Jun 02, 2025 City Council

TAKE A WEEK OFF, I'M TELLING YOU. RIGHT NOW. ALL RIGHT.

[00:00:06]

WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, AND IT'S 6:31 P.M.. FIRST UP, EVERYTHING IN THIS ROOM CAN BE HEARD BECAUSE OF THOSE LOVELY MICROPHONES UP THERE.

SO DON'T SAY IT IF YOU DON'T INTEND TO BROADCAST IT.

I THINK FIRST UP HERE WE HAVE OUR WORKSHOP SESSION, WHICH IS DISCUSSION OF CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. YOU WANT TO DO CLOSED AFTER THAT OR BEFORE WE CAN GO THROUGH IT IF WE GO BACK TO SO SO YEAH.

SO WE'RE GOING TO DO CONSENT AGENDA DISCUSSION REAL QUICK.

AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BREAK INTO CLOSED SESSION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.

OR JUST TO CLARIFY FOR. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 5.51.071 CONSULTATION ITEM NUMBER TWO. ITEM NUMBER TWO.

OKAY. YOU WANT. YOU WANT ME TO DO THAT AFTER WE GO THROUGH ALL OF IT? FOR SURE. EITHER WAY, YOU WANT TO DO IT. THEN WE'LL DO IT THAT WAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THE THE AGENDA.

FIRST UP, I'VE GOT THE INVOCATION, COUNCILMEMBER MEREDITH. I'VE GOT A PLEDGE TO THE FLAGS.

COUNCIL MEMBER TROYER. I DON'T SEE ONE PUBLIC HEARING.

SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THAT? PUBLIC HEARING.

NUMBER TWO, THIS IS THE REALM SUB-DISTRICT PLAN DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT.

AND INDEED, IS THERE A CITIZENS FORUM ITEM CONSENT AGENDA? IT'S AN AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER THREE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. ITEM NUMBER FOUR.

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH LJ ENGINEERING.

THIS IS FOR KING ARTHUR. THANK YOU, THANK YOU MA'AM.

ITEM FIVE RESOLUTION CITY COUNCIL RELATING TO DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY SECRETARY.

THEN WE HAVE CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF REPORTS. WE DO HAVE OUR CITY SEMIANNUAL REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

THAT REPORT IS IN YOUR PACKET. SO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN THAT.

AND THEN DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER CLOSED SESSION? YES.

OH YEAH. ONE ITEM GOING BEFORE ITEM FIVE. SUPER.

THERE IS NO OTHER DISCUSSION OF CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION PER 551 .071. OKAY.

[A. Invocation - Councilmember William Meridith]

WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. IT IS 7 P.M.. FIRST UP ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER MEREDITH WITH THE INVOCATION.

PLEASE JOIN ME IN A MOMENT OF SILENT CONTEMPLATION.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER TRAYER. PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGES TO THE U.S.

[B. Pledge to the American and Texas Flags - Councilmember Bob Troyer]

UNDER THE TEXAS FLAG, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD.

ONE INDIVISIBLE. ALL RIGHT. WE DO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL MATERIAL TO GO OVER IN OUR WORKSHOP.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PUT THE REGULAR SESSION ON PAUSE.

WE'LL BE BACK IN A MOMENT. COUNSEL, IF WE COULD GO BACK AND FINISH UP THE THE WORKSHOP PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL WE'LL COME BACK INTO THIS ROOM.

[H. Return to Workshop Session if Necessary]

OR YOU CAN SIT IN THAT ROOM AS WELL.

[00:07:03]

SO, KIND OF THE EVOLUTION OF WHERE WE STARTED BACK IN 2017, 2018 LAUNCHED THIS PROGRAM TO REDUCE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT MOTELS AND THE BYE WEEK.

PLACES LIKE THAT. IF YOU THINK OF THE THINGS LIKE AND THE NAME IS JUST COMPLETELY YEAH, BUDGET SUITES IN THOSE TYPE OF LOCATIONS AND IT WAS LIMITED TO JUST HOTEL AND APARTMENTS. ALTHOUGH THE AUTHORITY OF THIS DOES NOT JUST DO TO COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES, YOU CAN MOVE IT TO RESIDENTIAL AS WELL, BUT WE FOCUSED ON JUST THOSE.

IN 2020 WITH THE START OF COVID, WE PULLED BACK ON IT AND IT WAS PAUSED.

AND THEN 2023, IN THE SUMMER OF 2023, THE PROGRAM WAS STEPPED BACK UP AND REVAMPED.

HOWEVER, WE WE CAME AND WE SPOKE TO YOU ABOUT IT, BUT WE HAD TO PAUSE IT BECAUSE OF SOME ISSUES WE HAD PULLING OUR NUMBERS THROUGH OUR CAD AND OUR MS SYSTEM, WE WERE NOT ABLE TO PULL THE NUMBERS THAT WE NEEDED TO PULL TO GET OUR HISTORICAL DATA TO TELL US WHERE WE NEEDED TO GO.

AND THEN WE CAME AND WE SAID THAT ONCE WE GOT THAT UP AND RUNNING AGAIN, AND WE WERE CONFIDENT IN THE NUMBERS THAT WE WE WERE LOOKING AT, THAT WE WOULD START IT BACK UP. AND HERE WE ARE.

SO WE'RE HERE TO BASICALLY RENEW OUR COMMITMENT THAT WE WE KNOW THAT THE NUMBERS WE'RE GETTING, WE'VE LOOKED AT, WE FEEL CONFIDENT THAT THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE GETTING FROM OUR CAT AND MOUSE GIVES US THE CAPABILITIES TO RESTART AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROGRAM.

SO THE GENERAL PROCESS, THIS IS THE PROCESS THAT'S RECOMMENDED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE FOR DOING NUISANCE ABATEMENT.

THIS IS WHAT THEY SAY. BASICALLY, IT STARTS WITH A LETTER NOTIFICATION THAT'S SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS.

YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT THE NUISANCE CRIMES THAT WE'RE SEEING.

WE KIND OF DISCUSS HOW WE WOULD ADDRESS THOSE.

THE OWNER EITHER SIGNS AND COMPLIES WITH THE CRIME REDUCTION AGREEMENT THAT WE COME UP WITH, AND THEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH ANNUAL MONITORING AND REPORTING, AND WE LOOK AT HOW IT'S GOING AND KIND OF WORK WITH THEM AS IT GOES.

OR WE DON'T GET ANY COOPERATION FROM THE MANAGEMENT OR THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN MOVES TO THE LAWSUIT.

SO THE WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD IS GOING TO HAVE MORE STEPS IN THAT, AND IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE MORE LENGTHY AND INVOLVED.

AND WE'RE GOING TO DO ROUTINE MONTHLY, QUARTERLY, YEARLY AUDITING TO GIVE US A GOOD INSIGHT INTO WHAT'S GOING ON.

SO EARLY INTERVENTION, AGAIN, IS THE KEY. YOU KNOW, USING DATA DRIVEN APPROACH TO CRIME ANALYSIS, HAVING BOTH OUR OUR CRIME ANALYSIS. LOOK AT THE CALLS FOR SERVICE THAT ARE HAPPENING, SHOWING IT, BUT ALSO USING OUR GEOGRAPHIC ACCOUNTABILITY, OUR OFFICERS, OUR SERGEANTS, OUR CAPTAINS THAT ARE IN THE DISTRICTS KEEPING AN EYE AND LOOKING AT THE CRIME STATS. SO INCLUSION IN THE MAP WOULD HAVE COLLABORATION BOTH THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCE OFFICERS,

[00:10:02]

THEY'RE GOING TO BE THE POINT OF CONTACT, BUT IT'S ALSO GOING TO INVOLVE IT'S GOING TO HEAVILY INVOLVE THE GEOGRAPHIC OFFICERS THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO THOSE AREAS.

THEN WITH A FORMAL ENTRY INTO AN A NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM, WE WOULD HAVE A CRIME REDUCTION AGREEMENT SIGNED ROUTINE QUARTERLY AND EVEN MONTHLY MEETINGS WITH OWNERSHIP. AND IT ALSO INVOLVES THE CHIEF OF POLICE.

SO IT'S NOT JUST SOMETHING THAT WOULD JUST THE OFFICERS WOULD DECIDE, WE WOULD JUST SIGN IT, MOVE ON. IT WOULD BE INVOLVED WITH US, INVOLVED WITH OUR CRIME ANALYSIS.

WE WOULD EVEN CONSULT WITH LEGAL. EVERYBODY WOULD BE PULLED INTO THAT.

AND THEN NUISANCE ABATEMENT LAWSUIT WOULD ONLY COME THROUGH REVIEW FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE CHIEF OF POLICE.

HORTON DID NOTICE IN THIS. AGAIN, THE GOAL IS ONE AND TWO EARLY INTERVENTION.

GAIN VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE. WORK WITH THESE LOCATIONS TO HELP THEM WITH THE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE HAVING.

NOT JUST, HEY, YOU'RE HAVING THESE ISSUES, YOU NEED TO FIX THEM.

AND THEN WE MOVE ON AND MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCE OFFICERS ARE GOING TO BE ASSIGNED TO TO AN INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT, JUST LIKE OUR BEAT OFFICERS, JUST LIKE OUR DISTRICT SERGEANTS. SO THEY'RE GOING TO JUST BE AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON USING THE OFFICERS IN THE FIELD, HELPING, HAVING, YOU KNOW, ANNUAL MEETINGS WITH.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO GO AHEAD. SO I WAS I KNOW IN THE PAST WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS.

WE TALKED ABOUT YOU KNOW, IT WAS WE HAVE KIND OF A RANKING OF ALL THE PROPERTIES AND, YOU KNOW, A NUMBER OF CALLS. AND WE SAID WE WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE IN A PLACE WHERE WE CAN TARGET, WE CAN KIND OF TACKLE THIS NUMBER.

IS THAT STILL KIND OF THE APPROACH? AND IF SO, WHAT'S THAT NUMBER? OR IS THIS JUST LIKE WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO TACKLE ALL OF IT.

SO WHEN YOU'RE SAYING NUMBER LIKE NUMBER OF OFFENSES THAT OCCUR.

YEAH. LIKE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE INVOLVED.

YEAH. THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES BASED ON THE HIGHEST, THE PROPERTIES LIKE THE TOP TEN PROPERTIES THAT HAVE THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF OFFENSES, THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY WHAT WE DID. SO WE HAD LIMITED IT TO THE HOTELS OR EXTENDED STAYS.

AND THEN WE SAID WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE TOP ONE OR TOP TWO BECAUSE WE JUST WE WERE REALLY KIND OF STARTING ON THIS PROCESS HERE.

AND THEY'LL GO THROUGH THIS MORE IS THAT THEY'RE SETTING A STANDARD. SO IF YOU HIT A CERTAIN NUMBER OF OFFENSES OR ARRESTS ON THAT, THEN THEN YOU GET KICKED INTO THE PROGRAM. SO IT'S ACROSS THE BOARD, BUT YOU'LL SEE WHAT, WHAT THE RESULTS ARE. ONCE WE SET THOSE THRESHOLDS, YOU'LL SEE WHAT THOSE BUSINESSES ARE.

OKAY. AND MY QUESTION IS HAS THERE EVER BEEN A COMPANY THAT SAID, NO, I'M NOT ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT WITH YOU? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. I KNOW WE ONLY HAD 2 OR 3 PROPERTIES THAT EVEN ROSE TO THE THRESHOLD WHEN WE DID IT IN 2017, 2018. THIS IS 2025 NOW. WELL, ONE THING YOU'LL SEE WHEN YOU SEE THE BUDGET SUITES OF AMERICA UP HERE IN A MINUTE, I THINK WHEN YOU SEE THEIR NUMBERS. I, I, I CAN'T PROVE THIS BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE ANECDOTAL DATA TO BACK IT UP, BUT THEY'RE AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE LIST. AND THOSE OFFENSES WE ARE NOT SEEING AT THAT LOCATION.

IT'S GOT NEW MANAGEMENT CURRENTLY, AND I THINK NEW MANAGEMENT HAS BEEN A BIG PART OF IT.

YEAH, I WILL. I DID WANT TO ADD, JUST BECAUSE I WAS HERE WHEN WE FIRST STARTED, THAT WAS ACTUALLY BEING IN THE, IN THE PROGRAM, WORKING WITH THE POLICE OFFICERS.

THEY ACTUALLY WERE TO THE POINT AT ONE POINT OF FALLING OFF BECAUSE THEIR NUMBERS WERE SO THE BUDGET SUITES, BUDGET SUITES WERE GETTING SO MUCH BETTER. SO IT DOES WORK IF YOU WORK IT WHEN YOU'LL SEE THEY THEY WOULD SOMETIMES QUALIFY JUST FOR EARLY INTERVENTION, BUT THEY HAVE NOT RISEN TO THE LEVEL OF QUALIFYING FOR THE ABUSE INTERVENTION APPROACH.

YES, SIR. AND WHAT I'M HEARING IN KRISTEN'S QUESTION WAS MORE OF A WE HAD LIMITED BANDWIDTH INTERNALLY TO HANDLE EVERYBODY.

IF WE DID EVERYBODY. I'M ASSUMING BASED ON THE PRESENTATION I'VE LOOKED AT, THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE ANYMORE.

WELL, IT'S NOT AN ISSUE WITH THE NUMBERS THAT WE'VE SEEN.

SO YEAH, BUT BUT LOOKING AT IT THAT THE PLAN IS IS THAT IF YOU QUALIFY, THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME SORT OF EARLY INTERVENTION AND SOME SORT OF MOVE FORWARD INTO THE PROGRAM. THERE IS NO RIGHT NOW ANTICIPATED, OKAY.

IF WE GET 15 BUSINESSES IN HERE OR WE'RE GOING TO CUT IT OFF, THAT THAT IS NOT THE PLAN.

AND PART OF THAT WILL ALSO HELP THAT THIS IS ALSO YOU'VE GOT NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCE OFFICERS THAT ARE MANAGING, BUT THEN YOU'VE GOT, QUITE FRANKLY, 88 PATROL OFFICERS AND 12 PATROL SERGEANTS AND TWO CAPTAINS AND A CAPTAIN OVER THE NRO UNIT.

THAT IS ALL GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS. AND IT DOESN'T JUST FALL TO TWO, THREE, FOUR, SIX.

AND THAT IS DEFINITELY DIFFERENT THAN BEFORE. YEAH, I LIKE THIS.

SO THE ENHANCEMENTS WHICH WE'VE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN HERE.

SO WE'RE EXPANDING THE ELIGIBILITY. IT WILL NOT BE JUST THE HOTEL MOTEL THE EXTENDED STAY.

IT'S GOING TO BE I MEAN BASED ON CALLS FOR SERVICE AND THE CRIMES THAT HAPPEN, NOT BASED ON JUST WHAT TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT IT IS, WE'RE TRANSITIONING INTO QUARTERLY OVERSIGHT INSTEAD OF ANNUAL LOOKING AT IT YEARLY, THAT'S GOING TO HELP US,

[00:15:03]

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE NUMBERS THAT WE SHOW HERE IN A MINUTE AND KIND OF HOW WE COLOR CODED IT, YOU'LL SEE WHERE IF YOU LOOK AT IT THE RIGHT WAY, YOU COULD HAVE SEEN THE PROBLEM COMING.

BUT IF YOU WAIT UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR, IT'S JUST RIGHT THERE.

AND SO INCREASE ENGAGEMENT AND FOLLOW UP WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT.

THAT'S A THAT'S A CRITICAL PART OF THIS IS IT'S AGAIN, IT'S NOT JUST A HERE'S THIS PROBLEM.

I NEED YOU TO TAKE CARE OF IT. THAT IT'S, HEY, HERE'S THIS PROBLEM.

THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO WORK TOGETHER TO ADDRESS IT, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THEM IN A POSITION TO WEAR WHEN THEY'RE WORKING TO ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS, AND THEY'RE MAKING US AWARE OF THE CRIMES THAT WOULD QUALIFY.

AND THE ONLY REASON WE KNOW ABOUT THEM IS BECAUSE MANAGEMENT IS TELLING US TO GET RID OF THEM, THAT WE DON'T HOLD THAT AGAINST THEM AND MAKE THAT THAT COUNT AGAINST THEM.

AND THEN AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE CAPTAIN OVER SUPPORT OPERATIONS, WHICH IS CAPTAIN GORDON.

HE IS ALSO THE CAPTAIN OF THE NRO. HE IS GOING TO HAVE ALL PROGRAM OVERSIGHT AND WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DIRECT MANAGEMENT.

SO IT'LL BE RUN BY A CAPTAIN AND THEN DAY TO DAY, DAY TO DAY RUNNING FOR THE NRO WITH THE OTHERS THAT ARE INVOLVED.

SO THE PROCESS AGAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO STEPS.

THERE'S GOING TO BE AN EARLY INTERVENTION. THIS IS WHEN I WAS ASKING YOU ABOUT THE NUMBERS OF OFFENSES THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.

SO PROPERTIES WITH FOUR PLUS NUISANCE CRIMES IN A QUARTER ARE GOING TO RECEIVE A NOTIFICATION LETTER AND THE FOLLOW UP WITH THE NRO OFFICER.

THAT'S WHERE I THINK IT'S CRITICAL OF. IT'S NOT JUST A LETTER THAT YOU GET IN THE MAIL THAT YOU MAY READ AND THROW AWAY.

YOU MAY READ AND MAKE A CALL. THE LETTER COMES WITH THE FOLLOW UP, AND WHEN THE LETTER GOES OUT, THE FOLLOW UP, WE'LL START WITH THE NRO OFFICER.

AND THEN WE'LL ALSO BE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE BEAT OFFICERS AND THE BEAT SERGEANT.

AND SO WHAT THIS DOES IS IT GIVES US A CHANCE TO GIVE THEM PREVENTION STRATEGIES, TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN HELP.

WE CAN HELP THEM REDUCE CRIME, AND THEY CAN HELP THEMSELVES REDUCE CRIME TO AVOID THE FORMAL ENTRY INTO THIS PROGRAM.

SO FORMAL ENTRY AND AGREEMENT. SO THE, THE THE LINE OF DEMARCATION IS GOING TO BE 16 OR MORE OFFENSES AND A ROLLING YEAR.

AND SO WHEN WE'RE KEEPING UP WITH THIS, THAT'S THE OTHER THING. ONE OF THE REASONS IT'S IMPORTANT THAT ALL THESE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE DIFFERENT OFFICERS MANAGING BECAUSE KEEPING UP WITH THE ROLLING YEAR IS GOING TO TAKE PEOPLE LOOKING AT STUFF MONTH AFTER MONTH, QUARTER AFTER QUARTER, YEAR AFTER YEAR. AND SO THAT WOULD BE THE QUALIFICATION STEP FOR FOR THE NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM IS 16 OR MORE IN A ROLLING YEAR. AND THAT IS WHERE WE WOULD COME TO A CRIME REDUCTION AGREEMENT, WHICH WE WOULD HAVE A FORMALIZED LETTER THAT WE WOULD WORK, THAT WE WOULD WORK ON COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE CHIEF OF POLICE.

WE'VE WORKED WITH LEGAL TO HELP CREATE IT. WE WILL WORK WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER TO HAVE THEM COME IN, AND IMPLEMENTING SPECIFIC STEPS THAT WE COULD TAKE TO HELP MITIGATE THE CRIME.

AND THEN THAT IS PARTICULARLY ONCE YOU GET TO THAT POINT YOU KNOW, MONTHLY REVIEWS WILL NOT ONLY JUST INVOLVE LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, BUT LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, REACHING OUT TO THE BUSINESS OWNER OR THE PROPERTY OWNER, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE YOU SEEING? WHAT CAN WE DO IF THIS IF STUFF ISN'T WORKING, WHAT CAN WE DO TO HELP YOU? AND HERE'S THINGS YOU CAN DO TO HELP YOURSELF.

SO KIND OF LOOKING AT IT JUST STEP BY STEP, THIS WILL KIND OF HELP YOU SEE IT AS WELL.

FOR EARLIER MENTION. AGAIN YOU'RE LOOKING AT FOUR OR MORE NUISANCE CRIMES IN A QUARTER, BUT LESS THAN 16 IN A ROLLING 12 MONTH PERIOD.

EARLY INTERVENTION LETTER SENT CONTACT IS MADE THROUGH THE NRO UNIT WITH THE BEAT OFFICERS AND THE DISTRICT SERGEANTS.

