City Council - Regular Meeting

long it takes to get from 2:59 to 3 o'clock, but  we finally made it. So, um it is three o'clock.   I'm going to call the meeting to order. Um we  have a full um presence of our council. So,   we have a quorum and we appreciate all of you  being here today. As we do with every meeting,   we're going to start this meeting with an  invocation and follow that with our pledges   to the American and the Texas flag. So, I'm  going to call on Pastor John Duncan of the   Church of Horay to lead us in prayer. Thank  you, John. Before I pray, I'd like to express   uh my appreciation for your service as mayor to  our community, and we appreciate all that you've   done and pray the Lord's blessing on your life in  future days. Let's go to the Lord in prayer. Lord,   we thank you for Christ, our hope, salvation, and  strength. And Lord, we thank you for our wonderful   community that we live in. We thank you, Lord,  that you bless us and guide us and lead us. And   Lord, we really need that every day. We need your  care. We need Lord your guidance and Lord we need   uh your ministry in our lives. Lord in this  room probably there are people who have needs   and concerns and burdens and we lift those up  to you knowing that we can cast our cares on   you because you care for us. And Lord today  we pray for this meeting. We pray for the   leaders of our community and we pray again your  guidance and blessing in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. United States of America standy for all. Well, thank you all so much for being here. These  chairs in in the front here are available. They're  

designated handicapped, but that's uh that doesn't  mean anything if handicapped people aren't here.   We'd love for you to sit there. Um we have a full  agenda today, but I'd just like to take a moment   uh personally to thank um all of you for being  here. This is my last council meeting that I'll   preside over as mayor. It's been an honor to  to serve this city for the last six years in   one capacity or another. It's been an honor to  serve with um Cynthia Kleinmith there who was my   mentor as mayor and um with all of the people  up here. You've been wonderful colleagues,   wonderful support, the staff. Um the city  would not be what we are without the people who   um sit in this office and and make it run every  day. I'm so grateful to every one of you. I'm so   happy that you're all still going to be here. Um,  I could not feel better about the handoff to uh   Jeff Jones and we're continuing u great um custom  of leadership in the city and I'm just so proud   that I was able to be a part of it. So, thank  you all for being here. I know some of my friends   are here to today to help me celebrate and it's  very special to me that you're here. Thank you. So, um, the first item on our agenda is a  proclamation declaring September 28th through   October 4th as Source Water Protection Week. I  hope we did a good job, September the 28th through   October the 4th of protecting our water, but we're  going to proclaim that week now anyway. The Laura   Colorado River Basin is one of the most vital  resources for our region. in this pro proclamation   is intended to bring awareness to residents and  res visitors of that fact. So I'm just going to   read a few few of the uh the things that are said  in the in the proclamation. Whereas the health,   prosperity, and quality of life of the city of  Horseshoe Bay, citizens and community depend  

on a reliable safe source of highquality drinking  water. Protecting our drinking water is essential   to preserve our own health and economy and  that of future generations. And all Horseshoe   Bay residents are encouraged to recognize this  precious resource and help conserve the watersheds   that are the source of our water. September 28th  through 4th shall be hereafter known as was source   water protection week in the city of Horseshoe  Bay. And this will be filed by the city secretary.   And I just want to thank Ray Garcia and where's  Ray? and his staff for the great work that they do   um in in providing us with with clean water.  So, thank you Ray very much. Um item number   two is a proclamation declaring the month of  October as code enforcement appreci officer   appreciation month. Um, code enforcement  officers provide for the safety and welfare   of citizens throughout the United States through  the administration of local codes or ordinances   addressing various issues related to building  construction, zoning, housing, animal control,   environmental stewardship, and public health.  Code enforcement officers are off are often   have challenging and demanding obligations and  often do not receive adequate recognition for   the job that they do. improving living and working  conditions for the res residents and businesses   of a local community. They are dedicated and  highly qualified professionals. The city of   Horseshoe Bay recognizes the outstanding service  provided by the city's code enforcement staff   uh which consists are they here of Chad Mercer,  code enforcement officer and supervisor M. Monte   Montano. M um yeah Mac Mononttoya. matory  here and uh code enforcement officer Jeremy   Jacob. I didn't see him there. So, thank you  all very much. Um they do have a hard job.

They are code enforcement officers are rarely  welcomed when they show up somewhere. Um but what   the work that they do is very important and we  appreciate what you all do. So, thank you so much.   And the last proclamation is um declaring November  3rd through 7th municipal court week. And I know   that we have our municipal court um Beth Coun is  here and also Molly is involved with it. Yeah.   Okay. So the proclamation says municipal courts  play a significant role in preserving public   safety and promoting quality of life in Texas.  More people come in contact with the mun municipal   courts than all other Texas courts combined and  the public impression of the Texas judicial system   is largely dependent on the public's experience  in municipal court. The horseshoe body municipal   judge is not a policy maker for the city of  Horseshoe Bay but is bound by the laws and   the cannons of judicial conduct and is required to  make decisions independent of the governing body   of the city council, city officials and employees.  and court administrator Beth Coons is entrusted   with the responsibility of coordinating municipal  court activities for the city of Horseshoe Bay. We   hereby recognize the vital services they perform  in their dedication to our community. Um November   3rd through 7th shall hereafter be known as  Municipal Court Week in Horseshoe Bay. Beth, thank   you so much and um also to Judge Madison for the  outstanding work that you all do on our behalf.   And it's true. More people see the municipal the  court system through the municipal courts than any   other court. And they certainly see a smiling  face when you're there. So, thank you so much. Announcements. Okay. Jeff Costa. Well, this one took a long time to get here.  So, today we are gathered to honorable honor  

the the remarkable milestone of Jason, Chief Jason  Graham. 25 years of service that he's dedicated to   the city of Horseshoe Bay. In October 2000, Jason  joined the police department as a fresh graduate   from the police academy. What began in the first  step of his law enforcement career grown into   a quarter century of unwavering commitment to  our community. Over the 25 years Jason has just   served, he has excelled. Um he's worked his way  through nearly every rank and role of a department   of the police department. Uh from police officer,  sergeant, criminal investigator, captain. In 2018,   he was uh named the assistant city uh chief. Each  position brought new challenges and each time   Jason rose to meet the profession's dedication.  His commitment to excellence extended beyond the   city limits. 2018, Jason earned the prestigious  Trilogy Award from the FBI Law Enforcement   Executive Development Association, a distinction  given only to those who successfully completed all   three of the FBI LEDA institutes, the Supervisor  Loser Leadership Institute, the Command Leadership   Institute, and the Executive Leadership  Institute. This journey which bring began in   2016 demonstrates his dedication uh to continuous  improvements of professional development. In 2024,   Jason's year of service, leadership, and  deep understanding of our community led to   his selection of the Horseshy Bay's third  police chief. Both the city manager and   uh the police chief Rocky Warlow recognized  what we all knew that Jason has the best he   was the best candidate for the position.  He is constantly demonstrating understand  

our community's expectation is perform exceptional  service to our city. Beyond his badge and uniform,   Jason is a devoted father to his daughters Aya and  Aspen. when he's where he whether he's kayaking on   the lake, fishing, camping with his girls, or  spending time with family, Jason embodies the   value of our community. Family dedication, love  for a special place that we call home. I would   also recognize that the Reese Association of  Alisa Norman has also helped Jason smile more and added to his happiness and  his mustache, too. Chief Graham,   on behalf of the city of Horseshoe Bay and all  the residents have served for the last 25 years,   we thank you. Thank you for your sacrifice, your  leadership, your integrity, and your unwavering   commitment to keep our community safe. Please  join me in celebrating Chief Graham's 25 years. Oh, it's gonna be a nice picture. Congratulations, Jason. But more than that,  thank you. Thank you for  

uh 25 very dedicated years and for  the great hands that our city is in.   We really appreciate everything that you do and  the professional kind way you do it. So, thank   you very much. The next item on the agenda is Ray  Garcia. There you are with another recognition. Mayor, council, on October 2025. Uh,  this marks 10 years of service to the   city of Horseshoe Bay and its residents for  Aaron Watson. Aaron, come on up, please. Aaron's position as a grinder, pump, and motor  technician. Aaron Watson began his work 10 years   ago in the utilities department field division  as a field operator and then moved into the   current role as a grinder, pump, and motor  technician. Aaron has repaired thousands I   say thousands of grinder pumps and motors for  our residents and has assisted in many other   roles supporting field operation division during  his time with the field utilities department.   Aaron has become the leading expert in grinder  pump repair for the city of Horseshoe Bay and   possesses a wealth of field operation knowledge  that has made him an integral and valuable team   member and mentor to field team members. Aaron has  he he has wastewater collection class two license   and his water distribution class C license. Aaron  has become known not only for his vast knowledge   and experience in field operations and pump  repair skills, but also known for his generosity  

providing great barbecue and other delicious  barbecue lunch specials uh for uh volunteering   his time to cook for his team members there in  field and as well as the entire department. Aaron   loves spending time with his family, fishing,  and devotes his time to missionary work both   local and overseas in various countries. Please  joining join me in recognizing Aaron Watson for   his exemplary 10 years of service and dedication  to the city of Horseshoe Bay and its residents. George. George. That's not the easiest job in the world. and we  want to see you back here with a few more stacks   on your on your recognition because we don't want  you to go anywhere. Thank you very much, Erin. Thank you. Um, so we've come to the part of the agenda  for public comment and before we go there,  

um, is there a way that we could get three more  chairs set up? We just almost We almost made it,   but we if we could get three more back  there. We've got Thank you very much. I'm Oh,   I know. Okay. You know where I've skipped you,  Carrie. Um before I We're not g We're not going   to do public comments right now because when we  go back to when we get to the area in the agenda   where that comment is about, I'll call you on you  then. Um, at this time I want to Carrie uh Craig,   our administrative services director and city  secretary is in charge of of solicitate soliciting   members for new committee. So tell us what we've  got for that. We're recruiting for planning and   zoning commission and the board of adjustment this  time. Those are the two groups and um we have I   believe three vacancies on P&Z and three regular  positions on BOA and three alternate positions on   BOA. So the deadline for applying is November  1st. the application's available on the city's   website. It's just a one pager, very simple. Um  you can call my office and um you could come by   and fill one out whichever way you want to do it,  but we encourage everyone to apply and be part of   one of our groups and help let us know how you  want to see the community handled. Thank you.   Yeah. Um it's it's wonderful when people volunteer  to be on these committees and we couldn't do our   work without the planning and zoning committee  commission or the board of adjustments. Thanks,   Carrie. Okay. Um we're going to have a  public hearing now. I'm going to open the   public hearing at 3:16. The sub public hearing  is application for approval of a replat of lot   um of a lot at Mitchell Point at Skywater which  um includes approximately 1.73 acres of land. And   I'll let you explain what this is. Uh Rick. Yes,  ma'am. Of course. Uh thank you, Mayor Council.   Uh I'm sorry. I was looking for the clicker,  but Oh, I'm so sorry. No, no, no, that's fine.

