King Arthur Boulevard traffic-calming project

“A few months ago I was contacted by residents with concerns over people disregarding stop signs and speeding on King Arthur Blvd. I asked the city for an enhanced police presence and they responded immediately. They have also been providing me with a monthly review so I can monitor its progress. … The City is also conducting a review of King Arthur as a whole with the intent to find ways to slow traffic and ensure drivers obey the stop signs. Traffic calming measures take many forms; however, it's only fair to note that any structural change will be an expensive and difficult undertaking. I will work with residents to find the proper funding should the need present itself.”

This is the earliest project-related statement located in the captured Facebook record. Kelly described resident complaints, increased enforcement, a City review, and possible structural traffic-calming measures.

“We have been in Castle Hills for 25 years. And for 25 years there have been concerns about the traffic on King Arthur. The long timers here may even recall the nickname ‘Cooper's Speedway’ … City staff has been looking at options and are ready to present traffic calming ideas to the neighborhood. To that end, there will be a community meeting on Thursday, Nov 7th 6:30PM–8:00PM at LISD TECC East … to talk about traffic calming options on King Arthur.”

Kelly 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.

“For as long as we’ve been residents of Castle Hills, there’s been concern over speeding and safe, multi-model [sic] transit along King Arthur. … The City has an excellent plan to address some of these issues. … Part of Monday’s consent agenda is the approval of a bid award to start the traffic calming project. The construction period is just over 3 months.”

Kelly 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.

“Traffic calming work on King Arthur begins this summer, funded through a bond package approved before annexation. The project includes slimmer roads, raised crosswalks, bump-outs, and buffered bike lanes. The City has worked with HOAs, nearby schools, and residents to shape the design.”

In this pre-construction post, Kelly 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.

“This graphic shows there have been 317 traffic stops since March 1st in the beats that comprise CH … That's about 4 stops per day. … I’d assert the problem is not a lack of enforcement, but instead enforcement does not have the efficacy we would like it to have. If the ends are better drivers, and if punitive efforts such as tickets do not produce the results we would like, we need [to] think about other behavior modification tools such as the traffic calming project on King Arthur. … Combined tools such as enforcement and traffic calming together will help.”

Kelly 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.

“I’ve seen several posts/comments surrounding the traffic calming project on King Arthur … ‘nobody told us about this’. I … checked on communication efforts. … 1. Direct communication to all HOAs and Property Manager (over a year ago) and schools and LISD. … 2. HOA meetings … 3. Social media … 4. Newsletter … 5. Direct mail … 6. Public meeting with signs on King Arthur … 7. Email … We received emails in response to these efforts and dozens of people attended the public meeting. … Having this context, I’d ask that in fairness, the people posting ‘no one told us’ go back and edit or remove that statement. … Now—we’ve gotten past the shouting—it’s a good time to see if there are tweaks or solutions to some of the concerns while maintaining the integrity of the project.”

Kelly 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.

“OK—I’ve been out of town for the past week and wanted to see the progress on King Arthur personally before I poke my head up. … I can’t always give the answer you want, but I’m here for both of those conversations. … What I’m actually most concerned about [is] the theme of ‘nobody told us’. … Here are some of the ways both the city in general and me specifically attempted to convey this change was coming … 1. City posting to web site 2. Agenda items in open meetings 3. Feedback meeting at Independence 4. Various bond meetings … 5. Posts to this FB group 6. Posts to my personal councilman page 7. Article in Castle Hills magazine. … What other methods could be employed to keep residents informed of proposals and projects that could affect the fabric of communities in our city?”

This separate late-June post followed Kelly'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.

“People deserve to know where their elected officials sit. I voted for the KA project. I support the KA project. … I absolutely recognize and am disappointed when government doesn't communicate well. That said, I get frustrated with the sentiment of ‘no one told us’ when I repeatedly posted on social media, HOA presentations were given, postcards mailed, signs posted, and newsletters provided. … I continue to assert that conceptual designs are just that—conceptual. I agree that concrete was not on the concepts—nor were other items. Sometimes things present as a project unfolds and adjustments are needed. … I worked with the HOA to delay issuing violations for parking over sidewalks/blocked sidewalks until the project completed. I've walked the project with staff, addressed several resident concerns, and I drive it almost daily. … The first step is always to check with residents directly impacted. … This project has been several years in the making—not knowing anything about it until the project was underway says as much about the reader as the author. It's not a ‘nobody told me’ rather ‘I wasn't interested or looking for information until it impacted me.’ … Lastly—I was trying to show empathy to those with concerns by stating I was open to listening to their concerns and solutioning together. That should not have been confused with my lack of support for the project.”

This is the statement the prior page omitted. Kelly 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.

“Thank you for a dispassionate and data driven ask regarding a pretty emotional topic. It’s very, very much appreciated.”

Kelly 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.

“This update of extending the project to Josey is 100% false. I’m going to assume the best in people and think this is just a misunderstanding. To that end, I’m going to request you provide the documents that, somehow, I haven’t seen or remove this inaccurate update.”

Kelly 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.

“This is not traffic calming—it’s connecting trails from across all of DFW. The trails project design for the part our city plays has not been completed—last I looked it was about 30%. … This trails connectivity vision dates back as least a decade—at least 8 years prior to the first communications about the traffic calming project.”

Kelly 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.

“It was an input meeting—not a ‘this is the way it is’ meeting. For those that attended, there was ample discussion and attentive listening by staff. … But the facts are there was lots of opportunity along the way. … To what advantage was it to wait until taxpayer resources were spent and then show up for a conversation?”

This was Kelly's reply to criticism of the public-engagement process. It presents his position that residents had meaningful opportunities to participate before construction.

“Good news is the project was largely on budget—especially for a 6 figure 2+ year project. There’s a lot of confusion and misinformation about ‘over budget’ as there was a second project added for ADA ramp compliance. It made fiscal sense to do both at the same time. I’ve strongly advocated reviewing the council agenda.”

Kelly 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.