[0:48] Diana, you good?

[0:52] » Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

[0:54] Thank you'all for coming out tonight.

[0:55] [snorts] It is Tuesday, August 18th,

[0:58] 2026, 5:32 p.m. We're a little late.

[1:03] Diana, would you please call roll?

[1:06] » Mayor BS

[1:07] » Present.

[1:10] Mayor Promosian here.

[1:14] Council member Houston

[1:15] » Here.

[1:17] Council member Crowe

[1:19] » Here.

[1:20] » Council member Parks

[1:21] » Here.

[1:23] » And council member Tihawa reported

[1:24] absent. You have a quorum.

[1:27] » Thank you. We've got staff members here.

[1:29] We've got citizens from the neighborhood

[1:31] here, which we appreciate, and some

[1:34] consultants here. We'll work our way

[1:36] through this meeting.

[1:37] That being said, we'll start with the

[1:39] pledge of allegiance.

[1:41] Talen, would you lead us

[1:45] to the flag of the United States of

[1:47] America and to the republic for which it

[1:50] stands, one nation under God,

[1:54] indivisible, with liberty and justice

[1:57] for all.

[1:58] » Thank you, ma'am.

[2:02] » All right. Presentation of citizens.

[2:05] This is a time for anyone that would

[2:07] like to speak regarding anything going

[2:09] on in and around the city of Dripping

[2:11] Springs or in the whole USA to speak. If

[2:14] an item is listed with a public hearing,

[2:18] it may be better to speak at that time

[2:20] just so we have any pertinent paperwork

[2:23] in front of us. Would anyone care to

[2:25] speak?

[2:28] Seeing and hearing no one, we'll close

[2:29] presentation of citizens and we'll move

[2:32] on to proclamations and presentations.

[2:35] This is going to be a presentation of

[2:37] the Beast Star Awards. Normally, these

[2:40] are real quick presentations, but we've

[2:42] got a lot of people that have worked

[2:44] hard to be part of this, so it may take

[2:46] us a minute, but it's well worth it.

[2:48] Michelle, you going to start us off?

[2:50] » Almost everybody we asked for their

[2:52] consent to nominate them agreed. So, we

[2:55] have a lot more than usual. These rep

[2:57] awards represent um nominees from the

[3:00] city for the last two years, actually.

[3:03] And we have Annie Spade with us here

[3:05] from Dark Sky, Texas, who is going to

[3:07] first tell us a little bit about the

[3:10] awards and then uh I'll help her by

[3:13] going through the winners.

[3:15] » So go ahead.

[3:16] » Thank you, Michelle. I'm just so excited

[3:18] to be here as a as a citizen and also as

[3:21] a master naturalist to recognize each of

[3:24] you. Um 18 is really exciting. I I

[3:30] enjoyed the night skies this past week.

[3:32] Orion is is seen in our pre-dawn sky

[3:35] right now. I saw a persade meteor last

[3:38] night when I stepped out at 10:00. So,

[3:40] you're really contributing to the health

[3:42] and well-being and joy of the entire

[3:45] community as well as the animals and

[3:47] plants. And each of you has attended to

[3:50] the usefulness

[3:52] um whether it's directed your lighting

[3:55] um whether it's the level that just

[3:58] needs to be whether it's uh just um on

[4:02] and off when you need it to be and also

[4:06] the even the the color spectrum which

[4:09] would be more on the warm side versus

[4:12] the cool side of blue. So, uh, on behalf

[4:15] of the entire community and I'm outside

[4:18] of the ETJ and everything, but just

[4:21] really so appreciate each of you, each

[4:24] of the 18 who are here and not here for

[4:27] all that you've done to protect our

[4:29] health and well-being.

[4:31] And I'll let Michelle Fisher present the

[4:34] awards.

[4:35] » Did you want to take the photos over

[4:37] there?

[4:39] So, just a little bit of logistics for

[4:41] you all because we want everyone to have

[4:42] a photo, but there's really more people

[4:44] than we can get in one photo. Um, Lisa

[4:47] is going to take photos as we go through

[4:49] each recipient. Uh, and Mayor Bols

[4:53] agreed to do that with y'all.

[5:08] And each recipient's going to get either

[5:11] the large or small size sign. Let us

[5:13] know. Let Diana know which one you want.

[5:15] If we run out of the size that you want,

[5:17] we will order it for you and get it

[5:19] delivered to you. And then everyone also

[5:21] gets a window clean, which is over there

[5:23] as well.

[5:26] Okay.

[5:27] So, first we'd like to recognize

[5:29] Wildwood Elementary School. Uh Holly and

[5:32] Scott, if you can get up and you can be

[5:33] the first to get a photo.

[5:36] This is a Dripping Springs Independent

[5:38] School District Superintendent and um

[5:41] Chief Operations Officer Scott Barry.

[5:44] And it's really exciting that the school

[5:46] district um has brought, you know, this

[5:50] school was built to comply with the

[5:51] lighting warrants. They also over the

[5:53] years over the years have brought most

[5:56] of their other properties into

[5:58] compliance with our lighting ordinance

[5:59] which is really amazing including some

[6:01] that are not in the city limits that

[6:03] weren't required to to comply at all.

[6:06] [applause]

[6:11] » Thank you. You'll see as we go through

[6:13] some of these schools participants in

[6:17] this across Texas but I know we're one

[6:19] of the first districts. Yes, definitely.

[6:22] And I have to say I think they're a

[6:23] model because I cannot tell you how many

[6:26] conferences I've gone to or meetings on

[6:28] lighting where other cities have said

[6:32] how did you get your school district to

[6:33] comply. They, you know, they've been

[6:35] fighting with us about it or whatever.

[6:36] I'm like, tell them in Dripping Springs.

[6:39] They do it and people love it. So, I

[6:41] know they've looked looked at to y'all

[6:42] as a great example many, many times

[6:44] across the state.

[6:46] Okay. So, the next one is Frostbank. Is

[6:49] Dina Allen here back?

[6:52] You're [clears throat] here for

[6:53] Frostbank. Great. All right. You want to

[6:55] go take a photo? I do want to uh

[6:58] congratulate and thank Frostbank.

[7:00] Originally, when it was being built, it

[7:03] was very hard and difficult to figure

[7:05] out how to get their ATM machine to

[7:07] comply with our ordinance. It's an ATM

[7:09] machine that originally was outlined in

[7:12] very white bright light. So, it didn't

[7:14] comply with our ordinance in a lot of

[7:15] ways. And also it is an unusual one

[7:18] because they are one of the few projects

[7:21] that is lighting their flag poles from

[7:24] the ground up. And usually you don't

[7:26] allow that with a night sky dark sky

[7:29] ordinance, but our ordinance does allow

[7:31] that. It just it has to be light that is

[7:33] very specific on how high up the pole it

[7:36] goes so that it's not creating light

[7:38] pollution. And theirs, as you can see,

[7:40] does that very lovely. So

[7:41] congratulations and thank you.

[7:44] [applause]

[7:49] to the left.

[7:51] » Yep. Both you guys. Everybody.

[7:52] » The next is Heritage Amenity Center.

[7:54] » Do we have anyone here with Heritage?

[7:56] Great. Thanks for coming.

[7:58] » Are you Kyle?

[7:59] » There you go.

[7:59] » Great. Congratulations.

[8:00] » This is Kyle with MI Homes and this is

[8:04] their amenity center in Heritage. I also

[8:06] want to point out that I believe two

[8:08] years ago or more MI Homes has also

[8:10] received this award for some of their

[8:12] model homes in the past. So, you know,

[8:14] obviously their entire subdivision

[8:16] complies with their lighting ordinance,

[8:18] but this is a lovely example of a

[8:20] amenity center and how beautiful it can

[8:22] look at night and comply. Thank you.

[8:24] [applause]

[8:28] The next is the learning experience. Do

[8:31] we have anyone here from the learning

[8:33] experience? Nope. Um, so this is uh

[8:36] Alexander Gordon and Brad Nef's project.

[8:39] And you can see at the top on some of

[8:40] these slides, I've got photos that our

[8:43] building department took of different

[8:44] fixtures so people could see the

[8:46] different types of fixtures that are

[8:47] being used on projects.

[8:50] Founders Animal Hospital. Sure. Anyone

[8:53] is here. I don't think we have something

[8:54] here for that. Uh this one's beautiful,

[8:57] I think, at night when I go by it. And

[8:58] that's what that one looks like right

[9:00] here. And just up the road on Qataro,

[9:04] the prep of headarters. Is there anyone

[9:07] here with that?

[9:10] Um, this is a really big uh school

[9:12] preschool building and it turned out

[9:14] great, I think, in the headarters

[9:16] development. We appreciate their

[9:19] compliance.

[9:22] Joy Belter Apartments, we have anyone

[9:24] here from

[9:27] great

[9:30] and I believe Taylor Wilson uh was

[9:33] involved with several of the projects

[9:35] you're going to see tonight and this is

[9:36] one of them.

[9:38] But this is a retirement apartment

[9:40] community and they've got some really

[9:43] lovely light fixtures that they use

[9:44] throughout. Really pretty landscape

[9:46] lighting, too. [clears throat]

[9:49] Congratulations. [applause]

[9:55] The lookout apartments. Is anyone here

[9:57] with that? I cannot take credit for that

[9:59] amazing photo. They provided that

[10:01] nighttime one at the bottom. But it's

[10:03] quite a sight to see at night to see

[10:06] that. And this is one that's in the extr

[10:08] territorial jurisdiction. So they

[10:11] normally would not have to have to have

[10:14] done what they did and complied with the

[10:15] lighting ordinance, but it's a beautiful

[10:17] project.

[10:19] The local apartments is the next one. Do

[10:21] we have anyone here with the local? All

[10:23] right.

[10:24] [applause]

[10:27] Great.

[10:37] I love going by this one at night, too.

[10:43] » All right. Belter town homes, triplex,

[10:47] building 2, unit 5. Do we have the

[10:50] cartons here? I don't think so. This

[10:53] [clears throat] entire development uh in

[10:55] Belera complied with our lighting

[10:58] ordinance. It's in the extr territorial

[10:59] jurisdiction. Uh, and the the Carsonian

[11:03] were gracious enough to allow us to

[11:05] nominate their specific unit for it. So,

[11:07] I appreciate them letting us do that.

[11:10] The Arrowhead Sea Store, do we have

[11:12] anyone from that here? Nope. All right.

[11:16] Gas stations are a tricky one because

[11:18] they need a lot of light, but they did a

[11:19] great job with their lighting at this

[11:22] place.

[11:25] Oakwood Market. I don't think I see

[11:27] anyone from Oakwood Market in

[11:29] Headarters. That one's another beautiful

[11:30] one. They've got some really pretty

[11:32] lights in the back as well. [snorts]

[11:35] Dre's Model Home in Calera. I believe

[11:38] Ryan Brad Ryan [snorts] is here

[11:41] actually.

[11:43] » Uh oh. Okay. Is that an old name?

[11:46] And this is one of their model homes.

[11:49] They actually have several model homes

[11:51] in Calera that we could have nominated

[11:54] all of [clears throat] them for this

[11:55] award. This is the one that our staff

[11:56] chose that they they really like the way

[11:59] it turned out. So, thank you very much.

[12:02] [applause]

[12:06] So, now we're moving on to remodels or

[12:09] um additions and just bringing other non

[12:12] non-complying light into compliance. So,

[12:14] this is the Taco Bell. That was a

[12:16] remodel of a previous um restaurant and

[12:19] they did a great job with their

[12:20] lighting. Thank you very much, sir.

[12:24] » [applause]

[12:27] » The Valero gas station. Do we have

[12:29] anyone here from that? All right. So,

[12:32] they were doing a remodel and I think

[12:34] they had to put in lights like every

[12:37] light on the building I think is new,

[12:38] but they brought that into compliance

[12:40] and it looks great now. [snorts]

[12:43] Uh, CAK offices. I think I saw Ed pop

[12:46] in. Nope. So this is one where they did

[12:48] an addition to the building and when you

[12:51] do a major addition you have to bring

[12:53] the existing building into compliance.

[12:56] So they brought their old building into

[12:57] compliance and then obviously built the

[12:59] new building as well in compliance and

[13:01] it turned out great.

[13:04] And then we nominated ourselves. I know

[13:07] cheesy [laughter]

[13:10] but we like to lead by example. So uh

[13:13] this was our development services

[13:14] building that PEC was in before. You can

[13:16] see two photos showing what it looked

[13:18] like before and then what it looked like

[13:20] after [laughter]

[13:22] after we we switched out all the

[13:25] lighting. And then the last one is our

[13:28] downtown restrooms on Mercer Street that

[13:30] look really pretty at night. And that's

[13:33] it.

[13:33] » Can we applaud for ourselves? [applause]

[13:40] » So, thank you all very much for what you

[13:42] do to preserve the night sky. We

[13:45] appreciate it.

[13:47] Thank you all for everything you do.

[13:49] » Thank y'all. [clears throat]

[13:59] » All right.

[14:01] Well, Sean, we did that one in 14

[14:03] minutes, so now you're up. [laughter]

[14:09] » I will be as concise as I can.

[14:25] I think we'll be good. Mayor and

[14:27] council, uh, welcome. It is August 18th.

[14:31] This is the ninth and final scheduled

[14:34] workshop we have. Of course, uh, it's up

[14:36] to council's discretion if we'd like to

[14:38] call any more before the end of

[14:39] September, but this is the last one we

[14:41] had in the calendar. So finally,

[14:44] [laughter]

[14:46] so again, as I mentioned, uh, budget

[14:48] workshop number nine. Uh, just again,

[14:51] all of our budgets are posted on the

[14:53] website. And just to provide a little

[14:55] bit more information from what we did

[14:57] last week, uh, we now have updated our

[15:00] uh, proposed budget workshops page. So

[15:02] there are a list of all of our

[15:04] presentations, budgets, backup paperwork

[15:06] that was included in y'all's binders.

[15:09] And then of course we've [clears throat]

[15:09] updated our truth and taxation

[15:11] information with the proposed rates that

[15:13] council approved at the the last

[15:15] meeting. I just wanted to show that to

[15:17] council. We mentioned at the last one,

[15:18] but again uh Glory and Payton and Lisa

[15:22] and Stephanie all at the city got our

[15:24] websites updated for us looking really

[15:26] nice. So good presentations there. So

[15:29] again for tonight we will be discussing

[15:31] uh the TUR uh which is apt. They

[15:35] proposed their budget at their meeting

[15:37] last night. So, it is as fresh off the

[15:39] presses as could possibly be, but we

[15:41] will get to that in [clears throat] just

[15:42] a moment.

[15:44] I wanted to first go to the amendments

[15:46] that you'll notice uh in your packet. Uh

[15:49] if we start with the general fund uh

[15:53] based on the proposed tax rate that

[15:55] council adopted, we updated that figure

[15:58] for uh revenues coming in in FY27. That

[16:02] is the only thing that drove that number

[16:03] up. Uh so just wanted to show it in

[16:06] there because that is what council

[16:07] proposed. Again, if we propose a

[16:09] different rate, that number will change

[16:10] as well, but just wanted to to show that

[16:12] we did make that adjustment in the

[16:14] budget.

[16:16] Uh looking at the DSRP, uh these are all

[16:18] changes to the FY26 projections. Uh so

[16:22] we had uh programming revenue come in

[16:24] higher, but you'll see we also had

[16:25] programming expenditures come in higher.

[16:27] That's based on that that higher

[16:28] expenditure there. Office supplies uh

[16:31] came in a little bit higher. So to dues

[16:33] and fees, uh equipment maintenance,

[16:36] these were all line items about three or

[16:38] four months ago looking at we didn't

[16:40] know that we would need the full amount.

[16:41] So we were projecting that we wouldn't.

[16:44] And so now looking into it, we've had

[16:45] some things pop up. We're putting some

[16:47] of that money back. So that's why you

[16:48] see those changes there. Still gives a

[16:50] strong balance forward to FY27. Still

[16:53] not negatively impacting the FY27's uh

[16:55] balance forward to FY28. But just wanted

[16:58] to make council aware of those

[16:59] projections.

[17:02] Again, uh Texas uh gas franchise fee is

[17:04] one of the questions that was asked uh

[17:06] at the meeting. Uh we had it at 334.90.

[17:09] We've reduced that to 10. Turns out it

[17:11] wasn't Texas gas that was with a big

[17:13] payment in there. It was Texas disposal

[17:15] systems. All I saw was Texas. That's

[17:17] been moved to the correct line item. Uh

[17:19] which is why you see that reduction

[17:20] there. Not a loss of money uh in the

[17:22] fund. It's just changing that line item

[17:25] that it went to.

[17:27] And we'll go uh in the council

[17:30] questions. One of the questions was how

[17:32] much do we think the new gas company's

[17:33] providing? We've got information on that

[17:35] as well uh in the follow-up questions.

[17:38] Uh looking at the uh that's not the DSRP

[17:41] fund, that is the uh TUR fund. Uh uh

[17:44] this is actually all of our alternate

[17:46] funds. Uh so there you see the TUR

[17:49] reviewed their budget uh at the meeting

[17:51] yesterday. They made some changes from

[17:53] what was originally in the packet. I put

[17:55] it in here just because it was amendment

[17:57] from the last version of the budget you

[17:59] had, but we'll talk about that more when

[18:01] we talk about the TUR's budget, but just

[18:03] wanted to bring council aware of it.

[18:08] Now, moving on to council questions.

