Planning commission backs Roseberry rezoning, forwards change and land‑use amendment to council

The Keller Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6‑1 on April 8 to recommend that City Council approve the Roseberry plan‑development rezoning and an accompanying future‑land‑use plan amendment, forwarding both items for Council consideration on May 6.

Planner Alexis Russell told the commission the proposal covers roughly 9.2 acres at the corner of North Main Street (U.S. 377) and Johnson Road and would reclassify the residential portion to an SF‑8.4 (high‑density single‑family) standard and leave two frontage parcels as commercial. “The request before you this evening is to consider a recommendation for a plan development zoning change for approximately 9.2 acres of land from SF‑36 and commercial to plan development mixed use for 21 residential lots, 2 commercial lots, and 1.3 acres of open space,” Russell said.

Why it matters: the change alters the parcel’s future‑land‑use designation from “Patio/Garden Townhome” to high‑density single family for the residential portion, standardizing lot sizes and home types nearer to the elementary school and the commercial corridor on North Main. Supporters said the plan creates a transitional buffer between the school and the commercial frontage and would bring homes sized and priced to attract families and empty‑nesters.

Developer David Washington said the current plan is the product of more than a year of changes in response to city feedback and neighborhood concerns. “We have a total of 21 residential lots, which also includes 1 lot for the existing home on the property,” Washington said, adding the developer expects average lot sizes to exceed the 8,400‑square‑foot minimum and to offer home plans from Drees Custom Homes.

What the plan would do: the PD calls for 21 single‑family lots (SF‑8.4), two commercial lots fronting North Main and about 1.3 acres of open space and tree conservation. The applicant proposes some deviations from the Unified Development Code (UDC) including higher lot coverage limits (proposed maximums of 50%–60% compared with the UDC’s 35% main‑building limit), reduced interior side yards (6.5 feet) and flexibility on garage orientation (a mix of J‑swing/front garages with a requirement that at least 50% be J‑swing).

Traffic, drainage and neighbor concerns were raised at the public hearing. A resident who gave his address as 112 Johnson Road said he worried the planned access drive would be too close to his driveway and difficult to use during peak school and commuter traffic, saying, “I cannot be watching, trying to get out of my driveway certain times a day.” Developer Washington said the team has met with the resident and offered to construct a circular driveway or other measures to reduce the conflict.

Staff noted the project will require coordination with TxDOT for any new access to U.S. 377 and that a detailed civil/site plan, drainage plans and any required platting will be reviewed later if council approves the PD. The applicant also told the commission that the commercial lots would require separate site plans and that the residential portion is proposed to develop in an initial phase with commercial following when market conditions allow.

Commission discussion ranged from support for the transition buffer and the proposed homebuilder to concern about lot coverage and side yards. Commissioner Ross Brenzinger and others commended the applicant’s outreach and tree conservation; several commissioners asked for clarification on the proposed coverage and setback exceptions and emphasized that detailed construction permits and plat reviews would follow any zoning action.

The commission’s recommendation: both the plan‑development zoning change (E‑1) and the future‑land‑use amendment (E‑2) were recommended to City Council. The commission vote on each item was 6 in favor, 1 opposed; the record does not list a roll‑call of each commissioner’s vote. These items will appear on the May 6 City Council agenda for final action.

What’s next: if Council approves the PD and the land‑use amendment the applicant must submit a detailed site plan, civil engineering and platting as required by the UDC; those plans will be reviewed by planning, public works and fire, and any required construction permits will follow.

— End —