Neighbors oppose Solomon Estates rezoning over traffic, density and covenant concerns; commission approves 5–1

The Midland Planning & Zoning Commission approved a zone‑change request by Dunaway Associates on behalf of Black Family Partnerships to convert property in Solomon Estates from Agricultural Estate (AE) to a Planned Development (PD) for a housing subdivision, despite strong neighborhood opposition over traffic, lot size and covenant expectations.

Planner Madeline Hawkins told the commission the request involves Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Solomon Estates (site near North A Street and Mockingbird Lane). Staff reported 28 objection letters submitted, of which seven counted toward the statutory objection percentage, yielding a 14.666% objection rate. Neighbors had expressed concerns about traffic, safety, water wells and density; staff said the applicant revised the site plan (including adding a Mockingbird entry and removing one lot) and routed the proposal to transportation and engineering departments who reported no overriding technical objections.

Tim Here of Dunaway Associates described outreach steps (neighborhood meeting April 11) and said the proposal is for 36 detached single‑family homes — not townhomes — yielding an approximate density of 1.6 units per acre. He said changes since earlier submittals included a right‑turn only entry on Mockingbird, removal of one lot (37→36), designation of construction access to avoid Alisheba, and coordination with staff on traffic controls such as a potential four‑way stop at Alisha and Sir Barton.

Multiple residents urged denial. Jack Reed said the 15‑foot egress lane on Mockingbird is too narrow for heavy equipment and poses a hazard; he recommended wider egress or an Avenue A entrance. “It’s gonna create a tremendous… hazard,” Reed said, urging an expansion as a condition of approval. Denise Porter and others said many homeowners believed the subdivision required one‑acre minimum lots and raised concerns about housing character and long‑term subdivision phases.

The commission debated whether the developer had followed covenants and whether planning rules allow the proposed lots. Commissioner Laphoy moved to deny the request and asked the applicant to return with a modified entry; that denial motion (moved by Commissioner Berry and seconded by Commissioner Martin) failed on a 2–4 vote. A subsequent motion to approve (moved by Commissioner O'Field with a second by Commissioner Lefoy) passed 5–1.

Chair noted the tension between property owners’ rights and neighborhood character and said staff and council would have further review. Any future changes to the PD would have to return to this body and to city council.