Greenwood City Council members rejected Arbor Homes’ planned development on Honey Creek Road on Greenwood’s southwest side, which would’ve featured homes from the developer’s traditional series, Arbor.

An annexation for a proposed 252-home neighborhood on Greenwood’s southwest side failed to pass Monday night.

Council members failed to approve the 106.67-acre annexation and zone map change brought by Arbor Homes in a 4-4 split vote Monday, with council members Linda Gibson, Ezra Hill, David Hopper and Michael Williams voting against; council member Erin Betron absent. Because the vote failed, Arbor’s planned neighborhood between Honey Creek Road and County Road 125 West on Greenwood’s southwest side cannot move forward.

Arbor Homes had planned to build a new neighborhood of up to 252 homes on the land, which is within the Clark-Pleasant school district. This neighborhood would’ve been located directly across from Honey Creek Farms, an up-to-318-home Lennar Homes development under construction in the Center Grove school district.

Plans called for 167 Arbor Series homes, ranging from one- to two-story, 1,200- to 3,200-square-foot single-family homes, according to a presentation from Domonic Dreyer, a land entitlement manager with Arbor Homes. These homes could have optional sun rooms, flex spaces and three-car garages, Dreyer said.

It also featured 85 Destination Series Homes, which are one-story, “low maintenance” ranch-style single-family homes ranging from 1,500 to more than 3,200 square feet, the presentation shows.

Nearby residents expressed concern about the housing quality and type, along with traffic concerns, during a plan commission hearing last week. Those residents also spoke out during Monday’s city council meeting, where a public hearing on the annexation and zone map change was held.

Robert Poole, who lives to the south of the project area, told the council he was concerned about the quality of the homes being proposed. The area around Honey Creek Road has been more “country-style” with larger homes, and felt the Arbor Homes project would lead to a slipping of standards for the area.

He also expressed concerns about negative impacts on property values, wildlife and nearby roads. He said current road conditions are “horrendous.”

Michael Veenhuizen, who lives to the north of the project, took issue with how the project appeared to be “quite segregated” and how it may not be compatible with the intent of city’s comprehensive plan for this area.

“This proposal to annex this 100 acres, this is its third presentation in front of this council,” he said. “The recollection of the last two were similar comments, similar decisions made by the residents in the area is clearly a large lot, more estate home-type area, and it’s clear that in the last two presentations, on the decisions by the planning board, that they chose to preserve this area as one of those prized areas for Greenwood.”

Arbor Homes’ request to rezone 100.67 acres for an up to 252-home subdivision east of Honey Creek Road and south of Stones Crossing Road was rejected by Greenwood City Council members Monday.

Arbor Homes’ request to rezone 100.67 acres for an up to 252-home subdivision east of Honey Creek Road and south of Stones Crossing Road was rejected by Greenwood City Council members Monday.

Greenwood City Council members rejected Arbor Homes’ planned development on Honey Creek Road on Greenwood’s southwest side, which would’ve featured homes from the developer’s low-maintenance Destination Series.

Greenwood City Council members rejected Arbor Homes’ planned development on Honey Creek Road on Greenwood’s southwest side, which would’ve featured homes from the developer’s low-maintenance Destination Series.

Greenwood City Council members rejected Arbor Homes’ planned development on Honey Creek Road on Greenwood’s southwest side, which would’ve featured homes from the developer’s traditional series, Arbor.

Veenhuizen knows the land will one day be residential, but felt it wasn’t the right fit for the area. He asked the council to maintain large lot zoning for the area and not the residential medium zoning proposed, along with ensuring high-quality homes would be built if possible.

He also criticized Dreyer for not answering a past question from Hopper, who asked why Arbor Homes wasn’t bringing its Silverthorne Series with the project. Hopper had said it was higher-end.

Along with bringing up past projects for the land that were rejected by the city council, Allen Mathena, who lives on and farms land to the south of the project, expressed concern about the density. He was concerned about the 2.5 units per acre density for the entire development, which wasn’t uniform as there are different types of homes being proposed.

“The east side is quite a bit more dense than the west side is, which is not something that I would like to see. I’d like to see the density uniform throughout,” Mathena said.

Dreyer addressed some of residents’ concerns Monday, saying he believed the RM zoning was in line with the city’s new comprehensive plan. Addressing drainage, he said they would have to make a plan at a later stage of the development process, but drainage wouldn’t be made worse by project as they are required to improve it.

As for traffic, Dreyer said Arbor would be doing a traffic study and would make any improvements suggested by the study. The developer had also been in discussions with the city about the possible donation of land for a future roundabout in the area as well, he said.

City planning staff were favorable toward the project, as was the city’s plan commission. However, Planning Director Gabe Nelson said planning staff would have preferred to see the housing types not be as segregated, but rather spread throughout. They also would’ve liked more variety, such as having an alley-loaded product, he said.

Addressing density concerns, Nelson said 1 to 4 homes an acre is considered lower density for suburbs. Townhomes would be more dense than these single-family homes, as an example, he said.

Among the questions asked by council members were several from Hopper, including whether the development would have vinyl siding. Hopper has frequently offered amendments to restrict the use of vinyl siding on housing projects over the years.

Dreyer said the developer would be OK if the council voted to restrict its use. Hopper subsequently amended the project to not use vinyl siding, and council members voted in favor of this — an amendment later made moot by the final vote.

Hopper again said he didn’t understand why the developer wasn’t putting in the Silverthorne Series. They could work their way from Silverthorne, which would be larger lots, to lower/smaller lot sizes, he said.

Dreyer responded by saying the Arbor Series homes weren’t lower tier, but were just smaller lot sizes. However, Hopper said that the Arbor Series was the lowest tier the developer offered.

Dreyer continued, saying Arbor Homes does have a denser product compared to the Arbor Series. The Arbor Series lot sizes are smaller, so the prices of the homes would be lower compared to what’s being offered in Scottsdale Estates, a nearby Arbor Homes development that does feature Silverthorne, he said.

However, there is a “runway” for that type of housing at Scottsdale Estates. Arbor Homes officials felt the Arbor and Destination series homes fit the Honey Creek Road area better, Dreyer said.

“We do think that’s also a product that’s needed, but understanding, this is a transitionary kind of area, going from this [residential large], to our west side, kind of lots, we think this is the next kind of step here,” he said.

Council member Linda Gibson said she agreed with Hopper and wished it was a different level of housing in this area. She said it was her understanding the further from the city’s center people go, the larger the lots or more higher level the homes would be.