Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council continues debate, pushes contested R2→R3 rezoning to Dec. 3 after split vote
Summary
The Nacogdoches City Council delayed a decision on a proposed rezoning of seven lots in the Larry Wade subdivision from R2 (single‑family) to R3 (two‑family) after a split vote; owner Clifton White said he plans for for‑sale, condominium‑style duplexes to increase affordable ownership, while neighbors raised concerns about density, parking and neighborhood character.
The Nacogdoches City Council on Nov. 5 continued a heated public hearing on a requested rezoning of seven lots along Power Street from R2 (single‑family) to R3 (two‑family), after a motion to approve failed on a split vote and the council voted unanimously to continue the matter to Dec. 3.
City planning staff presented the application, filed by property owner Clifton White, saying the request would permit up to five duplexes on roughly one acre currently platted as seven lots. Staff told the council that Planning & Zoning had unanimously recommended approval and that 25 notices were sent to nearby property owners; staff reported one written objection citing concerns about density, parking and water/sewer infrastructure.
The applicant, Clifton White, addressed the council and described his local ties and development plan. "I'm trying to build a condominium‑style, two‑story something that they hadn't seen before in their neighborhood," White said, adding he intends for the units to be sold rather than rented and that he would use deed restrictions or a homeowners association to maintain the properties. White told the council his goals include increasing ownership and improving the neighborhood tax base.
Several council members pressed staff on technical details and neighborhood impacts. Staff said R3 zoning allows duplexes but remains within the comprehensive plan's single‑family designation, and that engineering staff confirmed water and sewer capacity for the proposed development. Council members asked about lot‑depth variances, the narrowness of two lots that could be combined to host a duplex, and how city ownership of adjacent parcels affects notification thresholds.
Public commenters included a longtime resident who voiced support for the applicant and urged investment in the neighborhood; a speaker also asked the council to consider adding permanent restrooms at Robert McMan Park.
After discussion a council member moved to approve the rezoning; the motion failed on a split roll call (the transcript records the result as "three against, two for"). The council then approved, unanimously, a motion to continue the public hearing to Dec. 3 so the applicant and the affected council representative can meet with neighbors and provide additional information on assurances that units will be for sale, not rental, and other clarifications.
Next steps: the public hearing will resume at the Dec. 3 council meeting; council members said they want clearer commitments about ownership, maintenance arrangements and any necessary development assurances before a final vote.
