Richardson City Council Meeting February 10th, 2025
OPENING
All councilmembers are present as well as City Manager (CM) Don Magner and City Secretary Aimee Nemer.
The Community Revitalization Awards are the first item that is presented before the business meeting begins. This is an annual recognition of property owners who make significant exterior improvements to their property. This year’s round of awards features eight residential properties, one residential development, and three non-residential properties, one of them being JJ Pearce High School. Awardees are presented their awards and take pictures with Council to commemorate.
The meeting officially begins after the awards ceremony. Councilwoman Justice leads a prayer and the pledges. She doesn’t quite beat her previous record. Tonight’s prayer takes five seconds.
Minutes of the previous two meetings are approved unanimously.
Several comment cards are submitted for tonight’s meeting. City Manager Don Magner begins with those not regarding public hearing items. He notes that he will not read the addresses of commenters aloud tonight to save time, but they will be included in the public minutes. (I apologize in advance if I do not capture the names of all commenters correctly. Minutes aren’t published until the following meeting so I’m just going off the way the names are spoken.)
Benjamin Goodine submits a comment in favor of DART funding. Regarding ZF 24-21 (Lennox R&D), 12 comments are opposed. Regarding ZF 24-34 (Legacy Arapaho Multifamily), four comments are in favor of the request. Regarding ZF 24-31 (Polk Street Residences), 24 comments are opposed. Five are in favor. One is neutral. There are simply too many names here for me to try and capture so I apologize for leaving most names out. I submitted the neutral comment. I asked Council to explore an improved pedestrian cut-through and ground-floor retail for the Polk St. request. No speakers are present for the visitors forum. We will hear from several speakers later during the public hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING – LENNOX R&D CONTINUATION
The first scheduled public hearing of the evening is on ZF 24-21. This is the rezoning request for Lennox to construct an R&D facility next to their existing office building at 2100 Lake Park Blvd. The applicant has requested to continue the hearing until the Feb. 17th meeting. The applicant steps forward to formally request a continuance to continue working with the community to improve their request. Since this public hearing was posted, speakers will still be heard. One speaker is present for this item, Allen Baskind. Allen opposes this request due to the industrial use and noise issues associated with the use. He is also concerned about traffic from deliveries causing hazards to pedestrians. Council unanimously continues the public hearing until Feb. 17th.
PUBLIC HEARING – LEGACY ARAPAHO MULTIFAMILY
The next public hearing is on ZF 24-34. This is a Special Development Plan request for a 443-unit multifamily development at E. Arapaho/N. Grove Rd. This is within the Station Area Sub-District of the Collins/Arapaho TOD and Innovation PD. This request was also covered at the Jan. 7th CPC meeting where the CPC unanimously recommended approval: https://open.substack.com/pub/justinneth/p/richardson-city-plan-commission-meeting-8e6?r=3ahunk&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Staff presents a background of the request. This development will include five buildings: a four-story apartment building, two three-story apartment buildings, and two two-story townhome buildings. Four areas of development exceptions are requested: Block Length/Pedestrian Connection, Streetscape, Building Length/Separation, and Building Materials. Cities can no longer dictate building materials thanks to the last state legislature, so that won’t be something Council can consider tonight.
The applicant is requesting that they be allowed to not provide a pedestrian cut-through north/south. Instead, they are asking to designate the southern property line east/west as the pedestrian walkway, on the other side of the parking lot. Their plan is to also connect this walkway to a trail in the future. Arapaho Station is to the Northwest of this development, and this area calls for transit and pedestrian-oriented development. (Putting pedestrians on the southern property line doesn’t seem like the best placement for the future in my opinion.)
The request to keep the existing streetscape is intended to save existing trees. The building length exception is to keep the proposed building along Arapaho at over 450 ft. without the required 15 ft. separation which is required for buildings longer than 250 ft. This requirement exists to improve pedestrian access. Again, the building material requirement is moot thanks to the state.
Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul asks how wide the existing sidewalks are. Staff answers that they are 4-ft. sidewalks. Code now requires minimum 5-ft. sidewalks, thus the requested exception to this requirement. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul asks what impact requiring 5-ft. sidewalks would have. Staff answers that a wider sidewalk would take away some existing green space. City Manager Don Magner notes that they do plan on making ADA and slope improvements to the existing sidewalks. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul prefers a 5-ft. sidewalk requirement.