Okay. So, what we have is a as as you said,  Mayor replat of uh one lot into three at Sorry,   let me find my place here. Approximately 1.739  acres of land from one single family residential   lot to three single family residential lots  located at the termination of Spice Lily in   zone 10 of Sienna Creek. And so, as it is platted  now, this is the uh this is the lot in question.   This is what they are proposing to do. Subdivided  into three lots. The three lots will range from   0.524 to 6 acres each consistent with neighboring  properties on Spice Liy. Uh the lot in question   fronts on the culde-sac at the termination of  Spice Lily. Uh identical frontages of two have   an identical frontage of 48 ft and one has  46. That's the abupment to the culde-sac.   uh no variances or public improvements are  required for this. This uh application qualifies   for the streamline process without a separate  preliminary and final plat. So that's the part   where we'll approve both at the same time or  council has the authorization to do that. That's   part of the uh subdivision regulations found in  chapter 10. There were some concerns in the P&Z   about lot frontage and potential loss of Heritage  Oaks on one of the lots. The commission noted that   uh there's no authority to deny the plat based  on that. We do have ordinances that address   those and so they will be subject to our tree  ordinance and drainage etc. Uh so as such the   planning and zoning commission unanimously  recommended approval following the public   hearing conducted on September 23rd. Okay. Thank  you Rick. Is there anyone here from the applicant   who would like to speak? No. Um council do you  have any questions on this application? Nobody   will have a shared use uh of a Will they? No,  sir. Nope. They'll all have individual. And   there was some issue about the the frontage to the  creek. Is that's that's the creek right behind it,  

right? Yes. Right here. Doing this a little bit.  I'm I'm a little out of my element without Sandra,   but yes, ma'am. That's the creek back there. So, I  did have it. Now, there will only be understanding   it's just this lot. So, okay. There's somebody  from PMZ here. So, if I say something wrong,   just let me know. So, council members, do  you rest of you have any questions? Um,   is there anyone here from the public who would  like to speak to this issue? No. Okay. Staff   received no known opposition via email or  letter as well. And I'm going to close this   public hearing at 3:20. And council, if someone  would like to make a motion, we can move forward. I move to approve the proposed replant as  presented. I have a motion from council   member Morgan. Is there a second?  Second from council member um um   um Wadell. All in favor? Is there further  discussion? Did you you u all in favor say   I? Opposed. Motion passes. Okay. Okay.  So now we move on to business and um all of you signed up to discuss this.  So we have a a request for a variance   um from subdivision for well I'm going to let  you tell this is the Rick Ranch issue. So Rick,   I'm gonna let you This is a long description. I'm  let you tell us what Okay. Uh and I'm assuming   you don't want me to read it word for word,  so I'll paraphrase that. So, uh, yes, mayor,   council, residents, this is, uh, to hear a  variance to the subdivision regulations found   in 10.03.462 of subdivision regulations. It's  relief from general design standards related to   cut and fill. So, a brief overview of that  is uh, for cut and fill of a general lot,   anything over 4 foot requires a variance  for public rideaways and infrastructure,  

anything over eight feet. And so, that is what  you're here today to hear. Uh this proposed   subdivision uh known as RTOR's Ranch 1.0 is uh  just shy of 55 acres 54 and a half. It includes   approximately 123 single family residential  lots and seven commonly owned lots located the   uh sorted at the intersection of Mountain Dew  and Rocky Ridge zone 4A at Portion Bay proper.   So, uh, as you recall, this preliminary  subdivision plat was denied by the council in   November of 2024 due to non-compliance with the  cut and fill. U, since then, the applicant and   their engineers have been working on uh a couple  different proposals to to bring forth to council   to get that approval. It is a requirement prior  to the preliminary plat that if they have that   request, it be approved prior to adoption or prior  to consideration of that. Uh in my staff report,   you'll see so the applicant uh wants to use what  is a paper lot approach. Uh we did run it through   the attorney. That is an approach that is allowed,  but it essentially what they're asking to do is   they're asking for a variance to the cut and fill  now for the public infrastructure. They're asking   to defer the cut and fill uh on the lots to the  future residents. Uh they have some reason. They   do have a presentation prepared too if you'd like  them to give that or if you have questions ahead   of time for that. But that's essentially today  what we're here. They're asking for a variance to   that. Okay. Um I'm sure we will have questions,  but I think it would be a good idea if we saw   your presentation first. Absolutely. I'm with  K's permission gonna hand her the question. It's up to you. Yep. So, I'll move  to the opposite side. And your name,  

please. Erin Sandaval with  WGI. Got it. Thank you. Um, oh, sorry, that's backwards.  Okay. Uh, like Rick mentioned,   this is the variance for cut and fill. Um,  mainly what we're going to be looking at,   uh, did that that skip. Uh, so this was, sorry,  there's going to be a lot of back and forth. Um,   so this was the previous one that you guys have  pre saw last year. Um, and this one is going to   be the new one that you're going to be looking  at today. I also have a few printouts if the   presentation's a little bit too small for y'all  to see. Um uh okay so with this uh the variance   is very similar to the previous one in regards to  that we are asking going back I don't I don't know   yeah she went to get jewels oh so I think it's I'm  trying I'm sorry it's not your fault it's clearly   um so we are going to be requesting a variance  for I'm gonna just leave this here until she   comes back Um, I do have these if you guys  want to look. It has a little bit more. Thank you. So, this variance is for uh cut and fill. I'm just not going to touch that. Okay. Thank  you. uh for a ride ofway that is off of Mountain   Dew where there are existing residents off  of there as long along with our two open  

space lots that are providing uh detention and  water quality for this future subdivision. Um   those are needing because they are exceeding  that 4 foot within a habitable not habitable   uh open lot and not contained within the street  right ofway as typical public improvements are.   So with that, we are requesting the variance.  Sorry, I'm trying to remember to memorize   uh the presentation. Um the reason for the road  off of Mountain Dew of why we need the variance,   we did go through a couple of iterations with  city staff on just maintaining that road as is   and existing conditions and not touching it. Um  but after some discussions back and forth, if we   improve that rideway and provide a culde-sac, as  you see in that top uh right hand corner, um that   is going to provide an updated street section  for those future residents and existing and   provide adequate fire safety for those potential  lots. um if they were if that road was to be left   um unimproved and kept as is, uh future fire  trucks would kind of come to a dead end there   and then have to back out on Mountain Dew versus  that culde-sac would provide them that turnaround   uh capacity should should something be needed  there. Um we also need the variance in that   ride of way because we are proposing to tie into  that slope just south of that street and provide a maybe um and provide adequate 3 to one slope for  our tie-in so it has more soil stability. I know   in the past presentation we had some concerns  from council and uh citizens in regards to trees   and in regards to the horseshoe bay trail that's  just south of our site. Um I think on that second  

page you can see that we imported an image  to show the relationship of what our overall   uh awesome what our overall development  is in relationship to that trail. So perfect. Okay. Uh so just to this is the  street I was talking about up here. We   are proposing that male kiosk as well. um that  requires a variance. In these next few slides,   there'll be a closer up image of that. Um so the  variance request, just to kind of bring light,   is this street right here and these two detention  and water quality ponds. Uh previously mentioned,   this overall drainage plan with those ponds were  approved back in March of 2024 by LC. They are   allowing us to stack detention and water quality.  So they wouldn't have to be two separate basins.   We would capture water and we would treat water  before discharging it into the Horseshoe Bay   Creek. Um along with Grassy Null, the proposed  rideway, it is existing right away, but again,   we are going to propose to update it, upgrade  it, uh and improve that right away for future   residents and those existing residents that take  access off of it. As we know, this area is very   steep with topography. um have to get a little  bit creative. As Rick previously mentioned,   we are trying to plat paper lots and only keep  improvements within the ride ofway to avoid mass   cutting and filling of this overall site to  keep that natural topography. Um some lots,   you know, are a little bit more creative than  the other, but we think that, you know, future   home buyers looking at the terrain in Horseshoe  Bay existing residents are capable of doing so.   um and it helps the overall development  keep its preservation of its natural beauty.

