Councilwoman Hall recommended denial of M&C25‑1126 — a request tied to developer Dominion’s proposed townhome project at the 9100 block of Makartt/Reisinger — and the City Council voted to carry that motion. The item drew extended public testimony both for and against the proposal.

Proponents including Peter Irvin, a member of the Pointe Crossing HOA board, and Terry Duckett, who identified himself as representing the applicant, argued the development would bring needed housing density, private investment in local infrastructure and subsequent economic activity. Duckett said Dominion typically holds properties long term, commits developer funds to nearby infrastructure improvements and has worked with partners such as the YMCA of Greater Fort Worth to provide benefits for residents.

Opponents — including long‑time neighborhood residents Jacqueline West, Derica Patterson (president of Rainbow Ridge HOA) and others — urged denial. Speakers warned that the proposed site lacks grocery access, sidewalks and adequate transit; that local schools are at or near capacity; and that the Fort Worth Police Department is already strained. Several speakers raised a fiscal argument: they said a 4% housing tax credit combined with future property‑tax exemptions and a one‑time collection of impact fees would leave the city with ongoing service burdens (police, fire, schools, roads) without matching recurring tax revenue.

Speakers gave different numerical framings: proponents and opponents referenced a proposal size of roughly 328 units and characterized the potential population impact as “up to around 1,000 residents.” Council discussion referenced those community concerns and the degree of neighborhood opposition. Councilmember Hall said she had listened to stakeholder input and recommended denial. A motion to deny was moved, seconded and the motion carried. The transcript records the motion as passing but does not provide a roll‑call tally.

What the council decided: The council’s vote denied consideration/approval of the requested measure associated with M&C25‑1126. The denial means the developer’s request for the tax-credit/exemption (and associated approvals before the council in that item) will not move forward at this meeting; the council did not adopt an alternative approval or mitigation package.

Background and context: Supporters framed the project as a housing production tool for a fast‑growing city. Opponents emphasized compatibility, safety and long‑term municipal finance implications; several asked the city to prioritize ownership pathways, community land trusts or bond‑funded affordable‑housing allocations rather than tax‑credit driven, high‑density rental models.

Next steps: The council’s denial was recorded as the final action in this meeting; the transcript does not state whether the developer will revise the proposal or reapply.