Councilman Dorian also supports a 5-ft. sidewalk requirement. Councilman Barrios asks how wide the new sidewalk will be along the southern property line. Staff doesn’t know. Councilman Barrios also supports requiring the existing sidewalk regulations. He also asks if there are any plans for a crosswalk. CM Magner states that the applicant will address that in their presentation.
The applicant now steps forward to present their request. The applicant states that they did meet with the Highland Terrace Neighborhood Association. These neighbors are concerned with traffic along Grove. In response to these concerns, the applicant is proposing to improve existing crosswalks and add new crosswalks if necessary. The applicant is also willing to widen sidewalks but cautions that this could result in losing some existing vegetation.
Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul asks which trees will be saved. The applicant answers that they will aim to save all trees around the perimeter. They also aim to fit existing mature trees within the planned courtyard area of the apartment buildings. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul asks if they are planning any new sidewalk construction. The applicant answers that they plan to construct sidewalks on Arapaho and Grove and can plan a new sidewalk for the walkway on the southern property line. CM Magner repeats that slopes and ramps will be improved to be in ADA compliance. Replacing all sidewalks risks losing trees. Councilman Hutchenrider states that widening some areas and not others could result in future trip hazards as new sections settle. Councilman Barrios asks what the area on the site plan labeled “pocket park” is. The applicant answers that this is an area where they plan to install trail and open space in the future.
No speakers are present for this hearing. Council unanimously approves the request with an additional condition to address the crosswalks discussed. Now, something highly unusual happens. Tonight, it appears the city is changing its practice of approving a zoning request and then approving the codifying ordinance at a future meeting. Instead, Council is also being asked to consider the adoption of the amending ordinance immediately upon approving the request. This is not the way things have been done before. I’m against this approach simply because, as we just saw, Council could add special conditions that aren’t already included in the ordinance. In Councilman Hutchenrider’s motion, he also moves to approve Ordinance 4531. The text of this ordinance does not include the added condition addressing the crosswalks. Councilwoman Justice asks if they need to amend the ordinance before voting on it. CM Magner answers that they do not. He states that they will amend the ordinance before it is enrolled to reflect the change.
(I don’t know how that works. I called the city to ask for clarification. The answer I was given is that ordinances were attached to tonight’s motions due to delays in scheduling these requests for Council hearings. I did confirm that the addition of a special condition also serves as direction to approve the ordinance with that amended condition. The official language of the ordinance won’t be seen until it is posted to the code of ordinances. I’m not sure this is the most cautious approach. I think Council and the public ought to be able to see the exact text of the ordinance before voting on it, especially for a public hearing item.)
PUBLIC HEARING – POLK STREET RESIDENCES
Now, the final public hearing item is on ZF 24-31. This is the Special Development Plan request for Polk Street Residences, a 279-unit multifamily development at the block surrounded by Polk St., Kaufman St., Texas St., and Greenville Ave. This was also covered at the Jan. 7th CPC meeting where three spoke in opposition and the CPC recommended approval 6-1: https://open.substack.com/pub/justinneth/p/richardson-city-plan-commission-meeting-8e6?r=3ahunk&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Staff presents a background of the request. The Future Land Use Plan designates this area as Neighborhood Mixed-Use, which is defined as low-rise residential with some ground-floor retail space. This request as it exists qualifies as Compact Residential. This is also within the Main Street Sub-District of the Main/Central Expy PD. The portion of McKinney St. between Polk and Kaufman will be abandoned and made part of this proposed apartment building. This request has been updated to include the correct amount of bicycle parking, 21 spaces, as well as a designated pedestrian cut-through that goes through the planned parking garage. Changes to open space areas have also been made. Streetscape improvements will be made to Polk St., Texas St., Kaufman St., and Greenville Ave.
The five areas of development exceptions requested include: buildings higher than what is allowed, less open space than what is required, a longer block than is allowed, less parking than is required, and relief from the recessed doorways requirement.
