Nov 16, 2021 City Council Work Session

[1. CALL TO ORDER ]

[3A. Discuss the 2018 City of Rowlett Parks, Recreation & Trails Master Plan and receive consensus from Council as to the current trail construction priority list. (45 minutes) ]

[00:17:51]

>> I WANT TO ECHO WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS SAYING THAT

[00:17:55]

[00:17:59]

[00:18:04]

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, INCORPORATED YOU GUYS FOR DOING WHAT YOU DID FOR THE SUBDIVISION AND NOT ALLOWING THIS THANK YOU BLAKE FOR COMING TO OUR ASSISTANCE IN BEING AN AWESOME LEADER. THANK YOU ALL.

>> THANK YOU. >> CHARTER RILEY?

>> THAT'S ME. I'M A LITTLE CRUSHED IN HERE SO I WILL SIT

UP HIGH. >> NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE

RECORD. >> CHARLIE RILEY.ADDRESS] I WOULD LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE FOR THE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE TO NOT THESE TRAILS IN THE SPECIFIC AREA THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. I SUPPORT ALL OF THE FOLKS HERE IN THEIR ENDEAVORS TO NOT HAVE ANY OF THE CONCRETE TRAILS BEHIND PSINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. I AM HER TO TALK ABOUT THE SIGNATURE GATEWAY PUBLIC TRAILS BUILT BETWEEN PARKER SIDE AND THE MANSIONS. I TRADE AND DESIGN AND CAREER I AM AN ENGINEER.

THIS IS NOT MY SPECIALTY BUT I KNOW A TERMINUS AMOUNT ABOUT SOIL EROSION AND PHYSICS OF EROSION. IN MY OPINION THE PROPOSED CONCRETE TRAILS WILL QUICKLY DETERIORATE INTO A COSTLY AND UNMANAGED EYESORE. NO TRAIL SHOULD BE BUILT IN THIS LOCATION UNLESS A PROPER EROSION CONTROL SEAWALL IS THERE AND CAN DIRECTLY. CREWS WILL NEED TO REMOVE THE

[00:20:08]

>> MAYOR: THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. RILEY.

>> SPEAKER: HELLO. MY NAME IS.[INDISCERNABLE] AND I LIVE AT.DEVELOPMENT THAT THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT AND I WOULD EXCEED THE TIME LIMIT IF YOU DO NOT MIND. IF YOU MONTHS BACK THE CITY WAS TOLD THAT THE LEGAL LOGISTIC REASONS OF WHY THE STATE WAS IN THIS TERRIBLE IDEA AND DECIDED CONCRETE TRAILS SHOULD NOT BE PUT IN HIND SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.

THOSE REASONS WERE VERY, VERY SOUND. LEGAL REASONS, I AM SURE THAT EVERYBODY EXPANDED, ECONOMIC REASONS. OUR PROPERTY VALUES WOULD DIMINISH FOR SAFETY REASONS I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR BECAUSE I'M THE LAST HOUSE THERE AND WE HAVE A LOT OF LAND THERE AND POSSIBLY IN THE LAST 10 YEARS I HAVE CALLED TO THE POLICE AT LEAST 45 TIMES OVER THE YEARS WITH NUISANCE GOING ON IN THE BACK. NOW IT LOOKS LIKE WE WILL INVITE MORE NUISANCE. ME AND MY WIFE HAVE CLEARED THESE PATHS, WE'VE CLEANED TRASH, CLEANED NEEDLES AND BY INVITING PEOPLE TO WALK THERE IT IS REALLY A TERRIBLE IDEA APPEARED THAT WE WOULD NOT BE HAVING A TRAIL IN MY BACKYARD WE WOULD HAVE A TRAIL ADJACENT TO MY BACKYARD. THAT WOULDN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM WALKING ALONG THE SHORE WHERE YOU SEE PEOPLE SHOULD NOT WALK TO. I NEARLY APPRECIATE WHAT THE COUNCIL DID IN STOPPING THIS IDEA EARLIER AND I URGE YOU TO DO THE SAME PIT THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS FOR YOU TO GO PAHEAD AND PASS SUCH A PROPOSAL THESE DO NOT AFFECT OUR BACKYARDS. WE DEARLY VALUE AND LOVE THEM. THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST I WAS NOT A PART OF THIS PROCESS BUT CAMBRIDGE HOMES HAS ALLOWED FIVE ACRES THAT WILL BE LOCATED IN THE CENTER OF THE PLANNED COMMUNITY. IF THESE TWO COMMUNITIES ARE GOING TO BE SO ARCHITECTURALLY DIFFERENT WHY NOT HAVE THE GREEN ZONE DIVIDE BETWEEN THE COMMUNITIES? SO THAT IT WILL NOT CREATE AN ISSUE AND CREATE A LOGISTIC DIVISION BETWEEN THE TWO COMMUNITIES THAT WE DO NOT INTEND TO CONTROL. AND, THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH PARKING AREAS IN THE EVENING BECAUSE PEOPLE WALK BEHIND. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE ACCESS STOPS RIGHT AT MY HOUSE? I THINK MY FRONT YARD

[00:25:04]

TRASHED. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DAVE

HOME? >> WILL I HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK

NOW AND LATER? >> GREAT, THANK YOU.

>> DAVE HOLT'S. >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FOR YOU. WHAT DID YOU PASS TWO OF THEM OVER? THERE SHOULD BE A

3A AND 3C. >> WE HAVE 3B?

>> 'S SAYS BE. >> THANK YOU.

>> NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD?

>> DAVE HOLT.

>> I AM CONCERNED THAT THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL HAS HEARD US CLEAR, RESIDENTS HAVE UNTIL LAST THURSDAYS PARK ADVISORY BOARD MEETING FOR AN EXPLANATION. DURING THIS THE COUNCIL HEARD YOU LOUD AND CLEAR TO UPDATE THAT THE RESIDENTS WERE PROHIBITED FROM ASKING QUESTIONS, ANSWERING QUESTIONS DURING THE PARK BOARD MEETING. THERE WAS NO EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION DURING THIS MEETING AT EIGHT AND THEN THERE WAS LESS THAN A WEEK BEFORE THE PARK BOARD MEETING TO THIS WORK SESSION. THIS SENDS A MESSAGE TO RESIDENT THE RESIDENTS DON'T COUNT YOUR THE STAFF TELLS US WHAT WE NEED AND WALK. I'M PROPOSED TO BUILD PUBLIC TRAILS BETWEEN SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN BOTH OF THOSE WITH AND WITHOUT A LEASE AGREEMENT. ALSO I HAVE PROPOSED A MORATORIUM ON THE PARK CAPITAL PROJECTS AND WE WILL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT WITH 3C. OUR COURT SHOULD BE DRIVEN BY WHAT THE RESIDENTS DESIRE NOT BY WHAT THE STAFF, COUNSEL AND MAYOR STATE RESIDENTS WANT.

WITH MY PROGRAM AT PADDLE POINT PARK AND NORTH TEXAS I AM IN DAILY CONTACT WITH CUSTOMERS WHO ARE SOME OF THE BEST ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, PLANNERS, INTEGERS OF OUR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. WE WILLINGLY OFFER THEIR OPINIONS ON PADDLE POINT PARK AND PROJECTS MANAGED BY ROWLETT STAFF AND COUNSEL. THEY POINT OUT MANY LOST OPPORTUNITIES AND POORLY DESIGNED PROJECTS. I HAVE HELPED CONSULTANT FIRMS TO HELP CITIES DEVELOP THEIR PARK SYSTEM. THE CONSENSUS IS THAT THE FIRM YOU ARE USING IS A REPUTABLE FIRM BUT THERE ARE BETTER. WE ARE TOLD THAT ANGE PICKED THIS FIRM FROM A LIST OF CONSULTANTS AND THEY HAD DONE WORK ON ANOTHER PROJECT. I WOULD PREFER A MORE THOROUGH REVIEW AND POSSIBLY USING A CONSULTING FIRM THAT HAS DESIGNED OUTSTANDING PROJECTS WITH OUR NEIGHBORING CITIES AND IS A LEADER IN TRAIL DESIGN TEXAS. EVERY DAY I DRIVE BY ATRIAL BEING WILL NEAR DALROCK THAT INTERSECTS MILLER ROAD.

THERE'S NO PARKING FOR USERS TO ACCESS THE TRAIL THE TRAIL LOOKS TO BE TOO NARROW FOR BICYCLES TO PASS THERE'S NO TREE SHADE FOR TREES AND IT'S IN A STORM WATER RUNOFF DALLAS COUNTY REJECTED A GRANT APPLICATION FOR THIS TRAIL BECAUSE IT DID NOT CONNECT WITH THE REGIONAL TRAIL PLAN P OF THE PARK ADVISORY BOARD ANSWERED AND SAID THE HIGHLAND TRAIL WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD TRAIL AND AS SUCH WAS PRIMARILY FOR THE USE OF THE CONTINUOUS RESIDENCE. THIS WAS THE REASON FOR NO PARKING. I WILL FINISH WITH THAT. AND Q.

>> THANK YOU MR. HALL. >> BRIAN BROOKS?

>> MY NAME IS BRIAN BROOKS AND I LIVE AT.BEEN LIVING THERE FOR FOUR YEARS. I LOVE ROWLETT. I HAVE BEEN IN THE AREA FOR A LONG TIME. I REMEMBER WHEN HEN DOCS WEREN'T ALLOWED ON THE LAKE AT ALL. DO NOT TAKE AWAY, IT WAS SO GREAT I REMEMBER WHEN BOTOX CAME AND IT ALLOWED RESIDENTS OF HE LAKE, THE OWNERS NEXT TO THE LAKE TO REALLY ENJOY THE LAKE AND TO TAKE AN OWNERSHIP OF THAT LAKE AND HE ENJOY IT.

NOW, TO PUT A TRAIL THERE IT WOULD NOT ONLY INCREASEDECREASE THEIR HOME VALUES AND MY HOME VALUES. I BOUGHT A ONE ACRE PIECE OF PROPERTY IN ORDER TO HAVE SOME PRIVACY AND I DEFINITELY DID NOT ANTICIPATE THE CITY PUTTING IN A FREQUENT WE USED PLACE A TRAIL WHERE PEOPLE MIGHT BE WALKING AND LOOKING AT MY PROPERTY AND MY PORCH. I AM DOWN A PRIVATE DRIVE AND I SPECIFICALLY DID THAT ON PURPOSE. EVERYTHING AROUND ME IS ZONED. I KNEW THAT AND I ACCEPTED THAT BUT TO PUT A TRAIL ON IT WOULD BE A HUGE INCONVENIENCE. IT WOULD BE AN INVASION OF MY PRIVACY A SECURITY RISK FOR MY CHILDREN AND TO BE QUITE HONEST IT WOULD BE UNFAIR OF THE OWNERS OF THE

[00:30:03]

>> THE ELECTION IS COMING UP! [LAUGHTER]

>> THANK YOU MR. BROOKS. I AM GOING TO READ THE EMAILS DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE A CARD? SOMEBODY STOP ME IF I GO PAST THREE. JILL RILEY I WOULD LIKE TO.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: ITEM 3A THE TWO TRAILS. FIRST THE GATEWAY TRAIL WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED AS A DESTINATION WITH RESTAURANTS AND ATTRACTIONS ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER SERVICE ROAD WHERE IT NEEDS LAKE RAY HUBBARD. SINCE THEN THE DESTINATION ASPECT HAS BEEN CHANGED AND INSTEAD BEING DEVELOPED INTO HIGH DENSITY HOUSING. IT'S NO LONGER A REAL DESTINATION OR ANYONE BUT IT TENANTS. SECOND THE CIT PLANS TO CONTINUE THIS TRAIL ON THE YET TO BE BUILT NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONTINUING NORTH USING THE RESIDENTIAL SIDEWALK ON SUNRISE DRIVE TO MILLER ROAD WHERE THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS PAIRED MY CONCERN FOR THIS PLAN IS THAT HARBORSIDE ONLY HAS THREE ACCESS POINTS THE NEW DEVELOPMENT IS ACCESSIBLE BY CAR ONLY TO THE ACCESS POINTS WITH ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON SUNRISE DRIVE. THE NEW DEVELOPMENT HAS VERY LOW ALLOCATION FOR STREET PARKING PLUS TRAIL VISITORS WILL LIKELY PARK ON THE STREETS. ALL HOMES ON THE STREETS OF SUNRISE HAVE DRIVEWAYS WHICH INTERSECTS WITH RESIDENTIAL SIDEWALK. THE COMBINATION OF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC LACKED OF DEDICATED PARKING AND DRIVEWAYS THAT INTERSECT A RESIDENTIAL SIDEWALK IS REST BEFORE DISASTER DUE TO THE CONCENTRATION OF CARS IN THE STREET NOT DESIGNED FOR THIS PURPOSE. SINCE ONE OF ROWLETT'S GUIDING PRINCIPLES IS TO CREATE A NEIGHBORHOOD I BELIEVE THE LAKEFRONT SHOULD BE LEFT AS GREEN SPACE AND A BARRIER SHOULD BE ERECTED BETWEEN THIS GREEN SPACE AND THE NEIGHBORING HARBORSIDE HOME AND THIS WOULD RESULT IN TRAIL WITH THE RESIDENTIAL SIDEWALK PREVENT PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE ADJACENT TAPED AREA AND VALUE HARBORSIDE AS AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD. AS FOR THE LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL THERE ARE FIVE EXISTING WILL FAMILY LAKESIDE HOME ALONG THE POST TRAIL AND AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MANY CITIZENS GAVE INPUT REGARDING PUBLIC TRAILS ALONG SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION INCLUDES THE PUBLIC TRAIL LISTENING SESSION AND CITY COUNCIL SPOTS ABOUT TRAILS ON EXISTING HOMES. THIS SHOULD APPLY TO THOSE HOMES AS WELL. THE CITY LISTENING SESSION WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTING THE HOMEOWNERS OR PLACED ON A BOND.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. LET'S GET READY TO READ.

