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!