Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Subdivision Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves first readings for 29-lot Shady Oaks development; neighbors won concessions

3020370 · April 15, 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

Council approved first readings on a land-use map amendment and RPUD rezoning for a proposed 29-lot subdivision at 1835 Shady Oaks. The developer agreed to a 50-foot setback on Shady Oaks, additional tree-preservation work and to investigate gated 114 access for construction.

The Southlake City Council on April 15 approved first-reading actions to change the consolidated future land use plan and rezone roughly 20.6 acres at 1835 Shady Oaks Drive for a planned residential development.

The developer27s concept calls for 29 single-family lots, including four 1-acre lots along Shady Oaks and smaller lots fronting the SH-114 frontage road. At the Planning & Zoning hearing the developer agreed to several concessions to address neighborhood concerns; the council27s first-reading approval carried with conditions.

Why it matters: The property had been designated 22office commercial22 with an optional multi-tenant office overlay. The council27s vote moves the parcel to residential land uses and would remove the optional office designation, allowing the developer to proceed with a residential planned unit development (RPUD) process that will return for a second reading.

What was approved (first readings) - Land-use plan amendment: Change the parcel27s designation from office commercial (with multi-tenant office overlay) to a mix of medium-density and low-density residential and remove the optional multi-tenant office overlay on the property. - Zoning and development plan (RPUD): Approve a residential plan with 29 single-family lots (density about 1.4 units per acre), a proposed 50-foot buffer yard along Shady Oaks, 25-foot buffer and 25-foot setback measured from the SH-114 right of way, and tree-preservation and landscape plans to be refined in the planning stage.

Neighborhood concerns and developer responses Residents who live on and near Shady Oaks urged stronger protections for the 22wooded, rural character22 of the corridor and asked for sound mitigation along SH-114. Planning staff noted the property has extensive tree cover; the developer provided a tree-preservation analysis showing about 20% of the existing tree canopy marked for preservation in the conceptual survey and agreed to refine the preservation plan during the permit process.

To address traffic and neighborhood concerns the developer agreed to: - Explore construction staging that would route construction access from the SH-114 frontage road rather than Shady Oaks, to limit heavy truck traffic on the neighborhood street. - Investigate gated access options for the SH-114 access point, including required stacking distance so vehicles do not queue onto the frontage road; council asked the applicant to return with specific gating options at second reading. - Provide a more detailed landscape and buffering plan for SH-114 that favors vegetation (and irrigation options) rather than a long masonry wall; the applicant said it would present alternatives at second reading.

Council action and next steps Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Randy Williamson moved approval of first readings of both the land-use amendment and zoning/development plan, with the conditions above. Both first-reading motions carried (land-use amendment unanimous; zoning first reading carried 6-0). Staff and the applicant will return with refined landscape plans, tree-preservation surveys and gating/queuing options for a second-reading vote.

Evidence: Director Killough presented the application and the planning commission recommended approval with conditions. Public comment included both neighbors supporting residential reuse of the site and residents who asked for larger minimum lot sizes; the applicant said the plan had been shaped in consultation with both neighborhoods and P&Z recommendations.