These are the three areas um we are requesting  variances for. Uh if you can see it's mainly the   blue and pink that we are looking for that exceed  that four feet or this yellow. Everything that's   green and red are within that 4 foot. Um so like  I said us tying into providing this street we are   able to keep the street within that 8t cut infill.  It is whenever we start tying back into those   uh natural grades that we need to grade a  little bit more to provide soil stability as   well as providing ADA spacing and male kiosks uh  accessibility for future residents. the detention   ponds. Um, they are pretty big, but that's just  because I'm going to go back two slides maybe. Um,   so this site, as you know, is uh adjacent to  Horseshoe Bay Creek. Um, a lot of this water from   this nearby uh neighborhood is coming onto our  site. So, we do have to detain and treat uh that   water a little bit excessively per LCA standard.  So with this grade and cut and detention ponds,   um this one is a little shallow because we're  not taking as much water, but this this big old   boy is taking on a lot from neighboring area and  treating it and it's at the lowest point of our   site to Horseshoe Bay. So, we're keeping it in  this area, not adjacent to uh a ride ofway as we   could in intentionally do um but would require  more of a variance into those rightways over 8   ft. Uh we coordinated with city staff quite a bit  um heard citizen concerns and we wanted to make   sure that we not only heard but we addressed  everything that was previously discussed. Uh  

we did provide city staff global stability from  our geotechnical engineer and our wall designer   um since there are a little bit more excessive  uh cuts for those ponds as well as we did an   environmental assessment with Pepe Dawson  engineers. Uh city staff has that report of   their findings. Although they did see uh one  bird they did make mention into it. It's not   It's more of a traveler bird. They couldn't find  a nest. They couldn't find a tree. They couldn't   find what the environmental engineers distinguish  as a habit or habitable uh area for these birds.   Um they did recommend to ensure that we are not  removing anything that we should not be removing   in far as as far as trees for these birds is to  stay within um clearing again only within the   ride ofway, not the lots. clearing uh that's not  occurring during breeding season. Um after that,   regular construction can occur. It's just  the clearing of trees should happen within   a specific time frame. Um and then we did meet  with the Hill Country truckers um to talk about   that proposed trail uh to let them know how  far we actually are staying away from that   trail system and we're not putting houses right  next to it. Um, there is that open space lot. Uh,   you can kind of see it right here. So, all these  trees, you see it a little bit better on y'all's   printout. All of these trees are going to remain  um will never be touched with this development.   And even future home builders, they're not going  to be able to touch this because this is a 900   series lot. So, no homes, no habitable structure.  And we actually had a lot of coordination with   the truckers on how we can incorporate, you can  kind of see this little open space right there   um for this development and how we can propose a  trail connection to the Horseshoe Bay Trail. And  

I'll add it on at the last of these slides,  but we were in some coordination with them   uh and getting their input since they, you know,  walk it weekly and every time what they look to   see. Uh the additional coordination that we  will need to do as far as engineers is when   we reopen our review with LCR. LC does not allow  for any pvious uh pavement with imperous pavement   within their buffer. So no concrete sidewalk.  It would all have to be low impact development   trails and it would all have to be done by hand.  Uh which our development is on board with doing   and providing that for an amenity for not just the  city but for this subdivision. Um, but there would   be some additional coordination that needs to be  had to make sure that we're abiding by LC rules. And then this is the printout that you guys  have. So this is the trail system. So this   black dash line is our overall boundary line. Um,  but our home property line isn't going to be up   uh won't be up until up here. Uh, the city does  require a 15oot building setback line. So, we have   that shown there. So, really what you're looking  at is uh 210 ft between a potential back of home.   Um we don't anticipate home builders going all the  way to that property line, but that's in theory   what they could do. Um we also have been working  with city staff of providing u open space on top   of that building setback line just to ensure that  there's not going to be an accessory building   placed back there as well. Um, so this is where  those homes are fronting that trail system. And   as we kind of go a little bit north, this is  that detention pond. Um, and we're actually   about 300 a little bit over 300 feet away from  the trail that starts tearing off over this way.

Um, if we were to adhere to city's current 4 foot  and 8 foot variance, uh, 4 foot and 8 foot cut   fill requirements, um, we would have to severely  probably alter the terrain for this site. We would   have to do a little bit more of mass grading just  to make sure that we have more workability um,   to get the detention ponds. Those would be  a way bigger footprint. um as long as well   with uh getting ride ofways to adhere to what the  existing topography is out there. So to avoid all   of that uh that's why we're coming once more to  request this variance. And then to give a little   uh what we've talked about with the truckers, this  is what we're anticipating that trail connection   to be. That's going to be that proposed uh culdeac  down there. where there is a separation between   these two residential homes and we would cross  around maintaining to avoid these trees to keep   them um and then tie into that trail system down  here where there's uh less elevation difference. Um I have a question. Who did is this packet is  this information? Did you all provide it or did   they? I'm looking at page 23 where it's got a  map and it's got all this red and green on it.   Page 23 if it's in your packet that was provided  by us. Their slideshows. Okay. Because um what   what is the I can't read the I can't read the  legend on page 23. What is the red and what is   I I see the blue of the detention pond, but  what is the red and the green? That's wrong.   So, you might not have it. Yeah, this is going  to be and we can I should have printed that   out as well. So, the red and green are under  four feet. Um, everything that's cut and fill   uh not exceeding that doesn't require very  correct. Got it. Okay. Yes. Hey, council,  

do you have any questions for either Erin or Rick? You've already got a significant amount of  that's coming into that first area on the left   which is going to be a retention pond. Correct.  Uh yes. Okay. And that's without any development   whatsoever on this track. So this these ponds are  designed for maximum uh development. So they are   accounting for future homes that are going on and  everything. So for LCR to not get into too much of   the weeds, you have to tr you have to analyze  your site as existing and propose and propose   being the ultimate. So homes are there that  impervious cover. Um you know water's going to   be flowing a little bit faster on driveways versus  natural land. Uh so this pond is designed uh for   ultimate development with those homes. I'm really  interested in what what how much how many lots   and where are they are going are going to require  cut and fill in in excess of the four four foot.   Um, we did not go too deep into that analysis  just because these are going to be custom   homes. And after touring a little bit more  of Horseshoe Bay and seeing the uniqueness   that some homes have with stilts and, you  know, a little bit more exposed foundations,   home builders can get creative and avoid that cut  and fill. So, this would require new home builders   then to come to us for a variance if they wanted  a variance. if they cannot get creative. Yes.   And I will let the homebuilders is a little  bit more out of what my realm. Um I'm one of   the owners on the project. I can speak a little  bit more to that. Um the challenge with this is   we're not homebuilders. We're only looking to  plat the site and do the public improvements.  

So, it's difficult for us to say what a  potential custom home builder who purchases   a lot from us would want to do specifically with  the site that it's hard to coordinate, you know,   potentially a hundred different lots and say,  okay, you know, what size is the home going to   be? How is the foundation going to look? What's  it going to look like prior to even having a site   plan that we can show to them? So, um, yes, if the  home builders did need a variance, they would need   to come to you for that. Um, however, there are  ways that you can design a home and a foundation   so that you don't necessarily need a variance. Um,  and I believe as well, and Lacy, you can correct   me if I'm wrong, um, a home foundation is exempt  from, uh, the cut and fill requirements in the   first place. So provided they're doing everything  on that foundation, that would negate the need   for a separate variance approach, which could  require a foundation that it's extremely tall on   some of these lots. Correct. That is a potential.  Yes. But that would ultimately be up to the home   builder and how they wanted to design that home.  So then you don't have really much of an idea on   how many lots we potentially could be looking  at in terms of uh cut and fill variances in the   future because our concern is whether we're going  to be faced with multiple people wanting cut and   fill once once you guys are out of it. Yeah.  and it's going to take up a lot of time and   effort and then we're gonna be hardpressed to  deny someone if we've accepted somebody else's   variance request. So yeah, uh I'd I'd love to see  which ones uh are more likely to be faced with cut  

and fill over four feet. I know you say it's you  can get creative, but that that doesn't define it   much for me. Yeah. and and I understand that and  that's definitely a valid point. The challenge   is there are, you know, probably a dozen different  types of home that you could put on any individual   site. So to go through, you know, each lot and map  out all of the potential different variations is   an incredible amount of um I mean we would have  to be essentially mind readading a future buyer   and unnecessarily restricting the lots then if we  were you know to say like and I don't even know if   this would be legal to say something like oh like  well no variances or something like that. It's,   you know, it's it's finding a way to strike  that balance between allowing somebody to,   you know, build a nice home, not unnecessarily  restricting them, but of course not unnecessarily   uh burdening you guys with um, you know,  additional work. Rick, oh, I'm sorry. Go   ahead. Has your staff done any analysis of  that? We can if I have the pointer. So roughly to answer kind of what I think uh Councilman Jones  is asking. So he is correct. It is difficult on a   on a custom construction to really know exactly  where they may place the house or not. Roughly   you can see you can see a little bit from their  grading lines. As they get darker and closer   that's typically means you have a steeper grade of  some type. So there is a ridge that goes through   there. You can vaguely see it. You can or I mean  you can kind of see it through here. So the lots   that have the highest risk of that are going to  be the ones where the gradient lines are closer   together. So it's it's this section here. If  you've driven out there, that section drops   off quite a bit going back to the creek. Those are  the ones that'll be more challenging in the very  

least. You've got a little bit here, but these  these are they're at least spaced apart. They   don't have a lot of change in them. So it's It's  probably these lots here plus or minus 30 I would   say that are gonna pose the risk to council that  you're referring to. What's the average lot size?   Uh I want to say it's around 10 12,000 square  feet something approximately like that. Say   it's 54 acres and 120 lots which I should be able  to do that but it's about a quarter acre give or   take a little bit. All right. So the what's what  are you anticipating the housing size to be here?   Um, again, that would be up to the the builder,  but we were we're anticipating probably 3 4,000   square feet. You know, they would be nice large  um custom homes. That'd be have to be multilevel,   though. I think, and I'm going to wing this  without Sandre. I think the zone requires   at least 1,800. This could be 2400. There's a  couple things on a golf course. I think it's 18. 1,800 square foot minimum. So, but  obviously, you know, custom homes   may be larger. All right. How many of the roads,  the existing roads are having to be redone? Uh,   essentially all of them. Uh, so all of them will  have to because they do not meet current code,   not just uh slip. No, I understand the code.  Okay. I'm talking about cut and fill issues.   Uh the roads themselves are not requesting they're  maintained within the eight feet that's allowed.   All right. Then the next question would have you  guys looked at this I mean this proposal is for   123 lots. If you reduce the number of lots does  that change cut and fill issues? No it does not.   um the topography is still going to be the same  and it's just either you put that bad topography  

