King Arthur Boulevard · Lewisville, Texas
A non-partisan grassroots effort helping Lewisville residents concerned about the King Arthur traffic-calming project be heard, share evidence, and advocate for change.
Sign the bump-out petition
Upcoming Lewisville meetings
Castle Hills Community Facebook Group
Stay connected with Lewisville
Community Group
Start here
The latest meeting, strongest evidence and ways to act.
Field record
Browse the complete photographic survey by installation type and location.
Tour
Tour the Calming Project from Old Denton to Lady of the Lake. The concrete barriers have been removed; their photos and condition data remain here as a historical record. The bump outs, accessible parking, and removed turn lane remain part of the tour.
Tour summary
Update: The concrete barriers have been removed. The photos and condition data below remain as a historical record of the installation; the bump outs, accessible parking, and removed turn lane remain part of the tour.
41% of concrete barriers need repair
66 of 161 concrete barriersShowing reflector or concrete damage67% of concrete barriers have been hit
108 of 161 concrete barriersAny visible impact recorded100% of bump outs have been hit
10 of 10 bump outsAny visible impact recordedInteractive map of the documented route. Browse the same numbered features in the photo galleries below.
Open a section to review every route photo. Select any photo to enlarge it. Numbers match the map; gaps belong to feature types in the other sections.
Project evidence
Official traffic data, design progression, planning context and the questions behind the project.
The question behind the project
The official record documents speeding. It does not document a crash crisis or state how many residents whose concerns started the project.
Lewisville staff says it initiated the project due to documented speeding. The November 2024 presentation cited a history of speeding concerns and stop-sign running, a 25 mph limit, an 85th-percentile speed of 32 mph, and roughly 4,000 vehicles per day. The deck also said the majority of people are driving over 25 mph.
The same presentation reported zero speed-related crashes from 2020 through 2024. It said signage and targeted enforcement had already been used after annexation and noted that a full $25M-plus rebuild was not included in the bond program because of cost and priority.
The presentation does not state how many residents raised the original speeding concerns, how many complaints the City received, when they were submitted, or any signed neighborhood petition asking for the installed design. A later memo documents resident requests for eight more crosswalks and 24 new or reconfigured ADA ramps, but still does not state the number of residents complaining.
Speeding was documented; a crash pattern was not. Why were permanent barriers judged safer and more proportionate than enforcement or less intrusive alternatives? How can concerned residents ensure that the traffic-calming project will not be expanded without clear notice, public input, extensive blueprints, and documented justification?
Audit the archived presentationConcept shown vs. final design
The City-provided Nov. 7, 2024 meeting records include a discussion deck and a corridor roll plot labeled “90% Submittal.” The roll plot was created Nov. 6 and modified Nov. 7, maps location-specific proposed medians, sidewalk and signs, and materially expands the record of what was available at the meeting. The deck still labels bump-out design “TBD,” and the later project-specific 100% package bears an engineer’s seal and Oct. 16, 2025 date.
Why those missing details matter: FHWA’s Traffic Calming ePrimer says practitioners should understand effects on large and emergency vehicles, evaluate exact placement and alternative response routes, and coordinate with emergency services. It also describes a Bellevue practice of laying proposed measures out with paint and cones before installation so fire and ambulance vehicles could test them and the plan could be refined from that field review.
Watch from the street-width discussion“We're really trying to just create a special place to live.”
Chris Bright · City of Lewisville interview
The vision before annexation
After annexation, is Lewisville's vision for Castle Hills staying true to the neighborhood's original vision—and to the qualities that drew residents here in the first place?
The Bright family acquired the first Castle Hills property in 1952, and Chris and Clay Bright grew up fishing, hunting, camping and riding horses on the land. Bright Industries says the brothers later expanded the family companies and broke ground on Castle Hills in 1997; the first resident arrived in October 1998. In the City interview, Chris says planning began in 1982.
Bright Industries describes Chris Bright as having decades of experience in all aspects of real estate and credits Chris and Clay with expanding the family holdings behind prominent North Texas developments. Chris then explains Castle Hills' planning choices firsthand in the 2020 City interview—from asking a planner to represent future homeowners to designing parks, sidewalks, streets and speed controls around residential life. His perspective is not a municipal finding; it is a primary account from an experienced developer responsible for the neighborhood's original plan.
The street-width discussion begins around 5:45 and continues through the 6:40 mark. Bright describes disagreeing with Lewisville over standard street width, using rollover curbs to make residential streets feel narrower, and pairing that design with a 25 mph limit to slow traffic.
Watch NBC 7: Vista to remove bike lane barriers months after installing themThe barriers were described as creating a dangerous, obstacle-course feel, so city leaders reversed course and began removing them.
Watch NBC 7: Vista to remove bike lane barriers months after installing them
California City Reverses Course after Safety Concerns
A 2026 NBC 7 report said Vista installed bike-lane berms and bollards and then removed many of them after resident and rider concerns that the barriers felt unsafe. The city described the treatment as obstacle-course-like and took rollback action as safety concerns persisted.
Vista began removing the installed berms and bollards in selected areas under a June 24 City Council rollback vote.
The same segment flags visibility and emergency-access concerns alongside continuing crash risk around the treated corridor.
“Some people have called it road furniture. I call it an obstacle course.”
Vista Mayor John Franklin, NBC 7, San Diego segment
“Drivers complained that they were difficult to see, so they were hitting them, and emergency vehicles had trouble accessing neighborhoods because of the post layout.”
NBC 7, San Diego segment
“There are more crashes now after they were installed than before.”
NBC 7, San Diego segment
Questions from Residents
These concise questions synthesize recurring themes in public Facebook and petition comments. Expand a theme to review them and follow each source.
What do before-and-after crash, tire-damage and lane-departure records show? Source
How many accidents have there been to date? Source
Did the installed configuration receive a field safety review, and will that review be published? Source
How was nighttime visibility evaluated for visitors and drivers unfamiliar with the street? Source
Who requested the project, how many complaints were received and when were they submitted? Source
What changed between the November 2024 public presentation and the final design? Source
Why was the slide presentation given to those that attended different than the end product? Source
How can residents ensure that what is presented is what gets built? Source
Where are the plans to continue the calming project between Josey and King Arthur? Source
Can the City clarify whether there is a plan to extend traffic calming to Josey Lane? Source
Apart from the King Arthur traffic-calming project, are there any separate plans to extend bike paths or modify traffic lanes along Lady of the Lake Boulevard or any other roads within Castle Hills? Source
If no extension is currently planned, what formal notice, public input, detailed plans and Council action would be required before that could change? Source
What measurable criteria will determine whether the City modifies or removes an installed feature? Source
Project Records
Qualified findings from City, TxDOT and regional planning records. Expand an item for the data, limits and primary evidence.
City deck covering the project rationale, traffic data, crash history, concept design and budget shown at the time.
Lewisville staff says it initiated the project due to documented speeding. The November 2024 presentation cited a history of speeding concerns and stop-sign running, a 25 mph limit, an 85th-percentile speed of 32 mph, and roughly 4,000 vehicles per day. The deck also said the majority of people are driving over 25 mph.
The same presentation reported zero speed-related crashes from 2020 through 2024. It said signage and targeted enforcement had already been used after annexation and noted that a full $25M-plus rebuild was not included in the bond program because of cost and priority.
The presentation does not state how many residents raised the original speeding concerns, how many complaints the City received, when they were submitted, or any signed neighborhood petition asking for the installed design. A later memo documents resident requests for eight more crosswalks and 24 new or reconfigured ADA ramps, but still does not state the number of residents complaining.
Open the official presentation deckCity-provided traffic studies counted vehicles and speeds in both directions at three King Arthur locations on October 30, 2024.
| Location | Direction | Vehicles | Average | 85th percentile | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Between Polser and Morgan | Incoming | 1,339 | 27.93 mph | 32 mph | 41 mph |
| Between Polser and Morgan | Outgoing | 1,394 | 29.12 mph | 33 mph | 47 mph |
| Near Lake Avalon | Incoming | 1,396 | 28.6 mph | 33 mph | 44 mph |
| Near Lake Avalon | Outgoing | 1,355 | 28.9 mph | 33 mph | 41 mph |
| Near Lady Carol | Incoming | 1,291 | 28.32 mph | 32 mph | 51 mph |
| Near Lady Carol | Outgoing | 1,406 | 30.1 mph | 35 mph | 51 mph |
These are one-day observations for each location and direction—not annual averages or proof of long-term conditions. “Maximum” is the highest recorded speed in that sample, not the typical speed.
City traffic-count summary pagesA City-provided TxDOT CRIS aggregate query covering January 1, 2016 through June 25, 2026 reports two reportable crashes in the queried King Arthur segment: one speed-related crash, zero fatal crashes, and zero suspected-serious-injury crashes.
The query is bounded to Route ID 1154709, DFO 0.01–1.35. It is not a complete record of every curb strike, tire-damage event, near miss, private-property incident, or non-reportable crash. Its longer 2016–2026 range does not contradict the City's separate statement of zero speed-related crashes during 2020–2024.
TxDOT CRIS aggregate queryThe City says evaluation should follow an adjustment period of 6–9 months.
The City says drivers generally need 6–9 months to adapt to the new configuration, after which engineers can assess long-term effectiveness through follow-up speed studies.
Concerned residents are asking the City to publish the pre-installation baseline, follow-up methodology, study dates, raw or summarized results, and any resulting design decision.
This is the City's stated evaluation approach—not a guaranteed outcome or proof that the installation is effective.
Official King Arthur project page and FAQCompare the 2024 discussion concept, supplied 95% file and 100% package.
A discussion presentation—not a formal plan set—showed lane narrowing, bike lanes, parking, crosswalks, signage, and bump-outs labeled “Design TBD.”
2024 public presentation · p. 10The supplied 76-page interim set translated the concept into location-specific roadway sheets 29–36. Its roadway title blocks say “100% Submittal” while also stating it was for interim review and not for construction, bidding, or permits.
95% file · reviewed sheets 1–2, 7, 29–38The 77-page package kept the same 1.45-mile limits and eight roadway-plan sheets, added a project-specific curb-bump-out detail, identified 158 parking spaces, changed the island material schedule from colored textured concrete to landscape/concrete pavers, and reduced scheduled bike-lane buffers from 242 to 167.
100% package · sheets 1, 7, 29, 34 and 38The public presentation is a discussion concept, not a formal 60% plan set. The comparison documents visible scope, schedule, callout, quantity and detail changes; it does not establish motives, field conditions, approval history, final cost, or whether every drafting change became a construction change.
The City's current King Arthur project page defines the corridor from Old Denton Road to Lady of the Lake Boulevard. Separately, NCTCOG's regional bikeway data marks a King Arthur segment as “Planned.”
A regional planned-network designation is not a City construction award, project funding, Council approval, construction schedule, or evidence that the current project extends to Josey Lane. It is appropriate context for questions about future planning—not proof of a committed extension.
