Greenwood plan commission forwards annexation, rezoning for 193‑acre Sterling Roads development

The Greenwood Advisory Plan Commission voted 9‑0 on June 8 to forward a favorable recommendation to the Greenwood Common Council for PC 2026‑033, a petition to annex and rezone roughly 193.27 acres at the northeast corner of Honey Creek Road and Whiteland Road for the Sterling Roads residential development.

The petitioner described the proposal as a mixed residential community that would include 236 single‑family attached homes, 120 paired cottages and 128 rear‑loaded townhomes, and said the concept preserves wooded areas and incorporates Alexander Ditch as a greenway and trail corridor. "I'm Joe Lennham with Alaw Homes. Thrilled to be here tonight," said Joe Lennham, who presented design and amenity concepts including playgrounds, a pavilion, dog park and a connected trail system.

Staff told the commission the parcel is shown as mixed‑use residential in Greenwood’s 2024 comprehensive plan and recommended approval with eight commitments (13 subparts). Those commitments, read into the record as part of the motion, include a requirement that zoning revert to agricultural if the development fails; installation of gravity sanitary sewer by the developer to city standards; a pedestrian crossing to connect trail systems; preservation of healthy trees; a traffic study and a restricted donation based on that study; coordinated road improvements and right‑of‑way dedication for a future roundabout at Honey Creek and Whiteland; and a southeast right‑of‑way dedication to be developed into a bridge over Alexander Ditch aligned with the transportation plan.

The bridge requirement (commitment #8) drew the most sustained debate. Petitioner representatives urged that constructing a vehicular bridge now would be premature and expensive, arguing it could cost "an immediate $500,000 to maybe a million dollars" and might not serve traffic for 10–20 years given that surrounding parcels remain in Johnson County and would require separate annexation or interlocal agreements to create the intended regional connector. The petitioner offered to dedicate right‑of‑way for future connections and said it would meet with affected homeowners about buffering and screening.

Staff and multiple commissioners pushed back, saying at least one bridge associated with the development should be required to prevent future developers or the city from shouldering disproportionate costs and to preserve the city’s transportation plan connectivity. Commissioners discussed but did not adopt an alternative trigger mechanism for bridge construction; staff noted triggers can be difficult to administer and that leaving the bridge to a future developer could frustrate long‑term connectivity goals.

Commissioners also questioned how the development would affect traffic at the Honey Creek/Whiteland intersection and asked staff for a traffic study, consistent with the commitments. Staff clarified that Alexander Ditch maintenance remains under county jurisdiction where parcels are not annexed, and that a 75‑foot drain easement around the ditch applies and would limit building within that area.

A motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the Greenwood Common Council with the listed commitments carried by voice/hand vote, 9‑0. The motion includes explicit provisions for sewer, tree preservation, traffic study and multiple road and right‑of‑way improvements; the bridge commitment remains part of the record and will be considered by the Common Council as the commission’s recommendation.

The commission also announced a June 29 joint training with consultant Opticos on the proposed unified development ordinance, introduced summer intern Bella and administrative assistant Mandy, and approved a procedural motion to allow the vice president to preside if the president participates electronically at a future meeting.

What happens next: the commission’s favorable recommendation is advisory; the annexation and rezoning, and the set of commitments (including the bridge requirement), will be considered by the Greenwood Common Council in a future council hearing.