City Council and P&Z Discuss New Land Use Classification for Meadow Park

August 30, 2024

A controversial land use classification in Bedford’s proposed Comprehensive Plan was modified Tuesday at a special joint session of City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission. The session convened specifically to review the Plan and, if appropriate, to make any changes.

As a result, the proposed classification that had been assigned to the 57-acre undeveloped Meadow Park property, owned by the Hurst-Euless-Bedford Independent School District, was changed from “Lifestyle Residential” to “Neighborhood Village.”

The main difference noted between the old “Lifestyle Residential” and the new, more “flexible” Neighborhood Village classification is a reduction in the dwelling density from four to 10 units per acre down to three to 10 units per acre. In addition, the change eliminates the provision for “live-work/home-based occupations and Accessory Dwelling Units.”

Land use classifications, as explained by Tony Allender, urban planning and economic development principal at Hawes Hill and Associates, “talk to the character of an area” and zoning codes are “the law” applied toward development.” Hawes Hill has been contracted as a consultant by the City to help develop the Comprehensive Plan. When a developer “comes into town,” Allender said, “you can show them the Comprehensive Plan” to help illustrate “what the community is interested in.”

The new Neighborhood Village land use classification adds “some flexibility,” which City Manager Andrea Roy had suggested for the development requirements of Meadow Park. For example, she said, by preserving some of the many trees on the property, a developer could increase dwelling density in another part of the property and, overall, be encouraged to “do something different and unique” rather than a typical grid pattern.

Mayor Cogan agreed with Roy, stating that by providing flexibility to a developer, would help encourage the preservation of green space. “We know it is going to be residential,” Cogan said, so “we want to preserve as many trees as possible” and try to limit the density. In addition, he said if we limit the development to the current R-15 zoning designation, “it would take away that ability to have that green space.”

According to City of Bedford records, the R-15 zoning designation is for single-family residential units. This means that if bought by a developer and divided into lots for homes, the minimum lot sizes would be 15,000 square feet, which would equal about a third of an acre each.

Craig Goudie… “It is an improvement, but still left up to interoretation of potential developers.”

When turning to public comments, Melody Farquhar Chang of the Meadow Park Action Committee, agreed with Cogan that the new Neighborhood Village classification sounds better.

She also distributed the thoughts and comments to the Council members of other neighbors that she complied.

However, after the meeting Farquhar Chang commented that the “Neighborhood Village” classification “is an improvement, but still left up to interpretation of a potential developer. Also, it will most likely mean zoning will likely be PUD. 3-10 still means town homes on zero lot lines. The City still wants tax dollars, I’m sure, and developers will want the maximum they can get.

Megan Murray… “We love the events” along with the “small-town feel.”.

Megan Murray, another resident, said “we love the events” along with the “small-town feel” and expressed her concern about the value of her property, which “backs up to Meadow Park.”

Cogan stated that he understands how she feels, stating that the density needs to be limited “as much as possible. That’s on the forefront of everyone’s mind.”

Cathy Wigert… Concerned about her dead end street

Cathy Wigert was concerned about the possibility of her street no longer being a dead end if Meadow Park were to be developed. She was also concerned about how close the new development would be to her home, what it would look like and wanted to ensure the “old growth trees” are saved.

Council Member Steve Farco addressed Wiget’s concerns by clarifying that “the School District is very interested in quality homes in that development, if they [the School District] sell it. They’re not looking for apartments” or “anything like that.” He stressed that “it’s all up to what they decide and put it out there for what the developer does.”

Cogan added that Dr. Harrington, the District’s superintendent, “mentioned that he wants those home values to be upwards of $800,000 to $2 million.”

Jaryn Quick… “I don’t want to see high density.”

Another concerned resident who lives next to Meadow Park, Jaryn Quick, voiced her concern for the sense of protection her dead end street provides for her family. “I don’t want to see high density” she said. Traffic congestion, strains on infrastructure, loss of green space, the mature trees, as well as the additional noise and air pollution were among other concerns she listed. She said she especially enjoys the wild flowers that grow in Meadow Park. It is “such a wonderful, positive memory,” she emphasized.

