1 1 2 3 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT 4 Special Session 5 Friday, January 15, 2021 6 9 a.m. 7 Commissioners' Courtroom 8 Kerr County Courthouse 9 Kerrville, Texas 78028 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: ROB KELLY, County Judge HARLEY BELEW, Commissioner Precinct 1 24 TOM MOSER, Commissioner Precinct 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Precinct 3 25 DON HARRIS, Commissioner Precinct 4 2 1 I-N-D-E-X 2 NO. PAGE 3 1.1 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 3 action for the Court to set a public 4 hearing for 10 a.m. on February 12, 2021 for the creation of an Emergency Service 5 District #3. 6 1.2 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 6 action regarding a concept plan for Eden 7 Farms, a residential development in Center Point. 8 *** Adjournment. 88 9 *** Reporter's Certificate. 89 10 * * * * * * 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 (Commissioners Belew and Letz not present.) 2 JUDGE KELLY: Good morning. It is January 3 the 15th, 2021 at 9 o'clock in the morning, and the Kerr 4 County Commissioners' Court is now in session for that 5 Special Court meeting. 6 And we have a quorum present. We'll have 7 the other Commissioners here hopefully later here in the 8 morning. We have one item scheduled at 9 o'clock, and 9 then another timed item at 9:30. 10 So at this time, I always ask is there any 11 public input? There being none, then what we will do is 12 move on to the first item on the agenda, which is to 13 consider, discuss and take appropriate action for the 14 Court to set a public hearing for 10 a.m. on February 15 12th, 2021 for the creation of an Emergency Service 16 District #3. 17 This is Commissioner Harris and our Tax 18 Assessor-Collector Bob Reeves. 19 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Yes. I've asked Bob 20 to come in. We're actually going to end up passing on 21 this, but Bob's got an explanation why. 22 MR. REEVES: Yes. Good morning, Gentlemen. 23 As Commissioner Harris has stated, we will need to pass. 24 The petition was not filed as we anticipated and 25 therefore, because the timing, it will not be able to be 4 1 on the May 1st ballot, and we will return to Court once 2 the petition is filed, and we can discuss it for the 3 November ballot. 4 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. Just so the public 5 understands, before you get away, in order to establish 6 an Emergency Service District, there is a vote required 7 of the District itself. Is that correct? 8 MR. REEVES: That is correct. It first is 9 the petition process, Your Honor. 10 JUDGE KELLY: I understand. But so I'm 11 backing into it for the public. We back into these 12 things trying to explain it to the public. If we're 13 going to put it on the ballot, there's certain things 14 prerequisite before we can put it on the ballot? 15 MR. REEVES: That is correct. 16 JUDGE KELLY: And so what we were trying to 17 do is get this on the May 1 ballot, but all the 18 prerequisites have to be done in order for us to be able 19 to do that. 20 MR. REEVES: That's correct. 21 JUDGE KELLY: And so we're running a little 22 late on those prerequisites, which gets us over to the 23 November ballot? 24 MR. REEVES: That is right. There is a 78 25 day buffer that you have to call the election. This 5 1 particular type of petition requires a public hearing 2 before the 78th day, which would be February 12th. You 3 need 21 days advance notice for publication before the 4 hearing. And with the those time frames, it is not 5 possible to have it on the May 1st ballot. 6 JUDGE KELLY: I understand. And for the 7 public, sometimes these dates that we set and why we're 8 doing it, it seems a little mysterious, and I was just 9 trying to give them an explanation that this is somebody 10 that everybody wants to do. We just have to wait to be 11 able to do it in the prescribed time required by law. 12 MR. REEVES: That is correct. And it's not 13 Kerr County's time frame; it's what's spelled out in the 14 Health and Safety Code. 15 JUDGE KELLY: The State of Texas? 16 MR. REEVES: That is correct. Thank you. 17 JUDGE KELLY: Well, thank you. 18 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Thank you, Bob. 19 JUDGE KELLY: That item will be passed. We 20 don't have anything on the agenda except a timed item at 21 9:30, so the Court will stand in recess until 9:30 and 22 we will reconvene. 23 (Recess.) 