Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors press Rowlett council to reject Columbia Estates zoning change; item postponed after executive session
Summary
Multiple residents told the council Sept. 17 they oppose the Columbia Estates development and related park-agreement proposal—citing density, traffic, tree ordinance and drainage concerns—after which the council convened in executive session and unanimously agreed to postpone the item to allow further staff-developer discussions.
Residents of the Mariner Park and nearby neighborhoods used the city’s public-comment period on Sept. 17 to press Rowlett City Council to reject a proposed zoning change and associated park-improvement development agreement for the Columbia Estates/Columbia Park area.
Stacy DuPree said the developer's requested zoning change would allow “75 plus homes” on a site she said previously supported about 35 homes under the comprehensive plan, and she warned that the proposal would contradict the city’s comprehensive development plan, require filling natural drainage channels, violate the tree ordinance and increase traffic. ‘‘I strongly urge the city council to reject the Columbia Estates proposal,’’ DuPree said.
Justin Marston and other neighbors reiterated those concerns and criticized the city for not making the proposed park agreement publicly available prior to the meeting. Marston said the plan would put about 76 homes on 16 acres and that voters had already authorized funding for Columbia Park in a bond package, which he said should not be supplanted by a developer-provided park.
After the public-comment period, council went into executive session under Texas Government Code §551.071 to receive legal advice on item 7H. Developer representatives (John Arnold of the Sportwork Company) asked to postpone the item to allow additional review and discussion with staff. Back in open session, Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Schindler moved — and Councilmember Bridal seconded — to postpone item 7H to a future date so staff and the developer could resolve outstanding language and concerns; council voted unanimously to postpone.
No binding agreement or zoning change was approved Sept. 17. Council directed staff to continue discussions with the developer and to return the matter at a later meeting once outstanding issues — including language in the development agreement and technical engineering concerns raised by residents — are addressed.