>> JAMES MORRIS. ROWLETT. FOR THE RECORD I AM AGAINST THE TRAIL THAT COULD POSSIBLY GO DIRECTLY BEHIND MY HOUSE AND TURNED SOUTH ALONG THE LAKE AND HERE ARE MY REASONS. RIGHT NOW I HAVE A FOUR FOOT CHAIN-LINK FENCE AND THE TREES PROVIDE PRIVACY. I WOULD HAVE TO BUILD A SIX FOOT FENCE TO WHAT I HAVE NOW. AND WILDLIFE THIS WOULD PUSH THE WILDLIFE OUT OF MY AREA. THE LIGHTS. I'M SURE THIS TRAIL WOULD REQUIRE LIGHTS AND I DO NOT WANT LIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE AND MY NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS WHO LIVE ON THE LAKE WOULD NOT HAVE THE BEAUTIFUL VIEWS THEY HAVE NOW WITH LIGHTS SHINING IN ALL NIGHT. AND FOR, SECURITY. MY FAMILY WOULD NOT FEEL SECURE HAVING TO WALK KIND THEIR HOMES DAILY. I WOULD NOT ONLY HAVE TO PUT A FENCE IN HAVE TO PUT A FENCE IN SECURITY SYSTEM. CLAIM CONCERNED. I AM A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF ROWLETT AND I STILL LIVE IN THE HOME THAT ME AND MY WIFE BILL THAT ME AND MY WIFE BUILT. I HOPE YOU CONSIDER ALL MY REASONS. NEXT ONE FROM PAUL DANIELS.

[00:35:01]

BUDGET GETS SPENT. THANK YOU. >> THE NEXUS FROM MARK HERNANDEZ. I DO NOT WANT ANY TRAILS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS WILL BRING DELINQUENCY FOR ME AND MY NEIGHBORS. DURING TOTAL DISAGREEMENT. AS HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENTS WE OPPOSE THE MAY 22 BOND ELECTION WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL. WE HAVE RESIDED HERE FOR SIX YEARS AND RECENTLY PURCHASED A HOME IN AUGUST OF 2021. OUR INTENT IS TO SUBLEASE IN 2022 WITH PLANS TO IMPROVE SHORELINE PROTECTION AND ADDING ANOTHER SHARED PATH FOR PUBLIC ACCESS WOULD NOT ONLY TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY AWAY FROM US AS HOMEOWNERS BUT ALSO TAKE AWAY THE PRIVACY OUR PROPERTY OFFERS AND WOULD DEPRECIATE OUR PROPERTY VALUES SIGNIFICANTLY. THE STONE MEADOW COMMUNITY IS A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE TAKE PRIDE IN. AS LAKEFRONT PROPERTY OWNERS WE HAVE HAD PROBLEMS IN THE PAST WITH PEOPLE LITTERING BEHIND OUR HOMES, LITTERING, LEAVING BEHIND DRUG PARAPHERNALIA AND IN A FEW OCCASIONS VERBAL EXCHANGES THAT INCLUDE PROFANITY AND VERBAL THREATS. THIS IS NOT WELCOMED OR APPRECIATED. TO ADD TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD DEFINITELY ADD TO THE UNDESIRABLE SCENARIOS MENTIONED ABOVE. THIS WILL IRREFUTABLY INCREASE CALLS TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR DISTURBING THE PEACE AND VANDALISM ADDING THE PATH WOULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENT, NATURE, AND THE ABUNDANCE OF WILDLIFE WE GET TO ENJOY DAILY. IN ADDITION WE FEEL THERE WOULD BE A NEED TO ADD SECURITY MEASURES FOR HOME AND PROPERTY. THAT WOULD BRING UNWANTED LIGHTS AND NOISE GENERATED FROM THE PUBLIC USE AREA. SADLY THE AMOUNT OF TRASH AND LITTER THAT WOULD ACCOMPANY THE PUBLIC AREA IS A GIVEN AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. ROWLETT ALREADY HAS SEVERAL PARKS AND LAKE ACCESS AREAS. WE ASK THAT YOU TAKE OUR CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCERNS TO THE PRIVACY OF LAND AND LAKEFRONT PROPERTY COULD THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THE NEXT ONE IS FROM LOGAN ADELE. ON SEPTEMBER 7 WE GATHERED AND SPOKE ABOUT ALL THE COMPLICATIONS LAKEFRONT HOMEOWNERS HAVE BEEN HAVING ACROSS THE HOMES. WE BROUGHT PHOTOS OF WORDS THAT WERE DIFFICULT TO DESCRIBE HERE AT THE ADDRESS SHARED AT THE BEGINNING OF MY SPEECH, 4021 MAYOR PRO TEM GRUBISICH TWO ROAD FALLS NEXT TO THE PROPOSED TRAIL P BY THE END OF THE PRESENTATION IT SEEMED THAT WE WERE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AS FAR AS THE NEED FOR SECURITY AND PRIVACY THAT WE ALL HOLD VITAL TO THE FAMILY STRUCTURE.

TO REITERATE THE COUNCIL VALUED THAT SECURITY AND PRIVACY WERE IMPORTANT. WHEN WE ATTENDED THE NEXT PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY MEETING IT SEEMED NONE OF THE MEMBERS WERE THE PREVIOUS MEETING NOR WAS THE RESEARCH AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING ABOUT THE STRUGGLES. IT SEEMED THAT WE WERE HAVING THE RIGHT HAND TALKING TO THE LEFT PAIRED WHEN I PURCHASED MY PROPERTY I WAS INFORMED I WOULD BE ABLE TO DO A LEASEBACK. I WAS INFORMED THAT THE REQUIREMENT WOULD INCLUDE PAYING OUT-OF-POCKET FOR SURVEY IN THE TUNE OF TUNA DOLLARS PAID THE MONEY WILL NOT BE REIMBURSED. AFTER GATHERING ALL OF THIS TOGETHER THE CITY DENIED WASTE ON THIS PROPOSED PARK. WHEN I ASKED WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PURCHASE AND BUILD WE WERE INFORMED THERE WOULD BE A TRAIL THERE AD THERE'S NOTHING WE COULD DO ABOUT IT. HERE WE ARE AGAIN JUST THE COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER THE SPARK. HELP US MAINTAIN OUR PRIVACY AND SECURITY. MOVE THE PARK ANDREA BETWEEN CANTERBURY COVE DEVELOPMENT TO PROTECT SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ALONG THIS PART OF THE LAKE. THIS WILL HELP LAW ENFORCEMENT NOT CREATING DEAD SPACE WITH ACCESS FOR CRIMINALS THAT ARE EASY TO SPOT. NO ONE SHOULD BE CONFRONTED STANDING ON THEIR OWN BACK PORCH ESPECIALLY DURING MORNING COFFEE. ON ACCOUNT COULD'VE BEEN A MESSY SITUATION WHERE I FOUND A MAN LOOKING THROUGH QUITMAN I HAD TO PROVIDE FOR MY FAMILY PAID HE QUICKLY REALIZED THE ERROR OF HIS WAYS AND HE SAID THAT HE WOULD NOT DO IT AGAIN. HE IGNORING NO TRESPASSING SIGNS PROVE IT DOESN'T WORK. THIS ALLOWS MORE FOOT TRAFFIC AND IT JEOPARDIZES MY FAMILIES SECURITY. HOPE THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS. DO NOT CREATE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR ENCOUNTERS THAT COULD BE MITIGATED. THERE IS ANOTHER OPTION. TO BIRD ONE STONE TYPE RUN THE TRAIL AROUND SHE'S CHIESA WHERE NO TRAILS EXIST. PEOPLE SLOWING TRAFFIC AND RIDING BIKES IN THE ROAD ALL BENEFIT GREATLY. NO ADDITIONAL TAXPAYER MONEY TO PUT A SIDEWALK THERE LATER. THANK

[00:40:02]

>> MAYOR: IS THAT YOU? >> MY WIFE.

>> MY HOME WILL BE AFFECTED THE MOST IF THE CITY FOLLOWS THROUGH WITH THEIR PLANS FOR THE TRAIL ON WATERFRONT. WE MOVED TO ROWLETT BECAUSE OF THE PEACE AND QUIET OF THE WILDERNESS BUT NOW WITH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION HAPPENING IT WILL NOT BE SO. I AM ABSOLUTELY IN NOT IN FAVOR OF ANY WALKING TRAILS ALONG THE WATERFRONT AS THERE WILL BE PEOPLE WALKING AT ALL HOURS AND DIRTYING THE AREA AND THE WATER. EVERY NOW AND THEN WE GO DOWN PICKING UP TRASH AND EMPTY BOTTLES FROM THE RIVERFRONT. THERE HAVE BEEN NEEDLES AND SYRINGES FOUND THERE, TOO. THERE WILL BE CARS PARKED OUTSIDE HER HOMES WHICH WILL BE A NUISANCE TO US OUR NEIGHBORS. THERE'S NO FENCE BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND CONSTRUCTION SO HOW DO WE STOP PEOPLE FROM COMING ONTO OUR LAND? WE WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THE FIVE ACRE GREEN AREA B INSTEAD BETWEEN HARBORSIDE AND THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AS TO CREATE A GREEN BARRIER BETWEEN THE TWO. THESE RECONSIDER THIS AND DON'T TURN OUR LITTLE PIECE

OF HEAVEN INTO HEALTH. >>> I DO NOT SUPPORT THE WALKING TRAIL ALONG THE LAKE THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I FEEL THIS WOULD INVITE PEOPLE TO WALK THROUGH OUR CIRCLE TO ACCESS THE TRAIL. MOST OF US IN THIS AREA ARE ELDERLY AND DON'T WANT UNKNOWN PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE A SWIMMING POOL HERE AND WE HAVE TO ASK PEOPLE TO LEAVE THAT ARE NOT MEMBERS OF OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU FOR THIS CONSIDERATION. THE NEXT ONE IS RICK MILLER.

>>> THIS WILL BRING MORE TRAFFIC TO OUR QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD. THE SIDEWALK ON STONE MIDDLE CIRCLE WILL SHOULD BE REPAIRED BEFORE BUILDING MORE TRAILS. WE HAVE HAD SIDEWALK BREAKS FOR YEARS NOW AND THOSE SHOULD BE REPAIRED

FIRST. >> MAYOR: THIS IS FROM BRENDA FISHER. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER FOR YOUR TIME AND ROWLETT. I LISTEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ITEM 3B. DISCUSS AND TAKE INPUT ON THE TRAIL AND HAVE GUIDANCE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A SPECIFIC TRAIL.

FOLLOWING THIS DISCUSSION COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS THE CONCERNS OF CITIZENS HALF OF THE TRAILS DIRECTLY BEHIND HER HOMES. RESIDENT SAFETY DUE TO LUCK OF POLICE ACCESS AND PRIVACY TO THE HOMEOWNER. I WAS SURPRISED TO READ THE FOLLOWING WHICH I PRESUME IS FROM THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD WHILE THE LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL COULD POTENTIALLY GO BEHIND SOME HOMES, ONE HOME BACKS THE DESIGNATED LAKESIDE PARK AND THE REMAINING FOUR DO NOT HAVE SUBLEASES AND NO LAKESIDE PARK IMPROVEMENTS DONE IN THE AREA. THIS POTENTIALL DOES NOT ALONG IF THEY ARE DESCRIBING EXISTING HOMES THE TRAIL WILL GO BEHIND SPIRITS A CALM THE CITY OF ROWLETT WILL NOT ALLOW THE HOMES TO THE TAKE LINE AND IT'S JUST A LITTLE MISLEADING. THIRD, ALL OF THE LIQUID HOME SHOULD BE PROTECTED FROM THE TRAILS. THIRD, THEIR ATTENDANCE THAT ARE SEPARATED ALONG THE TAKE LINE AND COULD POTENTIALLY BE A SAFETY HAZARD FOR CHILDREN. DID THE STAFF FORWARD THE 3B? DISCUSS AND TAKE PUBLIC IN DILI INPUT ON THE TRAIL AND HAVE GUIDANCE TO MOVE FORWARD? THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ARE YOU TAKING THIS? >> YES MA'AM. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE AND FOR HAVING US.

>> THANK YOU ALL, THANK YOU COUNSEL FOR INVITING ME TO LEAD OFF THIS EVENING WITH OUR TRAILS REVIEW. SOME HIGHLIGHTS PAIRED THIS ALL STARTED BACK IN 2015 WHEN THE VOTERS APPROVED $300,000 FOR FUNDING TO PLAN AND START WORKING ON THE TRAILS. 2018 ? PHOTO THE MASTER PLAN WAS APPROVED WHICH SHOULD ALLOW US TO CREATE TRAILS TO FOCUS ON THE NEXT 5 TO 10 YEARS. SAME YEAR 2000 18 VOTERS APPROVED TO HAVE MILLION DOLLARS IN TRAIL FUNDING AND CONTINU TO FOCUS ON THE TRAILS AND TO CONSTRUCT THOSE TRAILS OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS.