Public Data
Lewisville Police Department Records
Lewisville Police records supplied for the period beginning with Castle Hills’ annexation identify 294 traffic-related police encounters and 235 citations in the King Arthur traffic-calming segment. Across King Arthur, 165 of 269 citations were coded “Ran Stop Sign,” while 46 were coded “Speed Regulation Zone” and one “Unsafe Speed.” The records show that stop-sign compliance was the dominant documented citation issue, not speeding.
Public-record data supplied by the Lewisville Police Department for Nov. 15, 2021 through July 27, 2026.
Cost, Maintenance, and Exposure
Initial Cost Estimate
Funding-source explanation
A City-provided project financial snapshot identifies $675,000 from the General Fund and a $250,000 transfer from the Castle Hills Public Improvement District fund, for $925,000 in funding identified for the project.
Funding identified is not the same as final spending, invoices paid, or project closeout. The extract also reports balances as of its snapshot date.
City funding-source extract| Stage | Amount | What it means | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| Original budget | $675,000 | Documented FY2023–24 project budgetBudget—not spending. A later November 2024 presentation showed $650,000. | |
| Base bid | $420,902.07 | Quick Set Construction base bidLowest responsive, responsible bid opened January 21, 2026. | |
| Construction adjustment | +$21,045.10 | Five-percent construction contingencyAuthorized allowance—not evidence it was spent. | |
| Construction authorization | $441,947.17 | Base bid plus contingency$420,902.07 bid + $21,045.10 contingency. | |
| Barrier-removal change order | +$85,888 | Change Order #2 approved Sept. 15, 2026Removes 161 concrete barriers, transports them to the Public Works yard, and adds 4,200 reflective pavement markers. | |
| Original design | $49,620 | Original LJA engineering authorizationDesign services authorized before the later amendment. | |
| Design adjustment | +$38,400 | Additional survey and ADA-ramp designJune 2025 engineering amendment. | |
| Design authorization | $88,020 | Total engineering authorization$49,620 original + $38,400 amendment. | |
| Current known authorization | $614,147.21 | Design authorization plus revised construction contract$88,020 design + $526,127.21 revised construction contract; not proof all funds were spent. | |
| Potential total | $938,020 | Pre-bid planning comparison$850,000 revised pre-bid construction estimate + $88,020 design authorization; not a current contract or paid cost. |
Solicitation 26-33-C
Competitive sealed bidding. Lewisville received two bids and staff recommended the lowest responsive, responsible bidder under Texas Local Government Code §252.043.
Approved as Consent Agenda item 6 on April 6, 2026; the Legistar record does not show an item-level roll-call vote.
Maintenance
Five-year maintenance scenarios
Quick Set's bid priced 167 bike-lane buffers at $325 each, mobilization at $20,000, and stationary traffic control at $215 per day. The scenarios below assume two, eight, or seventeen buffer replacements per year (about 1%, 5%, or 10%), one traffic-control day, and either no new mobilization or a separate mobilization comparable to the original bid.
These are potential scenarios, not a City forecast or contractor quote. They assume the authorized capital ceiling is fully used, repeat 2026 unit prices without inflation, and exclude restriping, signs, curb/sidewalk work, pavement repair, City labor, engineering, and legal costs. City crews or bundling repairs could avoid separate mobilization; emergency work could cost more.
Exposure
Unpriced contingent exposure
These authorities support two specific concerns raised here: a municipality can face roadway-safety exposure after repeated notice of a dangerous traffic condition, and ADA Title II can reach inaccessible sidewalks, curb ramps, and other pedestrian-right-of-way barriers. Turturro is the closest traffic-safety analogue; Frame is especially relevant because the en banc Fifth Circuit governs federal ADA cases in Texas; Barden documents that sidewalk-barrier litigation can require a long-term municipal remediation program.
The Texas Tort Claims Act caps municipal liability under the Act at $250,000 per person and $500,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or death, and $100,000 per occurrence for property damage. Those are statutory ceilings—not forecasts, automatic payouts, or proof immunity is waived.
Supports the notice-and-response concern: the court upheld a verdict involving repeated speeding complaints, a dangerous roadway condition, and failure to implement a traffic-calming study's recommendations.
↗Frame v. City of ArlingtonADA Title II · en banc Fifth Circuit · 2011Supports the accessibility concern in controlling federal circuit law: newly built or altered sidewalks and curb ramps are municipal services, programs, or activities subject to ADA Title II.
↗Barden v. City of SacramentoADA pedestrian right-of-way settlement · 2004Supports the barrier-remediation concern: sidewalk access was treated as a Title II program and the resulting settlement required systematic removal of curb-ramp and sidewalk barriers.
↗History
A dated, source-linked record from annexation through installation and public response.
From annexation to installation
Full-purpose annexation took effect at 12:01 a.m. for approximately 2,568.38 acres encompassing Castle Hills freshwater-supply districts 1-A through 1-H. A voter-approved Charter amendment expanded Council from five to six places when an annexation increased Lewisville's land mass by at least 8%. Place 6 requires residency in its corresponding district but is elected at large citywide.
The current place 6 council member received 2,114 votes (72.85%) to Tom Cottrell's 788 in the first Place 6 contest after annexation. The electorate was citywide, not Castle Hills-only. The new place 6 council member, a resident of Castle Hills, later wrote, “I voted for the KA project. I support the KA project.” His December 2022 post says he asked the City for enforcement and described a City review of King Arthur, making him a documented early Council advocate for traffic calming; the reviewed City records do not identify a formal project sponsor.
The official FY2023-24 budget was $675,000. Later City records show an $850,000 construction estimate and $88,020 in authorized engineering, producing a $938,020 planning estimate—not a final paid cost.
The City executed the original $49,620 LJA agreement before the November public meeting. Its scope called for data collection, conceptual, 30%, 60%, 90% and final design, plus public outreach and coordination. The agreement confirms LJA was under contract; it does not prove a 100% plan set was complete in July or that no earlier traffic data existed.
At LISD TECC East, Lewisville described speeding and stop-sign concerns, showed traffic data, presented a corridor roll plot labeled 90% Submittal, proposed lane narrowing, parking/bike-lane changes and concrete features, and requested comments. Official minutes report 12 community members present and a meeting from 6:37 to 7:37 p.m. The City-provided sign-in form is incorrectly headed “Thursday, Nov. 6”; the invitation, minutes and staff notes identify the meeting as Thursday, Nov. 7.
The Place 6 Council incumbent—an ardent supporter of the King Arthur traffic-calming project in his own public statements—was re-elected unopposed with 1,640 votes in the citywide Place 6 election.
The City authorized a $38,400 LJA amendment for added ADA ramps and survey/design work. Staff recorded the construction estimate moving from $620,000 to $850,000 while design authorization reached $88,020.
Quick Set bid $420,902.07 and Gibson & Associates bid $535,685.13. Quick Set was $114,783.06 lower and staff identified it as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder.
Council approved a $441,947.17 authorization to Quick Set, including a $21,045.10 contingency, as Consent Agenda item 6. The public Legistar record does not expose an item-level roll-call vote.
Community members have reported many incidents and concerns involving vehicles, cyclists, damaged separators, opposing-lane movements and other safety issues since installation.
Five residents addressed the King Arthur project during Visitors Forum. They described navigation, vehicle-damage and safety concerns, asked for a prompt safety review, and requested that Council reconsider or modify the concrete barriers. The official transcript does not preserve the first grouped speaker's full name clearly, so that link is labeled rather than guessed.
Nine residents addressed King Arthur during Visitors Forum. Eight speakers raised concerns about concrete features, roadway geometry, maintenance, cost, crashes or injuries and asked the City to reconsider or modify the installation. One speaker defended the project and said it was reducing speeds and reckless driving. The Mayor noted the August 19 Special Called Council Meeting and said Council would continue receiving information.
The Castle Hills Master Association Board of Directors wrote Mayor T.J. Gilmore about the King Arthur traffic-calming project. The letter raises concerns about the installed concrete barriers and curbs, asks for discussion of the safety issues identified by the Association, and calls for a root-cause review of how the City communicates project information to residents.
City staff presented the project history, early post-installation speed data and three paths: continue monitoring, commission an independent safety review, or make physical modifications. The Mayor said no decision would be made that night. Staff proposed removing the concrete bike-lane separators and replacing them with a continuous rumble treatment, pulling back the Lady of the Lake bump-out, improving approach striping and exploring landscaped bump-outs. The Mayor said 23 people had registered to speak. The official video records comments from R.R., M.R., R.P., J.W., T.C., L.T., M., L.W., K.M., S.M., M.M., C.H., G.S., K.S., B.S. and additional speakers whose names are not reliably preserved in the uncorrected captions. Speakers offered both support and opposition, with recurring discussion of speeding, separator and bump-out strikes, cyclist safety, lane geometry, visibility, maintenance and alternatives. Council comments broadly favored the modification path. Staff was asked to return with costs, timing and a plan for another public discussion; no formal vote was taken.
FOX 4 reported on the newly installed concrete features before and after the Special-Called meeting, showing damaged elements and debris and reporting both support for and opposition to the installation. NBC 5 also covered the Council meeting and scrutiny of the traffic-calming project. The locally hosted clips below are recordings of the stations’ broadcasts; multiple clips may be different newscast versions of the same underlying report.
Reported issues
62 sourced incident, near-miss, hazard, and supporting-context entries are shown below. Resident accounts are identified as reports rather than official findings.
Reported curb, barrier and island strikes, disabled vehicles, tire and rim damage, and other collision accounts.
A second-hand community report says an Audi struck a King Arthur curb and sustained rim and tire damage.
A witness photo shows a silver Honda Accord stopped along King Arthur near the guardrail with its trunk open and an apparent flat or blown tire.
A first-hand account says a 2022 Lincoln Corsair struck a curb extending into the lane, ruining two tires and requiring a flatbed tow. The source identifies July 2026 but does not provide the day.
A first-hand report says a Lexus contacted a King Arthur curb during an early-morning commute, bending or breaking the rim and requiring a new tire. The account says the driver swerved slightly to avoid a possible collision.
A petition-based account says a driver hit a King Arthur barrier and could not exit the bike lane safely, with approximately $1,600 in claimed vehicle damage.
“A few days ago I saw 2 separate incidents within a few hours.”
A commenter reported seeing two separate incidents within a few hours but supplied no date, location, vehicle details, photographs, or report numbers. They cannot responsibly be broken into two distinct timeline records without more evidence.
A first-hand community submission says the driver struck a project barrier on King Arthur.
A police-call entry says a vehicle struck a concrete bump-out near Lady of the Lake and King Arthur, sustained two flat tires, and required a tow truck. A call-for-service number is retained in the private source.
A first-hand community report says a gray Honda Odyssey struck the traffic-calming median and lost both tires.
A witness report says a young driver struck the traffic-calming barriers and lost one or more tires, with possible additional vehicle damage.
A first-hand community entry says a black Range Rover turning right at the first King Arthur barrier did not see the concrete block, struck it, and sustained tire and rim damage.
A first-hand community entry says a driver struck a concrete barrier and replaced a tire.
A public resident account says a driver turning right from King Arthur toward Lady of the Lake did not see a concrete roadway feature and struck it. The account describes tire and rim damage to a black Range Rover.
