Greentree Lane Holdings asked the city of Greenwood to rezone about 29 acres along East Worthsville Road for industrial and commercial uses. The city council voted down the proposal Monday.
Map provided by the city of Greenwood
A proposed rezoning that would’ve brought industrial and commercial development to Greenwood’s east side will not be moving forward for now.
In a 6-3 vote Monday night, the Greenwood City Council voted against rezoning approximately 29 acres of land on the northeast corner of Worthsville Road and Collins Road for industrial and commercial use. Council members Mike Campbell, Linda Gibson and David Hopper voted in favor of the proposal, while members Ron Bates, Erin Betron, Ezra Hill, David Leske, Brad Pendleton and Michael Williams voted against it.
The city’s advisory plan commission had previously voted 8-1 to give a favorable recommendation to the city council on the proposal, with Leske — who represents the council on the commission — being the no vote.
Greentree Lane Holdings had come before the city council to ask them to rezone about 23 acres of the northern end of the site from agricultural to industrial large, and about six acres on the southern end of the site from agricultural to commercial large. This land is currently owned by Clark-Pleasant Community School Corporation, which was planning to sell the land to the developer.
The property owned by Clark-Pleasant actually totals about 40 acres, with only 29 acres being considered for rezoning. The remaining 11 acres located on the southeastern corner of the property would remain under agricultural zoning, said Brian Tuohy, an attorney representing Greentree.
Last week, Clark-Pleasant officials told the plan commission that the district had owned the land for a number of years, but had determined it would be worth selling the land.
Short-term, the sale will provide the district with some revenue that could help offset the impact of heavy tax cap losses. Long-term, the property’s net assessed value would increase, benefiting the district’s receipts of future property tax revenue. Selling the land also means there would be one less potential building taxpayers would have to pay for, director of finance and budget Austin Fruits said last week.
Resident Randy Goodin spoke out against the project. He had previously spoken against the project during the plan commission meeting last week and told the city council that over the last several years he has been trying to slow the encroachment of industrial development toward the Worthsville Road area.
Goodin asked the city council to be mindful of those neighboring the possible development, he said.
“I would ask that you consider reducing this from industrial large to an industrial medium or ask for commitments on the buffering and ways to be able to control the noise, the drift and the lighting on the industrial properties,” he said.
Current site plans showed the industrial area being occupied by a large warehouse, along with two smaller commercial buildings. However, the developer did not have a specific plan for how it will be developed, Tuohy said.
Goodin also asked the council to add commitments regarding buffering and lighting for the commercial area as well. He later referenced a conversation he had with the developer asking about gas stations, and the developer reportedly did not commit to saying they wouldn’t put one in the area, he said.
“I understand that there’s a need for it, but there’s also a need for other things such as restaurants that are badly needed in that area, especially for anyone that has worked up in the current warehousing industry, that is up in the current industrial park,” Goodin said.
The commercial area could’ve had restaurants or a number of retail outlets, Tuohy said. The developer had already agreed to not allow extended-stay hotels, indoor self-storage, auto and motorcycle sales and gas stations without a convenience store.
There are some new convenience stores coming into the Indianapolis area, such as Leo’s Market, and they could have been a possibility for the commercial area, Tuohy said.
“We don’t know exactly what it will be, but the idea is to have that corner be retail,” Tuohy said.
Tuohy also said the developer had given “careful consideration” to keeping some distance between the industrial area and neighboring under-construction homes to the east. They also planned on keeping about 3.5 acres of trees in place on the site, would’ve not had truck docks facing the homes and would’ve had substantial screening up, he said.
A traffic study also determined that nearby intersections would’ve been capable of handling traffic from the development. In addition, Tuohy said the total investment for the site would have been between $25 to 30 million.
During a work session on Tuesday, the Clark-Pleasant School Board discussed the effects of the proposal failing to pass. It was a surprise to the developer, Superintendent Patrick Spray said.
“They’re going to make a decision on whether they want to ask for an extension and redraw what they have, the concept, and go back for consideration, or just walk away at this point in time,” Spray said.
The developer cannot bring the same concept back for a year, and would have to make substantial changes to the plans in order to bring it back. Spray and the developer plan to get together to discuss the situation, and whether or not they plan to move forward, next week, he said.
At this point, the land has not yet changed hands, so Spray does not believe there will be any penalties if the developer ultimately did choose to walk away in the coming weeks. No decision has been made yet, he said.
— Daily Journal multimedia news editor Emily Ketterer contributed to this report.
