[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6693268,"mediaKeyId","2391207-f85265886706b64d081322867c494922","parentId",2391207,"title","Developer revises Erwin Farms plan, cuts density after Planning and Zoning feedback","audioSeconds",1189,"startMs",3668000,"endMs",4857000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2391207-f85265886706b64d081322867c494922&start=3668&end=4857","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2391207-f85265886706b64d081322867c494922/thumbnail_3668000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6693268/Rockwall-City/Rockwall-County/Texas/Developer-revises-Erwin-Farms-plan-cuts-density-after-Planning-and-Zoning-feedback","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6693268-e7f0f13ca34e4b713a35dd9ac3fab93e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186310&Signature=cjQ0GGrKpVNH1Su6iPau3auyhLmzjbEsQwdrfER3G~XKLqhBB3G5DTXDo0AURv1GvpO19UNb~RZNvSWxnahK6m4jsozQtFzRLjMQlBfzyr57IKfQnRfN42muc4diX3H9pke8XwWLrC48bKlE1rHMfBGEdzgXtGW0LRYwPE9G-SvshoBRgEZpQ8taiqRkd4jv30ziqBEp9nNc30vTbPvErlJK-R4q05cn~cVesnm220hsQWFSD7m9bABc1AX7FE5cG9rPV3SyJhMcrtOYuGrS7xesHOysRo6a48CCpLkmq8ETA1uyq0g7hNhSKTZt3PziIxReRjZKA590a8nucOJxeA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Rockwall","date","2025-02-25T00:00:00Z","article","A developer seeking to rezone about 98.4 acres along North County Line and FM 1141 presented a revised plan to the Rockwall Planning and Zoning Commission on a discussion item Tuesday that cuts lot counts and increases open space following earlier feedback.

Adam Bucek, representing the applicant, said the project — called Erwin Farms — now proposes roughly 123 lots on 98.4 acres, a net density the applicant described as about 1.25 dwelling units per acre, down about 40% from the previous submission. Bucek said the revision also raises the amount of open space to about 33.19 acres (roughly 25.6% of the site, using 50% credit for floodplain) and shifts the plan to include a mix of large “estate” lots on the south side of an Atmos gas line and smaller mid-sized lots to the north.

The applicant described other features in the revised concept: an average lot size around 16,400 square feet, roughly 38% of lots either fronting or backing to open space, centralized amenities with a pavilion and multi-use courts, two fountain ponds, a system of sidewalks and an 8-foot trail along perimeter roads, and minimum masonry and garage-door design standards. Bucek told the commission home sizes are expected generally from about 3,000 to 5,000 square feet with market pricing the applicant estimated in the high‑$700,000s to roughly $1.2 million on larger lots.

Staff and the applicant also discussed infrastructure and regulatory items. The applicant told commissioners they expect roughly $750,000 in sanitary sewer upgrades and pump equipment work and an estimated $185,000 to upsize a water main to 12 inches through the subdivision for the city water master plan. The applicant said the southmost lots (the larger estate lots) would use on‑site sewage facilities (septic systems) while the 100‑foot lots to the north would connect to city sanitary sewer. Atmos Energy has reviewed the plan and the applicant said they will leave an existing gas line in place and design around it.

Commissioners and staff focused several times on conformance with Rockwall’s comprehensive plan and residential design guidance. Staff noted the comp plan’s “housing tree” guidance and asked the applicant to increase the interior mix of lot sizes so smaller lots are closer to open space and larger lots are at the perimeter; staff also asked for a more explicit, looped trail layout that ties parks and open space together rather than a single linear trail segment. The applicant said the gas line and proposed septic areas constrain how lot types can be intermingled but agreed to work with staff on a trail loop concept that would cross the gas easement per Atmos’ requirements and to refine tree‑grouping/tree survey information.

Commissioners asked for clarified exhibits and details the commission typically expects before a formal rezoning or PD adoption: an updated concept plan showing exact open‑space and trail locations, a tree‑grouping or canopy plan, more lots fronting park/open space where feasible, and demonstration of how the sanitary sewer and water upgrades will be paid for and built. No formal rezoning vote was taken at the meeting; the item was presented and discussed as a zoning/public‑hearing discussion item and staff offered follow‑up comments the applicant must address for future action.

Why it matters: Erwin Farms is a major residential proposal that would change the land use of nearly 100 acres referenced in the comprehensive plan. The changes — lower density, larger estate lots and expanded open space — respond to neighborhood and staff concerns. The project will still require subsequent approvals (PD ordinance text, development plan and infrastructure agreements) and detailed engineering before any construction.