[18:12] Uh, first question we got was when will

[18:15] the debt issued in 2019 uh for the water

[18:18] development board pay be paid off? Uh,

[18:20] we have that being the final payment

[18:22] being made in June of 2040. Of course,

[18:24] it is callable in 2029. At that point,

[18:28] if we had the revenues and wanted to

[18:29] fully pay it off, we could. Or if we

[18:31] wanted to look at refinancing through

[18:32] arbitrage and and that type of thing, we

[18:34] could do that as well. But so 2029 is

[18:36] the first date we might take action on

[18:38] that. Very similar to what we did uh for

[18:41] the 20 2005 issuance that was our 2015

[18:44] that we recently paid off.

[18:47] Uh there was some uh other questions

[18:49] asked on the issuance uh for the 2026

[18:52] debt that the water development board

[18:54] just approved. So and earlier in August

[18:57] the water development board approved our

[18:59] our loan grant application for a little

[19:01] over 53 million I believe for the

[19:05] project. We will close on that loan in

[19:08] January. And so we're doing all the

[19:10] paperwork now. In your packet though is

[19:13] the draft

[19:15] uh payoff schedule. And so uh Chris

[19:19] Lane, our financial adviser, was able to

[19:20] provide that. It of course may change

[19:22] depending on some of those numbers uh

[19:24] for closeout costs and things like that

[19:26] if they change, but we're roughly

[19:27] spending about uh $3 million50 uh every

[19:31] year on that debt payment

[19:34] starting in 27. Sorry. Uh

[19:39] next question was is there any estimate

[19:40] of what the impact uh for natural gas uh

[19:43] with the additional firm coming in? Uh

[19:46] we're showing that they are contributing

[19:48] around 3 to 4,000 uh so far and so

[19:53] that's an additional 3 to 4,000 on top

[19:55] of the Texas gas franchise fee. So

[19:57] Universal Gas is also contributing. So

[19:59] we've got that projection bumped up from

[20:02] 6 to 10.

[20:06] And then there was some information at

[20:08] some additional information requested on

[20:10] the utilities department vehicle

[20:12] request. Uh essentially it boils down to

[20:16] we have a number of pieces of heavy

[20:17] equipment. A lot of which will be used

[20:20] on the same job. You could use the back

[20:22] truck and the mid skinny the skid steer

[20:25] or the mini excavator. All of those need

[20:28] a heavy duty truck to pull. Yes, we do

[20:30] have the crane truck, but looking at

[20:32] CDLs, once you add the trailer and any

[20:35] piece of equipment, you push it into

[20:36] that CDL uh capacity where you need a

[20:39] special license to drive it. So, also

[20:42] the crane truck is not a truck we want

[20:44] going out to all of our

[20:46] anytime we've got to do maintenance or a

[20:48] work order out there. It's not our

[20:50] everyday driver. Uh but the proposed

[20:52] vehicle is being proposed at FY27.

[20:56] Currently, we have two vacant positions

[20:58] uh in the utilities department, and

[21:00] we're able to make it work with the

[21:01] trucks we have because they can can

[21:03] double up. And right now, they're

[21:04] they're able to double up, and even if

[21:06] we added those two, uh one or two of

[21:08] them could still double up as well. It's

[21:10] just we anticipate the growth with the

[21:13] other package plants coming on with the

[21:15] new plant being built and designed that

[21:17] ultimately we're going to need that

[21:18] additional vehicle. And so what they're

[21:20] proposing in 27 is that additional

[21:22] vehicle of a 3/4 ton uh pick diesel

[21:25] pickup truck. Uh right now the 3/4 ton

[21:27] we have uh is a gas truck. And so also

[21:30] not looking to put too much strain on it

[21:33] with it always hauling the heavy

[21:34] equipment, but we can duplicate those

[21:36] efforts. So again, it's a supplemental

[21:38] request. It's not necessarily needed

[21:41] October 1st, but it is anticipated to be

[21:43] needed within FY27. Uh hence the ask.

[21:46] It's also one just wanted to make

[21:48] council aware of it in the future when

[21:50] we ask if we need to ask again.

[21:51] » Let me back up because and I may have

[21:54] very easily misunderstood you. I

[21:55] understand on CDL and combined way we

[21:58] got to have a CDL. If we don't buy this

[22:01] truck and we do have the equipment, how

[22:03] are we going to move it without a CDL

[22:06] driver?

[22:07] » We'll drop the truck, go get the next

[22:09] piece of equipment, pick it up on a new

[22:10] trailer. I would imagine you'd be making

[22:12] multiple trips with the same truck so

[22:14] that you're not violating that CDL. kind

[22:16] of backed into needing to buy this truck

[22:17] fairly quickly.

[22:20] » Excuse me.

[22:20] » Sorry. Sorry. Uh yeah. Um

[22:24] not a necessity like I say October one,

[22:27] but there is the foresight that it will

[22:29] be needed sooner rather than later.

[22:31] Hence being added in the budget now.

[22:34] » And I'm sorry, Greg, go ahead.

[22:35] » I was just wanting him to finish. Uh so

[22:37] we do have the current gas 34 ton will

[22:45] put

[22:47] that

[22:50] » But part of uh the reason the new truck

[22:52] is diesel is again to help with the

[22:55] pulling of that heavy equipment. It a

[22:56] little more strain on the gas engine

[22:58] than diesel.

[23:01] » I'm not a mechanic. I wouldn't.

[23:02] [laughter]

[23:03] » Thank you. Thanks Greg.

[23:07] Oh, the uh fifth question we has uh how

[23:12] might the tax rate be utilized? I have

[23:17] » So again, council, if you remember, we

[23:18] uh adopted the proposed tax rate of 27

[23:22] uh 272.

[23:23] » I'm going to interrupt you one last

[23:24] time. Lisa, if y'all would like to do

[23:27] another picture, please. I'm going to

[23:29] interrupt this just for that. People

[23:31] that have worked hard in the community,

[23:32] I want to recognize them. He wants to.

[23:36] » Okay. Michelle, will you help us?

[23:38] » That means you got to get the picture.

[23:40] » That means you got to get the picture.

[23:41] » I I know. [laughter]

[23:43] » I'm fine with that.

[23:46] » Hi.

[23:47] » The building that did the major

[23:52] » Major brought the rest of their

[23:53] building.

[24:00] » We started early.

[24:02] » Oh, really? We started on time, but

[24:05] I thought I was here early

[24:09] picture. Thank you.

[24:18] [applause]

[24:29] » Sorry, Sean.

[24:29] » Not a problem. finance director's happy

[24:31] to see the the logo going to good use on

[24:33] the wall. [laughter]

[24:36] I knew we'd use it and I'm glad we had

[24:39] [snorts] so council. One of the last

[24:40] questions we received uh last week was

[24:42] how might we utilize any additional

[24:44] revenue gained uh through the proposed

[24:47] tax rate. This is the slide from last

[24:49] year and we've updated a little bit. uh

[24:51] the proposed rate would bring in about

[24:54] uh a million50 in additional revenue

[24:57] based on what we had proposed it with

[24:59] our our old rate.

[25:02] Looking at uh the supplemental requests

[25:04] uh there's a copy of this in your packet

[25:06] as well. Uh there's uh park supplemental

[25:09] requests are totaling a little over 1.4

[25:12] million. Uh I will point out that some

[25:14] of those uh can be done with the

[25:16] parkland development and dedication. Uh

[25:19] that is what we're including for the

[25:20] parks board to determine and and

[25:22] prioritize that uh for their projects.

[25:25] Uh but there is 1.4 in supplemental asks

[25:27] from the parks department. Not a

[25:29] problem. Uh maintenance has an

[25:31] additional ask of 565 uh emergency

[25:34] management 217 legal 50 and Stevenson uh

[25:39] 150. Uh some other things we might

[25:41] consider if we were to raise that full

[25:43] tax amount is plugging in some of the

[25:45] money we reduced uh in previous years.

[25:48] So reserve fund we had historically put

[25:50] in uh 300,000 uh or 500,000 depending on

[25:55] the year. We've reduced that the last

[25:56] couple years and so that would be

[25:58] putting in uh that additional money for

[26:01] those years just backfilling what we

[26:03] reduced uh historically. Same for the

[26:05] capital reserve. Uh we we've reduced it

[26:07] over the last two years by 300,000. You

[26:10] could plug that back into the capital

[26:11] reserve and reserve fund balance. Uh

[26:14] both of which again strong reserve fund.

[26:16] Now, we always want to keep it healthy

[26:18] and growing. I believe it's got uh the

[26:21] last time I looked, it had, I believe,

[26:24] 40 to 50 days worth of reserve balance

[26:27] in there for the general fund. So, good

[26:28] strong fund balance. Not quite the 90

[26:30] days some cities have, but way more than

[26:32] the 30 days uh the is the minimum

[26:34] recommendation. So, there is the ability

[26:37] to utilize that funding this year and

[26:40] prepare for future years when we may

[26:42] receive uh less income but have more

[26:44] projects coming in.

[26:48] Last question we received is

[26:51] » Can I ask back up for a second? So when

[26:54] you're saying that that additional

[26:57] million could go towards these things,

[27:00] are you saying that we haven't allocated

[27:02] [clears throat] that additional million

[27:04] yet?

[27:05] » We have not allocated that additional

[27:06] million. No, not in the b in the budget

[27:08] you have in front of you in your packet.

[27:10] You'll see that the fund balance went to

[27:11] over a million. It includes uh the

[27:14] additional revenue here but we have not

[27:17] uh assigned any expenditures against

[27:20] that additional million

[27:21] » But that's only if we adopt a

[27:24] » Only if we adopt that rate. Yes ma'am

[27:26] » And that that rate could stay what it is

[27:29] » Full higher rate that recognizes the

[27:32] full amount possible that council could

[27:34] raise the tax on.

[27:38] » Okay. refresh us next

[27:42] meeting what it will be if we stay at

[27:46] where we are right now. If you look,

[27:49] » You can put that. Yeah.

[27:51] » On the first page of uh the amendments

[27:55] uh is the general fund. Uh that line

[27:57] item adorum that 5,134

[28:00] is the revenue raised on our 2026

[28:04] appraised values with our current tax

[28:07] rate. And that at the moment is or that

[28:10] before this budget that you have in

[28:12] front of you now was what the budget was

[28:14] built on and I think had a couple

[28:16] hundred thousand going into FY28

[28:19] after the end of FY27, but it did reduce

[28:22] some of these line items that we talked

[28:23] about.

[28:25] » An important number to look at.

[28:30] » And then some information uh was

[28:32] requested on why the tax rate might have

[28:34] been calculated as high as it was.

[28:36] Again, thank you to Payton uh who worked

[28:38] at the tax office and has a better

[28:39] understanding of all the ins and outs of

[28:41] that

[28:43] 1820 page form with numbers going in and

[28:46] out of it, but essentially our

[28:50] assessed values, our appraised values

[28:52] went up, our adjusted assessed values

[28:55] went down. Uh people were

[29:00] fighting their their raises in their

[29:01] property values and so some of that came

[29:03] down. We issued some debt that we uh put

[29:06] our property tax value towards. So that

[29:09] brought that number down. There was

[29:11] about uh it looks like 275 million in

[29:14] our adjusted value that went down just

[29:17] based on losses in properties uh

[29:21] adjustments and just different things

[29:23] that changed throughout the year.

[29:24] Another thing that we did was increased

[29:26] our TUR footprint. So in

[29:30] late 23 24 our TUR footprint increased

[29:33] and we added additional uh properties

[29:36] into our TUR one. Uh you'll see a map of

[29:40] that when we discuss TUR that also

[29:41] contributed to that loss in assessed

[29:44] value. Again appraised value went up but

[29:46] our adjusted assessed values went down

[29:48] and that's what allowed that tax rate to

[29:50] be uh at the 27 cent rate.

[29:56] Moving on council to uh TUR funds. As I

[30:00] mentioned, this is uh the map area of

[30:03] our uh TUR properties. Uh

[30:07] TUR two there is in green. No, actually

[30:11] they are all in green. The

[30:13] [clears throat] green is the original

[30:14] properties. The yellow are the new

[30:15] properties. I will point out that

[30:17] doublel or anarine is a part of the TUR.

[30:20] It is not in the city limits. So the

[30:22] assessed and appraised values on those

[30:24] properties are not a part of our tax

[30:26] role and did not uh contribute to any of

[30:29] the tax rate information that we just

[30:31] went over. However, Village Grove Canon

[30:33] and the others were added. Those

[30:35] browsers were brought into the TUR and

[30:37] were a part of that calculation as well.

[30:38] But just wanted to give council the most

[30:40] up-to-date map that we have of our TUR

[30:42] properties as we begin the discussion.

[30:44] » But just to clarify that says yellow is

[30:47] possible expansion.

[30:49] » This is the latest map I have. We've

[30:51] expanded these are our properties. They

[30:53] are our properties.

[30:54] » And I I was looking at all the

[30:56] information I had.

[30:56] » I just want to make sure cuz I was

[30:58] » They possible. So I'll work uh with who

[31:02] put the maps together for us. Get that

[31:03] to say all of the TUR areas.

[31:06] » Okay. Just for the public to know, can

[31:09] you explain TUR?

[31:11] » Yes. So TUR and if I if I say it wrong,

[31:15] I apologize. tax

[31:18] » Investment

[31:19] » Increment

[31:19] » Increment reinvestment zone essentially

[31:22] if you are a property owner in a in any

[31:25] of our tur boundaries 50% of your

[31:30] property tax goes to the city and 50%

[31:33] goes directly to the tur and is spent

[31:35] directly in the tur a lot of times this

[31:38] is used uh as a development tool the

[31:41] city is using it as a way as an economic

[31:43] driver as well so our old fits you code

[31:46] that is being funded through that 50% of

[31:50] the TUR value that came on those

[31:51] properties that was in TUR one. So, it's

[31:53] not raising an an additional tax uh for

[31:56] those TUR properties. It's taking what

[31:58] we've already assessed and specifically

[32:01] putting it towards certain projects

[32:03] within that boundary.

[32:04] » And to clarify, I don't think it's 5050.

[32:06] I think it's 50 of the increase.

[32:09] » Of the increase. Yes. So from the year

[32:11] that it was put in whatever that amount

[32:14] is as it increases half of it goes to

[32:16] general fund half of it.

[32:17] » So every year when we're looking at our

[32:19] assessed values uh we take

[32:21] hypothetically say that year one of the

[32:24] tur the assessed values were $10

[32:26] million. Year two it was 30 million. We

[32:30] take 50% of that increase of the 20

[32:33] million not of the full 30. So all the

[32:36] value gained since the TUR was created,

[32:39] it's 50% of that that gets put back into

[32:42] the TUR and is spent back into the TUR

[32:44] for development.

[32:48] I just wanted to uh show this is what uh

[32:51] Keenan our uh TUR uh project manager

[32:54] puts together for the TUR board. This is

[32:57] all of the TUR's priority projects uh

[33:00] and the funding mechanisms based on any

[33:02] contracts or future agreements that we

[33:04] have coming up. This looks at the TUR as

[33:07] a whole. It looks uh it's presented to

[33:10] the TUR board as a full expenditure of

[33:13] the TUR whereas at the council level we

[33:15] break it into TUR one and TUR two. We do

[33:19] that uh based on the percentage uh of so

[33:23] in tur one you could have the town

[33:25] center is primarily located in tur one

[33:28] so 75% of it is funded through tur one

[33:30] but it has a benefit beneficial use to

[33:33] tur 2 so a portion of it can also be

[33:35] paid out of of tur 2 we've taken those

[33:38] percentage of splits and we've applied

[33:40] it uh to the information Keenan provided

[33:43] to the board and for the city's

[33:46] standpoint we broke that down based on

[33:48] those calculations. So these numbers are

[33:50] what you will see in the future slides

[33:52] for TUR one and two over there on the

[33:54] right hand side. Uh that is that total

[33:58] amount breakdown by these percentages.

[34:02] And so looking at TERS one uh you can

[34:05] see there the city and county uh

[34:07] revenues are the primary revenue sources

[34:09] for this. Uh we get interest income on

[34:12] it as well. Uh but expenses are

[34:14] primarily related around the projects.

[34:16] Uh we do have project management and

[34:18] administration fees and legal fees.

[34:21] Project management is uh Kenan Smith

[34:23] with City Lights Design. He he's spoken

[34:26] to council many times on the progress of

[34:28] our projects. He also keeps track of it

[34:31] for us uh on that end. Keeps uh invoices

[34:34] going straight, contractors working

[34:36] together on all that. But uh we are

[34:38] charged a fee for that and we split that

[34:40] amongst the two uh tur uh project

[34:43] administration is P3. So when we

[34:46] developed the TURS uh there were

[34:49] assessed values that were assigned there

[34:51] were anticipated revenues to be earned.

[34:54] P3 is essentially

[34:58] kind of like our CPA for the TURS is an

[35:00] easy way to describe it. They look at

[35:02] the money coming in. They look at the

[35:03] money going out and quarterly they give

[35:05] the TUR a report. uh anytime we're

[35:07] looking to add new properties or adjust

[35:10] projects and scopes, uh they're looking

[35:12] on that to see how it might affect the

[35:14] TUR's overall budget and impact the TUR.

[35:16] So, we've got project management,

[35:17] administration, and then uh a little bit

[35:19] of legal fees in there. We do have an

[35:21] attorney that works uh for us. Used to

[35:23] be an in-house attorney. Uh our city

[35:26] attorney, Laura, went to work for a

[35:28] private company, maintained as our

[35:30] deputy, but we are charged a slight fee

[35:32] for that. Uh but the expertise was

[35:34] there. So, just looking to keep that.

