To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Alexis Russell, Planner I
Subject:
Title
PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a request for Rosebury, a Planned Development Zoning Change from Commercial (C) and Single-Family Residential - 36,000 square-foot lots (SF-36) to Planned Development - Mixed Use (MU) consisting of 21 residential lots, 2 commercial lots, and 3 open space lots (1.33 acres open space), on approximately 9.2 acres (7.53 acres residential and 1.67 acres commercial) of land, legally described as Lot 2 LESS HS, Block 1 of the L. L. Mc Donnell subdivision, and a portion of Lot 1R1, Block 1 of the L. L. Mc Donnell subdivision, and Abstract 29 Tract 5B04 & 27523 of the Richard F. Allen Survey, located approximately 240 feet east of the Johnson Road and N. Main Street intersection, and addressed as 550, 600, and 700 N. Main Street. Sage Group, Inc., Applicant. Mark and Chryste Keel, Owner. (ZONE-2501-0002)
Background:
This item was tabled and the Public Hearing continued from the March 25, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to the April 8, 2025 agenda at the Applicant’s request.
The Applicant is requesting to rezone the property from SF-36 and Commercial to Planned Development - Mixed Use with the intention of subdividing it into 21 single-family residential 8,400 square-foot minimum lots, 2 commercial lots, and 3 open space lots.
The Applicant has provided a concept plan for consideration with the Planned Development proposal.
Surrounding Zoning:
North: Light Industrial (Samantha Springs)
South: Old Town Keller (OTK) / OTK Monument Sign Overlay
East: SF-36 / KISD
West: Katy Road
Current Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) Designation: Patio/Garden/Townhomes - 5,000 to 7,999 square-foot lots (PGT) and Retail/Commercial (RTC)
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: PGT and Retail/Commercial
South: Retail/Commercial
East: Semi-Public
West: Retail/Commercial with Tech/Flex Overlay
The Applicant is also requesting a Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) amendment from PGT/RTC to High-Density Single Family - 8,000 to 14,999 square-foot lots (HD-SF). The FLUP amendment will be on the agenda as a separate item.
The PD proposes the following criteria for the non-residential portion:
Allowable Uses:
The Applicant proposes uses that are allowed in the Commercial and Retail zoning districts, with the same conditions.
Architectural Standards:
The Applicant proposes building materials in earth tones, natural colors of stone, metal and wood or variations of gray, with a minimum of 80% masonry or metal (no more than 20% metal), up to 20% wood.
Site Plan:
A concept plan was provided that shows a potential layout of the two commercial lots. Prior to approval for construction, a Detailed Site Plan shall have to be approved by the City Council, showing detailed plans, elevations, building materials and proposed uses.
Lot Size: Exception to UDC requirement
The PD concept plan shows two non-residential lots of 27,370 and 33,050 square-feet. The minimum lot size in the base zoning district (Commercial) is 33,000 square-feet per UDC Section 8.23(4).
Setbacks and Buffers: Exception to UDC requirement
Front setback: 30’ minimum, along US-377 and internal street (meets UDC)
Side setback: 10’ (UDC Section 8.23(4)(b)(4) requires a 60’ setback when adjacent to residential properties)
Rear setback: 10’ minimum (UDC Section 8.23(4)(b)(3) requires minimum 20’)
Landscape buffer adjacent to residential: 15’ (UDC Section 9.03(F)(1)(c) requires a minimum of 30’ landscape buffer adjacent to residential properties)
Signs and Lighting:
The Applicant intends to meet the UDC standards for signage and lighting.
The PD proposes the following criteria for the residential portion:
Lots:
Minimum lot size: 8,400 SF
Average lot size: 9,800 SF
Minimum lot width: 65’ measured from property line; 60’ measured from building line on curves/cul-de-sacs
SF-8.4 requirement for minimum lot width: 65’ and UDC Section 5.13(C) allows width at the front and rear building setback lines to be averaged but requires lot width at the front building setback line and frontage of the public/private street to not be less than require by the particular zoning district. UDC Section 9.11(A) requires a minimum lot width of 60’ on all lots with predominate frontage on the curved radius of a dedicated cul-de-sac street.
Minimum lot depth: 110’ (meets SF-8.4 requirement of 110’)
Lot Coverage: Exception to UDC requirements
The Applicant proposes a maximum lot coverage of 50% by main buildings and 60% including accessory buildings, driveways and parking areas.
This exceeds the maximum lot coverage requirements of no more than 30% by main buildings and not more than 50% including accessory buildings, driveways and parking areas in the base zoning of SF-8.4 (UDC Section 4(c)).
Setbacks: Exceptions to UDC requirement
Front yard: 25’ (meets SF-8.4 requirement)
Side yard: 6.5’. Minimum separation between structures shall be 13’. Minimum side yard on a corner lot adjacent to a street shall be 15’. (SF-8.4 requires side yard to be 10% of lot width but no more than 15’)
Rear yard: 15’ (meets SF-8.4 requirement)
Minimum Dwelling Size:
The Applicant proposes a minimum dwelling size of 2,500 SF (exceeds SF-8.4 requirement of 1,400 SF).