2018 WHAT WE DID WAS WE SURVEYED CITIZENS TO OBTAIN FEEDBACK RELATING TO THOSE TRAILS WITHIN THE CITY OF ROWLETT. WHAT WE FOUND OUT IS THE TRAILS WERE THE MOST CITED WANT OF THE SYSTEM PAIRED NOT PARKS, FIELDS BUT TRAILS PER THE REASON BEING BECAUSE THEY WANTED LONGER TRAILS, THEY WANTED MORE SAFE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN DESTINATIONS AND THEY WANTED MORE AMENITIES ALONG THE TRAILS. BENCHES, PARKS, THINGS

[00:45:03]

WHETHER THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS OR COMMUNITY PARKS WHICH IS SPRINGFIELD PARK OR COMMUNITY PARK. 84 PERCENT OF THE CITIZENS SURVEYED UTILIZED TRAILS FOR EXERCISE. THEY USED TO FOR SERVICES LIKE WALKING WITH THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR KIDS AND THEIR GRANDKIDS. AND ALSO WALKING TO JUST GET OUTSIDE.

THAT IS ONE THING WE CONTINUE TO PUSH TO ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO GET OUTSIDE AND USE OUR PARKS. 52 PERCENT OF THE CITIZENS SURVEYED SAW A NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL BIKE TRAIL, HIKING TRAIL AROUND THE LAKE AND FLOODPLAIN AREA. BASICALLY ALL AROUND THE CITY. AND THEN 41 PERCENT OF THE CITIZENS SURVEYED SAID THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOFT SURFACE TRAILS WHICH MIGHT BE DECOMPOSED GRANITE AND THEN 33 PERCENT ASKED FOR HARD SURFACES WHICH IS CONCRETE. SO, FEBRUARY 20 2018 THE 2018 WORKS IN RICK TRAILS MASTER PLAN WAS APPROVED. IT CONSISTED OF THREE MAJOR SECTIONS TRAILS AND PATHWAYS AS WELL ASRECREATION AND PROGRAMMING . WITHIN THE TRAIL AND PATHWAY IT OUTLINED THE STANDARDS FOR THE LAKE TRAILS, COMMUNITY TRAILS, SIDEWALKS, AND SOFT SURFACE TRAILS LIKE WE JUST TALKED ABOUT. IN THIS GUIDE, IT ALSO PROVIDED US A LIST OF 11 PRIORITY TRAILS THAT WE COULD FOCUS ON AGAIN FOR THE NEXT 5 TO 10 YEARS. THIS IS A LIST OF THE TRAILS THAT WERE PROPOSED IN THE TRAIL PLAN. ONE THROUGH 11 SCENIC POINT TRAIL FIRST. I WON'T READ EVERYONE TO YOU BUT THIS IS A LIST THAT WE STARTED WITH THIS IS OUR VISION FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS. I WILL GET INTO EACH PROJECT HERE IN A SECOND BUT THIS GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT WE HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT WHEN WE CREATED THE MASTER PLAN. CURRENT STATUS OF PRIORITY TRAILS. AGAIN, NUMBER 1 SCENIC TRL. WAS DONE AND IT WAS COMPLETED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH TARA LARGO. THE SPINNAKER POINT TRAIL, WE HOPE TO START WORKING WITH THE DESIGN TEAM IN DECEMBER ON THE GARNER FUQUA TRAIL AND LINK FUQUA TO WIND UP WITH THE BAYSIDE TRAIL. MAIN ST., EAST THAT CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE FROM ROWLETT ROAD PAID LAKE HIGHLAND TRAIL WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION WHICH IS A MILE AND 1/4 TRAIL THE NEIGHBORHOODS, HOPING BARRING NO ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SHORTAGES, WE ARE DONE WITH THAT MID-DECEMBER. I HAVEHOPE

PEOPLE CAN ENJOY THAT AS WELL. >> THE LAKE HIGHLAND TRAIL?

WHERE IS THAT? >> IT STARTS AT SHRADE. SHRADE TRAIL WE WILL TALK ABOUT IN JUST A SECOND. THEN WE HAVE THE MAIN ST., EAST, LAKE HIGHLAND AND LAKESIDE NORTH.

THAT IS IN DESIGN WILL HAVE TO DEVELOP DILI FINISH WITH THAT AND THEN RUNNING IT OUT THE MUDDY CREEK TRAIL AND THE ROWLETT PADDLE CREEK TRAIL. THE TRAILS ARE PRIORITIZED BASED ON PARTNERSHIPS AND OBVIOUSLY FUNDING. WE HAVE TO HAVE ONE THING TO FINISH THOSE PROJECTS. AVAILABILITY OF PROPERTY AND INVENTORY AND OBVIOUSLY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE BEST CONNECTIONS AND SAVE US CONNECTIONS. THE NEXT THREE YEAR PRIORITY LIST CONSISTS OF SHRADE ROAD TRAIL, LAKESIDE NORTH TRL., MAIN STREET EAST FROM ROWLETT HIGH SCHOOL TO LAKEFRONT P: ROAD WHICH IS THE PARK EAST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS FROM MAIN STREET. HOPEFULLY THE FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE AND WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET UNDERNEATH THE RAILROAD TRACKS. AND THEN THE FOURTH TRAIL IS THE ROWLETT

[00:50:03]

ALONG THE PADDLING TRAIL THIS COULD BE A STOP WHERE KAYAKERS COULD STOP, TAKE A BREAK AND LORD KNOWS I WOULD PROBABLY NEED A BREAK IF I WAS KAYAKING THAT FAR. JUST INCLUDED IN THE LOOP COULD THIS TRAIL IS ACTUALLY ABOUT 8/10 OF A MILE AND WE WILL INCLUDE A 10 FOOT CONCRETE TRAIL AND THEN HOPEFULLY WITH THE ENHANCED SHORELINES, REST STOPS AND TRAILHEADS. THE QUESTION IS WHY THESE TRAILS AND WHY NOW? IF WE LOOK AT THE MAP BASICALLY IT WE FOCUS ON THE SHRADE ROAD TRAIL AND LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL YOU WILL SEE THE LINKAGE BETWEEN SAPPHIRE BAY AND BAYSIDE. IF YOU START AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT-HAND HONOR OF THE MAP IT WOULD TAKE YOU FROM SAPPHIRE BAY TO THE LAKE HIGHLANDS TRAIL WHICH WILL CONNECT WITH THE SHRADE TRAIL AND THEN AT SOME POINT CONNECT WITH THE LAKESIDE NORTH AND PADDLE PARK NORTH AND CONNECT WITH THE BAYSIDE NORTH TRAIL. ALL OF THE YELLOW LINES ARE CITY TRAILS IN THE ORANGE TRAIL IS THE TRAIL THAT HAS ALREADY

BEEN ESTABLISHED. >> SOME OF THE YELLOW LINES ARE PARTNERSHIPS AND THE ORANGE ONE IS.[INDISCERNABLE]. SO, WHAT THE STAFF IS ASKING FOR IS CONSENSUS ON COUNSEL FOR THE PROPOSED TRAIL PRIORITY. TRAN 21 ROAD TRAIL, LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL AND MAIN STREET EAST TRAIL FROM THE RCC ROWLETT IMMUNITY CENTER TO THE LAKEFRONT PECAN GROVE AND IF THEY ARE NOT IN CONSENSUS, WHAT CHANGES WOULD THEY LIKE TO SEE?

>> THAT IS YOUR PRESENTATION? >> YES MA'AM.

>> ALL RIGHT. I GUESS, ME, PERSONALLY, I AM CONFUSED BECAUSE WE WENT AWAY FROM THE LAST MEETING KNOWING THAT WE WANTED TO SEE REVISION TO THE TRAIL MASTER PLAN. THAT SHOULD GO BACK TO THE PARKS AND BOARD FOR THE REVISION OF THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN. I'M CONFUSED IF WE ARE HERE ASKING THE THREE QUESTIONS. I FEEL LIKE WE ARE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE.

>> WE DID PRESENT THIS TO THE PARK BOARD ON WEDNESDAY AND SOMEWHAT OF THE SAME LAYOUT AND PRESENTATION AND WE BROUGHT TO

THEM THE SAME RECOMMENDATION. >> MAYOR: THAT IS NOT REVISING THE TRAILS. I THINK THE REVISION COMES IN WRONG.

>> WHAT THIS IS TALKING ABOUT IS THE PRIORITY?

>> MAYOR: WE TALKED ABOUT THE REVISION IN 2023 AND COUNSEL SAID NO WE WANT THE NT THE REVISION OF THE TRAILS PIECE BEFORE THAT. SO T. SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THE REVISED TRAILS MASTER PLAN WITH THE GUIDANCE THAT WE GAVE AFTER THE SIGNIFICANCE.

>> PART OF THE CHALLENGE WITH THIS, TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION LIKE THE TRAIL MASTER PLAN OUTLINES THE SPECIFIC TRAILS.

THERE'S A MAP WITH A TON OF FUTURE TRAILS BUT OUTLINES ONLY

[00:55:04]

TRAILS. >> MAYOR: I FEEL LIKE EVERYTHING HAS CHANGED AND GUIDANCE HAS BEEN GIVEN AND IT NEEDS TO GO BACK TO THE PARKS BOARD. I DON'T WANT TO SHORTCUT THE PROCESS AND SAY WERE GOING TO MAKE THIS DECISION REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE PARKS BOARD SIZE.

>> THE PARKS BOARD WAS GIVEN THE SAME PRESENTATION WEDNESDAY NIGHT AND PROVIDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE INPUT ON THE PRIORITY TRAILS AND WERE CALLED OUT SPECIFICALLY IN THE

PARKS MASTER PLAN. >> WHAT WAS THEIR

RECOMMENDATION? >> THEY WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH

THE ORDER THAT IS LISTED. >> MAYOR: SO, LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL STILL HAS TRAILS BEHIND THAT?

>> I WILL EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT.

>> COUNSEL GAVE SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS NOT TO PUT THE

TRAILS BEHIND HOUSES? >> ONE OF THOSE HOUSES I OWN

THIRD. >> I AM SO SORRY SIR, YOU ARE GOOD. WE NEED TO NOT OPEN IT UP TO GENERAL COMMENTS AT THIS

TIME. THANK YOU. >> JUST EXPLAIN THIS AREA FROM HERE UP ERE UP TO SHRADE ROAD IS CALLED OUT AS A PART FOR THE TAKE LINE LEASE. NO HOUSE UP UNTIL THESE FOUR ON STONE MEADOW CIRCLE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LEASE IT BACK.

THIS ONE IS IN THE PROCESS, IF I AM CORRECT IN THE DEVELOPMENT WITH A DEVELOPER WHO WANTS TO PUT IN THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE AND THE COVE IS GOING IN AND WE TALKED TO CANTERBURY CODE CALAIS COVE AND THAT TAKES US FROM HERE TO TRAN 21 ROAD WHICH SHOULD BE ABOUT RIGHT HERE. IN THAT AREA THESE ARE THE ONLY OR HOMES THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO LEASE AND ALL OF THAT AREA IS CALLED OUT. THE ONLY REMAINING PUBLIC PARK THAT IS ON THE PRIORITY LIST WHICH IS WHY WE MENTION IT. SO, THOSE FOUR HOMES AT THE TOP THERE IS NOT A CURRENT SUBLEASE IN THAT AREA AND IT IS AVAILABLE TO SUBLEASE AND IT IS CALLED OUT ON THE MASTER AND THAT'S HOW WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD BUT THERE ARE NO

CURRENT LEASES IN THAT AREA. >> IS THIS PART OF THE PARK

LAND? >> IT IS, YES.

>> MAYOR: I PERSONALLY FEEL LIKE WE ARE TRYING TO SHORTCUT THE PROCESS AND COUNSEL SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THE TRAIL SECTION TO BE REVISED. YOU ARE ASKING FOR GUIDANCE ON OR TRAILS AND IF YOU WANT GUIDANCE ON THE COUNCIL IS IT OKAY TO DO THIS NEXT TRAIL OR WHATEVER I THINK WE CAN DISCUSS THAT IF YOU ARE ASKING GUIDANCE ON MULTIPLE TRAILS TO ME IT NEEDS TO DO WHAT IT SAID WHICH IS TO REVISE THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN. IT'S PART OF THE PARKS BOARD MEETING WHICH I WASN'T THERE BUT WE DID GET INPUT AND THIS COUNCIL MEETING AND I

DON'T AT CUTS IT. >> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING AND I MIGHT'VE MISUNDERSTOOD BUT I THOUGHT THIS PROCESS WAS REVISING THE PARKS MASTER PLAN BY REORGANIZING THE TRAILS.

[01:00:04]

>> THIS WOULD ABSOLUTELY ALTER THE MASTER PLAN AND THE 11 PPRIORITY TRAILS CALLED OUT. I WOULD NOT TAKE THE ENTIRE CITY MAP AND REDESIGN THE ENTIRE CITY WITH THE TRAIL MAP. THAT IS ACCURATE. THE MASTER PLAN HAS A PROPOSED TRAIL MAP THAT HAS BLUE ARROWS WHICH ARE POTENTIAL TRAILS AND YELLOW.

THAT ARE TRAILS AND SOME AREAS OF RED ARE ALREADY TRAILS.

>> HYPOTHETICALLY WE REORGANIZE THIS AND THAT WOULD THEN AMEND

THE TRAIL MASTER PLAN? >> RIGHT. IT WILL AMEND THE

PRIORITY LIST. >> THERE IS THE TRAIL PLAN AND THERE ARE 11 PRIORITY TRAILS BUT THEY ARE NOT IN PRIORITY ORDER. NUMBER 1, THAT WAS NOT FIRST PRIORITY. WHAT WE ARE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO DO EVIL ARTIE DONE SOME BECAUSE OF HOW IT'S WORKED OUT WITH DIFFERENT DEVELOPERS BUT WERE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO DO IS TO FOCUS ON HOW DO WE FOCUS ON THE NEXT THREE YEARS WITH THE FUNDING WE HAVE. HOW DO WE PRIORITIZE THE REMAINING TRAILS? THESE ARE THE TRAILS THAT STILL NEED TO BE DONE THAT ARE OUTLINED IN THE TRAIL MASTER PLAN. HOW DO WE PRIORITIZE THOSE SEVEN TRAILS SINCE A COUPLE OF THEM

HAVE ALREADY BEEN COMPLETE. >> CAN WE GO BACK TO THE MASTER PLAN BECAUSE THIS IS HOW I REMEMBER IT. WE ASK THAT WE NOT OPEN UP THE ENTIRE MASTER PLAN BUT WE OPEN UP THE SPECIFIC SEGMENTS OF THOSE TRAILS THAT ARE GOING TO BE BEHIND RESIDENTS HOMES WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY ADDRESSED ONE.

