48 “Senior” LENNAR Townhomes Proposed for Medlock Bridge Rd

 

The proposed development is to be shoehorned between the 141 shopping center with Benjamin Moore & Medlock Bridge Subdivision.

The developer is aiming to market to seniors and empty nesters. Not sure where there are many older people that will want a 3 story home.

192 residential parking spots are indicated, with 14 guests spots, 206 parking spots total. With so much parking for cars, the traffic count report the developer submitted appears to be very low. The traffic count indicated 22 cars in the AM Peak and 31 PM Peak. This appears very low considering many homes have at least 2 occupants and 2 cars.

No amenities are provided with this Development.

Reports submitted to the City suggest they plan to utilize Medlock Bridge Subdivision’s amenities & facilities. A walkway path has been included in the plans, including a description of the Medlock Bridge amenities.

From the Developer’s Environmental Report, page 6:

To the west of the site is an existing community with amenity that has green space and active amenity that will be used by this development.

This site will provide additional residence to help protect green space and add residents to utilize the parks and recreation nearby.

Variances requested to reduce setback from 40ft to 10ft.

This is to MAXIMIZE the land and squeeze in more units.

Source: City of Johns Creek

10 Responses to 48 “Senior” LENNAR Townhomes Proposed for Medlock Bridge Rd

  1. Tom Tracy says:

    No rezoning signs are up yet but they have scheduled the zoning meeting for the 5th of July a Holiday week. Also no mention of the flowing stream on the property and the impact on Medlock Bridge lake sediment problem. Medlock Bridge amenities are part of the $1200 per year homeowners dues. Guess they will just come over and sell our amenities. Density is way way to high. Townhomes were denied up the street last year proposed at 8 per acre. We cannot wave these setbacks or it will set a precedent for Johns Creek and kill our community.

  2. I have to say quite frankly I will protest when the builders start! I will lay down in front of the bulldozers and shame JC council and Lennar and post it on national and social media. Enough is enough! I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore!

    Where are the Medlock residents? Are they happy with this?

    Hideous “leadership” here. I am ashamed of them all.

  3. DG says:

    What is the proposed size of these units (3 story — bedrooms? square footage?) Anticipated asking price? What is the current inventory for senior housing? How does a developer project on to another community’s amenities when that community’s residents haven’t heard anything about it (if true, shame on MB HOA)? The truth is that developers can propose anything they’d like and request whatever variances they need. What is concerning is the JC leadership does not seem to clear enough to discourage developers from proposals that have no chance (I hope) of passing.

  4. Ed Thompson says:

    Once again a developer is proposing to build high density housing along the already congested Medlock Bridge Road corridor, and requesting zoning variances in order to maximize density in order to increase their profit. No amenities are proposed for the development – instead, they appear to be proposing that they take advantage of amenities that Medlock Bridge homeowners have paid to build, and pay annually to maintain.

    The community has already made their opposition to road widening on Medlock Bridge known, but now we are being faced with yet another proposal that will certainly add to traffic congestion. Based on past precedents, we will not seek to impose any impact fees on the developers to cover the incremental costs to our city services, roads, schools, etc. The fact that the developers are proposing NO amenities in their proposal indicate that they are counting on Medlock Bridge and our Parks Bond money to provide the green space and leisure facilities that residents desire.

    We’re paying T-SPLOST taxes and have been pushed to approve Park Bonds in order to subsidize developers, all the while allowing more of the development that got us here in the first place. Johns Creek is already over-developed and doesn’t need more high density housing, and we absolutely do not need to allow it with additional zoning variances that will set the precedent that will be used to justify those same requests and more for each subsequent development request.

    This out-of-control march to ever higher density and ongoing support for the interests of non-residents has to stop. It starts at the top. Johns Creek needs new leadership that is invested in the interests of residents first and foremost – not someone who appears to be interested in re-creating a city that is dramatically different than what most Johns Creek residents moved here to enjoy.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Please go to http://www.MyLennarLemon.org and see the reviews. So many other sites reviewing these homes and most all bad. This is the developer that bought the Larry Dean property and after raping the land and building the model homes pulled out. I wouldn’t trust them not doing this to this land and not selling and thus leaving the land raped with models as well as building a bad product. I agree about the additional cars as well. Each home will have two cars and we just can’t allow that much more traffic entering 141.

  6. Hac says:

    Lennar Homes is the developer that bought the Larry Dean property. After raping the land and building model homes, pullled out and left the property with weeds and model homes that will probably have to be torn down. Please go to http://www.MyLennarLemon.org and see the reviews of this developer as well as many other sites with reviews mostly all bad. Please let’s not let this happen again and ruin more beautiful land. Also, as someone said you are looking at two cars per home and 141 just can’t handle more traffic.

  7. Unimpressed says:

    When you drive by the few little areas of green space still within JC city limits KNOW it’s only a matter of time before those space are seized and raped. JC gov is notorious for putting up rezoning signs that can hardly be seen, let alone read. They are known for planning major rezoning meetings around holidays, when most of us are distracted.

    Part of the problem is not enough residents are paying attention.

    Until we find a way to put term limits in place we will continue to have a mayor that will approve just about anything that benefits developers and those (non-taxer payers/non-residents of JC) using our city streets for their convenience. I get it. Traffic is BAD everywhere; but when our residents are choked by the ever growing traffic congestion, something has to be done.

    No more studies please. Call me, I’ll tell you for free.

    Maybe start by timing the lights. Residents has been asking for this for many years. Yet, JC gov seems to do nothing.

    Roundabouts have been helpful safety wise. I will say that much. However, when roundabouts were first proposed, part of the mayor’s justifying them was him saying, “they will encourage drivers to use other roads”. Whaaaaat?? What other roads Mr. Mayor?? Well, maybe somewhat right. Now those passing through JC have more options, and they choose them all!!!!!

    Until a way is found to initiate term limits (something I’m told the mayor opposes and has personally put steps in place that make this impossible), our city will continue to sprawl in a way that forever changes and errodes the reasons most of us moved here in the first place…

    Booker and his council cronies (and most of know who they are) need to go, right along with the dinosour Tom Black. With all of the so-called experience Mr Black supposedly has, little has been done to effectively address, let alone keep up with or better yet get ahead of the traffic congestion. TIME THE LIGHT for starters.

    Additionally, ticket the drivers that block intersections, making it impossible for others trying to get through. Ticket those running lights. Ticket the drivers traveling at high speeds up and down Boles/Bell! Ticket the tail-gators and aggressive drivers. City revenue would be greatly increased by doing so.

    Example: Try disobeying the traffic laws in Alpharetta. You will find your self ticketed in a heart beat. The police there are everywhere, and enforcing the laws. What a concept!

    TIME the dog-gone lights!!!!

  8. Zane Edge says:

    I’d like to hear from the MB HOA. Is it true the HOA has reached some agreement with the developer about amenities? The following questions are based on this answer being YES. Does the HOA realize this is effectively supporting the developer’s efforts to maximize density? What by-laws are in place to make sure the HOA board has the support of the MB community at-large in its actions? Have these by-laws been followed? How are the MB HOA board members selected?

    • EJ Moosa says:

      I’ve spoken with the MB HOA and while the developer did indeed approach Medlock Bridge. Medlock Bridge has not agreed to anything with this developer,

Comments