Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Greer Street topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cordele City Commission discusses rezoning for 120‑unit Greer Street development; motion fails to get a second
Summary
Developers and business groups urged rezoning a middle parcel on Greer Street to allow a 120‑unit apartment complex, citing workforce housing and economic benefits; residents warned of traffic, drainage and neighborhood impacts. A motion to rezoning failed for lack of a second, so no action was taken.
The Cordele City Commission on May 15 heard a developer’s proposal to rezone a middle parcel on Greer Street from R12 to R4 to allow about 120 apartments, but a motion to approve the rezoning failed to receive a second and no formal action was taken.
Developers said the project would sit on about seven acres of a 20‑acre holding and include two entrances they say will mitigate congestion. “We are only asking for the rezoning of the middle property that’s adjacent to the existing apartments,” developer Mr. Patel told commissioners, adding that the site connects to existing highway‑commercial parcels and that sewer service is available.
Supporters included the local UIDC business group and a representative of Chris Regional Health Services. Joel Owens, speaking for the UIDC, said the board unanimously backs the project as a way to attract industry and keep workers in town. A hospital representative read a letter saying Chris Regional employs 949 people and that 520 commute from outside the county; the letter estimated that if 50 employees relocated to the county it could generate more than $4.6 million in annual economic activity.
Opponents focused on traffic, neighborhood character and stormwater. Resident Ben Mallerie said the development would add vehicles and congestion “There will absolutely be a traffic problem,” he said, and warned that approving one rezoning could set a precedent for more multifamily proposals nearby. Cynthia Johnson, a parishioner and candidate, listed concerns about “noise, lighting, quality of life, [and] environmental drainage issues” and asked the developers to explain site selection and amenities such as proposed pickleball courts.
A commissioner stressed engineering and stormwater risks, saying the site sits on a significant drainage line for the city and urging a planned‑unit development (PUD) review before approving a zoning change. “This is our main drainage line for the entire city,” the commissioner said, calling for stormwater engineering, curb and gutter assessments and traffic design work to avoid exposing the city to unplanned costs.
After more than an hour of presentations and public comment, a commissioner moved to “reszone as presented,” but the motion failed to secure a second. The mayor said no action was taken, and the item may return to a future meeting for further study and possible formal action.
The discussion highlighted a recurring local dilemma: officials and business leaders pressing to grow housing to support jobs and retail, and neighbors resisting higher‑density projects in established residential pockets. Commissioners signaled interest in workforce and affordable housing yet emphasized the need for additional engineering detail, fiscal analysis and a development plan before changing zoning.
No vote was recorded on the rezoning request at this meeting; commissioners voted to adjourn.