24 JUDGE KELLY: (Gavel bang.) Okay, it is 25 9:30, and Commissioners' Court is now back in session. 6 1 We started this morning at 9 o'clock. And this is a 2 timed item. We have limited time this morning. I want 3 to advise everybody that we're going to try to end and 4 wrap this up by 11:00. I have to be somewhere. So 5 we're trying to move through this pretty quickly. 6 The next item on the agenda is 1.2, which is 7 consider, discuss and take appropriate action regarding 8 a concept plan for Eden Farm, a residential development 9 in Center Point. Commissioner Moser. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Thank you, Judge. 11 Eden Farms is a proposed project of which 12 we're -- our purpose today is to look at the concept and 13 hopefully approve the concept for this development. 14 We're going to go quite extensively through here is the 15 reason we want to have this as a special session since 16 it's going to take probably -- probably less than an 17 hour to do it, but it's going to take some time with all 18 the questions and -- and stuff that's in there. 19 But a little bit of background. Charlie 20 Hastings and myself met with the developer on this over 21 the last several months. And then we -- after that, we 22 began to get into the details and we've had two meetings 23 on this -- on this project that lasted well over an 24 hour, each one of them. But in those meetings what we 25 had is everybody that could be involved, should be 7 1 involved in this project was there. We had the 2 developer, which I'll introduce in a minute. We had the 3 developer's engineer, Mike Wellborn, Charlie Hastings, 4 the subdivision and floodplain administrator. We've had 5 AQUA Texas, who would be the water provider for here. 6 We've had WCID, Water Control Improvement District, from 7 Kendall County participating. We had the superintendent 8 of schools of Center Point participating. The 9 Headwaters Ground Water, Gene Williams, has been there. 10 So this has been discussed and cussed and -- 11 and what we did, we -- as we looked at it we could see a 12 number of problems. We think that there's a solution to 13 each one of these issues. Sort of with the attitude 14 that, you know, every problem's got a solution. I think 15 we found solutions here. 16 So our purpose today is to go through this 17 proposed development, and look at in detail, and bottom 18 line is the -- the biggest concern from -- from 19 everything we've seen, there's some other sub-issues in 20 there. The biggest concern is the water availability. 21 We think we've got a good solution to that. And the way 22 the thing is being proposed is a condominium project and 23 Brandon will discuss that more. 24 But Brandon Namken is the project developer. 25 So I think Charlie -- I think Jonathan's got something. 8 1 So Jonathan and I both have been in all these -- these 2 meetings that -- where we have reviewed this project. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a couple of 4 comments, going back to our subdivision rules. A lot of 5 what we're going to talk about today, or Brandon's going 6 to talk about will appear to be a little bit contrary to 7 our subdivision rules, or different, or looking at them 8 differently. 9 And the challenge that we've had, and this 10 is something that we've been working on, Charlie and I 11 have been working on them for the last two years on 12 rewriting our subdivision rules. I think the Court's 13 aware, we've had workshops on it. Our current rules do 14 not allow for a City private development. They just 15 don't -- we just don't talk about it. 16 I mean we've -- and the reason we never had 17 it, we were never able to do a City private development 18 because we didn't have wastewater when the rules were 19 written. Now we do. So this is a -- kind of a -- 20 almost a -- almost like a workshop. It's in the 21 direction that we're going to have to go, in my opinion 22 anyway, for this type of development because we will 23 have more of them come in more than likely down the 24 road. And we need to keep our rules in place where it 25 makes sense, but make the modifications where it -- 9 1 where that makes sense also. And a lot of the things 2 that are being looked at here, they're really not -- 3 they're different than we currently require, but they 4 make sense because our current rules don't allow for 5 this -- or high density development. They just don't do 6 it right now. 7 So anyway, I just wanted to put that out 8 there. That this is -- some of the things we're asking 9 and we're talking about are consistent and this can be 10 done without any waivers, but it is different. 