A first-hand entry says a vehicle struck a concrete bump-out at King Arthur and the Enchanted Hills entrance, tearing the rear passenger tire and scratching the rim.
A witness entry says a black Honda Civic struck a concrete bump-out near the King Arthur and Enchanted Hills exit, sustained undercarriage damage, and became immobile. Police were reportedly called.
A first-hand report says a driver turning right from Lady De Vance Lane onto King Arthur did not see the new barrier, struck it, and lost a tire. The same report says another driver encountered the barrier shortly afterward.
“I just witnessed a company truck get damaged due to both front and rear tires hitting the island bump on the road.”
A public community post says the author witnessed a company truck's front and rear passenger-side tires contact a roadway island.
A public witness comment describes a small SUV striking the first concrete block while turning right from Queen Peggy onto King Arthur toward the shops. The witness noted that the block sits close to the corner.
A witness entry says a black Range Rover struck a concrete barrier at King Arthur and Enchanted Hills and required pickup because of extensive front-passenger-wheel damage.
A witness entry says a white Toyota RAV4 struck a King Arthur concrete barrier and required flatbed pickup for front-passenger-wheel damage.
“Today, we saw an accident on the way to a neighborhood pool party.”
A resident wrote that the household saw an accident while traveling to a neighborhood pool party. The post supplied no location, vehicles, injuries, police report, or causal detail for this first event.
“Another driver at KA and Enchanted Hill … popped her tire after visiting a friend's house.”
In the same public comment, the author described encountering a driver at King Arthur and Enchanted Hill whose tire had popped after visiting a friend.
“Lady at KA and Morgan LeFay tonight at 4:26 pm. She said she had driven this route so many times before, but has never wrecked.”
A follow-up comment identified a driver at King Arthur and Morgan LeFay and said the driver reported never having wrecked on the familiar route before.
A first-hand report says a car struck a curb-out at King Arthur and Enchanted Hills, damaging front and passenger-side tires and leaving the vehicle undrivable.
A police-call entry says a driver moved to avoid another vehicle near Lady of the Lake and King Arthur, struck a concrete bump-out, and sustained two flat tires. A call-for-service number is retained in the private source.
A first-hand account says a black GMC Yukon contacted concrete bump-outs at both King Arthur and Enchanted Hills exits and sustained a scratched rear rim.
A witness entry says a white Infiniti SUV struck a concrete barrier while westbound near Morgan LeFay and Old Denton and sustained a flat tire.
A first-hand community entry says a driver struck a King Arthur concrete barrier and sustained a flat front-passenger tire.
A petition-based resident report says a vehicle slightly contacted a King Arthur median, after which both right-side tires were replaced and a bent “tire rod” was repaired. The report estimates approximately $5,000 in damage.
A witness entry says a white Lexus SUV turned right onto Lady of the Lake, struck a concrete bump-out, and stopped. The source entry does not establish the resulting damage.
A first-hand community entry says a vehicle struck a concrete barrier at Morgan LeFay and King Arthur. The current source entry does not establish the vehicle description or resulting damage.
A first-hand community entry says a GMC Hummer struck a concrete barrier near Morgan LeFay and Old Denton and sustained a flat front-passenger tire.
Yesterday, two of my tires went flat, and I ended up having to spend almost $900 to replace them. It was such a frustrating and unexpected experience.
A first-hand community comment says two tires went flat after the King Arthur changes and claims nearly $900 in replacement costs. The accompanying photo shows a vehicle wheel and tire; the exact damage is not visually established by the photo alone.
A first-hand community entry says a green Mercedes struck a concrete barrier near Morgan LeFay and Old Denton and sustained flat front- and rear-passenger tires.
A first-hand community entry says a Ram truck turning left from the Dame Susan alley contacted the projecting corner of a King Arthur bump-out and sustained a flat tire.
A witness entry says a vehicle struck a concrete bump-out at King Arthur and King Mark and sustained a flat front-passenger tire.
A witness entry says a white car struck a concrete barrier on King Arthur near Old Denton and sustained a flat front-passenger tire.
A witness entry says a blue-gray Honda contacted the concrete bump-out while turning right from Lady of the Lake onto King Arthur, leaving a scratched rim.
A firsthand entry says a blue Honda Civic contacted a concrete barrier on King Arthur and became lodged, requiring a jack and tow-truck assistance. The source reports possible undercarriage damage pending inspection.
A firsthand entry says a black Jeep Wrangler contacted a concrete bump-out while turning right from Lady of the Lake onto King Arthur and sustained a flat tire.
The community incident log says a white sedan hit a bump-out at Queen Peggy and King Arthur and sustained a flat front-passenger tire.
A witness entry says a silver car contacted the concrete bump-out at Lady of the Lake and King Arthur and sustained two flat tires and body damage.
A firsthand entry says a visiting driver moved over to provide room, contacted a concrete barrier, and sustained two flat tires. The malformed source date was normalized to Aug. 22, 2026 based on the surrounding 2026 incident sequence. The source row describes a white SUV while the attached exhibit depicts a dark Chevrolet SUV; that vehicle discrepancy remains unresolved.
A firsthand entry reports a flat tire after contact with a concrete barrier. The source does not provide a specific location, vehicle description, or whether 6:30 was a.m. or p.m.
A firsthand entry says a white Range Rover contacted the concrete bump-out at King Arthur and Lady of the Lake and sustained two flat tires. The source does not specify whether 4:30 was a.m. or p.m.
The community incident log says a Castle Hills mail-delivery van hit a bump-out and sustained a flat driver-side tire. The specific bump-out was not identified.
The community incident log says a black SUV hit the concrete bump-out at Lady of the Lake and King Arthur, sustained two flat passenger-side tires, and was picked up by a tow truck at the shops two days later.
A public community post reports another vehicle with blown-out tires and wheel damage near King Arthur and a location identified in the source as “Polsner.” The post says a family was standing outside deciding what to do. It does not state what the vehicle contacted or independently establish the cause of the damage.
A resident reports that the dark vehicle shown on the flatbed tow truck hit a bump-out. The privacy-reviewed photo shows the vehicle loaded on the truck, but the image alone does not establish the contact, resulting damage, or cause.
A first-hand community entry says a driver making a right turn at Lady of the Lake hit a bump-out and sustained a bent rim and tire damage.
A first-hand community entry says a gray Tesla turning right out of Enchanted Hills did not see the exit bump-out, struck it front-tire-first, sustained tire and rim damage, and required a tow truck.
A witness entry says a driver struck concrete at King Arthur and Morgan LeFay, blew out two tires, and called police. The source says the driver sought help at a nearby residence; private resident information was omitted.
The dark SUV shown stopped beside the roadway hit a bump-out. The privacy-reviewed photo shows the disabled vehicle with a detached wheel or tire beside it and a raised red-brick bump-out nearby.
The Nissan SUV shown stopped along the roadway hit a bump-out this morning. The privacy-reviewed three-panel exhibit shows tire and wheel damage, the stopped SUV, roadside response activity and a raised concrete bump-out with reflectors nearby.
The black Ford shown at roadside hit the bump-out by Queen Peggy and sustained three flat tires, including the visibly deflated front-passenger tire.
A witness entry says an SUV hit a bump-out on King Arthur. The source provides conflicting black-and-white vehicle descriptions and does not establish resulting damage.
A witness entry says a white sedan ran over bike-lane barriers near King Arthur and Polser and sustained two popped tires. The source identifies the vehicle as a Camry, while the attached photo depicts a white Honda sedan; that discrepancy remains unresolved.
Community accounts involving a reported injury or fall.
“When I walked up he was on the ground for some time with dirt on his shoulder.”
A cyclist hit the traffic-calming project bump-out in front of Enchanted Hill, fell, broke his collarbone, and had to have surgery.
Reports involving lane confusion, roadway obstructions, damaged infrastructure, or movement into opposing lanes.
“52 of 161 bump outs already struck and damaged.”
A community post supplied a precise damage count. The photograph shows one visibly chipped concrete separator with loose fragments.
“Cars swerving into oncoming lanes.”
Residents described drivers moving around installed features rather than following the intended channel. Public Council speakers also raised navigation and clearance concerns.
A witness report says a commercial vehicle traveled alongside a Jeep in the right-turn lane while leaving the neighborhood, creating a conflict before vehicles entered Old Denton traffic. No collision or damage was reported.
A public comment says a resident's husband encountered a concrete block sitting directly in a King Arthur travel lane. No collision or vehicle damage was reported.
Evidence below the incident record
The record now includes repeated impacts, disabled vehicles, damaged concrete, tire marks, a reported serious cyclist injury, constrained geometry, changing visibility conditions and an independent professional engineer’s review.
A Castle Hills resident’s Aug. 21 photo series shows driver-eye views of King Arthur taken around 5:15 p.m. The resident argues that the boulevard’s east-west orientation can put low sun directly ahead and that tree shadows can visually blend the concrete bump-outs into the pavement, especially for drivers who do not know they are there. He recommends removing the bump-outs or cutting them back substantially and using rolled or slanted curbs; he also argues that adding trees and irrigation could compound the visibility concern. These are resident observations and recommendations. The photos document conditions at one time and do not independently establish crash causation, design noncompliance or how often the same visibility conditions occur.
Resident record
Anonymous public comments plus the complete indexed resident testimony archive.
Public comments, organized by theme
Anonymous excerpts from public Facebook posts and Change.org petition comments. These are personal accounts and opinions—not independently verified incident findings or proof that a commenter is a registered voter. Expand a theme to read the quotes; every excerpt links to its public source.
