McAllen commission denies rezoning proposal for Trenton Road site after residents cite school-area traffic concerns

The McAllen City Commission on Feb. 10 voted to disapprove a request to rezone a vacant parcel at the southwest corner of Trenton Road and North Main Street from C‑1 (office) to R‑3 (high‑density residential).

Planning staff told the commission the property is currently vacant and that the city’s Envision McAllen future land‑use plan labels the site for “complete communities,” but staff recommended a lower‑density R‑2 (medium residential) alternative rather than R‑3. The Planning and Zoning Commission previously recommended disapproval of the R‑3 request.

Residents who live within a few blocks of the site urged the commission to uphold the planning board’s recommendation. “I just wanted to come and voice my support for that decision,” said Norman Barr, who identified himself as a neighbor. Arlene Garcia said her property “literally backs up against the property in question” and warned that a high‑density development would add to existing congestion near multiple schools. “We are concerned that the additional traffic to that area would be a true burden to the area,” Garcia said.

The developer, Noah Dyer, told the commission the owner planned an “upscale” apartment complex and preferred residential use over additional office development. Ewan Garcia, a consultant with Rio Delta Engineering, said the site geometry and parking requirements limit the project’s size: “the parking only allows for about 32 units. So it’s not, like, 3 stories. It’s 2‑two‑story buildings with 16 units each,” he said.

Planning staff highlighted that a petition had been submitted that triggers a supermajority requirement for the commission. Commissioners discussed that approving R‑2 would require a change to the developer’s site plan and that R‑2 would allow fewer units (staff estimated about 18–20 units for R‑2) than R‑3.

A motion to disapprove the rezoning request carried; the commission recorded the motion as approved at the meeting. The action means the property remains zoned C‑1 (office) unless the applicant requests a full commission vote or submits a different zoning application.

The record shows the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 3–2–1 to recommend disapproval of the R‑3 rezoning at its January hearing. The applicant may petition for a full commission vote or return with a revised zoning request.

The item drew multiple neighborhood speakers and discussion about traffic, school proximity and site constraints; no final site plan had been submitted to the city at the time of the hearing.