Planning commission tables development agreement for 3700 South Perry Street after density, wetlands and airstrip concerns

The Harris City Planning Commission on Sept. 3 tabled consideration of an ordinance that would create a development agreement for property near 3700 South Perry Street, directing staff and the applicant to return with revised plans and clarifications. Commissioner (speaker 2) moved to table the proposal “with all of the notes and everything that we've given to Bob,” and Commissioner (speaker 5) seconded; the motion carried after the Chair called for ayes.

Planning staff provided the background: the zoning baseline allows 50 lots, an earlier proposal increased that to 74 lots, and the applicant's updated concept reduces that earlier proposal to 60 lots — a net increase of 10 lots over the baseline. As staff summarized, “So with this, baseline layout, there are 50 total lots or units,” and the developer offered $10,000 per additional lot above the baseline (10 lots would equal $100,000) intended for park improvements. Commissioners debated whether to accept the extra units in exchange for park funding, to convert some 6‑pack clusters into single‑family lots, or to shrink one‑acre lots to more marketable sizes.

Concerns that contributed to the decision to table included a preliminary wetland delineation on the plat (staff said the hashing shown is an engineer’s preliminary estimate, not an Army Corps of Engineers official delineation) and an unresolved question about a private airstrip near the property. Commissioners asked staff to verify runway offsets with GPS coordinates so the commission could determine whether certain lots would be restricted. The commission asked that staff: research the private airstrip overlay and legal implications; request GPS coordinates and distance checks for the runway centerline; consider reducing clustered 6‑pack units to 12 total units (from 18); apply RE/0.5 zoning language to western lots if feasible; and prepare the development agreement text for consideration when the layout is substantially final.

The commission did not vote on the merits of the development agreement; instead it formally tabled the item to give the applicant time to incorporate the commission's direction and for staff to get legal and mapping clarifications. The chair noted that staff would follow up with email summaries of the notes and next steps.