Jonesboro City Council Tables Greensborough Village Project

A decision by council members on a project to rezone nearly 200 acres of land for a development in northeast Jonesboro was delayed Tuesday night.

At least 30 people attended the Jonesboro City Council meeting, where council members voted 9-2, with one absent, to table the Greensborough Village project at least until Oct. 9.

The Jonesboro Metropolitan Area Planning Commission voted 9-0 August 12 to rezone the land from R-1 single family to C-3 general commercial district.

The council approved the first two readings of the project on Aug. 19 and Sept. 2, creating the debate on the issue Tuesday night.

Council member Todd Burton, who voted yes to table the decision with council members Tim McCall, Rennell Woods, Darrel Dover, John Street, Chris Gibson, Ann Williams, Dr. Charles Coleman and Chris Moore, said the issues with the project were mounting.

“I would like to table it until the traffic study is done. I also have some other concerns as well,” Burton said.

Voting against tabling the decision were council members Charles Frierson and Gene Vance.

Absent was council member Mitch Johnson.

The council also voted 9-2, with McCall and Burton voting no, to approve a so-called restrictive amendment for the project.

Some of the restrictions on the project include:

· The proposed development shall satisfy all requirements of the city engineer and all requirements of the current Stormwater Drainage Design Manual.

· A final site plan subject to all ordinance requirements shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by MAPC prior to any development/phase of the subject property.

· A final site plan showing coordination is required of all right of ways and egress/ingress with the state highway department, city planning and engineers and the planning department.

· The setbacks, building heights, screening and site design standards are required per the city’s Master Plan and Design Pattern Book.

· The site shall be developed under the Town Center, TC-Overlay District rezoning with uses permitted as summarized in the staff report and approved by MAPC.

· Common open space shall compromise a minimum of 15 percent of the total land area.

· Single family residential subdivision lots shall be developed subject to MAPC review and approval.

· 70 percent of the total land area devoted to residential use within the Town Center shall be developed as single-family detached and attached (excluding multi-family).

· Multi-family (excluding single family attached) may occupy up to 30 percent of the total land area devoted to residential uses.

· For residential uses, such as lofts above ground floor/retail office within the non-residential or mixed use land area of the Town Center, there shall be no prescribed minimum or maximum acreage or units. However, these residential uses are limited to no more than four stories in height in any five to seven story mixed use building. Design and form layout shall be consistent with the approved master plan.

· Any increase to the multi-family land percentage restrictions or any changes to the height restrictions on mixed use buildings shall be presented to the Jonesboro City Council for review and approval prior to any changes being implemented.

DEBATE
At least seven people spoke in opposition to the plan.

Most stated their opposition was due to what they believed to be a lack of transparency, looking at other priorities, or both.

“I am opposed to it because it is not guaranteed,” Phillip Cook said of the financing for the project. “You have police officers, firefighters, janitorial staff or sanitation who have not gotten a raise. But you find the time to do work with money the city does not have.”

Mayor Harold Perrin said no taxpayer money would be used on the project, with money only coming from development firm Halsey Thrasher Harpole.

“There is a lack of transparency. They have not consulted with the neighbors,” Debbie Pelley said.

Pelley also argued that there were several conflicts of interest between Perrin and the developers.

Perrin responded there were no conflicts in any aspect of the project. Perrin said Harpole did serve as his operations director when he first became mayor and that Vision 2030, which critics have said is an expansion of federal government power in local affairs, was created by the city as a guide to recruit industry.

Dolores Coller, who told council members she did not ‘have a dog in this fight,’ said she felt the council needed to take its time on the decision.

“I feel like it is being forced through. If you have no answer, how can you make an informed decision,” Coller said. “We don’t know what we are getting into. To not know or not be willing to give answers (on the project), I don’t know which is worse.”

Charles Downham, an engineer with Nashville-based Littlejohn Engineers, said the Greensborough Village project would be beneficial to the city and area.

Downham said officials worked on the amended agreement to try to reach a compromise on the issue. Downham also answered a question from the audience about the property values as well as retail and office space in the development.

“(The retail and office), it is attractive and should pay for themselves,” Downham said.

Vance said earlier that the work by engineers should be able to answer some of the questions brought up Tuesday night.

“So we are going to pass it before we know what it is in it,” Coller said.

Harpole said late Tuesday that the council acted with prudence and diligence in delaying its decision. He said the partners in the development are not afraid of answering questions and are in the process of working with Burton and others on different ideas.

“Nothing can be hurt by doing due diligence,” Harpole said.