Jonesboro planning panel approves variance to retain Highland driveway, but final access point tied to traffic study

Jonesboro Planning Commission members voted to grant a variance allowing the owners represented by Stonebridge Construction to retain an existing driveway onto Highland for a proposed redevelopment of the former Ryan—s buffet site, with the exact access location to be determined by a required traffic study.

The variance covers a redevelopment that would replace an approximately 10,000-square-foot restaurant building with a smaller, roughly 6,000-square-foot restaurant. Rob Hester of Stonebridge Construction told the commission the firm was asking to keep the Highland driveway in its current location rather than making the Larkwood private drive the sole public entrance.

"The new building would be about 6,000 square feet and would bring into compliance the curbs and islands and so forth. But our request is to be able to keep our existing drive on Highland," Hester said.

Commission staff said the city—s traffic-access rules treat Highland as a principal arterial and require driveway spacing the code sets at 300 feet. Daryl (staff member) told the panel, "We haven—t seen plans submitted yet. We haven—t seen a traffic report. We don—t know whether this is a good location or not. But until this board is supposed to review plans that have been denied. These have not been denied because they have not been submitted." The staff view was that a traffic study and full plans are required before permitting can proceed.

Several members said they were uncomfortable removing a driveway that has existed for decades, even while acknowledging the commission must follow the city—s access-management policy. One member said, "I don—t see how ... we can take a driveway away from a development that's been there for 50 years." Another member noted the commission—s past practice of granting variances in predevelopment stages while pointing out that a later traffic study could still compel changes.

Developers said they sought the variance now because the project will not proceed without assurance of access; they did not yet have an engaged traffic engineer or a completed traffic study. Hester said the predevelopment meeting with city staff identified the driveway location as the primary hurdle and that the city asked for a stub to the adjacent Krispy Kreme property and a traffic study.

Commission discussion clarified consequences if the variance is granted prior to a traffic study: a variance would create a site-specific exception to the code for this lot, and, as one staff speaker noted, a later traffic study could recommend moving or closing the driveway but could not retroactively revoke a granted variance except through the appeal process.

The commission moved and seconded language granting the variance with the access location to be determined by the traffic study. In the roll call that followed, Miles, Bailey and April voted yes, and the motion carried.

Next steps: the developer will submit a traffic study and full plan set as required for permitting. City staff and the commission indicated the permit could be withheld if the traffic study shows the Highland access should not remain; if a variance remains in place, the practical effect would be to allow access to continue for this lot unless action is taken later to require change. The commission and staff also discussed potential future alignment with adjacent driveways and a stub connection should neighboring property redevelop.

Votes at the meeting were recorded by name for those present on the roll call: Miles (yes), Bailey (yes), April (yes). The motion text and the names of the mover and the seconder were not specified in the transcript record.