on a different piece of land or keep it on the  land that the lot that you're proposing. Um and   those that area that Rick had previously shown  um is very similar to the topography that's off   of Mountain Dew right now. If you see those homes  along, we had them in our last presentation where   there are homes that have are on stilts. um their  backyard is pretty well below what their house is.   Uh but those homes were able to be constructed  without that cut and fill requirement. So on   this on page 23 of your packet though, it shows  there is going to be either cutting or grading   required on every single road you're putting in,  not over the eight feet that's included within   the ordinance. So correct, these that are red,  there's probably going to be 8 ft of material   either either brought in or taken away, right?  Uh I would have to relook at the the legend,   but yes. Uh almost all of it has red on it.  Yes. I know we changed the colors last time.   Um but if you go back to the overall one, Rick,  sorry. So I guess what I want to know is what   are you how much are you going to bring in? How  much material is coming in? How much material is   going out? Is there any going to chance you're  going to ask us for a rock crushing permit? Um, I think just with the terrain that's out  there, there's going to have to be some sort   of pulling up rocks that's that are out there  right now. Just even the asphaltish roads that   are there are just contained full of rocks. Um,  we would have to abide by that. I think we talked   with city staff of what those hours would look  like and duration and I know that we as the I   think she's pardon me. So I think the question  mayor's asking are y'all going to crush rocks on   site for processing or you just hauling them off  and not not including jackhammers but actual rock  

crushing are you proposing to be honest we have  not gotten that far. We're trying to get this   variance. So we haven't gotten through like actual  construction scheduling or thoughts and processes.   Um but that is something we would consider. The  reason I asked that is because we had a recent we   have a recent experience and we didn't ask that  question. Okay. And then we ended up with a big   controversy because um we we ended up granting a  conditional use permit for the rock crusher and   everybody wished that we had asked that question  at the beginning. So I would like to know the   answer to that question. Um are you going to  you are you going to need that? Um how much   are you going to take out? How many dump trucks  are going to come in and out of the neighboring   property going down Mountain Dew? Those are those  are questions that it's our responsibility to   ask and I understand that you're just trying to  get to a point and you haven't gotten that far,   but for us it we would like to know the answers to  those questions. Yeah, I think that it's exactly   what you just said, mayor, is, you know, there's  there's a process that we go through between,   you know, planning and construction documents.  And once we have that, then we can look at   construction methods based on what's approved.  And and we're so early in the process at this   point. It's difficult for us to be able to go  to, you know, a general contractor or, you know,   infra infrastructure contractor and say, you  know, hey, are you going to do use this method?   Because they're going to say, I need to see the  construction documents. I need to see the plan in   the area. I need to see exactly what I'm working  with. I can't tell you until I have actual plans.   It's It's extremely difficult to give a concrete  answer. We have um I'm gonna council. Does anybody   else have a question? Oh, you mayor if you mind.  Uh Lacy Aer's um legal counsel for the applicant.   Um so we haven't gotten to the point with a  proforma that we'd be able to give you the   details exactly what you would what you're looking  for as far as the number of trucks exactly the   um most costeffective and timeefficient way  to tackle the rocks. However, the applicant  

is willing to work within the code and work with  the city to make sure that it is something that is   not disruptive to the city. Thank you, council.  Anybody else have a question? Yes. Um, how deep   is the east pond? That one is going to be about uh  six or seven feet. Okay. And then the west pond is   how deep? We're going over uh 10 10 11. All right.  And the majority of the var variances is around   the ponds, the lots around the ponds. Uh for this  specific variance, we're only asking for the pond   areas because we are not touching any of this dirt  that's over here. We're only working within this   open space lot, this drainage lot that we are  uh essentially laying out for the subdivision.   But but the variance around the ponds comes up  to the lot though, right? Uh for future you're   talking about the question back to potential home  builders coming in for a variance could if they   again don't get creative. Essentially those lots  are steep. So yeah, the variance though is like   she was saying they're not asking for anything  on the lots at this time. It's just that so it is   steep obviously coming off that road going down to  the pond. But um we have eight people signed up to   uh speak on this question. So I'm going to call on  Vicki Adcock and um Carrie has a timer over here.   I'd like for you all to uh keep your comments to  three minutes and if you just want to say ditto to   the person who spoke before you, that's fine, too.  So Vicky Hawk, I'll probably take a minute. Um,   good afternoon. I'm Vicki Adcock, 1307 Cats Eye.  Uh, thanks first of all to the city council for   listening to the Treker's concerns regarding  the Richter Ranch project. Um, I'm here today  

to provide an update on our experience with the  developer and uh, working through our concerns   regarding the preservation of trees. I'm happy to  report that they've been they've assured us that   they will not be clearing lots and trees will not  be removed except if necessary in areas for roads   and infrastructure. Uh the new trail if approved  uh will navigate around the trees uh as was   uh indicated earlier. Uh the developer has  provided detailed plans as requested and made   every effort to asssure all our questions and  concerns uh were answered. Our next steps will   be assurance that these custom builders uh that  are going to be building on these uh lots will   also respect the wishes of our community to pres  preserve the beautiful landscape of trees that   may involve education on the value of trees um  that trees bring such as um monetary preventing   erosion, slowing the rainfall runoff and um  and then cleaning the air and water as I've   mentioned. mentioned uh at previous meetings.  In summary, we're happy with the commitment from   the developer on uh preservation of trees.  Thank you, Vicki. Ellen, is it Angquish? Hi, Ellen. Anguish and I live the corner the  intersection of Mountain Dew and Grassy Null,   which is right where she was pointing out where  all that sure that renovation is going to be done.   Um I too am concerned obviously with the amount  of trucks coming in, the construction, the noise,   the traffic, not only during the improvement  that they are proposing, but the long-term  

effect of 123 homes navigating through this area  to build these roads. Right now they are dirt,   gravel paths. They're not they're not wide  enough for two cars. One car can go each way   on those roads. I've driven it. I've blocked  them. I've them. Um so, and they keep saying,   "Oh, the water's not going to run off. It's not  going to Well, they're saying now they don't know.   They hope it won't, but just a lot of concerns  about their lack of and they're saying we can't   guarantee what these custom home builders are  going to do." But if they're going to sell the   lots, they need to put that in there. you're  restricted to these rec these uh you know you   know what I'm saying so anyway okay thank you  we appreciate your concern Marilyn Campbell I've been before the council a little bit  and I previously didn't want objected to this   and I still have an objection um I've read the  current proposal that you had online. And to me,   you're just kicking the can down the road  to the future developers to the the new   every those areas are going to be expensive  to build on if they don't cut and fill. Um,   and you're going to have a lot of lots there. And  is there any guarantee that they're going to be   sold after you get all these? We have other lots  all over the country, all over this area that they   can build on. But if I and you're going to ruin  that whole environmental Horseshoe Creek area,   so I definitely object to it. Thank  you. Appreciate that. And Jeff Simmons. Hi, my name is Jeff Simmons. My wife and I  live at 1317 Mountain Dew. We also own the  

two adjoined lots. Um I have also spoken in the  past against this variance. You've heard all the   arguments today to deny this variance. It is a  very steep property. It's very environmentally   sensitive. It is going to take a tremendous  amount of rock coming out of that property to   build that infrastructure. And as you pointed out,  what they're asking is give us a variance today.   You don't have to give the v the builders a  variance tomorrow, but do you know how that's   going to be? That's going to be impossible because  you've already signal you will give in variances   and I hope you deny this. Thank you. Thank you.  Thank you, Jeff. Um well, I guess my concern is   um and I don't get to vote, but I wish you would  bring us something other than paper lots. Um, it's   our responsibility to look at these developments,  every development that comes to us, and make sure   that it's going to be a successful development.  We don't want developments in our city that aren't   successful, that that the lots don't sell. And  um, to hear that the lots are challenging, the   building, it's going to be challenging. I I don't  want to set someone up down the road to buy a lot   and it's too challenging or not cost effective  to build there. and that I wish you would have   brought us um more of a of a a total picture of  what this is going to look like. It it maybe it's   too much for you to do it. Other developers  have done it. Um we've we've seen that with   other developers where they brought us that that  we know there is a buildable building envelope on   every lot. Maybe not the one that you would want,  but it's possible. Is that unreasonable, Rick,   to ask for? uh subjective, but it is other other  developers have done that before. Uh it would  

mean essentially you would have a cookie cutter  home site plan and say this, you know, they're   not custom, but you could do that on these lots.  So, it is something that they could do. Council,   does anyone else have any questions on this? I I  want to state that uh I think you guys have done a   good job of addressing the trail and the trees  and that's off to that. I still think from my   perspective there's too many lots. I think if you  reduce the number of lots better better formulate   how those lots would work in conjunction with  the terrain then it would make less have less   impact for the custom home builders. I understand  your point and it's true. They can be creative,   but a builder is going to want to have to be  able to build a piece of property that he can   sell at the cheapest price that he can do it.  I mean, that's just common sense. And I think   if you reooked at this and reduced the number of  lots, you can you can charge more for the lot. So,   it's not going to it's not going to have an impact  to your negative, but at least with with reduced   some of these lots there won't be nearly the  cut and fill issues for the custom builders and   I'd like to see you guys address that. That's  my opinion. Um I just wanted to address what   you had brought up mayor about the making sure  that there's a building envelope on each lot. We   didn't do that for this presentation but you know  um last November when we had come to city council   that was one of the things that we had done and  presented to planning and zoning was we did a you   know essentially a conceptual layout on each lot  showing we have enough space to build essentially   a building pad. I don't remember the exact size  of the building pad but it would accommodate   um I believe a 4,000 square foot either single or  twostory home. So, you know, we we had done that  