WE'LL DO A CRIME REDUCTION ASSESSMENT, AND WE'LL MONITOR IF IT COMES TO THE POINT WHERE WE END UP AT A NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM, WHICH, AGAIN, IS 16 OR MORE OFFENSES IN A ROLLING 12 MONTH PERIOD.

EXCUSE ME, THE NAP NOTIFICATION LETTER WILL BE SENT.

WE WILL WORK TO ENTER INTO A CRIME REDUCTION AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, WITH THE MANAGER, AND THEN WE WILL MONITOR. AND IF THERE, IF WE GET NO RESPONSE OR WE GET NO COOPERATION, THEN WE WILL HAVE TO MOVE INTO THE LAWSUIT, INTO THE LITIGATION PHASE OF IT. AGAIN, THE GOAL IS TO NOT HAVE THAT HAPPEN.

BUT IF WE END UP THERE AND WE'RE NOT GETTING ANY COOPERATION, THEN THAT'S WHERE IT WILL END UP.

SO TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBERS AND KIND OF LOOKING AT IF YOU TAKE THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAD FOR 2023 AND 2024 DATA.

THIS WILL JUST KIND OF GIVE YOU A SNAPSHOT. AND IT'S BEEN COLOR CODED.

SO IF IT'S YELLOW, YOU SEE THAT THE BUSINESS WOULD QUALIFY FOR A NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROGRAM.

AND IF IT'S GREEN, THEY WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE ENTER THE EARLY INTERVENTION PROGRAM.

SO YOU LOOK AT YOUR TOP TWO, YOU SEE WALMART.

A LOT OF THE CRIMES THAT THAT COME WITH THIS ARE GENERALLY CRIMES THAT WE END UP THERE BECAUSE WALMART HAS DISCOVERED A CRIME AND CALLED US.

AND THEN WE, IN THE FURTHERANCE OF INVESTIGATION, FIND THESE NUISANCE ABATEMENT CRIMES, WHETHER THEY'RE WEAPONS RELATED CHARGES,

[00:20:02]

WE ARE FINDING STUFF AS WELL, BUT IT JUST GOES TO SHOW WHEN YOU WHEN YOU RUN THE NUMBERS AND THIS IS WHAT YOU SEE.

YOU KNOW, QUICK MART, ELECTRIC COWBOY CHILL. YOU'LL NOTICE THAT A LOT OF THOSE WERE ALCOHOL RELATED VIOLATIONS.

AND WE'RE ALSO GOING TO GOING TO BRING INTO THE SYSTEM WHEN WE START SEEING ESPECIALLY THE ALCOHOL RELATED VIOLATIONS, WORK WITH TO WORK WITH LOCATION, WORK WITH THESE ENTITIES THAT CAN ALSO HELP US TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AS WELL.

SO IN 2023, THERE'S THE OFFENSES YOU SEE IN 2024.

AND THE OTHER THING I WANT YOU TO SEE IS KIND OF HOW THE NUMBERS CAN FLUCTUATE FROM YEAR TO YEAR.

WHICH CAN BE A MULTITUDE OF THINGS. IT COULD BE A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP.

IT COULD BE A CHANGE OF ENFORCEMENT STRATEGY THAT LPD HAD.

IT COULD BE THEY'VE GOTTEN IN TROUBLE FOR SOMETHING PRETTY SERIOUS, AND THEY'VE HAD TO SERIOUSLY REVAMP WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

WOULD SHOPLIFTING BE A TRIGGER EVENT? SHOPLIFTING IN ITSELF IS NOT A NUISANCE.

CRIME. BUT AGAIN, WHAT I WAS SAYING WAS IT'S THE SHOPLIFTING THAT LED TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF A LOT OF THESE CASES OF VIOLENT CRIMES.

WHETHER IT BE, YOU KNOW, WE FIND WEAPONS, WE FIND, YOU KNOW, DRUGS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMMERCIAL ARREST STATS AND SO I WOULD LOVE TO TAKE CREDIT FOR THIS, BUT CLAIRE IS THE ONE THAT CAME UP WITH THIS HIGHLIGHTING STRATEGY OF THE NUMBERS, AND I NEVER WOULD HAVE SEEN THIS IF SHE HADN'T COME UP WITH THIS.

SO I WANT TO POINT OUT, IF YOU LOOK AND YOU SEE A LOT OF THE GREEN THAT WE WOULD HAVE SEEN, THAT MAYBE WE COULD HAVE BEEN IN FRONT OF BEFORE IT TURNED TO YELLOW.

RIGHT? THAT'S THE FIRST THING THAT POPPED UP ON ME WHEN I SAW COLOR CODING.

IT WAS LIKE, OH YEAH, THAT DOES MAKE SENSE. SO THAT I THINK IS GOING TO HELP US AND KIND OF SHOWS HOW DOING IT QUARTERLY CAN HELP YOU GET OUT IN FRONT OF WHAT YOU SEE AND GET IN FRONT OF PROBLEMS HERE BEFORE IT BECOMES PROBLEMS HERE.

BUT THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF THE PLAN OF HOW THAT LOOKS.

AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE YOU HAVE A FEW THAT HAVE JUST JUMPED OUT THE WALMARTS BOTH.

I KNOW YOU LOOK AT WALMART HERE. AND AGAIN, A LOT OF THAT COMES FROM OTHER CRIMES THAT ARE HAPPENING THERE.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO DRIVE WALMART DOWN TO A ZERO.

BUT WE WILL ALSO WORK WITH THEM AS WELL. IT'S NOT JUST BECAUSE THE CRIMES THAT THEY'RE REPORTING ARE LEADING TO IT.

WE WILL WORK AND DO STUFF TO HELP THEM AS WELL TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AS BEST AS WE CAN.

SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THERE WAS A LARGE REPORT PUT OUT ON WALMART AND HOW THEY HAD REDUCED THEIR SECURITY FOR THEIR FACILITIES OSTENSIBLY MOVING THAT ENFORCEMENT OUT TO OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, ADDING MORE POLICE.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING YOU SEE OCCASIONALLY. I MEAN, WHEN PLACES HAVE THEY HAVE BUDGETS AS WELL.

AND THAT'S GENERALLY ONE OF THE FIRST BUDGETS TO GO.

SO, SO THAT'S, THAT'S I THINK THAT'S INTERESTING.

AND WE'LL BE TELLING OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT CHANGES WITHIN THE FOUR WALLS.

ABSOLUTELY. THEN WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT RESIDENTIAL AND WHEN WE PAY RESIDENTIAL REALLY WITH RESIDENTIAL, ALL WE INCLUDED WERE OF COURSE RESIDENCES AND THEN THE EXTENDED STAY LOCATIONS, THE HOTELS AND MOTELS, WE INCLUDED THOSE IN COMMERCIAL. SO WHEN YOU LOOK THERE, THEY'RE SUBURBAN STUDIOS, WHICH IS OVER ON LAKE POINTE DRIVE.

ARBOR CREEK, I KNOW SUBURBAN OR ARBOR CREEK. I WAS TOLD THIS BY ONE OF THE OFFICERS THAT THEY GOT NEW MANAGEMENT.

SOMEWHERE RIGHT IN THAT PERIOD. AND WHEN THEY GOT NEW MANAGEMENT, THIS MANAGEMENT WAS VERY AGGRESSIVE ON DEALING WITH ISSUE TENANTS OR TENANTS THAT CAUSED ISSUES IN THEIR BUILDING, AND IT REALLY DROVE CRIME DOWN.

AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT CAN HAVE THE BIGGEST IMPACT IS THE MANAGEMENT THAT'S THERE.

THE PRIVATE RESIDENTS, I KNOW THAT 24 IS GOING TO JUMP OUT.

I DON'T PUT AN ADDRESS ON HERE. YOU KNOW, DUE TO PRIVACY REASONS, BUT YOU'LL SEE THAT WE HAD ZERO AND WE HAD 24.

I CAN TELL YOU THOSE WE ARE NOT AT THAT POINT TODAY, WE ARE AT A HANDFUL OF OFFENSES.

THAT WAS AN ISSUE WE DEALT WITH IN ONE QUARTER.

MATTER OF FACT, IF YOU CAN LOOK ON IT, YOU CAN SEE REALLY QUARTER FOR A LITTLE BIT AND QUARTER TWO.

BUT WE HAD AN ISSUE WITH A TENANT THAT WAS LIVING IN A RESIDENCE THAT WAS OWNED BY THEIR OTHER GRANDPARENTS.

SO REALLY, ONE SINGLE RESIDENCE? IT IS. WOW. OKAY.

I AM SHOCKED AND AMAZED THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN LIT UP AT CITY COUNCIL ABOUT THAT KIND OF YOU MIGHT.

SOME OF YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN. OH, WOW. I KNOW WE HAVE HISTORICALLY.

WE WANT WE GET WE GET THOSE WE GOT THOSE SPECIAL PEOPLE.

AND I KNEW RIGHT OFF THAT WE TARGETED SOME SOME ENFORCEMENT HAD SOME HELP AND PART OF THE FAMILY MOVED OUT.

AND I THINK IT WAS THE PART THAT WAS CAUSING THE MAJORITY OF THE ISSUES BECAUSE IT'S NOT ZERO TODAY.

BUT IT'S NOT 7 OR 8. AND WE'VE REALLY DRIVEN THAT DOWN BY JUST GETTING RID OF IT.

JUST GOES TO SHOW IT JUST TAKES ONE PERSON THERE THAT'S CAUSING PROBLEMS AND IT GETS DRIVEN DOWN.

SO WE ARE NOT CONTINUING TO HAVE THAT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE DEFINITELY GOT TO KEEP AN EYE ON BECAUSE WHO SAYS,

[00:25:04]

SO BUT YOU CAN ALSO BUT AGAIN, YOU LOOK AT BUDGET SUITES, YOU YEAH.

BUDGET SUITES WOULD NOT HAVE QUALIFIED IN ANY QUARTER.

RIGHT. BASED ON THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE SEEING THERE.

I'VE RIDDEN OUT A FEW TIMES ON MIDNIGHTS. I'VE BEEN TO SOME CALLS OVER THERE.

I KNOW ON TWO THAT I'VE BEEN THERE WHERE WE'VE HAD ISSUES. I'VE LOOKED UP AND SEEN SOMEBODY STANDING.

I'M LIKE, WHO IS THAT? AND BOTH THE OFFICERS ARE LIKE, OH, THAT'S THE ON DUTY MANAGER THAT LIVES HERE.

SHE USUALLY SHOWS UP WHEN WHEN WE'RE HAVING THIS TYPE OF STUFF.

SO THEY'RE ON TOP OF THAT. SO THEY'RE TRYING TO HELP DRIVE THAT DOWN AS WELL.

BUT AGAIN, JUST LIKE IF YOU TAKE A LOOK HERE, WE DEFINITELY WOULD HAVE WOULD HAVE SEEN IT AT THE QUARTERLY.

WE SHOULD HAVE SEEN IT. JUST LOOKING AT IT LIKE THAT TO HOPEFULLY GET ON TOP OF IT TO, TO TAKE THESE DOWN.

SO THE NEXT STEPS MOVING FORWARD. WE ARE GOING LIVE ON JULY 1ST.

WE'LL WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME COUNCIL. WE APPRECIATE YOU.

THAT'S AN AWESOME PROGRAM. I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE THE DATA THAT GOES BEHIND THIS.

AFTER WE AFTER WE LAUNCH. AND JUST TO SEE THE DATA OF KIND OF HOW MANY PROPERTIES WENT INTO STEP 1 OR 2 AND HOW MANY OF THESE THAT WERE ABLE TO KIND OF GET UNDER CONTROL.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ABLE TO USE THAT DATA TO KIND OF GUESSTIMATE ON WHAT THE REDUCTION IN CRIME IS OR THE AMOUNT OF CRIME THAT WAS PREVENTED BY DOING THIS, BUT I'D BE I WOULD JUST LOVE TO DIG THROUGH THAT DATA.

IT'D BE FASCINATING. SO THE GOOD NEWS IS, IS WE KNOW WE'RE GOOD 2023 AND MOVING FORWARD.

SO EVEN SO, STARTING IN THE MIDDLE OF 25 AND MOVING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A COUPLE OF YEARS DATA.

I KNOW THERE'S A LITTLE POINT RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE WHERE WE HAD THE TRANSITION. AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT 100% CONFIDENT THAT EVERYTHING GOT WE KNOW STUFF'S THERE.

WE JUST DON'T KNOW THAT EVERYTHING TRANSFERRED OVER. BUT I THINK WE'LL AT LEAST BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU, IN YOUR WORDS, A GUESSTIMATE OF OF WHAT WE WERE HOPEFULLY ABLE TO PREVENT.

LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS COUNCIL. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT ALL THE DATA.

CAPACITY, CAPABILITY HERE. I'M ASSUMING A LOT OF THIS IS BEING DRIVEN BECAUSE OUR NEW ERP SOFTWARE ALLOWS US THIS LEVEL OF GRANULARITY.

WHEREAS BEFORE WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE IT AT THIS LEVEL.

SO YES, AND ALSO THE CRIME ANALYSIS THAT WE'RE USING IN THE CRIME ANALYST THAT WE HAVE NOW, AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT'S NOT I MEAN, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT GETTING GRANULAR INTO DATA YOU KNOW, IT'S A IT'S A HEAVY LIFT. AND TO HAVE THAT PERSON THAT CAN TAKE AND, AND NOT ONLY KNOWS HOW TO DO IT, BUT WHERE TO GO FIND IT AND PULL IT AND THEN DRILL DOWN, SHOW US PATTERNS, SHOW US WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT YOU SAW THIS IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS.

IF I WERE YOU, I WOULD PUT SOME SOME EFFORT ENERGY HERE.

YEAH, THAT DOES HELP. SO MY FOLLOW ON TO THAT IS BECAUSE THIS IS THIS IS A PRETTY STANDARDIZED REPORT.

OR IT CAN BE. IS THIS SOMETHING YOU GUYS ARE WORKING WITH? IT'S TO BE ABLE TO AUTOMATE THAT WHERE IT CAN PULL THAT REPORT UP EVERY MONTH AND NOT HAVE TO PUT THE MAN HOURS ON IT.

OR IS THIS OR IS THIS A PRETTY MANUAL PROCESS AT THIS POINT BECAUSE OF THE THE STRUCTURE OF THE DATABASE? THE BOSS IS RAISING HIS HAND. SO WE WERE ADDRESSING THAT A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO AS WE WERE DRIVING TOWARDS THIS PRESENTATION.

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE'VE AUTOMATED IT TO TO A LOT OF TO A LARGE DEGREE BECAUSE WE WANT TO REDUCE THE MAN HOURS OF HAVING TO CLIMB THROUGH EVERY REPORT.

SO WHAT WE HAVE IS PRETTY AUTOMATED NOW. THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE HAS BEEN PRETTY CLEAR WITH US.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FOLLOW WHAT THE DEFINITION OF A LAW FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT IS AND MAKE THAT A REPORT.

WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE ACTION WITH EVERY SINGLE THING THAT COMES ACROSS. RIGHT. SOME OF THOSE, LIKE WALMART, WE HAVE A GOOD PARTNERSHIP WITH WALMART. WE PROBABLY WOULDN'T MAIL THEM A LETTER, RIGHT? WE WOULD JUST HAVE OUR ONGOING DIALOG. BUT THE REPORT THAT WE RUN IS NOW AUTOMATED AND REQUIRES NOT AS MUCH HUMAN INTERVENTION AS IT USED TO BE.

YEAH. SO. YES, SIR. THAT'S GREAT. YEAH, BECAUSE I'M JUST LOOKING AHEAD RESIDENTIAL TO THAT. YOU'VE JUST. I THOUGHT THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER ORDER OF MAGNITUDE.

THAT'S FOR PEOPLE TOO. SO I'M GLAD WE GOT IT.

I'M EXCITED TO SEE THAT. I THINK THERE'LL BE MORE TO COME.

SO THANK YOU GUYS. APPRECIATE IT. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE DONE WITH WORKSHOP. WE'LL MOVE INTO REGULAR SESSION. GOOD JOB.

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK INTO REGULAR SESSION. ITEM C, PUBLIC HEARING.

[C. Public Hearing]

[00:30:03]

EXTRA SPACE STORAGE IS OPERATED AS A SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITY AT THIS LOCATION. SINCE 2007, BEFORE THE CITY ADOPTED ITS SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS IN 2022, A FIRE DESTROYED ONE OF THE BUILDINGS USED AS AN OFFICE WAREHOUSE FACILITY AND WAS SUBSEQUENTLY DEMOLISHED. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A NEW THREE STORY SELF-SERVICE STORAGE BUILDING WITHIN THE ORIGINAL ONE STORIES BUILDING'S FOOTPRINT. SECTION 7.2.4 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THE APPROVAL OF THE SUP, SINCE THIS IS AN EXPANSION OF THE ORIGINAL SITE. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED UNANIMOUS APPROVAL SIX TO NOTHING ON MAY 6TH, 2025, AND IT'S RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE ORDINANCE AS SET FORTH IN THE CAPTION ABOVE. MR. RICHARD LUCCI, OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR, IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.

I DO HAVE DALLAS FROM THE APPLICANT HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT.

MR. MAYOR, EXTRA SPACE, 3333 WELLBORN. DALLAS, TEXAS.

HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED YOU DON'T HAVE LIVE MUSIC LIKE AFTER PLANNING COMMISSION.

THAT WAS PRETTY NICE TO COME TO PLAN, COMMISSION AND HAVE A LIVE SHOW AFTERWARDS.

I THINK ALL ZONING CASES OUGHT TO WORK THAT WAY.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPONSOR THAT IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT LATER.

I'M SURE THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S GOOD. WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THIS.

STAFF WAS GREAT TO WORK WITH ON IT. PLANNING COMMISSION GAVE US THIS RECOMMENDATION.

THIS SEEMS LIKE AN IDEAL SITUATION WHERE WE'RE REINVESTING AT A SIGNIFICANT PLACE WHERE THE CITY GETS THE BENEFIT OF THAT 10 MILLION PLUS DOLLARS OF AD VALOREM VALUE.

AND WE'RE EXCITED TO DO THAT. IT'S NOT REALLY AN INDEPENDENTLY DEVELOPABLE SITE FOR ANYONE ELSE, SO IT SEEMS LIKE THAT IT'S A WIN WIN FOR EVERYBODY.

AND WE ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. I HAVE GOT A PRESENTATION, BUT SINCE YOU GOT OFF TO A SLOWER START AND I DON'T HAVE OPPOSITION, IT'D BE NICE TO NOT DO IT. THAT'S FAIR, THAT'S FAIR.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THERE, COUNCIL.

IF ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER. I HAVE NO OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT REQUESTS HERE.

IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THANK YOU FOR REINVESTING IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND WITH THAT, I WILL MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. COUNCIL.

PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL.

ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE. MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCES SET FORTH IN THE CAPTION.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND COUNCIL. PLEASE VOTE.

ALL RIGHT. AND THE MOTION TO APPROVE IS APPROVED.

SIX TO NOTHING. THANK YOU COUNCIL. THANK YOU SIR.

NEXT UP, ITEM TWO CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING. WE ARE GOING TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION BEFORE THIS HAPPENS.

[I. Closed Session]

AND THEN WE WILL COME BACK TO CONTINUE. ITEM TWO.

[J. Reconvene]

CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE LEWISVILLE CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 0428220N TO AMEND THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN.

SET FORTH AND EXHIBIT FIVE BE THE REALM SUBDISTRICT CONCEPT PLAN THERETO BY AMENDING THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR 3.459 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF ESSEX BOULEVARD AND PARKER ROAD. FM 544 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS CASTLE HILLS H3.

LOT TWO BLOCK A CORRECTING THE LIST OF EXISTING PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, PRESERVING ALL OF THE PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

DETERMINING THAT THE ZONING AMENDMENT HEREIN MADE PROMOTES THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING FOR A SAVING CLAUSE. REPEAL OR SEVERABILITY, AND A PENALTY AND EFFECTIVE DATE AS REQUESTED BY MCADAMS ON BEHALF OF ERIC STANLEY OF LANDS, LLC, THE PROPERTY OWNER. CASE NUMBER 2404 TWO PRS ORDINANCE NUMBER 0428, DASH 22 DASH ZONE ADOPTED A PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR CASTLE HILLS, WHICH INCLUDED A CONCEPT PLAN AND REQUIRED A REZONING PROCESS FOR MAJOR AMENDMENTS TO THE CONCEPT PLAN. THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THIS AREA IS VAGUE, BUT INDICATES SEVERAL LOTS AROUND A CUL DE SAC. NOW A SINGLE MIXED USE BUILDING IS PROPOSED.

THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF GENERAL BUSINESS TWO GB TWO DISTRICT FOR THIS AREA IS NOT CHANGING.

THE ONLY FACTOR UNDER CONSIDERATION WITH THIS CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT IS THE INTERNAL SITE CIRCULATION.

A SIMILAR REQUEST WAS DENIED IN AUGUST 2024. SINCE THEN, MORE INFORMATION ON SITE LINES, TRAFFIC AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. THE PRIMARY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 3 ON APRIL 15TH, 2025. SINCE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL AND AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF AT LEAST THREE FOURTHS OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. THE CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED A PUBLIC HEARING TO THE MAY 19TH, 2025 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO PROVIDE THE APPLICANT WITH ADDITIONAL TIME TO PREPARE ADDITIONAL DETAILS RELATED TO THE SITE AND THE PROPOSED PROJECT. ON MAY 19TH, 2025, THE CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE JUNE 2ND, 2025 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SO THAT THE REVISIONS CAN BE MADE TO THE ATTACHMENTS TO PROVIDE INCREASED CLARITY RELATED TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT CONCEPT PLAN. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE ORDINANCE AS SET FORTH IN THE CAPTION ABOVE. WE DO HAVE RICHARD LIEDTKE, OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND MARISSA BREWER'S FROM ADAMS HERE TO PRESENT, AND WHICH POINT WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[00:35:07]

I'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS MOMENT TO JUST GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF THE CASTLE HILLS PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOW THE RELATED CONCEPT PLAN WORKS WITHIN THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

FIRST, I WANT TO START OFF WITH SOME SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL EVENTS.

NOW, PLEASE BEAR WITH ME. THIS IS THE SAME, SAME PRESENTATION THAT I MADE AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, SO I'LL TRY TO GET THROUGH THIS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

IN 1996, THE ORIGINAL CASTLE HILLS AGREEMENT WAS WAS APPROVED, AND IN THAT AGREEMENT IT ESTABLISHED BASE ZONING DESIGNATIONS, INCLUDING THE GENERAL BUSINESS TWO ZONING DESIGNATION, ALONG WITH A HANDFUL OF OTHER ZONING DESIGNATIONS, THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS ASSIGNED AT THE TIME OF FINAL PLAT FOR INDIVIDUAL SITES, IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE LIMITATIONS ESTABLISHED FOR THE OVERALL LAND USES IN THAT MASTER AGREEMENT. NOW, 2014 IS WHEN THE REALM DISTRICT WAS APPROVED.

THAT AGREEMENT ESTABLISHED THE BOUNDARIES, AND IN THIS PARTICULAR SITE, THE NORTHEASTERN RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE RAILROAD TRACK WAS ESTABLISHED AS THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE REALM. ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT PROVISION OF THAT AGREEMENT THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ALLOWED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH MULTIFAMILY UNITS ABOVE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL USES.

AGAIN, THAT WAS PROVED TO BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN ALL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THE REALM.

IT DID NOT AFFECT THE OTHER AREAS OF CASTLE HILLS.

THE NEXT SIGNIFICANT EVENT WAS ANNEXATION, WHICH OCCURRED ON NOVEMBER 15TH OF 10TH OF 2021.

A CAVEAT THEIR STATE LAW REQUIRES ALL MUNICIPALITIES TO APPROVE PERMANENT ZONING FOR ANY NEW AREAS THAT THEY ANNEX WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THAT ANNEXATION.

ON JANUARY 3RD, 2022, THE CASTLE HILLS PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONING WAS APPROVED, THAT IT CREATED THREE SUBDISTRICTS AND ALL OF THE BASE ZONING DISTRICTS WERE ESTABLISHED. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO DRILL DOWN ONE EXTRA LAYER DOWN TO THE ACTUAL PD.

AND AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THAT PD WAS TO REFLECT THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE LIMITATIONS ESTABLISHED IN THE 1996 AGREEMENT.

THE THREE SUBDISTRICTS WAS CASTLE HILLS PRIMARY, WHICH WAS PRIMARY ALL OF CASTLE HILLS MINUS CROWN CENTER AND MINUS THE REALM, AND ALL BASED DISTRICTS FOR ALL OF THE AREA WITHIN CASTLE HILLS WAS ESTABLISHED AT THAT TIME, AND THOSE BASE DISTRICTS REFLECTED THE REGULATIONS THAT WENT THAT WERE ENUMERATED IN 1996, AND THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THAT WAS TO MAKE SURE ALL THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE GROUND WAS NOT LEGALLY CONFORMING.

WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE ALL THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE GROUND DID MAINTAIN A LEGAL CONFORMING STATUS.

OF THE REALM WAS ONE OF THE AREAS THAT DID HAVE A FEW SITES THAT THAT DID NOT HAVE A PLAN OR DID NOT HAVE DEVELOPMENT ON IT.

THE ZONING ORDINANCE AT THE TIME DID REQUIRE A CONCEPT PLAN.

A COMPANY REALLY ALL AREAS OF OF CASTLE HILLS, INCLUDING THE REALM AND WITH THE REALM, THE ASSOCIATED CONCEPT PLAN ONLY ILLUSTRATED BUILDING FOOTPRINT LOCATIONS IN SITE CIRCULATION.

THERE WAS ALSO THERE'S ALSO LANGUAGE IN THE PD THAT DEFINES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MINOR MODIFICATION, WHICH CAN BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR VERSUS A MAJOR MODIFICATION.

MODIFICATION. MAJOR MODIFICATIONS INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF REMOVAL OF BUILDINGS AND CHANGES TO SITE CIRCULATION PATTERN THAT IMPACTS CONNECTIVITY WITHIN THE SITE INTO SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. AND AGAIN, IN THOSE TYPE OF SITUATIONS, IT DOES REQUIRE THE AMENDMENT PROCESS THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS. THERE ARE SEVERAL AREAS WITHIN THE REALM THAT REMAIN BLANK DUE TO THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT DETAILS.

HOWEVER, THOSE SITES STILL HAVE THE BASE ZONING.

SO I WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THE BASE ZONING THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1996 AND FURTHER AMENDED IN 2014 ESTABLISHES THE USES, THE SETBACKS AND THE HEIGHTS. AND SO THOSE ARE REALLY NOT ON THE TABLE TONIGHT.

THOSE WERE ESTABLISHED AT THAT TIME. THIS IS NOT A BASE ZONING CHANGE.

IT'S ONLY A CHANGE TO THE CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT.

AND AGAIN, A CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE BLANK AREAS ARE CAN BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.

SO THIS MAP JUST SHOWS THE BOUNDARIES OF THE REALM.

THE REALM IS SUBDIVIDED INTO SUBAREAS. THE RED AREA IS NORTH OF WIND HAVEN PARKWAY.

AND THIS IS JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CONCEPT PLAN.

THEN OF COURSE, YOU'VE GOT THE BLUE IS THE THE SOUTHERN AREA THAT IS SOUTH OF WOODHAVEN PARKWAY.

AGAIN, THIS MAP SHOWS THE BASE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE REALM.

[00:40:01]

THE BRIGHTER REDS ARE THE GENERAL BUSINESS TWO.

SO YOU CAN SEE MOST OF THE PROPERTIES ALONG SAN RAMON TOLLWAY AND NORTH OF WOODHAVEN CONTAINED THAT BASE ZONING OF GENERAL BUSINESS, TOO. BUT AGAIN, THE AREA SOUTH OF FM 544 ALSO HAVE THAT BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF GENERAL BUSINESS TO THE KIND OF LIGHTER BROWN IS THE ESTATE TOWNHOME DISTRICT, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT THAT DOES ALLOW FOR BOTH ATTACHED TOWNHOMES AND DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY.

SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO DRAW ON ANOTHER LAYER TO THE GENERAL BUSINESS TO BASE ZONING DISTRICTS.

THAT DISTRICT ITSELF JUST HAS NO FRONT, SIDE OR REAR SETBACKS, SO THEREFORE IT'S ZERO SETBACKS.

THE HEIGHT IS TYPICALLY UNLIMITED. THERE ARE PROVISIONS IF IT IS ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT OR IF IT IS WITHIN.

IF A BUILDING IS WITHIN 150FT OF A PROPERTY ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A FAIRLY LENGTHY LIST OF OF ALLOWED USES PRIMARILY RETAIL, SERVICE, ENTERTAINMENT, RESTAURANT, RETAIL, OFFICE, THAT SORT OF THING.

THERE'S ANOTHER CAVEAT THERE. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THAT IN 2014, THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE PROVISION THAT DOES ALLOW BY RIGHT DWELLING UNITS OF 700FT² MINIMUM SIZE WHEN LOCATED OVER A RETAIL RESTAURANT OR SIMILAR USE ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS KIND OF A COMPARISON OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS TO BASE DISTRICT IN CASTLE HILLS IN THIS MIDDLE COLUMN, COMPARED TO THE GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT IN THE CURRENT UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, AS IT APPLIES THROUGHOUT LEWISVILLE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S VERY LITTLE. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE SETBACKS.

THE HEIGHTS VARIES SOMEWHAT. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN CASTLE HILLS IS LIMITED TO THE FAA REGULATIONS.

WHERE ELSEWHERE IN LEWISVILLE IT'S LIMITED TO THE WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY PLUS DEPTH OF THE FRONT YARD.

BUT WHEN THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE VICINITY, THE THE THE PROVISIONS VARY SLIGHTLY.

PRIMARILY, IT'S 45FT. IF YOU'RE ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL, WHICH DOES ALLOW YOU TO GO UP TO 12FT WITH WITH ADDITIONAL SETBACK IN CASTLE HILLS, THERE IS A PROVISION, THOUGH, THAT STATES THAT BUILDINGS WITHIN 150FT OF RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTY SHALL NOT EXCEED THE HEIGHT ALLOWED IN THAT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

WHEREAS THAT PROVISION IS NOT NOT PROVIDED IN ELSEWHERE IN LEWISVILLE.

SO NOW WE'RE DRILLING DOWN TO THIS PARTICULAR TRACT.

THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN ILLUSTRATED EIGHT PARCELS OR EIGHT LOTS FRONTING ON A SMALL CIRCULAR ENTRANCE, AND THAT ENTRANCE WAS SITUATED VERY CLOSELY TO FM 544, WITH THOSE LOTS BACKING TO THE RAILROAD.

THERE WERE NO BUILDINGS ILLUSTRATED. AT ONE TIME STAFF THOUGHT DUE TO THE VERY VAGUENESS OF IT AND THE THE, THE EXHIBIT DID APPEAR TO SHOW SOME BUILDINGS, BUT WHEN YOU WOULD ZOOM INTO A VERY LARGE FORMAT, IT WAS IT WAS JUST PIXELATED. IT WAS REALLY HARD TO TELL WHAT IT WAS.

WITH THE MOST RECENT SUBMITTAL FROM MCADAMS, IT DID THEY WERE PROVIDED A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR CLEARER IMAGE THAT WHEN YOU DO ZOOM IN, IT DOES SHOWS MORE CLEARLY THAT THOSE WERE, WERE NUMBERS.

SO IT WAS MERELY, NUMBERING THE THE POTENTIAL LOTS OR TRACKS ILLUSTRATED AROUND THE SMALL CUL DE SAC. SO SITE CIRCULATION CHANGE IS CONSIDERED A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO THE CONCEPT PLAN, AND IT DOES REQUIRE APPROVAL THROUGH THE ZONE CHANGE PROCESS.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT ILLUSTRATES ONE BUILDING OF ABOUT 14,000FT² SITUATED CLOSER TO PARKER ROAD, WITH SITE CIRCULATION CIRCLING AROUND THE PROPOSED BUILDING INSTEAD OF IN FRONT OF IT.

ANOTHER CAVEAT TO THIS SITUATION IS DURING THE PLANNING PROCESS, THE AN 80 TO 120 FOOT WIDE ELECTRIC UTILITY EASEMENT WAS IDENTIFIED AND THAT RUNS ADJACENT TO THE RAILROAD, SO THAT FURTHER CONSTRAINED THE LOCATION OF BUILDINGS ON THE SITE.

THE FINAL PLAT WAS APPROVED ON JUNE 22ND, WAS PLATTED IN APRIL 23RD, AND WITH THAT ORIGINAL PLAT ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE, WATER AND SEWER WAS EXTENDED TO THE SITE, AND IT WAS SIZED SIGNED TO SERVE A POTENTIAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE.

SO AGAIN, WE WANT TO STRESS THAT THE USES PROPOSED IN THE BUILDING AND THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING ARE NOT ELEMENTS UNDER CONSIDERATION TONIGHT WITH THIS CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT. AND THEN THESE ARE JUST THE ILLUSTRATIONS.

AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT IS THE CURRENT CONCEPT PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED IN IN JANUARY OF 22.

[00:45:03]

AND THEN THE PROPOSED CONCEPT SHOWS THE BUILDING CLOSER TO PARKER ROAD, FM 544 WITH REALLY TWO DIFFERENT CIRCLES KIND OF ENCIRCLING THE BUILDING.

THE SITE CIRCULATION IS ILLUSTRATED IN BLUE ON BOTH OF THESE.

THE BOTH OF THESE ILLUSTRATIONS. AND I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE EIGHT BUILDING PARCELS, THERE'S PROBABLY WITH WITHOUT THE DETAIL OF OF OF BUILDINGS, IT'S YOU KNOW, IT IS VERY, VERY VAGUE AND THERE'S NUMEROUS POTENTIAL.

CONFIGURATIONS, PARTICULARLY WITH THE ZERO SETBACK.

THERE ARE SITUATIONS EVEN HERE IN OUR OLD TOWN WHERE WE HAVE MULTIPLE BUILDING SITES OR BUILDING LOTS, BUT THE BUILDINGS ARE ATTACHED LIKE THEY ARE ON MAIN STREET BECAUSE THEY HAVE ZERO SIDE YARD AND FRONT YARD SETBACKS.

THIS ILLUSTRATION DOES SHOW IN YELLOW THE LOCATION OF THE ELECTRIC UTILITY EASEMENT.

WERE WERE BUILDINGS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE PLACED, SO THE THE PLATTED BOUNDARY OF THE SITE IS SHOWN IN RED.

SO WHAT IS LEFT IN WHITE WITHIN THE RED IS THE ONLY BUILDABLE AREA ON THIS SITE.

A CITY STAFF DID USE A DRONE AND WANTED TO JUST SHOW THE COUNCIL.

WHAT A VIEW FROM A WINDOW ON THE TOP FLOOR OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING WOULD LOOK LIKE.

SO THAT'S WHERE THE 47.5FT AND THAT WAS FROM EXISTING GRADE.

WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS SITE WILL BE REGRADED AND MOST LIKELY WILL BE LOWERED SOMEWHAT AS FAR AS THE FINISHED FLOOR, BUT WE WANTED TO JUST PROVIDE KIND OF A WORST CASE SCENARIO BASED ON THE EXISTING RATE.

SO THIS IS THE 47.5FT LOOKING TOWARDS THE NORTH THAT IS ESSEX DRIVE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE OF THE PHOTO.

THIS NEXT SHOT IS LOOKING TO THE SOUTH. AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT'S WHERE THE RAILROAD IS.

AND THE GOLF COURSE AND THAT THAT BRIDGE ON THE RAILROAD IS INDIAN CREEK PASSING UNDER THE RAILROAD.

AND THE FINAL ONE IS LOOKING TO THE SOUTHWEST TOWARDS THE THE RESERVE GATED SUBDIVISION IN CASTLE HILLS.

AND WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I DO HAVE MARISSA BREWER WITH MCADAMS. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MARISSA MAYER. I'M A PLANNER WITH MCADAMS. I'M HERE REPRESENTING BRITE REALTY. AND TODAY I AM GOING TO TOUCH ON KIND OF WHAT RICHARD HAD ALREADY SAID.

SO I'LL KIND OF GO THROUGH IT A LITTLE BIT FASTER BECAUSE THIS IS A PRESENTATION THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED AS WELL.

SO JUST GOING THROUGH THE HISTORY A LITTLE BIT.

ORIGINALLY THE SITE HAD COME ABOUT BECAUSE FM 544 WAS NEEDING RIGHT AWAY DEDICATION IN ORDER TO REBUILD IT AND EXPAND IT. SO AT THAT TIME TEXT HAD APPROACHED BRIGHT REALTY AND ASKED FOR SOME ACREAGE IN ORDER TO REDESIGN FM 544. SO THEY GAVE ABOUT 17 ACRES AND THEN TEXT DID WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO AND THEN LEFT, REMAINING ABOUT TWO ACRES FOR THE CERTAIN SITE. SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO KIND OF THIS SITUATION TODAY WITH THE SITE LOCATION.

AS RICHARD HAD TOUCHED ON ABOUT THE AMENDMENT TO THE PD.

AS FAR AS THE ANNEXATION HAPPENED AT THE TIME, THERE WERE 60 DAYS AND YOU HAD TO TIE SOME KIND OF CONCEPT PLAN TO THE PD. WITH SOME OF THOSE CONCEPT PLANS, THEY WERE MORE DETAILED.

THIS ONE WAS JUST VERY ARBITRARY AND KIND OF SHOWED THE GENERAL LAYOUT OF WHAT THE POTENTIAL OF THIS SITE COULD LOOK LIKE.

AS RICHARD HAD ALSO TALKED ABOUT JUST AMENDING THE PLAT BACK IN JUNE OF 2023.

THEY HAD SPLIT THE LAW INTO TWO. AND THEN WITH THAT, THEY IDENTIFIED THE ENCORE EASEMENTS.

AND ALSO HAD IDENTIFIED THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT NEEDED TO BE PUT IN PLACE IN ORDER FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO BE PUT THERE.

SO THAT INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE AND THE ENCORE EASEMENTS WERE IDENTIFIED IN THIS AREA SO EXISTING TODAY.

THIS IS WHAT FM 544 LOOKS LIKE. AND THEN THIS IS THE PROPOSED PLAN.

AS RICHARD HAD TALKED ABOUT, THE THIS IS NOT A ZONING CHANGE.

WE ARE ASKING FOR THE SAME ZONING THAT IT HAS ALWAYS FELL UNDER.

THIS IS SIMPLY JUST A DISCUSSION OF SITE CIRCULATION.

PER THE PD, IT REQUIRES A CONVERSATION A PROCESS TO GO THROUGH THE PLANNING, ZONING AND COUNCIL.

SO THAT WAY THEY CAN SEE THE SITE CIRCULATION CHANGE AND ALSO MAKE THAT MODIFICATION JUDGMENT.

[00:50:06]

SO JUST TO SPEAK THROUGH THAT A LITTLE BIT AND TOUCH ON EACH TOPIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.

SO THE CITY REQUIRES US TO PLACE A ZONING SIGN ON THE PROPERTY WHICH AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT WAS DONE.

AND THEN ALSO TO SEND OUT NOTICES TO WITHIN A 200 FOOT BUFFER.

WE ALSO HELD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ON FEBRUARY 5TH.

WE WERE PROVIDED A LIST FROM THE CITY, AND THOSE WERE THE RESIDENTS THAT WE REACHED OUT TO.

AND WE HELD THAT AND WE GOT FEEDBACK FROM THOSE RESIDENTS AT THAT MEETING.

SO THOSE ARE ZOOMED IN. SO TALKING ON THE ZONING, WHAT IS A PERMITTED USE? AGAIN, WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS A PERMITTED USE WITHIN THIS ZONING CODE.

THE REASON WHY THE REASON WHY WE COME BEFORE YOU IS BECAUSE WE ARE CHANGING SITE CIRCULATION.

AND THAT'S A MAJOR MODIFICATION. SO THE PD REQUIRES THAT TO COME BEFORE YOU.

THE CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT, IT WAS VERY ARBITRARY, BUT ALSO YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE GREAT CIRCULATION WHEN IT COMES TO SAFETY CONNECTIVITY.

SO WE AND THEN THE ENCORE EASEMENTS ALSO KIND OF PUSH THAT BUILDING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER FORWARD.

BUT ALSO NOT ONLY WITH THE NON REGULATORY CONCEPT PLAN THAT ALSO DID NOT HAVE ANY KIND OF HEIGHT TIED TO IT, NOR DID IT HAVE ANY KIND OF ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS LIKE SETBACKS TIED TO IT.