“I live on KA and have witnessed too many accidents due to these bump outs and bike lane curbs. The installation of these items has not achieved the ‘intended’ purpose of calming the speeders. Instead, they have made KA more dangerous. They need to be removed and have painted lines only, as was done on Lady of the Lake. Make KA safe again!”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“So sorry!! Going on south on Old Denton and making a left to Polser is very dangerous also!!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 16 post
“There's a small margin of driver error for this many drivers and an experienced cyclist to run into these curbs. There are better ways to slow traffic other than disabling vehicles and injuring cyclists with curbs. How is this #curbenthusiam project effective since cars are still speeding and running stop signs?”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“god forbid a squirrel or rabbit runs into the road and one does a small swerve to not smoosh the thing. Or maybe an adjustment to not hit kid on a scooter not using the crazy bike lane. Or maybe innocent paying attention driver needs to adjust for someone not paying attention. These micro maneuvers happen all the time to drivers paying attention. The margin for error is terrible and the consequences shouldn’t be punitive.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“Oh my! It’s just not safe. Hoping this gets resolved sooner then later. Be very careful and even being careful. Unfortunately this will happen to many unfortunately. It’s so very unfortunate. The count just continues. Til this is changed and made safe and resolved. Uugghh! Extra careful with school buses. Praying for those drivers and many. They just don’t fit and many children are on those buses. Not to mention the lack of space and where to go to avoid and turns for those bus drivers are pretty intense now.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“Unbelievable! I'm afraid to drive the KA obstacle course unless I have to; I feel for residents who must drive it on a regular basis. There's obviously a tight margin for error.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“Not to mention that the narrow bike lanes travel in different directions if you’re headed east on KA? I wish I could see people riding in them.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 13 post
“<redacted> Agreed! You'd just run into a curb and blow out your tire and maybe your rim.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 13 post
“And they still blow through the stop sign at KA and Morgan Lefay Lane. This morning a City of Lewisville truck with flashing lights was sitting on the corner on MLF and a car exceeding the speed limit on KA sped right through the stop sign.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 13 post
“<redacted> and I’ve seen people treating the bike lanes the turning lanes at the stop signs (while still not stopping).”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 13 post
“The concrete barriers need to go… they are both an eyesore and dangerous for drivers (and cyclists). I have seen more accidents since the install of the barriers than I’ve seen in King Arthur in the 13 years I’ve lived here.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“These ugly concrete barriers are an eyesore that diminish the beauty, character, and welcoming feel of our neighborhood while doing little to enhance its appeal. They also create unnecessary safety hazards by obstructing visibility, complicating navigation for drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, and emergency vehicles, and ultimately cause more problems than they solve in addressing speeding.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“We’ve lived in CH for 21 years and are well aware of the speeding issues. So, I was initially on the fence about these concrete barriers. But when someone mentioned that they’d be nearly invisible when it snows, that’s all I needed to hear.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“I live on King Arthur, and I'm also a cyclist. The barriers and the bump outs are hazards. I used to consider KA to be one of the safer roads to ride and drive on, and now it's stressful as a driver, rider, or pedestrian. I also have not observed "calming" of the traffic, which was the stated purpose.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“Awful and dangerous. If someone falls off a bike or trips, those reflectors could impale them. We live on KA and no one even uses the bike lane. I actually don't mind that part, but the bumpers and spikes don't make me feel it's safer for my children, actually does the opposite.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment
“This needs to be fixed! I almost got hit turning right on Old Denton because a car got into the bike lane to turn! Not to mention what an eyesore it is. It's just not safe!”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“Who thought this was a good idea? And how on earth did this pass a safety inspection? I mean really.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“It’s 11:34 on Saturday night and I was almost killed losing control of my car after hitting these concrete barriers. I was locked in a lane that maybe was a bike lane which I need to get out of and it destroyed my tires and rims. I’m completely shocked and will be contacting my attorney and suing the city. This is insane and dangerous. Whoever is responsible should be fired but I will sue them personally.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“I’m actually concerned what will happen on Halloween in the dark with all the traffic and new to the area drivers.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“Cars swerving into oncoming lanes. Hit one at speed… you lose control.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook post
“They are painted white and low to the ground. No one is expecting them.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“That bumpout is right behind my driveway. I have to be super careful not to hit it. Believe me this was not well placed”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment
“My daughter got a flat tire (unrelated to this, nail picked up somewhere), got the light, and asked if she should pull over - there is nowhere to pull over anymore when heading East on King Arthur. I told her I’ll buy a new rim or whatever, just pull onto a street or until you get somewhere safe with room to stop. King Arthur is no longer that place.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment
“The most dangerous turn from Lady of the Lake going west to King Arthur when avoiding the bump will soon have a head-on collision with an oncoming vehicle!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“It’s negligence at this point. The city had a duty to keep our roads safe. They missed and created new dangers to satisfy rule-following idiocy.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“It’s totally valid that we address the speed and keep our neighborhood safe. But, the cement parking curbs are proving too damaging with lanes too narrow.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“they are horrible. Really have to watch out every time we drive that road especially on the turns. Very idiotic idea.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“those concrete barriers are a serious hazard and definitely need to be re-evaluated before more people get hurt.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Those bump outs at the Enchanted Hill entrance are definitely a hazard.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Then there’s the bike rider who was trying to avoid getting hit in the face with the trees overhanging the bike lane between the stop sign at Morgan Lefay headed to Old Denton. Of course people don’t want to ride in the “bike lane” with all the obstacles, the accumulated water and debris close to the curb.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“I asked a couple of times if anyone from CoL rode with our trash trucks as a trial run to see if they could navigate KA with the bump outs & bike lane. No response(s).”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Pretty ironic that, in an effort to make our street safer including adding a bike lane, what they’ve actually managed to do is make it far more treacherous and dangerous for bikers, drivers, and pedestrians. This poorly thought through project has caused more harm to vehicles, and people in the first 30 days than it did in the past 20 years. Wow. Just wow.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“As the old saying goes....the road to perdition is paved with good intentions. Intentions be damned, this entire mess simply screams "Just do SOMETHING!!!" - even if the "something" is a horrible idea and someone is likely to get more seriously injured (or worse) along the way. Nobody thought about breakdown lanes, heavy equipment passage, trash bins in the bike lanes, street cleaning (who is going to pick up all the trash stuck in the bike lane??), visibility at night/winter, or the consequences of a driver making an evasive maneuver to avoid striking a family pet, a cyclist (not using the bike lane - typical), or an inattentive teenager on a scooter.... the consequences of striking any one of the bumpouts or cement barriers are costly. Rip them out.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“So the bumps are dangerous for cyclist and vehicles.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“The main issue was the lack of visibility of the bump-out structure. I hope the city evaluates this design soon so we can prevent further injuries to our community.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“unfortunately all of the avid riders I have seen do not like the bike lanes. They prefer to ride in the middle of the lane in the same direction as the traffic.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“The newly added barriers, along with their rapidly shedding and stripped damaged reflectors, make the bike lanes debris-collecting minefields. There is no simple solution to keep them clear. Oh, and have fun dodging the waste bins on collection days.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Honestly I hate to say this but we will all hit it at some point. Just wait! It’s ridiculous! It was the very tip corner and super slow. Can’t imagine a biker or even a golf cart hitting that. What a dangerous road hazard for everyone.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I drove on KA the other day. The main road is so narrow, and with all the curves, if you don’t pay close attention, you could easily hit those light reflectors”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I am so sorry this happened. This keeps happening repeatedly to drivers on KA. It is a safety hazard. Both drivers & bicyclist have reported accidents due to these blocks & curbs.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“The bump outs are so DUMB! First of all if your car rides high they are hard to see.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Anytime I host at my home in Castle Hills, I warn all visitors about these dangerous blocks & oversized curbs.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Road scanning is an important component of defensive driving. But it’s dangerous on King Arthur. Unfortunately, with these obstacles on curves and narrow lanes we have to focus directly ahead at all times. If a child, scooter, animal etc is approaching from the side we are less likely to notice them because we don’t have time to scan anymore.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“It’s hazardous- someone on a bike or a golf cart will be severely injured one day.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Agree they are dangerous and concerned someone will seriously get hurt. I drove to see them in night time and reflectors are not visible. Also there are many signs and distractions.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Perhaps when the reflectors were all attached, they could be seen, and yes, possibly a distraction! Now, so many have been damaged and knocked off by being struck that the curbs are starting to fade into the darkness. The reflectors are now just more debris in the bike lane, ready to flatten bike tires.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“if this is not changed and eliminated, how much fun will it be in freezing temps with snow and ice covering everything.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“As of August 3, 37 reflectors have broken off making these dangerous at night!”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“It turns out to be very dangerous for bikers too and not many are using the lanes.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Be careful. I also saw a tractor trailer coming through and almost hit a car because he just doesn’t even fit on the road. Imagine what it looks like when he turned. This is not good.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I am so sorry to hear of this personal injury and hope the person makes a full recovery. These weird curbs and parking blocks invite the potential for accidents, and evoke sad memories for me of a friend who hit a similar barrier on a motor bike. The impact caused him to fly over his handle bars, and killed him instantly. I agree that change needs to happen to correct this.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Wow! So sorry to hear all this. Thats terrible. Hope he is recovering well and safety changes can be made in our neighborhood. Safety first and foremost.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“People, keep in mind that other people's driving can impact you. See this police report of a law-abiding attentive driver who still hit one of these bump outs because she had to swerve to avoid hitting another driver who was encroaching on her lane.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“<redacted> Certain times of day there's shade on the barriers making them blend into the road. Some infringe on intersections because they're too close. Many reflectors have fallen off the bike lane barriers. Visitors driving KA aren't familiar with the barriers.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“I filed a claim against the city for these barriers giving me two flat tires. Anyone file a claim and get it approved? Crazy to me they deny when they know the engineering on these was a major miss.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Sep. 16 post
“We just blew two tires on those concrete curb separations. There may be suspension damage we don’t know about till the shop looks at. They need to go or be changed to something less hazardous for cars and cyclists.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment · Sep. 15
“Well, I definitely try to avoid KA and take Holy Grail to Hebron most of the time, so I guess by placing all these hazards in the road, less cars are on it, so it's calming the traffic”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“I live on KA and walk my pups along it daily, multiple times a day. The ‘communicated’ purpose of ‘calming drivers’ on KA has failed. I witness it daily! This has not slowed the speeders down, it has not made them want to obey the speed limit or stop at posted stop signs any more than it did before this was installed. What I have noticed ‘calming’ speeders down is the new and consistent presence of LPD sitting at various points along KA! Had we requested Lewisville’s finest prior to going way over budget on an unnecessary project, the ‘majority’ would be happier. Just today I saw 3 vehicles hit with the concrete barrier or a bump out, ALL before noon.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“2nd car with a flat tire of the day, and 7th car with flat tire of the week if anyone is counting 🙋🏻♀️”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“If you drive ( driver 1)a slightly wider vehicle, and the oncoming vehicle is closer to the middle, it is very likely that driver (1) would move a little to the right. It’s just human nature. I did this, when the lines were newly painted- but the blocks were not installed yet. I was driving a SUV that day and had a pickup truck on the opposite side who drove close to the center line. I did move a tad to the right side of my lane. If the blocks were installed at that time, my suv would have been a part of the statistic currently growing by the day.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“<redacted> don’t think I ever remember seeing a flat on this section of KA before this “calming” project. Lived here sine 2007. So that should factor into the equation as well. And saw a mini van pulled over IN the bike lane today. So what calming is it doing?”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“We have to remember to tell people who visit to be super careful! It’s an obstacle course. <redacted> changed a fifth stranger’s tire last night, and they’re always embarrassed that they hit the curbs. It’s so sad and humiliating that our beautiful neighborhood took a turn for the worse.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 13 post