THE LAKE ISLAND NORTH WHICH TO ME IS THE LAST ONE. TO ME CAN YOU GO TO THE LAKE HIGHLAND NORTH? LAKESIDE NORTH, I AM SORRY. WHEN I LOOK AT THAT, ANYBODY WHETHER THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO LEASE THAT LAND OR NOT TOTALLY UNDERSTAND IT IS PARKLAND AND THERE IS A LOT OF VALID CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP. PUTTING SOMETHING BEHIND SOMEONE'S HOME THAT WAS NOT EXPECTED IS NOT RIGHT. AS THOSE DEVELOPMENTS HAPPEN YOU'RE RIGHT IT'S PART OF OUR CHARGE AND WE HEARD IS TO HAVE MORE ACCESS TO THE LAKE. THOSE SHOULD BE WORKING WITH THOSE DEVELOPERS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S ADEQUATE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TRAIL IN THE HOMES, FENCES IF THERE NEEDS TO BE FENCES AND IT NEEDS TO BE DONE CORRECTLY WITH SEAWALLS TO HANDLE THE EROSION PI TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. THIS NEEDS TO BE REDESIGNED. I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THE ORDER IS UNTIL THIS GETS REDESIGNED TO MEET WHAT I THINK WAS THE CONSENSUS OF HOUSEHOLD OF WEED DON'T WANT TRAILS BEHIND PEOPLE'S HOMES. LIKE YOU MIGHT BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDESIGN AS THE PARCEL ABOUT, THERE IS A PART OF THAT BEFORE YOU GET TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WELL BEFORE YOU GET TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IT TAKES A JOG OVER TO CHIESA AND THEN GOES UP THE REST OF THE

WAY. >> THIS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS IS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THEN THIS DEVELOPER DREW UP, TO AND WERE NOT SAYING DON'T DO THAT PART THAT WE CAN GO FORWARD WITHOUT DIRECTION WITH THIS ONE AND

THIS ONE. >> ALSO THE OTHER THING TO GIVE IN MIND IS EVENTUALLY WE WILL EXPAND CHIESA NORTH AND STILL CONNECT TO SHRADE ROAD I THINK THAT IS A REASONABLE APPROACH.

>> MAYOR: I AGREE WITH ALL OF THAT. WHAT I DON'T WANT IS ALL OF THESE RESIDENT HAVING TO MONITOR US FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF WERE TRYING TO SLIP SOMETHING BY, WHICH WE ARE NOT AND I AM NOT BUT THAT IS WHY WE SAID LET'S DO A REVISION TO THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN. IF IT IS AS SIMPLE AS REPRIORITIZING THESE FEW AND NOT GOING BEHIND THOSE HOUSES I AM FINE WITH MAKING THAT DECISION AS A BODY TONIGHT. WHAT I WANT IN THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN IS A DEFINITIVE STATEMENT OF WE ARE NOT GOING TO PUT TRAILS BETWEEN PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS IN THE LAKES.

>> EXISTING. [APPLAUSE] I THOUGHT THAT SHOULD BE PART OF

THIS DISCUSSION. >> I CAN ABSOLUTELY MAKE THAT HAPPEN FOLLOWING THIS MEETING AND THE REASON WE ARE NOT HOLDING BACK IS THERE'S ONLY A NUMBER OF PRIORITIZED TRAILS.

[01:05:04]

BUT ABSOLUTELY WE CAN RECOMMEND THIS WE HAVE THAT MAP AMENDED, WE CAN PUT THE STATEMENT IN YOUR DIRECTION AND THAT IS THE

RELATIVE PROCESS. >> I THINK THAT IS THE STATEMENT WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE. HAVING A HARD TIME STAYING TONIGHT THAT IS OUR PRIORITY BUT THE PERCEPTION IS THAT THAT IS STILL THERE SO UNTIL THAT CHANGES IN OUR PUBLIC FACING MATERIAL INCLUDING THE MASTER PLAN THAT SHOWS THE AMENDED ROUTE AND THE AMENDED LANGUAGE I'M NOT PREPARED TO SAY THAT IN MY PRIORITY RIGHT NOW IT'S AT THE

BOTTOM OF MY PRIORITY LIST. >> WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE. TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THOSE THREE OR FOUR VERY SPECIFIC TRAILS AND WHAT CHANGES TO MAKE WITH THEM SO WE COULD DO THAT AND GET THE MASTER PLAN ONLINE AND IT'S VERY EASY TO AMEND THE MAP AND PUT IN SOME INFORMATION ABOUT IT THAT IS A LITTLE HARD WITH DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS TEND TO SEE DIFFERENT THINGS AND HOW IT'S SET UP BUT WHAT THE CITY DOES WE CAN ABSOLUTELY DO THAT. THAT WAS REALLY THE POINT OF

TONIGHT. >> MAYOR: REALLY, THE LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL, THAT TOP SEGMENT, LET'S JUST WRAP THAT UP, THAT PIECE RIGHT NOW I WILL NOT SUPPORT THAT NORTH PART OF THE

TRAIL. >> I AGREE.

>> MAYOR: EVERYBODY? >> CUT IT ACROSS TO CHIESA.

>> MAYOR: THIS IS NOT EVEN BELONG ON A PRIORITY LIST.

>> THERE IS A POTENTIAL THAT WE MIGHT HAVE TO PARTNER WITH THE DEVELOPER AS THEY GO IN AND SAY WE WANT TO PARTNER. WE'VE DONE THAT IN THE PAST WITH THE TRAIL MONEY WHERE WE ARE ABLE TO PARTNER WITH THEM TO FUND THAT.

>> MAYOR: LET ME ASK A VERY SPECIFIC QUESTION PAIR PRIORITIZING THIS IN A REVISED MANNER OR REVISED ROUTE WOULD NOT CAUSE ANY EXPENDITURE WITHOUT COMING BACK TO COUNSEL, IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT TOO MANY NEGATIVES? WE WILL NOT SPEND A CENT ON THIS TRAIL WITHOUT COMING BACK TO COUNSEL AND YOU WILL REVISE THE MASTER PLAN TO EXCLUDE THE TRAIL KIND

THOSE HOMES. IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT. YES.

>> ANYTHING ELSE ON LAKESIDE NORTH TRAIL? I WILL TALK ABOUT IT WITH YOU AFTER THE MEETING. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE NEXT.

TRADING? CAN WE NOT CALL IT SHRADE ROAD? I DON'T WANT

ASSOCIATED WITH THE DITCH. >> I THINK WE SAID THAT BECAUSE IT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH TORNADOES BUT THIS SECTION WITH THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING WITH THE LAKE TRAIL, WE COULD GO THROUGH THAT WORK LINE AND HOW WE COULD MAKE THAT CONNECTION TO SHRADE.

WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT AND SEE HOW WE DO THAT.

>> AND FOR THE SHRADE ROAD TRAIL THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR GRANTS FOR THAT BECAUSE OF IT DRAINING INTO THE LAKE ON THE EASTSIDE SO, WE DEFINITELY WANT TO LOOK

INTO THAT. >> YES, THAT IS ONE OF THOSE

PROJECTS. >> MAYOR: DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THE SHRADE ROAD TRAIL? WHAT IS

NEXT? >> MAIN ST., EAST. TO BE ABLE TO GET FROM RCC TO LAKESIDE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A CHALLENGE WITH THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT BUT IT WILL CONNECT THAT TRAIL ALL THE WAY

TO THE PARK. >>.[INDISCERNABLE]

>> OH YES. AND THE FOLLOWING IS TO CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON THIS TRAIL AND THAT IS INCLUDING PIT STOPS ALONG THE AREA AND WE HAVE PARKS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE LAKE AND PARTS ALONG THE LAKE THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO LOOK AT.

>> WHAT IS THE PLAN TO GET UNDER THE RAILROAD TRACKS?

>> THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION. >> YOU GOT TO PUT IN A LOT.

>> WE TALKED ABOUT GOING IN THERE YOU HAVE TWO GO TO LEAD

[01:10:02]

THE RAILROAD TRACKS. >> IS ALONG THAT WAY AND WE WILL HAVE TO DO SOME RESEARCH ON WHAT THE BEST ANSWER IS. WE MAY HAVE TO GO DOWN PALM ROAD TRAIL AND CUT DOWN SOME STAIRS OR SOMETHING WERE GOING TO HAVE TO REALLY PARTNER.

>> DO YOU THINK IT IS REALISTIC THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH A SOLUTION AND BUILD SOMETHING IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS FOR THAT?

>> PROBABLY FOR THE NEXT 3 TO 5 AND WE WILL START AT PROCESS.

SOMETIMES WE FIND OUT IT'S NOT THE BEST OPTION BUT FOR NOW I

THINK IT'S AT LEAST AN OPTION. >> WE HAVE THE IMPACT FROM

SAPPHIRE BAY. >> MAYOR: I'M GOING TO BACK UP FOR JUST A SECOND. THE NORTH SIDE NORTHLAKE THANK YOU. THE CHIESA PARK AND I KNOW WE HAD THE CITIZENS INPUT MENTION ABOUT BUILDING SIDEWALKS ON CHIESA BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT CHIESA NORTH HAS TO BE EXPANDED AND SIDEWALKS ADDED IN THOSE A LOT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCESS ISSUES. IT'S NOT A SOLUTION TODAY TO CUT OVER AND GO UP AND BUILD A SIDEWALK TO CONNECT THOSE TRAILS INTO THE WHOLE CHIESA DEVELOPMENT IS FIGURED OUT. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE WILL GO BEHIND THE HOUSES BUT THAT IS JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN POSSIBLY DO WITHOUT A HECK OF A LOT OF ENGINEERING OVER THE ENTIRE CHIESA NORTH ROAD. IN MY RIGHT? IN REGARDS, MUNAL CAN I ASK YOU TO ADDRESS THE DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF HARBORSIDE? IN REGARDS TO THE MASTER PLAN AND THE ISSUE OF SHOWING THE LAKEFRONT AND WHAT THE DEVELOPER IS DOING COMMIT.

>> SURE. IT IS A SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND I'M SURE EVERYONE KNOWS THAT AS IT IS PART OF THE KRAMER PLAN FOR THE SIGNATURE GATEWAY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS PARCEL THAT IS MOVING OUT NOW. THE AREA THERE IS A SIDEWALK AND TRAIL SYSTEM. THE ONLY TIME THE CITY OF DALLAS REQUIRES US TO SHORE UP THE SHORELINE IS WHEN WE HAVE PERMITS THAT ARE REQUIRED WITH SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT OF THAT MATTER ATTACHED TO IT. SO SEAWALLS WILL NOT BE A PART OF IT. AS IT RELATES TO PERMITTING OFF OF THIS SIDEWALK IS SELF THE CITY OF DALLAS DOES NOT PARTICIPATE IN THAT. WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT THE PLANS ARE STANDARD DETAIL AS IT RELATES TO IT AND THEN THE REINFORCEMENTS WITH THE TRAIL SYSTEM AND THE CONCRETE WALL.

>> DO YOU ALL DO ANY KIND OF ENGINEERING STUDIES FOR EROSION AND THE IMPACT OF REMOVING TREES?

>> THANK YOU. IF TREES ARE BEING REMOVED AND YOU CAN SEE THAT WHERE TREES ARE REMOVED ON THE SHORELINE, IT IT IS WITH THE ASSOCIATED TREE REMOVAL PERMIT AND PLAN SET. ALL OF THAT IS TO ADDRESS THAT PROCESS AND THAT WOULD BE HIGHLIGHTED AT THAT TIME. IN THIS CASE THERE WERE NO ISSUES THAT WERE

REALIZED AS A RESULT. >> MAYOR: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

WHAT ELSE COUNSEL? DID WE ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS?

>> YES ME HIM. COUNSEL? ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. SO, YES.

I WANT THAT STATEMENTS. >> YES, IN BOLD.

>> I'M GOING TO MOVE TO 3C AND THEN 3D AND THEN BACK TO 3B

UNLESS YOU ARE OVERRULING ME. >> NO I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE A SUGGESTION. NUMBER 1, 3B SHOULD BE MOVED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT AND THE OTHER THING IS COULD BE DONE AFTER THE MEETING IF WE HAD TO IF WE RUN SHORT OF TIME.

>> MAYOR: SO CAN 3D. >> I HAVE SOME COMMENTS ON 3B.

[3C. Discuss the potential to move forward with a May 2022 Bond Election to include new City facilities and Parks, Trails and Recreation Facility improvements. (45 minutes)]

>> I'M GOING TO 3C. AARON, WHERE DID YOU GO? WHAT WAS

[01:15:06]

THEM? >> I WILL MAKE THIS ONE BRACE.