SO WITH THIS PLAN, YOU'RE KIND OF NARROWING DOWN MORE OF A SITE DATA TABLE WITH HEIGHT WITH, WITH REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LIGHTS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.

SO ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN PUT ON THIS PROPOSED PLAN, WHICH WILL BE A REGULATORY DOCUMENT THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW.

AND THEN TALKING ABOUT SITE CONDITIONS. SO WE ARE NOT ADJACENT TO OR LOCATED WITHIN 100FT OF A RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT.

SO WE ARE WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE FAA REGULATIONS WITH THAT, THAT THAT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE A SET HEIGHT LIMIT. SO THE HEIGHT CAN BE ENDLESS. IN THIS CASE TO SOME EXTENT OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T GO TOO CRAZY, BUT THE BUILDING ALSO IS SET BACK 350FT AWAY FROM THE EDGE OF A RESIDENT TO THE FRONT OF A GLASS OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING. AND THEN THOSE ARE SOME IMAGES AT THAT HEIGHT.

SO HOW IS THIS COHESIVE WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE? WE'RE GOING TO TALK THROUGH A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.

THIS IS ALL WITHIN CASTLE HILLS. AND WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, YOU SEE SINGLE FAMILY ACROSS FROM MULTIFAMILY.

AND THE SETBACKS ARE AT 7140 AND 120. AND THIS WAS APPROVED BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2024.

AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HERE AGAIN YOU HAVE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS TOWNHOME LOTS ACROSS FROM MULTIFAMILY.

THAT'S AT 167 AND THEN 70FT. SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS ABOUT 350FT.

SO IT IS A GREATER INCREASE OF A SETBACK THAN WHAT YOU SEE AROUND CASTLE HILLS EXISTING TODAY.

TOUCHING ON THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS. WE ARE UPDATING A TIA FOR THE OVERALL THE REALM SUBDISTRICT, BUT ALSO WE HAVE DONE A TIA ON THIS SPECIFIC SITE ITSELF.

WHICH WARRANTED A TRAFFIC SIGNAL. AND WE ARE WE HAVE AGREED TO PUT A NOTE ON THE PLAN THAT WE WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE THE ONE WHO WOULD PAY FOR THE COST OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

SO THAT'S ALSO ON THE PLAN AS WELL, TO ENSURE THAT IT GETS BUILT.

AND THEN HOW ARE WE ADDRESSING CONCERNS? COHESIVE WITH LAND USE.

IT'S FOLLOWING THE ZONING. WHAT'S ALWAYS BEEN ZONED AS SAME, SAME STANDARD AS THOSE LISTED WITHIN THE ZONING CODE.

IT PROVIDES CERTAINTY BECAUSE WE'RE PROVIDING A CERTAIN HEIGHT LIMIT.

WE'RE PROVIDING THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS THAT CAN BE BUILT.

THOSE SORTS OF THINGS ON THE ACTUAL PLAN VERSUS THE PREVIOUS PLAN DIDN'T HAVE ANY OF THAT EXISTING.

TODAY. WE INCREASED THE SETBACK. WE IMPROVED TRAFFIC BY ADDING A TRAFFIC SIGNAL, AND THEN IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING LAND USE WITHIN THE CASTLE HILLS DISTRICT.

YOU CAN SEE IT EVERYWHERE. AND THEN THE CONSTRAINTS ON THE PROPERTY.

IT IS A INTERESTING SHAPE PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND THEN YOU ALSO HAVE THOSE ENCORE EASEMENTS.

SO YOU'RE KIND OF LIMITED TO WHAT YOU CAN DO, BUT ALSO YOU'RE ALSO TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ENHANCING THE SAFETY AND THE PUBLIC

[00:55:01]

AND I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. ALSO, WE HAVE ERIC STANLEY HERE WITH BRIGHT REALTY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL.

COUNSEL. ANY QUESTIONS EITHER FOR MISS BREWER OR FOR MR. STANLEY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

SO, AS YOU CAN PROBABLY SEE, I HAVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENT TO GO THROUGH BEFORE WE GET TO THE REST OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE HERE. SO I WILL BE MOVING THROUGH THESE AS AT A DECENT CLIP, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

THE WAY THIS WILL WORK IS I'M GOING TO READ THROUGH JUST A BRIEF.

WHO SENT THE EMAIL AND WHETHER THEY ARE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED? I WILL THEN READ THE NAMES AND IN FAVOR OPPOSED OF THE COMMENT CARDS THAT GAVE OPINIONS BUT ARE NOT SPEAKING.

AND THEN I WILL MOVE INTO THE OPINIONS OF FOLKS WHO HAVE ASKED TO SPEAK.

SO THAT'LL BE THE PROCESS. AND AGAIN, EVERYBODY WILL HAVE TEN MINUTES.

AS I HAD LAST TIME, I WOULD ASK THAT IN RESPECT FOR EVERYBODY'S TIME, THAT IF YOU ARE REPEATING SOMETHING THAT'S GREAT, PLEASE DON'T FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE TO TAKE YOUR ENTIRE TEN MINUTES TO REPEAT SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE'VE HEARD 3 OR 4 DOZEN TIMES.

BUT IF YOU WANT TO TAKE YOUR WHOLE TEN MINUTES, YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN JUST UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES LESS IS MORE.

WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ THE EMAILS.

JUST THE NAMES AND THEIR POSITION. THESE ARE ALL LEWISVILLE RESIDENTS.

I'VE GOT ONE. CARMONA OPPOSED. CASEY BUGS OPPOSED.

WILLIAM PRIEST OPPOSED. AND AGAIN, THESE ALL OF THESE COMMENTS AND EMAILS WILL BE IN THE AGENDA INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO GO BACK TO THEM FOR HISTORY.

JOYCE LANDRY OPPOSED THOMAS. MY APOLOGIES THERE.

THOMAS OPPOSED. GREG SARNO OPPOSED. THOMAS RAUSCH OPPOSED.

DONNA VIDAL OPPOSED. PATRICIA HOFF OPPOSED. ERIC MILLER OPPOSED.

DARCY. WELSCH OPPOSED FALCON. GARCIA OPPOSED JEFF, STACEY RICHARDSON OPPOSED.

KRYSTEN GARCIA OPPOSED. PATRICIA CROPP OPPOSED.

AND CLINT ADAMS OPPOSED. THOSE ARE OUR EMAILS, OUR PUBLIC SPEAKING CARDS, FOLKS WHO ARE EXPRESSING AN OPINION BUT DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. SOME OF THESE ARE OVERLAPPING WITH THE EMAIL.

SO WE DO HAVE PATRICIA KOPP OPPOSED CHANDLER AND BETHANY TARR OPPOSED.

BEVERLY PORTER OPPOSED. JULIE LEWIS OPPOSED. CHRIS LEWIS OPPOSED.

JOHN. MY APOLOGIES. JOHN PAWLOWSKI OPPOSED. KYLE BJORNSTAD OPPOSED.

JOAN SIGMAN OPPOSED. MELISSA PIPER OPPOSED. PORTER OPPOSED.

LAWRENCE MAGUIRE OPPOSED. WILLIAM HEPBURN OPPOSED.

WILLIAM. PARMA'S PARMESAN. OPPOSED. HERBERT BATES OPPOSED.

TONYA LYNN OPPOSED. RENÉE LAWSON OPPOSED. PATTY RADCLIFFE OPPOSED.

MARC AND LORI CONNOLLY OPPOSED. JAMES RADCLIFFE OPPOSED.

GARY VAN MOORESVILLE OPPOSED. CHARLES FISCHER OPPOSED.

DARYL AND CAROLYN BASIL OPPOSED. MY APOLOGIES, FOLKS, IF I GET THESE WRONG, PLEASE HAVE GIVE ME JUST A LITTLE BIT OF GRACE.

I'VE GOT MARTIN VAN OPPOSED. I'VE GOT BILL PRIEST OPPOSED, JOYCE LANDRY OPPOSED.

TRACY JACOBS OPPOSED MARSHALL LINCOLN SUPPORT.

MEGHAN I CAN OPPOSED MICHAEL I CAN I CAN BO OPPOSED YOUNG PARK OPPOSED KAREN HAHN OPPOSED KEN AND JESSE OUR OPPOSED. PAT HOFF OPPOSED PEGGY ALLEN.

ROD ELLEN MEADE OPPOSED. CHARLES HUMMER OPPOSED.

SANDY CORDNER OPPOSED. KATHLEEN DOCKERY OPPOSED.

KEVIN CORDER OPPOSED. NANCY. HEPBURN OPPOSED.

BARBARA MARTIN OPPOSED. JAN MILLER OPPOSED. BRITT DOCKERY OPPOSED.

PATRICIA COOKE OPPOSED. MARC JONES OPPOSED. MELINDA MCMAHON OPPOSED.

BETH KOHR OPPOSED. LISA RESNICK OPPOSED. ROBERT BERKE.

OPPOSED. MARY PRYOR OPPOSED. NORMA RUIZ OPPOSED.

NAN REIS OPPOSED. AMANDA DUNCAN OPPOSED. LADONNA PIPER OPPOSED.

CYDNEY TRAN OPPOSED. SCOTT TRAN OPPOSED. DARCY WALSH OPPOSED.

SUE LARSON OPPOSED. TALMA. BRAND OPPOSED. GLENN LARSON OPPOSED.

[01:00:01]

NEXT, I HAVE THE FOLLOWING FOLKS WHO ASKED TO COME UP IN A PARTICULAR ORDER, SO I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.

FIRST UP REQUESTING TO SPEAK. AND AGAIN, TEN MINUTES.

MR. RICHARD MEGGS JR. AND, MR. MEGGS, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

MY NAME IS RICHARD L JR. FIVE THREE. THREE CROWN OF GOLD.

MY MY BACK PORCH, WHERE I SIT OUT AND HAVE COFFEE EVERY MORNING, WOULD BE LOOKING INTO THE THIS PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX. I HAVE A SIMPLE QUESTION, AND IT MAY HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE TWO WEEKS SINCE THE LAST MEETING, BUT WHEN WE WERE HERE, YOU HAD A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE SIGNAL LIGHT AND THE FACT THAT THE SIGNAL LIGHT WASN'T PUT INTO WASN'T PUT INTO SOMETHING.

AND HE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT THE SIGNAL LIGHT WAS BEING PUT IN.

THAT'S WORDS OF AFFIRMATION THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE PUT IN.

DIDN'T SEEM TO SET WELL WITH A COUPLE OF THE PEOPLE ON THE THE COUNCIL.

AND I'M JUST KIND OF THINKING, IF YOU REALLY HAVE THAT MUCH DOUBT ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE COMPANIES, WHY WOULD WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS? I, LIKE THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING THERE'S THERE'S NO CHANGE IN THIS.

IT'S JUST IT IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD. AND IT IT THEY'VE LOST A LOT OF CREDIBILITY.

ANYWAY, THAT'S. I'M JUST A RHETORICAL QUESTION.

IF YOU'RE HAVING SO MANY DOUBTS ABOUT THE COMPANY AND THEN PUTTING UP A SIGNAL LIKE WHY? WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH THEM? THANK YOU SIR.

ALL RIGHT. I HAVE NEXT UP, I HAVE JUSTIN, I BELIEVE IT'S BIRCHMEIER.

BIRCHMEIER. MY APOLOGIES, SIR. NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

JUSTIN BIRCHMEIER, 401 GRAIL CASTLE. THANK YOU.

MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL STAFF. THIS IS A LITTLE PERSONAL TO ME, AND I STATED THAT THE LAST TIME MY WIFE AND I LITERALLY JUST MOVED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS ALL OF THIS WAS GOING ON AND NOTHING WAS EVER BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION ABOUT THIS MATTER UNTIL AFTER WE SIGNED THE DOTTED LINE.

THIS SITUATION HAS BECOME VERY PERSONAL TO NOT ONLY MYSELF, BUT ALSO MY NEW FAMILY.

ONLY BECAUSE WE INVESTED OVER THREE QUARTERS OF $1 MILLION TO MOVE INTO OUR FIRST HOME TOGETHER AS A FAMILY.

AND ONCE WE MOVED IN, WE'RE TOLD THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A 60 FOOT BUILDING IN OUR BACKYARD.

IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT OUR ONLY OUTDOOR SPACE LOOKS DIRECTLY AT THIS PLOT OF LAND.

SO NOT ONLY IS THERE A STRONG POTENTIAL OF TAKING SIGNIFICANT HIT FINANCIALLY IN THE HOUSE THAT COULD POSSIBLY NEVER PROVIDE A RETURN DUE TO THIS PROJECT, BUT NOW OUR PRIVACY HAS BEEN COMPLETELY TAKEN FROM US.

WE ARE BASICALLY RESTRICTED TO STAY IN THE HOUSE IF WE WANT PRIVACY BECAUSE OUR FRIENDS DIDN'T.

BACKYARD NO LONGER WILL BE A PLACE OF PRIVACY.

SO I HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION, HOW WOULD YOU FEEL IF THIS WERE YOU AND YOUR NEW FAMILY MOVED IN HERE? WE BOUGHT INTO THIS COMMUNITY BECAUSE IT IS GATED, PRIVATE, QUIET AND PEACEFUL.

TO ONLY KNOW THAT OUR PRIVACY AND PEACEFULNESS WOULD BE RIPPED AWAY FROM US.

IN LESS THAN A MONTH. AND NOW I HAVE TO ATTEND THESE MEETINGS OVER AND OVER IN HOPES THAT WE GET EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND OUR SIDE OF THE STORY AND ALL OF OUR CONCERNS. SO NOT ONLY ARE WE ARE ALL OF THESE TAKEN AWAY FROM US, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOU'RE TAKING AWAY MY FAMILY TIME BECAUSE I HAVE TO BE HERE TO STAND UP FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

BECAUSE I'M FIGHTING FOR WHAT'S REASONABLE, RIGHT AND FAIR FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND ITS SURROUNDINGS.

THEN THERE'S THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, PROPERTY VALUES, WHICH I MENTIONED BEFORE.

HOW DO WE EVER SELL OUR HOME WHEN IT'S IN THE SHADOW OF A FIVE STORY BUILDING? HOW ARE WE COMPENSATED? MAYBE SOME OF THE REVENUE FROM THIS PROPOSED BUILDING SHOULD GO TO THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTS WHO ARE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED.

[01:05:01]

THESE PHOTOS ARE VERY MISLEADING AS THEY'RE SHOT WITH A WIDE ANGLE LENS, WHICH IS NOT WHAT THE HUMAN EYE SEES IN REALITY.

THIS PROPOSED BUILDING WOULD BE MUCH CLOSER AND WAY MORE INTRUSIVE THAN THEY ARE TRYING TO LEAD YOU TO BELIEVE.

YOU'LL SEE PHOTOS TONIGHT THAT PROVIDE A REALISTIC VIEW FROM THE HUMAN EYE.

AS MY FRUSTRATION HAS INCREASINGLY GROWN SINCE WE HAVE MOVED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I'D LIKE TO PROVIDE A QUICK DEFINITION FOR US ALL TO CONSIDER.

AND THAT IS THE MEANING OF BUSINESS ETHICS. BUSINESS.

BUSINESS ETHICS ARE THE MORAL PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS THAT GUIDE BUSINESS BEHAVIOR.

THEY ENCOMPASS VALUES LIKE HONESTY, INTEGRITY, FAIRNESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY IMPACTING ALL ASPECTS OF THE BUSINESS OPERATIONS. THESE PRINCIPLES EXTEND BEYOND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, SETTING A CODE OF CONDUCT THAT SHAPES ACTIONS AND FOSTERS TRUST WITH EVERYONE ELSE. I BRING THIS TO EVERYONE'S ATTENTION BECAUSE AS I STARTED TO DIG IN LITTLE BY LITTLE AND HEAR MORE OF THE STORY I LEARNED, I HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY, SIGNIFICANTLY QUESTIONED THE ETHICAL STANDPOINT OF THIS DEVELOPER WE SIT WITH HERE TONIGHT TO KNOW THAT US AS RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN LIED TO AND THE CITY HAS BEEN LIED TO.

I NOW WANT TO ADDRESS SOME MISLEADING STATEMENTS THAT CONTINUE TO SHOW UP IN THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE STAFF MEMORANDUMS. IT STATES THAT THE APPLICANT MET WITH THE RESIDENTS.

UNFORTUNATELY, THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S ONLY HAPPENED FOR THE NORTH SIDE OF PARKER ESPECIALLY.

I KNOW FOR CERTAIN IT HASN'T HAPPENED SINCE I'VE LIVED THERE.

WE AS A COMMUNITY WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR TO EVERYONE HERE TONIGHT THAT WE WERE NOT INVITED.

OUR RESIDENTS STILL HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTIFICATION AS TO ANY DEVELOPER COMMUNITY MEETING WITH OUR RESIDENTS.

EVEN THOUGH THE DEVELOPER MET WITH RESIDENTS NORTH OF PARKER ROAD IN THE REALM, IN MY OPINION, I HAVE TO SAY THAT THIS DECISION HAS BEEN CALCULATED BY THE DEVELOPER AND QUITE FRANKLY, IS SPINELESS.

IN THE APRIL PMC MEETING, MR. STANLEY WAS ASKED ABOUT NOTICES TO HOMEOWNERS.

MR. STANLEY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE RESIDENTS NORTH OF PARKER ROAD WERE NOTIFIED BY MAIL INDIVIDUALLY, BUT THE RESERVE RESIDENTS, THOSE OF US ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARKER, WERE NOT.

HE WAS CERTAIN TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT HE SENT OUT OVER 600 LETTERS IN THE MAIL.

BUT ONCE AGAIN, MY QUESTION OF ETHICS RESURFACE HERE.

AS MR. STANLEY STATED, WE LIVE IN A GATED COMMUNITY AND BECAUSE WE ARE TREATED A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

WORD FOR WORD. PERSONALLY, I WISH I KNEW WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO INSINUATE ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY AS I FEEL WE WERE BEING SLIGHTED. MR. STANLEY STATED THAT THEY ONLY SENT A NOTICE TO OUR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FIRM. OUR RESERVE BOARD AND OUR PROPERTY MANAGER KNEW NOTHING OF THIS.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, A DEVELOPER IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PROPER NOTICE TO HOMEOWNERS, NOT AN HOA OR AN HOA MANAGEMENT COMPANY.

AS I PREVIOUSLY STATED IN MEETINGS, I GUARANTEE I CAN FIND OUT WHAT EACH AND EVERY ONE EVERYONE'S ADDRESS IN THIS ROOM IS AS THERE IS THIS TOOL CALLED THE INTERNET. ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS A COWARDLY RESPONSE, AN EXCUSE FROM THE DEVELOPER.

WE WANT TO CLARIFY HOW MAIL IS DELIVERED WITHIN ALL OF CASTLE HILLS.

THE RESIDENTS NORTH OF PARKER GET THEIR MAIL DELIVERED FROM USPS TO CASTLE HILL'S MAIL CENTER.

THE MAIL CENTER THEN DELIVERS A MAIL DOOR TO DOOR TO THE INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS.

THE RESERVE RESIDENTS. THOSE OF US SOUTH OF PARKER GET OUR MAIL DELIVERED FROM USPS TO CASTLE HILL'S MAIL CENTER.

THE MAIL CENTER THEN DELIVERS DOOR TO DOOR TO OUR INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS.

THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE. LASTLY, THE CASTLE HILLS MAIL SERVICE HAS FULL GATE ACCESS TO OUR COMMUNITY, JUST AS THEY DO WITH OTHER GATED COMMUNITIES WITHIN CASTLE HILLS.

BECAUSE THIS BACKGROUND STATEMENT IS VERY MISLEADING.

WE WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE BACKGROUND STORY.

I'LL END ON THIS NOTE. THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT THAT YOU ADOPTED IN JANUARY OF 22 STATES THAT THE PD WAS ADOPTED TO ENSURE THE ZONING IN CASTLE HILLS WAS TAILORED

[01:10:02]

THIS FIVE STOREY MIXED USE PROJECT IS NOT COMPATIBLE, NOR IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, AS YOU WOULD BE HARD PRESSED TO FIND ANOTHER HOA THAT HAS BUILDINGS TOWER OVER ITS RESIDENCES.

I WILL LEAVE YOU ALL WITH THIS. I'VE HEARD FROM MULTIPLE NEIGHBORS IN CASTLE HILLS.

MANY THAT ARE NOT EVEN IN THE RESERVE, THAT IT'S A DONE DEAL.

AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPER AND THE HIGHER UPS ARE TELLING EVERYBODY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. FOLKS. IF I COULD.

I'D JUST APPRECIATE IF WE JUST KIND OF KEEP THE CLAPPING AND CHEERING DOWN TO A TO A MINIMUM TO NONE IF WE CAN.

BECAUSE THERE ARE LOTS OF DIFFERENT OPINIONS THAT MAY FLY AROUND THE ROOM. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON THE OPINIONS AND THE COMMENTARY.

SO THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE MR. TOM ROACH.

TOM ROACH, 28, 1200 KNIGHTS DRIVE. THANK YOU SIR.

THANK YOU, MAYOR GILMORE, CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF.

WE DO NOT OPPOSE DEVELOPMENT ON THIS LOT. NO OBJECTIONS TO SOMETHING MORE AKIN TO THE DEVELOPER'S ORIGINAL MULTI PAD SMALL RETAIL CONCEPT. THIS WOULD BE MORE COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA.

CERTAINLY NOT THIS MAJOR CHANGE OF A FIVE STORY APARTMENT RETAIL BUILDING THAT WILL RISE 64FT FROM THE LEVEL OF OUR FRONT PORCH LIKE IT WILL. TO OR FROM OUR NEIGHBORS HOMES AS WELL.

64FT. YOU KNOW, MR. STANLEY IS PRESIDENT AND CEO OF BRITE REALTY.

SAFE TO SAY, HE IS THE DEVELOPER OF THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THIS LOT AND SPEAKS FOR THE BRIGHT ORGANIZATION.

THE CITY REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPERS, AS STATED VERY WELL BY MR. LEWICKI, ARE CLEAR MAJOR MODIFICATION. THIS IS A QUOTE.

MAJOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONCEPT PLAN WOULD NEED TO BE AMENDED.

LIKE ALL OTHER PDS IN THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE, WITH A ZONING AMENDMENT PLUS PUBLIC HEARINGS BEFORE APPROVAL.

MAJOR CHANGES INCLUDE ADDITION OR REMOVAL OF BUILDINGS AND CHANGES TO SITE CIRCULATION, UNQUOTE.

SEEMS LIKE A VERY GOOD CHECK THAT'S BEEN BUILT IN TO MAKE SURE MAJOR CHANGES BY DEVELOPERS MAKE SENSE FOR THE COMMUNITY.

THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS WHAT BRINGS US RESIDENTS HERE TONIGHT AND BRINGS COUNCIL HERE TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE.

MR. STANLEY IS PROPOSING CHANGES IN A NUMBER, IN BOTH THE NUMBER OF BUILDINGS AND THE SITE CIRCULATION.

THE CHANGES IN SITE CIRCULATION ARE NOT CONTROVERSIAL.

THE CHANGE IN NUMBER OF BUILDINGS IS CONTROVERSIAL, HOWEVER, IS CHANGING FROM EIGHT SMALL STRUCTURES TO ONE BIG STRUCTURE A MAJOR CHANGE? WE, THE RESIDENTS, THINK, YES, MR. STANLEY THINKS NO.

OUR BEEF IS THAT HIS SINGLE BUILDING IS A FIVE STORY APARTMENT RETAIL BUILD THAT IS NOT COMPATIBLE OR CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.

MR. STANLEY HAS LOST THREE CONSECUTIVE VOTES ABOUT THIS MAJOR CHANGE.

THREE CONSECUTIVE VOTES HAVE BEEN LOST. NOW HE WANTS TO SAY THERE'S NO CHANGE IN BUILDINGS.

SO IF THERE'S NO CHANGE IN BUILDINGS, THERE'S NO NEED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT THE BUILDING.

NO. AND THERE'S NO REASON FOR A COUNCIL TO VOTE ABOUT THE BUILDING.

INTERESTING TACTIC. TONIGHT WE ARE COVERING REASONS WHY THE COUNCIL IS SAYING NO IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

I'M GOING TO COVER A COUPLE OF THESE REASONS NOW.

YOU HAVE COPIES OF SOME PICTURES, I BELIEVE, THAT WERE PASSED OUT AHEAD OF TIME.

YES, SIR. OKAY. OKAY. VERY GOOD. THE ISSUES I'M GOING TO DESCRIBE HAPPEN PRIOR TO ANNEXATION FROM 2008 TO 2020, SO THE COUNCIL MAY HAVE VERY LITTLE AWARENESS OF THEM.

MULTIPLE MAJOR WATER RELATED SOIL COLLAPSES HAVE HAPPENED WITHIN 400FT OF THIS BUILD SITE.

LOOKING AT SLIDE NUMBER TWO, PARKER ROAD HAS SHOWN AT THE TOP.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SHOWN JUST BELOW IT. THE RAIL LINE, THE 100 KNIGHT'S CUL DE SAC IS SHOWN.

SO THE BIG FAILURES THAT HAVE HAPPENED ARE THE YELLOW ARROWS.

AGAIN, THIS IS 400FT FROM THE PROPOSED BUILD.

SLIGHT. THERE'S BEEN THREE LANDSLIDES, THREE COLLAPSED WALLS, TWO FOUNDATION ISSUES AND A RAIL LINE SINK.

[01:15:08]

THE HUMAN IMPACT FOR 61 FAMILIES AND MULTIPLE RETAIL BUSINESSES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, ALONG WITH THE LARGE FINANCIAL LIABILITY THAT WOULD COME WITH THIS, WHO WOULD BE FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIRING THE BUILDING IN ITS FOUNDATION? WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST TO RELOCATE 61 FAMILIES? WHO WOULD BE COMPENSATE THE RETAILERS FOR LOST REVENUE? WHO WOULD COVER THE COST OF RAILROAD REPAIRS.

WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR NEW SOIL STABILIZATION MEASURES? FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD BE AGREED IN WRITING PRIOR TO ANY APPROVAL TO BUILD ON THIS PROPERTY TO PROTECT THE CITY BUILDING OCCUPANTS, RESIDENTS AND THE HOA. I WILL SHARE SOME INFORMATION ON TWO FAILURES WE HAVE ALREADY EXPERIENCED.

I WOULD ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THIS INFORMATION NOT FOR THE HUMAN IMPACT IT HAD ON US, BUT FOR THE IMPACT.

IF IT HAPPENS ON THIS NEW LOT. THINK OF THE SAME THING HAPPENING THERE.

SLIDE NUMBER FOUR. DURING A CASTLE HILLS WATER DISTRICT MEETING IN SEPTEMBER 2020, WHEN DISCUSSING THE MOST RECENT LANDSLIDE THAT WE HAD JUST EXPERIENCED, WE WERE MADE AWARE OF AN EARLIER LANDSLIDE ON THE SAME LOT THAT HAPPENED BACK IN 2008.

A FORMER BRIGHT DEVELOPMENT EMPLOYEE SAID. DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE AUDIO RECORDING.

WHEN I BUILT THE SLOPE, IT FAILED. IT FAILED BEFORE ANY HOMES WERE BUILT OR LOTS WERE SOLD.

THERE WAS A DISCUSSION WITH THE DEVELOPER THAT THESE LOTS SHOULD NOT BE SOLD, AND HOMES SHOULD NOT BE PUT ON THESE LOTS.

UNQUOTE. SO THIS SOIL WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM. THE DEVELOPER BUILT THE HOMES.

NO STRUCTURAL WALLS, NO WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM, NO STABILIZING PIERS ON THE HILL.

WHAT IF THE SAME HAPPENS ON THE PROPOSED BUILD SITE? SLIDE FIVE. THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE MOST RECENT LANDSLIDE FROM JUNE OF 2020.

2 MILLION POUNDS OF SOIL SLID DOWN THE HILL, DAMAGING THREE HOMES.

AGAIN, PICTURE THE PROPOSED BUILD SITE WITH THE SAME ISSUE.

SLIDE SIX. THIS IS OUR HOME. OUR NEIGHBORS WAS SIMILAR.

AN APARTMENT RETAIL BUILDING WOULD BE UNINHABITABLE IF THIS THE SAP.

SLIDE. SEVEN UNDERGROUND WATER FLOWS WERE FOUND DURING THE REBUILD.

MANY OF THE 74 PIR DRILLING TO STABILIZE THE HILL ALSO HIT WATER.

UNDERGROUND WATER FLOW IS INHERENT IN THIS AREA AND CAUSES SOIL INSTABILITY.

SLIDE EIGHT. THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE REBUILD OF THE 2020 LANDSLIDE FIVE MONTHS INTO THE PROJECT.

YOU DON'T FIX THESE THINGS IN TWO WEEKS. TOTAL TIME FROM SLIDE TO COMPLETION WAS NINE MONTHS.

WHERE ARE THE FAMILIES AND THE BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE? TOTAL COST OF THE REPAIRS EXCEEDED $700,000, THE MAJORITY PAID FOR WITH CASTLE HILLS WATER DISTRICT TAX FUNDS.

SLIDE NINE. ARE THERE ALREADY SIGNS OF SOIL ISSUES ON THE BUILD LOT? INTERESTING. I HAD A NEIGHBOR GIVE ME THE IMAGE THAT YOU SEE ON SLIDE NINE.

THIS IS A GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE. THERE'S ALREADY A 40 FOOT BY 40 FOOT SLIDE TOWARDS THE RAIL LINE FROM THE SUBJECT LOT, SO IT MAY BE A WARNING SIGN OF EXTREME FAILURES TO FOLLOW.

SLIDE TEN. IT TOOK 12 YEARS, BUT FINALLY, ON OUR PROPERTIES, A PROPER SOIL EVALUATION WAS DONE AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN COMPLETED. WILL THE DEVELOPER DO A GEO TECH SURVEY FOR THE NEW LOT? OF COURSE THEY WILL. DO YOU HAVE TO DO THAT? OKAY.

IT WAS DONE ON OUR PROPERTIES. OKAY. BUT OF COURSE OUR PROPERTY STILL FAILED.

SO EITHER THE SURVEY WASN'T VERY ACCURATE OR THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE NOT FOLLOWED.

COUNCIL SHOULD ASSURE A PROPER SOIL EVALUATION IS COMPLETED WITH STABILIZATION REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED AHEAD OF EVER ENTERTAINING APPROVAL.

NOT 12 YEARS LATER. PLEASE DO NOT LET 61 FAMILIES AND MULTIPLE BUSINESSES EXPERIENCED WHAT WE HAVE EXPERIENCED JUST FOUR 400FT AWAY.

NO ONE DID THE RIGHT THING BY LETTING US KNOW THESE PARTICULAR ABOUT THESE PARTICULAR FAILURES, AND WE CANNOT IN GOOD CONSCIENCE HAVE OTHERS BE UNINFORMED AS WE WERE.

MY FINAL POINT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I WOULD HAVE ASKED MR. STANLEY IF WE HAD EVER HAD A MEETING TO TALK ABOUT.

THIS IS WHERE'S THE PARK? THE SHORT ANSWER IS THERE ISN'T ONE.

[01:20:03]

SIMPLY NO ROOM. WHERE WILL THE CHILDREN OF 61 FAMILIES PLAY THEIR LANDLOCKED BY HAZARDS RAILROAD TRACKS, A WALL, INDIAN CREEK, PARKER ROAD. THEIR CHOICES TO PLAY ARE EITHER IN THE PARKING LOT, DOWN NEAR THE RAIL TRACKS, OR MAYBE INDIAN CREEK THAT BECOMES A RAGING RIVER WHEN IT RAINS.

THEY WILL HAVE TO CROSS SIX LANES OF HIGH SPEED PARKER ROAD TRAFFIC TO FIND A PARK EVEN WITH A TRAFFIC LIGHT, THIS IS A TRAGEDY WAITING TO HAPPEN. THE CITY HAS A GREAT STRATEGIC INITIATIVE ON TEN MINUTE WALK TO THE PARK, BUT I DOUBT IF THE SPIRIT OF THIS INITIATIVE INCLUDES KIDS WALKING ACROSS SIX LANES OF HIGH SPEED TRAFFIC.

OUR CITY DESERVES DEVELOPERS THAT DO THINGS, DO THE RIGHT THINGS, AND DO THEM IN THE RIGHT WAY.

COULD THIS PROJECT BE DONE? CERTAINLY. WE'VE YES, WE'VE SEEN THE DEVELOPER'S UPDATED CONCEPT PLAN.

SHOULD IT BE DONE? NO, NOT IN THE OPINION OF THE RESIDENTS, FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO COVER TONIGHT.

WILL IT BE DONE? THAT'S UP TO YOU. YOU GET A VOTE.

WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO PICK AMONGST THE MULTIPLE REASONS AND VOTE NO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. MR. RICK VIDAL. MR..

RICK VIDAL. NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE, SIR.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. RICK VIDAL, 28,100 KNIGHTS DRIVE.

PARDON ME GETTING OLD. WE ALL KNOW THAT THIS HAS COME BEFORE BOTH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL THREE TIMES. IT'S BEEN OPPOSED THREE TIMES.

AS MAYOR GILMORE HAS POINTED OUT. THE OPPOSITION IS UNANIMOUS, STRONG AND A LOT.

THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS HERE THAT ARE NOT HAPPY ABOUT THIS.

I WOULD LIKE TO START OUT BY CLARIFYING A MISCONCEPTION.

WE ARE NOW BEING TOLD THAT THE EXISTING CONCEPT PLAN WAS NEVER INTENDED TO PORTRAY EIGHT BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES.

HOWEVER, AT THE AUGUST 6TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THE STAFF REFERRED TO THIS AS EIGHT GARDEN OFFICES, LIKELY 1 OR 2 STORIES. THE DEVELOPER HIMSELF SAID CURRENT CONCEPT PLAN CALLS FOR EIGHT STRUCTURES AND I WOULD LIKE TO.

PLAY A LITTLE SOUNDTRACK HERE. HEY, MISTER. MISTER STANLEY, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.

YOU CAN. YES WE CAN. OKAY. THE CURRENT CONCEPT PLAN CALLS CALLS FOR EIGHT STRUCTURES.

AS WE'VE NOTED, JUST IN CASE THERE'S ANY DOUBT THAT OUR QUOTES HERE ARE NOT ACCURATE.

AT THE AUGUST 19TH COUNCIL MEETING THE STAFF MEMO SAID MAJOR CHANGE.

THIS IS A MAJOR CHANGE BECAUSE BUILDINGS WERE BEING REMOVED AND SITE CIRCULATION PATTERNS WERE IMPACTED.

THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SAID BUILDINGS OF THIS SIZE ON LOTS OF THIS SIZE ARE LIKELY TO BE 1 OR 2 STORIES AT THE APRIL 15TH PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING. AGAIN, THE STAFF MEMO SAID THIS IS A MAJOR CHANGE BECAUSE IT WAS MOVING BUILDINGS AND CHANGING SITE CIRCULATION.

PLANNING STAFF SAID THIS IS A CHANGE TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN TO A SINGLE BUILDING, AS OPPOSED TO 5 OR 6 SMALL BUILDINGS.

AT THE MAY 5TH COUNCIL MEETING, STAFF MEMO AGAIN SAID THIS IS A MAJOR CHANGE BECAUSE WE'RE REMOVING BUILDINGS AND WE'RE CHANGING SITE CIRCULATION.

HOWEVER, THIS ITEM WAS OR THIS MEETING AND THIS ITEM AT THIS MEETING WAS CONTINUED BY REQUEST OF THE DEVELOPER TO MAY 19TH.

SO THERE WAS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION OTHER THAN THE STAFF MEMO.

THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN WAS EIGHT STRUCTURES FOR GARDEN STYLE OFFICE RETAIL, AND THAT FACT HAS BEEN CONSISTENT FOR EIGHT MONTHS.

THE TWO PNC MEETINGS AND THE TWO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS SUDDENLY AT THE MAY 19TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

THE GARDEN STYLE OFFICE RETAIL SITES HAVE DISAPPEARED, AND THE ONLY FACTOR UNDER CONSIDERATION WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT IS THE INTERNAL SITE CIRCULATION FOUR TIMES AT FOUR DIFFERENT MEETINGS.

WE WERE LOOKING AT EIGHT SEPARATE BUILDING PADS OR STRUCTURES AND NOW THEY'RE GONE.

CITY PLANNING NEVER WAVERED THROUGH THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS, ALWAYS REFERRING TO EIGHT PAD SITES AND STRUCTURES SHOWN ON THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN.

THE DEVELOPER AND THEIR ENGINEER HAVE NEVER REFUTED THOSE FACTS BASED ON THEIR COMMENTS AT PRIOR MEETINGS.

AND NOW WE ARE BEING TOLD WE WERE ALL MISTAKEN.

WHAT HAPPENED? HOW DID THIS CHANGE? WHO MADE THIS DECISION? HOW? ONE DAY WE ARE LOOKING AT A MAJOR CONCEPT PLAN CHANGE REQUEST, AND THE NEXT DAY IT APPEARS THAT IT IS SOMEHOW APPROVED AND NO LONGER UNDER CONSIDERATION.

[01:25:08]

AN ORDINANCE NUMBER 0428220N MAY SAY OTHERWISE.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS PROPERTY IN THE REALM OF SOME DISTRICT. THIS PROPERTY DID NOT EXIST IN ITS CURRENT FORM PRIOR TO 2018, WHEN FM 544 WAS REALIGNED, NOR WHEN THE REALM PD WAS ADOPTED IN 2014.

IT WAS THE ACTUAL ROADBED OF THE OLD FM 544. YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE PHOTO DECK THAT I BELIEVE EVERYBODY HAS A COPY OF.

IT'S ON THE LAST PAGE AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE THAT THE OLD ROADBED IS NOW.

THIS PROPERTY. WHEN THE NEW ROAD WAS CONSTRUCTED, THIS SLIVER OF LAND WAS LEFT OVER.

THIS PROPERTY NEVER WAS PART OF THE REALM AND IS PHYSICALLY DIVORCED FROM THE REALM BY A SIX LANE, DIVIDED THOROUGHFARE. I ARGUE THIS PROPERTY SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED PART OF THE REALM.

THE DEVELOPER'S OWN SALES BROCHURE FOR THE PROPERTY.

AND IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS, I'VE GOT A COPY I'D LIKE TO SHARE.

THANK YOU. SIR. THAT SALES BROCHURE SAYS THAT.

LET ME FIND IT HERE. HERE YOU GO. IT SAYS THAT THIS PROPERTY IS JUST SOUTH OF THE REALM.

A ONE POINT 5,000,000 SQUARE FOOT MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR A HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE.

IN ADDITION TO THE STAFF MEMO. IN ADDITION, THE STAFF MEMO DESCRIBES THE PROPERTY AS FOLLOWS AND I QUOTE.

THE SITE HAS SEVERAL DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES, INCLUDING AN ODD OR IRREGULAR SHAPE, FLOODPLAIN GRADE VARIATION, LIMITED ACCESS ON FM 544, LIMITED VISIBILITY, ADJACENCY TO RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY, AND AN 80 TO 120 FOOT ELECTRICAL EASEMENT. I COULDN'T HAVE DESCRIBED THAT ANY BETTER MYSELF, BUT LET'S NOT STOP THERE, SINCE THERE'S ONE MORE DESCRIPTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED TO THIS LIST OF CHALLENGES. IT IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. ALL OF THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN CASTLE HILLS ARE BUILT ADJACENT TO A FREEWAY, COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, ANOTHER APARTMENT BUILDING, A MAJOR POWER LINE EASEMENT, OR A MAJOR DRAINAGE AREA, ALL OF WHICH CREATE A NATURAL BUFFER. AS WAS POINTED OUT BY THE MCADAMS REPRESENTATIVE.

THERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS THERE. THE DIFFERENCE IS THOSE PLANNED OR THOSE WERE NOT CHANGED.

THE CONCEPT PLANS WERE IN PLACE, SO WHOEVER BOUGHT THOSE HOMES KNEW WHAT WAS THERE OR THE HOMES WERE BEING BUILT CONCURRENTLY WITH THE APARTMENTS.

SO THERE'S NO SURPRISES, UNLIKE THIS SITUATION.

YOUR PEERS ARE PLANNING, A ZONING COMMISSION COMMENTED WHILE DENYING THIS REQUEST TWICE, THAT A FIVE STORY MULTIFAMILY BUILDING ON THAT SITE DOES NOT BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY.

AND THIS IS NOT A FIT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IF YOU TRAVEL UP AND DOWN FM 544, YOU WILL NOT SEE ANY BUILDINGS OVER TWO STOREYS.

