Richardson City Council Meeting January 13th, 2025
OPENING
All councilmembers are present as well as City Manager Don Magner and City Secretary Aimee Nemer.
Councilman Hutchenrider leads a prayer and the pledges.
Minutes of the previous meeting’s minutes are approved unanimously.
City Manager Don Magner notes that one speaker has filled out a speaker card and three have submitted comments opposed to ZF 24-24 (Valencia Villas). One comment was submitted in support of ZF 24-30 (Mesorah High School for Girls). No speakers end up being present for the visitors forum.
AQUATICS MASTER PLAN FINAL DRAFT
The first presentation of the evening is on the final draft of the Aquatics Master Plan. A resolution adopting the plan is part of tonight’s consent agenda. This plan was also discussed at the April 1st, Oct. 14th, and Dec. 9th Council meetings of 2024. Parks & Recreation Director Yvonne Falgout presents. City Manager Don Magner states that tonight’s presentation will focus on three changes made to the plan in response to feedback received at the Dec. 9th meeting.
Yvonne presents the three options that they have settled on. Option C1 would either replace the Canyon Creek Pool with a sprayground or invest in updates to the existing pool. It would also reinvest in the Heights Aquatics Center and replace the Cottonwood Pool with a sprayground. It would also install a new sprayground at Breckenridge. It would also replace either the Glenville or Terrace Pool with a sprayground. It would also provide a new outdoor pool at Apollo. This option would cost approx. $23M and result in an annual operating cost of $850K. 34% cost recovery would be achieved. The new Apollo Pool would take over five years to complete. Everything else is projected to take 2-5 years.
Option C2 would either refresh the Canyon Creek Pool or replace it with a sprayground. It also includes a new sprayground at Breckenridge. It also includes the Heights Aquatic Center reinvestment. Cottonwood would still be replaced by a sprayground. So would either Glenville or Terrace. The major difference is that the new Apollo Pool would be an indoor/outdoor pool. This option would cost approx. $67.5M with an annual operating cost of $3M. 43% cost recovery would be achieved. The new pool would still take at least five years to build with everything else taking 2-5 years.
Option C3 provides the same plan for Canyon Creek, Heights Aquatic Center, and Cottonwood. It would replace the Terrace Pool with a sprayground. A new outdoor pool would be built at Glenville. It would also provide a new indoor pool at Breckenridge. This would cost $84M with an annual operating cost of $2.2M. 40% cost recovery would be achieved. The new pools would still take more than five years to build with everything else taking 2-5 years.
Tonight’s consent agenda item would adopt these findings. It would not approve any specific capital projects. Councilman Barrios asks how the cost recovery differences were determined for options C1 and C2. Yvonne answers that the difference comes from the annual operating costs of operating an outdoor vs. an indoor pool. Council asks no additional questions.
PUBLIC HEARING – VALENCIA VILLAS
A whopping four public hearings are scheduled tonight. The first is on ZF 24-24. This is the rezoning request for the Valencia Villas planned development at 601 E. Main St. This 38-unit townhome development was also discussed at the Oct. 3rd CPC meeting where one speaker and several audience members expressed opposition to the request. Since the applicant wasn’t present, the item was continued to the Nov. 19th meeting. The item was recontinued until Dec. 3rd to allow for more meetings with neighbors. The item was finally considered by the CPC on Dec. 3rd where three speakers, one representing the Highland Terrace Neighborhood Association, expressed opposition to the request. The CPC unanimously recommended approval 4-0 with an amendment requiring a southern masonry screening wall.
Before staff provides a background of the request, City Manager Don Magner introduces the new Development Services Asst. Director Andrew Bogda. He has previously served as a planner for the cities of Plainfield, IL and Mansfield, TX. He was most recently the Development Services Director for Kaufman, TX. Staff now presents a background of the request. The screening wall along Main St. will now be a masonry wall. The remainder of the screening will be a wrought-iron fence. Staff notes that, including written comments, seven total comments were received opposing the request at the Dec. 3rd CPC hearing.
Councilman Barrios asks how the development standards proposed in this request compare to other similar requests. Staff answers that this is generally in line with other requests that have come through.
The applicant steps forward to present their request. The applicant states that they now have plans to provide right-of-way for a future right-turn lane from Main St. onto Grove St. The applicant also restates that they attempted to meet with neighborhood associations in the area. The venue being a bar made it difficult to effectively meet and discuss their request. The applicant also clarifies that they intend to save every existing tree that they can. The applicant provides a diagram that shows at least a couple dozen existing trees around the perimeter of the development that they intend to keep. In the applicant’s opinion, a masonry wall is not the most appropriate screening. He will comply with what Council requests for screening.
