HomeMy WebLinkAboutCherry Lane Golf Course Maintenance Building MemoMemo
Ta Mayor and City Council
f1-~ Steve Siddov~y
CG: Jennifer lovan-l~IloNray
Dane: 8/13/01
ills: Cherty Lane Golf Course Maintenance Buildng
As requested by the Council, I met with Jennifer Lovan-Holloway and Nancy Link on August 9
to discuss potential locations of the proposed maintenance facility for Cherry Lane Golf Course.
We examined 7 potential sites for the new maintenance building. Attached is a map depicting
the seven sites. I will discuss the general pros & cons of each site below. None of the sites is
free of issues. The goal is to find the site with the fewest conflicts.
its 1: This site is across Harbor Point Drive from the new clubhouse. It is the first choice of
the golf course management., It also appears to have had general agreement among the Council
members that this might be the best location, in the minutes of the May 8 hearing on this subject.
On the positive side, this location can be monitored from the clubhouse; it has pazking available
across the street for workers; it does not affect as many homeowners' views as some of the other
sites. Plus, it already has the activity and noise associated with the clubhouse and pazking lot
adjacent to it and it is centrally located.
Oa the other hand, it is perhaps the most visually sensitive of all the potential sftes. Any building
built at this location will become a major focal point, given the existing site conditions such as
the curve of the street. If the maintenance building were built in this location, it would require
great attention to aesthetic details to make the building blend in with the surrounding properties.
The siding should be horizontal and colored to match the nearby residences. The roof should be
pitched and the azea should be landscaped. Generally, maintenance facilities are tucked away
and hidden as much as possible because of the necessary equipment, outdoor storage, etc., but
this location is a focal point.
Site 2: This site is the north side of the clubhouse. On the positive side, it is immediately
adjacent to the clubhouse. However, this site is planned for pazking expansion, cart storage, a
new practice bunker, and expanded practice tee azea. It also backs up to existing residences.
Site 3: This site is just south of the clubhouse and would be ideal for many reasons. It does not
abut any residential lots and therefore would not block anyone's view or directly affect any
residences. The maintenance building would become part of the clubhouse "campus" and would
therefore be easily monitored by the clubhouse, the existing parking is already available for
employees and any noise associated with the maintenance facility would be confined to the
clubhouse and not a more residential area. It is also less of a focal point than site 1, yet it is still
centrally located.
The problem with this site is that it is planned for a future scoreboazd/barbecue area. This site
seemed basically out of the question to Nancy and Jennifer due to conflicts with the bazbecue
area and associated entertainment. However, to be fair, no specific site planning for this azea has
been done to date. Therefore, I strongly recommend exploring the potential of this site to
accommodate both uses. It appears that there may be enough room for both uses. If both uses
can be accommodated spatially, I believe this would be the right site. If there is not enough
room, one of the other sites will have to be used.
Note: if the only argument against this site is that maintenance noise and odors associated with
the facility aze incompatible with the entertainment uses of the barbecue area, that would simply
be a "nimby" azgument, not unlike residents are likely to make if it were located near their
backyard patios. In fact, if any noise, odors, and trash associated with the maintenance facility
affect the clubhouse directly, such nuisances are more likely to be kept to a minimum. If such
impacts make it incompatible with the barbecue area, I would suggest that the impacts would be
even more incompatible with a residence.
The more I think about this area, the more I believe that some creative site planning could allow
this site to work for both uses. This should be explored in further detail.
Site 4: If site 3 is unable to accommodate the building and if the aesthetic considerations of site
1 are too costly to be practical, site 4 becomes my next choice. It is located along Turnberry
Way at the site of the old practice putting green. The site is surrounded by existing homes, but
nearly all are fenced off so that none of the yards look directly into the azea. Existing mature
trees help screen the area and make it less visible to the general public. This site is far enough
away from the clubhouse that it cannot be monitored directly. Pazking would have to be
provided. However, there is ample room for the maintenance building and associated parking.
Site 5: This site is a wide spot in the fairway (I believe along hole 9) that is not often used for
active play. It can be accessed via a maintenance road that ACRD has required to be built for
access to the storm drainage ponds. It has adequate room and access, but the building would
physically separate future houses from the fairway and would eliminate the views of the lots
behind it.
Site 6: This site is along Black Cat Road (I believe near hole 8). It already has a dedicated
access/curb cut onto Black Cat and conflicts with few residences. The main problem with this
site is adequate space. It is very tight and does not appear to be large enough to accommodate
both the building and parking without acquiring additional land and/or moving the green. Also,
maintenance equipment would be forced to drive on Black Cat Road. For this reason, this site is
not recommended.
Site 7: The issues with this site aze very similar to Site 5. This also is a wide spot in the fairway
along the par 5 and would separate future homes from the fairway. It would be accessed by a
fairly long maintenance road that would have to be built off of Silver Leaf Way and run behind
several homes before accessing the maintenance building. The direct impacts of this site on
many homes make this one a poor choice.
Staff Recommendations
1. First, explore the possibility of placing the maintenance building on Site 3, south of the
clubhouse. The applicant should prepaze site plans to illustrate how the scoreboazd/barbecue
area and the maintenance building can or cannot be integrated.
2. My second choice would be Site 1. However, due to the high visual sensitivity of this site,
aesthetics play a more critical role here than on any other site. The maintenance building
should be residential in character and heavily landscaped. The applicant should explore the
costs associated with the aesthetic improvements to the building. If they are cost-prohibitive,
another site should be chosen.
3. If neither of the previous options work out, my third option would be Site 4.
4. The applicant should hold neighborhood meeting(s) on the proposed sites with surrounding
homeowners to discuss the site, provide information to the homeowners, and get feedback
regarding the design. Planning and Zoning can provide a mailing list of surrounding
property owners for each of the sites, at no charge. The applicant should simply call our
office 48 hours prior to needing the list so that we can provide the most current information.
Please note that this application will require a Conditional Use Permit.
On a separate, but related note, 4 or 5 trees in the parking lot are dead and need to be replaced.
Staff recommends that the applicant check with DuRite Nursery regarding guarantees on the
trees, as they were just planted last November. The trees should be replaced this fall, at least by
the end of October. (Many nursery stocks are depleted at this time of summer. However, new
trees will be dug this fall to replenish available supplies.) This allows 2 %Z months to replace the
dead trees.
Cherry Lane Gof~ Course
~~]''-
o~~~ -
0 Golf Course
Potential Maintenance Site
o ,moo Zooo Sao Fit
Maintenance Building