Temporary Restraining Order Granted in Favor of Neighbors Against Pepper Square Rezoning
Share News:
Hours before the Dallas City Council was slated to vote on the rezoning of a 15.5-acre mixed-use development at Preston and Belt Line roads, a judge granted a temporary restraining order to the Save Pepper Square Neighborhood Association.
The action means that the council can’t vote on the matter for at least two weeks while the legal process continues, residents involved in the legal filing told CandysDirt.com.
Opponents of the Pepper Square project in Far North Dallas have expressed concerns about traffic, building height, and housing density. Here’s a link to the 117-page filing which names all Dallas plan commissioners and council members. Members of the neighborhood association are alleging that the rezoning wasn’t properly noticed, which is a violation of city code.
Plano attorney Anthony Ricciardelli, who is representing the plaintiff Save Pepper Square Neighborhood Association, said he believes that “rigorously adhering to notice requirements is important in an open and transparent process so that citizens’ voices can be heard.”
“We are pleased that the Court granted a temporary restraining order halting today’s vote and will continue asking the Court to order the City of Dallas to follow its own notice requirements,” Ricciardelli told CandysDirt.com.
City Attorney Tammy Palomino confirmed that the Pepper Square matter would be removed from Wednesday’s council agenda, pending another court hearing next week. The matter is scheduled for 9 a.m. Friday, Nov. 1 in Dallas County’s 68th Civil District Court before Judge Martin Hoffman.
Masterplan consultants Lee Kleinman and Andrew Ruegg have taken the project — which originally proposed 2,300 housing units — through numerous iterations. Now developer Henry S. Miller is asking for a maximum of 984 units, with 116 designated for retirement housing. The City Plan Commission voted 12-2 in August to recommend the project for approval. It has also been supported by staff.
“Public benefits include tailored design standards, enhanced open space, upgraded sidewalks, additional landscaping, transit shelters, and a trail connection to White Rock Trail,” the case report states. “In addition, mixed-income housing is to be provided to further increase the proposed density, all within the bounds of the MU-2 district standards. Certain land uses are proposed to be prohibited to support the vision for the shopping center turned mixed-use development.
The project is in District 11, represented by Councilwoman Jaynie Schultz. The council member has taken heat from the Pepper Square Neighborhood Coalition, and announced in July that she would not seek re-election next year.
When reached for comment Wednesday afternoon, a consultant with Masterplan said the most common reason that notification signs go down is because opponents take them down. He declined further comment.
9 Comments
Leave a Comment
This is another example why we need to pass the resolution currently on the ballot that allows citizens to file lawsuits against the city. Dallas should have to be accountable when they do not follow their own rules and procedures. We have appointees that are termed out and continue to make decisions not in the best interests of our citizens. We need to start somewhere!
Kathy, I agree entirely. I’m tired of the talking point, “It will bankrupt the City.” NOT IF THE CITY OFFICIALS DO WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO AND OBEY THE LAWS–MANY AND MOST OF WHICH THEY CREATED! The citizens of Dallas currently have no recourse when a City Counsel runs amok. I have attended City Council and town hall meetings, written my council representative numerous times, and all for what? Totally ignored. And I am not alone. Many of my neighbors have done the same thing. And so I went and voted YES to this proposition!
I agree. Thanks
Ugh. Bunch of people who love their lots and hate their fellow citizens.
We could save taxpayers a lot of money on lawsuits if District 11 had a City Councilperson who actually listened to her constituents. For over two years, Jaynie Schultz has fought against District 11—never yielding, never advocating for constituents to the developer, and never making an effort to find a compromise. Her unwavering support for the developers, at the expense of her own constituents, is appalling and frankly why she was forced to resign.
And now, with her decision not to run for reelection, we’re left in an even worse spot—Jaynie’s free to continue her destructive ways. It’s a frustrating situation, to say the least. Kathy is right: Pepper Square is the perfect example of why Prop S makes sense. If we can’t get representation on the council, lawsuits seem to be the only way to get their attention.
Maybe the TRO will push this council vote to closer to city council elections. Maybe then reps will be interested in siding with the will of the people?
Good news! The District 11 residents deserve to have this “plan” negated. The citizens postion were ignored by their representative and the Planning committee. I hope the citizens win! I hope the HERO propositions pass!
Maybe if council members weren’t so shady they wouldn’t be so worried. And if the city manager actually did a good job he/she wouldn’t be so worried about a paycut.
Jeeezzuz……and I thought the screaming NIMBY banshees of north oak cliff were bad. You guys are gonna run off what looks like a real windfall for your property values all to defend……what exactly? a mostly empty strip mall in a part of town where the traffic already blows?
As a person that has benefited from the increase in my property value because nearby density made my adjacent single family home much more valuable, the logic of the no crowd escapes me.
Should the NIMBYs win I sincerely hope they enjoy their hard won vape stores, Korean tug joints, and empty store fronts
“As a person that has benefited from the increase in my property value because nearby density made my adjacent single family home much more valuable, the logic of the no crowd escapes me.”
I’d like to see some proof of this assertion. Without specifying where the property is, what the comps are, and the time frame of the increase this is a dubious assertion at best.