Commissioners deny Hays Commons

HAYS COUNTY — A week following the postponement of any action on the subdivision, the Hays County Commissioners Court met again on May 2 to discuss the MileStone development, Hays Commons subdivision.

In a 3-2 vote, the commissioners voted to deny the Hays Commons Subdivision Preliminary Plat and sent it back to development services for review. Commissioners Lon Shell and Walt Smith were the dissenting votes (in favor of the project).

Hays Commons is a proposed subdivision that would be located off FM 1626 and Carpenter Lane in Manchaca and would include city of Hays Extra-Territorial Jursidiction (ETJ).  This development would consist of 20 family residential lots, two multifamily/condominium lots, three parkland/open space lots, three utility lots and one commercial lot.

Local resident Keith Whittington took the stand to speak on the project at the commissioners court meeting regarding the project. Whittington lives on Carpenter Lane, located within the ETJ in the center of where Hays Commons is proposed.

“This subdivision would only be accessible by Carpenter Lane and Carpenter Lane is not a fully developed county road. It has three low water crossings that flood during severe rain,” Whittington said. “There are no bridges on this road to pass over the rushing water from Little Bear Creek and Little Bear Creek passes through my property. The road has been flooded many times in the 30 years I have lived here.”

In 2018, when Whittington experienced 10-11 inches of rainfall, the creek rose 14 feet and caused damage and flooding to the area where he lives. Whittington has built a catwalk so he and his neighbors can get to work when there is rainfall. The way this plan is proposed, more people would have to drive through water in the event of a flood. Whittington urged the court to only approve this project once the road is repaired and up to standard.

“This road does not meet current county standards and at a minimum, [it] should be improved to avoid a future tragedy.” Whittington said. “This development should at least contribute funds to upgrading the road so that a future resident doesn’t die because emergency services can’t reach them.”

Jeff Kaufmann, another Hays County resident, spoke before the court and urged it not to approve the plan as proposed, asking that there be interjurisdictional cooperation and greater transparency.

“I think there’s a need for interjurisdictional cooperation and there’s also a much greater need for an internal process that’s more transparent for dealing with developmental proposals here at Hays County … The boundaries that we have as a community are artificial. We really all live together in one region and I think we need to share commonly the results of the damage or the benefits that we bring to our environment,” Kaufmann said. “MileStone has plans to build and pave a whole swath of communities, basically, that would connect from [FM] 967 in Buda, through the city of Hays and up to South Austin, ravaging the environment that entire way, as they have done historically. This is what they do … They have been jurisdiction-shopping for the best deal so that they can get the best deal they can possibly reach.”

He also questioned the commissioners’ knowledge of the proposed agreement, which was submitted a week before the meeting, specifically calling his own commissioner's knowledge into question.

“Ostensibly, not one of these commissioners were prepared on this topic,” Kaufmann said. “Even Commissioner Smith, my commissioner, who was sponsoring the item, knew nothing about it. I find that hard to believe, commissioner. You said so from the dais, so I take you at your word.”

Jeff Howard, who is an attorney with McClain and Howard Law in Austin, represents MileStone. He stressed to the court that the action laid out in front of them is just the preliminary plan and is not a final subdivision plat.

The commissioners court does not have access to the full timeline of this project and if the city of Hays does not respond to the preliminary plat within a certain time frame, then the preliminary plat will become the final plat.

“I’m encouraging us to terminate this transaction, calling it a denial, call the vote, deny it and move forward with the proper process,” said County Judge Ruben Becerra.

Precinct 1 Commissioner Debbie Ingalsbe urged the court to deny the proposal as well.

“It’s hard for me to approve this because there are so many big issues that have not been approved. I know there is time to look into all of those,” Ingalsbe said. “I just have concerns with all the issues that are remaining that we need to address.”