RACE. >> MAYOR: NAME AND ADDRESS FOR

THE RECORDD, I AM SORRY. >>.[INDISCERNABLE] ADDRESS] I'M GOING TO START USING YOUR ADDRESS FOR MY FORWARDING. ITEM 3C IS RUNNING BOND ELECTION IN 2022 TO INCLUDE NEW FACILITIES, PARKS AND TRAILS. AS YOU KNOW, MANY.[INDISCERNABLE] SOME OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS MOOT NOW GIVEN THE DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ON 3A BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU.[INDISCERNABLE] CONSIDER HOW THIS LOOKS TO THE CITIZENS WITH THE OTHER PROPOSITIONS THAT FAILED THIS YEAR. IT MAKES AS LOOK YOU HAVE A COUNCIL ELECTION COMING UP GIVEN THAT YOU HAVE THE BOND THAT WAS TO CREATE THE COUNCIL ELECTION. IT WILL BRING BACK SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP A YEAR AGO WITH AN APPEARANCE TO SOME OF THE STUDENTS THAT IT IS TO GET THIS IN WHILE THE CURRENT COUNSEL IS SEATED. THERE ARE A LOT OF POTENTIAL PARKS PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL. WE ARE OBSESSED WITH COMPLETING THE CIRCLE OF THE TRAIL AND WE GOT SOME THE OTHER THINGS LIKE MY HUSBAND MENTIONED THE PARK. THAT IS A WONDERFUL THING AND I KNOW THAT IS A HUGE EXPENSE ON THE BUDGET. THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU CAN GET A LOT MORE SUPPORT ON PAYLESS JUST MAKE SURE THIS TRAIL FALLS WITHIN

THE CIRCLE. >> MAYOR: JUST FOR THE RECORD THAT WAS NOT MUCH TROUBLE.[LAUGHTER] I AM SORRY.

I'M JUST GIVING YOU A HARD TIME.

>> THIS RECEIVES GRANT FUNDING IN PARTNERSHIP WITH ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION. HOW MUCH MONEY HAS REAL TRIED TO BUILD PARK WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT? SO MANY YEARS AGO THEY CAME TO ME AND ASKED TO STUDY MY KAYAK FACILITY AND HOW IT INTEGRATED INTO THE PARK. IT WAS A GREAT DEVELOPMENT WE THINK O THE PROJECT WITH A PIECE OF USELESS LAND THAT YOU WANT TO GET RID OF. IT RECEIVED A GRANT TO CLEAN UP THIS LAND AND BUILD A KAYAK PARK THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HAD THE PARX DESIGN TO PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROJECT THEY FOUND THE SAME CONSULTANTS THAT ROWLETT USED TO DESIGN THEIR GRAPEVINE PARK. THE GRAPEVINE

[01:20:05]

MASTER PLAN. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU MR. HALL.

ALL RIGHT. >> YOU HAVE A SMILE ON YOUR FACE. COUNSEL AT THIS TIME, THERE ARE, WE ALWAYS TAKE FEEDBACK AND THAT IS ALWAYS THE HOPE OF EVERY DISCUSSION IS WE GET TO THE COUNCIL WHERE WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING OUR TIME ON WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO FOR THIS CONVERSATION IS BEFORE WE SPEND A LOT MORE TIME AND ENERGY PREPARING FOR AN ELECTION BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN ELECTION THE GOAL TONIGHT REALLY AND I'M JUST GOING TO MENTION OUR CONSENSUS QUESTIONS, FIRST OFF, IS THERE A CONSENSUS TO HOLD THE BOND ELECTION, IF SO WHAT PROJECTS TO INCLUDE AND IF NOT IS THERE ANYTHING THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE US TO WORK ON? THAT'S WHY A WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FOCUSED ON IT TONIGHT. SO, AS WE KNOW AS WE ELOQUENTLY PUT, OUR PROPOSITION DID FAIL THE PARKS AND RECREATION'S FACILITIES. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DESIRE TO CONTINUE WITH OUR PROGRAM. WE HAVE HAD THREE SUCCESSFUL RELATIONS AND EACH OF THOSE HAVE CONTRIBUTED SOME PORTION OF THE PARKS THE TRAIL SYSTEM AND THE OTHER THING IS THAT WE MADE A CONSCIOUS DECISION LAST FALL TO DELAY THE FACILITIES ON A FUTURE BOND ELECTION AND PERHAPS EVEN FROM THIS NOVEMBER WHICH WE DECIDED NOT TO DO AS WELL. SO, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE RAISE THESE ISSUES AND DECIDE IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. WE HAVE SOME SPECIAL CHALLENGES AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THESE ARE AT THE TOP OF THE MIND HERE. FIRST THE EXISTING FACILITIES ARE OBSOLETE. AND, I THINK WE HAVE ABOUT 83,000 SQUARE FEET RIGHT NOW IN THE FACILITY SPACE. THE STUDY THAT WAS DONE BY THE SERGEANT INDICATED A FULL BUILDOUT. NOT TODAY BUT AGAIN, THE LIBRARY, THE CITY HALL, PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING, ALL THOSE THINGS, ANIMAL SHELTER, ALL THAT COMES INTO PLAY WITH THESE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE. SO, WE KNOW THIS IS WHY WE DID THE STUDY TO BEGIN WITH. TO BE BLUNT WE ARE OUTGROWING OUR CURRENT SPACE AND TO MEET THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY IT IS SOMETHING THAT MY STAFF AND I TALK ABOUT QUITE OFTEN. EVERY BUDGET SEASON, FOR SURE AND AS WELL AS EVEN ONGOING STRATEGY DISCUSSIONS. I SOMETIMES JOKE WITH THE STAFF AND SOMETIMES THEY DON'T SMILE THAT HE CAN GO TO THE BUG NETS IF OUR CEILINGS WERE HIGH ENOUGH BUT THAT DOESN'T GO ACROSS WELL. THE SECOND THE GROWTH IS CAUSING ITS OWN HEADACHES AS DEMAND FOR SERVICES INCREASE PEER THAT IS

[01:25:03]

WE KNOW THESE ARE THE CHALLENGES THAT WE ARE FACING.

BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY THIS. TIMING IS JUST AS CRITICAL.

EVEN WITH THE UNUSUAL CHALLENGES WE HAVE IN THE SENSE THAT WE HAVE AN ELECTION COMING UP IN MAY, WE STILL DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN TERMS OF PROPERTY TAX VALUES.

IF YOU WILL REMEMBER AFTER THE GREAT RECESSION 2015 WAS THE FIRST YEAR WE ACTUALLY SAW AN INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES AND IT WAS .15 PERCENT. BASICALLY IT WAS FLAT. SINCE THAT TIME THROUGH BOTH NEW CONSTRUCTION MOST $700 MILLION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AS WELL AS REASSESSED VALUES CLIMBING ALL ACROSS THE VFW AREA NOT JUST ROWLETT. WE HAVE BEEN SEEING 8 TO 10 TO 12 PERCENT INCREASES IN PROPERTY AND TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE DELAY VALUE IN THIS YEAR WE DID NOT.

COMING UP NEXT YEAR WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT WERE GOING TO SEE BECAUSE NEW CONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO HAVE A MUCH SMALLER IMPACT FOR AT LEAST A COUPLE OF YEARS UNTIL WE SEE SAPPHIRE BAY START TO WORK. SO, GIVEN THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE, GIVEN THE CRUCIAL DYNAMICS THAT AND I THINK IT AS ONE PERSON HAS SAID THE CHALLENGES WHERE YOU COME BACK WITH AN ELECTION THAT FAILS, THEN WHAT? AND HOW DO YOU REBUILD THAT MOMENTUM? WE'VE HAD MOMENTUM AND I KNOW WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE THAT AND I THINK THE TIMING IS JUST IMPORTANT AS OUR NEEDS. WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR FROM COUNSEL AT IN TERMS OF DIRECTION IS DO WE PUT FORTH THE EFFORT TO BRING THIS BACK TO COUNSEL IN FEBRUARY? DO WE PAUSE AND SAY LET'S SHOOT FOR NOVEMBER OR DO WE PUT IT OFF TO A LATER DATE? THAT IS REALLY WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO SAY. IT IS A BALANCING ACT, IT ALWAYS IS BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A BOND ELECTION WE NEED TO HAVE IT ON THE COUNCIL HAS TO PROVE IT BY ORDINANCE BEFORE FEBRUARY 19.

IT'S TIME FOR US TO WORK ON THAT IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE ARE GOING TO GO. AT THIS POINT I AM READY.

>> MAYOR: THANK YOU. I'LL BE GLAD TO START. SO, I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT A MAY ELECTION ON THESE ITEMS WILL NOT GO WELL.

I DON'T THINK, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE SO MUCH GOING ON IN

[01:30:07]

I AM JUST REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT NOT GETTING THE RIGHT COURSE OF ACTION WE NEED JOB THIS VERY SERIOUS DISCUSSION FOR THE CITY. THAT IS WHAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT WITH MAY.

WE WOULD HAVE THAT SAME ISSUE IF YOU BUY OFF ON A CONCERN THAT'S MY PERSONAL CONCERN, WE WOULD HAVE THE SAME ISSUE THE FOLLOWING MAY AND THEN THE FOLLOWING MAY IN TWO ENOUGH YEARS AWAY. I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF SHOOTING FOR A NOVEMBER, WHATEVER ITEM WE DECIDE TO PUT ON THE BALLOT TO LOOK AT NOVEMBER FOR A LOT OF REASONS, ONE, YOU ARE OFF THE LOCAL ELECTION CYCLE AND TWO, IT SHOULD BE A PRETTY WELL ATTENDED VOTE AND WE ALWAYS WANT MORE RESIDENTS GIVING INPUT ON THESE THINGS THAN LESS. IT ALSO ALLOWS US TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THESE TAX VALUES GO AND WE MADE A DECISION IN THE BUDGET PROCESS THAT WE WERE GOING TO PRESERVE THAT CAPITAL. WE WERE GOING TO INCLUDE IN THE OPERATING FUND AND NOT CAUSE A TAX INCREASE RATE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN MAKE A DECISION FOR WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO FOR THE TAX RATE BY FEBRUARY. BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT DATA ON THE TAXABLE ITEMS. I FEEL LIKE WE WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE INFORMATION DOING IT IN NOVEMBER GOING THROUGH THE SUMMER EVALUATION PROCESS. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, MOST IMPORTANTLY, MET A LOT OF THESE SUGGESTIONS FOR FACILITIES, LET'S APPROVE THE MASTER FACILITY PLAN AND FIGURE OUT THE TIMING OF IT ALL BUT DON'T JUST APPROVE THE ANIMAL SHELTER NOW AND THEN THE LIBRARY TOMORROW. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WORK YOU'VE GOTTEN DONE ON THAT YET BUT PROBABLY NOT ENOUGH AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD GET THAT READY FOR PRIME TIME FOR A MAY VOTE.

WHAT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DO AS A CITY IS NOT GIVE THIS THE AIRTIME IT NEEDS FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND EVERY ASPECT OF IT AND MAKE LOGICAL DECISIONS. I KNOW IT'S A LOT.

>> I AGREE WITH ALL OF THAT. ANOTHER CONCERN I HAVE IF WE WERE TO DO IT THIS MAY WOULD BE THAT WE HAVEN'T INCLUDED THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD IN THE FACILITIES DISCUSSION TO MY KNOWLEDGE. BEING ABLE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF CITIZEN INPUT I THINK IS IMPORTANT FOR DECISION LIKE THAT. BUT I MEAN I THINK EVERYTHING YOU JUST SAID WAS SPOT ON. I WILL LET THE OTHERS SPEAK.

>> I LIKE THE THOUGHT PROCESS ON THAT MAYOR. IT ALL MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO ME AND TO NOT POLITICIZE THE BOND OFFERING IN MAY ALSO MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME AND INTO HIS POINT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING OF AN EDUCATION PIECE THAT GOES ALONG WITH THIS SO THAT OUR COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS WE ARE NOT JUST GIVING INTO THE SAME BOND OFFERING THAT WE DID LAST MAY AND THAT GIVES US AND THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD TIME TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC AND LET THEM KNOW THE CHANGES THAT WE HAVE MADE AND WHY WE WANT TO PRESENT THIS TO THE PUBLIC. NOVEMBER MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO ME AND TO YOUR POINT THE MIDTERM WILL BE IN NOVEMBER AND WE WILL HAVE A REALLY GOOD TURNOUT. WE SHOULD HAVE AND THAT IS WHAT WE ALWAYS WANT FOR THE BOND ELECTION AND TYPICALLY THAT IS HARD TO GET OUT. FOR ALL THE REASONS YOU CITED I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT. I DO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE AT LEAST A 30,000 FOOT

[01:35:04]

MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO ME. >> TO ME I HAVE HEARD A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY LET THE NEW COUNSEL DECIDE. IF WE MOVE IT TO NOVEMBER THE NEW COUNSEL CAN DECIDE. I HOPE -

>> MAYOR: I HOPE IT'S THE PUBLIC DECIDING NOT TO COUNSEL

DECIDING. >> I HOPE THE NEW COUNSEL'S FEET ARE CLOSE TO THE GROUND BY THE TIME BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE IN FRONT OF THEM AND WHAT THEY'VE GOT TO LEARN BETWEEN MAY AND NOVEMBER. I LIKE THE IDEA OF NOVEMBER. I THINK MAY IS ALMOST RUSHING EVEN THOUGH IT IS A WAYS OUT IT IS RUSHING. WE HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO PUT THAT TOGETHER

BETWEEN HERE AND NOVEMBER. >> THIS COUNSEL CAN GIVE GUIDANCE RIGHT NOW ON WHAT WE WANT THE STAFF DOING TO GET READY FOR WHATEVER. I DON'T UNDERSTAND LET THE NEW COUNSEL DECIDE. I AM NOT TRYING TO COULD DECIDE SEO, I HAVE JUST HEARD THAT IN THE PUBLIC AND IT'S NOT FOR US TO DECIDE.