Speakers quoted in this article were identified during the meeting and are named below. Direct quotations are taken from the hearing transcript.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Rockwall - Planning & Zoning Commission - Feb 25, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Applicant for a 98.4-acre Erwin Farms subdivision told the Planning and Zoning Commission it reduced density by roughly 40% and increased open space; commissioners asked for additional mix of lot sizes, trail connections and tree buffering before any final approval.","taxTitle","Rockwall City, Rockwall County, Texas","taxId",54915,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6693258,"Planning and Zoning votes at a glance: key approvals, denials and tables from the Feb. 11 meeting",3168,352000,3520000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2391207-f85265886706b64d081322867c494922&start=352&end=3520","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2391207-f85265886706b64d081322867c494922/thumbnail_352000.jpg","/articles/6693258/Rockwall-City/Rockwall-County/Texas/Planning-and-Zoning-votes-at-a-glance-key-approvals-denials-and-tables-from-the-Feb-11-meeting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6693258-b59c609a15cf8c2975cea3440750dad0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186310&Signature=eKzx0nBLpxJuTH3lcwFsTfuW2o4cSZJX9oMJTQ5ss~-m34XstzcYOcx9hScbLBO3l-65xPtRi9WCvXT2VnuT0fV05NzqwKFBwcNdDOjWrO1rq8QbovLFudMPO0eyKGrkKjtVQqFASBR9X~BQaaFbU8JhBe1WjSybTNWirj6Nu9BgoqgacrUnKYyxSy26T50qogbNjFJPZcWTYq-S0ZLXisrYG9hmHiLwMyERJpiGBL2JfQVD5z4XOjcLvZDILBfXi6PEMm8j~AXqP3BPFwDp1g~VzgWoExPI2dnRHMX7I-JTw2sXZCQFDL7UDTV1fncr0X7oDvG3C3sWooBIEvneug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Here are the formal actions taken by the Rockwall Planning and Zoning Commission during the Feb. 11 meeting (motions and vote tallies are recorded as announced at the hearing). Where a motion listed a mover or seconder in the transcript those names are shown; when the transcript did not identify the mover or seconder the fields are left as generic commissioner attributions.

Votes and formal outcomes

- Consent agenda: approved, tally announced as 5–0 (Commissioners Thompson and Deckard absent). (motion carried)

- SP2025‑002 (693 E I‑30; amended site plan for existing minor automotive repair facility): Motion to approve passed 5–0.

- SP2025‑003 (407 W Washington St; site plan reinstatement from 2020): Motion to approve passed 5–0.

- SP2025‑004 (409 W Washington St; site plan reinstatement from 2020 with photometric condition): Motion to approve passed 5–0.

- SP2025‑005 (restaurant at SW corner of IH‑30 Frontage Road and Sunset Ridge Drive): Motion to approve passed 5–0.

- SP2025‑007 (amended site plan for general retail building at 1407/1409 S Goliad St): Table per ARB recommendation; motion to table passed 5–0 and the commission directed the applicant to return with updated renderings (item to return to the March 11 meeting).

- MIS2025‑001 (3445 Bridal Cross Drive — exception to allow synthetic turf beyond 400 sq ft / visible from open space): Motion to approve passed 4–1 (one commissioner opposed). The applicant had paid noncompliance fees and the case included required removal of an unapproved planted bed behind the property.

- MIS2025‑002 (1511 Orion Dr — exception to fence standard for a keystone lot encroachment): Motion to deny passed 4–1.

- MIS2025‑003 (375 Cornelius Rd — exception to allow wooden split‑rail fence in Single Family Estate 1.5): Motion to approve passed 5–0.

- MIS2025‑004 (variance request from Rockwall Economic Development Corporation to keep existing overhead utilities in portions of SH‑276 and Corporate Crossing/FM‑549): Motion to deny (i.e., denial of the variance) passed 5–0. Staff noted the variance is discretionary for City Council but Planning and Zoning recommended denial and the commission voted to deny the variance request; staff recorded the measure for forwarding to council as a recommendation.

Other actions / next steps

- Several discussion items (zoning and specific use permit hearings including the Erwin Farms PD discussion, multiple zoning change requests, short‑term rental SUP request and others) were presented for public hearing and discussion; no final zoning votes on those items were recorded at the meeting and staff indicated follow‑up submittals and conditions would be required before any action can be taken.

