[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