[35:35] But you can see the charges annually are

[35:36] are nominal. Uh when we get into the

[35:39] projects, again, as we discussed, we've

[35:41] got the town center. Uh that's a project

[35:43] we keep on the books in case we find uh

[35:46] a piece of land or a site that we would

[35:49] like to investigate uh as possibly being

[35:52] the location of our TUR property. The

[35:54] TUR board keeps a little bit of funding

[35:56] in there should we need to do any

[35:57] assessments on that. Hasn't been spent

[36:00] in the last couple years. Uh but it is

[36:01] there should we find one we need to go

[36:03] look at. Uh old Fitchy Road again is a a

[36:06] major project about to kick off. You'll

[36:08] see that it's red. Uh one of the notes

[36:10] uh in your adjustments we had 60

[36:15] around4ome,000 in there depending on the

[36:18] split. The old Fitzy Road project, we

[36:21] have that funded out of our debt service

[36:24] 25 fund. Uh if you remember when we

[36:26] presented that we broke down all those

[36:28] projects that were being debt funded

[36:30] through that the the money that was

[36:33] included in the TUR was for construction

[36:35] administration through HDR since it's

[36:37] directly related to the construction

[36:39] project it's covered through we're

[36:41] putting it as a part of that

[36:42] construction project it's not

[36:45] necessarily being covered by debt funds

[36:48] uh our postack proceeds that we received

[36:50] towards the old fitue project a portion

[36:53] of that can be used for that contract

[36:55] administ administration. So we'll show

[36:56] that those postsec funds as a revenue

[36:59] line item in the debt 25 fund which is

[37:02] why you're seeing that that line item

[37:04] was reduced uh in this one and

[37:06] subsequently in the TUR 2 account.

[37:08] Again a little bit on on downtown

[37:10] parking and Stevenson. These are just uh

[37:12] engineering costs or project management

[37:14] cost to keep those projects rolling

[37:15] forward or to to wrap them up. Uh

[37:18] downtown master plan. Uh this one's one

[37:20] that was increased. You previous line

[37:23] item had it at $220,000. This has got it

[37:26] at 352.

[37:28] The reason for the change is the TUR

[37:30] board asked uh Chad Gilpin who helped

[37:32] put together the the plan to look at a

[37:35] different phasing. So this phase

[37:38] includes all of the Mercer area uh north

[37:43] and gets all the streets that we are

[37:45] looking at downtown drainage, sidewalks,

[37:47] roads to develop uh to a 30% design. Uh

[37:51] after that we'll look

[37:53] are we ready to start with the project

[37:55] take it to 100 and look at debt funding

[37:57] or or supporting a project. But this 30%

[38:00] helps us identify underground utilities,

[38:02] any right-of-way issues, any things that

[38:04] may cause headaches as we continue to

[38:06] design or go to construction. A turb

[38:08] board wanted to at least have as much

[38:11] information as possible with that 30% uh

[38:14] design on those projects so we would

[38:16] know if we were going to run into any

[38:17] headaches. So when we looked at

[38:19] financing it any either the uh the 100%

[38:22] completion of the plans and

[38:24] construction, we weren't getting

[38:25] ourselves into any unknown waters.

[38:28] That's just the Mercer district.

[38:30] » That's just the Mercer district.

[38:31] » That's what they opted to recommend.

[38:33] » It does not. Uh we had originally looked

[38:34] at what it would take to take the Mercer

[38:37] and the Hayes districts of our historic

[38:39] districts up to to 30% even farther than

[38:42] that. Uh based on revenue availability

[38:45] and project scope and timing, they

[38:48] settled on the 30% for the Mercer.

[38:51] Again, they're also taking into

[38:52] consideration there's going to be

[38:53] texttop projects in that area. All of

[38:55] that will be included as a part of that

[38:57] 30% design.

[39:00] Uh looking at the library, previously

[39:02] this was at zero. Uh the library is

[39:06] included as a bit of a stop gap measure

[39:09] as they are working to uh get approved

[39:13] financing uh for the debt issuance for

[39:15] the construction of their project. This

[39:18] is something that will help them get

[39:20] over the hump as they are working with

[39:24] their financial adviserss and the banks

[39:26] for the amount that they can debt fund

[39:28] versus the amount they need for the

[39:29] project. So at the moment uh I'm working

[39:32] with uh the financial adviserss of the

[39:34] county, the library and our own

[39:36] financial adviserss along with P3 uh to

[39:39] look at options

[39:41] feasibility for the city county being

[39:44] able to provide some funding to the

[39:46] library for that kind of stop gap

[39:47] measure. Uh when it's being discussed at

[39:50] the TUR, it's also being discussed that

[39:52] this could be funded through the TUR

[39:54] through the anarine proceeds that we'll

[39:56] eventually receive. Again, as I

[39:58] mentioned before, none of that is city

[40:00] funding. It's all county funding. Uh,

[40:02] and so that funding is what we will be

[40:04] looking at to offset any library

[40:07] contributions. Uh, again, that's part of

[40:09] the reason we're working with P3 to make

[40:11] sure we know when those assessments will

[40:13] come in, when we might get paid on that

[40:15] so that we're not, you know, too far out

[40:17] over our skis and neither is the county.

[40:19] But, uh, looking into that, uh, at the

[40:21] moment, again, it is not anticipated

[40:24] that that is a check written to the

[40:25] library. It is again kind of a drawdown

[40:29] as needed based on any recommendations

[40:31] we include in an ILA. There would be

[40:33] standards and guidelines that everybody

[40:35] would have to follow. Uh once we begin

[40:38] working on that, we'll have more to

[40:39] present to council and get further

[40:41] direction from y'all and what y'all

[40:42] might like to us to include in that. But

[40:44] this was just uh the TUR board's way of

[40:46] saying we haven't forgotten about the

[40:47] library. We've got a funding source for

[40:50] it. We didn't want anybody to think we'd

[40:52] forgotten about it.

[40:54] And to be so I understand completely,

[40:58] we've allocated a quarter million

[41:00] dollars next year. That doesn't

[41:03] necessarily roll over to the next year

[41:06] and suddenly we're going to allocate

[41:08] 500,000 if they haven't done anything.

[41:10] Is that correct? What the TUR board's

[41:12] proposed is we allocated 500,000 in FY26

[41:16] is to maintain that in like a capital

[41:19] reserve or or a library reserve. That

[41:21] full 500 split between the two tur and

[41:25] the additional 750 as well. So it's

[41:28] comes out to a little over a million250

[41:30] total is what the TUR board's proposing

[41:33] for the end of FY27. The one thing I

[41:35] think that's a little bit confusing is

[41:37] they because it's broken down into TUR

[41:39] one and TUR two, you have to add

[41:42] » Yes. You're you're adding

[41:44] » In order to see the total being

[41:45] recommended. It might be helpful to give

[41:48] everybody the consolidated numbers.

[41:52] » Yeah. So the library for this year, you

[41:54] can see uh there at the bottom it had 20

[41:57] uh 6 at 500,000 and 27 at 750. That's

[42:01] not that 750 is not made up of a portion

[42:04] of that 500. It is an addition to that

[42:06] 500 at least the recommendation of the

[42:08] TUR board.

[42:10] » And and y'all I apologize. I missed the

[42:12] meeting yesterday, but I gave them my

[42:14] input in advance of the meeting. So what

[42:16] I'm hearing you say is they want to make

[42:19] the 750 allocation with the

[42:21] understanding that it's sort of

[42:24] asterisked for what is the need. What

[42:27] does the ILA say? We're not actually

[42:29] distributing anything. We're just doing

[42:31] a set aside so we know the money's there

[42:34] and can be used if an agreement is

[42:36] reached down the road. Right.

[42:38] » This is budgeting for anticipation of

[42:40] the future ILA when the library might

[42:42] anticipate drawing down once it's

[42:44] approved once their project gets further

[42:47] along and they have things that might be

[42:49] utilized to draw that down.

[42:50] » So, it's not a commitment to give it to

[42:52] them. The 500 we've committed because

[42:55] that was this year's money that we

[42:57] approved last year.

[42:58] » We budgeted for it uh in our

[43:00] conversations with the library uh at the

[43:03] time and currently is that won't be

[43:05] distributed unless there's an ILA. So

[43:07] right now it's budgeted, it's funded,

[43:09] there is no expenditure

[43:12] » On the books for it until an ILA is is

[43:15] worked out.

[43:15] » So there would be a total of 1.25 set

[43:18] aside potentially for the library at the

[43:20] end of next year.

[43:21] » Yes, ma'am.

[43:23] This [snorts] is all based on an ILA

[43:26] being done this this money and I

[43:28] understand that completely.

[43:31] If

[43:32] what's the for lack of a better word the

[43:35] drop dead point? We can't just keep

[43:37] setting aside money without an ILA. If

[43:41] the ILA doesn't happen next year, where

[43:43] are we? So, uh, working with, uh,

[43:46] working with Commissioner Smith, uh,

[43:48] it's our goal to try to have the ILA

[43:50] done as or at least the draft of the ILA

[43:52] start to be completed hopefully in

[43:54] October. Uh, we've started meeting with

[43:55] the financial adviserss now just to get

[43:57] the ins and outs of what that ILA might

[43:59] include.

[44:01] If there's any landmines we're not

[44:03] seeing that we need to be anticipating,

[44:04] just so all three parties are

[44:07] comfortable with it, uh, but yeah, it's

[44:09] not expected to be utilized unless there

[44:11] is an ILA.

[44:13] So what I had suggested mayor to the

[44:16] board was that rather than putting in a

[44:19] number they tell us how much they felt

[44:22] like there was room in the budget to

[44:24] contribute but not actually put in a

[44:27] number. I think their decision to put in

[44:29] a number is just an indication of the

[44:32] the tur board's strong interest in

[44:34] supporting the library and perhaps

[44:36] [clears throat] helping the library in

[44:38] their conversations that they're having

[44:40] that they're going to get back to us on.

[44:41] I wasn't at that meeting. I don't know

[44:43] exactly how it went, but the fact that

[44:45] they put a number in tells me they're

[44:47] they're both wanting to communicate to

[44:49] us what they think is available, but

[44:52] also acknowledge that it's not a

[44:54] commitment. It will be dependent on a

[44:55] future agreement and at at some point we

[44:59] could next year. I think it's ambitious

[45:01] to think we're going to get an ILA done

[45:03] in a couple of months personally um or

[45:06] even before the end of um Commissioner

[45:09] Smith's term. I don't know. But that is

[45:12] a a goal. That is something we're

[45:13] working towards. And I I think that if

[45:16] we were to go back next year and say

[45:18] there is no ILA, we don't know exactly

[45:21] what the library needs. We need to use

[45:23] this money for other things. That would

[45:25] be this body's ability to say we need to

[45:28] use that money.

[45:29] » That's what I want to be clear about.

[45:30] » Is that fair to say?

[45:31] » Yes. I just want to be clear because

[45:35] » We are limiting our taxing ability by

[45:38] how we're dedicating this money. And at

[45:41] some point, TUR will need to spend

[45:44] money, pull the trigger. And if the

[45:47] library doesn't move, there needs to be

[45:49] something to push them along to get it

[45:52] done. So, I just want to be clear, we're

[45:53] willing to support it and allocate a

[45:56] good bit of money, but we've got to see

[45:58] some movement. It's calling. One one of

[46:00] the things uh building off of uh mayor

[46:03] pro Tim Manassian's conversation there

[46:06] uh two tur meetings ago that we were

[46:09] looking at what can we afford what can

[46:11] we do one of the things we worked on uh

[46:14] last week with the budget subcommittee

[46:16] was plugging all these things in and

[46:17] seeing where our fund balance went uh if

[46:20] you look in uh actually I can go to here

[46:24] if you look at the TUR one I'll use it

[46:27] as the first example uh you'll See, we

[46:29] got the library in there. We also added

[46:31] that last line item of a fund balance

[46:34] reserve. When the TUR

[46:37] discussed taking on debt for its

[46:40] priority projects, Old Fitu Stevenson,

[46:43] the parking lot, it did so at a 75%. it

[46:46] said we can cover 75% of it right now,

[46:49] but we also need to make sure that we

[46:51] set aside an annual debt payment so that

[46:54] we're not artificially or are shooting

[46:57] ourselves in the foot that we don't have

[46:58] funding. Uh when we were talking about

[47:00] the library and other things that the

[47:02] tur might uh be able to afford uh this

[47:05] year and in subsequent years with the

[47:07] fiscal forecast, they asked that we plug

[47:09] that fund balance reserve in there so

[47:11] that the budget now reflects the balance

[47:13] forward at the end of the fiscal year is

[47:15] available funding for whatever projects

[47:17] the TUR would like to spend it on. It's

[47:19] already accounted for any reserves the

[47:22] TUR board wanted to to hold. And so that

[47:25] 652 in TUR one is completely

[47:28] unencumbered. Whatever council or the

[47:30] TUR board might uh vote to to utilize

[47:32] that for it is available. So that's a

[47:34] little bit of a change from the original

[47:36] discussion uh that we had uh the first

[47:40] time where we were just looking at the

[47:41] fiscal forecast. Now we've actually

[47:43] plugged it in and this represents so

[47:45] they were comfortable with plugging the

[47:46] 375 in because it didn't give them any

[47:49] negative uh fund balance. It's

[47:52] » So the cushion is the library money plus

[47:55] » What's in those reserve lines.

[47:57] » Okay.

[47:59] » Uh thank you.

[48:00] » TUR two again almost the same as TUR one

[48:04] just different splits and percentages.

[48:06] Uh but you can see there old Fitzu uh

[48:08] road was reduced zero. You still have

[48:10] the same 352 for the downtown master

[48:13] plan and the library. Uh the difference

[48:15] the big difference here is the

[48:17] allocation of the 2025 payment and that

[48:20] fund balance reserve is at 207 whereas

[48:23] for TUR one it was at 366. That reserve

[48:27] again is based on the project split in

[48:30] that TUR. So old Fitzu road a pretty

[48:33] major project gets split between TUR one

[48:35] and two and so does the debt payment on

[48:38] that as well. And so that's why those

[48:40] numbers are different there. But you see

[48:42] that we've got that next year's debt

[48:44] payment already reserved so that at the

[48:46] end of FY27

[48:48] uh the TUR board and council can be

[48:50] comfortable with. We've got a little

[48:51] over $3 million unencumbered that we can

[48:54] utilize for our projects.

[48:58] Council happy to answer any questions on

[49:00] the TUR or provide any further feedback

[49:03] on anything y'all might like.

[49:11] questions. Council,

[49:15] » I think it would be helpful for just for

[49:18] their information, the same information

[49:20] we were given as to what the Mercer

[49:22] drainage costs would be, 30% design,

[49:27] execution. I would like that included.

[49:30] Um, I know we don't have another budget

[49:32] workshop, but if we could add that to

[49:34] your list of questions from this one so

[49:36] they can see

[49:37] » What what is to come expense wise. on

[49:40] that one. Yeah. Uh Chad, our city

[49:42] engineer, worked with Keenan and they

[49:43] they broke all that out and had

[49:45] presented it to the tourist board. So,

[49:46] we'll provide that presentation to

[49:47] council. I'll again kind of see how the

[49:49] sausage was made on this budget.

[49:52] » And again, understanding that spending

[49:54] the 30% design doesn't force us to

[49:57] immediately take the next step, but I

[49:59] want y'all to know what the future

[50:01] expense looks like. That was that was

[50:03] the major concern of the TUR board is we

[50:05] didn't want to do more than 30 and get

[50:07] into near construction if the TUR and

[50:10] council were not ready to look at

[50:13] issuing debt on any construction. That's

[50:15] not something we've proposed to council

[50:17] at the moment. So that's why we're

[50:18] capping it at that 30%.

[50:20] » Have we I'm sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead.

[50:23] » No, I was going to change the topic. So

[50:25] » Okay. I would say, have we had a

[50:26] presentation to this body on that

[50:29] drainage work the way that Chad laid it

[50:32] out? I wonder if we should, since we're

[50:36] being asked to include it in the budget,

[50:39] um I think it might be helpful to have a

[50:41] presentation

[50:43] at least on the Mercer piece, but maybe

[50:45] even the big picture of all the options

[50:49] that the TUR board considered and then

[50:52] focused on the Mercer piece. We've

[50:54] already got the presentation. We can

[50:55] work with Chad to present that the next

[50:56] meeting

[50:58] » Recently.

[50:58] » No, I think we need to cuz two to three

[51:00] weeks ago

[51:01] » We were going to do all that

[51:03] » Or get the dollars and

[51:04] » The dollar must right but I haven't seen

[51:06] it. So yeah, we need to see.

[51:09] » Yeah. And we may say yeah the dollars

[51:11] are big but we have reason to take it

[51:12] on. I don't think the clearly the TUR

[51:15] board was like I don't know if they're

[51:16] going to

[51:16] » I can tell you Mercer construction cost

[51:19] is total total design and construction

[51:22] for Mercer is right around 9 million.

[51:25] It's right around 9 or 10 million for

[51:26] the Hay Street as well construction and

[51:29] and that 30% is included in that 9 to 10

[51:32] million.

[51:33] » Yeah, I would like to see more

[51:34] information coming weeks or so.

[51:37] » Uh so again we don't have any more

[51:38] scheduled workshops. Uh the 18th was the

[51:41] last one we had. Uh the next meeting we

[51:43] have will be unless a special workshop

[51:46] is called uh will be September 1st and

[51:48] that's where we'll have our first uh

[51:50] workshop on the budget and the tax rate

[51:53] public hearings. Then on the 15th is

[51:55] when we look to adopt. Quick question

[51:57] about going back to the beginning when

[51:59] you were answering the question that was

[52:01] asked last um budget

[52:05] workshop whenever we were talking about

[52:06] the tax rate. Um if I'm looking at it

[52:10] correctly and again this is it just came

[52:13] on in May so I'm not sure the history so

[52:16] I might be interpreting it wrong but it

[52:17] looks like we weren't using the

[52:21] advalorum tax rate to service debt

[52:23] before and now we are.