WHAT YOU WILL SEE IS SCHOOLS, SINGLE STOREY RETAIL OR RESTAURANT BUILDINGS, COMMERCIAL BUSINESS BUILDINGS AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THAT IS WHAT FITS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE KNOW THAT BY RIGHT, GP2 ZONING ALLOWS A FIVE STOREY MULTIFAMILY BUILDING, BUT ONLY IF THE CONCEPT PLAN IS CHANGED AND APPROVED.

WE ALSO KNOW GP2 ALLOWS FOR A MULTITUDE OF OTHER USES, INCLUDING 1 OR 2 STOREY OFFICE RETAIL PROFESSIONAL BUILDINGS.

THE TACTICS HERE OF A BULLY ALWAYS SEEM TO FOLLOW THE MONEY TRAIL, AS DEMONSTRATED WHEN THE DEVELOPER STATED AT THE AUGUST PNC MEETING THAT HE WOULD MAKE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THAT REAL ESTATE.

WHAT THAT MEANS IS HE'S GOING TO GO AFTER THE HIGHEST PRICE, AND IN HIS OPINION, THAT'S THE BEST USE.

WE BOUGHT OUR HOME THREE YEARS AGO, KNOWING THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY BEHIND US WAS FOR SALE.

IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE PICTURES, OUR HOME IS IN THOSE PICTURES.

WE LOOKED INTO IT AND WE'RE TOLD IT WAS BEING MARKETED AS RETAIL AS THE SIGN ON THE PROPERTY SAID, AND STILL DOES TO THIS DAY. WE CLOSED ON THE PURCHASE FEELING SAFE THAT IT WAS SOMETHING WE COULD EASILY LIVE WITH.

NOW WE ARE FACING A FIVE STORY APARTMENT BUILDING BEING MARKETED BY AN UNSCRUPULOUS DEVELOPER TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A LOOPHOLE IN A DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

THEIR OWN DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS ADOPTED TO ENSURE THAT ZONING IN CASTLE HILLS WAS TAILORED TO MATCH EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

THIS APARTMENT BUILDING IN THIS LOCATION WOULD BE NEITHER COMPATIBLE NOR CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA.

[01:30:03]

THE DEVELOPER HAS MADE CHANGES TO THIS PROPOSAL NOT TO TRY TO MAKE IT MORE DIGESTIBLE, BUT BECAUSE OF A POWER LINE HE'S BEEN ON THE PROPERTY HE HAS APPARENTLY CONVINCED SOMEONE THAT THERE IS NEVER A EIGHT GARDEN STYLE OFFICE RETAIL BUILDING PLANNED FOR THIS SITE.

THE SIGN ON THE PROPERTY STILL SAYS FOR SALE RETAIL.

IT HAS BEEN THERE FOR AT LEAST THREE YEARS, AND THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AN OBJECTION TO THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT BUY RIGHT YOU CAN DO. IT'S ABOUT DOING THE RIGHT THING.

OUR VOICES ARE IMPORTANT AND MUST BE CONSIDERED THE CITY COUNCIL, WHICH WE ARE THE THIRD LEG OF A THREE LEGGED STOOL WHICH CONSISTS OF THE DEVELOPER, THE CITY COUNCIL, AND ALL OF US.

WE ARE THE COMMUNITY. WE ARE LEWISVILLE. IT'S NEVER WRONG.

IT'S NEVER A WRONG TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

AND NOW IS THE TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. GEORGE IS SMILING.

MISS SMILEY, IF I CAN GET YOU. NAME AND ADDRESS. FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. GEORGIA SMILEY 401 CROWN OF GOLD. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE TONIGHT.

I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT A FEW ITEMS THAT, IN MY OPINION, NEED TO BE STATED, RESTATED, OR QUESTIONS ASKED AND ANSWERS RECEIVED IN ORDER TO CLARIFY FOR ALL PARTIES. BUT FIRST, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO ASK EVERYONE IN THIS CHAMBER AUDIENCE, IF YOU'RE HERE TONIGHT, IN OPPOSITION OF THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST TO BUILD A FIVE STORY MIXED USE BUILDING ON THIS THREE AND A HALF ACRES, PLEASE STAND. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOU MAY BE SEATED.

COUNCIL. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE REMAIN STEADFAST IN OUR OPPOSITION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT COMPATIBLE NOR CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT.

ONE ITEM OF IMPORTANCE THAT EVERYONE ON THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO ALWAYS KEEP IN THEIR MIND IS THAT THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT PD DOCUMENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED ON JANUARY 3RD, 2022. IT INCORPORATED ALL PROVISIONS OF THE CASTLE HILLS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ALONG WITH VARIANCES TO THE AGREEMENT APPROVED SINCE 1996. THE PD WAS ADOPTED TO ENSURE THAT ZONING IN CASTLE HILLS WAS TAILORED TO MATCH EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

THIS DOCUMENT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND GIVES ALL PARTIES GUIDELINES TO OPERATE WITHIN.

IT MUST BE FOLLOWED AND ADHERED TO. BELOW ARE SOME ITEMS THAT WE FOUND WHEN REVIEWING THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S MEETING.

ONE THE ONLY FACTOR UNDER CONSIDERATION WITH THIS CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT IS THE INTERNAL SITE CIRCULATION.

BUT I ASK, HOW CAN YOU APPROVE A SITE CIRCULATION PLAN WHEN YOU HAVEN'T EVEN APPROVED A CONCEPT PLAN? TWO. WE ARE BEING TOLD THAT UPON ANNEXATION, THE CITY HAD 60 DAYS TO ADOPT A PERMANENT ZONING FOR THE AREA, AND THAT REQUIRED A CONCEPT PLAN BE ATTACHED.

THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A CONCEPT PLAN AND IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE PD.

THAT CONCEPT PLAN REFLECTED EIGHT PAD SITES. CONCEPT PLANS PLAY KEY ROLES IN DEVELOPMENT, AND I'D LIKE TO QUOTE MR. LUDEK BACK IN THE AUGUST 2024 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

HE STATED CONCEPT PLANS ARE VERY IMPORTANT. THEY ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT AS BASE ZONING.

CONCEPT PLANS COMPLEMENT BASE ZONING BY BRINGING INTO FOCUS THE LOCATION OF BUILDINGS, STREETS AND OTHER AREAS OTHER ACCESS WAYS. I WOULD ALSO ADD TO MR. LUCKY'S COMMENT THAT CONCEPT PLANS ALSO PROVIDE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND BUSINESSES INFORMATION ON WHAT THE FUTURE WILL LOOK LIKE, SO THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO MAKE WELL-INFORMED DECISIONS ABOUT WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE OR WHERE THEY WANT TO BUILD THEIR BUSINESSES. SO IT'S NOT RIGHT THAT THE APPLICANT CAN JUST CHANGE IT WHENEVER THEY WANT TO, WITHOUT ANY REGARD TO THE RAMIFICATIONS TO THOSE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS OR BUSINESSES.

SO IN OUR SITUATION HERE, THE APPLICANT CREATED A CONCEPT PLAN THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THE PD THAT WAS ADOPTED IN JANUARY 2022.

THE APPLICANT DISCOVERS THAT WHAT THEY'VE CREATED, HE CAN'T BUILD ON BECAUSE OF EASEMENTS.

APPLICANT IS NOW ATTEMPTING TO CONVINCE EVERYONE THAT WE ARE ALL CRAZY, AND THAT ALL THE MANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN REFLECTING EIGHT BUILDINGS, IS NOW TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT HAS EVER BEEN DISCUSSED.

SO HE NEEDS US ALL TO BELIEVE THAT WE ARE CRAZY, AND THAT IT WAS NEVER HIS INTENTION TO BUILD MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON THIS SITE.

SO IF WE BELIEVE THIS, THEN HE CAN CONVINCE YOU THAT WE ONLY NEED TO TALK ABOUT A SITE CIRCULATION PLAN.

[01:35:06]

AS WE'VE NOTED, THE APPLICANT'S INABILITY TO PUT TOGETHER A LEGITIMATE CONCEPT PLAN IS NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE OUR PROBLEM.

HIS INABILITY DOES NOT AND SHOULD NOT GIVE HIM THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THE CONCEPT PLAN WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ALL THE PROPER PROCESSES OF APPROVAL.

CONCEPT PLANS ARE VERY IMPORTANT. JUST AS MR. LUDEK STATED ABOVE. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A CONCEPT PLAN? IF YOU CAN JUST CHANGE IT WHENEVER YOU WANT TO WITHOUT PROPER PROCESSES, HOW IS THAT FAIR TO THE CITIZENS AND WHERE IS THE PROTECTION FOR THE CITIZENS? WE ARE NOW BEING TOLD THAT THE DRIVE TO THE PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE RELOCATED TO ACCOMMODATE AN EXISTING ENCORE EASEMENT ALONG THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, AND A CONCEPT PLAN MODIFICATION IS NOW REQUIRED.

WE ARE ALSO BEING TOLD THAT THE SITE HAS ALL KINDS OF DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES WHICH WE'VE LISTED.

WE ARE ALSO BEING TOLD THAT THE PRESENCE OF THE EASEMENT WAS NOT KNOWN WHEN THE ORIGINAL PD WAS ADOPTED IN JANUARY 22ND, AND THAT THIS PLAT WAS APPROVED IN JUNE OF 22, REPLANTED IN APRIL OF 23.

SO HERE'S WHAT I SAY TO ALL THOSE ITEMS ONE. IT NEEDS TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT THIS APPLICANT HAS OWNED THIS PROPERTY LONG BEFORE ANNEXATION, AND LONG BEFORE HE HAD TO CREATE A CONCEPT PLAN TO ATTACH TO THE PD DOCUMENT.

TWO THIS PROPERTY IS OWNED BY THE APPLICANT, AND IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT EASEMENTS MAY OR MAY NOT EXIST ON THEIR PROPERTY.

THE ENCORE EASEMENT HAS BEEN THERE LONG BEFORE THIS PROPERTY WAS DIVORCED FROM THE REALM, LONG BEFORE THE CITY ANNEXED CASTLE HILLS, AND LONG BEFORE THE CITY ADOPTED THE ORIGINAL PD IN JANUARY OF 22.

SO WHY DOES AN ACCOMMODATION NEED TO BE MADE HERE? WHY SHOULD HOMEOWNERS BE PENALIZED BECAUSE THE APPLICANT HAS AN ODD SHAPED PROPERTY WITH LIMITATIONS AND EASEMENTS ON IT? WE ALSO LEARNED THAT THE DEVELOPER STATED THAT HE WILL FUND A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT FM 544 IN ESSEX DRIVE, AND THAT HE HAS COMPLETED A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PREPARED IN AUGUST 24TH, AND THAT THIS STUDY IS UNDER STAFF REVIEW.

HERE ARE MY COMMENTS TO THAT. FIRST OF ALL, HE USED MCADAMS TO COMPLETE THIS TIA AND IT WAS DONE IN AUGUST 24TH.

IS THIS A STUDY THAT CAN BE RELIED UPON? IT SEEMS THAT MCADAMS AND BRITE ARE A LITTLE TOO CLOSE, IN MY OPINION, AND I WONDER IF THE PROPER OBJECTIVITY IS THERE ON MCADAMS PART.

IT APPEARS THAT THE TIA WAS NOT DONE DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR, AND ANYONE WHO DRIVES DOWN PARKER ROAD DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR NEAR KILLIAN MIDDLE SCHOOL WILL TELL YOU THAT THE TRAFFIC IS RIDICULOUS.

I DID A LITTLE RESEARCH MYSELF ON TES, AND WHAT I READ ABOUT IT STATE THAT IF YOUR STUDY IS NEAR A SCHOOL, IT SHOULD BE DONE DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR. I'M ALSO CURIOUS HOW MCADAMS COUNTED THE TRAFFIC.

I DON'T RECALL ANY INDICATION OF A TRAFFIC STUDY DURING THE LAST FEW YEARS ON PARKER ROAD.

SO ARE THEY JUST USING COMPUTER SOFTWARE OR DO THEY GO TO PARKER ROAD? SET UP WHAT I WOULD CALL A PROPER STUDY, AND COUNT THE TRAFFIC.

THE DEVELOPER HAS ALWAYS SAID HE WOULD PAY FOR THE COST OF THE INSTALLATION OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND ETC.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THAT TIRE, IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT HE'S WILLING TO PAY 100% OF THE COST.

IT LOOKS LIKE HE'S WANTING TO DO A FEE IN LIEU AMOUNT OF $103,250 TOWARDS THE IMPROVEMENT, AND MCADAMS REFLECTS AN ESTIMATED COST OF 350,000.

SO YOU'RE ON THE HOOK FOR THE OTHER. NOW, WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, I'LL BE THE FIRST TO TELL YOU THAT I'M NOT EDUCATED ON TIAS, BUT I HOPE THE CITY MAKES CERTAIN THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED WITH THIS DEVELOPER AND MCADAMS. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT A VISUAL IMPACT? SORRY, WHAT ABOUT A VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT? HAS ONE BEEN DONE FOR THIS? THREE AND A HALF ACRES, WHICH PROPOSES A FIVE STORY MIXED USE BUILDING.

IF SO, WE WOULD LIKE A COPY OF IT. IF NOT, WE BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED.

IN CASE YOU'RE ASKING, WHAT IS A VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT? WELL, GENERALLY IT'S GENERALLY REQUIRED WHEN A DEVELOPMENT OR PROJECT COULD SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT THE VISUAL CHARACTER OR AMENITY OF AN AREA.

THIS OFTEN INCLUDES PROJECTS THAT COULD ALTER THE LANDSCAPE, CHANGE LAND USE, OR IMPACT THE ESTHETIC APPEARANCE OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

WE BELIEVE THIS IS DEFINITELY A SITUATION WHERE THIS SHOULD BE MANDATORY BEFORE ANY YES VOTES ARE GIVEN.

BUT I DO GO BACK TO THE INITIAL FACTS OF THIS CASE.

HOW CAN YOU VOTE ON A SITE CIRCULATION MATTER, WHICH IS WHAT'S ON THE TABLE FOR A VOTE? WHEN THE PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN CHANGED FROM EIGHT PAD SITES TO A SINGLE MULTI-STORY MIXED USE BUILDING HAS NEVER BEEN APPROVED, TO OUR KNOWLEDGE. IF WE FOLLOW THE PD DOCUMENT THAT WAS ADOPTED IN JANUARY 22ND.

THAT DOCUMENT STATES SPECIFICALLY THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT MUST BE COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

[01:40:02]

THE REALM IS FAIRLY, FAIRLY REMOVED FROM WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THIS AREA.

SO BASED ON THIS REASON, YOU SHOULD VOTE NO TO THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY. AND THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ALL OF OUR CONCERNS.

THANK YOU. PHIL SMILEY.

MY NAME IS PHIL SMILEY. I'M AT 401 CROWN OF GOLD.

I MAY NOT BE AS ELOQUENT AS SOME OF THESE OTHER SPEAKERS, SO BEAR WITH ME. BUT, MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.

IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO HAND YOU GIVE YOU SOME SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS THAT YOU CAN DISTRIBUTE, MR. MAYOR, THAT WILL SUPPORT WHAT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT.

THANK YOU SIR.

AS I SHARE WITH YOU AND THE COUNCIL MEETING ON MAY 19TH, A LITTLE OVER 13 MONTHS AGO, I WAS ELECTED TO SERVE ON THE RESERVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD, AND JUST THIS PAST APRIL WAS APPOINTED AS PRESIDENT.

ALSO IN THAT LAST MEETING, I EMPHASIZED YOU THE LEVEL OF DISTRUST OUR RESIDENTS IN THE RESERVE COMMUNITY HAVE FOR THE APPLICANT, A DISTRUST BROUGHT ABOUT, IN MY OPINION, BY A LACK OF INTEGRITY.

OUR PASSION THAT OUR COMMUNITY HAS CAN EASILY BE TRACED BACK TO WHEN TONIGHT'S TOPIC FIRST AROSE LAST SUMMER.

TWO WEEKS AGO, I RECAPPED FOR YOU A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT OCCURRED IN THE AUGUST 2024 COUNCIL MEETING.

I SHARED WITH YOU THE EXAMPLE WHERE MR. STANLEY, REPRESENTING BRICKELL LAND LLC, ATTEMPTED TO SEPARATE HIMSELF FROM ME FROM THE MANY TENTACLES OF THE RIGHT ORGANIZATION. AND IF YOU DO A REVIEW OF THE TEXAS CONTROLLER RECORDS SO YOU CAN SEE FOR YOURSELF, THAT'S VERY MISLEADING. MR. STANLEY SERVES AS AN OFFICER OF MANY COMPANIES, SOME OF WHICH AFFECT OUR RESIDENTS PERSONALLY.

ONE SUCH RESIDENT. ONE SUCH ORGANIZATION IS THE CASTLE HILLS MASTER ASSOCIATION, CASTLE HILLS COUNCIL.

PLEASE NOTE THAT IN MY PRESENTATION I MAY REFER TO THE DEVELOPER, THE APPLICANT OR RMA THAT MR. STANLEY IS INVOLVED IN ALL OF THESE. ALSO IN THAT AUGUST MEETING, YOU LEARNED THAT THE APPLICANT HAS NOT COMMUNICATED ANYTHING TO OUR COMMUNITY.

IT WAS NOT FOR IF IT WAS NOT FOR A VERY OBSERVANT RESIDENT IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SEEING THE POSTING ON THE PROPERTY LAST SUMMER, WE WOULD HAVE KNOWN NOTHING.

SPEAKING OF NO COMMUNICATION, IF I MAY, I'D ALSO LIKE TO RECAP SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE IN THE AUGUST 2024 COUNCIL MEETING.

COUNCIL MEMBER K TO MISTER STANLEY. THERE'S A TOTAL LACK OF COMMUNICATION, AND PASSING OUT BUSINESS CARDS DOESN'T CUT IT.

THERE NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSIONS. THERE NEEDS TO BE COMPROMISES.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD NOT BE SHOVED DOWN A NEIGHBOR'S THROAT.

COUNCIL MEMBER JONES. MR. STANLEY, YOU HAVE TO TAKE SOME TIME TO TALK TO THE RESIDENTS TO SEE WHAT'S ACCEPTABLE.

BY RIGHTS, YOU CAN DO SOME THINGS, BUT BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR IS IMPORTANT.

WHILE MR. STANLEY ACKNOWLEDGED WHAT YOU SAID, HE SAID HE'D BE HAPPY TO SET UP A MEETING WITH THESE NEIGHBORS LIKE OTHER NEIGHBORS.

BUT HE ALSO SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHAT I GIVE HERE.

THAT COMMENT CLEARLY SHOWS HIS UNWILLINGNESS AT WORKING WITH US TO COMING TO A COMPROMISE.

AS OF TODAY, THE APPLICANT STILL HAS NEVER MET WITH THE RESIDENTS OF THE RESERVE COUNCIL.

IN MY OPINION, THE APPLICANT HAS BLATANTLY DISREGARDED COUNCIL'S DIRECTION TO MEET WITH OUR COMMUNITY.

AS A FORMER BUSINESS OWNER, IF THIS PERSON WAS MY EMPLOYEE, HE WOULD NOW BE MY EX EMPLOYEE.

IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS EVEN ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT.

IF THIS APPLICANT CAN, IF THIS APPLICANT CAN BLATANTLY DISREGARD YOUR REQUEST, WHAT ELSE CAN THEY BLATANTLY DISREGARD? IF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS ALLOWED TO PROCEED. HONESTY AND INTEGRITY MATTER.

ALSO, IN THE MAY 19TH COUNCIL MEETING, I HELPED PUT CONTEXT INTO ANOTHER REASON OUR RESIDENTS DO NOT TRUST THE APPLICANT AND THIS CENTERS UPON THE CURRENT SITUATION THEY ARE HAVING TO DEAL WITH WITH THEM REGARDING THE TOTAL DISREGARD OF THEIR LEGAL REQUIREMENT TO PRESERVE AND IMPROVE LOT 16 X BLOCK A WITHIN THE RESERVE COMMUNITY, THIS LOT AND BLOCK IS KNOWN AS THE RESERVE LAKE PARK OR BOOT PARK.

OUR RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WERE DEVELOPED AND EXECUTED BY THIS APPLICANT.

BOOT PARK WAS MARKETED AS AN AMENITY TO OUR COMMUNITY.

RESIDENTS WHO PURCHASED HOMES, THEN BACK THAT BACK UP ONTO BOOT PARK PAID PREMIUM PRICES FOR THOSE HOMES.

