Planning commission reviews UDC zoning map, warns rezoning could make park uses nonconforming

The Planning and Zoning Commission on July 15 reviewed the final step of adopting the Unified Development Code zoning map and debated whether not having a dedicated parks zoning district leaves town parks adequately protected.

Leslie Knight, Director of Development Neighborhood Services, told commissioners the UDC codified new districts adopted by City Council in March and that the zoning map applies those districts to parcels across Addison. Knight said staff and a consultant developed the map with input from a 12-person advisory committee and multiple public meetings.

Knight emphasized staff chose not to create a single parks zoning district because Addison’s parks vary widely in purpose and context. "We were not going to create a one-size-fits-all parks district that would end up requiring many small, tailored districts," Knight said. Instead, staff proposed applying districts compatible with adjacent uses to limit nonconformity.

Commissioners pressed on the practical effects of rezoning parks. Knight explained that rezoning Addison Circle Park to a residential district (for example, R-1 or R-2) could make existing uses such as a café or farmers market nonconforming, which could limit future reinvestment or operations. "Rezoning to residential would make cafes and markets nonconforming, potentially prohibiting those uses," Knight said, using Java and Hops at Addison Circle Park as an example of a use that could become nonconforming under a residential classification.

Knight also reviewed the UDC's neighborhood transition provisions, which tie allowable building height to setback from adjacent residential zones. She said the transition rules are intended to reduce impacts where taller buildings are near homes.

Staff’s comparator-city review of 13 cities identified by council found none had a dedicated parks zoning district; Knight said this made Addison’s approach "not unique to the region." Knight further noted that state law and the town charter require a referendum and public process to sell public parkland, adding that any change in park status would also need to align with long-range planning such as the comprehensive plan.

During questions, commissioners asked whether the primary driver of the earlier disagreement over the map was the potential creation of nonconforming properties. Knight said nonconformity was an important consideration but not the only factor shaping proposed district assignments.

Knight presented several proposed conversions: certain Quorum-area parcels now shown as Industrial 1 would be revised toward light industrial or commercial general; some town-owned parks and facilities would be assigned districts that match surrounding uses (for example, several parks proposed as R-2, Wynwood and Celestial park areas proposed as R-1, and Addison Circle Park proposed as M-4 consistent with adjacent mixed uses). Knight also said notices were mailed to property owners and published in The Dallas Morning News; staff received three inquiries with questions but no formal opposition statements.

Town staff clarified that the Addison Recreation and Open Space Master Plan identifies parks and supports their intended use but does not, on its own, formally dedicate land as parkland; a formal dedication or other legal mechanism is required for some protections. Town staff member Sarah added that a "beneficial designation" or other legal steps can create the practical protections of parkland even if zoning does not explicitly label a parcel as a parks district.

Next steps: staff expects to bring the zoning map discussion back for action at the regular meeting process that follows the work session schedule; Knight told commissioners the comprehensive-plan discussion has been delayed about four weeks and will be presented in August.