City engineers presented four alternatives for the North Carroll Avenue and Lakewood Drive intersection and asked the City Council for feedback; council members signaled support for a modified version of the original design while asking staff for more analysis of a signalized option.

The presentation by City Engineer Jeff Ginn summarized past corridor studies, current construction status (about 45% complete by contract value) and findings from a new median-access study. Ginn said updated crash data met signal warrant 7 (crash experience), a threshold not met in prior studies, and described the four alternatives: the original design included median revisions and left‑turn lane changes (Option A); a slight geometric modification preserved most safety benefits while improving driveway access (Option B); a signalized intersection would permit protected left/through/right movements and reduce conflict points most significantly but add capital and operations costs (Option C, estimated additional capital ≈ $775,000 plus about $75,000 for a driveway relocation); and a no‑build option would remove phase‑4 work from the current contract and preserve current access (Option D).

Council and staff emphasized that no vote was taken; staff asked for direction so construction sequencing is not delayed. Ginn said options A and B could be implemented without a separate bid package, while Option C would require design and separate bidding because the cost would exceed public-contract change‑order thresholds. He also said installing a signal would require coordination with TxDOT for timing with the SH‑114 interchange.

Nearby business owners and residents made extensive public comments focused on access and safety. Chris Lott, owner of the Landmark office building (750–756 N. Carroll Ave.), said extending the median would remove northbound access to his property and force difficult U‑turns near SH‑114, which are unsafe for trucks and larger vehicles. Multiple Lakewood Acres residents described the neighborhood as a “sleepy” area with no sidewalks and children at play, recounted crashes near the intersection and urged the council to avoid routing commercial egress onto Lakewood Drive. Residents proposed lower‑cost alternatives — dual left‑turn lanes to westbound SH‑114, speed‑display signs, clearer hooded‑right markings and reciprocal cross‑lot access — as interim measures.

Council discussion ultimately coalesced around Option B (the modified original design) as a near‑term path forward while requesting additional analysis of a signalized Option C that would remove the most conflict points. Council asked staff to return with refined information about signal timing, stacking impacts for Lakewood Drive, and whether a version of a signal could be designed that preserved no direct commercial access onto Lakewood. No formal motion or binding direction was recorded tonight.

What happens next: staff will refine the alternatives, provide additional signal‑timing and stacking analyses, and notify nearby residents about the next meeting.