Councilman Dorian appreciates the applicant’s intent to save existing trees. Councilman Dorian would prefer to see front entries facing Main St. and Tyler St. The applicant clarifies that front entries facing the alley were something that city staff directed them to do to minimize the impact on neighboring properties. Main St. traffic concerns were also part of the consideration. Councilman Dorian asks what the target demographic would be for these units. The applicant answers that young working couples would be the likely demographic for these units. They are also popular among those who are looking for less exterior maintenance. City Manager Don Magner adds that the city also suggested the front entry be alley-facing to avoid potential parking issues on public streets.
Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul asks if the applicant has considered shifting the configuration to preserve even more existing trees. The applicant answers that this is the configuration that they deem best for preserving trees and providing the best lots. Much of the tree loss is due to the grading of land that will be necessary. They will seek to replace any trees that are lost. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul is concerned about the look of this development compared to the surrounding developments.
Councilman Barrios asks what the price will be for these units. The applicant answers that they will likely be somewhere in the $450K+ range. Councilman Barrios also asks if public sidewalks will be around the exterior. The applicant confirms they will.
Councilman Dorian asks if they will have landscaping along the southern masonry wall. The applicant answers that trees and shrubs will be installed. Councilman Dorian asks what façade improvements could be made to the public street-facing side of the homes. The applicant answers that they are willing to do anything this Council desires. Councilman Dorian expresses a desire to include some sort of backside façade requirements in the motion. Staff notes that the development will be required to have design and articulation features on the backside that face the public streets. And it’s time for City Manager Don Magner to once again remind Council that the state doesn’t allow them to dictate building materials.
Councilwoman Justice asks if the neighborhood associations have seen the tree plan. The applicant answers that they have not. Councilwoman Justice advises that this might help neighbors understand how trees are planning to be saved.
Two speakers are present for this hearing. The first speaker represents the Highland Terrace Neighborhood Association. She does see this neighborhood as an appropriate location for missing middle housing. She does not, however, think this request meets that definition. She states that these homes would be larger and more expensive than a lot of existing single-family homes in the neighborhood. They are concerned about the number of units and the tree loss. They are also concerned about the aesthetics and how this development will blend with the rest of the neighborhood. She opposes the request. The second speaker asks those in the audience who are from the Highland Terrace Neighborhood Association to stand up. Roughly a dozen visitors stand. He provides examples of past development proposals that they have collaborated with to provide a better result than what was planned. He states that there are too many units. Fewer units would mitigate parking concerns. He opposes the request.
Councilman Hutchenrider asks if this would be appropriate for a continuance to allow further opportunity for the neighbors to meet with the developer. He asks the developer if he would be open to a continuance. The applicant agrees but is concerned about further delays. The applicant is concerned that he would not be able to come to a place of agreement with the neighborhood association. Councilman Dorian agrees with continuing the item. He suggests the applicant explore other housing types such as bungalow-style housing.
City Manager Don Magner reminds Council that if the request changed substantially, that would require a new request. Councilwoman Justice also agrees with continuing the item. The applicant now asks Council if they also think these units are too big and expensive. Councilman Barrios expresses his opposition to the request. He is opposed to the lack of connectivity to the surrounding area. Councilman Corcoran supports continuance. Mayor Dubey encourages the applicant to consider smaller sq. ft. units and more open space. Council unanimously continues the item until Feb. 3rd. (This item will be voted on…someday. I jest, only because this has now been continued twice by the CPC and once by Council. Allowing more time to collaborate with neighbors is always a good thing.)
PUBLIC HEARING – DUCK CREEK TOWNHOMES
The next public hearing is on ZF 24-28. This is a rezoning request for Duck Creek Townhomes near the corner of E. Belt Line/N. Jupiter Rd. This was also covered at the Dec. 3rd, 2024 CPC meeting where the CPC recommended approval 4-0. Staff documents note that three letters in opposition have been received as well as a letter from the Millwood Creek Condominiums HOA. Staff presents a background of the request. A gate will be installed to restrict access to the existing Millwood Creek development. Staff clarifies that the letter from the Millwood Creek HOA is in support of the request.
Councilman Barrios asks where gates will be located. Staff answers that a gate will restrict access to the neighboring Millwood Creek Condominiums. There will be no gate restricting access to this new development.
The applicant steps forward to present their request and answer questions. Councilman Corcoran asks for clarification on agreements they have with the Millwood Creek HOA. The applicant answers that any agreements between them are separate from this request to the city. Those will be navigated by the developer and neighboring HOA. Council is not approving those agreements. No speakers are present for this request. Council unanimously approves the request with no further discussion.
