Turkey Creek Retirement Community Plan Returns

The new plan, right, differs from the intense grid-like layout of the proposal that commissioners rejected last year.

A proposed elderly community on Turkey Creek Road that was rejected by the Coweta County Board of Commissioners last year has returned.

Last April, commissioners voted 4-1 to reject an application by Freedom Land Holdings to rezone 105 acres along Turkey Creek Road to the county’s RRCC – residential retirement care district – for a 247 single-family home development. . The RRCC allows for significantly higher density than any of the county’s other residential zoning districts, but homes are restricted to people 55 and older.

Although the overall density would have been 2.3 units per acre, development would have been clustered on the property, much of which is wetland. Lots would be as small as 8,500 square feet, or about 1/5 acre.

The new proposal is a little different and responds to some of the concerns expressed by commissioners last year.

The current request is to rezone to RRCC for a development of 225 houses, with the same size of land.

A public hearing on the proposal will take place on Tuesday, during the regular meeting of the commission. The meeting begins at 6 p.m. and is held in the commission rooms, upstairs at 37 Perry Street, Newnan.

At last year’s public hearing, Commissioner Al Smith objected to the intense grid layout of the project. “Everything is so condensed and too tight. I would like to see some respite in the subdivision,” Smith said at the time. The project engineer said he could redesign the plan to have a more curvilinear design and some pocket parks.

The new layout is radically different. The railings are gone and all but 37 houses would return to the green spaces.

Last year Commissioner Tim Lassetter expressed concerns about the community center and amenity area. The old proposal was for a 3,500 square foot community center, pickleball courts and lounge area, with a total amenity area of ​​approximately 1 acre, located at the entrance to the subdivision.

Lassetter said he felt the amenity area was grossly undersized. “It looks like you’re using every available space for homes and not a sense of community,” he said at the time.

The new proposal is for a 4,800 square foot clubhouse, 1,500 square foot pavilion with picnic tables, grounds, fire pit and a nature trail through the open space. The amenity area is towards the center of the development.

The property has very little frontage along Turkey Creek Road, but the plan shows two entrances on Turkey Creek and one on Campus Drive.

According to the Community Development Report, the proposal is more intense than recommended in the county’s comprehensive plan and does not conform to the growth strategy plan or plan.

The department recommends several conditions, including that graded lots must have “manageable yard transition slopes” of 4:1 or flatter. If the slopes are steeper than this, retaining walls would be required.

In the report, the community development engineer asked if the distances from the site for the intersections were adequate and stated that there does not appear to be enough storm water management.

According to the report, there is “no mitigation or protection of state property and water to the east of this development” and the applicant will need to plan for runoff reduction above the stormwater ponds.

Sharon P. Juarez