“Hit the little corner tip with truck and barely made it back home. What a wonderful eventful morning.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“This is horrible. Remove the ugly tire killers!”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“I had to replace both right side tires and had a bent tire rod after slightly bumping one median 2 weeks ago! Cost me around 5,000 to fix!”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“Dangerous for drivers and specially for children on board! My tire slashed on that barrier and would have caused terrible accident! City needs to take immediate action and remove and replace with something that is safe for both drivers and bikers!”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“I just hit one of those concrete blocks. It took out two of my tires.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“There is a massive truck that’s stuck on Lady of the Lake and King Arthur.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“Today, we saw an accident on the way to a neighborhood pool party.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“On way home we came across another driver at KA and Enchanted Hill who popped her tire after visiting a friends house.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“She said she will never visit this friend again because of this thousand dollar mistake.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“She had driven this route so many times before, but has never wrecked.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook reply
“I just witnessed a company truck get damaged due to both front and rear tires hitting the island bump on the road.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“We often leave the neighborhood down Polser to KA to Old Denton. Not anymore! No matter what GPS says, we go Holy Grail to Hebron to Old Denton. Trying to exit or enter KA to Old Denton is an ugly mess.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“Yesterday I was passing the side entrance of EH going from Lady Devance towards King Mark while a waste Management truck was turning right on KA from EH. It had to stop and let me pass because it needed to use 50% of my lane to make that turn and not hit the bump out there. The thing is I would not be able to veer to the right because of the lovely concrete bike barriers.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“I also saw someone stopped in the bike lane by Polser close to Old Denton yesterday afternoon (in the old right turn lane onto Old Denton). I dont know how easy it is to accidentally get in that lane without hitting a block, but hopefully he reported it if that was the case.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“The school bus is another concern for making turns. Hopefully we will hear how their trial drives go. Then how about fire trucks? I think they’re probably big and heavy enough to plow right over if need be but really?”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“it’s also not safe when there are cars in the car line to turn right at Morgan Lefay from KA and someone else decides they’ll use the bike lane as a right turn lane, barely stopping. So when the car lane car goes to turn right not expecting a car in the bike lane to turn with barely stopping, that’s a disaster waiting to happen, even worse if a biker is in the mix.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“I’ve lived here in castle hills 24 years. All my kids raised here and all grown and live in here also. Might be time to all move out of here. I’m amazed at the horrible changes in our neighnorhood. Castle hills is not what it used to to be. Just got a flat. Just hit the tip and one of our new additions in our neighborhood. I was also driving very slow so can’t imagine if not. Thank you city of Lewisville for your wonderful new horrific ideas and things you’ve placed in our neighborhood. For us all to have to spend more and more money on flats and cars being damaged. Never imagined our neighborhood would come to this catastrophe and horrible planning.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post · Aug. 12
“I don’t know why those little road bumps weren’t used instead - at least you don’t get car damage when you hit them!!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“The name should be the King Arthur Tire and Rim Destruction Project. Sponsored by Discount Tire”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“We put the stone in Bridgestone. - CoL”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“It’s a poor attempt to slow down traffic. It’s not working. It’s causing regular drivers who aren’t speeding to hit these curbs and pop their tires. They aren’t evil awful people. And it’s NOT stopping speeding or stop sign runners. I see speeders every day. And stop sign runners all the time. So yes. Tell the people that popped their tires they are terrible distracted drivers. But in my 20 years here I haven’t seen this many popped tires. And it’s not fixing the problem it was meant to fix.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Another car with blown out tires and wheel damage. Near KA and Polsner, a family is standing outside trying to figure out what to do”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post · Aug. 30
“Just pulled in the neighborhood 1/2 hour ago and they were still there. Very sad. Can’t get these removed soon enough.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“Another catastrophe. Just saw a car and a tow truck on KA.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“So annoying! So sorry for these people and everyone else that’s had to deal with this! It really just needs to go back to the way it was or repeat what Lady of the Lake has! Remove the concrete!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“Another one this is just awful.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“<redacted> I disagree. There are way too many incidents of people hitting them for it to be a handful of terrible drivers.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“And there was another one on King A/ & Lady of the Lake over the weekend. Blew two tires and can’t get it fixed until mid week. So now the family has one car trying to figure out schedules for kids and work.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“How many blown tires is this now? Anyone want to guess how much money in total drivers have paid to repair their vehicles because of these obnoxious curbs and bump outs? Stop stalling ~remove them now.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post · Sep. 11
“Are concrete islands going to?they were installed hanging in the driving lanes…duh!!!!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Sep. 16 post
Happy Friday, CH residents! I apologize for missing the meeting on the 19th; I had a mandatory parent booster golf meeting for my daughter at Hebron High School. I’ve received feedback from many residents who attended the meeting and I also viewed the online post. I want to share my perspective and the opinions of others in the hope of concluding the calming project. I remember we used to enjoy driving through the KA. KA Boulevard is the main thoroughfare through our community, stretching from the east to the west side of the neighborhood. This main street is characterized by beautiful tree-lined sections, both one-way and two-way streets, large and small medians, homes with various architectural designs, the wonderful Village Shops, the stunning views of Avalon Lake, and the exclusive guard-gated Enchanted Hill. As we cruise west on KA, we encounter friendly curves, golf course views, and tree-lined creeks, all contributing to the pleasant driving experience that CH is known for. As a resident and a real estate agent who interacts with current and prospective residents daily, I believe we would prefer managing a few speeders on KA rather than contending with the mess we currently face. Multiple incidents have been reported, and we can only wonder how many other incidents have occurred at night due to concrete barriers or bumps. Enchanted Hill, an exclusive guard-gated section with over 90 multi-million dollar homes and 11 lots remaining, is facing significant challenges due to the calming project. The bumps at the front entrance and the barriers at the rear entrance have made it a nightmare for large trucks needing to enter and exit. Eighteen-wheelers cannot navigate out freely without damaging those barriers! This design has caused serious problems. Here are our suggestions: 1. Remove the bumps and barriers entirely; doing so will save more money than modifying them. These bumps & barriers shouldn't be in the first place. 2. Be aware that driving west on KA in the evening exposes drivers to direct sunlight hitting their windshields, plus a lot of curves, so bumps & barriers will be a problem! 3. Do not assume that drivers hitting or crashing into the bumps or barriers are careless or distracted by their phones. Don't we all use GPS to find directions? 4. Restore CH’s aesthetic appeal and bring back the easy, friendly driving experience we used to enjoy. 5. There’s no need for bike lanes since the maximum speed limit for cars is 25 mph, which aligns with the speed at which bikes travel. We can all share the street. 6. Eliminate the clutter of unattractive, aggressive bike lane signs on the street and in front of houses. Home shoppers are likely to rule out homes on busy streets with designated lanes or parking. What will this do to home values? 7. Would these signs create a more welcoming atmosphere? Suggestions include: "Young kids riding bikes. Please slow down!" "Deaf person in the area." "We love walking in our neighborhood. Please drive carefully." "Heads up! Our amazing Village Shops are coming up!"
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post · Aug. 21, 2026
“King Arthur is embarrassing.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 15 post
“Traffic stressing instead of traffic calming.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“The crawl way strikes again”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“Agree, it’s so ridiculous”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“It’s tacky and messy looking. The amount of damaged curbs with black marks, crumbling edges and torn away reflectors….the concrete dust that was left around the new very-bumped out curbs, the not-straight painted lines…adding on the golf carts now driving in the road, bikes not on the bike path and still not stopping at stop signs…. King Arthur is simply a mess. We took a sweet community and have made it an overwrought joke It’s stupid and embarrassing.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“King Arthur Chaos Project”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“<redacted> - Yes, there are many other options that could have been implemented. I'd prefer ones that don't destroy cars, ruin aesthetics, and create more problems than they were supposed to "solve".”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 12 post
“<redacted>, exactly - I can't believe of all the choices to do this, somehow this not only got accepted, reviewed, and implemented - and one or two people defending the implementation baffles me, too.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 13 post
“Colossal waste of money, dangerous and an eyesore.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“The concrete barriers do more harm than good. Not to mention they are an eyesore in the heart of our neighborhood.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“Going on King Arthur from old Denton its distressing to see ugly concrete barriers on both sides of the street. The streets are not wide enough if a car were to break down and the road looks so ugly with the barriers. It’s completely changed the look of this beautiful community.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“I live in this community and putting a concrete barrier does not make sense There are various better options to address.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“My thoughts are same as everyone else's. These barriers have caused more harm than good. More accidents have taken place since installed, than there ever where, pre-installation. In addition to the danger it's created, how about the horrible look! For a neighborhood who won't allow mailboxes (because it would ugly up the curb appeal), they sure threw that concept out the window when installing these barriers.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“I feel the final outcome of the King Arthur traffic calming project significantly over-corrected in its effort to bring down the average auto speed. Instead it has had a negative impact in several measurable ways - not to mention how unattractive and unsightly the bump-outs and curb stops are. Surely data will support that more harm than good has been done. It’s ok to make mistakes, but now it’s time to come to the table to find a better solution.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“The concrete barriers are an eye sore and definitely take away from the clean and classic look of what Castle Hills is suppose to reflect. It’s also a hazard in my opinion as they are awkwardly placed and see many dings in them already showing that many have been running into them.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“It is just unnecessary, causes more harm then good. the bike lanes are great, leave them without the barriers. Lanes are just too tight in some areas, reflectors not effective. Overall look has really negatively impacted our beautiful neighborhood.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“Those bumps are a serious hazard and need to be removed ASAP.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“There are houses facing the street on the section of KA heading to Josey, so I’m not sure how they are going to do that.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“No slide indicated that a physical barrier would be placed as protection for the bikers.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook reply
“It is an absolute certainty that more thought went into the site than into the "calming" project and its execution.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment
“Even those who support "calming" cannot think this was well planned and executed.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment
“Incorporating a physical cement barrier that causes unsafe conditions is not an adjustment, that is a fundamental change of what is being delivered.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply
