Planning Commission denies rezoning request near Country Club Road and Cemetery Road

The Planning Commission voted to deny a rezoning request for a parcel near Country Club Road and Cemetery Road after neighbors and commissioners raised concerns about drainage, road conditions and alignment with the city's future land use map.

Nearby landowners spoke against the request during the public hearing. "My biggest concerns I have are drainage," said Jeff Pixler, who lives immediately west of the proposed site, warning that his property sits low and could be affected by floodwater coming off the bypass. Casey Fox, who owns about 60 acres northwest of the site, told commissioners that Cemetery Road has severe potholes and narrow sections that make passage difficult and costly; he said the area lacks basic infrastructure such as fiber internet and that more development should wait until roads and services are improved.

The applicant, identified in staff remarks as Mr. Ryder, characterized the proposal as senior living duplexes and said he planned 10 duplexes (20 units). He said drainage would be addressed when the project is platted and improvements are engineered and estimated the full development cost in the neighborhood of $2.2 million to $2.5 million. He also said he intended to include covenants or CC&Rs for the senior-living development if it moved forward.

Commissioners discussed whether an R2 residential zoning designation fit the site, which lies amid A1 agricultural zoning and is shown on the city's future land use map as part of an industrial corridor further east. Several commissioners said the current future land use map and zoning pattern made an R2 rezoning inappropriate and raised the risk that a rezoned parcel could later be developed for a different use than the applicant described. Commissioners also cited persistent infrastructure shortcomings in the corridor, including water-pressure concerns and dangerous road geometry on Cemetery Road.

A motion to deny the rezoning passed on a recorded vote: Commissioner Kerr — yes; Commissioner Jackson — yes; Vice Chair Knight — abstain; Chairman — yes. The denial means the property will remain in its current A1 zoning; the applicant may pursue development rights permitted under that designation or return with a different proposal in the future.

The commission did not take additional steps directing staff to prepare a different zoning proposal or to redraw the future land use map; commissioners noted that map changes would be a separate planning process.