Residents press council on Sawyer Road rezoning as developer seeks PDD for townhouse-style project

A proposed zone change and plan‑development district for roughly 6.8 acres on Sawyer Road drew lengthy public comment at the Leon Valley City Council meeting, with neighbors urging the council to slow the process and raise traffic, safety and drainage concerns.

The application submitted by developer representatives requests a change from R‑1 (single‑family) to a PDD with a base R‑3 (multiple‑family) zoning allowing townhouse‑style, stacked units and up to roughly 150 to 165 units on the property. The applicant said the design includes stacked three‑ and four‑story units, interior garages and on‑site open space, and that the lot’s shape and easements make other commercial uses impractical.

Planning staff noted the proposed project is generally consistent with the city’s master plan designation for the corridor, but recommended several clarifications and edits to the PDD application, and advised the council that some requested code changes — tree preservation variances and several broad “unstated” code modifications — should be removed or handled as separate requests. The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended denial at its hearing (5–2), staff reported.

More than a dozen neighbors and property owners spoke at the meeting. Speakers described Sawyer Road as a narrow, curving country street used by families and daily walkers and said it already experiences heavy local cut‑through traffic. Neighbors cited two blind curves, children walking to nearby parks, and existing delivery and commercial traffic near business properties along the corridor. “Adding more units, more residents, unfortunately, in that area will cause a real increase in a safety action or some sort of accident to happen,” one resident said.

Developer representative Mohamad Shahadi and his design team responded with a detailed site plan presentation, saying the proposed units would include enclosed garages, interior parking and on‑site amenities, and that the design attempts to limit traffic impacts to Sawyer and nearby streets. Shahadi said the team had revised the plan after staff feedback and noted there are precedents elsewhere in the city for multi‑family and townhouse projects. He also said the applicant has investigated possible future connection points (private easements and a paved but lightly used “crisscross” lane behind nearby commercial properties) that could provide secondary access if neighboring owners agree.

Councilmembers did not take a final vote; this was a first reading and a public hearing. Mayor and staff reminded residents that the item will return to a later meeting for additional consideration, at which point council will have the chance to adopt, amend or reject the ordinance. Several councilmembers encouraged the applicant to work with neighbors and staff on the concerns raised about traffic, visibility, drainage and tree preservation before the second reading.

Why it matters: The project would change the character and density of a portion of Sawyer Road and could increase traffic on a street neighbors describe as narrow and curved. It also tests the city’s checklist for handling PDDs that request multiple variances and separate tree‑preservation actions.

What’s next: The item will return for additional review and a second reading; council and staff asked the applicant to provide clarified setback language, a full tree preservation/mitigation plan or separate variance request, and updated traffic and drainage responses before voting.