Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors oppose Alta Landing rezoning; developer and staff back Planned Development as remedy to nonconformities
Summary
A Nov. 19 public hearing drew neighbors who said the Alta Landing apartment complex contains multiple Unified Development Code violations and urged denial of a rezoning to Planned Development; the developer and staff argued the PD requires a specific set of improvements (fence, landscape, dumpster relocation, guardrail, tree-replacement fund) with deadlines and inspections and warned that leaving the property nonconforming would risk loss of taxable value. Council voted 4–1 to move into executive session to consult the attorney before taking action.
Dozens of residents and Wood Partners representatives spent more than an hour debating a proposed rezoning for Alta Landing (3100 Joplin Road) at the Kennedale City Council meeting on Nov. 19.
Neighbors told council the apartment complex was built nonconforming to the city’s Unified Development Code and that multiple promised improvements (privacy fencing, parking corrections, retaining-wall compliance and other items) remain undone. “We are asking our city council to be the sheriffs that Kennedale also badly needs and to clean up the city staff and start holding them accountable,” one resident said, citing density, wall height and parking concerns.
Representatives for Wood Partners and their attorney presented the PD as a negotiated solution that would require more than ordinary MF zoning: an adopted PD site plan and ordinance would require the developer to relocate the dumpster away from neighbors’ property lines, install additional screening and eight-foot fencing, provide a guardrail and a tree-replacement fund (up to $1,200 reimbursements for eligible adjacent homeowners), and begin and complete a list of improvements on a fixed schedule subject to inspection. The applicant’s team said the project had an appraised value near $50 million and argued a lack of conforming zoning would make the asset difficult to refinance or sell, reducing long-term taxable value for the city and school district.
Staff recommended the PD as a path to hold the developer to an enforceable list of improvements. The city confirmed that the rezoning case met protest thresholds and would require a supermajority for approval. Before taking a final vote, the council voted 4–1 to convene in executive session to consult with the city attorney (pursuant to the code citation read into the record). That session began at 7:34 p.m.
Why it matters: The decision will determine whether Alta Landing is subject to a binding PD ordinance that forces specified remedies and inspection timelines or remains a nonconforming asset with attendant market and enforcement risks. Neighbors asked the council to require fixes before agreeing to PD; the developer said the PD is the only practical, enforceable mechanism to ensure permanent compliance.
What’s next: Council entered executive session for legal consultation; any return to open session and votes on the ordinance will be recorded in subsequent minutes.
