Glenn Heights staff brief council on Valencia Estates planned‑development amendment

Parvis Prozisian, Director of Planning and Development Services, told the Glenn Heights City Council that the ownership of the Valencia Estates planned development has changed and the new owner is seeking a planned‑development amendment that substitutes detached single‑family houses for previously proposed townhomes.

Prozisian said the site is at the southeast corner of West Bear Creek and Westmoreland and “they are removing the town homes … they want to put more single family home, detached single family home, instead of attached single family home, which reduces the density.” He said the applicant is requesting an increase in multifamily units from 368 to 400 but that the change from attached to detached single‑family units reduces the project’s overall density.

The staff presentation included a side‑by‑side table comparing the originally approved PD and the new proposal. Prozisian said the original plan included townhomes and single‑family units totaling about 495 residential units in the residential portion, with 368 multifamily units in the apartment area; under the new plan, detached single‑family units would replace the townhomes and the staff counted about 98 fewer single‑family units overall while multifamily units would increase by about 32.

Councilmembers asked about building height and circulation. Prozisian said the multifamily buildings are planned as three stories under the current amendment and that “the increase in the number is not significant to require 4 story,” but he added that any change to four stories would require Council approval. He also said the applicant revised some street layouts to eliminate cul‑de‑sac dead ends and to improve internal connectivity.

On landscaping and parking, Prozisian said the applicant submitted a revised PD document that deviates from the original standards; staff returned comments and “we are insisting to stay with the … criteria … defined for the landscape and parking on the original PD.” He said staff had not yet received a final response from the applicant.

Councilmembers pressed for market data supporting the developer’s pivot away from townhomes. Prozisian said the new engineer told staff that the developer’s market view is that townhome demand is stronger closer to major downtowns rather than in suburban locations; Prozisian said the developer has not provided the market study to staff. Councilmember Michelle Hale asked staff to request a more detailed landscape plan because of concerns about tree stands and buffers between parks/detention areas and private backyards.

Prozisian said the park/open‑space layout was changed back toward the original approved plan in part, and that some green areas function as detention ponds but would remain open and could be used informally as play space. He said the applicant has not yet selected a builder. Prozisian concluded that staff supports the project conceptually and will return to Council when staff and the applicant agree on a final PD amendment to be presented for formal action.

The item was informational; no vote was held. The Council did not set a date for a formal public hearing or final action during the work session.