“This poorly planned project has already negatively impacted real estate values and diminished the interest of new families wanting to move here!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“What’s happening here on KA is a joke! Castle Hills is known for its amazing curb appeal, beautiful tree-lined streets, and friendly community atmosphere. Instead of enhancing our neighborhood, we are facing concrete blocks, island bumps, sign clutter, and street reflectors!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“This is not traffic calming. This is straight-up negligence… and ugly as hell.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“A few loud voices couldn’t stand drivers “breaking the rule” of a 25 mph sign…. even though real-world speeds of 32-35 mph had been safe for 25 years. City data showed averages of just 31 mph with virtually zero serious accidents. So the city spent over a million dollars on virtue-signaling concrete and ugly signs to enforce blind obedience.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“They damaged the beauty of our neighborhood and turned it into a dangerous industrial eyesore.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“I like the idea of removing the barriers and putting rumble strips instead. Those barriers are the real eyesore IMO. Some of the signs could go too and that silly misplaced handicapped spot.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“How ugly. We hardly ever go there but I totally agree. Chris Bright did make a lovely place here for us to live. Let it alone.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“Those concrete barriers are not only an eyesore, they’re dangerous. Get rid of them and put In rumble strips. While they’re at it dig the bricks out of the bump outs and plant trees or low-maintenance bushes”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“they need to get rid of the bump outs and paint lines like on Lady of the Lake and Windhaven”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“I recently drove KA past LOTL for the first time and saw how ugly and absurd this KA Calming Project is. Fortunately I live off KA on Avalon further east and thankfully don't have to drive the KA obstacle course unless I'm going to someone's home in that area. ”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Not only did the city create an abomination on KA, but as predicted the concrete obstacles are extremely dangerous. As your incident shows, the KA project did not make anything safer for bicycles but only created more danger. It is sad that we have residents supporting this tax-money wasting project.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“I have lived in CH since 8/99 and this is absolutely the worst community disaster ever.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“ridiculous that they would create a bike lane to protect bikers and yet fill it with obstacles that force them cyclist into the road. Absolutely moronic. And I agree with the previous comment… Our neighborhood is filled with young drivers. I have three sons that learned to drive in this neighborhood and I’m so grateful for the broad roads that gave them room to learn. I feel sorry for all the kids right now trying to figure this out. ”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“per the TxDoT best practices the lane should be a minimum of 10ft ours is less than 8ft and 2 way. But the COL did not follow TXDOT guidelines.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Get rid of them now”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“I find it interesting how much of this new "accommodating" infrastructure seems more concerned with signaling exclusion and barrier rather than accommodation. I dont' ride my bike much anymore, but these bump-outs would be a really sore spot for me as a cyclist trying to get around. One of my favorite things about this neighborhood as a kid was the smooth curbs. We didn't have those in my old neighborhood and they were the cause of more than one crash.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Really, it just feels like Lewisville coming to roost in our neighborhood. These bump-outs and curbs feel very "municiple" and standardized in a way our neighborhood has proudly managed to avoid being for a long time. What's really absurd is that this huge project is because the 85th percentile speed clocked on King Arthur was...32 mph. In a 25. That's a paltry overstep and not a call for what could easily be classified an emergency public work. Frankly, the only reason the speed limit isn't 30mph is because Chris Bright wanted to mimic Highland Park in the stupidest of ways.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“They could have at the very least installed these with eased curbs like every other curb in the neighborhood.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I hate it too.. thing is I never see bike riders in our neighborhood every once in a while.. and yes more and more money out of our pockets…”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I am genuinely sad to see the negative impact this “project” continues to have on my neighbors.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“But I also have no idea how they provide any added safety; they seem functionally useless to me. So, what bothers me is that apparently it cost millions of dollars for something useless.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I hate those damn things!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Yes, there are many other options that could have been implemented. I'd prefer ones that don't destroy cars, ruin aesthetics, and create more problems than they were supposed to "solve".”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Instead of these ugly monstrosities, medium size smooth speed bumps in the far right lanes would have accomplished the same thing...probably for less money. If someone drifted a few inches they would hit the speed bump and instead of having a damaged car or blown out tire in 100 plus degree weather, or a broken collar bone!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I’m really disappointed with the changes the city has made, especially when they can lead to situations like this and create such a financial burden for residents. I hope we can all come together, raise our concerns, and encourage the city to reconsider and remove this. If enough of us speak up together, hopefully we can make a positive change for our community.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“I support this effort to change unsafe road hazards and to address the issue that this was nothing more than spending the Lewisville taxpayer's money on the Mayor's pet cycling project. Further, it sheds accountability on the failure of the Lewisville Police Chief to oversee the traffic division and their lack of enforcement of this area, thus resulting in serious resident injuries. I trust that the residents of the Castle Hills area of Lewisville will strongly support the removal of the Lewisville Mayor and the Castle Hills city councilman for being a detriment to the city.”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“It actually created a problem we haven’t had before and didn’t solve the big issues. Just poor decisions all around.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“Why do we live in Legoland”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 13 post
“Replace the concrete curbs with rumble strips. Dig out the bricks from the bump outs and plant trees or easy-to-maintain shrubs. That’d go a long way to solving the problem.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“It’s tacky and embarrassing. This is a good lesson. It never occurred to me the neighborhood we bought into could chose to make such a strange alteration. It makes me have less faith in the the town.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 13 post
“If you take the time to read all the new signs, you won’t even notice the road!🤣🤣🤣🤣”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 13 post
“It’s hard to believe that even the 2 people that support it could like it. If only the planners had heard of the internet. A quick search yields: These concrete curbs create several problems: • They sit low and blend into the pavement, especially at night. • Headlight glare, rain, leaves, ice and snow can make them extremely difficult to see. • A bicycle tire striking one can stop or deflect the wheel instantly, causing a serious fall. • They leave cyclists very little room to avoid an obstacle or recover. • Vehicles can suffer tire, wheel, suspension and underbody damage. • Snowplows must maneuver around them and can strike, damage or displace the concrete. • Snow and debris can collect around them, reducing visibility and usable road width. • They create difficulties for emergency vehicles, school buses, delivery trucks and trailers navigating the narrowed, curved lanes. • The small reflectors are not an adequate substitute for tall, highly visible delineator posts. Other cities have experienced problems with similar installations: • Boston removed concrete bike-lane curbs after motorists repeatedly crashed into them and replaced them with flexible posts. • Portland removed 2,500-pound concrete traffic-calming planters after frequent collisions. • Vista, California, removed newly installed bike-lane barriers after residents reported that they created traffic hazards. National street-design guidance recommends pairing low concrete barriers with tall flexible posts so they remain visible at night and after snowfall. It also recognizes that precast curbs can be displaced by vehicle impacts and damaged by snowplows. Traffic calming should make our neighborhood safer—not introduce low, unforgiving concrete obstacles that are difficult for cyclists and drivers to see. Given that a cyclist has already suffered a broken collarbone, the City of Lewisville should immediately conduct a formal safety review, install tall delineator posts and prominent warning markings as an interim measure, and determine whether these concrete barriers should be redesigned or removed before someone else is seriously injured. Boston example: https://mass.streetsblog.org/.../building-back-flimsier... Portland example: https://bikeportland.org/.../concrete-planters-for... Vista example: https://www.cbs8.com/.../509-5294831b-df6b-4533-aa7a... Design guidance: https://nacto.org/.../separating-protected-bike-lanes/”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 13 post
“<redacted> ~ they are just so weird! Not necessary and they leave not an inch to move. In some some sections there is curbing on both sides of the road-no ability to pull over for an emergency etc. What if an emergency vehicle needed to pass?? No one can pull over?? People unfamiliar with our neighborhood are not understanding that we have created a driving gauntlet- With no extra space, I’ve been stuck driving behind golf carts, and unbelievably BIKERS. Since you’ve only driven it twice I understand your question-I drive it at least 6 times a day and it’s annoying and embarrassing. With homes over a million dollars, the damaged curbs and crumbling bumpouts are ruining the charm of KA.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“This is so infuriating! Everybody wonders why people hit them… because it’s not normal road design!  completely unexpected and ridiculous. I was driving behind someone the other day that was hugging the yellow line the whole way down the road and effort to stay far away from those stupid hazards. Imagine someone coming the opposite direction and trying to give them some space? You wonder why people hit them! It’s a ridiculous design. And I was at the August 19 meeting… It has made no appreciable impact on the speed on King Arthur. So if the goal was to slow people down… Other than the 45+ cars with damage… It hasn’t made any difference at all! They need to reverse this mess. It is both hazardous and hideous! #MKAGA”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“I live closer to Josie and on Josie. They are two lanes and either direction with a median in the middle with grass and trees. Now that makes sense! And when you get to where the houses are the street narrows into one lane. The street isn’t even marked and we don’t have any problem. Why didn’t they do the same thing on the other side? Instead of forcing the cars to the center they should’ve put a median in the middle. If people hit a normal curb, (which rare to never happens) it still does its job without damaging the vehicle. But those parking curbs are disastrous.  this idea that these curves are saving life is absolutely insane. I’ve been in this neighborhood for 20 years and there’s never been a safety issue for pedestrians anywhere especially not on King Arthur. So to make this about pedestrian safety is ridiculous. ”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
“<redacted> 100% nailed it. It’s not safer it’s way worse. Sure, we did need traffic calming, but this wasn’t it. The other thing to point out that nobody has yet is, how do we know exactly how many incidents have occurred? The 35 number mentioned are only the ones we know about. How many incidents are going unreported? How can you do math on something where you don’t even have all the numbers? But again, is it now safer or are we having more incidents?”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 15 post
“I think the city cares more about thinking it's right than actually doing what's right. So, to reinforce their ego and maintain the belief that these barriers are the right solution, I think they'll do exactly what you don't want and put up those red posts.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“This simply MUST change. It’s so hard to imagine that a person or group of people thought those things were good at all!!”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“with all your statistics, the real question is simple: Is Castle Hills safer now than it was before this project? Are we seeing fewer accidents, or more? If the goal was to improve safety, the numbers should show that. If we’ve created a road configuration that is causing more wrecks, serious accidents, and people ending up in the hospital than before, then how is that making us safer? Did this project actually make Castle Hills safer, or did it create a new safety problem?”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“There’s no question that there was a failure on the part of the city to fully layout, the magnitude of this plan. If they had taken the time to do so there would’ve been lots of objections. I just hope it’s not too late for them to reverse course.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“The City needs to acknowledge where the process failed, fix the problems that can still be fixed, and learn from this experience so it is handled better going forward. The worst response would be to become defensive rather than recognize the legitimate failures in communication and execution.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“<redacted> figuring out where and how things went awry is a critical step in the problem solving process and avoiding a recurrence. In my opinion this is on the City for accepting the design from LCA and putting it out to bid without gathering feedback or running a pilot. The concrete vendor has been around a long time and does projects for multiple cities with good results. I believe they were just doing the work according to the design they were handed. This is not a blaming exercise. It's a citizen led due diligence post mortem.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“When I directly asked the City Engineer whether residents would have an opportunity to review and comment on the final barrier design, his response, word for word, was: “No, it is a matter of engineering best practices and established standards.” So, despite this being the first project of its kind in Lewisville or how many City Council meetings you went to prior, the residents who live here and are directly affected by it were not given an opportunity to see, review, or provide feedback on the final barrier design before it was implemented.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply · Aug. 14 post
“The preliminary design shared at the November meeting was dated 10/22/2024 and did not include the bike lane barriers. It also included half as many crosswalks and less signage. So even if one had attended, most of the problematic elements weren’t in the plans shown (if they were in fact shown at all).”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 14 post
“Please remove asap”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“Visitors to our neighborhood wouldn’t know what to do and might get the city’s attention quicker.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“A few days ago I saw 2 separate incidents within a few hours.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“We need signs indicating if someone damages their vehicle to call the Lewisville non-emergency line. Visitors wouldn’t know what to do.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“True waste of money. But to spend money to fix it again would be crazy too.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook comment
“The additional cost does have an impact to residents and should be communicated as part of transparency.”
