Euless council denies planned-development rezoning for sports-and-bar complex at 1010 West Harwood Road

The Euless City Council voted to deny a planned-development rezoning for a proposed sports-and-restaurant complex at 1010 West Harwood Road after a public hearing dominated by opposition from nearby residents.

The proposal, filed as planned development case 25-01 with ordinance 24 42 before the council, would have allowed indoor futsal courts, outdoor pickleball and shuffleboard courts, and a restaurant-bar in a roughly 2.37-acre site currently zoned C-1. Mayor Pro Tem Stinniferd moved to deny the rezoning; Council Member Eads seconded the motion, and the council approved the denial following public comment and council discussion.

Neighbors described the project as out of scale for the site and raised concerns about traffic at the already busy Harwood Road–Industrial Drive corridor, late-night activity, lighting and noise from outdoor courts and a bar. Vince Bassett, a Covington Hill resident, told the council, “It's zoned currently Charlie 1, C1, which means neighborhood business. That means a donut shop, a nail salon, not a big sports court with a restaurant and a bar and outdoor music and an outdoor pickle court.”

Staff presentation and applicant materials described a conceptual plan for a roughly 25,000-square-foot building with a 10,000-square-foot fenced outdoor yard, indoor futsal courts, outdoor pickleball and shuffleboard courts, and a restaurant/bar component. The applicant proposed parking at a rate of one space per 300 square feet of indoor area and three spaces per outdoor sports court (a level lower than the city’s typical code: restaurants and bars at 1 per 100 square feet, amusement uses at 1 per 200 square feet). Staff noted that if the PD were approved, the applicant would return with a detailed site plan.

The development plan would reduce the number of required front-yard trees compared with code but increase the required landscape buffer between commercial and residential uses from 5 to 15 feet; that buffer would require evergreen trees at least 6 feet tall at planting. The proposal also called for an 8-foot masonry wall along the residential property line nearest the outdoor courts, wall-mounted light fixtures no higher than 10 feet, 25-foot poles for court lighting (with shielding required for light sources within 50 feet of residences) and a building height of about 24 feet. Residents and speakers raised concerns that the conceptual drawings did not reflect existing elevation changes and tree lines.

The Planning and Zoning Commission had forwarded a recommendation of denial on Sept. 2 by a 6–2 vote. Staff reported that public-notification mailings had gone to property owners within 200 feet and that the city had received a petition with 43 signatures in opposition along with additional letters. Several neighbors who spoke at the hearing cited single-entry neighborhoods (Covington Hill was described as “one way in, one way out”), proximity to schools and drainage and wildlife concerns. Ed Turner, a crossing guard and Elmwood-area resident, said he worried that persons left intoxicated could end up in a drainage ditch near a school.

Council members said they had listened closely to residents’ concerns. One council member said they had been leaning one way prior to the hearing but were “now leaning another direction” after hearing public comment.

No formal commitments for mitigation, hours of operation or additional traffic study were adopted by council during the meeting; the matter failed with the council’s motion to deny. Because the PD application was denied at first reading, the project as proposed will not proceed to site-plan approval under the PD framework unless the applicant makes substantive changes and pursues a new application or appeals the council action.