Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tyler planning commission tables West Summit Creek rezoning after resident traffic, density concerns
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to table PD‑25‑003 (Jenico of West Summit Creek LLC) for 30 days after applicant request and public comment raising traffic, lot-size and safety concerns; the developer said it will hold community outreach and revise the site plan.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The City of Tyler Planning and Zoning Commission voted to remove and then table Planned Development application PD‑25‑003 (Jenico of West Summit Creek LLC) for 30 days, with the item expected back before the commission at the next meeting on May 6, 2025.
Staff said the applicant seeks to change the site from R‑1A to a Planned Unit Residential (PUR) district to build detached single‑family homes on private streets; the original site plan presented last month showed 74 single‑family lots and staff reported that the proposed development would create lower density than R‑1A allows. Planning staff told the commission that of nine notices mailed, three were returned in opposition and none in favor, and recommended tabling the request to allow the applicant to finish design work and community outreach.
Chris McCartney, representing the applicant as a Genico Group representative, asked the commission to table the item for 30 days so the developer could “work out veil layout, different lot sizing to really, nail down this. We don't wanna rush it. We wanna do our due diligence, and I think 30 days would would do so.” McCartney said the applicant intends to hold community outreach meetings to explain the zoning request and revised design to nearby residents.
Several residents who live adjacent to or near the site spoke in opposition or with concerns. Jim Clark, a Cumberland Road resident whose 15‑acre property borders the development, said neighbors oppose any new connection onto Cumberland Road and urged one‑acre lots to keep density low. Clark said traffic is already a problem on Cumberland Road and described a hazardous dip at the Wilder Trail intersection: "...when you try to get out of that road onto Cumberland, it's it's very dangerous."
Another speaker said a petition with 87 signatures opposing a connection to Cumberland Road and requesting larger lots was submitted to the office. Wesley Hamilton and Madeline Camp Wilkins also identified themselves as nearby residents who had discussed the plan with neighbors and wanted to ensure accurate property listings in the staff packet.
A commenter who identified themselves as a licensed geologist asked that “impact and health and safety issues” remain central to the record and noted material submitted previously to staff. The commenter said the information had been provided to commissioners and requested it be considered in the review.
Planning staff reiterated the recommendation to table to allow the applicant to revise the site plan and complete outreach. Commissioners moved, seconded, and voted to table the item; the motion passed with the ayes called and no opposition recorded. The meeting record shows the tabling will extend the item to the commission’s next meeting, May 6, 2025.
The public comment and staff statements in this hearing focused on traffic safety at Cumberland Road, lot size and density, outreach to adjacent property owners, and technical/design revisions the applicant must complete before the commission takes final action.

