Council approves first reading of comprehensive‑plan amendment to allow mixed commercial/residential at Buffalo Run

The City Council voted to introduce and approve on first reading a comprehensive plan amendment (Case LUP25‑0002) that would change map designations for part of the Villages at Buffalo Run from northern‑range commercial to mixed commercial and add a residential area designation aligned with a proposed townhome area.

Applicant Paul Shukas (PCS Group) and representatives from Local Homes presented the amendment and a conceptual site plan. Shukas said the amendment would allow a modest amount of townhomes (the “missing middle”) while keeping a commercial corner for a sit‑down restaurant. He said townhomes would provide attainable homeownership and support commercial viability by increasing nearby rooftops.

City staff (Planner Nick Berry) described the two map changes — the economic development framework map and the residential area framework map — and recommended approval. Staff noted the city’s Comprehensive Plan 2045 supports mixed, pedestrian‑oriented development and that the amendment restricts greenfield residential designation to the townhome footprint, preserving remaining commercial opportunity.

Traffic engineers for the applicant (SM Rocha) presented counts and said current vehicle volumes do not yet warrant a traffic signal at the Jasper/120th intersection, though signal warrants could be met in the near future; they noted corridor planning measures such as movement restrictions and signal spacing will shape final mitigation. Neighbors and HOA representatives raised concerns about existing parking, garage sizes in similar townhome projects, left‑turn delays, and the need for additional outreach; two local developers and an HOA president expressed conditional support if parking and garage depth are addressed.

Councilmembers debated precedent and the loss of commercial acreage versus the benefits of increased residential density to support future commercial tenants. City staff and the applicant said that an approved comp‑plan amendment does not guarantee rezoning or development; subsequent PUD and subdivision reviews will require an approved traffic impact analysis and other mitigation. Council Member Dukes moved to approve the amendment; the motion passed on a unanimous roll‑call vote for first reading.

Council members asked staff to ensure an approved traffic study, parking plans and continued neighborhood engagement accompany any future PUD or rezoning application.