BOUNDARY QUANDARY: City mulls annexation proposal to add 268 homes

0
2453

Some of the types of houses Arbor Homes is proposing on Greenfield’s south side would be similar to those in the city’s Keystone neighborhood, like the company’s information center there.

Mitchell Kirk | Daily Reporter

GREENFIELD — A developer is asking officials to annex land just south of the city to pave the way for 268 new homes.

Current residents of the area worry the additional traffic would be problematic, however. They also fear the new neighborhood’s younger residents would turn two nearby bodies of water into an attractive nuisance.

Indianapolis-based Arbor Homes wants to develop the community, called Forest at Brandywine, south of Davis Road, west of Morristown Pike and east of Brandywine Creek. About 47 acres of the 141-acre site is already in Greenfield city limits. The developer is seeking annexation for the remaining 94 acres.

Greenfield City Council will consider an ordinance on first reading tonight (Wednesday, Nov. 10) outlining the annexation of the land. The council will hold a public hearing on the annexation and a second reading at its Nov. 24 meeting.

The Greenfield Plan Commission voted unanimously Monday night, Nov. 8, recommending the land’s residential zoning designation if it’s annexed. It’s the same residential zoning designation as the part of the site that’s already in the city.

Forest at Brandywine would be split into two parts. The northern portion would be made up of 88 lots 70 feet wide and 130 feet deep. It would feature Arbor Homes’ Silverthorne product, with base sizes ranging from 1,800 to 3,300 square feet. Vinyl siding would not be allowed in this part of the neighborhood.

“All these homes would definitely exceed our residential design standards,” said Joan Fitzwater, Greenfield’s planning director. “There’s a lot of nice amenities on the houses.”

Forest at Brandywine’s remaining lots to the south would be slightly smaller — 62 by 120 feet.

They would be Arbor Homes’ traditional product line, like the houses in Greenfield’s Keystone neighborhood, with base sizes ranging from 1,300 to 3,200 square feet.

Caitlin Dopher, senior entitlement manager for Arbor Homes, said the Silverthorne and traditional homes are available in four architectural styles, ranch and two-story, and 11 floor plans. Based on current average sale prices, starting prices for the traditional homes are around $300,000 and around $400,000 for Silverthorne.

The development would also have a paved path along Davis Road and Morristown Pike, allowing for a connection between Thornwood Preserve to the east and Brandywine Park to the north. A path would surround the neighborhood as well.

Arbor Homes is willing to commit $800,000 toward a partnership with the city on a traffic circle at Davis Road and Morristown Pike to help keep traffic from backing up at the intersection. Jason Koch, a Greenfield Plan Commission member and city engineer, said single-lane traffic circles range from $1 million to $1.5 million just for construction, not including soft costs.

Residents who attended the plan commission meeting expressed concerns about land being taken for the traffic circle and whether schools and public safety could handle the increase in residents.

Tim Revolt noted traffic has already increased in the area to avoid State Road 9.

“Truck drivers and everybody else have found out that this is the roundabout around Greenfield; this is your bypass,” he said. “Now you’re going to add 268 homes. A roundabout at Morristown Pike and Davis Road is not going to alleviate the traffic problem.”

Matt Powell lives on part of the land his family owns that includes woods along with a 9-acre lake and 1-acre pond — property that’s adjacent to the proposed development site. He has safety concerns about children from the neighborhood coming onto the property, especially with the path that’s proposed nearby.

Jeff McClarnon, a plan commission member, said the worry is warranted.

“I think the guy’s got a legitimate question here,” he said. “There should be more than just ‘no trespassing’ signs.”