Staff notes that 19 letters in opposition to this request have been received today. Four letters have been received supporting the request and one letter has been received neutral to the request. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul asks for clarification on the current zoning regulations for the area. Staff answers that the use is allowed by right. They are asking for relief from the above-mentioned development standards.
Councilman Barrios asks what the sq. ft. of the area of McKinney St. being abandoned is. Staff answers that this equals roughly 20,000 sq. ft. The applicant steps forward to present their request. Public parking will be provided on the ground level of the parking garage. 7,000 sq. ft. of public open space will be designated along Polk St. A pedestrian passage will cut through the parking garage. The trash area will be located on Kaufman, next to the pedestrian passage. The applicant states that they don’t view this area as appropriate for retail with the current market conditions. They cite current retail vacancies and the desires of the owners of those vacant spaces as their reasons for not including retail in this request.
(Adding retail spaces owned by different people could help the market by driving the rent for retail space in the area down. This is good for the market and good for the community. We shouldn’t avoid competition to benefit current landlords. At least, that’s my opinion.)
Councilman Corcoran asks if there are issues related to utilities that cause the abandonment of McKinney St. to be necessary. CM Magner answers that working around existing infrastructure makes this difficult. The applicant does not indicate that utilities necessitate the abandonment of McKinney St. Councilman Dorian states that no one wants a wall down Main St. (I think he means Polk St. Main St. is a block to the north of this request.) He asks how wide the passage is for pedestrians. The applicant answers that the pedestrian path is about 9 ft. with a 19 ft. driveway next to it. Councilman Dorian asks if any retail is included in this plan. The applicant answers that there is no retail in this request. He clarifies that they studied where they could put it and included that area on the diagram they presented tonight.
Councilman Barrios asks if ground floor units will have street-facing entries. The applicant confirms that they will. Councilman Barrios asks why the garage entrance is on Polk as opposed to a side road. The applicant answers that public parking is the reason they put it on Polk. Councilman Barrios asks why they didn’t prioritize open space to connect to the trail on the other side of Texas St. The applicant answers that this design brings open spaces closer to existing retail. Councilman Barrios also asks why they need such a long block. The applicant answers that this makes more sense for them financially. This plan also creates a better experience for residents of the complex according to the applicant.
Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul also asks about the location of the garage entrance. He suggests considering putting it on Kaufman to prioritize pedestrian experience for events. The applicant answers that neighbors do not want the entrance on Kaufman. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul also encourages retail space to be included. Mayor Dubey states that The Nest will have retail to the south.
15 speakers are present. Robert Conelly is the first speaker. He opposes the request. He is against the block length, the cost to relocate utilities, the effect this has on the historic nature of the area, the pedestrian passage going through the garage, the blocking of neighbors’ views, the traffic impact, the insufficient parking, the loss of trees, the detrimental impact to walkability, and more apartments. The second speaker is Carrie Juettner. She is opposed to the request. She is against the closing of McKinney St., Staycation having to move, the building height, the block length, and the trash collection location. Pat Kinder is the third speaker. He opposes the request. He is against the lack of community engagement from the applicant, the block length, the closing of McKinney St., the location of the pedestrian passage through the garage, the lack of retail, forcing Staycation to move, and the building height.
Jason Hughes is the fourth speaker. He opposes the request. He is against the state of current infrastructure, abandoning the plan, and the lack of adequate parking. Megan Santonicola, owner of Partenope, is the fifth speaker. She is opposed to the request. She is against the negative impact this will have on her downtown business, the lack of adequate parking, the impact of construction, the traffic impact, and the lack of retail.
David Harrel is the sixth speaker. He represents the recently approved Nest retail development. He provides a Dallas address. He is in support of the request. He supports the additional public parking and the lack of retail. Jerry Harkins, owner of Tavern on Main, is the seventh speaker. He supports the request. Pat Hanahan is the eighth speaker. He also provides a Dallas address. He is a leasing agent for a nearby building at 100 N. Central Expy. He doesn’t state clearly if he supports the request but seems to think this will be a good product for downtown.