Speakers and attributions

Primary staff presenters named in the hearing transcript: Bethany (case presenter for several SP cases), Henry (planning/technical staff), Ryan (director or senior staff) and Angelica (case presenter). Applicant representatives identified in the record include Adam Bucek (Erwin Farms), Ryan Joyce (Jupiter/Juniper phases), Kyle Peterson (MIS2025‑001), Cameron Thatcher (MIS2025‑002 applicant), Nick Grennan (SP2025‑008 applicant), Phil Wagner (Rockwall EDC), and others who presented site plans or spoke on specific cases. When the transcript did not identify a speaker for motions the commission’s procedural announcements were recorded as generic commissioner motions.

Why it matters: The commission approved several site plans that move projects closer to construction, denied a high‑cost utility variance sought by the Rockwall EDC (which has infrastructure and budget implications), and approved a small‑scale turf exception while denying a fence encroachment request. Many larger zoning matters remain in discussion and will return to the commission after the applicant and staff provide revised plans, exhibits or engineering materials.

For reference: the case identifiers and outcomes above were read into the public record during the meeting; the transcript contains the verbatim motion calls, tallies and many of the applicant and staff remarks for each case.","The commission approved multiple site plans and miscellaneous exceptions, tabled one site plan per ARB recommendation, denied a utility‑placement variance requested by the Rockwall EDC, and took action on fence and turf exceptions; all formal actions and vote tallies below.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6693264,"Jupiter/Juniper preliminary‑plat pared back; phases 1–2 to move forward for review",142,7252000,7394000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2391207-f85265886706b64d081322867c494922&start=7252&end=7394","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2391207-f85265886706b64d081322867c494922/thumbnail_7252000.jpg","/articles/6693264/Rockwall-City/Rockwall-County/Texas/JupiterJuniper-preliminaryplat-pared-back-phases-12-to-move-forward-for-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6693264-0c8208d4779f56391dcf81ca9b6239ca/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186310&Signature=FTX4USx-6k-dj~EsXFBo6OauUJ3T03F0J3E7Lqh8UrFdufZE-nRoFOVlT1eschngexn210zbOqKteR4QhBtSXFNF6MbCe2nCeoA~qnd0EO19wCvRJ1kKYOAMqU-se5QB3IjeVqMjHiXqnIhAYsHCp7~sifhYxI3FfNOt5~L8Pg~S5jxgF-MMYms0u2WikqMhVcm99JKcZLGx~Ap20TG5XP0aNcAclTGc2tL8lQ46S23M5jvcMrVWR7O4uwhdzAJreI~P0iRvIH48oaAnXz-rV~KC7ChcmuZsqEsmooPyVewfXPXcliC6Z-TPlPAuU7ZtWCZFsAYBmJj95rsrjuTnmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A large preliminary plat for a 526.778‑acre development named Jupiter/Juniper — originally proposed with 870 single‑family lots and two commercial parcels — was discussed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The applicant said he will limit the current preliminary plat submittal to only phases 1 and 2 and will return revised materials for further review.

Ryan Joyce, speaking for the applicant group, told the commission that phasing the submittal will “take it in bite‑sized chunks” and allow staff and the applicant to address comments incrementally. He said staff comments were received and the applicant was already incorporating adjustments. The commission and staff noted that the reduced submittal will shorten the immediate review scope but that later phases (3–6) remain part of the overall project and will come back as the developer advances infrastructure and engineering.

Staff said the item will be routed to the Parks Board for review and then return to Planning and Zoning (the applicant stated a March 11 return was expected). No final action to approve a full preliminary plat was taken at the hearing; the commission received the discussion, and staff and applicant agreed to the phased submittal and follow‑up process.

Why it matters: Jupiter/Juniper is a significant master‑planned subdivision for the city’s southwest planning area with substantial infrastructure and park/trail implications. Phased submittals are common for large developments but require the commission and staff to review engineering, drainage, park dedication and off‑site improvements on a phase‑by‑phase basis.

Speakers quoted in the article were identified in the meeting and are listed below. Direct quotations appear in the council transcript.","Developer told the commission it will submit only phases 1 and 2 of a planned 526.8‑acre Jupiter/Juniper subdivision and asked staff to forward the preliminary plat to the Parks Board for review; the commission did not take a final plat vote at the meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Developer revises Erwin Farms plan, cuts density after Planning and Zoning feedback

Planning and Zoning votes at a glance: key approvals, denials and tables from the Feb. 11 meeting

Jupiter/Juniper preliminary‑plat pared back; phases 1–2 to move forward for review