Kelli Thurman… “I don’t know if it’s a fair trade-off.”

Kelli Thurman, a 25-year resident “living directly across from the park” commented that she was “hoping it would never be developed.” She voiced her concerns about additional traffic, congestion and density. Referring to the proposal to exchange higher density for green space, she stated that, “I don’t know if it’s a fair trade-off.”

Cogan responded to Thurman that “we are so far ahead of this” with the timing so “we don’t know what a potential developer is going to bring back to us.” He added that “if we went with straight zoning…there would be no green space.”

Meadow Park

Brian Jilek… “It’s a shame we couldn’t preserve some of that or buy the property.”

Brian Jilek noted that Meadow Park, in its current state, is “true green space.” He said, it is “not park space” and it is “not [an] event center, like it is at the Boys Ranch. This is true green space.”

Jilek said that he had moved from the “explosive growth” in Dallas as “bulldozers take everything down and build homes.”

Comparing himself to Henry David Thoreau and comparing Meadow Park to Central Park, in New York, and to Golden Gate Park, in San Francisco, Jilek said he walks the trails every day and that “it’s a shame that we couldn’t preserve some of that or buy that property.” In an impassioned tone, he emphasized that, “unfortunately, we’re going to lose our ‘Central Park.’ I want to make sure that people keep that in mind!”

In an attempt to sympathize with Jilek’s plea, Cogan said, “I understand it’s a beautiful area” and that “I hope we can keep some of it.” But, he stated that with an estimated value of $20 million dollars for the property, “it’s a lot of money that we couldn’t recoup on” and “is out of Bedford’s budget.”

Craig Goudie… “I moved here because it was quiet and safe and I have this amazing piece of property that I bought with this amazing view.”

Craig Goudie, whose backyard, he said, borders the Meadow Park property was resigned to the point that change is coming. He stated in a tone of frustration, “the reason why people live here and move here has kind of been lost!” Otherwise, he said, “I’d have moved to Grapevine” or Flour Mound. “I moved here,” he continued, “because it was quiet and safe and I have this amazing piece of property that I bought with this amazing view.”

If Meadow Park is developed up to his house, Goudie said, “we’re moving” because it would “no longer be the place for me.”

Jacob Quick… Wanted the limit of 10 dwellings reduced.

Jacob Quick asked the Council if “the top” of the density level of the new “Neighborhood Village” land use classification could be knocked down from 10 properties per acre to a figure closer to seven.

Mayor Cogan clarified that “if there’s more density,” it would “be along the thoroughfare,” so more space could be added in other areas of any development.

Additionally, Cogan urged residents to approach the School District with their concerns about Meadow Park, since they are the owner of the property.

Krista Jilek… Concerned over the future of the Bark Park.

Krista Jilek expressed her concern over the future of the Bark Park, which is located on the Meadow Park property.

Cogan replied that the City is already looking at other options, including a possibility on L. Don Dodson. But, he emphasized, “not having a dog park is not an option!”

Gary McDonald… “You are our line of defense.”

Gary McDonald stated that “to see where Meadow Park is going is really sad.” Addressing the Council directly, he said that “you are our line of defense.” He urged the Council to “keep Bedford beautiful. Keep it the way that it is. There’s a certain flavor here. There’s a certain lifestyle here. You’ve heard these people; they moved here because of that.”

He added, “there is a whole ecosystem that is going to be torn down.” In the meantime, he said, “whoever the developer is, they’ll get their money” however they develop it.

Lance Chang… “If you build it, somebody’s going to buy it.”

The final resident to express their concern was Lance Chang who voiced his opposition to higher density options, including apartments, to which Mayor Cogan replied that possibility was already off the table with the classification. Chang also mentioned “marketability.” He explained, “if you build it, somebody’s going to buy it.”

With Tuesday’s approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the proposed Comprehensive Plan, with the changes to the land use classification for Meadow Park, is now scheduled to go before the Council for final approval on Tuesday, September 24.

Free Monthly Email Newsletter Recap

No time to follow news developments in the Bedford Journal Project?

The Project introduces a free email newsletter with its feature articles delivered to your inbox at the end of each month.

Visit the ‘About’ page to read more and sign up!