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Sure. And I -- I'd add 12 one thing to it is, is we looked at this, we looked at 13 the surrounding. We do have some high density 14 development in the area and it's right adjacent to this 15 property, as a matter of fact, in Center Point. There's 16 some really high density stuff there. Not to be 17 discussed in any detail now, but there is the -- over 18 the horizon, there's a potential for hundreds -- 19 hundreds of additional jobs in this part of the County, 20 in the east part of the County, that could come to 21 fruition. And if they do, what -- what does everybody 22 say? Workforce development and housing is what -- is 23 what's needed. 24 So I think Jonathan hit the nail right on 25 the head, we're doing something a little bit different 10 1 here. So hopefully, we can peel this onion. Okay. You 2 got something, Charlie? Yeah. 3 MR. HASTINGS: Just when you're ready I can 4 introduce, and then we'll turn it over to the 5 developer's engineer. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Sure. Okay. 7 MR. HASTINGS: Okay. The owner/developer is 8 Brandon Namken. This is a proposed total acreage of 9 this subdivision is 149.5 acres. The number of lots 10 that they're looking at are 293, but it's divided 11 between single family and RV lots, so this concept plan 12 proposes to subdivide that 149.5 acres in Center Point 13 into 293 lots. 166 would be single family residential 14 lots and 127 would be RV lots. The maximum number of 15 allowable residential lots will be determined using the 16 Texas Water Development Board's Model Subdivision Rules, 17 as it relates to water availability. 18 The property owner is also requesting the 19 Court allow lots to have less than 150 to 200 feet of 20 road frontage. Section 7.04, access to roads, of the 21 Kerr County subdivision rules and regulations requires 22 150 feet of frontage on a local road and 200 feet of 23 frontage on a collector, but it also states that the 24 minimum lot frontage distances may be reviewed by the 25 Commissioners' Court, and lesser distances may be 11 1 approved based on lot density, topography and other 2 mitigating factors recommended by the County subdivision 3 administrator. 4 Subdivisions within a high density 5 development area and where the above minimum lot 6 frontage distances are not practical will be considered 7 on a case by case basis. So there -- there are 8 provisions in our regulations to allow for lot frontage 9 to be less. 10 With that being said, I will turn this over 11 to Mike Wellborn of Wellborn Engineering, who is the 12 developer's engineer. 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: This -- this is Mike -- 14 oh, go ahead. 15 MR. NAMKEN: Yeah, I'm -- I'm going to start 16 if that's okay. My name is Brandon Namken. I'm 17 representing Eden Farms as the developer. As you can 18 see, and you all -- you have concept plans, or if not 19 you can see them up on the monitor. 20 Obviously, there's probably not a reason to 21 really harp on the need for workhorse housing. I think 22 that everybody pretty much knows there's a need here for 23 that. 24 You know, our -- what we've decided to do is 25 try to get density into the County and we -- we looked 12 1 at this from different aspects with current development 2 standards, what we're looking for as far as density to 3 get price points to where we need it and this is kind of 4 how we've -- our plan of attack so far. We're going to 5 go -- go to the next -- who do I talk to about that? 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Brandon, give a little 7 bit of background on -- on the company and what you guys 8 have done. 9 MR. NAMKEN: So I've -- I've joined forces 10 with the entity Eden Farms and we -- we're developing 11 all over the State of Texas. And we're actually doing 12 this actual type of development to provide workforce 13 type housing in communities where you have a top end 14 real estate market and not much of a middle to low end 15 market. 