Council denies four short‑term rental special‑use permits after public comment

The Carrollton City Council on April 1 declined to grant special‑use permits (SUPs) that would have allowed four single‑family homes to operate as short‑term rentals, following multiple public speakers citing noise, safety and property‑value concerns.

Each of the four properties was considered separately. Planning staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval for several of the cases, but public opposition and procedural rules changed the outcome at council.

2242 Old Mill Road (Case PLSUP2025-012). Applicant Macklin Marchant said the property has been operated on a family-friendly basis for about two years and that he vets guests; staff told council that initial opposition reported in the packet increased after publication to about 18.74% of notified property owners but remained below the 20% threshold that triggers a supermajority requirement. Councilmember Raqsburg moved to approve the SUP and Councilmember Palacios seconded, but after the roll call the motion was recorded as denied; staff will follow up on next steps. Marchant told council, "I've been there for about a year...we have really made it an Airbnb for families," and said he was willing to comply with Planning & Zoning recommendations including noise monitors.

2120 Kings Road (Case PLSUP2024-193). Philip and Angela Hague, who said they invested roughly $50,000 and converted the house to a short‑term rental about 17 months earlier, told council they contacted city staff seeking guidance and were told at the time there were no restrictions. Planning staff reported public opposition was low (about 3.5% of notified property owners) and Planning & Zoning recommended approval; council voted against the SUP. Philip Hague said the home had been used for displaced families following storms and that the owners have not had code or police violations. "We take care of our properties. We take pride in how they look," Hague said.

2017 Sam Houston Boulevard (Case PLSUP2025-002). Staff reported the Planning & Zoning Commission vote on this case ended in a 4–4 tie, which effectively denied the commission recommendation. Staff also reported more than 20% opposition in the noticed area, which raises the council’s legal threshold for approval to a supermajority (six of seven). The applicant argued constitutional protections and said the properties were put into service before enforcement began; neighbors testified about repeated cars, noise and safety concerns. The council did not reach the six‑vote threshold and the SUP failed.

2925 Rolling Hills Drive (Case PLSUP2025-018). Planning & Zoning recommended approval and staff reported no active code or police violations on the property. Despite the staff recommendation, the council motion to approve failed.

What council said: council members repeatedly noted their responsibility to weigh neighborhood testimony, code compliance and planning recommendations. Several council members asked staff to confirm notification radii, opposition percentages and whether any of the properties had code or police incidents; staff answered that some opposition came after the agenda packet was posted, that the city’s online registration system had previously categorized some properties as long‑term rental registrations before an SUP process was in force, and that for the cases where staff had records there were no code violations.

Why it matters: under the city’s short‑term rental rules and state law, properties with more than 20% opposition in the notified area require a supermajority to approve; absence of that threshold means council can approve by majority, but strong neighborhood opposition and the commission actions led to denials in this meeting. Opponents cited noise, safety, parking and loss of neighborhood character; applicants cited investment in property and lack of violations.

Next steps: staff said it will provide applicants with the next steps after the denials and will handle any required follow‑up on code registration and permit status.

Cases and council outcomes (summary) - 2242 Old Mill Road (PLSUP2025-012): motion to approve (mover: Councilmember Raqsburg; second: Councilmember Palacios); outcome: denied (vote tally not specified in the transcript). Opposition rose to ~18.74% after packet publication; Planning & Zoning had recommended approval. - 2120 Kings Road (PLSUP2024-193): motion to approve (mover: councilmember; transcript indicates a motion and second), outcome: denied (transcript records that the motion failed; staff reported ~3.5% opposition; Planning & Zoning recommended approval). - 2017 Sam Houston Boulevard (PLSUP2025-002): Planning & Zoning tied 4–4 (denial); staff reported >20% opposition in the notice area, which requires a supermajority; the council did not reach six votes and the SUP failed. - 2925 Rolling Hills Drive (PLSUP2025-018): Planning & Zoning recommended approval; council vote to approve failed.

Public concerns raised during testimony included repeated late‑night activity, damage to fences, a noise complaint that prompted an officer visit, worries about vulnerability of children and the desire among neighbors for a stable, residential character. Applicants emphasized record of compliance, local investment and use by families rather than parties.