[52:25] » Yeah. 2025 issuance is the first time

[52:28] we'd ever used Adalorum to service debt.

[52:30] Prior to that, it was all

[52:31] » Why did we do Why did we change that?

[52:34] » There wasn't cash funding to support the

[52:36] projects. We did not have enough cash on

[52:37] hand for the 14 million that we took out

[52:40] in loans. Okay.

[52:41] » And we looked at doing all those

[52:42] projects kind of together right around

[52:45] the same time so that we weren't

[52:46] negatively impacting the downtown on

[52:49] three major separate occasions.

[52:51] » Okay. Thanks. Just needed to fill in

[52:52] that historic.

[52:53] » Sorry about Yes. Yeah. Uh the 2025

[52:55] issuance was the first time uh and so

[52:57] the 2026 budget is the first budget that

[53:00] shows Avalor being used to to service

[53:03] debt.

[53:03] » Okay, makes sense. Thanks.

[53:08] » All right, no other questions. We'll

[53:10] move on to consent agenda.

[53:12] » Mayor, I think we have a be a star award

[53:14] recipient that that came in after the

[53:16] presentation. If we could acknowledge

[53:19] them and maybe take a photo with them.

[53:21] » Hello.

[53:21] » If that's okay.

[53:22] » Yeah. No, I didn't know. I thought y'all

[53:25] were here. I thought you were here on

[53:27] another item. So, come on up.

[53:29] » It's a wonderful budget presentation. I

[53:31] think

[53:31] » It's great. I learned a lot.

[53:34] » And we'll we'll email you the

[53:35] presentation we gave earlier on the

[53:38] awards.

[53:40] [laughter]

[53:41] » We'll email you the presentation from

[53:43] earlier. So, you have it

[53:47] » So who are they with?

[53:48] » Which project is this?

[53:49] » Uh DS Prep.

[53:50] » Nice.

[53:50] » DS Prep. Thank you.

[53:59] Do you have a bedroom?

[54:04] » Oh,

[54:07] » Wow.

[54:08] » That's crazy.

[54:19] » That lasted a good five minutes.

[54:25] Congratulations.

[54:33] » Went to the restroom.

[54:47] » Right. We're all here. Moving on to

[54:49] consent agenda. Items three, four, and

[54:51] five may be taken together or if anyone

[54:53] wishes to break one out, you're

[54:55] certainly welcome to.

[54:56] » Mayor, I'll move that we approve items

[54:58] three through five.

[55:01] » Second. Motion second. Any discussion?

[55:05] All those in favor?

[55:07] » I opposed. Item carries. At this time,

[55:11] we'll open a public hearing and have a

[55:13] discussion and possible action on a res

[55:15] on an ordinance regarding ZA2026-00001,

[55:21] an application for a zoning map

[55:22] amendment from single family attached

[55:24] residential district garden home within

[55:28] the historic district Hay Street

[55:30] historic district overlay to local

[55:33] retail with Hayes historic district

[55:35] overlay and a conditional overlay with

[55:38] LR HO for 200. 100 Bluff Street

[55:41] applicant presentation.

[55:42] » Mayor, I'm going to um recuse myself

[55:45] from this item.

[55:46] » Okay.

[55:50] » Who's doing the presentation? Sarah.

[55:52] Who?

[55:53] » Okay.

[55:54] » You'll follow. Okay.

[56:05] » Yeah. We'll go through it. There's our

[56:08] clipper. Okay.

[56:13] Thank you for hearing us today. Um, my

[56:15] name is Jennifer Kilibru. I own Glow

[56:16] Medpa over on 12. We've been open for

[56:19] about six years. We do aesthetics, we do

[56:21] wellness, we do hormones. Um, part of

[56:24] our brand, we we're in a 194 we're in a

[56:27] 1940s bungalow over there on Route 12.

[56:30] Part of Glow Medpa's brand has becoming

[56:32] mixing the old with the new. Um 200

[56:35] Bluff Street was on the market as a

[56:38] residential property. Um they could not

[56:41] sell it. Um a lot of it needs to be

[56:43] redone. Um we saw this as an opportunity

[56:46] to bring some revenue to the property.

[56:49] Um but also beautify it for it's we're

[56:52] in love with it. Um we feel like it is

[56:56] going to be part of our brand as well

[56:57] and matches what we're doing. Um so we

[57:00] have put in a contract. It is

[57:02] conditional based on being approved for

[57:05] LR and where we're at. Um, so we do have

[57:09] to get reszoned in order for us to close

[57:11] on this property. So, we do find it to

[57:13] be important. Um, if you guys have seen

[57:15] this property, [snorts] it needs money

[57:18] running into it. It needs revenue and we

[57:21] are here to help do that. Um, Jeremy and

[57:23] I own small businesses here in Dripping

[57:26] Springs. We have four kids in the high

[57:27] school. Our home is here. where our

[57:29] forever home is being built right now in

[57:31] Dripping Springs. The community is very

[57:34] important to us. We give back to the

[57:36] community. We give fundraising dollars.

[57:38] We give money for sports. I have interns

[57:41] every semester. We have deep roots in

[57:43] this community. So, I'm happy for you

[57:45] guys to hear this project and we are

[57:46] just as invested in this doing well and

[57:49] being good for the city. Also,

[57:53] um here is Russell.

[57:55] » Thank you, Jimmy.

[57:57] » Hi, good evening. Russell Collins. I'm

[57:59] the owner of Resolve Designs. Uh we're

[58:01] commercial real estate and uh

[58:03] architecture development here locally uh

[58:06] locally here in in Dripping Springs. So,

[58:08] a few of y'all know my faces and it's

[58:10] good to see you all again. Um so, we're

[58:14] just going to jump right into the

[58:15] presentation here. Um [clears throat]

[58:21] » Excuse me, Russell.

[58:22] » Yes,

[58:22] » That's a Crosswell residence.

[58:24] » Jony's That's Joany's old residence.

[58:26] That's correct. this cross

[58:27] » Except for I saw the picture if I saw

[58:29] the picture.

[58:30] All right. Thank you.

[58:31] » Yes, sir. Thank you, Travis. Uh, so as

[58:34] Jenny stated, so it it had it was on the

[58:36] market and um she and and Jeremy are um

[58:40] very very interested in the acquisition

[58:42] of the asset.

[58:44] Um and so what we're [clears throat]

[58:46] presenting today tonight is essentially

[58:49] the um the the the amended zoning of

[58:53] this particular asset. It's it's

[58:54] currently in the SF5 uh zoning. And so

[58:58] as as Jenny would like to um run the

[59:02] business operations of a a well med spa

[59:05] at the location, as she stated earlier,

[59:07] it it already really does have

[59:09] precedence as being a a doctor's house,

[59:12] multiple doctor's houses. So, it only

[59:15] kind of bring backs uh brings brings

[59:17] back that um that operations and also

[59:20] here locally uh in in the Hayes uh uh

[59:24] historic district.

[59:27] Did shall I go through all this for them

[59:30] or they pretty much got it?

[59:32] » Okay.

[59:33] » Whatever

[59:34] whatever you would like to present.

[59:37] » Oh, okay.

[59:39] So, we're going to take it from the top,

[59:40] aren't we? Uh okay. So, we we we see

[59:44] that it's in the historic uh Hayes

[59:46] district. Um

[59:48] um our our team our our city has gone

[59:51] out to um uh to a third party uh

[59:55] historic preservation committee and

[59:57] created a wonderful uh uh pallet of all

[1:00:00] the different um historic buildings that

[1:00:02] are in our our city. Um this particular

[1:00:06] one is one of the highest uh well-known

[1:00:08] historic buildings uh all throughout

[1:00:10] Dripping. And and again, as stated, it

[1:00:12] was a it was an old doctor's house. Uh

[1:00:14] originally built in 1883. Um some of the

[1:00:17] additions were in 1905. Um and just

[1:00:20] recently, uh there's been a couple of

[1:00:22] smaller additions to it. Um so

[1:00:25] it sits at the uh at the corner

[1:00:27] intersection of Hay Street and Bluff

[1:00:29] Street.

[1:00:31] Um, part of the reasonzoning or the the

[1:00:34] amended zoning ask is to join like

[1:00:38] like-minded businesses and and to bring

[1:00:41] not not just um economic value uh to

[1:00:45] back to our city in this direction uh

[1:00:47] but to also join other businesses that

[1:00:50] are that are um here in this in this

[1:00:53] district. So above to our north is uh

[1:00:56] our are three different uh design

[1:00:58] businesses. Um and then of course time

[1:01:01] and do and pigpen who are commercial uh

[1:01:04] commercial services CS. Um immediately

[1:01:07] to the east of the parcel is a wedding

[1:01:09] rental um plus also a uh an an Airbnb.

[1:01:13] And then immediately south is Dripping

[1:01:15] Springs uh HVAC company uh a small um uh

[1:01:20] small business.

[1:01:22] [clears throat]

[1:01:25] Okay.

[1:01:27] Take a break.

[1:01:31] So the original concept design

[1:01:34] was to essentially

[1:01:37] uh bring bring back the glory is is

[1:01:40] essentially to bring back the glory uh

[1:01:41] of the 1883 homestead. Um and then also

[1:01:45] to elevate uh her her her wraparound

[1:01:48] services. Um and and with with Jenny and

[1:01:51] Jennifer uh their program is is to

[1:01:55] introduce a wellness component. um plus

[1:01:58] uh a medical um spa uh resort say a

[1:02:02] resort medical location here. So alto

[1:02:06] [clears throat] together um doing the

[1:02:08] the master site concept um would would

[1:02:11] to bring would bring the pool um is and

[1:02:16] uh label M and then also a terrace plus

[1:02:19] uh some small cabanas to associate with

[1:02:22] the pool. Letter C is the original uh

[1:02:25] 200 bluff. Uh letter F jumping to the uh

[1:02:29] southwest corner. Letter F uh is

[1:02:31] essentially the old Sistn is a stone

[1:02:33] sister and our intention is to uh rehab

[1:02:36] it and make it into a salt cave um uh

[1:02:39] for for part of her wellness program. Um

[1:02:42] letter E's and G's are small newer

[1:02:45] buildouts. Uh G would be a small um uh

[1:02:49] dry infrared sauna house and then letter

[1:02:51] E is a small um just two unisex

[1:02:54] bathrooms to for changing. Letter I is a

[1:02:57] small cabana uh that would serve um

[1:03:00] fresh frozen drinks um appertifs um

[1:03:04] whatever Jenny feels that her customers

[1:03:06] would like uh near the pool. Um, and

[1:03:09] then letter B currently is uh in this

[1:03:12] particular concept was where the ADA and

[1:03:15] and compliance uh originally was going

[1:03:18] to be located, but we're now current

[1:03:20] we're now moving it to letter D, which

[1:03:22] is at the south of the parcel. Um, and

[1:03:25] then letter N uh is basically a nice

[1:03:28] sitting area there.

[1:03:32] the new concept after after going

[1:03:35] through planning and zoning and and

[1:03:36] receiving some really great feedback um

[1:03:39] plus also uh city uh or that is public

[1:03:43] comments and neighborhood comments uh

[1:03:45] were that most people were were

[1:03:48] requesting that um more vehicles be

[1:03:51] parked on site. Um and so we've gone

[1:03:54] back quickly to the drawing board uh

[1:03:57] made some highle revisions and uh as we

[1:04:00] were quantifying the amount of parking

[1:04:02] spaces to the parking ratio uh we know

[1:04:04] that we're supposed to be hitting at 16.

[1:04:07] This particular concept is is at 15. Um,

[1:04:11] and so we would be looking at uh a

[1:04:14] simple variance with one of our

[1:04:15] neighbors neighbors plural uh to have an

[1:04:18] additional

[1:04:20] one if not maybe four to five other

[1:04:22] ones. Um, Jenny's done a great job uh

[1:04:25] about receiving letters of of of um of

[1:04:29] support from Carrie Lynn Design and then

[1:04:32] also from um from Danielle Keem Design.

[1:04:35] They were our north partners uh there at

[1:04:37] 2011 Bluff [clears throat] or I'm sorry

[1:04:40] it was 102 Bluff. I I got the addresses

[1:04:44] up upside down. So um

[1:04:48] » Oh and then and then Pigpen also uh

[1:04:50] chimed in as well and said that they

[1:04:51] would be interested um in serving as as

[1:04:55] a as a uh additional alternate parking.

[1:04:58] So what we've done as as the master site

[1:05:00] plan is we've actually given square

[1:05:04] footage uh to to the parking um

[1:05:08] resolution here. So we're essentially

[1:05:11] given a 7 foot6 by

[1:05:14] al albeit it's cut off by the label by

[1:05:16] about 104. So roughly 9 900 ft on the

[1:05:20] north side of the parcel and then on the

[1:05:22] east side of the parcel um another 4 to

[1:05:26] 500 square ft. So altogether about

[1:05:28] 14-500 square ft dedicated for um new

[1:05:33] sidewalks that uh ties in with the with

[1:05:36] the master plan concept um that was

[1:05:38] shared with us earlier. Um so we'd love

[1:05:41] to tie in the sidewalks the way the

[1:05:43] sidewalks go into the intersection. Um,

[1:05:45] and then we also have a setback at the

[1:05:48] north side of the parcel where the 45

[1:05:50] degree parking starts uh by code uh to

[1:05:53] set back 30 ft from the stop sign. Um,

[1:05:56] that's facing

[1:05:58] east

[1:06:01] going on Hay Street there.

[1:06:06] Here we go. There's a a linear drawing

[1:06:09] for all um just kind of gives you a

[1:06:11] better overall of that.

[1:06:16] So once again, we've cited it. We we can

[1:06:18] we can certainly get 15 on there. Um and

[1:06:22] we're shy of one right now.

[1:06:28] » Okay. Um would you like to say anything

[1:06:31] else, Jenny?

[1:06:33] » Um I think some of the

[1:06:36] we're we're happy to earn trust on She

[1:06:39] has wonderful recommendations. The city

[1:06:40] has wonderful recommendations. We are

[1:06:42] really happy to earn trust and prove to

[1:06:44] you guys and come back and ask for more

[1:06:46] permissions out of the cup. We do have

[1:06:49] cons some concerns with the

[1:06:50] recommendations of the cup. We

[1:06:52] ultimately see this place as being able

[1:06:54] to have fundraisers for the city um city

[1:06:57] council meetings chamber. I do think the

[1:07:00] cup limits us being able to do that. Um

[1:07:03] if we need to earn trust and come back

[1:07:04] and revisit that, fine. Um but I do

[1:07:07] think that it is overly limiting in that

[1:07:09] aspect. Um, and then if that's the case,

[1:07:12] then the 7 PM time frame would be over

[1:07:14] limiting in that aspect as well. It's

[1:07:16] not that we plan to do it often, but we

[1:07:18] plan to be available for the city. We're

[1:07:21] a big part of the city. We want to also

[1:07:23] be able to offer this to the city. So,

[1:07:25] that's my only kind of feedback on the

[1:07:27] recommendations.

[1:07:30] » Thank you.

[1:07:31] » Thank you, Sarah. You up?

[1:07:38] » Thank you, sir. Thank you.

[1:07:41] Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Good evening,

[1:07:45] council members. Happy to be with you

[1:07:47] this evening to present this zoning

[1:07:49] amendment request for 200 Bluff Street.

[1:07:53] Um we'll be focusing on the finer

[1:07:57] aspects of the uh zoning amendment um as

[1:08:02] well as the conditional overlay

[1:08:04] recommendation from staff uh this

[1:08:07] evening. And so um

[1:08:11] there's already a significant amount of

[1:08:13] content that was um presented very well

[1:08:17] by the applicants uh on this slide. And

[1:08:20] so, um, one thing additional to note is

[1:08:23] that this is a corner property, um,

[1:08:27] located at the corner of Hayes and Bluff

[1:08:30] Street, which I think, um, adds some

[1:08:32] additional consideration

[1:08:34] to the appropriateness of a zoning

[1:08:38] amendment to allow um, commercial um,

[1:08:42] commercial uses as opposed to the

[1:08:45] existing um, single family garden uh

[1:08:49] residential zoning that it has. So

[1:08:54] with that, I will um advance with the

[1:08:58] proposed zoning amendment to local

[1:09:01] retail with historic overlay and a

[1:09:05] conditional overlay.

[1:09:10] So, um, when we look at the existing

[1:09:17] zoning that the property has, it's

[1:09:19] interesting to take a trip down memory

[1:09:21] lane, so to speak, and find out or

[1:09:24] refresh our memories around how did we

[1:09:27] come to have this existing zoning, this

[1:09:30] um, attached garden family zoning. Well,

[1:09:36] um it dates back to 2013

[1:09:39] when the property owner at that time

[1:09:43] wanted to essentially subdivide

[1:09:46] um the the previously intact property.

[1:09:51] And I'll point it out here, but it kind

[1:09:53] of looks like a horizontally line lying

[1:09:58] um L shape. at that time that that

[1:10:01] property owner had two trackcts of land,

[1:10:05] two parcels of land that they wished to

[1:10:08] subdivide into six lots. And in order to

[1:10:11] make that happen, they had to seek a

[1:10:13] zoning amendment to allow for a higher

[1:10:17] uh type of density and uh allow for

[1:10:21] those essentially six lots out of what

[1:10:24] used to be two uh parcels. ending up

[1:10:27] with the six lots that we see over here

[1:10:31] and over here. So,

[1:10:34] brief trip down memory lane to tell us

[1:10:37] um where we are now and how we got

[1:10:40] there. uh when when considering um you

[1:10:46] know the merits uh and the intents of

[1:10:49] the applicant's zoning amendment request

[1:10:52] um you know as as previously mentioned

[1:10:55] the current uses are limited to 16 uses

[1:10:59] under the zoning essentially residential

[1:11:01] uses with uh the potential for a home

[1:11:05] occupation business which would mean

[1:11:08] essentially that the main use and

[1:11:11] function of the property is residential

[1:11:13] but then a portion of the property can

[1:11:16] be used for a business.

