Commission forwards Leon Reserve Phase 2 final plat and exception request to council after intensive entrance‑standard debate

The Planning and Zoning Commission on May 5 took up the final plat for Leon Reserve Phase 2 (FY25‑20‑PLT), a 40.11‑acre, 169‑lot portion of a larger planned development. The meeting featured a prolonged technical debate between city staff and the developer over how subdivision entrance and access standards apply once a development exceeds 300 lots.

Principal planner Cheryl Maxwell told the commission the applicant is requesting an exception to the Unified Development Code’s subdivision entrance standards so the entire two‑phase development (386 lots total at full buildout) could rely on two “alternate design” entrances instead of meeting the staff’s interpretation that three alternate entrances are required for developments above 300 lots. Maxwell said staff reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) and other materials and "do not recommend approval of the exception," citing public‑safety concerns because the two primary entrances are less than 500 feet apart and may not provide sufficiently independent ingress and egress.

Developer representatives from WB Development and their counsel argued the subdivision standard should be interpreted to count alternate designs as the equivalent of two standard entrances and that the plan — including Aguayo Way and Cross Timbers Boulevard built to alternate‑design widths — satisfies the numerical requirements. Travis Parks, counsel for the developer, said in part, “You must do so in a way that does not render another portion of that same provision meaningless,” urging an interpretation that counts the city’s alternate‑design detail as the developer reads it. WB Development’s Skyler (presenter) and project manager Juan Briscoe described the planned entrance widths and stubs to future connections; the developer said they had already widened Aguayo Way at staff request and had stubbed a collector to anticipate later connections.

Fire Marshal Landy Setzer and other staff noted that “remoteness of the entries is important to us,” explaining concerns that closely spaced entrances could be compromised by a single incident or congestion and that railroad proximity on the west side complicates alternate access to the subdivision. City staff also noted prior examples where temporary emergency connections or other stubs were used to meet entrance requirements.

After extended discussion, Commissioner Rhodes moved, and Commissioner Smith seconded, a motion to forward item FY25‑20‑PLT to City Council "to city council per staff recommendation." Tiffany recorded a unanimous vote. Earlier in the presentation Maxwell had said staff recommended disapproval of the exception and therefore disapproval of the final plat as presented; the commission’s formal action was to forward the matter to City Council consistent with staff’s recommendation.

Because the commission forwarded the item with staff’s recommendation, Council will receive the final plat and the exception request together with staff analysis and the record of the commission debate. City Council’s decision will determine whether the exception to the subdivision entrance requirements is granted and whether the final plat can be approved as presented.