Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Rezoning Morris Addition topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Blue Ridge council tables rezoning request for Morris Addition, asks developer for rendering and feasibility on sewer/water

3492784 · January 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City Council postponed action on a request to rezone three lots in the Morris Addition to R-2 (multifamily) and asked the applicant for an artist rendering and infrastructure feasibility information about sewer and utility meters before taking a vote.

The Blue Ridge City Council on Tuesday moved to table a request to reclassify three lots in the Morris Addition for R-2 (multifamily) use until the applicant provides a visual rendering and additional feasibility information about sewer and water capacity.

The request would have rezoned three adjoining tracts — Lot 1 (0.31099 acre), Lot 2 (0.414 acre) and Lot 3 (0.19699 acre) in the Morris Addition — totaling approximately 0.92198 acres inside the city limits and in Collin County.

Council member Colvin Collinsworth made the motion to ask for an artist-style rendering showing the proposed building layout and exterior appearance; the motion also asked staff to confirm utility availability and meter requirements before bringing the item back. The motion was seconded and approved by the council.

The applicant, Hugo Mondragon, said he owns the property and described growth and economic reasons for developing rental housing. “I’ve been living in this town for 20 years, and I see how it’s growing,” Mondragon said. He said the proposal aims to provide more housing options and shared that the intent is affordable units.

Several residents spoke in opposition during two public hearings. Camille Shen, who said she has lived at 320 South Morrow Street for 81½ years, said the street is narrow and already experiences speeding and heavy vehicles; she urged limits on building height and density. “We would like it not to be more people living in the house than there are bedrooms,” Shen said. Jokita Morris, who identified herself as a long-time resident of the same neighborhood, and Maureen Lawrence reiterated concerns about street condition, parking and property values.

Council and staff addressed infrastructure questions in the meeting. City staff reported they located the sewer line and believe there is current capacity for approximately eight additional homes citywide but cautioned that overall sewer capacity is becoming tight because of several ongoing developments (including Blue Ridge North, Heritage Grove and Blue Ridge Crossing). The city official advising council said they were “looking at a potential moratorium” if capacity is exceeded and noted the city is development-driven for wastewater expansion — meaning growth usually must bring financing or developer-built infrastructure for treatment plant expansion.

Participants also described a likely configuration for the proposal: the applicant said the plan under consideration would build duplex-style units (four duplexes were discussed), with two parking spaces per duplex and on-site maintenance by the property owner. The applicant said the duplex option is intended to lower cost compared with building single-family houses.

Nut graf: Council members said neighbors’ concerns about traffic, street condition and sewer capacity warranted more detail before a rezoning. The council’s request for a visual rendering and confirmation of meter/sewer feasibility is intended to give residents and the council clearer information on scale, layout and infrastructure impact before any zoning change.

The council did not adopt the rezoning at Tuesday’s meeting; the item was tabled pending the applicant’s submission of a rendering and staff confirmation of utility capacity and meter requirements. The council indicated it would reopen public hearings as needed when the item returns to the agenda.

Ending: The applicant and staff were advised to return with the requested materials; a date to reconvene the matter was not specified on the public record.