Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council pauses Lakeside East rezoning after hours of testimony and 300+-unit proposal

2892370 · April 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Developer Realty Capital asked the Flower Mound Town Council to amend the Lakeside DFW master plan to transfer 326 residential entitlements to a new Lakeside East parcel across FM 2499; after hours of testimony from retailers, residents and traffic experts, council tabled the item at the applicant’s request.

Developer Realty Capital presented a proposal to amend the Lakeside DFW master plan and rezone a roughly 22-acre parcel east of International Parkway into the Lakeside mixed-use district. The proposal would move 326 residential entitlements from built portions of Lakeside to a new mixed-use block called Lakeside East and authorize a mix of office, hotel, multifamily and townhomes, including structured parking and a minimum 35,000 square feet of nonresidential space on the frontage before any multifamily certificate of occupancy is issued.

The applicant, Jimmy Archie of Realty Capital, told council the plan is intended to extend Lakeside’s walkable core across FM 2499 and to attract higher-end restaurants, office tenants and a hotel. “Why are we bringing this forward? Why do we think it makes sense for this particular piece of land?” Archie asked council, saying Lakeside’s retailers and restaurants draw customers from across the region and that the eastern corner is the last corner of the intersection remaining undeveloped.

Town planner Lehi reviewed the ordinance changes proposed for the Lakeside mixed-use code, including two subzones (MUTMR‑3 for major roadway transition and MUN‑2 as a neighborhood subzone), modified permitted uses (e.g., auto-oriented uses and drive‑throughs treated more restrictively than a typical C‑2 zone), and building‑height adjustments for two specific buildings (applicant seeks up to five and six stories for two buildings fronting FM 2499). Lehi also summarized parkland and open‑space credits the developer proposed and noted the Parks Board recommended approval after asking for amenity clarifications.

The project attracted extensive public comment in two directions. Dozens of residents and a wide range of restaurant and retail brokers, property owners and Lakeside tenants urged approval, saying the proposal would deliver restaurants and services Flower Mound currently lacks and would increase tax revenue. Jake Sherrington of SHOP Companies and tenant representatives said higher‑end restaurant operators are already interested and that the mixed‑use plan — not a strip‑center alternative — is what attracts those users.

Opponents said the reallocation of entitlements was a “shell game” that simply moved density rather than creating net new housing, and they raised traffic, safety and notification concerns. Several Cross‑Timbers and nearby neighborhood residents said they had not received mailed notifications they expected. Stephen Wood, a nearby property owner, told council he had observed creek bank erosion after tree clearing on the Knights Landing property and opposed moving apartment entitlements across the street without more safeguards.

Planning & Zoning considered the application earlier and voted 4–2 to recommend denial; council heard the formal public hearing and, after deliberation, voted to table the master plan amendment and rezoning at the applicant’s request. The applicant asked to return to council on April 21 to continue the conversation.

Why it matters: The Lakeside project has created a concentration of higher‑value property and sales tax revenue in southern Flower Mound. The council must weigh whether shifting existing residential entitlements across FM 2499 preserves the Lakeside vision and the town’s zoning intent, while also managing traffic and neighborhood impacts.

What’s next: Council tabled the item until a date requested by the applicant; staff said no additional public‑hearing notice is required because the hearing was held. The item can be brought back to a future council meeting when the applicant requests reconsideration.