Loading...
Items 6A & 6B - Concerned Resident6A -+ � 8 Ordinance No. 480-730, (ZA17-064 & ZA17-066) / Stony Brook To: City of Southlake ®ate: 02/25/18 RE: SPIN Meeting -- March 06, 2018 Dear Mayor Laura Hill and City Council, (Concerned Resident) From: Perry Vargas Jr. CC: Perry Sr. & Elvira Vargas My name is Perry Vargas Jr. I am the son of Perry & Elvira Vargas that reside at 209 Brock Dr. Southlake Texas. As we move forward with the 2"d reading of Stony Brook, I want to take a moment of your time to share a few thoughts about safety and accountability. First, you will find on the last several pages of this letter a summary of concerns (including several photos and two videos) that we have already shared with City Council during past SPIN meetings. I am resubmitting that information for your final review, and hope it will be used to make the necessary adjustments to the new development before final approval. We know that approving a development that will cause additional traffic to enter 1709 (where there are no street lights) isn't an easy decision to make, nor a popular one. Much research regarding safety must come first, otherwise it can lead to future accidents, upset city residents and negative news reports. Hopefully, no serious accidents) Red Flags: 1. During the last SPIN meeting the developer mentioned that the new development would cause U-turns to occur at Brock Drive, an area by the way, that already experiences heavy traffic and routine turnabouts throughout the day. This is due to drivers trying to get ahead of traffic by racing to beat the street lights located at 1938 & 1709. Rather than waiting on the left turn light at the intersection of 1709 / 1938, a countless number of west bound travelers will pass through 1938, then do a U-turn at Brock Dr., then turn south bound on 1938. Apparently, this saves time! 2. As you are aware, there is a hill between the Stony Brook proposed exit/entry and Brock Drive. Adding additional traffic to this particular area will create an increased risk of a rear -end collision and future accidents. This will be caused by stopped traffic at the small deceleration lane in front of the church that can't be seen by east bound traffic until the driver clears the hill. Nevertheless, any idea that would add additional U-turns, or crossover traffic on 1709 where there are no street lights, isn't a good one — not at the new development site, nor Brock Drive. So, as part of the approval process we must limit adding additional traffic to 1709 the best way possible. 3. Sienna residents / stub out — when asked by the Mayor about the stub out, the president of their home owners' association confirmed the residents of Sienna were told about future development plans to that area. And with that, their main concern about the new development was cut through traffic from 1709. Well, if there is a gate at 1709 (only accessible by Stony Brook residents) there is no worry of cut through traffic other than what they already knew was coming! 4. For safety reasons, most new developments of this size have more than one point of entry and this one shouldn't be any different! Safety first. S. Accountability —The developer agreed to one less home than he proposed during the last meeting and should be held to that promise. He should take out the home located at the stub out and build a through street, or add an emergency exit only. Once again, safety must come first! To be perfectly honest, I/we commend Stony Brook Builders for their changes and great effort to make things right, but with that said, there hasn't been enough research and planning to the streets that lead to the new development. Maybe a road through the Haney's property that leads to 1938 is the best solution — just food for thought. On a positive note, I am confident through proper planning and communication that Sienna residents can actually benefit from the new development. However, unlike they did for us, Stony Brook authorities would have to communicate those benefits to them, such as shared amenities and other perks that may exist. On a final note, I ask that you take an extra moment to revisit the attached summary of concerns and let me know if you have any questions. In closing, I share this information with the utmost respect for each and every council member and know you will do what's right for the entire community. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Perry Vargas Jr. & Family Summary of Concerns The following is a cut and paste of information that was presented/ sent to City Council during past meetings: February 20, 2018 With the best interest of the entire community in mind (buyers/sellers included) we still remain very concerned about the following items: - Flooding to the properties located on the east side of Brock Dr. caused by the new development No mention by the developer where the retention pond will be located (if needed) Giving up 40% of Brock addition for an idea that isn't best for all current residents, nor the entire Southlake community. Additional traffic added to 1709 and risk of vehicle accidents (Vote: In the event this is approved, a better idea would be to enter the new development from the Sienna neighborhood and use the original entrance at 1709 as the emergency exit. This would satisfy the Sienna resident's concerns regarding cut through traffic, and will create less traffic at 1709. February 06, 2018 We understand potential flooding conditions will be addressed during the next phase of the approval process, however in the event a retention pond is needed, and as the developer promised, where in the development plan will it be located? Migration of wild animals caused by the new development is another big concern, not just by my parents, but myself as well. I grew up in the area and quite familiar with the animal life that live there. This includes many skunks, bobcats, coyotes and an infestation of poisonous snakes. For the record, this has been mentioned to (and noticed by) the developer during various visits to the property being sold. With the safety of all surrounding residents in mind, we ask how the removal of existing wild life will be handled (e.g., trapped, relocated, euthanized, etc.)? (Vote: I have attached two pictures (taken from my cell phone) of a bobcat that wandered up near my parent's yard during a cookout we had last October. What a beautiful, yet dangerous animal to come in contact with; especially for a child or elderly person. To help you gauge the bobcats size, the barbed wire is 29" from ground level, and the headlight/fender you partly see in the picture is a 56 Chevy. So, no small creature January 17, 2017 Recently, we learned by one of our neighbors that Stony Brook is proposing to open up Brock Drive to their development. This comes after stating on record that as a good neighbor they would not disturb the Brock addition. Another promise made (with my wife and I present) is that they would install a retaining pond to collect rainfall, which would satisfy one of my parent's concerns, yet this isn't noted anywhere in the proposed development plan. The developer also mentioned to my wife and I that no research, (that they were aware of) has been made to the small creek located behind my parent's house, where drainage from the new development will be directed to, but would look into it and provide us with an update — as of today no update. With safety in mind, opening up Brock Drive to the new development isn't the answer for a second entrance, nor any unforeseen emergency conditions. In fact, this idea only creates a u-shaped entrance and/or exit right back to the same busy street used as the main entrance to the development. This will cause additional risk for an accident or incident created by "two" drivers entering 1709 at the same time, at nearly the same point of entrance, instead of one. I can't help but wonder if this is a plan to redirect the Sienna emergency exit complaint issue to a neighborhood of least resistance. Currently, the Brock residence consists of several military vets (my father being one of them) and small children that use Brock Drive for exercise and play. If opening up Brock Dr. to additional traffic is approved, major improvements will need to be made to the street for safety reasons. Items such as building a wider street, installing sidewalks, safety signs, relocating mailboxes and improved water drainage, just to name a few. Proposing a development plan that benefits only one resident isn't fair to the rest of the neighborhood, especially considering it will reduce the open acreage by nearly half. When the seller is long gone remaining Brock residents, and surrounding neighborhoods, affected by the new development will still be here to support the city of Southlake where we are all proud to live. With that said, we must do what's right for everyone! Our Main Concerns: • Flooding • Safety of Brock residents • Traffic • Reducing Brock addition by 40% to accommodate one resident. • Density • Wild animals 08:00 Traffic @ 1709 / Brock Dr. IN Brock Dr. AM Traffic.mov 16:00 Traffic @ 1709 / Brock Dr. silk Brock Dr. PM traffic.mov Water coming from the Church and draining across Brock Dr. after their parking lot was extended. if not done correctly, this will get even worse with the new development! Picture of a bob cat taken from 209 Brock Dr. There are many more where this one came from! Safety of local residents must come first!