AND OUR LAST MEETING, I MADE YOU AWARE OF MAY'S ANNOUNCEMENT IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR THAT THEY'RE GOING TO TURN BOOT PARK INTO A NO MO ZONE,

[01:45:08]

AS YOU CAN SEE IN WHAT I'VE GIVEN YOU, THEY CANNOT LEGALLY DO THIS.

ALSO, IN THAT MEETING, I MADE YOU AWARE THAT OH.

AFTER THAT, I'M SORRY. YEAH. IN THAT MEETING, I MADE YOU AWARE IN THE SEPTEMBER KMA MASTER ANNUAL MEETING THAT MR. STANLEY, ACTING AS THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE WITH KMA, ALLUDED TO ASKING MISS STACY AND I IN PARKS AND RECREATION FOR ASSISTANCE WITH THE NO MO ZONE. AFTER MEETING WITH MISS AND I AND MYSELF, I LEARNED ONE PREPARATIONS REQUIRED TO CREATE A PROPER NO MO ZONE AND TO MISS.

AND I HAS NOT BEEN ASKED TO BE ASSIST TO FOR ASSISTANCE.

NOR DOES SHE HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE KMA.

TO IMPLEMENT A PROPER ANAMOSA. SINCE SEPTEMBER, KMA ANNUAL MEETING AND ALL THE SUBSEQUENT COMMUNICATION FROM KMA INCLUDED, A MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE HAS FOCUSED ON TWO KEY THEMES THE APPLICANT AND KMA, SAYING WE'RE NOT PUTTING ANOTHER DOLLAR INTO BOOT PARK AND TWO CMHA IS LETTING THE PARK, WHICH IS A FLOODPLAIN, GO NATIVE. THIS IS IN DIRECT VIOLATION TO THEIR LEGAL REQUIREMENT AND NOWHERE IN HIS COMMENTS AND NOWHERE CLOSE TO CONSULTING WITH US AND I ABOUT A NO GO ZONE.

CURRENTLY, YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT CITY CODE COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT HAS CITED THIS APPLICANT MULTIPLE TIMES FOR BEING OUT OF COMPLIANCE, AND AS OF TODAY, THEY ARE STILL OUT OF COMPLIANCE.

ALSO, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW IN THIS ROOM, SAFETY ISSUES EXIST ON BOOT PARKS, SUCH AS FIRE FROM HIGH GRASSES AND WEEDS AS WELL AS EXPOSED WIRING ON THE PROPERTY.

FLOOD RISK EXISTS DUE TO NON MAINTENANCE OF THE DRAINAGE CANAL THAT REMOVES STORMWATER FROM PARK OR ROAD TO BOOT PARK.

AND LASTLY, KNOW THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING LAND MOVEMENT ISSUES OURSELVES IN BOOT PARK DUE TO THE NEGLIGENCE OF THIS OF NOT MAINTAINING THIS PROPERTY.

SADLY, HOLDING THE THE APPLICANT AND KMA ACCOUNTABLE HAS BECOME A JOB IN ITSELF, NOT ONLY FOR MYSELF BUT ALSO FOR CITY STAFF AS STAFF IS DEALING WITH NOT ONLY WHAT I'VE SHARED, BUT ALSO WITH CURRENT RETAINING WALL FAILURES AND OTHER NEGLIGENT ISSUES IN CASTLE HILLS, ESPECIALLY WHERE THEIR NEGLIGENCE IS IMPACTING THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE.

AGAIN, I ASKED YOU WHY THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT EVEN ON THE AGENDA? IN MY OPINION, THIS APPLICANT HAS SHOWN A PATTERN OF NOT BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

I'VE ALWAYS HEARD THAT PAST PERFORMANCE IS A VERY GOOD PREDICTOR OF FUTURE PERFORMANCE.

AGAIN, THIS HAS TAKEN A LOT OF CITY'S TIME AND STAFF TIME ALONG WITH OUR TAXPAYERS DOLLARS, AND I FIND THIS EXTREMELY SAD. SO IN CLOSING, OUR COMMUNITY RESPECTFULLY ASKED FOR THE COUNCIL TO VOTE NO ON THIS PROPOSITION.

A NO VOTE WILL LET ALL CITIZENS OF LEWISVILLE KNOW THAT YOU CARE ABOUT ONE.

A RESIDENT'S QUALITY OF LIFE MORE THAN YOU CARE ABOUT A DEVELOPER'S GREED.

TWO THE COMPETITIVE COMPATIBILITY AND CONSISTENCY OF DEVELOPMENTS WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOODS MATTER.

THREE THAT YOU CARE ABOUT THE VALUES OF OUR RESIDENTS PROPERTIES, AND LASTLY, THAT YOU CARE ABOUT THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN AND OUR CITY.

A NO VOTE WILL SPEAK VOLUMES THAT INTEGRITY AND BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR MATTER TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

IF YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS AND CASTING A NO VOTE NO.

THERE IS NOTHING THAT SAYS WE CAN'T COME BACK AND REVISIT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE.

OUR OPENNESS TO KEEP DIALOG GOING WOULD BE DEPENDING ON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.

FOR US AS RESIDENTS, WE WOULD LIKE A MEETING.

A MEETING THAT YOU ASKED FOR. THAT SAID THAT WE SHOULD HAVE, BUT WE WOULD LIKE A MEETING WITH US AND THE DEVELOPER AND US TO COME WITH A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE SOLUTION OR TWO FOR THE CITY AND THE CITIZENS OF LEWISVILLE.

CONSULTANTS APPROVED BY THE CITY, WITH ALL COSTS BORNE BY THE APPLICANT.

ONE TO DEVELOP A PROPER SOIL EVALUATION STUDY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE DETAILED ANALYSIS OF, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SOIL BEARING CAPACITY, SOIL STABILITY, AND SETTLEMENT TO MITIGATE RISK OF LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE INSTABILITY.

WE ALSO WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A COMPLETE TEXT REVIEW AND AN INDEPENDENT AND COMPLETE TRAFFIC STUDY, AND LASTLY, COMPLETE A VISUAL IMPACT STUDY. ALSO, YOU NEED TO ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE COMPLETE LIABILITY COVERAGE IN THE EVENT OF SOIL FAILURE TO PROTECT ALL OF US AS TAXPAYERS FROM THE DEVELOPER WALKING AWAY FROM THEIR FINANCIAL LIABILITY.

AS TOM ROCHE ALLUDED TO IN HIS PRESENTATION. CASTLE HILLS ARE THE CASTLE'S WATER DENTON COUNTY WATER DISTRICT.

TAXPAYER DOLLARS WAS ALL OF OUR DOLLARS THAT PAID FOR THAT REPAIR, NOT THE DEVELOPER.

AND LASTLY, THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS FOR CHILDREN RESIDING IN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, PROVIDING THEM WITH DESIRABLE RECREATION OPTIONS BY PROTECTING THEM FROM THE RAILWAY, THE CREEK AND FLOODPLAIN RISKS, AND THE HIGH LIKELIHOOD OF CHILDREN CROSSING SIX LANES OF 50 MILE AN HOUR TRAFFIC ON PARKER ROAD.

AGAIN, OUR COMMUNITY ASKED FOR YOU TO STAND UP FOR ALL CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY AND VOTE NO ON THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

FINALLY, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO OUR RESIDENTS. TO BE RESPECTFUL, I'D LIKE TO ASK THAT THE CONCLUSION OF THE COUNCIL'S VOTE ON THIS AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT,

[01:50:06]

I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT. IF ANYONE FROM MCADAMS OR MR. STANLEY WOULD LIKE TO SAY ANY FURTHER WORDS. I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP TO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FIRST. OR IF YOU WANT TO ASK MR. STANLEY QUESTIONS, I WOULD IMAGINE WE NEED TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

NOW, I JUST WANTED TO SAY, OKAY, MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNSEL. PLEASE VOTE. ALL RIGHT.

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. I HAVE TWO QUICK COMMENTS.

YOU ALL ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO STAY AND PARTICIPATE IN THE REST OF THE COUNCIL MEETING.

WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOU HERE ALL THE TIME. SO BUT WITH THAT REGARD, I DO APPRECIATE THE COMMENT AND WHAT WAS MEANT THERE.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK MR. TOM ROACH FOR ADDING THE WORD BEEF IN THE MODERN DEFINITION TO OUR COUNCIL MEETING, SO I APPRECIATE THAT ONE. IT'LL GO DOWN IN HISTORY WITH THAT COUNCIL.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THIS UP FOR ANY COUNCIL COMMENTS OR OR A MOTION.

I HAVE. DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? I'LL CHECK WITH YOU.

OKAY. SO THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR COMING.

REALLY APPRECIATE IT. I AM ALSO I'M VERY, VERY HUMBLED TO HEAR EVERYBODY'S OPINIONS AND INPUT INTO THIS PROCESS. I HAVE SAT HERE QUIETLY FOR QUITE A FEW MEETINGS, AND I HAVE GOT A LOT OF THINGS I'D LIKE TO SAY.

SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME. I DID I WANT TO START OUT BY SAYING KIND OF WHERE WHERE I'M COMING FROM AND ALL OF THIS I AM I'M A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER. AND MY CAREER IS IN LAND PLANNING AND LAND ENTITLEMENT.

SO YOU KNOW, I'M I'M LOOKING FOR THE TECHNICALITIES HERE, AND I'M TRYING TO GET MY ARMS AROUND WHAT EXACTLY WE ARE CONSIDERING AND WHAT WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING. I KNOW FOR A FACT WE ARE NOT CONSIDERING ZONING.

I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT WE ARE NOT CONSIDERING HEIGHT, AND THAT ALTHOUGH I WOULD SAY THE HEIGHT IS NOT UNLIMITED, THAT'S YOUR HEIGHT IS LIMITED BY HOW MUCH PARKING YOU CAN GET ON THE PROPERTY.

BUT THERE IS THERE IS A COMMENT IN THE THE BACKUP THAT I JUST WANTED TO QUOTE.

IT SAYS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS TRIGGERING A PUBLIC HEARING SOLELY DUE TO THE RELOCATION OF A CIRCULATION DRIVE.

I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THAT, AND MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION DOESN'T NECESSARILY ALIGN WITH THAT LOGIC.

AND BECAUSE I BELIEVE BASED ON MY I EXPERIENCE.

AND, YOU KNOW, OF DOING THIS JOB LAND PLANNING, PUTTING TOGETHER PLAN DEVELOPMENTS MYSELF THAT THIS CONCEPT PLAN SETS A FORM FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THE FORM OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, OR THE INTENTION OF WHAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE, HAS FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED. AND I'LL EXPLAIN WHY.

SO IN THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN, THERE ARE SEVERAL PARCELS THAT ARE LEFT BLANK.

THIS PARCEL WAS NOT LEFT BLANK. IT HAD LOT LINES ON IT.

AND TO ME THAT IMPLIES THAT THERE WAS A PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY AT THE TIME THAT THIS CONCEPT PLAN WAS PUT TOGETHER.

AT THE TIME, WE HAD PUBLIC HEARINGS TO ADDRESS THAT.

THERE WAS A PLAN FOR THIS SITE. AND SO IF THERE WASN'T, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT BLANK. THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN IN ALIGNMENT WITH THERE WAS A PLAN FOR THIS.

IT SHOWS A SUBDIVISION OF THIS SITE INTO EIGHT SMALLER LOTS.

NOW, I'VE PUT TOGETHER A WHOLE LOT OF CONCEPT PLANS.

I HAVE NEVER, WITH THE INTENTION OF BUILDING ONE BUILDING SUBDIVIDED A LOT INTO EIGHT LOTS.

SO WHEN I SEE THAT WHAT I PERCEIVE THAT TO BE AS AN INTENTION FOR EIGHT SEPARATE BUILDINGS.

[01:55:09]

AND I READ THE ENCORE EASEMENT THIS LAST WEEK THAT WAS THAT WAS ADOPTED OR DEDICATED IN 1993.

IT'S BEEN THERE A LONG TIME. SO THAT WAS A MISS.

AND I GET IT. YOU KNOW, WE MISSED IT. OOPS. NOW WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? BUT THAT CHANGES THE FUNDAMENTAL FORM. FURTHER.

AT ONE POINT THIS PROPERTY WAS PUT UP FOR SALE.

AND THERE IS A BIG OLD SIGN ON THE ON THE PROPERTY THAT SAYS RETAIL.

SO WHAT DOES THAT IMPLY TO ME? AS YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY IN MY PROFESSION, BUT ALSO JUST AS A GENERAL CITIZEN.

IT IMPLIES THAT IT'S GOING TO BE MORE OF A LOWER PROFILE BUILDING.

I'VE NEVER SEEN A FIVE STORY RETAIL WHERE THERE'S FIVE STORIES OF RETAIL.

NEVER. SO AGAIN, FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGING THE THE FORM OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND ACTUALLY THERE WAS A IN THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION THAT THE SIGN WAS STILL THERE, STILL SITTING THERE.

SO IN MY MIND I'M THINKING, WHERE IS THE TRIGGER FOR SOMEBODY? I ALWAYS SAY, I'VE BEEN ON PENS AND COUNSEL FOR OVER A DECADE.

WHAT I ALWAYS SAY IS YOU HAVE TO DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE WHEN YOU'RE BUYING A PROPERTY.

YOU HAVE TO DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. SO I'M LOOKING AT THIS FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF IF I WERE IN SOMEBODY'S SHOES, WHO IS GOING TO BUY A PROPERTY TO, YOU KNOW, MOVE MY FAMILY INTO, I WOULD BE DOING MY DUE DILIGENCE.

AND WHAT WOULD MY DUE DILIGENCE UNCOVER? IT WOULD UNCOVER SOMETHING THAT I WOULD PERCEIVE TO BE.

LOWER PROFILE BUILDINGS. SO I'M GOING TO DISAGREE WITH STAFF THAT THIS IS JUST ABOUT A CIRCULATION DRIVE.

ALL OF THOSE THINGS TOGETHER. PROJECT IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION.

AN INTENTION TO THE NEIGHBORS. A TRIGGER OR A SIGNAL TO THE NEIGHBORS THAT SAYS THIS IS GOING TO BE A LOWER PROFILE BUILDING.

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DON'T NEED TO BE WORRIED ABOUT IT.

SO AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO REFERENCE IN THE, IN THE PD ITSELF IN THE LANGUAGE IN SECTION FIVE, THE REALM SUBDISTRICT SECTION C TWO, WHICH IS AMENDMENTS TO THE CONCEPT PLAN THAT THIS IT STATES MAJOR MODIFICATIONS SUCH AS THE ADDITION OR REMOVAL OF BUILDINGS AND CHANGES TO THE SITE CIRCULATION PATTERN THAT IMPACTS CONNECTIVITY WITHIN THE SITE AND SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT, SHALL BE AMENDED THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS SET FORTH IN THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE. SO IF I'M GOING TO BUY THE ARGUMENT THAT THE CONCEPT PLAN SHOWS NO BUILDINGS.

OKAY, WELL THEN A ONE BUILDING BEING ADDED MEANS THAT THIS IS A MAJOR MODIFICATION.

SO THAT, IN MY OPINION, IS WHY WE'RE HERE, WHY THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS HAPPENING.

I ALSO WANT TO MENTION THAT YES, WE DO HAVE A PLAT THAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN JUNE OF 2022, BUT A PLAT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

IT DID NOT COME TO COUNCIL, AND IT IS NOT A MECHANISM THAT SHOULD BE USED TO CIRCUMVENT A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND IT SHOULD ALSO NOT BE USED TO INSINUATE THAT WE SOMEHOW HAVE TO APPROVE THIS BECAUSE THE PLOT WAS APPROVED.

THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE PROCESSES. SO IN CLOSING, I WILL SAY I DISAGREE WITH THE ASSERTION THAT THIS IS JUST ABOUT SLIGHT CIRCULATION.

I AGAIN BELIEVE THAT THE FORM OF THE DEVELOPMENT HAS SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED.

AND I HAVE JUST TWO THINGS THAT I WANT TO LEAVE THAT I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH RIGHT NOW.

ONE IS IF WE ARE JUST CONSIDERING THE SITE CIRCULATION, WHICH I DISAGREE, THAT WE'RE NOT JUST CONSIDERING SITE CIRCULATION, BUT IF WE WERE, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE SITE CIRCULATION THAT THAT FIRE LANE IS IN THE THAT OVERLAPS INTO

[02:00:02]

NOW, I REALIZE THAT THERE ARE THINGS THAT CAN BE WORKED THROUGH, BUT THAT IS NOT THE SITE CIRCULATION THAT IS IN FRONT OF ME TODAY.

SO I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO ASK ME TO APPROVE A SITE CIRCULATION THAT IS NOT IN FRONT OF ME TODAY.

AND THEN THE LAST. LASTLY, I'LL SAY THAT I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT A MEETING OF THE MINDS HAS NOT HAPPENED BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND THE COMMUNITY. BECAUSE I'M TELLING YOU RIGHT NOW, IF THESE PEOPLE RECEIVED A NOTICE, THESE PEOPLE WOULD BE HERE, THEY WOULD SHOW UP. AND SO I JUST I'M FINDING IT VERY HARD TO BUY THAT THEY WERE INVITED AND JUST DECIDED NOT TO COME.

I THINK THAT THERE I STILL HAVE I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP SOMETHING ON THEIR PROPERTY, BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO COME TO SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE IN SOME WAYS, THAT THERE CAN BE A WIN WIN BETWEEN BOTH PARTIES.

AND THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED YET. AND THAT CONCERNS ME WITH THAT.

I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR. COUNCILMEMBER. JONES.

COUNCILMEMBER. EVERY BIT OF MY ARGUMENT HAS BEEN TAKEN, AND DON'T APOLOGIZE.

IT WAS VERY WELL, VERY WELL DONE. WHEN SOMETHING COMES BEFORE US AND I GO BACK AND I LOOK AT RECORDINGS, THE VIDEOS, AND I GO BACK EVERY SINGLE TIME THAT THIS WAS A PUBLIC MEETING.

AND NOT ONCE WAS IT DISPUTED. MATTER OF FACT, MR. STANLEY HIMSELF DISCUSSED THE EIGHT GARDEN RETAIL TO ONE STRUCTURE.

THAT'S WHAT WAS PRESENTED AT PNC. JUST THE SITE CIRCULATION WAS NOT.

AND UNLESS WE JUST WANT TO KEEP GOING. ON AND ON AND ON I MOVE.

TO. CAN I? CAN I GET YOU TO HOLD THAT ONE? WE HAVE TWO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND THEN YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO. THERE YOU GO. ACTUALLY, I DO WANT TO LEAN AS WELL REAL QUICK, BUT I'LL WAIT TILL YOU CALL ME. SO, COUNCIL MEMBER GREEN IS A HARD ACT TO FOLLOW, SO I DON'T THINK I HAVE TO SAY TOO MUCH MORE.

BUT I WILL SAY WHEN ANY KIND OF DECISION MAKING PROCESS THAT I THINK ANY OF THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS DOES, YOU TAKE IN ALL THE INPUT THAT YOU'RE GIVING.

I MEAN, I MET WITH RESIDENTS, I LOOKED TO THE SITE, I, YOU KNOW, GOT INPUT FROM STAFF, YOU KNOW, ATTORNEY. SO ANYTIME WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, KEEP IN MIND WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS THING THROUGH ALL PACES.

WE HAVE TO BE FAIR TO THE DEVELOPER AS WELL WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS THING.

SO ANYTHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS BASED ON ALL THOSE DIFFERENT FACTORS, NOT JUST ONE FACTOR.

THINGS ARE, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE SAID IN MEETINGS, WHATEVER.

BUT IT'S THAT'S THAT'S ALL WE'RE LOOKING. THAT'S ALL I'M LOOKING AT TO MAKE A VERY INTELLIGENT DECISION.

COUNCILMEMBER TROYER. EVERYONE. EVERYONE ELSE HAS SPOKEN AND SAID SOME MADE COMMENTS THAT ALIGN WITH MINE. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMEND EVERYONE WHO HAS TURNED UP FOR ALL OF THESE MEETINGS.

I WOULD THANK YOU FOR BEING FOR BEING CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE CITY.

AND I WOULD I WOULD URGE YOU TO, IN THE FUTURE CONTINUE.

TO TAKE WHAT GOES ON IN THE CITY SERIOUSLY AND FOLLOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.