[1:11:20] However, the applicant um would like to

[1:11:23] occupy the entirety of the property. if

[1:11:27] um you know all goes through with um you

[1:11:31] know their current plans for this

[1:11:33] property, they would like to use the

[1:11:36] entirety of the property for their

[1:11:38] business and not have it as you know a

[1:11:41] home occupation type of business. So um

[1:11:44] this is why they're requesting this

[1:11:46] zoning amendment. Um, one thing to note

[1:11:50] aside from the uses, you know, this

[1:11:53] property is within the Hayes Historic

[1:11:56] District overlay and not only does that

[1:12:01] restrict the permitted land uses um

[1:12:04] within the historic district, but it

[1:12:07] also requires review of site plans or

[1:12:11] exterior updates to the property. So,

[1:12:15] um, you know, just to note, um,

[1:12:19] regardless of any decisions this

[1:12:21] evening, if any exterior updates are

[1:12:24] proposed to this site,

[1:12:26] it will have to go through HPC review

[1:12:29] and ultimately further uh, decision and

[1:12:33] approval. So, that will remain unchanged

[1:12:36] um, regardless of um, any decisions this

[1:12:40] evening.

[1:12:42] When we look at the surrounding

[1:12:46] landscape

[1:12:47] um around 200 bluff,

[1:12:51] we do see a concentration of um you know

[1:12:56] more commercial uses

[1:12:59] along the US 290 corridor as well as um

[1:13:04] you know an institutional use with the

[1:13:08] Baptist church over here. Um, and we see

[1:13:13] this uh large um I guess

[1:13:18] more triangular shaped uh property that

[1:13:22] has the zoning designation that the

[1:13:26] applicants are seeking. So this property

[1:13:28] over here which is within the historic

[1:13:30] district and you know extends from the

[1:13:34] US 290 corridor all the way to the back

[1:13:37] of the Hayes historic district. it has

[1:13:40] [clears throat] this um same local

[1:13:42] retail zoning. So that's kind of an

[1:13:46] overview of our current landscape um at

[1:13:50] least you know extending from US 290 um

[1:13:54] towards the back of the district. We

[1:13:57] also have

[1:13:59] uh as evidenced by the yellow um

[1:14:04] uh shapes on the screen a duplex duplex

[1:14:08] type zoning. So again um a somewhat

[1:14:12] higher type of um residential uh density

[1:14:18] zoning.

[1:14:20] And so

[1:14:23] it helps also to take a type of zoomed

[1:14:25] out approach when looking at the

[1:14:28] surrounding land uses. Um we did see a

[1:14:32] little bit from the applicant earlier

[1:14:34] about the businesses that are you know

[1:14:37] kind of directly abuing um 200 bluff so

[1:14:43] to speak. But this is a slightly more

[1:14:45] zoomed out um screenshot from Google

[1:14:49] Maps which shows you know the current

[1:14:52] businesses uh that are around the

[1:14:54] property. So, in addition to those the

[1:14:57] design businesses that are located uh

[1:15:00] directly to the north of the property um

[1:15:02] and the the um restaurants uh again to

[1:15:07] the north uh east

[1:15:10] there are um you know there is the the

[1:15:13] wedding rental business um slash STR

[1:15:18] short-term rental that is across the

[1:15:20] street and then additional short-term

[1:15:24] rental businesses uh located to the

[1:15:27] south. So um along the south southern

[1:15:30] portion of Bluff. Um

[1:15:34] so we see an uh neighborhood that one

[1:15:40] could say is in transition. Um there

[1:15:43] still are quite a few residences and

[1:15:45] full-time residents within the district.

[1:15:49] Um but then there are you know uh other

[1:15:55] other types of uses that are somewhat um

[1:15:59] balancing I guess that residential use

[1:16:02] with more commercial types of uses. So

[1:16:07] just a quick quick overview of that.

[1:16:12] Now, when we get to the zoning amendment

[1:16:15] request, just to dive a little bit more

[1:16:17] into the details of what um what the

[1:16:20] zoning updates to local retail uh with

[1:16:24] historic overlay would allow. So, it

[1:16:28] would allow the permitted land uses to

[1:16:31] increase from 16

[1:16:34] to 73,

[1:16:36] but it would not allow the full list of

[1:16:39] 82 uses that are permitted under a

[1:16:41] straight LR zoning without a historic

[1:16:44] overlay. Um, and again, as I previously

[1:16:47] mentioned, you know, the HPC would still

[1:16:51] have to review and approve any site

[1:16:53] plans or exterior updates via a

[1:16:56] certificate of appropriateness review

[1:16:58] prior to applicants applying for

[1:17:01] permits.

[1:17:03] Um, so a little more details. We talked

[1:17:07] about uses here. Um, and these are the

[1:17:10] uses that are permitted without the

[1:17:12] conditional overlay. I will get to the

[1:17:14] conditional overlay and the

[1:17:15] recommendations and additional

[1:17:17] restrictions that come with that. But

[1:17:20] first, I did just want to point out some

[1:17:22] additional um updates that would result

[1:17:26] from the zoning amendment. So, aside

[1:17:29] from the increase in uses, we would also

[1:17:33] have um an increase in the minimum

[1:17:38] square footage of a lot permitted under

[1:17:42] this LR base zoning. Under the current

[1:17:47] um garden family

[1:17:50] type of zoning, we're allowed, you know,

[1:17:54] much tighter and um more dense lots and,

[1:18:01] you know, essentially an attached

[1:18:04] town home type of development. That's

[1:18:06] what the current zoning would allow. Um,

[1:18:10] so the LR zoning would actually increase

[1:18:14] the minimum square footage required for

[1:18:17] a, you know, legal lot size under the

[1:18:20] updated LR zoning. Um,

[1:18:24] other I think more important things to

[1:18:26] note is the current zoning also allows

[1:18:31] for up to 80% imperous cover

[1:18:35] uh on the site whereas the LR zoning

[1:18:39] reduces the maximum imperous cover

[1:18:43] permitted by 20%.

[1:18:46] So, you know, a more green um type of

[1:18:51] lot, you could say. Um,

[1:18:54] so I won't I won't spend uh too much

[1:18:58] more time on this slide. Um, but if ever

[1:19:02] we have questions, we can always come

[1:19:04] back to it.

[1:19:06] Um, I did want to just briefly touch

[1:19:08] upon the other existing

[1:19:13] areas within our city uh and within our

[1:19:17] historic districts that are classified

[1:19:20] for similar development because they

[1:19:23] have the same zoning type. So, they have

[1:19:26] the LR um HO zoning. So, we have the

[1:19:31] first property that we talked about was

[1:19:33] the 103105

[1:19:35] Creek Road, um, which is within the

[1:19:38] historic district and currently, based

[1:19:40] on my understanding, it has, um, you

[1:19:43] know, short-term rentals and, I believe,

[1:19:45] professional offices

[1:19:48] uh, at this location.

[1:19:50] Uh there's also the second property is

[1:19:54] the Mercer Chapman um historic property

[1:20:00] that's located along Mercer Street and

[1:20:03] from what I understand it's also

[1:20:05] operating uh with short-term rentals

[1:20:07] currently.

[1:20:09] And then last but not least in our uh

[1:20:12] old Fitzu historic district, there are

[1:20:15] several we see a a large uh

[1:20:19] concentration of properties that have

[1:20:23] you know this local retail zoning and

[1:20:25] there are a mix of uses uh land uses

[1:20:29] that are currently um you know located

[1:20:33] on those lots including um

[1:20:38] um short-term rentals, um the wine

[1:20:41] tasting room, um and other uh salon

[1:20:46] types of businesses.

[1:20:49] Uh, one thing to note is staff does not

[1:20:53] consider that a zoning amendment to 200

[1:20:56] bluff would impact

[1:20:58] um these existing zone properties

[1:21:01] negatively or impact their ability to

[1:21:05] redevelop if ever they wanted to uh do

[1:21:08] that in the future.

[1:21:13] All right. I do think it's important for

[1:21:16] us to just recap the public feedback

[1:21:18] that we received. So, this this public

[1:21:21] feedback was really a catalyst for staff

[1:21:24] recommending the addition of the

[1:21:25] conditional overlay to the requested LRO

[1:21:30] zoning. Um, you know, there were uh two

[1:21:36] letters of support that were provided

[1:21:38] for the zoning change. Um they briefly

[1:21:42] touched on it earlier, the applicants

[1:21:43] did. So letters of support from 112

[1:21:46] Bluff and 102 Bluff. Um but during the

[1:21:50] public hearing for the planning and

[1:21:53] zoning commission on July 28th, we did

[1:21:56] hear from, you know, residents of

[1:21:59] Dripping Springs um

[1:22:02] regarding, you know, sort of a mixed um

[1:22:06] sentiment. So, positive feedback for the

[1:22:09] proposed medical spa or medical office

[1:22:12] and spa land use. Um, but concerns

[1:22:16] about, you know, potential parking

[1:22:19] arrangements or parking impacts to the

[1:22:23] existing district and neighborhood. Um

[1:22:26] and also just you know some um some

[1:22:30] reservations about what the potential

[1:22:33] impact of not necessarily the spa itself

[1:22:38] but a future land use that could be

[1:22:41] permitted under the LR zoning. What

[1:22:44] could that potentially, you know, lead

[1:22:46] to in terms of negative unforeseen

[1:22:49] impacts to the surrounding properties

[1:22:51] and also to the residents? because, as

[1:22:53] we said, there are a lot of short-term

[1:22:55] rentals in this district, but they're

[1:22:58] also, you know,

[1:23:01] a lot of yearround residents. And so,

[1:23:05] you know, again, um there was another

[1:23:08] letter that was sent. This was following

[1:23:10] the public uh hearing at the planning

[1:23:13] and zoning commission. Another resident

[1:23:15] expressed support for the medical spa

[1:23:18] use and also the rehabilitation of the

[1:23:21] wonderful uh 1883 historic structure on

[1:23:24] the site while requesting that

[1:23:26] additional conditions be placed on the

[1:23:28] zoning amendment to preserve the quality

[1:23:30] of life of the neighboring residences.

[1:23:33] And really those concerns centered on,

[1:23:36] you know, the potential for exterior

[1:23:39] storage that could potentially blow

[1:23:41] trash onto the site. And then also just

[1:23:44] concerns about, you know, operating

[1:23:46] hours, um, making sure that, you know, a

[1:23:49] land use, um, beyond the foreseeable

[1:23:52] one, uh, is compatible with neighboring

[1:23:57] residences. So

[1:24:01] staff did, you know, take all of that

[1:24:04] input into account and also spoke with

[1:24:08] the applicants regarding this, you know,

[1:24:11] very important feedback and they agreed

[1:24:14] to modify the zoning amendment request

[1:24:17] to local retail with historic overlay,

[1:24:20] but then also the conditional overlay.

[1:24:22] So now we will get into what does the

[1:24:25] conditional overlay actually add in this

[1:24:28] case. It will reduce the permitted land

[1:24:31] uses from 73 to 59. Um

[1:24:36] you know things that would essentially

[1:24:39] drive a lot of traffic potentially to

[1:24:43] the site or you know potentially create

[1:24:47] noise issues or things like that. um

[1:24:50] that wouldn't be compatible with um you

[1:24:55] know existing residences.

[1:24:58] You know, we we went through the list

[1:25:02] and whittleled it down to 59 that would

[1:25:05] be the most um most compatible or more

[1:25:08] compatible. Uh the other thing that it

[1:25:11] would do is it would increase the the

[1:25:14] number of land uses requiring a

[1:25:15] conditional use permit from 12 to 15.

[1:25:19] Um, it would increase the number of

[1:25:21] prohibited land uses from 145 to 140

[1:25:24] 156.

[1:25:26] It would prohibit outside storage or

[1:25:29] display on the site. And it would also

[1:25:32] limit the hours of business operation to

[1:25:35] a schedule between 9:00 a.m. and 700

[1:25:37] p.m. [clears throat]

[1:25:39] which based on my understanding are

[1:25:42] within the normal business operating

[1:25:45] hours of the medical spa.

[1:25:50] So, the applicant already touched on

[1:25:53] this. I won't get too much in the weeds

[1:25:56] because they um already spent quite a

[1:25:59] bit of time on this, but they did, you

[1:26:01] know, take that input that was received

[1:26:04] during the PNZ meeting and they provided

[1:26:08] an alternative concept site plan. This

[1:26:10] has not been approved by the historic

[1:26:12] preservation commission. So, I will just

[1:26:14] put that out there. Um, you know,

[1:26:17] although this concept, this

[1:26:21] updated concept site plan achieves, you

[1:26:24] know, what our, um, downtown master plan

[1:26:29] puts forth in terms of onree parking and

[1:26:32] it accomplishes more than that.

[1:26:34] um you know ultimately this site concept

[1:26:38] plan would still have to undergo all all

[1:26:40] the normal review processes and permits

[1:26:43] associated with

[1:26:46] a development project um in the city of

[1:26:48] Dripping Springs and including historic

[1:26:50] preservation. So

[1:26:54] in terms of staff

[1:26:57] um and also other recommendations um

[1:27:00] starting with the penny and zoning

[1:27:02] commission recommendation on July 28th

[1:27:05] um they did recommend approval of the

[1:27:08] zoning amendment. Um at that time it was

[1:27:11] LRH.

[1:27:13] Um staff this evening recommends

[1:27:16] approval of the zoning amendment with

[1:27:18] the addition of the conditional overlay

[1:27:20] for the reasons we laid out. And then

[1:27:24] next steps again HPC review for a

[1:27:28] certificate of appropriateness, site

[1:27:30] development permit, sidewalk and parking

[1:27:33] agreements

[1:27:35] um with the city building permits and

[1:27:38] the like. And so this concludes my staff

[1:27:42] presentation. Um I will seed my time

[1:27:44] back to the council and um happy to

[1:27:48] answer any questions y'all may have.

[1:27:52] » Thank you Sarah.

[1:27:53] » All right.

[1:27:54] » Thank you both. It's helpful to hear

[1:27:56] from both of y'all. Let's move on to

[1:27:59] planning and zoning commission report.

[1:28:09] I don't need that. Um, [clears throat]

[1:28:12] okay. I'll try to be brief and uh stick

[1:28:14] to the high high points here. Uh, the

[1:28:16] applicant gave the uh same presentation

[1:28:18] pretty much at our July uh planning and

[1:28:21] zoning uh commission meeting. Did a good

[1:28:23] job with the presentation, answered a

[1:28:25] lot of our questions and we had a good

[1:28:26] dialogue with uh with the applicant. We

[1:28:28] considered the staff report which

[1:28:30] recommended approval at that time. I

[1:28:32] think it's very important to point out,

[1:28:33] however, that none of the work that was

[1:28:35] done on the subsequent conditional

[1:28:37] overlay was involved in the planning and

[1:28:39] zoning commission meeting. That's work

[1:28:41] that staff pursued subsequent to our

[1:28:42] July 28th meeting. So, the report I'm

[1:28:44] giving you is based upon what we did at

[1:28:46] the time. It did not include the

[1:28:48] recommendation that staff is now giving

[1:28:50] for a conditional overlay on top of the

[1:28:53] of the district. We acknowledge the two

[1:28:55] sets of written comments that that

[1:28:57] [clears throat] were submitted in our

[1:28:58] packet from neighbors on Bluff Street.

[1:29:00] No one spoke at the planning and zoning

[1:29:02] commission meeting. As we normally do,

[1:29:04] we get into a resoning matter. We began

[1:29:05] to review the criteria for resoning. We

[1:29:08] reviewed the existing zoning in the

[1:29:09] district, which currently includes SF4,

[1:29:11] SF5, MF, and of course, both GR and CS

[1:29:15] are located along the Highway 290

[1:29:18] corridor adjacent to the uh to the

[1:29:19] neighborhood. [clears throat] We also

[1:29:21] noted that LR is present in both of our

[1:29:23] other two historic districts. for

[1:29:25] whatever that's worth. We questioned

[1:29:26] staff on whether any of the 70 plus uses

[1:29:29] that are in the base zoning for long uh

[1:29:31] for LR could be detrimental to the

[1:29:33] future of the district and its property

[1:29:34] owners. Staff assured us that they had

[1:29:36] reviewed those uses and did not believe

[1:29:38] that any of those uses would be

[1:29:40] detrimental to the neighborhood or the

[1:29:41] residents at that time because

[1:29:43] [clears throat] LR is the least intensed

[1:29:44] zoning category for all commercial for

[1:29:46] commercial activity. We also noted that

[1:29:49] there were another 20 plus conditional

[1:29:51] uses in the base LR zoning uh that would

[1:29:54] require PNZ and council review if a

[1:29:57] conditional use of that sort was to be

[1:29:59] requested. They were not requested

[1:30:01] [clears throat]

[1:30:02] because we recognize that the decision

[1:30:03] could have an impact on future resoning

[1:30:05] in the entire neighborhood. Uh we spent

[1:30:07] considerable time talking about

[1:30:09] potential future reszoning in the

[1:30:10] district and the implications for

[1:30:12] preserving the district's character and

[1:30:15] while enhancing the overall value and

[1:30:16] aesthetics of that particular

[1:30:18] neighborhood. We expect that the comp

[1:30:20] plan when it's finalized will address

[1:30:21] this issue in more detail. Although

[1:30:23] zoning was the focus of our discussion

[1:30:26] like we normally do, we couldn't help

[1:30:28] but get into some of the aspects of the

[1:30:29] concept plan and we did offer some

[1:30:32] suggestions to staff with regard to

[1:30:33] parking hours of operation and those

[1:30:36] kinds of things. But again, we tried to

[1:30:38] focus on the fact that this was a

[1:30:39] reasonzoning request and not a site

[1:30:41] development plan. Finally, we verified

[1:30:43] that Historic Preservation Commission

[1:30:45] would be involved in reviewing the site

[1:30:46] development plan because they have to

[1:30:48] come up with a recommendation for

[1:30:49] certificate of appropriateness and we

[1:30:51] certainly deferred to their judgment on

[1:30:53] those matters in the historic districts.