Anonymous · Public Facebook reply
“I don’t see KA as a <redacted> issue. I see it as a City of Lewisville issue.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment
“What I have problems with is knowing the city used the traffic calming project to meet other sustainability measures that didn’t get fully disclosed to the residents.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment
“How would more involvement at the meeting have made a difference if the plan was changed? Was there a meeting before the decision was finalized to make these unsafe and unsightly “adjustments” where input was gathered about these specific changes?”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook reply
“No real engagement, no real input, no vote. A sham meeting after the contract was signed. Finger pointing back at the community that they should have been more engaged.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook post
“ask the city if any of the traffic calming project is being used to meet performance metrics for sustainability goals. The data proves it was never about speeding.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“So senseless! Hope you’re planning on attending the meeting on the 19th with the city of Louisville”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“This is an accident nightmare. Someone is going to get hurt on these things. You cannot even see them day or night. Totally unnesessary. The lines were more than plenty. HOV lanes changed to no barriers and just use lines now. Who approved spending money on this mess?”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“We ought to put these in front of every city council members home. that and handicap parking in front of their houses. let's contract the same company who did this work.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“This is what happens when 15 loud complaints and Karen's outweigh the reasonable majority. I completely agree—we cannot keep letting a small group of constant complainers control the conversation. I have dealt with the same issue in Frisco, and unfortunately, the loudest voices often get the most attention.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“This is ridiculous, dangerous, and needs to be removed. Who was the idiot that approved this crap.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · July 18 post
“I would love to time travel back and participate in any meetings where people sat around a table or on a conference call and cumulatively agreed that any part of this project was a good idea. The whole thing is mind boggling. The entire lifecycle of this project from inception to completion needs to be fully documented so it can be shared with other municipalities across the country as an example of what not to do.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Who in the world actually thought this was a good idea, much less enough people to bring it to fruition. Is this what the dumbing down of America is gonna look like? I generally trust people NOT to do something this asinine.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Another example of the idiocy of the people that designed and approved this mess, and further proof of things to come in the future.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Stupid is as stupid does for those decided this stupid mess.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“Show me the person that designed this and you will find they are 11 beers short of a 12pack”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“I should go the extra distance and make it clear that means that 85 percent of people driving King Aurthur were going under 32mph. That isn't a safety hazard and doesn't require any intervetion at all. Frankly, this whole project stinks of pork-barreling.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 2 post
“MKAGA.org tells the whole story of we got to this curb in the road. Read it and let’s remove the curbs!”
Anonymous · Change.org petition comment
“Looking forward to the meeting tonight. Please attend if you can to show support to make King Arthur Great Again.”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“WOW, what a great job. Using information from here to prepare my e comment to the City Council before the meeting per their requirement”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 12 post
“This needs to be fixed soon. It’s dangerous and unsafe! Council Member Place 6”
Anonymous · Castle Hills Community Facebook comment · Aug. 30 post
Resident remarks at City Hall
Each meeting bucket links directly to the section. Speaker cards use initials, include an excerpted clip, and identify the corresponding timing in the complete official recording.
Watch the complete official meeting Read the official transcript
Watch the complete official meeting Read the official transcript
Meeting outcome
Following public input and discussion, Council approved Change Order #2 for $85,888. The City staff memo says the change order removes the bicycle-lane barriers and adds sensory warning buttons along the bicycle lanes. The detailed work schedule calls for all 161 barriers to be removed, prepared for transport to the Kealy Public Works Yard, and replaced with 4,200 reflective pavement markers at 18-inch spacing along approximately 6,350 linear feet of bike lane.
City record
Public statements and official meeting excerpts organized by office.
Show up
Meeting information changes. Confirm the location, agenda and start time on the linked official City page before attending.
Accountability
Project staff, elected officials, contact information, the documented Council record, and the recall process.
Who represents Lewisville
Engineering staff developed and administered the project; the Mayor and City Council govern citywide and authorized the engineering and construction actions. Lewisville elects every Council place at large.
Project-era Mayor and City Council
Roles reflect the City of Lewisville roster archived April 17, 2026 and match the construction-era project sign. The current City roster now differs. Project-era City roster · Current City roster
Since November 18, 2024 through June 1, 2026, officials recorded 235/238 unanimous votes (98.7%) on council actions, so they almost always voted unanimously.
Lewisville has a Mayor and six councilmembers. All seven are elected citywide for three-year terms, so every Lewisville voter can vote in each race and every elected official represents the entire city.
Lewisville Charter §§ 3.01–3.02 City of Lewisville council district map (PDF)
Resident questions after the Aug. 19 meeting
After the August 19 Special-Called Council Meeting, some residents have asked about potentially recalling the Mayor, Councilmember Place 3 and Councilmember Place 6. This section explains the current Charter process and the practical scale of an officer-specific petition.
Denton County’s official May 3, 2025 Lewisville report lists 69,162 registered voters. The current 5% formula produces 3,458.1, so each officer-specific petition would need at least 3,459 valid signatures. Because signatures can be rejected during verification, a practical organizing target would be about 5,000 signatures per petition—not a legal requirement, but a buffer.
Before the 2025 charter update, the rule was 30% of votes cast for that office at its most recent regular municipal election, with a 150-signature minimum. Under that prior formula, the May 2025 Place 6 result would have produced a 492-signature threshold and the May 2024 mayoral result would have produced a 1,559-signature threshold. The current estimated requirement of 3,459 is also greater than the 2,415 voters who participated in Lewisville’s May 2025 election. That is an unusual practical result: more valid petition signatures are now estimated to be required to force a recall election than the total number of voters who participated in the City’s last regular election. The 2025 change therefore materially increased the number required for the offices discussed here, although the exact official threshold must be confirmed by the City Secretary before circulation.
Lewisville voters can also pursue a change to the recall rules themselves. Texas Local Government Code §9.004 requires the City Council to submit a proposed one-subject charter amendment to voters when supported by a petition signed by at least 5% of the City’s qualified voters or 20,000, whichever is smaller. Using the same 69,162-voter reference, the illustrative minimum would again be 3,459 valid signatures. That is not fewer than one current recall petition, but it would be one citywide process-reform petition rather than separate petitions for individual officers. Texas Election Code §277.002(e) does not create a fixed 180-day filing deadline; it makes a signature invalid if signed earlier than the 180th day before filing, providing a substantially longer practical collection period than Lewisville’s 45-day recall rule. If a majority then approved a lower recall threshold, later officer-specific recall petitions could proceed under the amended Charter. Organizers may believe a process-reform proposal could attract broader support than an officer-specific recall, but that support is not established until voters sign and vote. This is a two-stage strategy—not an automatic recall and not necessarily faster. The Texas Constitution also bars a charter-amendment election sooner than the 731st day after the preceding charter election. Because Lewisville’s latest charter election was May 3, 2025, another charter-amendment election cannot occur until after May 3, 2027 and must be held on a lawful election date. Proposed language, the official signature denominator, petition format and election timing should be confirmed with the City Secretary and qualified Texas election counsel before circulation.
The same qualified voter may sign multiple officer-specific petitions, signing each separate petition by hand. Logically, a coordinated effort concerning multiple offices could circulate the Mayor, Place 3 and Place 6 petitions together and ask each participating voter to sign all three separately. The King Arthur petition gathered more than 400 handwritten signatures in roughly 48 hours through word of mouth. Reaching approximately 5,000 signatures per recall petition would require substantially more effort and citywide organization, but that early response suggests the target is likely achievable if the effort is organized appropriately.
Project and City staff
City Manager
Answers
Detailed answers covering design, process, costs, recall, disannexation and next steps.
Straight answers
Two project-specific City actions currently documented here are Castle Hills Trails Corridor I and the Lake Avalon Boardwalk and Bridge Replacement. Lewisville authorized a $59,500 schematic-design effort for a proposed 12-foot trail from Windhaven Parkway east to the utility easement and north toward the sports fields, with possible wayfinding, trailheads, furniture and shade—not a construction award. The action authorized schematic design, not construction, and the scope says the alignment and amenities remain subject to site analysis, easements, stakeholder review and public input.
For Lake Avalon Park in Castle Hills, City solicitation 26-55-C sought competitive bids to remove the existing boardwalk and bridge and construct replacements, including abutments and landscaping. The solicitation was posted in February 2026 with bids due March 5; the linked construction plans identify City project LEW24009. This is a procurement/construction record, not evidence that the King Arthur design will be extended there.
In an Aug. 19 Facebook post, Council Member Place 6 said the meetings concern a $4.9 million component approved by voters in the 2024 bond package—not the broader Castle Hills corridor vision estimated at $15–$23 million. He connected the broader vision to Lewisville’s Healthy Infrastructure initiative and 2025 Vision process, said a citizen bond committee proposed the voter-approved projects, and said plans outside the funded component have not yet been developed. That paragraph records the Council Member’s public explanation; official project records control the authorized scope.
The broader official planning record adds important context. Lewisville adopted its Healthy Infrastructure Plan on Feb. 20, 2023 as a 10–20-year guide for parks, recreation, trails, open space and tree canopy; its implementation program includes Strategy 1.2.4, an active-transportation integration study. The City’s trail-plans page says the objective of a Castle Hills corridor is to connect with robust trail systems in Carrollton, Plano and The Colony.
Regional records reinforce that long-range connectivity objective, but not a particular construction design. NCTCOG says locally adopted bicycle and trail plans informed Mobility 2050 to promote regional continuity. Its current interactive network map distinguishes existing, funded and planned facilities; the planned layer depicts a local off-street shared-use-path alignment along King Arthur Boulevard as Planned, not Funded. That classification does not establish final engineering, a construction timetable, committed funding, or approval of the concrete barriers and bump-outs currently installed.
Mobility 2050 is NCTCOG’s current regional Metropolitan Transportation Plan, adopted June 12, 2025. Mobility 2035, adopted in 2011, is now a superseded historical plan and is linked only for context. NCTCOG’s Mobility 2035 is separate from Lewisville’s current 2035 city-vision process.
In our view, the Lewisville 2035 planning frame is also relevant because it repeatedly prioritizes mobility, safer and more walkable connections, and stronger neighborhood public spaces. That matters here because King Arthur discussions already raise connectivity, amenities and safety questions. We treat all of these long-range plans as planning context—not proof of a committed King Arthur design beyond the specifically authorized Corridor I schematic work.
Below are the parts of the framework to monitor over time in relation to Castle Hills:
Yes. This effort is led by residents who affiliate with both major political parties, along with many independents. The MKAGA logo draws inspiration from presidential campaign themes associated with both a previous Democratic president and the current president.
The official deck cited a history of speeding concerns and stop-sign running, a 25 mph limit, an 85th-percentile speed of 32 mph, and roughly 4,000 vehicles per day. It also says the majority of people are driving over 25 mph. It did not identify the original complainants, state how many complaints were received, or document a signed petition for the installed design.
The official presentation stated there were no reported speed-related crashes on the corridor from 2020 through 2024.
We found a November 2024 input meeting, but not a binding resident referendum or a published vote on the final design. The construction award later appeared on the City Council consent agenda.
Yes. At least 40 unique residents are documented as supporting the installed design. In a July 10 Facebook poll, 38 people selected “Nailed it! Love the bike lane, narrower lanes and additional signs.” J.D. and K.G. made separate comments explicitly supporting the installed work and do not appear among those 38 voters. P.K., who is included among the 38 poll voters, separately stated that he voted for and supports the project. This records self-selected Facebook participation, not a representative neighborhood survey. The Mayor and City Council, acting as a body, authorized the engineering and construction actions. The recorded Council actions were approved 6–0 in June 2025 and 5–0 in April 2026, unanimously among members present. Those votes document official approval of the project actions; they do not prove that every current member personally endorses every as-built detail.
