The Irving Planning and Zoning Commission on April 6 recommended denial of a rezoning request from the Islamic Center of Irving Endowment Fund to create a cemetery at 4190 Valley View Lane, forwarding the case to City Council on April 16 after a 5–4 vote.
The applicant’s representative, identified in the hearing as Mr. Dwey, said the proposal would allow roughly 3,000 burial plots and that the project would place 25–30% of each plot sale into a perpetual endowment for maintenance. “We’re anticipating about 100 burials per year,” he said, and estimated the cemetery would operate for roughly 30 years under current projections.
Commissioners and staff pressed the applicant on several points: the site’s small size (about 4.76 acres), traffic and access constraints, drainage and a creek across the property, and how much money would be immediately available in a cemetery‑specific endowment. One commissioner emphasized the scale of the variance requested, saying, “So what you’re asking for is basically an 82‑plus percent variance on our ordinance,” referring to the city’s minimum‑acreage guidance.
Neighbors and community members at the hearing questioned whether the proposed endowment and sales projections would support perpetual care. The applicant estimated plot prices at about $2,000 each and said roughly one‑third of sales proceeds (about $2 million, in his estimate over time) would flow into the endowment. Residents countered that a smaller cemetery yields a much smaller endowment and requested clearer, enforceable assurances for maintenance.
Staff told commissioners that the city’s guidance and professional recommendations favor larger parcels for long‑term sustainability and noted specific access and setback constraints that would be implicated by the proposed layout. Commissioners split on whether the cemetery’s religious‑community purpose justified a departure from acreage guidance: supporters said community need and proximity to the Islamic Center weighed in favor; opponents said local public‑safety, maintenance and funding uncertainties outweighed that consideration.
Commissioner Pritchard made the motion to recommend denial; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Gerald and carried 5–4. The denial is a recommendation only; City Council will make the final decision at its April 16 meeting.
If City Council elects to revisit the case, the issues commissioners highlighted — a clear initial endowment amount dedicated to cemetery maintenance, documented access and gate‑setback plans, and engineering on drainage and the creek — were the principal items the commission asked the applicant to resolve.