COME TO MEETINGS. SPEAK WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD TO THE TO THE QUESTION AND JUST BE SURE TO VOTE. AND ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR FOR PARTICIPATING IN THIS ADMITTEDLY DIFFICULT PROCESS.

COUNCILMEMBER KELLY. THAT WAS THE LAST THING I WAS GOING TO ADD.

SO SO COUNCILMEMBER TROY TOOK TOOK MY THUNDER ON THAT, BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT.

YEAH. DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY IS MESSY SOMETIMES, BUT IT'S REQUIRED.

COUNCILMEMBER KATE, ACTUALLY, IT'S COUNCILMEMBER JONES.

OH, YEAH. COUNCILMEMBER JONES MOVED TO DENY THE ORDINANCE AS SET FORTH IN THE CAPTION.

SECOND. OKAY, SO IF I HAVE A MOTION TO DENY, THEN I NEED TO HAVE.

[02:05:05]

SO. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT? SO THIS JUST REQUIRES A SIMPLE MAJORITY IF IT'S A MOTION TO DENY.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND, I GOT A SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. COUNCIL, IF YOU PLEASE, VOTE. THE VOTE IS SIX TO NOTHING TO DENY.

AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE MAYBE ARE CONFUSED THAT MEANS THAT THIS IS NOT MOVING FORWARD AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU.

ITEM D VISITORS FORUM.

[D. Visitors Forum]

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS CHANDRA CHRISTENSEN.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. I HEAR SOME FEEDBACK. CAN I GET IT NOW? I LIVE IN THE TANGLEWOOD SUBDIVISION OF OLD TOWN, LEWISVILLE.

I AM A TNR VOLUNTEER. YOU OKAY? OKAY. I AM A TNR VOLUNTEER IN FOSTER WITH RESCUE ME CAT RESCUE.

SINCE FEBRUARY 2024, WITH THE HELP OF PROJECT LEAD KAREN CROSS, MY 11 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER THAT IS HERE WITH US TODAY HAS BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING AND OUR NEIGHBORS, JOANNA HOLT AND 11 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER.

WE HAVE TNR TRAPPED, NEUTERED, RETURNED OVER 100 CATS ON JUST TWO STREETS.

AND HERE IS MY SORRY. HERE IS MY BINDER THAT I CAN PRESENT TO ANIMAL SERVICES.

WE ARE A FULL SERVICE RESCUE, SO WE VACCINATE THE FERAL CATS TO HELP PREVENT THE SPREAD OF DISEASES.

GET THEM UP TO DATE TO THE CITY'S STANDARDS, PROVIDE OTHER MEDICAL CARE, OR FOSTER KITTENS.

IF WE HAVE THE MANPOWER WHILE TRAPPING THE PHARAOH, MOM AND DAD TO STOP THE BREEDING PROBLEM.

ALL OF OUR HOME. EXCUSE ME. EXCUSE ME. ALL OUT OF OUR OWN HOMES AND AT OUR OWN EXPENSE.

I WANT TO SHARE WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE ON A NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL. AND WHY THIS MATTERS SO DEEPLY TO US.

BEFORE WE BEGAN TNR, I COULDN'T OPEN MY FRONT DOOR WITHOUT A SWARM OF 25 PLUS CATS ON MY LAWN.

MY PORCH WAS CONSTANTLY SPRAYED. PACKAGES WERE DESTROYED.

CATS WERE FIGHTING DAY AND NIGHT. MY OWN PETS BECAME SICK FROM EXPOSURE TO FERAL CATS AND I WAS LEFT WITH THE HEAVY VET BILLS.

THIS WASN'T JUST AN INCONVENIENCE. THIS WAS AN UNSUSTAINABLE SITUATION.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THIS IS A HUMAN CREATED ISSUE.

FERAL CATS AREN'T NATURAL WILDLIFE. THEY EXIST BECAUSE PEOPLE ABANDON PETS.

FEED OUTDOOR CATS WITHOUT FIXING THEM, AND LACK THE RESOURCES OR THE KNOWLEDGE TO STOP THE CYCLE.

FEEDING IS BREEDING, AND WITHOUT EDUCATION OR SUPPORT, THE PROBLEM GROWS REALLY QUICKLY, AND THERE ARE SEVERAL NEIGHBORS ON THE TWO STREETS WHO REGULARLY FEED THE FERAL CATS. MOST ARE KIND HEARTED PEOPLE WHO SEE A HUNGRY ANIMAL AND REALLY WANT TO HELP, WHICH IS A NATURAL AND VERY COMPASSIONATE RESPONSE.

BUT BEFORE RESCUE ME BEGAN, AN EXCUSE ME BEGAN EDUCATING THE COMMUNITY.

MANY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TNR WAS, OR THAT THERE WAS A MORE EFFECTIVE WAY TO HELP.

OTHERS SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE TIME, TRANSPORTATION, OR RESOURCES TO CARRY IT OUT THEMSELVES, AND SOME ASSUME THAT RESCUE GROUPS WILL TAKE CARE OF IT ALL.

AND THAT'S WHY BETTER AWARENESS AND CITY SUPPORT IS SO IMPORTANT.

[02:10:06]

THOSE WHO LOAN THEM HAVE BEEN TRAINED BY THE RESCUE AND HOW TO TRAP SAFELY.

WE ALSO EDUCATE OTHERS AND MANAGE THE RECOVERY.

OFTENTIMES, THE VOLUNTEERS FROM OUR RESCUE RECOVER THEM IN THEIR OWN HOMES.

WE WANT TO EMPOWER RESIDENTS, NOT JUST RESCUE CATS.

AFTER ALL, WE ARE ALL VOLUNTEERS AND UNFORTUNATELY, FERAL CATS DON'T PAY OUR BILLS.

BUT WHAT'S MISSING IS CITY SUPPORT. RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO INFORMATION ABOUT TNR ON THE CITY'S SHELTER'S WEBSITE.

THERE IS NO GUIDANCE FOR RESIDENTS WHO FEED OUTDOOR CATS.

THERE IS NO CLEAR PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE PEOPLE ALREADY DOING THE WORK.

WE'RE ASKING FOR SIMPLE, REALISTIC CHANGES THAT CAN MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE.

EXCUSE ME. ONE IS AT INFORMATION ABOUT TNR AND LOCAL RESCUES SO THAT WE ARE THAT WE ARE ALREADY USING, LIKE TCP IN DENTON AND SPAY AND NEUTER SOCIETY RIGHT HERE IN LEWISVILLE TO THE SHELTER'S WEBSITE.

NUMBER TWO IS HELP PROMOTE SAFE TRAP LOANS WITH BASIC EDUCATION OR MENTORSHIPS OR EXCUSE ME OR MENTORSHIP REQUIREMENTS.

AND NUMBER THREE IS SUPPORT POLICIES THAT ENCOURAGE ACCOUNTABILITY.

FOR EXAMPLE, REQUIRING FEEDERS TO FIX AND VACCINATE THE CATS THEY CARE FOR WITH SUPPORT TO MAKE THAT POSSIBLE.

WE KNOW THAT TNR WORKS. THE VISIBLE DIFFERENCE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD ALONE PROVES THAT WE'VE GONE FROM CHAOS TO CONTROL, AND NOW WE'RE HELPING OTHERS DO THE SAME. BUT WE CAN'T KEEP DOING THIS ALONE.

A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY, WHETHER THAT THROUGH EDUCATION, INFRASTRUCTURE OR GRANT SUPPORT, WOULD MAKE A TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCE TO US. IF YOU'RE UNSURE HOW URGENT THIS ISSUE IS, I INVITE YOU TO DRIVE THROUGH THE TANGLEWOOD SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS JUST A HALF A MILE DOWN THE ROAD. EXCUSE ME? WHILE THE MAJORITY OF CATS ARE NOW FIXED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, IT STILL REFLECTS THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM.

EVEN AFTER MORE THAN A YEAR OF HARD WORK. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND I TRULY LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING TOGETHER TO FIND SOLUTIONS THAT BOTH BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY AND THE ANIMALS THAT LIVE IN IT. THANK YOU.

AMY TURNER. ALL RIGHT. MY NAME IS AMY TURNER, AND I'M THE MEDICAL VOLUNTEER FOR RESCUE ME.

CAN I GET YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? 4608 OAK SPRINGS DRIVE.

AND I'M ACTUALLY IN FLOWER MOUND. BUT OUR RESCUE SERVES LEWISVILLE AND THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.

COULD I ASK TO STAND THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE IN SUPPORT OF WHAT WE CAME FOR TONIGHT? WE'RE NOT AS BIG AS THE LAST CROWD, BUT WE'RE HARD WORKING.

SO OUR CAT RESCUE SERVES THE LEWISVILLE AREA.

THE SURROUNDING AREA IS HIGHLAND VILLAGE, LANTANA, FLOWER MOUND, CARROLLTON, AND SO FORTH.

OUR PRIMARY ROLE AND KIND OF WHEN MOST OF US GOT STARTED, WAS TO ADOPT OUT KITTENS AND CATS AS PETS.

BUT IN THE COURSE OF FILLING THAT ROLE, IT'S COME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT IF WE JUST ADOPT OUT KITTENS AND CATS AS PETS, WE ARE NOT SOLVING THE FERAL CAT PROBLEM. THAT SEEMS TO BE WORSE IN LEWISVILLE.

MOST OF OUR CALLS COME FROM LEWISVILLE. ADULT CATS ARE HAVING 3 OR 4 LITTERS OF KITTENS PER YEAR.

I FEEL LIKE MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT EACH OF THOSE LITTERS MIGHT BE ANYWHERE FROM 1 TO 10 KITTENS, AND THOSE KITTENS ARE BREEDING AS YOUNG AS FOUR MONTHS OF AGE.

SO WE WILL NEVER, EVER BE ABLE TO ADOPT KITTENS AND GET LEWISVILLE OUT OF THE FERAL CAT PROBLEM.

SO WHAT WE'RE HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR IS THE NEED FOR TNR, WHICH IS THE SAFE AND HUMANE TRAPPING, NEUTERING, AND RETURN OF THE FERAL OR WILDCATS TO THEIR OUTDOOR HOME.

SO TO BACK UP A LITTLE BIT, IN CASE YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR, FERAL CATS ARE NOT ADOPTABLE PETS, A FERAL CATS, A CAT THAT IS UNTOUCHABLE BY HUMANS.

IT'S OFTEN NOT SEEN. THEY COME OUT TO HUNT AND MATE AFTER DARK.

LEWISVILLE IS COVERED OVER WITH THE ISSUE. DRIVE DOWN CHANDRA STREET OR ANYWHERE AROUND LEWISVILLE HIGH SCHOOL.

YOU'LL SEE THE ISSUE. CHECK THE COMMUNITY FACEBOOK PAGE.

YOU'LL SEE THAT PEOPLE ARE POSTING. I FOUND KITTENS IN MY CAR UNDER MY SHED.

OH MY GOSH, ALL OVER THE PLACE, RIGHT? SO THE PROBLEM IS PERVASIVE.

WHY ARE THESE CATS SO PREVALENT TO LEWISVILLE? I THINK I SEE THREE BIG REASONS. ONE IS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE JUST AREN'T AWARE THAT THEY'RE HERE.

BUT PEOPLE ARE. THEY'RE AWARE OR THEY ARE AWARE THAT THEY'RE HERE. SO THEY'RE FEEDING THEM, WHICH IS COMPASSIONATE, BUT THEY'RE INADVERTENTLY ADDING TO THE OVERPOPULATION PROBLEM. ANOTHER REASON IS THAT THERE'S NO PROGRAM IN PLACE TO CURB THE REPRODUCTION OF THE FERAL CATS.

AND THEN ANOTHER BIG REASON I SEE IS THAT THOSE SAME PEOPLE, THEY MAY NOT KNOW THAT FIXING THE CAT IS IMPORTANT, BUT EVEN IF THEY DO KNOW THAT IT'S IMPORTANT, THEY DON'T KNOW HOW THEY LACK THE TIME TO DO IT, OR THEY LACK THE FUNDS TO DO IT. SO THEY KEEP FEEDING.

AND FEEDING IS BREEDING. SO WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS TO GETTING ALL THESE CATS FIXED? WELL, TEACUP IS OUR USUAL GO TO IN DENTON COUNTY.

IT'S TEXAS COALITION FOR ANIMAL PROTECTION. THEY'RE UP IN DENTON, BUT IN ORDER TO TAKE A FERAL CAT THERE TO FIX IT, YOU HAVE TO ARRIVE AT 530 IN THE MORNING, WAIT IN LINE UNTIL EIGHT FOR A CHECK IN, AND THEN YOU GO BACK AT 3 OR 4:00 FOR PICKUP.

[02:15:03]

THE CATS ALSO NEED TO BE PRESENTED IN A LIVE, HUMANE TRAP, WHICH MOST PEOPLE DON'T HAVE.

DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, DON'T KNOW THEY NEED IT.

ADD TO THAT MANY, MANY OF THESE FEEDERS, THE PEOPLE FEEDING THE CATS, THEY'RE OLDER PEOPLE.

THEY'RE DISABLED PEOPLE. THEY'RE PEOPLE THAT DON'T DRIVE OR LACK TRANSPORTATION.

SOMETIMES THEY DON'T SPEAK ENGLISH. SO THESE ARE ALL THE BARRIERS.

SO OUR RESCUE IS FIXED. WELL OVER 200 CATS FROM JUST LEWISVILLE IN THE PAST YEAR.

WE'VE DONE IT ON OUR OWN DIME. WE LOAN TRAPS.

WE MENTOR CITIZENS ON HOW TO SAFELY TRAP AND FIX CATS.

WE MANAGE SURGICAL RECOVERY AND RETURN WHEN WE ADOPT OUT CATS AND KITTENS AS PETS AND ADOPT IT AS AN ADOPTION FEE, AND THAT OFFSETS OUR COSTS. THESE CATS HAVE NO OWNER.

THERE'S NO ADOPTION FEE, NO ADOPTER, NO OWNER.

NO ONE CAN BE BILLED FOR THEIR CARE. SO IT'S A PUBLIC SERVICE THAT RIGHT NOW OUR RESCUE IS PAYING FOR.

BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE'S TAXPAYERS IN THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE THAT WOULD LIKE TO NOT HAVE FERAL CATS RUNNING AROUND THEIR YARD, AND THEY'RE PAYING TAXES TO THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE. SO I'D RATHER WORK IN A PARTNERSHIP.

NOBODY'S REIMBURSING US. WE'RE DOING IT AS VOLUNTEERS BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

BUT TO MAP IT OUT, LET'S SAY WE FIX 200 CATS WITH A CONSERVATIVE COST OF $50 PER CAT.

SOMETIMES IT'S MORE EVEN. SO, 200 TIMES 50 IS $10,000.

THAT'S A COST WE'D LIKE SOME HELP WITH. WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THE WORK, BUT WE'D LIKE TO DO THE WORK IN PARTNERSHIP AND NOT ON OUR OWN SHOULDERS.

NOW, I CAN PERSONALLY UNDERSTAND THE CITY MAY LACK THE RESOURCES TO MANAGE TNR.

WELL, I WILL SAY I DISAGREE A LITTLE BIT WITH THAT BECAUSE I SEE THAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING IT.

ARLINGTON'S EXPANDING THEIR TNR. DALLAS HAS A PROGRAM.

MESQUITE HAS A PROGRAM WHERE THEY CERTIFY RESIDENTS TO DO TNR.

WATAUGA JUST LAUNCHED A FANTASTIC PROGRAM. THEY'VE GOT INFO ON THEIR WEBSITE, WHICH I BROUGHT AN EXAMPLE OF.

SO A POSSIBLE SOLUTION MIGHT BE TO OFFER GRANT MONEY TO THE RESCUES IN THE AREA THAT ARE DOING THE JOB.

WE'RE DOING THE JOB. THERE'S ANOTHER RESCUE CALLED DALLAS SCOUT LADY.

THEY'RE DOING A LOT OF THE JOB. IT'D BE NICE IF WE COULD GET SOME HELP.

SO I KNOW THAT IF LEWISVILLE GOT A STAFF MEMBER INVOLVED TO DO TNR, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU'D HAVE SOMEBODY'S SALARY TO PAY, RIGHT? WE'RE ASKING FOR $10,000 TO FIX 200 CATS.

THAT'S A LOT SMALLER THAN SOMEBODY'S SALARY. AND THE DATA IS ALREADY THERE.

THE SHELTER NUMBERS ARE ACTUALLY DOWN THIS YEAR BECAUSE OF THE WORK WE'VE BEEN DOING, BUT THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK TO BE DONE.

ANOTHER PROPOSAL MIGHT BE TO OFFER A DAY OF THE WEEK WHERE A VET IS PRESIDENT AT PRESENT AT THE LEWISVILLE SHELTER, TO PROVIDE SPAY AND NEUTER TO THE VETS ALREADY THERE.

LET'S JUST SAY FOR THE SHELTER PETS. WELL, THAT VET IS PAID BY THE DAY, NOT BY THE PET.

SO WHY NOT MAX OUT THEIR SURGERY SCHEDULE AND SERVE FERAL AND UNOWNED COMMUNITY CATS ON THOSE SAME DAYS? THE COST TO THE CITY WOULD BE NOMINAL SINCE THE VETS ALREADY THERE AND THEY'RE PAID BY THE DAY.

ALSO, IT WOULD BE REALLY OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S THE LAST OF THE COMMENTS I HAVE FOR VISITORS FORUM.

WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO CONSENT AGENDA. ALL THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE SELF-EXPLANATORY BY THE COUNCIL AND BE ENACTED WITH ONE

[E. Consent Agenda]

I'M NOT HAPPY. THERE WE GO. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT, NEXT UP, I HAVE A REQUEST BY OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.

THIS IS FOR SECTION FIVE. 51.07 FOR PERSONNEL CITY SECRETARY DISCUSSING.

CONSIDER APPOINTING A CITY SECRETARY IN ALL MATTERS INCIDENT AND RELATED THERETO.

WE WILL MOVE INTO CLOSE ALSO IN UNDER 7105 51.071 CONSULTATION WITH CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SIR. ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, I'LL WE ARE BACK IN A REGULAR SESSION.

I WILL MOVE INTO ITEM F, REGULAR HEARING F FIVE, CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

[F. Regular Hearing]

THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION DOCUMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL'S CONTINUED APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF THE CITY SECRETARY POSITION. DAY TO DAY SUPERVISION WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY MANAGER.

THE RESOLUTION CLARIFIES AND APPOINTS JENNIFER MALONEY POLITO, THE ACTING CITY SECRETARY TO THE CITY. SECRETARY POSITION IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION AS SET FORTH IN THE CAPTION ABOVE. COUNCIL. IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THE CITY COUNCIL.

CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION AS SET FORTH IN THE CAPTION ABOVE. SHALL WE APPROVE?

[02:20:01]

DID YOU SAY CONSIDER? DID YOU SAY APPROVE OR DENY? I'M READING OFF THE.

I'LL STATE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THE ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION, AND I VERY HAPPILY SECOND.

AND I'VE GOT A SECOND COUNCIL, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE VOTE. I GUESS WE DIDN'T WANT TO SAY RECOMMENDED MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

ALL RIGHT, EASY PEASY. NEXT UP, ITEM G REPORTS REPORTS ABOUT ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST REGARDING WHICH NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN.

[G. Reports]

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. NO REPORT. ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL GO. WE'LL GO TO MY LEFT. COUNCILMEMBER.

NO REPORT. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER JONES. NO REPORT.

COUNCILMEMBER. GREEN. NADA. COUNCILMEMBER KELLY LAKE LEVEL IS 100%.

JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S OUT THERE. PERFECT. THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO ASK. I WAS GOING TO ASK. SO, TAD, ANYTHING SINCE YOU'RE YOU'RE HOLDING UP THAT END OF THE STREET? NO, SIR. OKAY. CITY SECRETARY, CITY ATTORNEY.

ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, FOLKS, WE WE DO HAVE EARLY VOTING ON THE RUNOFF, SO PLEASE CONSIDER DOING YOUR CIVIC DUTY.

DUTY? YOU CAN FIND THAT ON THE CITY WEB PAGE.

WE ALSO HAVE OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE SEMIANNUAL REPORT AVAILABLE IN THE COUNCIL PACKET.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, LET ME KNOW. WE HAVE ANY OTHER CLOSED SESSION? YOU SURE? WE'RE GOOD? OKAY. AS THERE IS NO FURTHER ACTION TO BE TAKEN ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, WE STAND ADJOURNED. 934. FOR THAT MANY.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.