Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies MXD rezoning for 13.55 acres after traffic, fiscal and land‑use concerns
Summary
The Newman City Council denied a request to rezone 13.55 acres to MXD for 284 residential units and 7,500 sq ft of commercial space, citing concerns that the project functioned chiefly as an apartment complex, would strain public services, and offered limited commercial benefits despite a developer promise to fund a traffic signal.
The Newman City Council on a majority vote denied RZ2025-10, a rezoning application by Woodlands Acquisitions LLC to convert about 13.55 acres along Union Crossing Bypass to a mixed‑use (MXD) district that would allow 12 town homes, 272 multifamily apartments (284 units total) and about 7,500 square feet of commercial space.
Staff senior planner Chris Cole told the council the applicant’s master plan proposes 284 residential units with an average unit size of about 958 square feet, 505 parking spaces and an average proposed residential density of about 20.96 dwelling units per acre. Cole also said the applicant proffered to pay for a traffic control signal at the site’s southern entrance, a condition added after the work session.
Applicant Melissa Griffith, representing Woodlands, said the project ‘‘helps pursue’’ the city’s comprehensive‑plan idea of encouraging mixed‑use development and described pedestrian connections to the link trail and the adjacent Wood Partners project. Developer Bennett Wooten described the proposal as an ‘‘extension of an emerging mixed‑use district’’ intended to create walkable connections and shared amenities.
Traffic engineer Vern Wilburn told council that based on projected peak‑hour turning movements the site ‘‘would be even closer, probably close enough to to consider [a signal] to be met,’’ and that a coordinated signal would improve levels of service at the bypass. Nevertheless, Wilburn cautioned that formal warrant studies and coordination with adjacent signals would be required.
Several council members pressed the applicant and staff on two central issues: whether the MXD designation was being used as a technical pathway for what is functionally an apartment complex with only a small retail component, and whether the city would be adding residential supply at a pace that could outstrip absorption and impose net costs on municipal services (police, fire, schools). One council member noted staff estimates that the project would yield about $61,000 in property tax revenue while the police department estimated roughly $41,000 in one‑time equipment costs and additional recurring service pressures.
Council discussion also raised land‑use strategy: several members said parcels currently designated for business or office should be retained so the city can attract commercial uses that generate sales tax and jobs. Others argued delaying or denying build‑ready residential projects can result in long stretches of approved but unbuilt properties.
After extended questioning, a motion to deny the rezoning was made and seconded; the motion carried. The council accepted the planning commission’s prior recommendation (the commission had recommended denial 5–0).
What’s next: The denial means the applicant can revise the plan and seek a different application, pursue development under the current CGN zoning, or file a new rezoning application in the future. Any future application would return to staff and the planning commission for review.