Garages: Exception to UDC requirement
The Applicant proposes J-swing garages as a requirement on a minimum 50% of the lots. These homes shall also be allowed an additional single, front-facing garage with a maximum of 72 SF of garage door exposure to the street, if located a minimum of 45' behind the property line or right-of-way, whichever is closer.
The remaining lots may have front-facing garages (garage doors facing the street shall not exceed a total of 144 SF) with a minimum setback of 25’.
UDC Section 9.02 (C) requires that all homes provide a minimum two-car garage and permits front-facing garages in Planned Developments and properties platted prior to 1992. An attached front-facing garage with 144 SF garage frontage is permitted if located a minimum 100' behind the property line or right-of-way (whichever is closer) or located a minimum 45’ behind the property line with 72 SF of garage frontage.
Architectural Standards:
The Applicant proposes a minimum of 80% masonry (which includes brick, stone, or cementitious siding) per elevation and 100% masonry on front elevations.
See Exhibit A for additional standards related architectural ‘features’ on front elevations.
Open Space:
The Applicant proposes three areas of open space to meet the 15% open space requirement in all Planned Developments. (UDC Section 8.27). The open space totals 1.33 acres, or 17.66% of the residential gross acreage.
A Homeowners’ Association shall be required and will be responsible for all open space areas within the residential portion of the project.
In addition to the open space, the Applicant intends to meet all UDC requirements for landscaping on individual residential lots.
Screening and Fencing: Exception to UDC requirement
The Applicant proposes the following fence materials:
• An 8’ pre-stained cedar fence with metal poles, top cap, top side trim along the northern boundary of the residential lots (exception requested); and
• A 6’ iron open-style fence with masonry columns on the eastern boundary of the residential lots and adjacent to open spaces (exception requested); and
• A 6’ pre-stained wood fence along the existing residential behind Lots 1 and 3-5; and
• A 6’ masonry wall between the commercial lots and residential subdivision and between Lot 1 and an open space (Section UDC 9.07(G) requires open style fencing when adjacent to open space).
All fence styles and locations are shown on the Wall/Fence Diagram on the proposed concept plan.
UDC Section 9.09(D) requires masonry screening when a single-family development is constructed adjacent to a developed non-residential use. The responsibility of constructing the wall is determined by the phasing of the development.
Drainage and Utilities:
A preliminary drainage and utility plan was included in the application documents. The Applicant will be required to provide a full set of civil plans with the Detailed Site Plan that meet UDC requirements.
Ingress and Egress:
Rosebury proposes two points of ingress/egress: one off North Main Street/U.S. Hwy. 377, and one off Johnson Road. The entry/exits meet the requirements of the UDC. The Applicant will have to coordinate with TXDOT to construct the entrance off U.S. Hwy. 377.
Trip Generation:
The Applicant provided a Trip Generation Form for the proposed development.
Project Phasing:
The Applicant proposes to develop the property in two phases; the residential portion will be phase one while the commercial portion, will either be co-developed with the adjacent property to the south, or when market conditions warrant.
Summary:
Section 4.03 (A) of the UDC states that when considering an amendment to the zoning regulations or zoning change request, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following factors:
1) Appropriateness of all the uses permitted by the proposed change for the immediate area concerned, and the relationship of the proposed uses to the general area and to the City as a whole.
2) Agreement of the proposed change with any existing or proposed plans for providing streets, water supply, sanitary sewers, and other utilities to the area.
3) The amount of vacant land currently classified for similar development in the City, and any special circumstances that may make a substantial part of such vacant land unavailable for development.
4) The rate at which land in the same zoning classification has recently been developed, particularly in the vicinity of the proposed change.
5) Effect on other areas designated for similar development if the proposed amendment is approved.
6) Conformity with the goals and objectives for future developments within the Future Land Use Plan for the City of Keller.
7) Any other factors which will substantially affect the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the citizens of the City of Keller.
Citizen Input:
On March 13, 2025, the City mailed out 27 letters of notification for this Public Hearing to all property owners within three-hundred feet (300’) of the subject site. A public hearing notice sign was posted on the site.
The Applicant also sent out their own letter of notification to neighboring properties.
Staff has received no public feedback regarding this request.
Alternatives:
The Planning and Zoning Commission has the following options when considering a Zoning Change:
• Recommend approval as submitted.
• Recommend approval with modifications or additional amendment(s).
• Table the agenda item to a specific date with clarification of intent and purpose.
• Recommend denial.
City Council Action:
If the Planning and Zoning Commission takes action and makes a recommendation on this agenda item, then this Zoning Change application will be scheduled for City Council action on May 6, 2025.