Official records show a $675,000 FY2023-24 budget. Some planning estimates exceed $900,000; the $938,020 figure is an arithmetic pre-bid comparison combining the $850,000 construction estimate with $88,020 in authorized engineering—not a current contract amount or final paid cost. Known design and construction authorizations total $529,967.17, while final paid cost is not established.
Lewisville used competitive sealed solicitation 26-33-C. Two bids were opened January 21, 2026: Quick Set Construction at $420,902.07 and Gibson & Associates at $535,685.13. Staff recommended Quick Set as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder; Council authorized $441,947.17 including contingency.
Residents can request a new engineering review and ask a councilmember to place modification or removal on a future agenda. That is different from automatically forcing a repeat of the prior contract vote.
In general, reducing speeds on King Arthur has broad neighborhood support, but the installed method is disputed and whether the measured outcome was achieved remains unclear. Most prefer to work with our elected officials, and a recall should be considered only as a last resort. Current petition participation suggests support to organize such an effort. Charter Article 6 creates an office-specific process. Section 6.02 now requires signatures from qualified City voters equal to at least 5% of the people who were qualified voters on the date of the last regular municipal election. Denton County’s official May 3, 2025 Lewisville results report lists 69,162 registered voters. Five percent is 3,458.1, so the mathematical minimum is 3,459 valid signatures for a petition against one officer. The final number should be confirmed with the City Secretary before circulation, and organizers would need additional signatures as a buffer for any signatures found invalid. A separate petition package should be used for each councilmember or mayor sought to be recalled: Article 6 requires each petition to identify specific grounds and give the individual officer notice. For example, recalling the Place 3 councilmember, Place 6 councilmember and Mayor would require three separate petition packages, each independently reaching at least 3,459 valid signatures under this calculation. The same qualified voter could sign all three officer-specific petitions. Signers must personally sign and provide their residence and signing date. The Charter also specifies the verification affidavit, 45-day signature window, filing and presentation process, possible public hearing, election procedure and restrictions. Under the current three-year cycle, the next regular election is May 1, 2027 for Mayor, May 6, 2028 for Place 6 and May 5, 2029 for Place 3.
Potentially, but not through a simple neighborhood vote. Lewisville is a home-rule city. Under Lewisville Charter §1.04, removing inhabited territory requires a petition signed by a majority of qualified voters living in the proposed area, an accurate metes-and-bounds description and a plat. Even then, City Council may—but is not compelled to—disannex by ordinance if it finds the territory unsuitable or unnecessary for City purposes. A separate Texas Local Government Code §43.141 route exists only when a majority of property owners can prove a qualifying failure to provide services required by the applicable annexation service plan or agreement; if the City refuses a valid petition for 60 days, signers may seek relief in district court. The 50-voter petition-and-election process in §43.143 applies to general-law municipalities, not Lewisville. Any viable proposal must also resolve boundaries, police/fire and utility service, infrastructure, debt, taxes and any applicable refund. This is a difficult municipal-law process, not a simple petition campaign.
It is a traffic-calming and street-safety project with a pedestrian-accessibility component. The City scope includes crosswalks and ADA-compliant curb ramps. A June 2025 memo described 24 new or reconfigured ramps, while the later bid schedule lists 23 curb-ramp units; because the records do not reconcile those figures, neither is a definitive installed count. The 100% plans also mark at least five accessible on-street bays: three along the residential portion of King Arthur and two by Castle Hills Village Shops. They are public street spaces, not spaces assigned to the adjoining houses. Their locations are not visually random: the marked bays appear beside proposed curb ramps, pedestrian refuges, or sidewalk connections, where an accessible route can be provided. But the reviewed City record does not explain the selection rationale for each location, why particular homes front them, or why the plan appears to show five when its cover states 158 added spaces and federal Table R211 would ordinarily call for six among 151–200 marked spaces. Federal PROWAG R211 requires accessible spaces when on-street parking is marked, but includes an exception for parking designated exclusively as residential parking. The plans do not label these spaces resident-only, so a residential street by itself does not resolve whether that exception applies. Lewisville's ADA Transition Plan remains a separate citywide program.
Yes. Culver City voted in February 2024 to remove substantial portions of its Move Culver City lane-reallocation project. That official Council record supports the point that an installed street design can be revised after operational review, public pressure, and political reconsideration. The City of Vista (California) also removed similar concrete barrier treatments after resident safety and visibility concerns were raised, which is a direct comparator for how safety-driven revisions can happen after installation.
Use the City of Lewisville’s Stay Connected page for newsletters and official update channels, check upcoming City Council meetings and agendas, and follow the Castle Hills Community Facebook group for neighborhood discussion and shared updates.
There are several practical ways to help:
Research library
The complete source library remains grouped by topic and available on demand.
Sources, records and action links
Every source and destination linked throughout the page is collected here by topic. Key official documents are also preserved as local read-only copies.
City Quotes
Straight from our City Officials
Public statements and meeting remarks are organized by official. Each quotation includes source context; meeting clips are excerpts from the official Aug. 19 recording.
Mayor
3 statementsBefore live testimony began, Mayor TJ Gilmore summarized the emails, letters and blue cards residents submitted offline, stated that every Council member had received the written comments, and entered each submission’s broad position into the meeting record. The clip runs from his explanation of that process through the transition to the first live speaker.
Open the official meeting record ↗Mayor TJ Gilmore rejected social-media claims that staff used the meeting presentation to impede communication. He said staff needed to present the information and background so Council could make an informed decision. The clip is excerpted from the official meeting recording.
Open the official meeting record ↗In his closing remarks, Mayor TJ Gilmore agreed that the project should change but declined to support restoring King Arthur to its pre-project configuration. He supported Option 3, further resident feedback and a search for a middle-ground design. The clip contains his complete closing remarks before Council moved to the next agenda item.
Open the official meeting record ↗Councilmember Place 1
1 statementCouncilmember Brent Kuykendall supported staff’s proposed bump-out modifications and rumble strips while also speaking in support of providing a bicycle lane. The clip is excerpted from the official meeting recording.
Open the official meeting record ↗Councilmember Place 2
1 statementCouncilmember William J. Meridith supported Option 3, including rumble strips, removal of the bike-lane barriers and proposed changes to the bump-outs. The clip is excerpted from the official meeting recording.
Open the official meeting record ↗Councilmember Place 3
1 statementMayor Pro Tem Ronni Cade criticized what she described as laughter following discussion of a cyclist being hit. During the resulting exchange, the official video shows residents leaving the chamber; Cade acknowledged that people were clearing out. The clip is excerpted from the official meeting recording and preserves the exchange in context. Multiple residents have reviewed the recording and have been unable to confirm what councilmember place 3 was referring to in her accusation
Open the official meeting record ↗Councilmember Place 4
1 statementDeputy Mayor Pro Tem Lonnie Tipton described three deliberate drives in different vehicles. He said he almost hit a bump-out in his SUV and later struck something in his pickup after becoming distracted. He did not identify what the pickup struck, so this entry does not characterize it as a barrier impact. The clip is excerpted from the official meeting recording.
Open the official meeting record ↗Councilmember Place 5
1 statementCouncilmember Kristin Green said the roadway’s width and straight alignment communicate speed to drivers, while noting that participants shared safety as their priority. The clip is excerpted from the official meeting recording.
Open the official meeting record ↗Councilmember Place 6
16 statementsThis is the earliest project-related statement located in the captured Facebook record. Council Member Place 6 described resident complaints, increased enforcement, a City review, and possible structural traffic-calming measures.
Find the Dec. 2022 Facebook post ↗Council Member Place 6 announced the November 2024 public meeting and characterized King Arthur traffic concerns as decades old. The entry uses the meeting date because the Facebook capture did not expose a reliable post date.
Find the 2024 public-meeting post ↗Council Member Place 6 previewed the consent-agenda construction award and described the project as responding to long-running speeding and multimodal-safety concerns. The official award occurred April 6, 2026.
Find the construction-award Facebook post ↗In this pre-construction post, Council Member Place 6 summarized the physical design and said the City had worked with HOAs, schools, and residents. The available capture did not expose an unambiguous calendar date, so the entry does not invent one.
Find the pre-construction Facebook post ↗Council Member Place 6 argued that enforcement alone was not producing the desired behavior and presented the King Arthur project as a complementary tool. The post described the data as covering the prior 75 days, placing it in mid-May; the capture did not expose an exact date.
Find the enforcement-data Facebook post ↗Council Member Place 6 listed seven asserted communication channels, rejected the claim that there had been no notice, and said the City could consider tweaks while preserving the project. This is retained as his public account; it is not treated as independent proof that every resident received notice.
Find the June 24 Facebook post ↗This separate late-June post followed Council Member Place 6's own drive through the work. He again defended prior outreach while asking residents to suggest additional communication methods. The capture did not expose an exact date, so it is not assigned one.
Find the late-June communication post ↗This is the statement the prior page omitted. Council Member Place 6 expressly said he voted for and supported the King Arthur project, defended the communication record and design changes, and said openness to adjustments should not be read as opposition.
Find the July 1 Facebook statement ↗Council Member Place 6 posted this reply in the public thread where residents were collecting King Arthur incident information. It is included because it addressed how project concerns should be documented.
Open the July 23 public comment ↗Council Member Place 6 posted this after residents asked whether King Arthur traffic calming would continue to Josey Lane. In a later comment he distinguished the regional trails vision from the traffic-calming project.
Open the Aug. 2 public comment ↗Council Member Place 6 said the NCTCOG map was an aspirational regional network, not a City construction page, and urged residents to subscribe to City newsletters and participate when a local design is presented.
Open the Aug. 2 trails comment ↗This was Council Member Place 6's reply to criticism of the public-engagement process. It presents his position that residents had meaningful opportunities to participate before construction.
Open the public-input reply ↗Council Member Place 6 characterized the ADA work as a second project coordinated with traffic calming and encouraged residents to review Council agendas. The City's own June 2025 memo and later bid documents should be used to test that characterization and the unreconciled ramp counts.
Open the budget and ADA reply ↗Council Member Place 6 said the upcoming meetings concern the $4.9 million voter-approved component, while the $15–$23 million estimate belongs to the broader Castle Hills corridor vision. He connected that broader vision to the Healthy Infrastructure initiative and Lewisville 2025 Vision process, described the bond proposal as citizen-developed and voter-approved, and said details outside the funded component have not yet been developed. These are the Council Member’s public explanations; the linked official project records remain the controlling sources for scope and authorization.
Open the Aug. 19 Castle Hills Trails post ↗In his latest post-meeting recap, Council Member Place 6 identified his 26 years in Castle Hills and citywide Place 6 role, supported removing the concrete bike-lane separators in favor of rumble strips, pulling back the Lady of the Lake bump-out, improving striping, and exploring landscaping. He said he remained supportive of the project’s safety goals and that staff would return with a plan and budget for discussion at an open meeting.
Open the Aug. 19 post-meeting recap ↗Councilmember Place 6 said he did not support commissioning another safety study and instead supported staff’s Option 3, including replacing the concrete bike-lane separators with rumble strips and pulling back the Lady of the Lake bump-out. The clip is excerpted from the official meeting recording.
Open the official meeting record ↗