16 So I've done developments in Gruene, we're 17 doing them in Buda. We're looking at College Station to 18 do some. We're doing some in North Waco. We're 19 actually in Brownwood. And we are wanting to be here in 20 Kerrville, in the Kerr County area. 21 So when we looked around, we looked at 22 properties, we -- obviously you guys probably know that 23 the main reasons why you struggle with development are 24 several reasons. Topography is one. Water and sewer is 25 another. So when we started going through all of this, 13 1 it'll kind of start making -- I'm going to start 2 painting this picture of why we ended up trying to go to 3 the condo regime versus just a traditional plat. 4 And if you go to the second page here, it 5 gives you more of an aerial of our subdivision, the 6 parameter, the general lot layouts within the 7 boundaries, and then I'm going to refer in a little bit 8 to AQUA Center Point North water station, that is -- 9 it's highlighted in blue there. That is the CCN that 10 we'll be connecting water -- looping our water system 11 with. 12 If you can go to the next slide. So the 13 subdivision's in Center Point. There's development 14 opportunity there. There's -- obviously because there's 15 a need for workforce housing. There was 150 acres that 16 was suitable for this type of development for several 17 reasons. Utilities were close by. We still need to 18 extend to get them. Water and sewer. 19 We -- the topography is suitable for us to 20 develop a density, a higher density subdivision. And 21 based on the product that we're going to -- our 22 approach, we think that this is an economically feasible 23 development that we can put our hands around and get 24 together. 25 The development challenges are obviously 14 1 price point to properties. That -- that's a big one. 2 To try to make sure that we stay in the workforce 3 housing market. And we're trying to adhere to -- you 4 can go back to the -- to your Kerrville, I think it's 5 the 2050, comprehensive plan that delineates a lot of 6 details in there on what workforce housing actually is. 7 And you know, we are trying to provide 8 housing for -- from anywhere between 200 and to 300,000. 9 And -- and we feel like that's --that's a market that is 10 lacking here in this area. And so that's one of the 11 challenges. 12 The next couple of challenges, obviously, 13 that we -- Commissioner Moser touched on was water. 14 Water is a big one we have to tackle. Typically, if 15 you -- you know, when I'm looking at land to develop 16 if -- if water's not available you just really can't -- 17 can't develop. 18 You can -- you can manufacture different 19 ways to have sewer, but if water is not there you 20 can't -- you can't move forward. Both of those are 21 close -- in close proximity so we feel like that's 22 obtainable. But they are a challenge. They come with 23 challenges that we have to overcome and design for and 24 account for. 25 The last development challenge that we've 15 1 come across is the county's current development 2 standards, which that was kind of led off with this. 3 You know, it -- I think -- I think we have a plan for us 4 to -- again, it'll look a little different based on how 5 we're going to package it, and our approach -- because 6 how we're going to package it, our approach is going to 7 be a condo regime. 8 And I'm going to kind of lay into there now 9 with the three things of why we're choosing to do a 10 condominium regime are subdivision requirement 11 deviations, water use and sewer control, and development 12 substantiations. So I'm going to touch on this slide. 13 We're going to focus on the subdivision 14 requirement deviation. The first one's the 15 right-of-way. We're -- based on our density, we have 16 over 120 lots which then triggers our right-of-way into 17 the subdivision to be a collector street and what -- 18 arterial. Arterial. It's going to be classified as an 19 arterial based on the density of our subdivision, which 20 means that it's a 24 foot wide of pavement, 28 foot of 21 base, but it's a 90 foot right-of-way. 22 What we have on the ground, what we are 23 allowed to do based off of some restrictions we have is 24 a power line, and that we have 60 feet. So that is one 25 of the deviations we're going to have to -- we were 16 1 going to have to ask for a waiver for, that we feel like 2 we can roll up into this condominium regime. 