Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Aldermen approve first reading of rezoning at Second Creek Bridge amid resident concerns

Smithville Board of Aldermen · July 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Smithville aldermen approved first reading of Bill No. 3072-25 to rezone property at the northeast corner near the Second Creek Bridge and Lowman Road. Neighbors warned about lot-density and the absence of a site plan; the measure passed first reading 4–1–1.

Smithville aldermen on July 15 approved, on first reading, a rezoning ordinance for property at the northeast corner of the Second Creek Bridge and Lowman Road.

The board voted 4–1–1 to approve Bill No. 3072-25 on first reading; Alderman Ron Russell voted No and Alderman Dan Hartman abstained. Mayor Boley declared the bill approved on first reading.

Why it matters: the change would adjust the parcel’s zoning designation to R‑ID, a moderate-density residential district. Development Director Jack Hendrix told the board R‑ID typically allows 50‑foot‑wide lots and the city’s comprehensive plan describes the category as roughly one to five homes per acre; by contrast, higher-density designations—six to 18 units per acre—are intended for multi‑unit buildings.

During public comment two nearby residents urged the board to slow the change until a plan is presented. Resident Cindy Hadley (520 Second Creek Road) said she was concerned about the number of homes allowed per acre and about a proposed dog park near her property. Roberta Lowman (16251 Lowman Road) said she was troubled by rezoning before a site plan had been shown and raised concerns about “11200 square foot homes” being built around her property.

Jack Hendrix responded to questions from the board by clarifying the R‑ID lot-size and density ranges in the comprehensive plan; he described R‑ID as moderate density rather than the higher-density apartment classification.

The measure passed only on first reading; the record does not specify a date for further readings or final action. Officials did not provide a site plan during the meeting.