Sarah Marsalis-Luginbill is the ninth speaker. She opposes the request. She is against the size of the units and the price of the units. She supports additional housing that is affordable for the workforce and accommodates families with children. Martha Canuteson is the 10th speaker. She opposes the request. She is against the lack of adequate parking, the traffic impact, the block length, the lack of retail, the lack of connection to the trail, and the lack of adequate open space. Tony Palagonia is the 11th speaker. He asks audience members to rise if they are here as neighbors to oppose the request. The camera does not show how many visitors stand. He opposes the request. He is against the lack of elements that benefit Richardson in this request and the lack of connection to the trail. Beverly Rasor is the 12th speaker. She opposes the request. She is against more apartments. She supports more missing middle housing.
Eleanor Stone is the 13th speaker. She owns the office at 105 E Main St. She supports the request. She likes the parking, the additional residential units, and the pedestrian passage. David Bond is the 14th speaker. He supports the request. Courtney Gowin is the 15th and final speaker. She is the owner of the planned Nest retail development. She supports the request. She likes the multifamily use and the parking.
That’s nine opposed and six in favor. The applicant now returns to rebut the concerns expressed. The applicant offers to put 3,000 sq. ft. of retail-ready space at the corner of Texas St. and Polk St. This space would still be rented as living space but would include different ceiling heights and building materials to support future retail use. The applicant clarifies that the reason for not including retail is because the project wouldn’t be financeable.
Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul wants more concessions from the applicant to support residents' concerns. He hears the community asking for improved walkability. He also hears the community asking for destinations to walk to as well as improved safety for pedestrians. He cites The Nest owner’s claim that her development is 80% pre-leased as a reason for asking for true ground-floor retail destinations. He also states that this pedestrian passage isn’t sufficient.
CM Magner notes that the added condition of retail-ready space will necessitate the additional exception of allowing ground-level entryways instead of the required 18-inch stoop. Councilman Hutchenrider states he is torn. He then speaks directly to the audience and asks if they remember Isabelly’s. He asks if visitors frequented their shop. He states that he visited their shop, and the owners said they had to close due to a lack of customers. He states that this use would bring customers to the area. He states this plan is a compromise between the applicant and residents. He supports the request.
Councilman Barrios is concerned with the lack of retail. He acknowledges that this decision will have a longer-term impact. He also acknowledges that more customers are needed downtown. He wants to see smaller blocks maintained. He supports density and this use. He states that this will be difficult to redevelop since it’s combining two blocks. He opposes the request because he wants to prioritize the community’s needs.
Councilman Dorian states that he has also been torn. He states that the area needs more people. He asks that some of the retail-ready space be located along Texas St. He states that the applicant is providing 75% of what the community is asking for. He supports the request.
Mayor Dubey states that people have cherry-picked their hot-button issues. He asks members of the community to instead think big-picture. He states that there will be plenty of parking. He also states that much of the reason Isabelly’s closed was due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. He states that the developer has the ability to make this successful. He thinks this will be a catalyst for success in the area. He states this is the best option they have been able to consider.
Councilman Corcoran states that he understands the benefits of maintaining smaller blocks. He parked at Belt + Main and explored the area on foot. He states that he saw firsthand how this can all come together to achieve the vision. He did not see how this request becomes a hindrance to the plans.
Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul states that if we miss this opportunity this will have major impacts on the area long-term. Getting this wrong will bother him for the rest of his life. He wants to prioritize walkability and increase restaurant and retail destinations. If the applicant isn’t willing to put actual retail space, he can’t support the request.
Councilwoman Justice finally speaks up. She thinks this request will support the vision for the area. She thinks this request addresses concerns expressed by residents. She supports the request. Council approves the request 5-2 with the additional condition of requiring 3,000 sq. ft. of retail-ready space. They adopt the ordinance reflecting the same in the same motion. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul and Councilman Barrios are opposed.
CLOSING
Council takes a brief recess and returns to unanimously approve a resolution ordering the May 3rd Election for Mayor and the six Council positions.
Council also unanimously approves a resolution supporting full funding of DART.
Council discusses the Lunar New Year celebration in Chinatown. Before adjourning, CM Magner acknowledges a request for a discussion of recording the current Charter Review Commission meetings to be placed on a future agenda. He states that this will be placed on the Feb. 17th agenda. Council then convenes into executive session to deliberate regarding economic development negotiations in the area of W. Renner/Alma Rd. The footage stops there. Fun fact: This was the longest Council meeting since June 13th, 2022.