3 I think in many discussions the 90-foot 4 right-of-way is a bit excessive. I think if you're 5 going to do higher density subdivisions, you're going to 6 have to relook at those right-of-way widths. You know, 7 especially -- especially when you're trying to get a 8 higher density. That's the biggest issue. So ours -- 9 we would be asking for a 60-foot right-of-way. 10 The second is the lot frontage width. As 11 Charlie had mentioned, it -- it's required for 200-foot 12 on arterial roadways, our design allows for 75-foot. We 13 feel like we can mitigate some of those issues that come 14 with the 75-foot. The biggest issue is in the county 15 you typically don't do curb and gutter, you do bar 16 ditches and culverts. So that is, I understand, the 17 premise of why you do larger lot frontages, but we feel 18 like we can mitigate a lot of that by doing shared -- 19 shared driveways, reducing the amount of culverts that 20 are on our lots, so we feel like we have a plan intact 21 that can mitigate any of those issues potentially for 22 drainage purposes specifically. 23 Lot sizes. This is where it's -- we're 24 going to start getting into some details here. Lot 25 sizes. The minimum lot size in the County is a quarter 17 1 acre. Most of our lots in our design are between a 2 quarter acre and a half acre. Well, that fits. Well, 3 but -- and I'm going to also touch just a little bit on 4 the RV side because you typically -- right now you have 5 no size requirement. But when we go down to the density 6 is where the lot sizes come from. 7 So you take our 150 acres, I'm rounding up 8 to 150 acres. The -- the current standard for the 9 County is that you have to take the acreage and divide 10 it by two, which gives us 75 lots. Obviously, that does 11 not -- it doesn't pencil out from a developer's 12 standpoint to do 75 lots on this development, as with 13 the cost of the sewer -- attaching the sewer and the 14 water and all of the detention wells and stuff like that 15 that have to go on there for the water. 16 So we -- we can do the half -- quarter acre 17 and half acre lots, which meets the lot minimums, but it 18 gets into the 75 lots is the allowable in the current 19 regulations for the density. So obviously, we -- our 20 design has 166 single family residential lots and 127 RV 21 lots. And I'm going to touch on that a little bit with 22 why we're -- we have -- we've started doing the RV lot 23 investigation a little bit more over the last six to 24 eight months in other areas. 25 I think over this last year, you've seen a 18 1 lot of -- I don't -- I'm going to use the transient type 2 workforce, where you have people living in motor homes 3 and working in certain areas, and this has actually been 4 a much more popular real estate transaction, as people 5 living in RVs. And -- and so, we -- we're looking at it 6 as a possible to where you can buy an RV lot and it'll 7 be another layer of affordability within the subdivision 8 that you can live in this area. 9 Green space is always a hot topic. How 10 much -- how much green space in the common area. Well, 11 out of our 150 acres right now, we have 66.63 acres of 12 green space. That's 44 percent of our property is green 13 space, common areas, drainage for the neighborhood. 14 If you go to the next page, I'm going to 15 start on the water usage. So this will -- this is 16 probably going to be our -- I would say this has taken 17 up most of our time talking is the water. And -- and 18 it's not that we don't -- we understand that there's an 19 issue. We just -- we just feel like we needed to be 20 able to prove up our case. 21 So I'm going to go with water usage and 22 sewer control for the second item that -- and AQUA and 23 us as the developer to control the water usage. Water 24 and sewer owned and maintained by AQUA within our 25 condominium regime. 19 1 The first item of our development plan is 2 density is predicated on 144 gallons a day for single 3 family residential and we've calculated for 45 gallons 4 per day for RV sites. Kerr County does not have a 5 standard requirement other than two acres of density 6 requirement. Headwaters will provide 80,000 gallons per 7 acre per year, and the max water usage is 438 gallons 8 per year per lot. 9 So what we've done and to substantiate 10 our -- our calculations is we requested from AQUA to 11 pull CCN data from -- they gave us for 12 different 12 water systems, which is over 1200 connections, and that 13 averages out over 158 gallons per day. In those 14 systems, you'll obviously have water loss from 15 occasional leaks on older systems and a lot of the homes 16 in there are built from -- are older and not sufficient 17 housing with plumbing fixtures. So you're going to have 18 some extra loss there that's -- that's calculated in 19 there and it's hard to quantify what that -- that value 20 is. 21 This includes the Center Point North CCN of 22 91 units and that was -- that was shown on the -- that 23 second slide where that little shaded blue area is, just 24 to kind of give y'all a reference of location. 