Southlake planning commission recommends denial of Johnson Road rezoning after strong neighborhood opposition

The City of Southlake Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of two related requests for the 2530 Johnson Road property: a consolidated future land-use map amendment (CP25-0002) and a zoning and development plan (ZA25-52) that would have allowed three single-family lots to be developed along Remuda Court and Johnson Road.

Commissioners signaled the decision followed substantial neighborhood opposition and legal and access questions raised during public comment. The motion to deny each item carried 5-0.

The matter mattered to neighbors because the applicant’s plan would have extended access from the applicant’s parcel into the end of Remuda Court, a cul-de-sac serving five households. Neighbors and Johnson Place HOA representatives said the subdivision’s covenants and restrictive (CCR) provisions require a 75% HOA vote to amend plat or access provisions and that the HOA has not approved such changes. Susan French, a Remuda Court resident, told the commission the applicant’s plan “couldn’t look more uncharacteristic of either Johnson Place” and that “the plan details that were submitted did not clearly show that there is over 10 feet of space between their lot and our street.” Lawrence Langford, another Remuda Court resident, said allowing the access would “permanently alter our established quiet cul de sac.”

Staff told the commission the application proposed changing the future land-use from low-density to medium-density residential and adding an RPUD zoning to match adjacent Johnson Place. The presentation noted 24 opposition letters were submitted, with 12 of those within 300 feet and a reported opposition rate “just under 64%” among properties within 200 feet of the site. Applicant Curtis Young of the Sage Group said the proposal would create three larger lots than those in the nearby subdivision and that “this is consistent with the neighborhood,” adding the project would replace a rundown house with three new homes.

Commissioners pressed the applicant on access and neighborhood support during deliberations. Multiple commissioners said they were reluctant to approve a land-use change when a large share of immediate neighbors objected. One commissioner noted the site had been examined in prior land-use exercises and said such changes should be addressed in the consolidated future land-use process as well.

After the votes, Chairman Dan Kubiak explained the applicant could bring the applications to city council. He said the applicant “has the ability to take this recommendation to the city council potentially to their next city council meeting” and referenced the council calendar for follow-up.

The commission’s action is a recommendation to City Council; final decisions on CP25-0002 and ZA25-52 will rest with council members if the applicant pursues the matter further.

Votes at a glance: The commission voted 5-0 to recommend denial of CP25-0002 (land-use amendment) and 5-0 to recommend denial of ZA25-52 (zoning/development plan).