on previous iterations and so you can do it. Yes.  The the challenge with that is it's essentially   just a rectangle on the lot, right? It doesn't go  into engineering an actual foundation for the home   on each lot. But we can definitely, you know, show  a concept plan that has, you know, a box that says   you could put a rectangular home with this square  footage of the foundation on this lot. So, you   know what? I I guess one of my concerns is I don't  I'm leaving, but I don't want to set this group of   people up for 30 or 40 um different hearings to  decide whether they need a cut and fill ordinate   uh variance to build their home. Um I don't I  don't think that's fair to the potential buyers   and I don't think it's fair to the council. if  it's possible for you to address that upfront. I   think that's the way we should proceed so that you  know what cutting what lots are going to require   it and um upfront. That's just my thought on it.  But um I don't I don't know if that's something   the rest of you feel or not. Back to my point uh a  reduction in the number of lots will minimize some   of the cut and fill requirements for the builders.  So I would like you to look this thing from the   perspective you're you're recommending 123 lots  55 acres um if that was reduced 10 15 maybe 20   how much how how much would that reduce so we did  look through we had many iterations with the city   from last time we heard to now and we looked into  getting rid of some lots but even if you were to   combine these two lots right there you still have  that fall. So, you're still going to have to deal   with that cut fill challenge. Doesn't matter if  it's two lots or if it's one lot. And even if you  

were to combine one, two, and three, maybe you're  not using that space and you're putting it here,   but you're still, if you wanted to fully develop  that lot, you would still run into that cut. So,   you don't see a Let me see if I say it a different  way. If there was a reduction in number of lots,   it would give the builder more options on how to  build on that lot. You understand what I'm saying?   So, if you've got an 8 foot drop, you know, you've  dedicated a lot that clearly they would have to   get some kind of variance or to your point, you  know, be creative on how building a stilt type   of home. I'm just suggesting that if the lot was  bigger, then how that builder builds on that lot   gives him more options. It becomes easier and less  less of an issue. I just don't want the point that   was made. I don't want to be going over this  thing every other month with a new builder who   wants to put a 10- foot side up in order to  have a buildable, you know, to build a lot.   when when all we'd have to do is expand the  lots because I think you could still make the   same income. I just like to see you guys look at  the potential of of expanding some of these lot   sizes that will give the builder more options  without having as much cut and fill. Yeah,   and we definitely understand that. And to Erin's  point, we did work on multiple concept site plans   with city staff to look at different variations  and what would happen if we, you know, did remove   10 or 15 or 20 lots. One of the things that we  have to do as developers is balance, you know,   what we can realistically do while staying within  code or a reasonable variation from code and the  

economic viability of the project. And so there I  mean and and you're you're definitely right. there   is a way to reduce the number of lots and then  get rid of cut and fill. To take a very extreme   example, we could just subdivide the property into  two lots and then we wouldn't need to do it. But,   you know, so it's kind of at what point in lot  reduction do we actually achieve what's needed   or what you know you're proposing. And what we  looked at with city staff is kind of trying to   find that line between at what point does the  product or does the um project just not become   viable? And in those lot reductions, you know, we  kind of hit this point where it's like, you know,   we would have to, you know, cut down so many lots  that it just doesn't even make sense. You know,   I I think we need to recognize that what  that they have some requirements in terms   of our our ordinances that they need to  follow and it's really not our place to   um to tell them how to design the project  the project. So, uh, if if they I mean,   we may say we'd like to have 30 lots in there, but  if if this viably can have 121 lots, I don't think   it's our place as a council to to go in and say  that's that's that's for not what you can do. Um,   I don't think that the density is something that  we can really um that that we can really address   as a council. Um, and I have a feeling that Lacy's  about to tell us that. Oh, well, I was actually   trying to hope to find some solutions because I  think we're sympathetic to the the city's concern   about what the lots are and the success of the  project. And so, the thought that we the problem   that we run into not being the homebuilders,  which it is very common for developers to to   um have a divide between what is who the developer  who does the paper lot and then that's actually   what goes to market. And so, we're not in a  position to be able to request the variances for   the homes individual lots at this point because we  don't have the engineering on it. Understood. So  

we would not be able to satisfy the application  requirements to even bring forth the request   without having a home builder on board which we  can't get the home builder on board without having   the paper lot. So it becomes this chicken egg. So  what I was suggesting to Rick is maybe finding a   middle ground. Maybe there is a plat that could  be suggested that eliminates coming back to you   for 30 different lots. Maybe it comes as a single  application for a set of lots that we have now   engineered and we know that they're going to need  the variance. So before they can move forward on   maybe a certain set of lots, we have engineered  those lots. The home builder has and they come to   you with one request instead of having multiple  crests. And then you can look at it as a whole. We would want Doy to weigh in obviously on that.  Well, just as I would say from your own letter,   you say that it just reduces if you follow  strictly follow the cut and fill regulations,   it just reduces the amount of developable lots.  And then you also say that um it doesn't meet LC's   water quality standards, but I don't see anything  in the information that justifies that. So,   I think you ought to start with if you strictly  followed the city's regulations for cut and fill,   what would that look like? And then look at  reasonable variances on certain lots like the   other developers have done. Is that is that  reasonable? So, so if I'm following looking   at the individual lots and seeing if we can  follow code, you say in your letter that the   um strict adherence to the 8oot cut and fill and  the 4-foot cut and fill would limit the number of   lots that are ultimately developable. What I'm  saying is what does that look like? The council   hasn't seen that. Well, I don't think we're  and then the other developers have done that  

and then shown what lots within the development  actually need a variance instead of um instead   of developing the lots as much as possible  in order to make a good rate of return. So,   we actually went over that with Roy when  he was here and why we say it would limit   us to developable lots because kind of the  exaggerated but very truthful statement from   Andrew is we would subdivide this into two lots  and that would be two two residential lots. Uh   we probably wouldn't need a detention pond anymore  just because of the amount of impervious cover. We   would get rid of roads. Um, if we were to adhere  and not do cut and fill, again, this life safety,   uh, updated road would not be a thing. Uh, those  residents would have to maintain existing access   from that dirt path. Uh, this pond would now  take up even more of a footprint space. Um,   and not be as deep, but I feel would be a little  bit more of an eyesore. Uh, and then as well as   this one, you would now have this pond probably  wrapping around this LC buffer getting closer   to that trail. Um, so we really tried to hone  in and hide and place these things that match   existing topography and nature and drainage. Um,  to kind of go back and want to hear, you know,   the citizens concern of runoff and not capturing  water. We are actually capturing all water. um the   street designs that we have have coverts capturing  it and all have to convey it into that pond. So,   we're not just letting water just loosely off  our property. We have to capture it and treat it   uh before discharging it off of our property. Um  but to uh Doy's point, you know, we kind of went   over what that would look like if we didn't come  if we didn't need a variance. Uh we would probably  

end with two lots. Um probably a little bit more.  You know, we could probably get six. Um but all   of those roads would have to be gone. There would  no be I don't understand what you just said. Uh   if we were if we were to develop this property and  not need a variance, we could go through the city,   get it platted. Um these streets would no longer  be there. Um this path, these streets that people   use as walking paths would not be there. they  would be somebody's uh private property. Um   so this connection, all of that, this would look  different. It would be like six homes. Um again,   that's being a little dramatic, but it wouldn't  be as open with mobility traffic-wise and walking   wise. So, your development, you're saying under  our under the ordinance that is in place would go   from 121 homes to six. Did I misunderstand what  you said? Well, just I think the the greater   point is that we worked through this exercise  in at length with Roy for you know many many   months in exploring all of you know the different  questions that have come up and I'm sure that you   know the planning and zoning department has  the notes of all of those meetings and all of   the iterations that we already did. So it I mean  and you know we're happy to put I guess another   um we can put another presentation together. Um  I think part of the the challenge and where we're   a little confused is that we feel like we've been  asked these exact same questions. We went through   multiple you know revisions with city staff to  find an acceptable alternative uh or what we   believe would be an acceptable alternative that  addresses the concerns as best we can. and that's   what we're presenting and then being asked like  the same questions you know can you do this can   you do this and I'm kind of I'm stuck on how  you know how we can actually get the answers  

um there or or to assure you that we have run  through those exercises and and looked at these   various alternatives. Well, you got to admit that  we've we haven't surprised you with regard to the   fact that we've always been interested in where  the cut and fill is going to be. Yes, definitely.   So, we haven't changed that much. That's true. And  we've and we've reduced um you know a significant   amount if we Oops. Yeah. Sorry, I'm going the  wrong way. It's counterintuitive. Uh so, you know,   in the top left here, this was the original plan  that we had presented that was defined and you   can see there is a lot more cut and fill that is  outside of the ride ofways there and we've you   know worked extensively to revise that to now  what we're currently proposing which is in the   bottom right which does still require a variance  but the cut and fill is very very minimal and it's   you know basically almost exclusively within the  detention ponds and then this small culdesac to um   you to the north uh on the northeast. I don't know  why I'm thinking this, but did Roy ever present   you with an iteration of about 80 lots if you if  you reduced it to 80 lots that you would not need   cut and fill. So, we didn't look at the cut fill,  but I think the one that you're talking about 80,   if I'm not if I'm remembering correctly, was what  this development originally came to city staff   and did like a pre-development meeting and said,  "Hey, here are acre halfacre lots. There are 80,   but they're all going to be served off septic."  Um, but city proposed, no, we want to extend our   infrastructure. we want to do that. Um, in order  to make that viable to provide that amount of   uh utilities and infrastructure, they had  to uh downsize the lots ever so slightly  