IT'S ABOUT US DOING THE RESEARCH ON WHAT THE NEEDS ARE IN THE CITY AND PUTTING FORTH THE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC AND LETTING THE PUBLIC DECIDE. YOU SOUND YOU'RE GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE. I CAN READ YOUR FACE. I KNOW YOU WELL

ENOUGH NOW. >> WE ARE GETTING AGGRESSIVE SO LET ME GO BEFORE YOU GO.[LAUGHTER] I HAVE BEEN IN NOVEMBER BUCKET FOR A WHILE NOW BECAUSE OF THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS THAT ARE GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME WITHIN NEW MAYOR. I ALSO THINK THAT TIME IS A GOOD FOR US BECAUSE IT DOES ALLOW US TO DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATION PLAN FOR THE FACILITY PIECE WHICH I THINK IS GOING TO BE ESSENTIAL.

IT IS $160 MILLION THE TOTAL PACKAGE. IT WILL AFFECT THE TAXES IN SOME WAY OR ANOTHER AT SOME POINT SO IT'S VERY AND POINT THOUGH IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF INPUT AND INVOLVEMENT WITH THOSE DECISIONS BEFORE E GO TO BONDS IN MAY. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS COUNSEL MAKES AMONG THOSE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT WE PRIORITIZE FIRST COMING OUT OF THAT FACILITY AND PUTTING THAT TOGETHER SO THE STAFF CAN BUILD A PLAN AND PUT TOGETHER FOR WHATEVER THAT BOND

MAY LOOK LIKE IN NOVEMBER. >> SORRY WENDY I WAS EDUCATING.

>> THE ONE COMMENT I WILL SAY AND GO BACK TO WHAT THE MAYOR SAID AS WELL AND WANT TO POINT THIS OUT. WE HAVE A NEW COUNSEL IN MAY. IT MAY BE RUN OFF SO MAYBE NOT A FULL COUNSEL UNTIL JUNE AND THEY HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION BY AUGUST TO PUT IT ON FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. TO THE MAYOR!, YOU REALLY HAVE TO BE WORKING ON THIS ALL ALONG BECAUSE YOU CAN'T WAIT UNTIL JUNE TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS.

>> MAYOR: MY LITTLE EXCHANGE OVER HERE CONVINCED

MATT.[LAUGHTER] >> 50 PERCENT! 75 PERCENT! GO

AHEAD! >> I AM ON BOARD WITH THE FACILITIES PIECE, 100 PERCENT. THAT IS A BIG NUGGET AND THAT'S GOING TO HAVE SOME REALLY HARD DECISIONS MUST GOING AND I AGREE WE HAVE TWO OF THE MEMBERS HERE AND THEY REALLY NEED TO HAVE THEIR ARMS AROUND IT AND THAT IS GOING TO TAKE A HUGE EDUCATION CAMPAIGN TO GET THAT ONE PASSED. IT IS SO IMPORTANT AND SO NEEDED THAT THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A FULL STRATEGY DEVELOPED BEHIND IT. THE PART THAT I DON'T AGREE WITH IS I FEEL LIKE THE PROPERTY FAILED FOR ONE PARTICULAR REASON AND WE HAVE A LOT OF NEEDS OUT THERE IN OUR PARKS THAT DIDN'T GET FUNDED THAT NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. I

[01:40:04]

>> YOU MAKE SOME GOOD POINTS. WE WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD

DO TO THE TAX RATE, RIGHT? >> WE WON'T KNOW THAT TECHNICALLY, WELL, BY MAY WE WOULD HAVE A GOOD IDEA. THAT

IS AFTER THE ELECTION. >> THAT'S MY BIG CONCERN ABOUT THAT. LET ME REPHRASE THAT. WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE PUBLIC WITH THE INFORMATION THAT THIS WOULD INCREASE THE

TAX RATE. >> NUMBER.

>> FOR THE PARKS? >> WE DON'T KNOW THAT.

>> MAYOR: WE DID NOT SET THAT CAPITAL ASIDE. PLEASE DON'T

WHISPER. >> I WILL REITERATE I THINK NOVEMBER IS THE TIME TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT GIVES US THAT EDUCATION PIECE WE DON'T HAVE TO RAISE TAXES, POSSIBLY TO DO THAT IN NOVEMBER, WE WOULD HOPE. IT TAKES THE POLITICAL PEACE OUT OF IT AND, YOU KNOW, WE THINK IT WOULDN'T BE A POLITICAL ISSUE BUT IT COULD BE. THERE'S ALWAYS THE POTENTIAL FOR THAT. BUT I STILL SUPPORT NOVEMBER AS THE BEST DATE AND I AGREE WITH YOU, I HATE TO PUSH OFF HERFURTH PARK ANOTHER SIX MONTHS BUT I'D RATHER PUSH IT OFF ANOTHER SIX MONTHS THEN RISK IT NOT PASSING IN MAY. THOSE WERE MY

WHISPERING COMMENTS. >> MAYOR: I DON'T KNOW HOW TO COUCH THAT BOND BECAUSE IT MIGHT RAISE TAXES AND WE DON'T KNOW AND THAT BECOMES POLITICAL.

>> IT DOES. >> I DON'T WANT THESE DECISIONS TO BE BASED ON POLITICS, I WANT THEM TO BE BASED ON CAPITAL

NEEDS AND DESIRES OF RESIDENT. >> I UNDERSTAND THE COMMENT ABOUT HERFURTH PARK BUT I THOUGHT WE WERE MOVING FORWARD WITH PHASE I THAT WAS FUNDED. THAT WILL HELP IN THE MEANTIME IT WILL BE GREAT BUT IT WILL DO SOMETHING. WE ARE LOOKING FOR THE LAST TWO DECADES BUT WE COULD WAIT A COUPLE MONTHS.

>> I DO SUPPORT NOVEMBER. >> I THINK WE HAVE THE DIRECTION. BEFORE WE WRAP THIS UP I DO WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT THAT WE ARE STILL WORKING ON THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THE FIRE STATION AND WE WILL BE HEARING ABOUT THAT SHORTLY.

JUST SAY THAT WE STILL HAVE THAT DISCUSSION COMING SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS CLEAR. IN THE MEANTIME I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS TO SUPPORT THIS AND I THINK WE HAVE WHAT WE NEED. I MUCH PREFER TO KNOW NOW THEN BE SPENDING THE NEXT THREE MONTHS ON THAT AND MAKING THE DECISION IN FEBRUARY. THANK YOU. I KNOW THIS WAS HARD. GOING BACK TO WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT HERFURTH PARK HAD THE PROPOSITION BEEN PASSED COULD'VE DONE THE ENTIRE PARK AND PROBABLY HAD A BIGGER BANG FOR THE BUCK AND SAVED MONEY PIT THAT IS NOT WHAT IS IN FRONT OF US AND WE WILL HAVE TO DO EACH PHASE AND MAYBE WAS

[01:45:03]

>> WILL WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF WORK DONE BETWEEN NOW AND MAY. BROWNIE HAS A POINT THIS IS GOING TO BE DECIDED BY THE PUBLIC AND THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE EDUCATED. IT'S GOING TO BE A LONG EDUCATION PROCESS BUT THERE'S A STEEP LEARNING CURVE WITH THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MORE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE TO PASSON TO THE NEW COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT CIP WAIT UNTIL THE FIRST OF THE YEAR. TO ME THEY SHOULD START MEETING ASAP AND START THE GROUND WORKS AND PUTTING IT TOGETHER BECAUSE I DON'T IT IS, BACK TO THE SAME POINT AS I STATED BEFORE, WE CAN'T WAIT 10 TO 15 YEARS. WE HAVE TO JUST RIP THE BAND-AID OFF AND THAT'S GOING TO BE

TOUGH. >> DO WE NEED TO REAPPOINT

THEM? >> LAURA WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO?

>> AT THE END OF THE LAST BOND CYCLE THE COUNCIL DETERMINES TO DECOMMISSION FOR A LOCK OF A BETTER WORD THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH AN AD HOC BOND COMMITTEE AS THE CYCLES CAME UP. IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT STARTING THAT PROCESS SOON COUNSEL WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER APPOINTING THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, SOON.

>> WHICH IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT SO WE WON'T GO ANY FURTHER WITH THAT THERE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.

OKAY. YOU SAID NOVEMBER? DID WE HEAR FROM EVERYBODY?

>> >> I BELIEVE IT WAS UNANIMOUS

US. [LAUGHTER] >> 90 PERCENT UNANIMOUS

.[LAUGHTER] >> MAYOR: I ALWAYS LIKE IT WHEN PEOPLE SAY I GAVE 120 PERCENT AND UNLIKE HOW DID YOU GIVE 120 PERCENT MAC HOW IS IT 80 PERCENT UNANIMOUS? [LAUGHTER]

[3B. Discuss and receive a presentation regarding the Trails at Cottonwood Creek drainage, trafficand environmental studies. (30 minutes) ]

>> MAYOR: ALL RIGHT WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TO 3B ISCUSS AND RECEIVE A PRESENTATION REGARDING THE TRAILS AT COTTONWOOD CREEK DRAINAGE, TRAFFIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES. AND WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER. MS.

HIGGINS? >> I MEANT TO PUT 3C.

>> DO YOU STILL WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT HE MET.

>> I DO. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT IF YOU DON'T MIND. LET'S

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORDS? >> I'M SORRY ALWAYS WANT TO CALL ON YOU BEFORE HAND.

>> I AM STEPHANIE HIGGINS I LIVE AT.HAD CHANGES THAT I WAS GOING TO SAVE ON THIS ONE AND I GUESS MY QUESTIONS ARE ON THESE NEW TRAILS THAT ARE GOING TO BE HAPPENING BECAUSE THAT IS A DESIGNATED PARK AREA ED PARK AREA AND THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT ARE DESIGNATED PARK AREAS AND IT'S NOT IN THE IL-8 IS LISTED IN RESOLUTION 1201 A SECTION 3 WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT REZONING IN THAT AREA CALLS OUT WHAT IS DESIGNATED AS A PARK AND WAS PUT TOGETHER AROUND THE SAME TIME 2001 WHEN ALL OF THIS WAS FIGURED OUT. I ALSO GOT A MAP THAT HAS KEYNOTES ON THEIR IT IS MAP 171 AND 172 THAT GO OVER THESE AREAS SPECIFICALLY THE SHOW RIGHT WHERE THAT PARK IS AND WHERE IT IS SUPPOSED TO AND SO MY QUESTION IS ARE THOSE GOING TO BE AMENDED AS A RESOLUTION SINCE YOU MADE THAT DECISION TONIGHT? THAT IS THE ACTUAL DOCUMENTATION OF WHERE THAT CAME FROM. THE PARK AREA IS A LITTLE BIT SHORTER THEN WHAT WE MENTIONED. SO THERE ARE SOME CHANGES THAT NEED TO

BE TO THE LEGL DOCUMENT. >> MAYOR: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DID I ALREADY READ 3B? I DID? I DID NOT? HELLO.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I AM HERE TONIGHT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED TRAILS AT COTTONWOOD CREEK. LET ME GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND ON THE PROJECT. THE TRAIL CREEK PARTNERS WHO ARE PROPOSING THIS CONTAINS, IT DOES CONTAIN 765

[01:50:08]

THE MAIN SUBJECT OF TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION ARE A NUMBER OF STUDIES THAT HAVE GONE INTO THIS PROJECT TO SUPPORT ITS DEVELOPMENT. THERE IS A DRAINAGE STUDY, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY. LET'S BEGIN WITH THE DRAINAGE STUDY. I AM GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND INFO ON COTTONWOOD CREEK. COTTONWOOD CREEK AND ITS TRIBUTARY DO FLOW THROUGH THE PROPERTY. THEY CONVERGE ON THE PROPERTY AND THEN THEY FLOW OUT THE SOUTHERN TIP OF THE PROPERTY. AND THEN COTTONWOOD CREEK CONTINUES TO FLOW TO STONEWALL ROAD WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED RIGHT THERE. IT CROSSES STONEWALL ROAD. THIS IS AN IMAGE OF THE ENTIRE WATERSHED OF COTTONWOOD CREEK AT STONEWALL ROAD IT IS ABOUT 3.3 SQUARE MILES. AFTER IT CROSSES STONEWALL ROAD, EXCUSE ME. AT STONEWALL ROAD THE CREEK IS FLOWING WITH ABOUT 6000 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND AND LET ME ILLUSTRATE WHAT THAT MIGHT MEAN. IF YOU CAN IMAGINE YOUR GARDEN HOSE AND YOU FILL UP A FIVE GALLON BUCKET THAT TAKES ABOUT A MINUTE. THE GARDEN HOSE IS ABOUT FIVE GALLONS A MINUTE. ONE CUBIC FEET PER SECOND IS EQUIVALENT TO 450 GALLONS PER MINUTE.

THIS CREEK IS FLOWING AT 6000 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND.

>> MAYOR: THAT WAS HELPFUL. >> AFTER IT CROSSES STONEWALL ROAD IT FLOWS PAST THE ENCLAVE WHICH IS A NEIGHBORHOOD. IT EVENTUALLY DISCHARGES INTO LAKE RAY HUBBARD TAKING UP AN EXTRA 500 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND. WHEN WE DO A PROJECT, ANY PROJECT IN THE CITY WE REQUIRE THE ENGINEER TO DO A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DRAINAGE STUDY. IN ADDITION TO THIS STUDY, HOPING TO SIZE THE ON-SITE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE THESE STUDIES ALSO HELP TO ENSURE THAT THAT PROJECT THAT PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT DO INFRASTRUCTURE AND ASSOCIATED PROPERTIES AND USERS. THEN IF A CREEK IS INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT AND ESPECIALLY IF THAT CREEK HAS A REGULATED FLOOD PLANE, A DETAILED STUDY IS NEEDED TO LOOK AT THE CREEK AND TO HOW THE PROJECT MIGHT BE IMPACTING IT. AS A MATTER FACT, THE ROWLETT CITY CODE IN CHAPTER 82 REQUIRES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT GETS A FLOOD PLANE PERMIT AND THAT CHAPTER ALSO DICTATES STANDARDS FOR SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT IN FLOODPLAINS. FOR THE TRAILS AT COTTONWOOD CREEK TRAIL CREEK PARTNERS DID HIRE A CONSULTANT

[01:55:05]

WE ASKED O'BRIEN ENGINEERING TO HELP WITH THE REVIEW OF THAT REPORT. I DO HAVE MY CONSULTANTS HERE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS LATER ON WE ARE HERE TO HELP. THEY ISSUED A REVIEW LETTER IN MARCH 2021 AND THEN WE GOT A REVISED SECOND REPORT IN OCTOBER, LAST MONTH. FROM TRAIL CREEK PARTNERS.