[1:30:55] So, with that, PNZ is recommending

[1:30:57] approval of the uh of the request

[1:30:59] [clears throat] for the reszoning to LR.

[1:31:01] Uh the vote was 4:1, although I think it

[1:31:03] was a little closer than 4:1 indicates.

[1:31:05] It was a spirited discussion. So, with

[1:31:07] that, I'll answer any questions that you

[1:31:08] might have.

[1:31:10] Anyone have any questions at this time

[1:31:12] from him?

[1:31:13] » You said the timing,

[1:31:16] the hours of operation that were

[1:31:18] mentioned when we approved this, are

[1:31:20] those set in stone or would that come

[1:31:22] back at a later time?

[1:31:23] » That'll have to be discussed during the

[1:31:25] development uh plan review. That's not a

[1:31:27] zoning issue.

[1:31:27] » Actually, no. That's in your

[1:31:28] recommendation then Sarah

[1:31:32] limit the hours of operation.

[1:31:33] » Yeah, that's why I asked.

[1:31:35] » So, it would be

[1:31:35] » I I will pipe in. So the conditional

[1:31:39] overlay would um impose that

[1:31:45] that time that schedule you know

[1:31:48] regardless of if it changes property

[1:31:51] owners um if the property changes hands.

[1:31:55] This is not specific to this business.

[1:31:56] it would apply to all businesses and

[1:31:59] really that is to protect the existing

[1:32:01] residents um and just make sure that you

[1:32:05] know uh good intentions don't turn into

[1:32:07] a nuisance ultimately like

[1:32:10] » We want um for everybody to

[1:32:13] » So you know

[1:32:14] » At at the end of the day if we go by

[1:32:16] your recommendation not what PNC

[1:32:17] approved those hours would be

[1:32:20] » Yes

[1:32:20] » Covered up which is what you were asking

[1:32:22] I think

[1:32:25] » That was subsequent to the PNC Right.

[1:32:26] Yeah. Right.

[1:32:27] » What was the biggest hesitation?

[1:32:29] » Say again.

[1:32:29] » What was the biggest biggest hesitation

[1:32:31] do you see?

[1:32:32] » I think the biggestation uh on this

[1:32:34] whole thing is is

[1:32:36] we we would we would like to have seen a

[1:32:39] little more material on the vision for

[1:32:41] the historic district out of the comp

[1:32:43] plan. Uh I think when we deal with these

[1:32:46] issues, these these issues come up. Uh

[1:32:48] it's difficult as you know to do these

[1:32:50] things on a individual peace meal basis.

[1:32:52] And if you had the long-term vision

[1:32:54] described before you and we had proved

[1:32:57] that this is the direction we want to go

[1:32:58] with this historic district, it would

[1:32:59] have made the discussion a lot easier.

[1:33:01] Uh I think what [clears throat] we found

[1:33:03] in the discussion was there's a large

[1:33:04] concern, a huge concern about

[1:33:07] maintaining the quality and the

[1:33:08] character of the historic district on

[1:33:10] the one hand. On the other hand, what we

[1:33:12] also recognized is is that that uh

[1:33:15] investment in the in the structures and

[1:33:17] so forth in that neighborhood could

[1:33:18] certainly improve the aesthetics and the

[1:33:20] overall appeal of the neighborhood. And

[1:33:21] so how do you balance that? That's a

[1:33:23] tough question. That's a very tough

[1:33:24] question. We think that this particular

[1:33:27] home is one of the stars of this

[1:33:29] historic district. And so we certainly

[1:33:31] welcome the idea of renovating it,

[1:33:32] improving it, and bringing it back to

[1:33:34] its glory on the one hand. On the other

[1:33:35] hand, what we can foresee is we can

[1:33:38] foresee a number of other requests

[1:33:39] forthcoming about reszoning other

[1:33:41] properties in the area for similar

[1:33:43] reasons, commercial type activity. And

[1:33:45] that was a concern of ours. And we

[1:33:46] discussed that at length

[1:33:49] » When you guys were choosing times.

[1:33:52] How did you come up with 9 to7? Was that

[1:33:56] based on um just residential concerns?

[1:33:59] Was that also based on businesses in the

[1:34:01] area? Did you guys at all consider um

[1:34:04] doing stuff to where when you have a

[1:34:06] venue that has inside and outside? Um

[1:34:08] sometimes they'll do like open until 9,

[1:34:11] but after 7 any outdoor activity has to

[1:34:14] cease. like can you bring more light

[1:34:16] into that conversation and how you got

[1:34:17] to those times?

[1:34:18] » So, you know, we're we're definitely

[1:34:20] forward thinking when it comes to the

[1:34:22] times. Um we don't want to limit, you

[1:34:25] know, this thought process to just the

[1:34:28] immediate um but immediate

[1:34:31] considerations

[1:34:33] were definitely taken into account in

[1:34:35] speaking with um the applicants. their

[1:34:38] business operates usually between the

[1:34:40] hours of 9:00 am and 6 pm. Um, so, you

[1:34:46] know, in in order to be generous, uh, if

[1:34:49] you want to call it that, we did extend,

[1:34:52] [snorts] you know, the operating hours a

[1:34:53] little bit past their regular hours of

[1:34:57] business. Um, and we do think that this

[1:35:00] is an appropriate uh consideration when,

[1:35:05] you know, taking into account that there

[1:35:07] are neighboring residences around the

[1:35:10] business. And so yes, you know, you do

[1:35:14] want to balance um the needs of the

[1:35:17] business and its usual operating hours

[1:35:20] with the needs of the surrounding

[1:35:22] properties to make sure that when you

[1:35:25] make a recommendation as staff that

[1:35:27] you're considering, you know, the needs

[1:35:31] of um not only the applicant but the

[1:35:34] greater community surrounding. So I hope

[1:35:38] that answers your question. Was the

[1:35:39] applicant okay with the time that was

[1:35:42] given?

[1:35:43] » I'm sorry.

[1:35:44] » Did the applicant express what time

[1:35:47] ideally they would like to stay open?

[1:35:48] » They did. Yes. So, they expressed that

[1:35:51] they're not open past 6

[1:35:54] and that, you know, you can look at the

[1:35:57] planning and zoning commission meeting

[1:35:58] if you would like, but that's what they

[1:36:01] expressed.

[1:36:04] Uh, sorry. Go ahead. Were you going to

[1:36:06] say something? Okay.

[1:36:09] um

[1:36:10] pivoting to parking.

[1:36:13] Are you guys when we were talking about

[1:36:15] So I saw some of the parking spots that

[1:36:17] were around there, they had mentioned um

[1:36:19] talking to Pig Pen, Pig Pen allowing for

[1:36:21] some spots as well. How are how is the

[1:36:25] committee going to deal with parking in

[1:36:27] the future? Would y'all require like if

[1:36:28] they if pigpen allowed it, would you

[1:36:30] require there to actually be a contract

[1:36:32] in place with other businesses or I know

[1:36:35] eventually if they did off-site parking

[1:36:36] that would probably have to come back to

[1:36:38] council, but did y'all discuss the

[1:36:39] details of what that would look like?

[1:36:42] That's a great question. So if um if

[1:36:47] there is, you know, I guess a long-term

[1:36:52] willingness on the part of those

[1:36:53] neighboring businesses to share parking

[1:36:57] with the applicants, then that would

[1:37:00] require a long-term parking agreement.

[1:37:03] It would also require a variance. So,

[1:37:06] they would have to go, you know, in

[1:37:08] front of PNZ and ultimately city council

[1:37:12] to get that type of variance. Um, when

[1:37:15] it comes to the parking spaces that

[1:37:19] they're showing in their updated site

[1:37:22] plan, um, those would not require a

[1:37:26] variance in and of themselves. that

[1:37:28] would require a separate type of um

[1:37:32] licensing, right-of-way licensing and

[1:37:35] sidewalk easement agreement with the

[1:37:38] city. And so that would have to be um

[1:37:42] done in concert with our legal staff,

[1:37:46] Mr. Anise Alani, who is here this

[1:37:48] evening, and also with the assistance of

[1:37:51] our city engineer, Chad Gilpin. So

[1:37:54] hopefully that answers your question.

[1:37:56] Yeah.

[1:38:06] the the applicant can return up there

[1:38:09] for ask direct question.

[1:38:11] » Can I ask?

[1:38:12] » Okay. Um for the applicants, can y'all

[1:38:14] um give me your opinion on the times

[1:38:17] from 9 to 7 and if you are comfortable

[1:38:19] with that and you feel like it wouldn't

[1:38:21] how that would affect your business. I

[1:38:24] think

[1:38:26] » We might have to have you go

[1:38:27] » On the phone so you're on record. Okay.

[1:38:29] » Sorry.

[1:38:34] » Perfect.

[1:38:36] » Um like Sarah said, she is correct. The

[1:38:38] spa will be open from about 9:00 to

[1:38:40] 7:00. That's our hours at Glow right now

[1:38:42] or 9 to 6. I do not see an extension of

[1:38:44] that time. I do see a severe limitation

[1:38:47] in using this building as like I said a

[1:38:50] fundraiser or anything to do with with

[1:38:54] helping the community. And that is a big

[1:38:56] part of what we want to do. If everyone

[1:38:58] has to be gone by 7:00, I we go to tons

[1:39:00] of fundraising. They start at 7. I I'm

[1:39:02] not asking for 10 p.m. midnight, none of

[1:39:04] that. But I think 9 would be a more

[1:39:06] appropriate time. um it won't be used

[1:39:08] that often, but if if we're, you know,

[1:39:11] having to talk about it now and I can

[1:39:13] never change it, seven is severely

[1:39:15] limiting. And is that what everybody

[1:39:17] else has as a conditional approval? Is

[1:39:20] that extra limiting to us as opposed to

[1:39:23] everybody else? Because I wouldn't want

[1:39:25] that either.

[1:39:27] Okay. I'm not sure. Can staff answer

[1:39:29] that question? Like I know Pig Pen has

[1:39:31] events. They close at 8 um during the

[1:39:35] week and then but they'll have events

[1:39:36] like outdoors. How does that work? Do

[1:39:38] they have to get permission from the

[1:39:40] city for that?

[1:39:41] » Yeah, I can address that. And to

[1:39:42] clarify, so what we're discussing here

[1:39:44] is a conditional overlay. So it's kind

[1:39:46] of a a standalone overlay district on

[1:39:48] this particular piece of property that

[1:39:50] we're discussing. [clears throat]

[1:39:51] » Uh so it's an opportunity to address the

[1:39:53] unique nature of this development. maybe

[1:39:55] in a situation like this where um where

[1:39:59] the base zoning district may not be

[1:40:00] fully appropriate there without any

[1:40:02] additional uh constraints. Um so the

[1:40:06] only times where hours of operation

[1:40:07] would be limited are in cases where

[1:40:10] there's a conditional use permit like

[1:40:12] maybe for a bar for instance

[1:40:15] um or or a conditional overlay. I can't

[1:40:18] think of a conditional overlay that we

[1:40:20] have active today that limits the hours

[1:40:22] of operation. I'm looking around the

[1:40:24] room at other staff to see if they're

[1:40:25] aware of it, but I it's it's not common

[1:40:28] practice probably because we don't see

[1:40:30] very many of these conditional overlays.

[1:40:32] Um they're they're rare particularly for

[1:40:35] retail uses.

[1:40:36] » So with the conditional overlay, if any

[1:40:38] business in the future at this property,

[1:40:41] if they wanted to have a fundraiser or

[1:40:43] an event after the normal operating

[1:40:45] business hours, how would they be able

[1:40:47] to do that? they would come back with an

[1:40:49] amendment to that conditional overlay

[1:40:52] similar to a zoning change. They'd come

[1:40:53] back before planning and zoning

[1:40:54] commission and city council to request

[1:40:56] an amendment to that because that is

[1:40:58] written at that point into the zoning

[1:40:59] ordinance of that property.

[1:41:01] » So, it would have to be an entire

[1:41:02] ordinance change and not just a one-time

[1:41:04] exception for a onetime amendment.

[1:41:06] » I don't see an option there on these.

[1:41:09] » Um, yeah, that's a it's a it's a good

[1:41:13] contingency that we hadn't thought of

[1:41:14] when drafting the conditional overlay.

[1:41:16] And I I might suggest that in the hours

[1:41:19] of operation condition, if we added

[1:41:22] words to the effect of except as

[1:41:24] authorized by a validly issued special

[1:41:28] event permit, um

[1:41:31] then we could deal with that through the

[1:41:33] special event permit process and they

[1:41:36] wouldn't have to come back for an

[1:41:37] amendment.

[1:41:39] » I would like that. How did the other

[1:41:41] members on the dice?

[1:41:42] » I'm not debating it. You're asking

[1:41:43] questions and then start talking about

[1:41:45] it. Never mind. I don't care about

[1:41:47] y'all's opinion.

[1:41:48] » We'll have a good discussion.

[1:41:49] » Just kidding. Okay. Okay. Um, but what

[1:41:52] you just said, have we ever done that

[1:41:54] before or that'd be something new?

[1:41:56] » Not during my time.

[1:41:57] » Okay. All right. I think that's it for

[1:41:59] me.

[1:42:02] » Any other questions?

[1:42:04] » I do. Um,

[1:42:07] » And

[1:42:10] okay, y'all had your presentation.

[1:42:11] » Go ahead, Russell.

[1:42:13] » Okay. Um, I I just want to be clear on

[1:42:16] on the reading of sub uh section five at

[1:42:20] the end of accessory uses and outdoor

[1:42:22] amenities. Second paragraph, no pool,

[1:42:26] cabana, patio, food, or beverage area,

[1:42:30] gathering area, or other outdoor amenity

[1:42:34] may operate as independent principal

[1:42:37] use. restaurant, bar, special event

[1:42:40] facility, commercial recreation use, or

[1:42:44] commercial entertainment use.

[1:42:49] » That's a Tory or Anise question.

[1:42:53] Sorry, I I heard what you read, but I

[1:42:55] didn't catch the question.

[1:42:58] So the question is it that's

[1:43:02] highly limiting

[1:43:05] on a conditional use permit to go back

[1:43:08] and utilize the space as a nonprofit

[1:43:14] um fundraiser. H how do we and and our

[1:43:18] client how how do we get past that

[1:43:20] verbiage? Uh so and I'll stand to be

[1:43:24] corrected by the planning director but

[1:43:27] what section five of the condition um is

[1:43:31] meant to say and I think does is you've

[1:43:34] got accessory uses and independent

[1:43:37] principal uses. So accessory uses and

[1:43:41] activities are sort of non-permanent

[1:43:45] occasional exceptional events and those

[1:43:48] are and so I'll just read what the rule

[1:43:51] is again. Accessory uses and activities

[1:43:54] are allowed only when customarily

[1:43:57] incidental and subordinate to a

[1:43:59] principal use permitted by right or

[1:44:01] authorized through a conditional use

[1:44:03] permit are located on the property and

[1:44:05] comply with all applicable city code

[1:44:08] requirements. So something like a

[1:44:10] fundraiser like and it's not a

[1:44:12] fundraising center, it's not place

[1:44:14] that's rented out for fundraisers, but

[1:44:16] is a you know essentially a one-off

[1:44:19] fundraiser.

[1:44:20] » Yes, sir. If that were customarily

[1:44:24] incidental and subordinate to the

[1:44:26] principal use,

[1:44:29] uh then

[1:44:30] that uh would be fine as long as it

[1:44:34] meets all the requirements and is

[1:44:36] subject to what might be an amendment

[1:44:39] from the DY. We could independently

[1:44:42] allow activities that are authorized by

[1:44:45] special event permit regardless of what

[1:44:48] the principal use is. the the second

[1:44:50] provision which it sounded like maybe

[1:44:52] caused more anxiety

[1:44:54] um is saying you can't have an

[1:44:58] independent principal use

[1:45:00] uh like you can't use the pool or the

[1:45:04] cabana etc as an independent principal

[1:45:07] use um so you can't turn it into like

[1:45:13] the primary business can't be a swimming

[1:45:15] pool

[1:45:16] » Understood

[1:45:18] » So going back to your recommendation of

[1:45:21] utilizing a a special request

[1:45:25] through the cups.

[1:45:28] » Uh so the cup is is different. That's if

[1:45:31] you want to add another principal use.

[1:45:33] If you wanted to add another occasional

[1:45:36] use

[1:45:37] » That could be uh if an amendment's made

[1:45:40] to a special event permit. special event

[1:45:43] permit,

[1:45:44] » Which is essentially what the city does,

[1:45:46] you know, throughout the city. If

[1:45:47] someone's having a special event at, you

[1:45:51] know, a restaurant, restaurant's a bad

[1:45:53] example, but,

[1:45:55] I don't know, a golf club or a daycare.

[1:45:59] Uh, we don't really look at what the

[1:46:01] primary use is. We're allowing a special

[1:46:05] event. Um, you know, kind of

[1:46:08] » Okay. Thank you.

[1:46:09] » Despite the original zoning.

