Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident tells Rowlett planning commission Alfred Estates proposal conflicts with comprehensive plan
Summary
At the Feb. 11 Rowlett Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, resident Justin Marston urged commissioners to reject higher-density variances for the Alfred Estates development, saying the proposal departs from the city's future land use map and would reduce lot sizes below the currently designated half-acre estate residential standard.
Justin Marston, a Rowlett resident, told the Planning and Zoning Commission on Feb. 11 that the Alfred Estates development proposal—scheduled for a Board of Adjustment hearing—seeks variances that would increase density and conflict with the city's comprehensive plan.
Marston said the city's comprehensive plan and the future land use map outline how the city should grow, including build-out capacity, thoroughfares, utilities and levels of service. "I'm concerned about the density that's being proposed here and how it does not fit with the city's comprehensive plan," he said. He added the property is currently designated for "estate residential or half acre lots or more" and argued the proposed density would deviate from that designation.
Marston displayed a blowup of the future land use map and pointed to a northern section of the city he said was designated for employment center uses; he said the proposal introduces single-family, townhomes and industrial warehouses that he believes are inconsistent with the map. He asked the commission to "take into consideration the future land use that this property should shall be half acre or more to help preserve and protect the existing character of the site while providing a mix of manageable development and retain integrity of this city's comprehensive plan."
Marston noted the city spent taxpayer dollars on professional consultants to develop the comprehensive plan and urged commissioners not to abandon those recommendations. He said he supports residential infill in principle but called the Alfred Estates density "not appropriate for the existing location." No developer representatives spoke during public comment, and the transcript records no formal action by the commission on Alfred Estates at the Feb. 11 meeting.
The Board of Adjustment hearing on the developer's requested variances was referenced by Marston as occurring separately; the transcript indicates the developer will appear before the Board of Adjustment on a later date rather than before the Planning and Zoning Commission.
No vote or formal commission direction on Alfred Estates is recorded in the Feb. 11 meeting minutes excerpt.