>> MAYOR: DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO THE COMMENTS FROM OUR REPORT?

>> YES. I WILL GO OVER THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. EXCUSE ME.

THEREFORE, FOR THE REVIEW LETTER, IT DID ASK FOR SOME CLARIFICATIONS AND IDENTIFIED A FEW ISSUES. IT WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REPORT ADDRESSED THE WATER SURFACE ELEVATION DOWNSTREAM OF THE PROJECT TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE NOT INCREASED BECAUSE THAT IS A REQUIREMENT. THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN IT IS APPROPRIATE THE DESIGNERS USED SCOUR PROTECTION AND THEY ALSO WANTED TO JUSTIFY, THEY WANTED THE OFFERS TO JUSTIFY THE USE OF A RUNOFF COEFFICIENT THAT WAS USED IN THE MODELING. THE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT IS BASICALLY A NUMBER THAT CHARACTERIZES A WATERSHED SURFACE AND IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE AMOUNT OF RUNOFF THAT OCCURS BASED ON

A GIVEN RAINFALL. >> CAN I ASK YOU REALLY QUICK WHAT IS PROTECTED AGAINST SCOUR?

>> SCOUR EROSION. >> UNDERSTAND THAT WORD.

>> MAYOR: DOES SCOUR STAND FOR ANYTHING?

>> NUMBER SCOUR IS ANOTHER TERM -

>> MAYOR: IT IS A SYNONYM? WHAT'S YES. THE SECOND REPORT WAS SUBMITTED AND O'BRIEN AS OF THE WRITING OF THIS PRESENTATION IS REVIEWING THAT REPORT. I WILL TELL YOU JUST TODAY THEY GAVE ME A LETTER OUTLINING THEIR REVIEW OF THE SECOND REVISED REPORT AND THEY FOUND THAT THAT SECOND REPORT ADDRESSED ALL THEIR COMMENTS AND THEY HAVE NO FURTHER COMMENTS. THE CONCLUSIONS IN THAT REPORT ARE SOUND.

>>. >> MAYOR: LET ME STOP YOU FOR A MOMENT. IS IT NORMAL FOR US TO HIRE AN EXPERT WHEN THESE THINGS ARE SO COMPLEX THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE?

>> IS IT NORMAL? IT IS COMMON. I WON'T SAY IT'S NORMAL. IT DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH TIME ME AND MY TEAM HAVE AND WHAT WE MIGHT BE DOING AND HOW COMPLICATED THE REPORT IS.

>> MAYOR: WHEN YOU REVIEWED THAT RACK IN FEBRUARY BECAUSE

OF THE COMPLEXITY? >> YES IT WAS AN ISSUE. I KNEW THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IN TERMS OF DETENTION AND I WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THE CONCLUSION THAT THAT REACHED REGARDING THE DETENTION.

>> MAYOR: CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE EXPERTISE AND WHO WE HIRED?

>> O'BRIEN HAS, CAN I LET THEM BECAUSE I REALLY DON'T KNOW THE

HISTORY. >> MAYOR: WHY DID YOU TRUST

THEM? [LAUGHTER] >> WE HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH THEM BEFORE ON OTHER PROJECTS AND WE KNOW THEY ARE A KNOWN ENTITY TO US REGARDING HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS.

>> MAYOR: AND BRIEFLY WITH THEIR EXPERTISE?

>> NIGHT INHERENT TO TALK ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE 40 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN REFORMED OUR OWN COMPANY 30 YEARS AGO AND REALLY SPECIALIZE IN THE ANALYSIS OF DRAINAGE. WE HAVE DONE THAT FOR A PRIME DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY.

>> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. THE USE OF RUNOFF COEFFICIENT FOR SOME PORTIONS OF THE WATERSHED MODEL, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THERE ARE TRIBUTARIES THAT RUN OFF OF THAT MAIN DISCHARGE AREA THAT REDUCES SOME OF THE VOLUME OF WATER THAT IS COMING

[02:00:03]

DOWN THAT CREEK? >> NO.

>> OKAY. >> THE RUNOFF IN THIS CASE IS THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT COMES OFF THE LAND AS A DIRECT RESULT

OF THE RAINFALL. >> IT SOUNDED GOOD.

>> IT IS LIKE A REVERSE FORCE. IT SOUNDS GOOD.

>> OKAY. THE REPORT'S CONCLUSIONS, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY HAS ENACTED IN ORDER TO HELP PROTECT THE STREAM USERS. IN OUR ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE WE REQUIRE THAT IF A DEVELOPMENT INCREASES RUNOFF ABOVE THE PRE-DEVELOPED LEVELS THAT THAT DEVELOPER MUST USE DETENTION MEASURES WHICH TYPICALLY IS A DETENTION POND BUT NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS. TO DELAY THAT RUNOFF AND KEEP THE RUNOFF THIS CHARGE RATES TO PRE-DEVELOPED LEVELS. THERE IS AN EXCEPTION IN THE RULE WHICH SAYS THAT IF THAT DEVELOPMENT DISCHARGE IS DIRECTLY TO LAKE RAY HUBBARD THEN DETENTION IS NOT REQUIRED. FOR YOUR EDIFICATION A DETENTION POND IS BASICALLY A STRUCTURE THAT USES A CONTROL MECHANISM REGULATES THE DISCHARGE OUT OF THAT POND AND KEEPS THOSE DISCHARGE RATES BELOW THE ESTABLISHED LEVEL WHICH IS THE PREDEVELOPMENT LEVEL. WHY IS THIS NECESSARY? WHEN VACANT LAND IS IN ITS NATURAL STATE MEANING GRASSES AND TREES AND EVEN IN AGRICULTURAL FIELDS, DEVELOPMENT WILL INCREASE THE RATE OF RUNOFF. THAT IS BECAUSE THE NATURAL VEGETATION IS A PERVIOUS COVER WHICH ALLOWS THE RAINFALL TO SEEP INTO THE GROUND AND WHEN YOU DEVELOP YOU REPLACE THAT PERVIOUS COVER WITHIN HIM PERVIOUS MATERIAL WHICH CAUSES THE RAINFALL TO RUN OFF IN A GREATER QUANTITY AND AT A FASTER RATE. GREATER QUANTITY BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SEEP INTO THE GROUND AND FASTER RATES BECAUSE THE SURFACE IS SMOOTHER AND THERE IS LESS RESISTANCE FROM WHAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE VEGETATION.

>> THE TRAILS AT COTTONWOOD CREEK.

>> MAYOR: PAYING ON. I WANT TO GO BACK TO THIS DOES IT REQUIRE A RETENTION POND IF THE RUNOFF IS DIRECTLY TO LAKE HUBBARD? I

DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY. >> LAKE RAY HUBBARD IS A SELF A DETENTION POND AND IF THE DEVELOPMENT DISCHARGES DIRECTLY INTO THE LAKE YOU ARE BASICALLY DISCHARGING INTO A LARGE BODY

OF WATER, NUMBER 1. >> MAYOR: THEY STILL HAVE TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS EVEN IF YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PUT IN THE RETENTION?

>> ADVERSE EFFECTS? IF THEY, I HAVE TO SAY WE DO NOT LOOK AT DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS OF PROJECTS THAT DISCHARGE DIRECTLY INTO THE LAKE BECAUSE THE LAKE IS THE DOWNSTREAM, ALMOST THE FINAL DESTINATION. YES, THE LAKE HAS A SPILLWAY THAT CONTINUES ON TOWARD THE OCEAN BUT NO, WE DON'T DO DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS OF PROJECTS THAT DISCHARGE DIRECTLY INTO LAKE RAY HUBBARD. ONLY PROJECTS THAT ARE DISCHARGING INTO SOME KIND OF WATER SOURCE OR DRAINAGE SYSTEM THAT ITSELF ULTIMATELY DISCHARGES INTO LAKE.

>> YOU SAY THIS PROJECT - >>> MAYOR: I UNDERSTAND. I'M WONDERING IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE NOT MITIGATING BECAUSE HER SOMETHING BETWEEN THE LAKE AND THE DETENTION

POND. >> I'M SORRY, IT IS DISCHARGING DIRECTLY INTO LAKE THERE'S NOTHING IN BETWEEN AND THAT IS

THE EXCEPTION TO THE ROLE. >> THAT IS THE SITUATION TO

THIS DEVEOPMENT HE MET. >> NUMBER.

>> THAT IS MY POINT. >> THIS IS A GENERALIZED

REQUIREMENT. >> MAYOR: ARE YOU GOING TO COME

BACK AND ADDRESS THIS? >> I WILL GET TO THE SPECIFICS.

>> MAYOR: THAT'S THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION.[LAUGHTER]

>> NOW I UNDERSTAND. STAND. THE TRAIL IS A DEVELOPMENT SO

[02:05:06]

>> REALLY? THEY ARE GOING INTO THAT?

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> GLAD YOU ASKED! [LAUGHTER]

>> SO, WHY CAN SOMETIMES THE RETENTION BE ELIMINATED?

>> UNLIKE THIS DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT IS LOCATED IN THE WATERSHED THE RUNOFF FROM THAT DEVELOPMENT ENTERS THE WATER COURSE AND IF NOTHING IS DONE TO MITIGATE THE RUNOFF IT IS INCREASED, IT GETS INTO THE WATER COURSE RIGHT AWAY AND BEGINS TO TRAVEL DOWN THE WATER COURSE. EVENTUALLY CAUSING INCREASED WATER LEVELS AND WATER RUNOFF RATES TO THE DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES. DETENTION IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE IS A VERY GOOD TRIED-AND-TRUE METHOD TO COMBAT THOSE EFFECTS. WHEN A DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED NEAR THE BOTTOM OF THE WATERSHED WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU HAVE THAT WAVE OF RUNOFF COMING FROM THE UPPER REGION FROM ALL THE DEVELOPMENT AND ALL THE LAND THAT IS LOCATED UP THERE AND THAT WAVE TAKES A WHILE TO GET DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THE WATERSHED.

IF YOU CAN GET THE WATER FROM THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT OUT INTO THE WATER COURSE BEFORE THAT WAVE HIT YOU STAND A VERY GOOD CHANCE OF NOT INCREASING THE RUNOFF RATE AND NOT INCREASING THE WATER LEVEL AND YOU MAY EVEN DECREASE IT. IF ON THE OTHER HAND YOU APPLY DETENTION TO SUCH DEVELOPMENT THAT IS LOCATED IN THE LOWER REGIONS OF THE WATERSHED YOU COULD DELAY THE DISCHARGE FROM THAT PROJECT SO THAT THE WAVE AND THE DISCHARGE FROM THE POND ACTUALLY HIT AT THE SAME TIME COMBINING AND ACTUALLY MIGHT INCREASE THE RUNOFF RATE AND THE WATER LEVELS. THE ONLY WAY TO REALLY KNOW IF THAT WILL HAPPEN OR NOT IS TO DO A DOWNSTREAM AND AN ANALYSIS. WE CAN PUT IT INTO AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET AND IT GENERATED THESE CURVES. THIS IS THE DATA FROM A MODEL IN THE STUDY WERE THAT MODEL WAS USING DETENTION AND YOU CAN SEE IF THIS WORKS -

>> IT IS THE TOP BUTTON. >> I CAN DO IT WHERE YOU WANT

TO GO? >> THE LARGER SQUARE THAT SQUARE THERE YELLOW LINE IS THE PROJECT. IT'S THE TRAILS AT COTTONWOOD CREEK AND THE BLUE LINE IS COTTONWOOD CREEK ITSELF AND THE RED LINE REPRESENTS THE ADDITION OF EVERY VALUE ALONG THE CURVE OF THE PROJECT AND THAT VALUE WHERE THE BELL CURVE PEAKS YOU WILL NOTICE ONE THING. ALL OF THOSE PEAKS AND CURVES CAN COINCIDENTALLY DRAW IN THE SAME LINE IN THE VALUE OF THE RED PEAK IS THE VALUE IN THE CREEK COMING OFF AS A RESULT OF THE DETENTION AT THE TRAILS AT COTTONWOOD CREEK AND THAT VALUE IS 6200 CFS. IF WE DO THE SAME THING WITH THE MODEL THAT DOES NOT HAVE DETENTION HERE, THE GREENLINE THE GREEN CURVE IS THE PROJECT, THE BLUE CURVE IS COTTONWOOD CREEK AND THE BLACK CURVE IS THE COMBINATION OF THE TWO.

YOU WILL SEE THAT THE GREEN CURVE THE PEAK OF THAT CURVE HAS SHIFTED TO THE LEFT MEANING IT PEAKS ABOUT 30 MINUTES OR SO

[02:10:03]

RED CURVE IS SHOWING. >> MAYOR: THAT IS SAYING WE DON'T NEED A DETENTION POND BUT IS IT SAYING THAT WE HAVE AN

ISSUE? ARE YOU GOING THERE? >> YES THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS SAYING, THERE IS AN ISSUE WITHOUT DOING THE DETENTION IN FACT IS PROBABLY BENEFICIAL TO NOT DO THE DETENTION.