[1:46:10] » I appreciate it. Any

[1:46:14] other questions? I

[1:46:15] » I had a question and I can't find it

[1:46:17] now. There was a list of things we've

[1:46:19] done through the years in the in that

[1:46:22] historical area changing zoning.

[1:46:25] » And I'll say the there is a list in the

[1:46:28] packet. It's the last attachment showing

[1:46:30] all the permitted and conditional uses.

[1:46:32] Is that what you're referring to or is

[1:46:33] it a

[1:46:35] » It it was changing zoning um throughout

[1:46:38] the years and I now I can't find it. I

[1:46:41] think it's probably

[1:46:43] Thank you for uh for your question. Um I

[1:46:46] think it's likely in

[1:46:51] section four of the review

[1:46:56] factors.

[1:46:56] » Can you tell us page number on our

[1:46:58] packet by chance? I'm just asking.

[1:47:01] » I'm not seeing it um on mine, but let me

[1:47:04] see here. Um

[1:47:08] » Cuz I'm wanting I'm wanting to to look

[1:47:10] at historically what we've done, you

[1:47:12] know, are we being consistent with um

[1:47:18] what we're allowing?

[1:47:21] Um well so I will direct you um

[1:47:26] unfortunately I don't have the specific

[1:47:28] page number in the packet but there is a

[1:47:30] section in the staff report uh it

[1:47:34] follows the

[1:47:36] um graphic with the existing LRH zone

[1:47:42] properties um and it is the fourth

[1:47:46] uh category of factors that we look at

[1:47:50] when considering considering a zoning

[1:47:52] amendment. So when you look at the table

[1:47:55] um [clears throat] that is underneath

[1:47:57] the header 2.28.2

[1:48:01] um it says factors on one side of the

[1:48:05] table and on the other side it says

[1:48:06] staff comments. So if you go to

[1:48:10] section four

[1:48:12] or actually my apologies

[1:48:15] I think I misnumbered it. It's actually

[1:48:18] meant to be section five,

[1:48:19] » Page 129 of the package.

[1:48:22] » Thank you. Yeah.

[1:48:23] » Thank you, Tori.

[1:48:25] » It listed.

[1:48:26] » Yes. So,

[1:48:27] » What you were looking for, Sharon?

[1:48:30] » What' you say? 129.

[1:48:32] » 129

[1:48:41] crazy.

[1:48:42] » Can you type it in there? There you go.

[1:48:49] Sorry.

[1:48:50] » That's okay.

[1:48:52] » It's all right. Uh, y'all go. Go ahead.

[1:48:55] » This over here.

[1:48:56] » This one. 129.

[1:48:57] » Yes.

[1:48:59] » That was it. 129.

[1:49:01] » That was You want to follow up with

[1:49:03] something or you?

[1:49:04] » No. Okay. No. Thank you.

[1:49:07] » We listen to a little bit of PNZ's

[1:49:09] discussion on this.

[1:49:12] » [clears throat]

[1:49:12] » I think what you're doing is the right

[1:49:14] thing as far as the project.

[1:49:18] I think that the overlay

[1:49:21] has been added since PNZ got to look at

[1:49:23] it. We're getting down into the weeds

[1:49:25] now. When we start talking, you're

[1:49:28] bringing in the first I've heard is

[1:49:30] maybe a special event or maybe a

[1:49:32] fundraiser. Well, are we a spa or we a

[1:49:35] fundraiser? And I'm struggling with that

[1:49:37] now. Before I was like, this is good.

[1:49:40] But now I'm hearing fundraisers. That's

[1:49:42] not your primary use. But we do have a

[1:49:46] fair amount of residents that are living

[1:49:48] over there who we're telling we're going

[1:49:51] to put in a spa. It's going to by these

[1:49:54] our recommendations from staff. It's

[1:49:56] going to be shutting down about 7:00 at

[1:49:58] night. It's going to have a little bit

[1:50:00] of traffic. They've allowed for all of

[1:50:01] the cars except for one or two. They can

[1:50:04] definitely sign a contract with a couple

[1:50:06] of people.

[1:50:08] My other issue with that is you sign a

[1:50:11] contract and I know Bill Warren, you

[1:50:13] know, he'll work out a deal. Bill Warren

[1:50:16] leaves, where's your parking?

[1:50:19] Every one of those. And that's the

[1:50:20] problem with off-site parkings with

[1:50:22] lease. And unfortunately, we've had a

[1:50:25] lot of turnover in businesses. I think

[1:50:27] Bill's pretty stable, but that doesn't

[1:50:30] to me fix the problem. In your case,

[1:50:33] it's one parking place. So, I'm not I'm

[1:50:35] not worried. If you had to have all 16,

[1:50:37] I think I would I wouldn't be

[1:50:40] supportive. But that's just me. And you

[1:50:42] don't have that though, so it doesn't

[1:50:43] matter. I really think we've opened up a

[1:50:46] whole new can of worms. I think it may

[1:50:49] be best to go back to PNZ, but it's

[1:50:52] certainly council's pleasure.

[1:50:55] I think the

[1:50:57] the concept of the spa, I don't know

[1:51:00] that. I haven't heard really much from

[1:51:02] council. Seems like that's okay.

[1:51:05] But now when y'all open the door with,

[1:51:09] "Well, we might want to do this and

[1:51:11] might want to do that." For me of

[1:51:13] sitting up here for as long as I have,

[1:51:15] when I start hearing we might want to do

[1:51:17] it, that moves over into the we're going

[1:51:19] to do this. We just don't want to admit

[1:51:21] it right now. So, I have a great deal of

[1:51:23] concern about that because those people

[1:51:28] that have lived there and are still

[1:51:29] living there, I feel like they have a

[1:51:32] fair right to know what's going on. That

[1:51:34] being said, there are view very few

[1:51:38] residents in that area that can afford

[1:51:41] to invest in these buildings and what

[1:51:44] you're going to do to make a nice place

[1:51:48] really nice and preserve it. So, I think

[1:51:51] we've got to be working towards that. I

[1:51:54] just don't know if the neighborhood has

[1:51:57] grown up enough to just blanketly say,

[1:52:00] "Here we are. We're gonna do this." Now,

[1:52:02] are we doing a disservice to the people

[1:52:05] living there? I don't vote on this

[1:52:08] unless it happens to be a tie and it

[1:52:10] can't be a tie because we only got three

[1:52:12] unless somebody else steps away. But I'm

[1:52:17] that's just my suggestion. But council,

[1:52:19] y'all ask more questions and y'all have

[1:52:21] a discussion over it.

[1:52:22] » And I agree with the mayors. This

[1:52:24] conditional overlay has thrown a wrench

[1:52:26] into this. If it wasn't for that and all

[1:52:27] this other stuff, we shouldn't be up

[1:52:29] here debating in depth as with as much

[1:52:31] of the conditional overlay. It should

[1:52:33] have been worked out at a not only staff

[1:52:35] but P&Z level. So they come up here and

[1:52:38] say we approve this or not and it's cut

[1:52:39] and dry whether you say we want it or we

[1:52:41] don't. I don't think we should be up

[1:52:42] here debating the times on it. That

[1:52:43] should be handled at a P&Z level. I also

[1:52:46] agree that it's a great project. The

[1:52:47] house sat on the market because it

[1:52:49] couldn't people can't afford to renovate

[1:52:51] at that price and that's why you're

[1:52:53] there and it's great. The parking, I

[1:52:55] agree with the mayor, is one parking

[1:52:57] spot. You know, not a not a deal maker,

[1:52:59] not a deal killer by any means, but

[1:53:01] overall, I like everything, but the CEO,

[1:53:03] since this is holding us up, I think it

[1:53:05] needs to be put down back to P&Z for

[1:53:06] them to look at and give a

[1:53:08] recommendation because that's what seems

[1:53:10] to be holding us up is that 9 to7 time

[1:53:13] frame on that. And that's just what I

[1:53:15] think.

[1:53:16] » Well, the type of events that would be

[1:53:18] going,

[1:53:18] » It's not the events, but I'm saying that

[1:53:20] it does concern me

[1:53:22] » That either.

[1:53:26] I don't think it's a question right now

[1:53:28] on that. I mean, it was brought up,

[1:53:31] » You know, you brought it up to do that.

[1:53:37] » Okay. You You've got to speak so they

[1:53:39] can hear. Okay. Otherwise, people You're

[1:53:42] Go ahead. But you just got to go to the

[1:53:44] microphone. Okay.

[1:53:48] That helps him record everything. Okay.

[1:53:51] [laughter]

[1:53:51] » Sorry. First time here. Um, I I did say

[1:53:54] earlier that I'm willing to earn trust

[1:53:56] with the city and come back. As long as

[1:53:58] we have an avenue to re amend, I I don't

[1:54:01] see a problem with this.

[1:54:04] We will earn the trust of the community.

[1:54:05] I'm not worried about that. If it's a

[1:54:07] matter of asking for a special event

[1:54:09] permit for something that happens every

[1:54:11] now and then, that doesn't affect us

[1:54:13] either. So for us, we see it as a

[1:54:16] non-issue as long as we have an avenue

[1:54:19] in order to come and speak to you again

[1:54:21] if we need to expand.

[1:54:23] And and I think that's what I'm saying.

[1:54:25] And Travis, y'all have not had the

[1:54:27] opportunity to fully, for whatever

[1:54:30] reason, understand what the limitations

[1:54:32] really are and what can you get to

[1:54:35] because we're all very close to a yes, I

[1:54:38] think. But you need to be make sure you

[1:54:42] know what you're getting because we

[1:54:43] don't want to do it and then box you in

[1:54:45] a corner.

[1:54:46] » You come in for permits and suddenly

[1:54:48] they say no and then you've wasted more

[1:54:50] Russell's time, everybody's time in this

[1:54:53] design. And so we want to make sure it's

[1:54:55] something that you'll be successful with

[1:54:57] or I do.

[1:54:59] » Understood.

[1:55:01] But ma'am, I'm going to call on you just

[1:55:03] because

[1:55:06] you think PNZ would appreciate the

[1:55:08] opportunity or do you think we're just

[1:55:10] wasting time sending it back down to

[1:55:12] come right back up?

[1:55:13] » If we appreciate the opportunity, we'd

[1:55:15] be more than glad to take it on.

[1:55:17] [laughter]

[1:55:18] » Well, I mean, you know,

[1:55:20] » Well, seriously, I

[1:55:22] think I think

[1:55:23] » Part of the awkwardness in my

[1:55:24] presentation was there's been a lot of

[1:55:26] work done that we were not privy to at

[1:55:27] the PNC level. Okay. we just didn't see

[1:55:30] the conditional overlay work that was

[1:55:31] done subsequent to our meeting. Uh and I

[1:55:34] think it does make some sense for us to

[1:55:35] go back and kind of massage that and and

[1:55:37] and process it. So, I'm happy to do

[1:55:39] that. I'm happy to I think it's the

[1:55:41] right thing to do because uh

[1:55:43] [clears throat]

[1:55:44] at our meeting when we work with staff

[1:55:46] on the recommendation, we repeatedly ask

[1:55:48] the question, are any of the uses the 70

[1:55:50] some odd uses that are allowed at LR

[1:55:53] detrimental to the neighborhood and the

[1:55:54] property owners? And the response from

[1:55:56] staff was we didn't see that. And we

[1:55:58] knew there were other conditional uses

[1:56:00] that would have to come back to P&Z and

[1:56:01] counsel if they wanted to pursue those.

[1:56:02] So we weren't too worried about those.

[1:56:04] And so with that we said well okay there

[1:56:06] really isn't a real problem with these

[1:56:08] uses. So we had a lot of spirited

[1:56:10] discussion and the vote was

[1:56:11] [clears throat] 4 to1 to go ahead with a

[1:56:12] recommendation to approve. Subsequent to

[1:56:15] that meeting the discussion kind of

[1:56:17] morphs into well what about a

[1:56:18] conditional late to further restrict. We

[1:56:20] were not a party to that. We didn't get

[1:56:22] involved in that conversation. That's

[1:56:24] normally the kind of thing that we would

[1:56:26] get involved in. So, if you're asking if

[1:56:28] we would be I I think we would be

[1:56:29] obligated to take it on, frankly. And

[1:56:31] so, I'm happy to do it. I'm happy to

[1:56:32] take it back and talk that through with

[1:56:34] the benefit of having the work that

[1:56:35] staff did on the conventional overlay.

[1:56:38] [clears throat]

[1:56:40] » We hadn't gotten there yet, but I think

[1:56:41] Yes, sir. Go ahead.

[1:56:43] » Just want to add a little bit more

[1:56:44] context on to why the conditional

[1:56:47] overlay materialized after PNZ. Up until

[1:56:51] PNZ, we had only received those two

[1:56:53] letters of support. um you know

[1:56:56] unanimous support you could say from the

[1:56:58] business owners that provided a support

[1:57:00] letter uh for the for this proposed

[1:57:04] zoning amendment. However, during PNZ,

[1:57:07] that's where we, you know, got

[1:57:08] additional public feedback in addition

[1:57:11] to the very good questions that were

[1:57:13] raised by the planning and zoning

[1:57:15] commission. you know, we heard from two

[1:57:18] um Trippy Springs residents during that

[1:57:21] very meeting and then also following the

[1:57:24] meeting, we received a public comment

[1:57:27] letter that was on the 31st. So really

[1:57:31] that that work of you know drafting a

[1:57:36] tool that would fine-tune

[1:57:40] um you know the original ask to make it

[1:57:45] reflective and responsive

[1:57:48] um to the surrounding context um and

[1:57:51] concerns of the people who you know care

[1:57:53] enough to share feedback. um that was

[1:57:57] really staff's intention to be

[1:57:59] responsive and so you know um I just

[1:58:03] wanted to share that. Okay.

[1:58:06] » And let me let me just make a quick

[1:58:08] comment about the two letters because it

[1:58:10] came up in P&Z. Both of those were

[1:58:12] business owners. [clears throat] Uh they

[1:58:14] were not residents. They were business

[1:58:15] owners and uh they may have had a

[1:58:18] different perspective on why this was

[1:58:20] important than the residents.

[1:58:23] » And that's what I was going to bring up.

[1:58:25] We I've heard from the business owners,

[1:58:27] you will help their businesses. I mean,

[1:58:29] you're going to make that grow. The

[1:58:31] issue is the residents and the residents

[1:58:34] don't come out to speak until it's too

[1:58:36] late. Two have out of probably 30, 35, I

[1:58:40] don't know how many live over there. I

[1:58:42] don't know if you're familiar, we had a

[1:58:44] project up on 290 that was going to be a

[1:58:46] sports center. We had the room full of

[1:58:48] people protesting it. All of them

[1:58:50] residents. The gentleman took a month.

[1:58:54] He came back and I don't believe he had

[1:58:56] two people in the room protesting

[1:58:58] anymore. Once everyone heard what your

[1:59:01] real plan was, he went out and reached

[1:59:03] out to residents and it shifted the

[1:59:06] whole dynamics of the room. Every one of

[1:59:08] us sitting up here were taking me

[1:59:12] sitting at PNZ. Russell, you may be on

[1:59:13] PNZ at the time. Nope. But it changed

[1:59:17] the dynamics. I think a little more

[1:59:19] homework with the residents and make it

[1:59:22] clear what you're doing and it's these

[1:59:25] surprises that's catching people. But

[1:59:28] council, it's y'all's pleasure.

[1:59:30] » Now, I think it's appropriate to to for

[1:59:32] PNZ to hear it again and all the

[1:59:34] changes. I do want to commend staff on

[1:59:37] taking into account uh what they're

[1:59:40] hearing and um responding positively um

[1:59:45] on both for the both the applicant and

[1:59:47] the residents. Uh because that's you

[1:59:50] know that's what it takes to make a city

[1:59:52] work.

[1:59:55] » Shell Ginger need a motion.

[1:59:58] » What type of motion do we need to send

[1:59:59] it back to PNZ?

[2:00:02] Uh, it would just be a motion to refer

[2:00:03] back to PNZ.

[2:00:07] » If if y'all decide if you want to make a

[2:00:09] motion for approval or denial, that is

[2:00:12] certainly

[2:00:14] y'all's prerogative.

[2:00:15] » I'd like to move public hearing.

[2:00:18] » Oh, have we had a public hearing?

[2:00:20] » Oh, need to open a public hearing. I'm

[2:00:23] sorry. Thank you.

[2:00:26] Do we need to postpone the date certain

[2:00:28] or anything so that we don't or do we

[2:00:30] have to go back for renotification? I

[2:00:32] want to try to make it easy.

[2:00:40] » If we do it date certain then

[2:00:41] notification wouldn't have to be redone.

[2:00:44] » Do you agree?

[2:00:47] » Let me open a public hearing anise while

[2:00:49] you think about it. Okay,

[2:00:50] » Sounds good.

[2:00:51] » This time we'll open a public hearing to

[2:00:52] item six. This is possible action

[2:00:55] regarding an application for a zoning

[2:00:57] map amendment.

[2:00:59] Is there anyone here that would like to

[2:01:01] speak to this item hearing? And seeing

[2:01:04] none, we'll close the public hearing.

[2:01:08] I gave them all a 10 seconds, but

[2:01:11] do y'all and I know you're going through

[2:01:13] due diligence and process. Is that going

[2:01:16] to just blow this thing up for you or

[2:01:18] y'all still able to work? Okay. We don't

[2:01:20] want to make it any harder than what it

[2:01:23] is.

[2:01:26] So, uh, we've already with tonight's

[2:01:29] meeting, it's the second public hearing

[2:01:32] that was in the notice. So, y'all can

[2:01:33] just refer it. It the desire is to refer

[2:01:36] it back to PNZ. It doesn't have to be

[2:01:38] date certain.

[2:01:40] » Okay.

