TCEQ hosts public hearing on proposed Fitzhugh concert venue

DRIPPING SPRINGS  —  On Monday, Jan. 29, numerous residents and stakeholders gathered at Dripping Springs Ranch Park for a public meeting held by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to share their concerns about a proposed concert venue off Fitzhugh Road.

As previously reported by the News-Dispatch, California-based developer Blizexas LLC applied for a wastewater permit for a 5,000-seat concert venue, to be located on Fitzhugh Road near Crumley Ranch Road. In addition to wastewater, residents have consistently raised concerns regarding a number of factors, including traffic, noise and safety.

Following the introduction of the panel, an informal question and answer period began. Due to the scope of TCEQ’s jurisdiction, the panel was only able to answer questions regarding the potential wastewater permit and water quality concerns. In addition to TCEQ representatives, two Blizexas representatives were present to respond.

To start off the question and answer period, Earl Lott, who was representing the Van Ackeren family who lives about a mile from the property, asked the panel about site assessments.

“One of the first things I did when I took on this project is I went out adjacent to the site and did a site assessment of it … and during my actual visual of the site, I noticed very minimal soil and just some of the poorest geology you can find for subsurface irrigation,” Lott said.

According to TCEQ, there were two site visits, one in March 2022 and one in January 2023.

Alan Barraza, agronomist for TCEQ, responded that, upon visiting the site, there were some thin soils and some thicker soils. He further explained that there are special provisions in the permit to require a minimum of 12 inches of soil below the drip lines and exactly six inches above the drip lines.

“So, in some places, the applicant may have to import soil to bring that soil up so there is sufficient amount of soil for their water to disperse into that soil temporarily,” Barraza said. “We also put another special provision in there to protect [from] oversaturation of the soil. We have a requirement for soil moisture sensors. If any of the sensors go off, those lines are automatically turned off until that soil dries up more.”

Nearby landowner Holland Van Ackeren expressed concerns about the location of the field and the accuracy of the amount of wastewater that will be generated.

“I wondered who is responsible for mitigating any damages to the aquifer that may occur from wastewater migrating from the proposed area?” Van Ackeren asked the panel.

“The applicant is responsible for the mitigation of that. There’s no allowance for the effluent to go in the groundwater at all. So, if anything does happen, it’s ultimately the applicant who bears the responsibility for any corrective actions,” said Harrison O’Malley with the Environmental Law Division of TCEQ.

Although outside the scope of TCEQ’s jurisdiction, a Sunset Canyon resident asked about the source of water for the facility, to which the applicant representative responded, “We haven’t filed an application in the groundwater district; I don’t know that we will need to. We’re going to try to get the wastewater permit process first and then we’ll address the water because I don’t have any particular insight as to what that implies.”

Several people who asked questions during the informal portion wondered aloud why the applicant was not present at the meeting.

“Is Mr. LeClerc or Mr. Hirschman here tonight?” asked Mike Clifford with the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance. “Okay, so that’s the problem when the developer doesn’t show up, you have all these specialists that don’t actually know anything. The developer can answer all of these questions.”

“The developer has gotten — not applied for, but gotten — a TCEQ permit for injecting wastewater into the ground, into the rock formations of the middle Trinity Aquifer here and nobody seems to know anything about that,” Clifford continued. “I asked about a site plan. Nobody seems to know about the site plan. Nobody seems to know where the TLAP fields in relation to all the impervious cover … where is the developer?”

Following the informal question and answer period, the public hearing was opened for formal comments to be entered into the record. During this time, the panel did not respond to inquiries, but rather TCEQ will prepare a written Response to Comments (RTC). According to a statement provided by TCEQ, the RTC will be considered by TCEQ commissioners at an open public meeting prior to taking final action on the application.

More than 45 people signed up to have their comments added to the record, one of whom was Marshall Bowen, an attorney with Butler Snow and Shield Ranch representative.

“If we start allowing out-of-state developers … we lose the charm of the Hill Country. This de-velopment is completely incompatible with preserving wild open spaces for future genera-tions,” Bowen said.

Cindy High, president of Fitzhugh Neighbors, requested that TCEQ deny the wastewater permit due to the potential risk to Barton Creek and the aquifers.

“Engineers tell us that contaminated wastewater that escapes the insufficient holding ponds will mix with stormwater and runoff, heading downhill, bringing all kinds of contaminants from wastewater … into currently pristine Barton Creek and its aquifers,” High said. “Those experts claim that any inconvenience will be short term, but there is absolutely no tolerance for occasional pollution.”

At the end of the meeting, the public comment period was closed. The written RTC will be mailed to anyone who submitted written or formal comments at a public meeting, as well as being made available online at www.tceq.texas.gov.