and add more lots to make sure that  those utilities could be installed. You have anything to add, Rick? Uh so I guess  with with both attorneys uh to to weigh in on I   think I think the the biggest concern of council  at this point is if if y'all grant this variance   is it is as one of the residents said it kind  of kicks the can for some of the variances to   future home builders etc. Would it be something  just kind of spraying on would I don't want to   speak outside of expertise zone as far as a face  plat etc. but you know in the gist of a plat note   etc. could they carve a section out would they  be willing to carve a section out and say we'll   either phase it or we can phase construction  etc and then go back and do the engineering on   that section to show what the variance would look  like. And I'm talking specifically to these areas   we've outlined that are likely to have either cut  and fill or you it'll take a a higher tier home   builder to navigate those. U is that something  council would be interested in or so you're saying   u cordon off a piece of it to do a prototype?  Uh uh no that's a good idea too though. know,   potentially phasing the actual plat, the  construction to say if y'all were to grant this,   you know, one of the things you could do is the  lots you're concerned about. You could carve   those out for now and do a phased approach and  say, "All right, we're going to ask the owner   and engineer to go back to take a better look at  this to actually engineer what would it take to   build on these lots. We can assume a average home  size or whatever is appropriate and say to build   on that lot, it would take this." And so we'll  ask again, they would have to come back. It would   be another cut and fill variance, but instead of  punting it to we're gonna say 3030 individuals,  

it would be the applicant coming back and  saying, "Okay, we'll ask for it in this phase,   we'll ask for a variance for these sections."  And then, you know, the protection of council   is if hypothetically, if you were to do that and  agree to that, if a home builder comes later and   wants to do something different, they can do  that. But it would give council I think it   would give you better leg to stand on to say  well we already approved a variance for this   and so if you want to do something different we  may or may not agree to that. I don't think you   have enough information that be able to um make a  motion on that recommendation. I really think that   this matter deserves postponement to explore the  questions that council has raised. Um, with with   all due respect, our request is only for the road  and the two ponds. We're happy to figure out a   way that we can come back to the city and address  the lots, but we're not in a position to be able   to apply for those applications or give you the  engineering for them. So, within the bounds of   what is is being requested today, we cannot apply  for a variance for the lots. That is why that   information has not been provided. Our request is  for the road and the two drainage ponds. The road   being the top right. That one and and the reason  that we have we requested that road and and Rick   can back me up on this one. It is an emergency  request because of the fire truck. So that   one is while we could try to angle the road to  avoid it, it would not be ideal for fire safety. I still don't think you have enough information  to be able to grant the variance with some of   the questions that have been asked. Um I would  recommend postponing, you know, we we could we   could postpone this um we could just postpone  this issue until the November meeting and get   make sure that we I don't want I I don't want  to put you in a position that this gets denied.  

Um, I'd rather make sure that the the questions  that are of concern to council are answered. Um,   and that we work it out. That that's  that's a thought. I don't know if   um if if council would like to do that or if you  guys want to vote, somebody can make a motion.   you know, we're still going to be faced with  down the road revisiting this at some point.   And so I think if it is going to be down the road,  if you guys want a full engineered plot of land,   we're going to have some upset citizens because  we're going to masquerade this site. We're going   to have to remove a lot of trees. There will be  tree wells. We're not going to remove all of them   because we'll have to go by a city ordinance. But  if you guys want to see the true engineering of   all lots right now with what we have without  the home builder and stuff, you are going to   be looking at a mass grading of this entire site.  Um, we can make it to where we are not we're still   within the limits of eight feet within rideway and  four feet within the lots. Um, but that natural   beauty out there is going to be destroyed. How  does that change? We wouldn't have to come for   a variance. We would be able to engineer the site  to be within the constraints. It's just going to   be real ugly. Well, I understand what you're  what you're proposing is preparing the whole   development as opposed to peace meal. Right. The  reality of this because of the densities of the   trees and some of the cut and fill issues you guys  are going to have at time somebody's going to come   in here and say, "I got to take out these three  trees and we got to have this cut and filled."   Now, what you're saying, I understand your point,  and your point's well taken. If we if we look at  

this as a total development to get the down to the  specific engineering, you got to you got to blast   through the whole area. All right. But you're  missing I think a key point for us. The bottom   line is this is beautiful area has been and will  be. I I go back to my original comment that if   there was a relook at this thing with smaller with  less density, then the tree issues and the cut and   fill becomes minimal because now you're giving  the the the custom builder instead of having   a a.5 acre lot or whatever it is, maybe it's a 6  or 7, he has that many more variables of where he   can do that without impacting the tree, the  foliage, as well as the cut and fill. I I my   my whole issue with this, I think you guys, like I  said, you did a great job on identifying the trees   and the and the and the the trail. I think you've  done a wonderful job. the fact that you've done   the retention ponds. I think that the only issue  I have is I don't think you've looked at this from   this perspective of, you know, and I know you're  having to look at the economics of how many the   more the more lots you have, obviously the more  potential sale revenue is when you present it to   a builder, but I still think a smaller number  of homes gives the builders more options.   Uh, so I I just have a quick question for Rick  or either attorney. Um, with this variance that's   being heard for these ponds in the street, we're  not locked in to the lots that are shown on this.   Correct. Uh, no. And they can weigh them. No.  So, the variance would be for the sections. The   variance would apply as you've asked for  those sections of the rideway. You could  

before preliminary plan. As long as it doesn't  trigger an issue to require another variance,   you could alter the Okay. Yeah. So we are because  we're we're before prelim. Okay. That's that's   except Okay. So I understand you got to have a  variance for the ponds. Yes. And I I understand   that and I understand the variance for the street.  Yeah. But I don't like the whole plan. It would   roughly and I say this loosely because you can  always ask for another variance. Sorry council,   but they could they could come back. So, it  kind of locks you in for the rideway and the   ponds for that section, but the lot layout could  change as long as it doesn't trigger. Okay. So,   unless any of the other council members have any  questions, I think uh we've talked this thing to   death. Uh the options are we're either going to  approve it, we're going to deny it, it's going to   die for lack of a motion, or we're going to  uh continue it. So, I'd like for someone to   uh make a motion as to what they would like to  do. I'd like to continue it until next council   meeting so that I can consider the additional  information that we have. Okay. And what what   additional information are you requesting that  they provide us? I would like to see the uh the calculations that you came up with when you  said it's not viable for us to do this without   variances unless we go down to or two two lots  or whatever you said. And you might have been   exaggerating on that, but you obviously had  some type of calculation in mind that you   did that. You said, "Oh, that's not viable  for us. I'd love to see what that was." So,   when you went when they went from putting  septic in to putting the the sewer,   you're saying you Well, no, no, it's it's that's  part of it, too. Yeah, that that's part of it,  

but it's not the whole thing. No. No. Okay. Well,  um I think we will continue it. Um I don't know   that you've got the votes right now. So, let's  continue it until the November meeting. And   um I'm going to ask Rick to meet with the council  members individually that have expressed concerns   so that we're certain what the questions are. And  I want to I want to be clear to these developers   on what we're asking so that um we're we're clear.  And by the way, I also appreciate how hard you   work with and mayor neighboring community. I'm  sorry to interrupt, but you need to ask for a   motion to postpone to the next meeting. Okay, then  I think I just got one. I'd like to make a motion   that we postpone it until the November meeting.  Is there a second? Second from uh Council Member   Wadell. All in favor of postponement. Can we  have one bit of discussion before we vote? Sure. I just sense a lot of frustration on their side.  I just sense a lot of frustration on their side   and I mean it's not fair to either side. This  thing gets gets batted back and forth and back   and forth and you know we tell them to do  something they come back and then we tell   them to do something else and they come back. We  gota we gota find the 20 point peace plan that you   know that comes up with what we need what does  the city want and tell them what they need to   do to make it right for the city and we'll be  we'll be we'll be batting this thing back and   forth until the mayor after Jeff. So, I'd just  like to see us that's that's a very good point,   Buck. And uh I think that's well spoken. Better.  You said it better than I was trying to in a   nutshell. What we're feeling right now,  we definitely want to work with y'all. I   think that we've demonstrated that. Yes. Um  but yeah, having some specific information  

about what we need to do would be extreme.  So, we have a motion and a second. All in   favor of postponing this until the November  meeting. All opposed. Okay. Thank you. And uh   Rick is here to stay. Uh you've got someone to  that to that to that to that to that to that to   that to that to that to that to that you can  talk to and work with and um and I'd like to   be the first one. I want to see where I want to  understand the pond. I want to see physically walk   that area. Okay. Yeah. If council members if y'all  reach out to me and let me know who wants to. So   let's move on to item 8B on the agenda. Thank  you very much. Appreciate you being here. Um, a request for relief from either or  both the amount or form of fiscal   security otherwise required for the  trails phase 4 final plaque. Um, Rick, I didn't see anyone from the  trails here. Oh, yes, I did. Yes,   I did see someone from the trails. Yeah.  Sorry. Let me move back over to this podium. You have a you have a something  to show us. Oh, okay. Okay. Okay. No, there's no slides. So, uh, not for that. I'm sorry. This is I mean, do you  have slides for this? Oh, I don't think so. Okay.   I was going really just tell us what it is. Yeah.  Just don't look at the screen. I don't know what  