[2:01:42] » I would like to move that business

[2:01:44] agenda item number six be referred back

[2:01:48] to Planning and Zoning Commission.

[2:01:51] » Second. Got a motion. Second. Any

[2:01:53] further discussion?

[2:01:56] All those in favor?

[2:01:57] » I

[2:01:58] » Opposed. Passes. It'll get a little

[2:02:01] tricky with calendarers on how quick

[2:02:03] they can get it on their agenda, but

[2:02:04] they will work on it so that the posting

[2:02:06] is as quick as possible. I'm not sure

[2:02:08] when their meeting is and then it'll

[2:02:10] come back to us the next meeting after

[2:02:12] that or 10 days later.

[2:02:16] » Okay. Thank y'all.

[2:02:19] » We're going to get there

[2:02:20] » Somehow. We'll work it out.

[2:02:23] Thank you.

[2:02:27] » It looks really, really nice.

[2:02:29] » Yes,

[2:02:30] » It very exciting.

[2:02:31] » I think it'll be great.

[2:02:34] » All right,

[2:02:36] and we're back to Talen's back on the

[2:02:39] dis. We're at [clears throat] item

[2:02:41] number seven, discussion and possible

[2:02:43] action to approve an engineering service

[2:02:45] agreement between the city of Dripping

[2:02:46] Springs and Burgess Knif, Inc. to obtain

[2:02:50] professional engineering services for

[2:02:52] the design, construction, and planning,

[2:02:54] acquiring, extending, upgrading,

[2:02:56] renovating, rehabilitating, replacing,

[2:02:59] and improving of the city's wastewater

[2:03:01] system. Really?

[2:03:04] And this is all to be funded or to be

[2:03:06] funded may be funded through the Texas

[2:03:08] Water Development Board and other state

[2:03:10] or federal funding programs. Do y'all

[2:03:13] want to send this back to PNZ?

[2:03:16] [laughter]

[2:03:19] Who's giving the report?

[2:03:20] » I'll give a

[2:03:21] » Brief report on this one. So, items

[2:03:23] seven, eight, and nine on your agenda

[2:03:25] are all contracts um related to water

[2:03:28] development board funding. Um we did an

[2:03:31] RFQ uh back in December of 25 uh in the

[2:03:36] anticipation of getting awarded the

[2:03:38] funding from water development board

[2:03:40] that we just got in July. Um,

[2:03:44] Burgess and Knipel is the first contract

[2:03:45] item number seven. Uh, they were

[2:03:47] selected uh, as the engineer uh, through

[2:03:50] that RFQ process. Um, so now we're

[2:03:53] coming forward since we did receive the

[2:03:55] funding with contract for their

[2:03:57] services.

[2:04:01] » Do we need to take these all separately?

[2:04:04] » You can certainly combine them.

[2:04:06] » We can combine them. Do I need to call

[2:04:08] them all out individually or 8 n and 7 8

[2:04:13] and nine? Is that good enough? I'm

[2:04:15] looking for a motion on item 7, eight,

[2:04:17] and nine or discussion.

[2:04:21] » Can I admit that my brain was still on

[2:04:23] the last item and I would ask for you to

[2:04:25] restate your staff report.

[2:04:26] » Okay. [laughter]

[2:04:28] » You're fine.

[2:04:30] » You're fine. Off and on.

[2:04:31] » She was taking the trash and my candy.

[2:04:33] » Yeah. So items seven, eight, and nine

[2:04:36] are that's okay. Uh contracts uh related

[2:04:40] to water development board funding that

[2:04:42] we just received in July. So back in

[2:04:44] December of 25, we were in the process

[2:04:47] of applying for funding from water

[2:04:49] development board. We were being

[2:04:51] proactive. So we went ahead and did the

[2:04:53] required solicitation

[2:04:55] uh for engineering uh financial advisor

[2:04:58] and bond council. So those are the three

[2:05:00] contracts that you see uh here. Um, we

[2:05:03] did receive our funding in July from

[2:05:05] Water Development Board. And so now

[2:05:06] we're ready to uh go with the contracts

[2:05:09] for the the uh re for the contractors

[2:05:13] that y'all selected uh back in February.

[2:05:17] » So not new people, same people,

[2:05:19] familiar.

[2:05:20] » It is the same people. Yes. Familiar

[2:05:21] with our our uh wastewater project.

[2:05:25] » Then I would make a motion that we

[2:05:27] approve items number seven, eight, and

[2:05:29] nine.

[2:05:31] » Second. Any

[2:05:33] discussion? And we do have

[2:05:35] representative from Burgess Nipel here.

[2:05:37] And Frank, I don't know your last name.

[2:05:39] » Failed.

[2:05:40] » Failed. Frank's are you new with Burgess

[2:05:43] Knipel?

[2:05:44] » You are right. Just couple of months.

[2:05:46] » I've been doing this for a long time

[2:05:48] now.

[2:05:48] » And Bill Ball. So they're here to answer

[2:05:50] any questions. We've got a motion. We've

[2:05:52] got a second. Is there any other

[2:05:54] discussion?

[2:05:56] All those in favor?

[2:05:57] » I.

[2:05:59] » Items carry.

[2:06:01] Item 10, discuss and possible action to

[2:06:04] approve a change order number one for

[2:06:05] the south collector project to include

[2:06:08] optional bid items number one and two

[2:06:10] for clearing grubbing silk fencing. Upon

[2:06:13] approval, change order number one will

[2:06:14] become effective upon execution of the

[2:06:17] awarded construction contract between

[2:06:19] the city of Dripping Springs and Santa

[2:06:21] Clara Construction Limited for the south

[2:06:24] collector project.

[2:06:26] [clears throat]

[2:06:27] Council, thanks for having me. So, we're

[2:06:29] talking about the South Collector

[2:06:31] Project, which I brought through council

[2:06:32] not too long ago. Um, the parties on

[2:06:34] this project are city dripping springs

[2:06:36] in Santa Clara construction. Um, of

[2:06:39] course, this is going to be funded by

[2:06:40] Texas Water Development Board funding.

[2:06:43] Um, one of the funding requirements is

[2:06:45] we need to do a golden cheek wobbler

[2:06:47] bird survey. Um, and those requirements

[2:06:50] end on September 15th. Um, associated

[2:06:54] projects that go with this are the

[2:06:55] driftwood treated affluent line and the

[2:06:56] east interceptor. Um and so yeah, we had

[2:07:00] the approval for this contract on the

[2:07:02] July 21st um council meeting. Um and

[2:07:06] notice of award to better went out July

[2:07:08] 28th. Um originally this contract had uh

[2:07:12] we we had these two bid items that I I'm

[2:07:15] presenting today, which is clearing and

[2:07:16] grubbing and silt fencing on the along

[2:07:19] the easement. Um originally we had them

[2:07:21] as alternate bid items in the contract.

[2:07:23] Um, we were in the process and I know

[2:07:26] when I brought this to council, we were

[2:07:28] kind of on the fence whether um, this

[2:07:30] would be part of the driftwood treated

[2:07:31] ethylent line or part of the south

[2:07:33] collector project. Um, as we get closer

[2:07:35] to the project, it looks like it's going

[2:07:37] to be on the city to u, the proposal is

[2:07:41] to change order these two items into the

[2:07:44] contract upon execution of the south

[2:07:47] collector project. Um, we do have a 10%

[2:07:50] contingency, but we'd like to change

[2:07:52] order this in. So, we still have that

[2:07:53] effective when we start construction to

[2:07:55] move move construction forward. So, um

[2:07:58] our anticipated construction start date

[2:08:00] when I presented to y'all originally was

[2:08:02] August 12th. Our new construction start

[2:08:05] date is September 16th is the

[2:08:07] anticipated start date. Um we do have

[2:08:09] those contracts in hand and we are

[2:08:11] working on getting them executed

[2:08:13] currently. Um substantial completion 300

[2:08:16] days um which puts us around July 13,

[2:08:18] 2027.

[2:08:20] Um stack re staff recommendation on this

[2:08:23] u would be approve approval authorizing

[2:08:25] city administrator to execute this

[2:08:27] change order contingent upon the

[2:08:29] execution of the construction contract

[2:08:31] with Santa Clara Construction LTD.

[2:08:36] Do y'all have any questions on this

[2:08:38] project?

[2:08:41] » I'm not immediately following where

[2:08:44] Santa Clara contract fits into this. Did

[2:08:48] you address that? And I'm Yes. So this

[2:08:50] is the the South Collector Project. We

[2:08:52] awarded Santa Clara the South Collector

[2:08:55] Project. Um we when we took that out to

[2:08:58] bid, we gave alternate bid items for

[2:09:00] these two items here. Um you know, so

[2:09:03] this project both has the driftwood

[2:09:05] treated effluent line and the south

[2:09:07] collector in the same easement. And

[2:09:09] originally we were in discussions about

[2:09:11] driftwood doing the tree clearing, silt

[2:09:13] fencing going into this project um

[2:09:16] through kind of looking back at the

[2:09:18] agreements. And so I went to you with

[2:09:20] that originally and so we left them off

[2:09:23] the original approval. Um after looking

[2:09:26] at agreements and kind of working with

[2:09:27] the land owner, there's been a

[2:09:29] withdrawal from Driftwood's side and so

[2:09:32] we're looking to get the project

[2:09:34] [clears throat] started with Santa Clara

[2:09:36] so we could go ahead and put the south

[2:09:38] collector in and then um we'll have to

[2:09:41] come back with a treated affluent line

[2:09:42] later. So in order to do that, we need

[2:09:44] to clear the easement and establish

[2:09:46] erosion controls.

[2:09:48] So, how is the Santa Clara agreement

[2:09:51] going to get approved?

[2:09:52] » It's already been approved.

[2:09:53] » That one was approved on July 21st.

[2:09:56] » So, this is a change.

[2:09:57] » It just hasn't been signed.

[2:09:58] » It's being circulated for signatures

[2:10:02] now. Um and

[2:10:03] » There's no nothing outstanding on it.

[2:10:05] Y'all just need signatures on

[2:10:06] » Just signatures. Um

[2:10:08] » Okay.

[2:10:08] » And then this change order for the for

[2:10:11] them to do the clearing silt fence.

[2:10:13] Okay. So,

[2:10:14] » It's kind of a preemptive change order,

[2:10:16] if you will.

[2:10:19] Why did Driftwood not want to take on

[2:10:21] item one and two, the clearing and

[2:10:22] grabbing the silk fence?

[2:10:24] » Right. I'll jump in. It It really was

[2:10:26] not a Driftwood issue. It's the

[2:10:28] landowner and requirements that they had

[2:10:30] for insurance and access and um we were

[2:10:35] kind of anticipating some of this and

[2:10:38] that's why when we bid it out we did uh

[2:10:40] add alternates. Yeah. Um, so after con

[2:10:45] continuing that NE negotiation and then

[2:10:47] finally wrapping it up with that

[2:10:48] landowner, we brought two different

[2:10:50] agreements to y'all within the last

[2:10:51] month with them. Uh, it just became very

[2:10:53] clear the cleanest way to do this is for

[2:10:56] us to do it. Um, yeah.

[2:10:59] » Do we need to state the amount in the

[2:11:01] motion

[2:11:03] the way that it's done in the staff

[2:11:05] report?

[2:11:07] » I did not add that to my recommendation.

[2:11:08] I think just by stating that you're

[2:11:10] approving change order one that that's

[2:11:12] the amount. I don't think you have to

[2:11:13] say the specific amount.

[2:11:15] » Are we ready for a motion or do we have

[2:11:17] more questions?

[2:11:20] » Ready for a motion?

[2:11:21] » Okay, then I'll make a motion that we

[2:11:22] approve change order one contingent upon

[2:11:25] execution of the contract with Santa

[2:11:27] Clara Construction.

[2:11:29] » Second.

[2:11:30] » Motion second. Any discussion?

[2:11:32] » All those in favor?

[2:11:33] » I

[2:11:34] » Oppose.

[2:11:36] Item carries

[2:11:37] » And thank you for that

[2:11:38] » That extra explanation

[2:11:40] » Discussion discussion and possible

[2:11:42] action regarding the appointment of

[2:11:43] Bruce Molton as the representative of

[2:11:46] Hayes Trinity Groundwater Conservation

[2:11:48] District to the utility commission and

[2:11:50] the reappoint of Charlie Boseby for

[2:11:51] terms ending June 30th 2028. Thank you

[2:11:54] gentlemen.

[2:11:55] » Thank you.

[2:11:58] » This is a recommendation from Hayes

[2:12:00] Trinity. They have one or two

[2:12:03] appointments on the utility commission.

[2:12:04] have two

[2:12:05] » Two appointments. One of the terms is up

[2:12:07] and they have recommended Bruce Molton

[2:12:11] and Charlie Busby is the current chair

[2:12:14] and this is a recommendation to

[2:12:15] reappoint him. [snorts]

[2:12:20] » Is there any information we need at all?

[2:12:23] No. Then I'll make a motion that we

[2:12:25] appoint Bruce Molton and reappoint

[2:12:29] Charlie Busby.

[2:12:30] » Got a motion. Do we have a second?

[2:12:32] » Second. Any discussion?

[2:12:34] » Um, just for staff, I see their agenda

[2:12:37] in there for the Haz Trinity Groundwater

[2:12:39] Conservation District. Can we get a copy

[2:12:40] of their minutes from that meeting?

[2:12:42] » I'm sure we will when they get approved.

[2:12:44] Um, we will get that. We did get a

[2:12:46] letter from them as well.

[2:12:47] » We requested that.

[2:12:48] » Yeah.

[2:12:49] » Yeah. Perfect. That's it.

[2:12:54] » Got a motion, a second. Any other

[2:12:55] discussion? All those in favor?

[2:12:57] » I

[2:12:58] » Opposed.

[2:13:00] Item carries.

[2:13:01] Item 12, this would be Chase discussion,

[2:13:05] [snorts] possible action regarding

[2:13:06] approval of employee benefits plans for

[2:13:08] medical, dental, life policies, the city

[2:13:11] of Dripping Springs, and authorize the

[2:13:14] mayor to finalize the agreement.

[2:13:17] » Hello, sir. Yes. Good evening, Mayor

[2:13:20] Council. This was uh move to the next

[2:13:23] item. This was we received we went out

[2:13:27] to bids for our healthc care benefits

[2:13:28] and we received Oh, there we go. I think

[2:13:32] we clicked here.

[2:13:35] » No, I clicked too much.

[2:13:36] » There you go.

[2:13:37] » There we go. Okay. So, uh our bids went

[2:13:39] out for healthcare. Uh we received that

[2:13:42] uh this month. Um upon the results of

[2:13:46] the bids, uh good news and bad news. Uh

[2:13:49] bad news,

[2:13:51] well good news first. We are loss ratio.

[2:13:54] [laughter] Let's go with the good news,

[2:13:56] right? And then then we'll news we sugar

[2:13:59] coat it first make it easier for you. So

[2:14:02] for the the good news is our loss ratio.

[2:14:05] This is what healthcare providers uh do

[2:14:08] u each year. Uh our loss ratio was 78%.

[2:14:12] Which is a significant improvement over

[2:14:14] years past. To give you some context, we

[2:14:17] were 132 3 years ago, last year 97, now

[2:14:21] 78. bad news. Uh health care costs have

[2:14:24] risen, so our uh rates will increase. Um

[2:14:28] bottom line, we

[2:14:31] uh recommend going back. We have current

[2:14:34] uh sticking with our current United

[2:14:36] Healthcare, which is our provider. uh

[2:14:38] based on the uh rates that we received

[2:14:41] back it is increased cost um in which

[2:14:45] we've highlighted I think it in the

[2:14:47] agenda packet but um this is for the

[2:14:51] most part be the same

[2:14:54] medical plan uh no difference in terms

[2:14:56] of the network in addition to the uh

[2:14:58] provider uh same dental and vision which

[2:15:01] is going to be through guardian

[2:15:05] » Questions

[2:15:07] good news also So is even with this

[2:15:10] increase, we've got it in the budget.

[2:15:12] » It's a it's a we budgeted for a 20%

[2:15:15] increase. This was significantly lower

[2:15:17] than that 20% increase.

[2:15:18] » So we'll have a little savings budget

[2:15:20] » Amount. A little bit. Yes, we did switch

[2:15:22] some things from the rates to the HSAs

[2:15:25] that were funding like we did last year.

[2:15:27] So

[2:15:29] » But it's all covered.

[2:15:32] Mayor, were you a part of the planning

[2:15:33] with them and did you get to see like um

[2:15:35] when comparing different plans with

[2:15:38] benefits or stuff like that? Okay, cool.

[2:15:40] » Yes, we had two different meetings where

[2:15:42] we went through it till our eyes were

[2:15:45] kind of cross-sided looking at all the

[2:15:47] different options and staff had looked

[2:15:49] at the floor.

[2:15:53] » Are we ready?

[2:15:55] » I'll make a motion that we approve the

[2:15:58] employee benefit plan as presented.

[2:16:01] Second.

[2:16:02] » Motion second. Any discussion? All those

[2:16:05] in favor? I

[2:16:09] » Motion carries. I've sat up here for 20

[2:16:13] some odd years. This may be one of the

[2:16:16] first meetings. We have not had anything

[2:16:19] listed under close session.

[2:16:23] » Congratulations, staff. [laughter]

[2:16:25] We haven't actually gone into close

[2:16:27] session, but it's the first one where

[2:16:29] there wasn't anything listed.

[2:16:31] » We're looking for that last motion to

[2:16:34] » Got a motion to adjourn by Talen. Do we

[2:16:35] have

[2:16:36] » Second? And all those in favor? We are a

[2:16:40] journey. [laughter] I didn't I

City Council Meeting

Agenda

Transcript