Argyle council approves Heritage Tract planned-development zoning, OKs economic development agreement

Argyle Town Council on March 17 approved a planned‑development zoning change and related economic development agreement for the Heritage Tract, a roughly 123.93‑acre project at the southwest corner of I‑35W and Robeson Ranch Road, that developers say will include retail, a wellness district and a hospital campus. The vote was unanimous.

Councilors and staff said the project will be reduced in size from an earlier 195‑acre concept and that the developer agreed to a set of conditions the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended in March. The council also approved the Heritage Track Economic Development 380 agreement (as modified in executive session) tied to the project.

The change rezones the property from Agricultural (AG) to a Planned Development (PD) with base districts of Office Retail (OR), Community Retail (CR) and Community Facilities (CF). The developer presented an illustrative plan showing a grocer pad at the corner, a wellness district and a hospital parcel; staff emphasized the illustrations are informational and not mandatory binding layouts.

Developer Jim Wills said his ownership group has held the land for more than two decades and described the site as a regional retail-and‑medical corner. “This is a regional corner now,” Wills said. He told council members H‑E‑B had pursued a different site across the intersection but that the Heritage project remains positioned to attract a grocer and other retailers.

Council discussion focused on a set of conditions the P&Z Commission recommended: (1) establishing a 20% threshold to distinguish major vs. minor plan amendments (with 20% as the major‑amendment trigger), (2) requiring two amenities per acre in amenitized retention/detention open space, (3) increasing minimum site landscaping to 20% in the aggregate with a 15% minimum on each lot, (4) wayfinding signage approval at site‑plan stage, (5) limiting temporary concrete/asphalt batch plants to Area A, (6) restricting communications equipment in the hospital area to hospital/medical uses, and (7) permitting medical uses without a Specific Use Permit (SUP) in the designated wellness district for buildings 40,000 sq. ft. or larger while requiring an SUP elsewhere for comparably large nonmedical developments. Council also added tree spacing and other refinements as conditions.

Councilmember discussion also covered whether certain high‑intensity retail (listed as “general retail—high intensity” and “home improvement center”) should require an SUP. The developer requested those uses be permitted in specific subareas to avoid delays for anchor tenants; staff recommended retaining SUP review to preserve an extra layer of review for very large users. Ultimately, the council approved a motion that incorporated P&Z’s seven recommendations, clarified the landscaping aggregate/lot minimum (20% aggregate with no lot under 15%), increased buffer‑yard tree spacing to 30 feet for canopy/understory plantings along the I‑35W buffer, permitted the temporary concrete batch in Area A only, and allowed medical uses to be capped in areas A–C at 20% of square footage to preserve retail capacity in those areas. The motion also removed the SUP requirement for general high‑intensity retail and home improvement centers in Area B as part of the approved conditions.

Economic consultant Jason Claunch (Catalyst) provided fiscal projections for a 30‑year horizon that the development team summarized: roughly $159 million in estimated private investment, about $13 million in business personal property, $16.6 million in net new property tax revenue to the town and approximately $127 million in net new sales tax over the projection period; the presentation also estimated roughly 3,200 jobs related to buildout and operations over time.

Council members pressed the developer on landscaping survivability and tree spacing along the I‑35W frontage; the developer agreed to plant more than 1,500 trees across the development and to adopt 30‑foot spacing for larger and understory trees to improve long‑term survival. The developer also confirmed architectural controls and site‑plan review will apply even if an SUP is waived for certain uses, and that a 380 agreement will include architectural standards and other commitments.

The council motion passed unanimously. No speakers from the public testified for or against the rezoning during the public hearing; staff said one nearby property owner within 200 feet had previously registered opposition but that, after contact from the developer, the owner indicated they were amenable to the north‑phase changes.

The ordinance and economic development agreement now proceed under the town’s implementation steps, including future site‑plan reviews and required permits. Council members and the developer said they intend continued public engagement as the project moves from plan standards to specific tenant and site submissions.