/17/2006 - 3:27pm
By: John Munford

Wieland density same with or without townhomes

Levitt site plan

One of the main overriding community concerns about the two proposed west side annexations in Peachtree City is density.

A higher number of homes brings lots of cars, lots of traffic and other considerations. But The Seasons at Peachtree City, the “active adult” community proposed by the Levitt and Sons company, shouldn’t impact the school system in terms of additional students, as it will be restricted to persons ages 55 and up.

Connector Village, the John Wieland Homes proposal, will not be age-restricted although the company has already set aside a possible elementary school site in its nearby Centennial subdivision that will be donated to the Fayette County School System.

Wieland site plan

To compare the density of The Seasons and Connector Village projects, The Citizen is using the net acreage for a given property calculates how many housing units will be built per acre based on the buildable area for a given parcel.

The Citizen calculated the Connector Village proposed net acreage as being 3.76 units per acre based on the amount of open space and park acreage set aside in the plan; Wieland is including several “pocket parks” and there is a significant amount of open space left along Line Creek. Interestingly, the density doesn’t change whether or not the additional 335 townhomes are calculated in which Wieland wants in a rezoning for an adjacent 79-acre tract.

Without the townhome tract included, the Wieland proposal’s net density remains 3.76 units per acre. The number of homes has been reduced significantly from Wieland’s initial proposal, however.

The Seasons proposal is for a more modest density of 2.89 units per acre, but despite a warning from several council members to reduce the density significantly, Levitt has chosen not not done so.

Here’s how some other nearby subdivisions stack up against the Wieland and Levitt proposals in terms of net density (per acre):
Centennial: 4.04
Cedarcroft: 5.64
Ardenlee: 3.95
Chadworth: 3.54
Kedron Hills: 1.25
Planterra Ridge: 2.04

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Fri, 08/18/2006 - 6:36pm.

Great article John. The folks that get uptight about density usually don't understand it. Some of them speak in a shrill voice at public meetings (Yes, Phyliss I'm talking about you) others actually have seats and voting power at council and commission meetings. Some of them - usually female, vote against density because they can be swayed by the anti-growth crowd. Or, in some cases it what they were elected to do.

Nevertheless, please look at the west village plan for what it is - a plan to be reviewed by staff and planning commission and then voted on by city council. The staff which is very good will get the bugs out of theplan - not council and certainly not the public.


Spear Road Guy's picture
Submitted by Spear Road Guy on Sat, 08/19/2006 - 10:14am.

Density is very much a factor, especially in "bedroom communities" like ours. When commutes are absolutely necessary, like living in Peachtree City, every new traffic signal and every new car creates more gridlock.

The residents of Peachtree City, for the most part, are not working in Peachtree City. Look at Highway 74 for example, more traffic signals installed every quarter. Why? The traffic is becoming more dense. Why? More homes built in the surrounding area.

Our building more dense lots is not "the" problem; instead, it makes us part of the "big" problem. Munford's newspaper wrote a while back that Senoia's population will grow by 10,000. Fayetteville is not slowing down. Tyrone just voted to increase the density of a new Wieland site. Senoia has two more annexation requests and Pathway wants to build a huge development in unincorporated Coweta. What will this do to traffic John Munford and R.W. Morgan?

I'll give you a good example that I know about well - Gwinnett County. Density wasn't their issue either and look what happened. Put that in perspective, Gwinnett has many more state highways and an interstate highway to move traffic - we don't.

If you can build more expensive homes (eg. Platinum Ridge, The Peninsula , etc.) and still get the bridge, then I conclude, for the good of us all, build it that way.

My statements are not anti-growth, that's would be don't build anything on the site. Peachtree City succeeded, for the most part, because the government controlled the growth.

Vote Republican


nuk's picture
Submitted by nuk on Sat, 08/19/2006 - 7:29am.

I'm in total agreement with Robert on this one. Well said!
NUK


PTC Guy's picture
Submitted by PTC Guy on Sat, 08/19/2006 - 8:47am.

But infrastucture and WATER.

Where is the water coming from? On restrictions, the lake continues to shrink and homes continue to be added.

We are talking adding upward to 10,000 new residents. An increase of almost 1/3 to the PTC population.

Where is the water coming fron?

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.


bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Sat, 08/19/2006 - 10:28am.

Where's the traffic going to go?


PTC Guy's picture
Submitted by PTC Guy on Fri, 08/18/2006 - 6:56pm.

Depending on how handled, it can or cannot be an enemy.

It does most assuredly impact infrastructure. How it is handled is critical.

But one point on density is bad in these times.

That being supplying WATER.

No getting around it, we are heading for a massive water crunch, in the future, unless two things occur:
1. A new locating for Lake McIntosh.
2. A dependable source of water to fill our reservoir lakes.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.