By Brittany Anderson
BUDA — A proposed development in an already congested area of Buda has residents and planning and zoning commissioners concerned for potential traffic and safety issues, among others.
During the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on Jan. 11, the commission held a workshop to provide feedback regarding a proposed residential and non-residential development on the Bailey and Armbruster tracts.
The tracts are located north of RM 967 and south of FM 1626, near the future SH-45.
The development would feature a mix of thousands of condos, townhomes, single-family homes and potentially apartments, as well as non-residential uses such as park space, trails and other amenities.
The combined properties span approximately 775 acres. Jeff Howard of MileStone Community Builders, the project developers, said that 40-45% of the tracts are within Austin’s extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ), while the rest is within Buda’s ETJ.
The developers requested an expedited 90-day approval in the hopes of beginning construction in March, as well as entitlements that would allow the development to proceed, including the creation of a Municipal Utility District (MUD), a Development Agreement (DA) and a Planned Development (PD) zone.
Previously, only the Bailey tract was proposed, which has been in development since 2018. The project has since doubled in size to include the Armbruster tract, shown during the Jan. 11 meeting, which developers have said is part of their solution to the traffic concerns that have been voiced.
The Armbruster tract would implement an additional four-phase transportation improvement plan – phases D, E, F and G — that would include a connection through to 1626. In addition to phases A, B and C of the Bailey tract, the improvements would total $41 million.
A roundabout where the road currently curves would be constructed during phase A for the development’s entrance and exit.
Because developers are unsure how long it would take to reach phase D – the 1626 connector — the singular entrance and exit present throughout phases A through C could linger for quite some time, causing increased traffic and safety issues in and around the development.
Developers said that the “ballpark” completion date of the entire project could be up to 10 years, but some of the commissioners believe it could take longer.
Commissioner Meghan McCarthy said that while she is appreciative of the addition of the Armbruster tract in the sense that it makes a more cohesive development, it is unwise on the developer’s part to put hundreds of homes on one entrance and exit that is being shared with construction traffic.
“So much of phases A, B and C are contingent on the connectivity that Armbruster allows,” McCarthy said. “To ask us to expedite an approval process … is not smart planning for us.”
While traffic was the main concern, residents and commissioners also brought up other issues such as the lack of large-housing lots offered, the removal of trees around the property and the inevitable need for a new school in the area to keep up with the explosive growth.
Commissioner Virginia Jurika said that this project is not something that Buda needs right now, and that the developer’s intent for project approval within 90 days is a “bum-rush.”
“This is a very important subject, so it would be totally irresponsible on our part, or my part at least, to approve this project,” Jurika said. “This is not looking out for the citizen’s interest. I’m a commissioner here, but I’m a citizen as well. This is going to directly impact what my quality of life is like if we accept this project as it is.”
Because it was a workshop item, no final decisions were made. Per a news release from the city, the city of Buda has not “solicited, sought or promoted this project,” but was simply exercising its governmental authority in evaluating the proposal and providing regulatory oversight.
According to LaMarriol Smith, Buda’s director of communications, the developers are continuing to work with the city and plan to present a workshop during the Feb. 1 city council meeting. Any official approvals will have to go back through the commission and council for consideration and approvals.
