Planning and Zoning committee recommends rezoning of Dickinson Plaza to auto‑centric commercial

The Planning and Zoning Committee voted May 20, 2025, to recommend rezoning about 8.813 acres known as Dickinson Plaza from the Mixed Use (MU) district to Auto‑Centric Commercial (AC).

The change applies to four parcels (parcel numbers 163214, 163340, 163366 and 163371) with registered addresses listed on the record as 3401, 3429 and 3535 Gulf Freeway. Staff recommended approval during the committee’s public hearing.

Travis Moore, the building official who presented the staff analysis, said the site “is commonly referred to as Dickinson Plaza” and that the request responds to leasing constraints created when the Unified Development Code rolled the property into MU. Moore noted that a nearby former car dealership has already been rezoned to AC, creating a continuous frontage of auto‑oriented zoning along I‑45.

Applicant Vijay Mishra, who identified himself as representing the property owner, told the commission the center is already built and oriented to vehicle access and that MU limits potential tenants. “I think it was incorrectly zoned to MU last time the zoning was done,” Mishra said, arguing AC would “align better with the property's existing development and it would enable a broader range of viable commercial uses.” He cited a physician who could not lease space under MU rules as an example that prompted the rezoning request.

Under the UDC definitions discussed at the hearing, AC permits a broader set of commercial uses than MU, including medical clinics, banks and certain retail such as liquor or vapor/tobacco stores that MU excludes. Mixed Use retains allowances for upper‑story residential and live‑work units that AC does not permit; commissioners discussed that difference and whether it reflected the city’s intended land‑use goals for the corridor.

Committee members also raised procedural concerns about the UDC rollout and whether some distinctions between MU and AC could be streamlined; several members said the rezoning before them reflected the existing built character and was effectively a technical correction. Staff confirmed the rezoning request fits the future land‑use map and does not propose new construction beyond tenant changes.

A motion to approve the rezoning recommendation passed without recorded dissent; the committee called for the standard administrative follow‑up to update the official zoning map and for any required development permits to follow city procedures.

The item concluded with no public comments during the hearing and the committee moved on to subsequent agenda items.