Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grant County BZA denies large variance for Muny Pike affordable-housing proposal after neighbor opposition
Summary
The board denied variances requested for an 11-unit affordable-housing project on Muny Pike, citing infrastructure and neighborhood-fit concerns raised by nearby residents; petitioner said construction would wait for sewer availability but may reapply in a year.
The Grant County Board of Zoning Appeals denied variances sought for an 11-unit housing development on Muny Pike after extended public comment and board deliberation.
The petition by William Francis (docket 01-26) sought variances from the R4 development standards to permit unit sizes reduced from 720 square feet to between 560 and 640 square feet and to reduce building separation in two instances from 20 feet to 15 feet. Jill Muser, representing the petitioner, said the proposal responds to an identified need for smaller, more-affordable rental units in Jonesboro and that local officials had expressed support. She and the petitioner also said they would wait to begin construction until sewer service is available.
Neighbors at the meeting raised multiple objections. Gina Jones, who lives across Muny Pike, said she has lived there 30 years and testified that the site lacks sewer service, that the project description had shifted (initially described as senior or veteran housing, later as general affordable housing), and that additional units and rentals could increase traffic, stormwater runoff and crime and depress property values. Another resident, Christine Crockett, echoed safety and police-response concerns in the semi-rural neighborhood.
During rebuttal the petitioner reiterated design changes (reduced unit count from an earlier 14 units to 11), explained vehicle access would be from Walker Street and said leases would cap occupancy. He said a $1.4 million sewer grant was being refiled and that he would not start construction until sewer service is in place.
Board members questioned whether the requested variances constituted an unusually large change for an R2 neighborhood and emphasized uncertainty about infrastructure and long-term impacts on surrounding single-family properties. After public testimony and deliberation, the board voted to deny the variances; the clerk announced the petition was denied and that the petitioner may reapply after a year.