I did. Yeah. Uh, sorry, Mayor Council. So this is  a this request by the developer for trail space 4   uh for I'm going to say alternative  fiscal security. They asked to either   uh reduce the security required or change the  type that's required. So our our ordinance   requires fiscal security. It it mentions  a bond but it says fiscal security that's   acceptable to the city. Our interpretation of  that is the city council when they say city. So   um this is found in chapter 10 of our code of  ordinances. also subdivision. Uh the requirement   is for a construction bond in the amount of 120%  of the approved engineer's opinion of probable   cost for public improvements. Uh the purpose  of this requirement is to provide the city   with means to complete or remediate a project  if the developer does not complete it such as   if they were to stop in the middle of it and leave  open ditches. Obviously that poses a safety risk.   The city would want to remediate that and then  recede etc. Uh if council entertains the request,   uh what staff is recommending on advice from legal  counsel is a hybrid approach. Uh we'd suggest   requiring a bond for a portion of the cost,  roughly 33%, an additional letter of credit with   collateral for property to satisfy the remaining  67%. U I'm gonna leave it to DY though. I didn't   I don't want to speak for her, but she she has  thoughts typically on what she advises us to do.   The um letter of credit, if you choose to  go with that portion of the staff report,   should be from an accredited financial institution  and also have the uh city attorney approve as to   form to make it so that we can have it payable  and on demand and not have to um go through some   of the standard letters of credit. You don't  um easily collect on. What do you mean by an  

accredited financial institution, Doy? So, it's a  um they the bank meets specific regulatory quality   standards to operate. So, they whatever bank they  ch whatever bank they chose, we would make sure   it's accredited. Oh, okay. So, I think uh Robin,  you're you're talking I mean I got a letter from   the Bank of the West. Is that who you all are?  Yeah, that's who's going to be um our lender.   And first of all, thank you. uh my dad would be  here. He was very ill last night. We think he has   the flu, so he could not show up today. So, um  I apologize. He wanted me to apologize for him,   but um hopefully I can convey everything as he  would. So, um for those of you that don't know   my dad, Michael Walsh, he developed the first  three phases of the trails. He also developed   um the Horseshoe Base Center, which involves  the grocery store and the Ace Hardware. And   I'll just read this letter that I had uh written  to you guys along with the letter from the bank.   Um, on behalf of Michael Walls,  general partner of trails phase 4,   I'm respectfully request that the city wave the  performance bond requirement for phase four of   the trails of Horseshoe Bay. Over the past 25  years, Mr. Walsh has su successfully completed   all three phases of the Trails of Horseshoe  Bay, creating a residential neighborhood that   reflects the city's values of quality, lowdensity  living, a preservation of natural surroundings.   He has also developed two of Horseshoe Bay's most  prominent commercial centers anchored by local   operated businesses and supported by highquality  tenants. Each of these projects was completed to   a high standard as and has become a valued part  of our community. Importantly, this developer has   a consistent record of completing every project  even in difficult economic times. Conditions have   always um and he has always delivered what has  been promised. Phase four is a continuation of   an established neighborhood which further  reduces risk and its scope is primarily  

limited to roads and utilities that will be fully  inspected and overseen by the city. In addition,   the project is responsibly structured, financed by  a local lender, which would be Bank of the West,   um constructed by quality local contractor, which  is approved by the city of course, and supported   by investors who own property and live in the  trails. So myself, my dad and many of more than   um you know 75% of the investors all own  property are anchored there. Uh given his   history of reliability, strong community ties,  and the limited scope of work, we respectfully   submit that waving the performance bond is a fair  and practical request. Approving this waiver will   both recognize the developer past contributions  and support the timely successful completion of   phase 4, further enhancing the city of Horseshoe  Bay in line with its vision. The performance bond,   I just want to point out that all these  projects that he has done in the past,   the trails, the grocery store, anything he's  done, he's never had a performance bond in the   past and he's always been able to complete the  project. And these are beautiful projects that   are staples in our community. I think he's more  than proven that he is responsible and doesn't   leave projects open-ended. He's completed  everything he's ever done with, you know,   uh, high standards. Um, to do a performance one,  kind of contrary to what we just heard, we have   a property that's 165 acres and we're doing 39  lots. So, these are large acreage lots and as   you can imagine, that's difficult financially, but  we're making it work. And so to do a performance   bond is very expensive and we kind of see it as  an unnecessary expense. We know we can complete   the project. We're going to have the loan. If  there's any hiccups, we get another contractor,   but the money is going to be there and our bank  has written a letter saying that. Um the thing   about Bank of the West and Sandy and Susan over  there is they've been involved in all the projects  

as well. So they know that he'll complete it.  So they're willing to issue a um um a letter of   credit to cover that. Well, the letter of credit  could be a possibility, but that's expensive,   too. I mean, they the banks charge you for  a letter of credit. So, I mean, we're what   we're asking for is a waiver of the bond. Um, if  there's, like I said, on all the projects we've   completed in the past, we haven't had to do those  and we've completed them. I think it's important   to note that the projects I'm talking about have  been here in the city of Horseshoe Bay and we   see them every day and the trails is um you know  it's got it's a great development that's focused   on nature. It's everything the city wants and  we're just trying to continue that out. Thank   you. There's no doubt that your dad has done  you and your dad because I know you've been   real involved mostly him for sure. But like he  he has a proven track record and um I think that   we could all safely say that he'll complete the  work. I mean there's nothing that's going to stop   us from finishing this and we're very rooted  in the community and like I said the people   um putting up the money the bank feel comfortable  with us. Plus we have all of our investors are   also in the community. Our our packet says that  we're it's the request is to allow a letter   of credit from a local bank in lie of a bond  requirement. So that was not your request. No,   I accidentally set we had talked about a few  things and I had accidentally set the wrong letter   um just from the bank. It's one Sandy had written  ahead of time. They will provide us one if if we   need to. But the request um I had asked them to  switch that out. So, sorry that y'all got that,   but um but the quest is the request that we're  making is to wave it. We're trying to reduce,   like we said, we're trying to reduce unnecessary  expenses. It's already very expensive. Um one of  

the things that we're adding to do over there  is I'm sure y'all have been talking or the city   has been talking to Blue Lake about how are we  going to get the people in the trails off of the   uh wastewater over there with the mud district.  So right now there are 140 home sites over in the   trails and um when my dad first did the trails  there was not a city. So he was talking to the   Lo Mud District and um he contracted for a 100  connections over there to do the wastewater. So   right now there's 140 home sites. There's about  80 people over there that have connections with   the mud district and um and we're going to run  out of them. So, we're also finding a solution   to that by putting in our own grinder pump, which  will take all the people in the trails off of the   um Loano County mud and onto just the city. And  you're building a line directly to the wastewater   treatment plant. Is that correct? No. No. No.  No. It's going to connect on the other side on   the downside stream of the uh lift station that  is Blue Lakes lift station and tie into that line.   And what we've talked about is that line where  that connection if we had to do a trade-off   because I would like to get all the people off of  out of the trails and having to pay an additional   fee that they pay to Blue Lake for that. And what  we would do is trade off and take over that line   from that point of that connection all the way  back to the the plan itself. And then we would   be responsible for maintenance of that line during  that time which is which is better effect on us.   you know, definitely make I know there's been  some complaints from some of the people on the   trails about having to pay that fee and also  paying, you know, the city as well when So,   it's a it's kind of getting in front of a problem  that is going to happen eventually when when these   at least just out of the 140 when they get  to 100 connections, at least my conversations  

um with them with Jessica over there is they're  not interested in adding any more connections. So,   this would take it all. else. Do you have any  any question? I just have one question. It was   all the stuff that Mike did was prior to the  city and that's why there wasn't a performance   bond. I'm just trying to understand why why  the ordinance requires a performance bond or   uh an acceptable form of credit. Isn't that  right, Rick? That's that's exactly so why   wouldn't Bayside didn't Why would That's the one  I was going to ask. Why? I don't know. You help   me with it. Bayside doesn't have public water  lines, so they're they're actually private. So,   it's only public infrastructure. It's not  buildings that require it. Okay. All right.   I understand. I understand. Okay. Thank you. How  many of these waiverss have we given in the past? To my knowledge, we've not waved one. Uh council  has allowed a letter of credit before. Uh not   to speak for again, but she has an opinion on  that. So, this isn't even a letter of credit,   though. Uh yeah, this they're asking for a  waiver. This is just a total waiver. Yeah. How   do you feel about that, D? Well, the ordinance  says uh financial assurance, so it doesn't say   letter of credit or leaves it up to the council  to make that determination. I don't know um what   the council did in the past to not um in what they  looked at as financial assurance. So that would be   But you're you have a lot of leeway there on  financial assurance. Yeah, on financial assurance,   I mean, like I said, we know that we're going to  have our development loan from Bank of the West.   If something were to happen, can Bank of the West  write a letter saying the city can use the funds?   I don't know if like y'all want to use, you know,  it's for you to use the funds. Maybe they can  

provide a letter saying that, you know, we would  allow the city to use the funds to complete the   project. I don't really know what the financial  assurance means either, but we have financing. The   money will be there. Reason there's ever a project  that has financial security. Yeah. Very successful   phases and this is the fourth one, you know. Yeah.  You've got a track record. No question. Thank you.   The reason we have that is for if there is a  developer come doesn't have financial resources   and they stop and that happens. We've seen  that happen with multiple projects uh that are   developments and then then the city's left with  infrastructure and different places that are just   you know mess and we use the bond either to finish  it or to clean it up and get it back to nature.   Yeah. And it's important to note too though that  with what we're talking about it's just roads and   utilities basically which my understanding of that  is the city watches that I mean it's basically   your stuff right so you're going to be monitoring  it and you're going to be inspecting it the whole   way. So when the contractor comes in there and he  you know puts something in the city the engineer   and the bank are all going to go inspect it.  They're going to make sure that it's perfect   and then we're going to pay the guy and that's how  it moves through. So there's very little room I   think for anybody to default or for there to be go  haywire. I don't see any risk at this at all. My   question is are we setting a precedent? I just  don't want to I just want to avoid a precedent   that somebody can flip back on us. I have no  issue with granting this, but I just want to   make sure that this can't be used against us. Can  we say this is tied into the previous and this was   an continuation of what we've already agreed  to or something to that effect for the first  

