Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Kemp Tract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends denial of Minto's 3,100-acre Kemp Tract zoning request after resident pushback
Summary
The Waxahachie Planning & Zoning Commission voted 5'2 to recommend denial of Minto Communities' proposed Kemp Tract master plan, citing unresolved traffic, enforceability and design standards after staff listed 75 conditions and residents raised concerns about drainage, access and scale.
The Waxahachie Planning & Zoning Commission voted to recommend denial of a proposed 3,100-plus acre master-planned community known as the Kemp Tract, rejecting the developer's plan by a 5'2 margin on Dec. 8. The project would have allowed up to 13,270 dwelling units and an estimated buildout population of roughly 33,000.
Staff told commissioners the latest submittal had prompted additional comments and that the staff report now lists roughly 75 conditions the developer must meet. "There is a total of 13,270 dwelling units that would be allowed as a maximum on the site," staff said during the presentation, and flagged continuing concerns about the conceptual traffic impact analysis (TIA), anti-monotony standards and how the written PD standards would be enforced.
Developer representatives said they have worked with staff and were prepared to continue negotiations but argued some staff conditions are tied to separate documents such as the development agreement and municipal management district. "We went through about four hours today and went through about 30 of the 70," one developer representative said, adding that many items were resolved in discussion but others remain in flux.
Residents who live near the proposed project told commissioners they feared loss of local character, the effect on Brookside Road and nearby water features, and potential downstream drainage impacts. "This is my house, and you want to put an entrance road in front of my house," a resident told the commission, urging protection of an existing watercourse and saying she would contest encroachment on the pond at the site.
Commission discussion focused on the scale of the proposal and whether the current PD standards and staff conditions were sufficiently specific and enforceable. One commissioner noted that multiple conditions had been resolved while new material in revised submittals produced new staff comments.
After debate, a motion to recommend approval failed for lack of a second. A subsequent motion to recommend denial carried 5'2. The commission's recommendation goes to the city council, which will take the final vote.
Next steps: the council is scheduled to consider the zoning recommendation later this month; developers may revise the PD standards and resubmit or seek to address council concerns directly.