PUBLIC HEARING – PILLARS CHILDCARE
The next public hearing is on ZF 24-29. This is a special permit request for Pillars Childcare, a Christian faith-based daycare, at 3501 Murphy Rd. This is the current location of Whistlestop Childcare. This request was covered at the Dec. 3rd, 2024 CPC meeting. Staff presents a background of the request.
The applicant steps forward to answer questions. Mayor Dubey asks about student-to-teacher ratios. The applicant answers that the state regulates these ratios. The ratios correlate with the age of the students. No speakers are present for this hearing. Council unanimously approves the request with no further discussion.
PUBLIC HEARING – MESORAH HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS
The final public hearing of the evening is on ZF 24-30. This is a special permit request for a private Orthodox Jewish school, Mesorah High School for Girls, at 2101 Waterview Pkwy. This was also covered at the Dec. 17th, 2024 CPC meeting where the CPC unanimously recommended approval. Staff presents a background of the request. A clarified fence location is provided on slide 34 of the presented handouts: https://www.cor.net/home/showpublisheddocument/42309/638723827814070000 . Staff notes that one neighboring property owner has submitted a letter in support of the request.
Councilman Hutchenrider asks what the enrollment will be. Staff answers that the 120-person capacity of the proposed storm shelter would dictate maximum enrollment currently. Councilman Hutchenrider points out that, if 120 students are enrolled and present and need to utilize the storm shelter, that would not leave room for any staff in the shelter. City Manager Don Magner remarks that the applicant should be able to address that in their presentation. Councilman Hutchenrider is concerned about students navigating a pedestrian gate to get to the storm shelter. He prefers a shelter location within the fence line. Councilman Barrios shares this concern. He asks if they would have to come back to the city to approve a second storm shelter if needed. Staff confirms they would need approval from the city for an additional shelter.
The applicant steps forward to present their request and answer questions. The applicant explains that utility and mutual access easements dictate the proposed location for the storm shelter. They also did not want to locate the shelter next to Waterview Pkwy due to visibility. The applicant states that it would stand out more if it were located next to Waterview. A community meeting was held but no one attended that meeting besides the applicant.
Councilman Barrios asks to clarify the school's curriculum. The applicant answers that they would have both Jewish education and secular college preparatory curriculums for students. These students are members of the Jewish community. They would not seek to recruit students who aren’t members of the Jewish community, but anyone would be welcome to apply to the school.
Councilman Hutchenrider asks if a storm shelter could be located over a water or sewer line. City Manager Don Magner answers that this may be more of a construction consideration than a regulatory consideration. The city would allow it, but it might not be a best practice. Councilman Hutchenrider is still concerned about the size of the pedestrian gate on the path to the storm shelter. He wants to see a bigger gate than the currently proposed three-foot gate. The applicant is open to a bigger gate if Council desires that. Councilwoman Justice agrees with this suggestion.
Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul asks if they have considered a different shape for the storm shelter. The applicant answers that this shape was chosen as the most visually appealing based on the existing pre-fabricated options available on the market. Mayor Pro Tem Shamsul suggests the architect explore better options for the location and style of the shelter.
Mayor Dubey asks if the storm shelter could be included as part of the fence line to have pedestrian access directly into the shelter instead of navigating a gate. The applicant repeats that the mutual access easement needs to be maintained so this wouldn’t be possible.
No speakers are present for this hearing. Councilman Hutchenrider moves for approval with an amended condition of a six-foot wide pedestrian access gate in the fence along the path to the storm shelter. Council unanimously approves this motion.
CONSENT AGENDA & CLOSING
Now, Council considers the consent agenda. Councilman Barrios requests to remove the Aquatics Master Plan approval from the consent agenda to allow for discussion. Council unanimously approves the remainder of the consent agenda. This includes an ordinance codifying the approval of ZF 24-25 (Haraz Coffee). It also includes four bid awards: $9.1M to McMahon Contracting for Lakeside Blvd. and Lawnview Dr. road construction, $401K to Weaver Technologies for software and hardware upgrades, a $50K annual requirements contract to Compass Metering Solutions for water meter replacements, and a $500K annual requirements contract to Compass Metering Solutions for water line inspections. Finally, it includes a competitive sealed proposal award of $66M to McCownGordon for the construction of the new city hall and municipal campus. Councilman Barrios states that the findings of the Aquatics Master Plan are not in alignment with what he sees as best for the city. He thinks pools other than just Canyon Creek should be prioritized. Because of this, he cannot support the findings of this master plan. Council approves the Aquatics Master Plan 6-1 with Councilman Barrios opposed.
Council discusses the city's response to the winter storm, a Lunar New Year event, and the Los Angeles wildfires. Council then convenes into executive session to deliberate regarding economic development negotiations for commercial development in the area of N. Greenville/Apollo Rd, and to consider the sale of city property in this area. The footage ends here.