three phases. Dy, is there something is there  some way that you could say that we could word   um something in agreement with the bank that would  allow us to be in compliance with the ordinance?   I think you could make a motion to accept  financial assurance in the form of a letter from   the bank uh verifying the loan. Uh that is going  to um be the cost to complete the um road and the   utility lines and um would that instrument cost  you? I don't think a letter if as long as it's   not a letter of credit those do cost which I  did not know but I learned but a letter from   the bank from Sandy and Susan a bank of the west  that that should be fine. I don't see a problem   as long as we don't have as long as we're not  setting precedent. You know, we just got to   make sure we covered ourselves on that and that  this um developer has been in good standing with   the city having completed. That's why I wanted  to continuation of previous agreed upon because   of phase one, two, and three. Frank, do you want  to make a motion? I don't know how to do that. I mean, I'd love to uh make  a motion that we approve   uh phase four. It's page uh it's on page 26. Does it makes Does it say what we want? No,   it you're going to have to add You're gonna  have to You're going to have to add to it.   I I move to approve the request for relief.  The hell word is this? In your motion,   you want to say um I move that the um applicant  has shown uh financial assurance. Yes. For phase  

four. Um and we'll provide a letter from the bank  uh that uh details the loan that's sufficient for   the roads and utilities and that um this is based  the financial assurance is based on the developers   um being in good standing and having completed  three other phases. I'll I'll I'll second that.   Did you write it down, Terry? That I can read  it. I'm gonna listen to it later. I move to   approve the request for relief regarding fiscal  security of the trails phase 4 as provided by   staff with the um with provided the um applicant  provides uh financial assurance in the form of   a letter from the bank verifying the presence of  funds to complete the public utilities required.   Okay. Perfect. I'm okay with that. And I  think it also say on the uh the basis of their   uh record. Yes. Okay. And on the basis of their  um past performance in in previous projects. So,   okay. You kind of have that Carrie. Okay. Um so,  Frank made a motion. Yes. Thank you. Is there a   second? Second. Second from council member um  Weatherby. Is there any further discussion? All   in favor say I. I I thank you very much. Really  appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. Um the next item   on the agenda is resolution 2026-03 authorizing  the transfer of the Summit Rock Pit assessments   collected by Lano County um to the trustee  pursuant to the Summit Rock Pit U P um deposit   agreement. And Jeff, yes, ma'am. I'll make this  quick. Um, this was a continuation of the work we  

were doing last month on the Summit Rock Pit to be  paid off for the the city infrastructure that the   city uh had put up in view of a like impact fee.  And so, um, what we determined is that, uh, once   the city gets paid off of their $7.5 million that  was vested in the interest of the Summit Rock Pit,   um, with this payment of the $3 million that  we're going to get, um, that we would direct   the money to go straight to the resort from the,  uh, Leno County mud. To do that, we have to have a   resolution that directs the Atlanta County MUD to  do that. So the resolution does that. It's going   to a new entity created called the Summit Rock  PID LLC. Yeah. That that's that's which happens   to be um so it'll go from the L County MUD to the  uh I mean Atlanta County CAD to the trustee and   it'll be dispersed to the trustee. So that's the  resolution part of this. There's also an agreement   in here which is for the custodium uh which is  region banks that will will uh disperse that money   accordance with that resolution. Just just as a  clarification uh Jeff Jones and I met this morning   with Jordan Jaffy who's um the managing member  of that LLC and they are they have not uh I don't   think he's actually signed the documents yet but  he said they're that their attorney has reviewed   them. he's ready to sign them. And so we told him  that um and this is my recommendation is that we   pass this resolution, but that we direct staff  not to send it to the Lano County MUD until the   signed documents as well as the payment for the  note payoff have been received by the city. Yes,   ma'am. Um council, do you understand what we're  discussing here? Does anybody have anything   else to add to that? questions. And there's one  other item, schedule B to the deposit agreement  

was not provided by the bank, right? Okay.  Yes. This this uh handout that you guys got,   the additional one, it's exactly the same that  was in your packet. However, we need to include   um schedule B, which is just contact information.  So, um, I'd like for someone to make a motion,   um, on this, including my suggestion  as well as the fact that we need to   include schedule B in the in the document.  I move to approve uh, resolution 2026-03. Is that the right number? Yeah. Okay. and  Summit Rock public improvement district   deposit agreement as developed by the city  attorney and as presented by staff. Uh provided,   however, that the city staff shall verify  both the PID agreement has been signed by   the managing member of the Summit Rock  PID and the deposit funds have been   received by the city prior to delivery  of this agreement to the Lano County.   um CAD I guess it is. No. Yeah. Yeah. CAD the  resolution to the CAD the resolution. And uh   I also uh would like to uh include the fact that  schedule B is attached to this motion confirmation   of contact information um in schedule B. Okay.  Motion made by uh Mayor Pro Tim. Is there a   second? Second. Okay. Is any further questions?  All in favor say I. I. All right. Okay. Moving   right along. Uh the next item on the agenda is  a res is um resolution 2026-02 designating an   official newspaper for fiscal year 2026. And  Carrie, do you want to tell us about that?

I'll be very quick with this one. The state law  simply requires the city to designate an official   newspaper every year. And we do this in October  each year. Um, these newspapers have to meet   certain requirements by law. Um, the Beacon is  the community newspaper, but it does not meet the   state requirements to be considered a designated  newspaper. So, we have to look elsewhere. Um,   what I've done is collected information from  other newspapers in the area and compared those.   I've provided that in the staff report. Um, the Lo  News has pricing that is the least expensive and   um, their subscribers. They do have subscribers  locally. Uh, staff is asking council to designate   a newspaper. I'd like to point out that the  Lano News price that you guys see on page 44,   that price will include publication in the Lano  News and in the Beacon for that same price. And   we're going to we're going to put it in the beacon  anyway because uh council has always voted to do   that because that's who reads it. So um that  one price of the example pricing that they give   you is for publication in both of those. That's  great. Are there any questions for Carrie? Uh,   would someone like to make a motion? I move  to approve resolution 2026-02 designating   the land owns of or the Highlander as the official  newspaper. No, you want to designate the Oh, okay.   The land own as the official newspaper for the  city of Paru Bay for fiscal year 2026. Thank you.   I have a motion from council member Weatherbe. Is  there a second? Second from Mayor Pro Tim. All in   favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Okay. Uh,  regarding the consent agenda, is there anything   anyone would like to see removed from the consent  agenda? Okay. So, is there a motion to approve it? I move we can uh approve the consent  agenda as presented. Is there uh a  

second? I'll second. Um motion from  Mayor Pro Tim, second from council   member Hosia. All in favor say I. I. Okay.  Any liaison reports? Yes. Possibly. Ray,   are you still here? Yes, sir. Why don't  you give an update on what happened? Mayor, councel, uh about uh 12:30 today, our  contractor had hit our main water line coming   off of uh our high storage and that supplies the  summit and the lower area of the uh air park and   airport area. Um it was immediately secured by  our field department and uh the contractor. They   both worked together. Uh the repair was about  a six foot section of line. Um it's restored,   repaired. Uh we're moving on, flushed in lines.  Um it was unfortunate, but that section there   kind of meandered. They thought they were  online to keep digging and the line shot   back out and by the time the guy realized that  he had taken out a sixoot section of our main,   but that's since been repaired and restored  and we're back up and running. Thank you. So,   the notice went out to the notice has been sent  out by Jess. Thank you. Approval. Good job. Um,   do you want to talk about the 20th anniversary?  I would love to talk about the 20th anniversary.   Don't forget the 20th anniversary of this city  on the 25th of October at the new city center.   If you don't know where it is, you've been  under a rock. Um, and it's going to be fun.   We got plenty of parking that's available right  there on 2147. Signs will lead you there. Uh when  

you park, you've got uh shuttles that'll take you  right to the event. And there's a chance to get   all kinds of swag from all the vendors as well as  a chance to win prizes. So come stock up for the   grandkids. 11 to four. Thank you. Excited reading  about it in the beacon. On the committee. You're   on the committee. That's right. Any Anybody else  have a liaison report? Uh oh, somebody's having a   bad day. Okay, Jeff, what have you got for us?  Yes, ma'am. I just uh wanted Tim to report on   the the completion of his uh road project. Good  job, by the way. Yeah, Bay West Boulevard looks   great. Thank you. So, as uh Jeff alluded to, we  are finished finally with seal coating. We started   August 5th and completed it October 8th. We only  had one rain delay in that whole episode. So that   that project's complete. We're going to be bidding  out this year. Like working at night. It it was   challenging. Uh I think it went very well uh to be  honest, but uh it was a little bit challenging. It   was less disruptive for the community. It was  very very Yes. The impact on the residents was   very low. uh to so to do it on Bay West Boulevard  uh easily done. Doing it through the side streets   possibly a little bit more of a challenge. Um not  afraid of it at all, but uh you know if that's   something we wanted to consider for next year, we  can uh certainly investigate it. And did it cost   us any more to do it at night? No, sir. Good.  Okay. And I'm happy to report that the golf my   golf cart will fit in the lane. Now, so we did we  did widen the lane to six feet as requested. If  

if you remember when we put it at five feet, it  was more of, you know, to get a feeling for for   everybody to see how uh everybody would react  to it. But we did everybody seemed to like it.   Uh they like the security of the paint line.  So uh we did take it out to six feet with this   new paint. Educate me. Why don't you seal coat  over the bridge? Because the bridge is concrete,   so that will disappear pretty quickly. Thank you,  Tim. Thank you. You're welcome. Anything else,   J? No, I don't believe Jason, you don't have  anything, do you? Okay. Okay. Um I think that   that covers the agenda. Uh so um we are going  to um go into executive session at 453. We have   uh two items on the executive session. It's  relating to Michael coffee or coffee claim   including but not limited to affidavit of  prospected claim of lean and this is in   cons consultation with city attorney under Texas  government code 551.071 071. And we're another   item is to amend the city code section 13.03.02  related to water service rates and conditions to   add a provision to exclude properties outside the  ETJ from receiving water services in consultation   with city attorney Texas government code 551.071.  So no action will be taken in the public uh in   the executive session, but we will come out of  exe executive session to take any action. So   that's we're going into executive session,  if I could say it, at 5 at 454. Thank you.