>> MAYOR: I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT ADDING

TO AN ISSUE. >> IT IS ACTUALLY NOT AGGRAVATING ANY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND I WILL GO INTO

THAT. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU.

>> ANOTHER IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THE STUDY IS THIS WHERE COTTONWOOD CREEK CROSSES STONEWALL ROAD, THAT AGAIN THE WATERSHED IS 3.3 SQUARE MILES AND THE TRAILS IS ABOUT 3.5 SQUARE MILES ABOUT 10 PERCENT OF THE WATERSHED AND THAT IS WHAT WE CALL THE ZONE OF INFLUENCE AND THAT IS AN IMPORTANT POINT THAT WE CAN USE TO LOOK AT WHAT IMPACTS MIGHT BE IMPOSED TO THE DOWNSTREAM USER ON THAT PROJECT. FROM THE REPORT AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT, THE ZONE OF INFLUENCE, WE CAN SEE THE PRE-DEVELOPED CONDITION IS BEFORE THE PROJECT IS EVER BUILT IS GENERATING ABOUT 5900 CFS, CUBIC FEET PER SECOND WHEREAS THE POST POSITION IS GENERATING 5700 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND. [INDISCERNABLE]

>> YES, OKAY. IT IS BASICALLY GOING BACK TO THESE CURVES HERE. IT IS ALL THE RESULT OF THESE CURVES. THE TIMING.

>> THAT MAKES SENSE. I'VE GOT YOU.

>> I HAVE AN ANSWER. >> SO, LET'S PAVE OUR PARKING LOTS. OH WAIT! TONY KATE PARADISE!

>> AS LONG AS YOU PUT IN STORM DRAINS! [LAUGHTER]

>> JANIS JOPLIN. >> YOU DID A GREAT JOB.

>> THANK YOU. I REALLY LEARNED STUFF FROM THAT. YOU DID A

GOOD JOB. >> OKAY. JUST TO REITERATE, I HAD THIS SLIDE IN AND WE NOW KNOW THAT O'BRIEN HAS REVIEWED THE SECOND REPORT AND SIGNED OFF ON IT AND THE CONCLUSIONS

IN THAT REPORT ARE SOUND. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, THIS IS A GENERAL QUESTION AND A LIGHT QUESTION BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF BIG INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS AND CAN ASSUME THERE WERE A LOT OF STUDIES TO BE PUT IN THEM AND WE HAVE THE FAILURE OF INFRASTRUCTURE. IT DOESN'T WORK OUT IN REAL LIFE IN THE SAME WAY THAT LOOKS ON PAPER AND I'M NOT SAYING INTENTIONALLY, BUT FOR SOME REASON THINGS HAPPEN LIKE THAT, OCCASIONALLY SO WERE THAT TO BE THE CASE AND DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES WERE IMPACTED, DO THEY HAVE ANY RECOURSE FOR ANYONE TO COME BACK AND DO SOMETHING TO MITIGATE THAT AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD BE

IN THAT MIGHT BE A QUESTION. >> MAY I INTERJECT? I'M SURE

DAVID HAS THAT. >> I THINK SHE'S TALKING ABOUT

RECOURSE TO FIX THAT. >> I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT DISCUSSION AND SOME ARE ALREADY WITHIN THE FLOOD PLANE SO THAT WAS THEIR BIGGEST CONCERN. THEIR BIGGEST CONCERN

[02:15:10]

THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DIGEST BECAUSE YOU'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS. SO YES, THE MODEL DOESN'T WORK THEN ABSOLUTELY THERE IS RECOURSE FOR THE DEVELOPER OR HOMEBUILDER IN WHAT IS GOING ON WE CAN REDIRECT THIS AND

REVISIT. >> THAT WAS MY QUESTION AND YOU SEEM TO BE ANTICIPATING THE NEXT SLIDE.

>> SO YES, WE DID MEET WITH A GROUP OF RESIDENTS WHO HAD ORIGINALLY EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS. THEY LIVED RIGHT AROUND THAT AREA AND THEY LIVE ON OR NEAR A STONE WALL NEAR COTTONWOOD CREEK AND THEY HAVE EXPRESSED FEARS OF BEING FLOODED OUT TO THE TRAIL DEVELOPMENT. WE MET WITH THEM AND WE EXPLAIN THESE CONCEPTS THAT I EXPLAINED TO YOU TONIGHT AND WHILE WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE AT RISK. THEY ARE STILL SOMEWHAT SKEPTICAL BUT THROUGH THE COURSE OF THAT MEETING WE DID LEARN THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING FLOODING ON A REGULAR BASIS. THEY HAVE GONE TO DALLAS COUNTY. I DON'T THINK DALLAS COUNTY HAS BEEN AS RESPONSIVE AS THEY WOULD HAVE LIKED AND AS MUNAL SAID, THE CITY WITH THE TRAIL CREEK PARTNERS DOES NOT HAVE ANY OBLIGATION TO CORRECT EXISTING CONDITIONS ESPECIALLY SINCE THOSE EXISTING CONDITIONS ARE NOT IN THE CITY AND ON DELAY IN OUR CONTROL. WE HAVE OFFERED TO TALK TO DALLAS ABOUT THIS ISSUE TO SEE IF WE CAN GET

SOME ON IT. >> THEY HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE COUNTY AND FROM THE LAST TIME WE HAVE MET THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO MAKE CONTACT SO WE DID SAY THAT WE WOULD GIVE THEM A BIT

OF AN EDGE. >> MAYOR: WE COULD HAVE INVITED THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER TO THE MEETING.

>> DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD'VE COME? TO BE HONEST?

>> IT'S A MISSED OPPORTUNITY NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT.

>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON DRAINAGE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO

THE TRAFFIC ASPECT? >> WERE GOING TO GO FROM 5957.

>> THAT IS THE PREDICTION OF THE MODEL AND IN THEORY THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING AND NOT DOING DETENTION IT COULD BE BENEFICIAL. THE STUDY WILL INCREASE.

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION BECAUSE WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME BUT THE STUDY LOOKS AT CURRENT CONDITIONS, CORRECT?

>> IT LOOKS UP BUILDOUT CONDITIONS OF THE TRAILS AT

COTTONWOOD. >> YES. SO, THE INTERESTING PIECE THAT WASN'T LOOKED AT DURING THIS ENTIRE STUDY IS AS THE BUILDOUT CONTINUES TO HAPPEN IS THE REST OF THE WATERSHED WHICH COULD, IF THAT WENT TO MORE IMPERVIOUS LESS INCREASE OF THE PEAK AND THEN IT IS RUSHING THOSE THROUGH THEIR AT A QUICKER TIME WHICH COULD IN THE FUTURE, THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT CAUSE ISSUES BUT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT COULD STILL CAUSE FLOODING ISSUES BELOW WHICH IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO TAKE THIS TO THE NEXT LEVEL IT COMES INTO A GREAT PLANNING LEVEL BASED ON HOW THE WATER FLOWS THROUGH THE WATERSHED AND IT IS REALLY AT THE NORTHERN EDGE, THERE SHOULD BE DETENTION TO PREPARE FOR THE FUTURE WATER FLOW. AND IN TERMS OF IT SHOULD BE A REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE OUT-OF-CONTROL FLOODING AND THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE. TO MEET EVEN IF IT IS NOT NEEDED TODAY IF THERE WAS A WAY TO BUILD IN STORM WATER RETENTION TO CAPTURE THAT WATER, NOW YOU

[02:20:04]

>>.[INDISCERNABLE] >> NUMBER IT IS REGIONAL.

DID YOU SUPPLY THE RESIDENCE WITH THESE STUDIES? THE ACTUAL

STUDIES? >> THEY SUBMITTED THEIR REQUESTS AND I GAVE THEM WHAT THEY ASKED FOR.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> DO WE HAVE TWO OR THREE MORE

MINUTES? >> YES. I WILL TRY TO SUM THIS UP QUICKLY. THERE WAS A PREVIOUS TRAFFIC ANALYSIS DONE IN 2012 WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT WAS PROPOSED AT THE SAME SITE OR THE DEVELOPMENT WAS SLIGHTLY SMALLER BUT IT DID CONCLUDE THAT THE ROADWAY WOULD OPERATE LOW CAPACITY AND RECOMMENDED A ROUNDABOUT AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE WAS THE NEW PLAN AND IT DEDICATES A RIGHT TURN LANE GOING ONTO STONEWALL ROAD AND THAT MIGHT HAVE TO BE TILT AT A LATER STAGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

>> WHY IS 2012 OKAY FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY?

>> THAT WAS DONE TO SUPPORT A PREVIOUS PROPOSAL.

>> MAYOR: I UNDERSTAND BUT WHY IS IT OKAY TODAY?

>> A NEW TRAFFIC CONSULTANT HAS UPDATED THAT.

>> MAYOR: I AM SO SORRY. >>.

>> THATT, THIS CONSULTANT DID COLLECT SOME CURRENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES IN SEPTEMBER 2020 AND IF YOU INCORPORATED A MOMENT WE WERE IN THE MIDST OF A HEALTH EMERGENCY ALTHOUGH THEY DID NOT SEE THE NEED TO ADJUST THOSE NUMBERS BECAUSE ALL OF THEIR HISTORIC DATA WAS LOWER THAN THE DATA THEY COLLECTED AND THE PUBLISHED DATA FROM TX DOT WAS ALSO LOWER. THEY DID APPLY A FIVE PERCENT, ALMOST A FIVE PERCENT GROWTH RATE FOR THE BACKGROUND TRAFFIC TO DO THE STUDY. THIS STUDY IS PRIMARILY IN INTERSECTION ASSESSMENT IT DOES NOT LOOK AT ROADWAY CAPACITIES. I AM REQUESTING THAT THEY REVISE THE REPORT TO ADDRESS ROADWAY CAPACITY AS WELL BECAUSE THE TRAILS AT COTTONWOOD IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN THE PREVIOUS PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, I HAVE LOOKED AT THE DATA AND I DO NOT THINK THE ROADS ARE GOING TO BE UNDERSIZED. I DON'T EXPECT IT TO BE THE CASE BUT IT SHOULD BE IN THE REPORT. WHEN WE DO THE INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAY CAPACITIES WE DO LEVELS OF SERVICE AND IN AN INTERSECTION THAT IS THE WAIT TIME FOR THE CAR TO GET THROUGH THE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE A IS A FREELY OPERATING INTERSECTION F IS A CONGESTED INTERSECTION D IS CONSIDERED TO BE THE MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE BUT WE LIKE TO SHOOT FOR LEVEL LOS C. THIS STUDY CONCLUDES THAT ALL OF THE INTERSECTIONS ARE OPERATING AT LOS C OR ABOVE AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE INTERSECTIONS ARE OPERATING AT LOS B. THE NEW STUDY DOES NOT FIND ANY WARRANTS FOR ANY RIGHT OR LEFT TURN AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS POINT BUT IT DOES RECOMMEND A LEFT TURN LANE FROM VINCENT

ONTO STONEWALL. ONE MORE? >> YOU SAID EARLIER THAT THE OTHER STUDY REQUIRED A RIGHT TURN LANE AND I ARE SAYING IT

DOESN'T? >> THEY ARE NOT SAYING IT DOESN'T THEIR JUST RECOMMENDING A LEFT TURN AS WELL.

>> GOTCHA. >> THERE IS ALSO AN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED IT WAS A WETLANDS DETERMINATION AND ALSO AN INVESTIGATION THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES HERE THERE WAS WORK CONFINED TO THE PROPERTY. THE WETLANDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINED THAT COTTONWOOD CREEK IS LIKELY A JURISDICTIONAL WATER WHERE IS THE TRIBUTARY TO COTTONWOOD CREEK IS NOT. THERE ARE ALSO TWO UPLAND PONDS AND THEY ARE LIKELY EVENTUALLY NOT JURISDICTIONAL TO THE CORE AND THEY DID NOT FIND ANY OTHER

[02:25:01]

THEY RECOMMEND THAT WE MONITOR THE CORE GUIDANCE POLICY BECAUSE THEY ARE CHANGING AND CONDUCTING FOLLOW-UP SURVEYS AS APPROPRIATE. THE TRAILS IS AVOIDING THESE WATERS.

ALTHOUGH THE OFF-SITE SEWER IS GOING TO CROSS COTTONWOOD CREEK SO THERE WILL LIKELY BE A NEED FOR A NATIONWIDE PERMIT WHICH IS AN AVAILABLE PERMIT THE ROADS THAT ARE CROSSING THE TRIBUTARY ARE LIKELY NOT GOING TO REQUIRE ANY PERMITTING AND AS FAR AS THREATENING AND ENDANGERED SPECIES THEY DID NOT FIND ANY SPECIES OR HABITAT OF FEDERALLY LISTED THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION.

>> MAYOR: THAT IS MORE THAN I WANTED.

>> THAT WAS THOROUGH! >> MAYOR: YOU ASKED FOR THIS AND WE PUT IT ON THE AGENDA DID WE GET YOUR STUFF COVERED?

>> YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR DOING THAT. I'M GLAD THAT YOU ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND I'M GLAD THAT WE GOT THE QUESTIONS ANSWERED AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY. >> MAYOR: WE ARE NOT GOING TO COVER 3DWERE JUST GOING TO PULL IT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION WHICH IS 7L. WE ALSO WANT SEVEN I PULLED AND ANYTHING ELSE? WE HAVE A VETERANS RECOGNITION POSTHUMOUSLY DID I SAY THAT RIGHT?

>> YES. >> MAYOR: THAT WORD IS SO HARD FOR ME RECOGNIZING OUR

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.