25 We hired an environmental consultant out of 20 1 Dallas that actually took a look at some of our plans 2 that we -- that we are planning on putting in here and 3 they came back with 134 gallons a day for three people. 4 KCWCID stated in their last -- our last meeting that 5 their average connection usage was 145 gallons a day, 6 and then you add -- couple that with that our 7 development is going to instill rainwater harvesting 8 encatchment for all of irrigation and xeriscaping at all 9 our -- near our new houses. 10 So we feel like we can mitigate any of the 11 averages, and we feel like we can even get below what 12 we're predicting to be using on an -- on an average per 13 single family. 14 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And how do you do that? 15 MR. NAMKEN: How would we do that? 16 COMMISSIONER BELEW: (Shaking head yes.) 17 MR. NAMKEN: Well, I'm going to get to that 18 here in a little bit. Part of the new construction of 19 the houses, using more water savings appliances within 20 it, the new development -- and my next page I'll start 21 getting into how we're going to do that. It's going to 22 be -- you know, new construction -- I'll just go ahead 23 and flip -- you can go to -- 24 MR. HASTINGS: Brandon, before you go 25 there -- 21 1 MR. NAMKEN: Yeah. 2 MR. HASTINGS: -- I know you read it right 3 off the slide but the slide had a typo, and I noticed 4 438 gallons per day per lot and I know that -- 5 MR. NAMKEN: Oh yeah. Per year. 6 MR. HASTINGS: And if it is per day, I -- I 7 know that minutes are being taken over there so I just 8 wanted to -- 9 MR. NAMKEN: Okay. Sorry about that. 10 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: I was trying to figure 11 that out, so -- 12 MR. NAMKEN: Sorry about that guys. Yes, it 13 is per day per lot. 14 So if you go to the next slide, I'll start 15 getting into how. Continue with the water usage and 16 sewer control. The AQUA water system improvements in 17 the new construction with better pipe material and 18 fittings, embedment and backfill which reduces leaks and 19 breaks. 20 New water lines that go in are continuous 21 solid PEX lines instead of a bunch of fittings and 22 joints that -- that tend to erode. And I think Joseph 23 can kind of hit on that at another point if somebody has 24 a specific question about that. 25 Our new water system will also be looped 22 1 into their existing water system at the Center Point 2 North System, which will eliminate a lot of the dead end 3 -- dead end pipes, where you have to flush them. So 4 there's a lot of loss there as well. 5 And then new meters. When you install new 6 meters, you actually are able to -- most of the water 7 loss that we have found, and we've heard that most of 8 the water loss, is actually at the meter. So when you 9 have to put new meters in, you actually are starting to 10 resolve some of that issue as well. 11 AQUA water and sewer system. AQUA will own 12 and manage the sewer system -- 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You mentioned the 14 tankless hot water? 15 MR. NAMKEN: I'm going to get to that in my 16 development part. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. Sorry. 18 MR. NAMKEN: Yep. AQUA will own and manage 19 the -- the sewer system that will connect with KCWCID 20 sewer extension there in Center Point. And that is 21 through this condo regime is the only way that we're 22 allowed for them to be able to do that. 23 AQUA will own and manage the water system, 24 and I think from the County standpoint, this is big. 25 AQUA will -- will maintain both the water and sewer 23 1 systems all throughout this development. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Brandon, let me 3 interject about that. This is a really important point. 4 WCID does not plan to go into the wholesale business. 5 They want to have one connection. So they're -- they 6 will not enter into an agreement where AQUA Texas is 7 kind of owning and operating the system, and then asking 8 them to have all the meters. But they will allow a 9 condominium or apartment or something like that where 10 there's just one entity they're working with. And then 11 kind of wholesale it that way. So this is the only way 12 that they can connect to the sewer system. 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And I might add that 14 the sewer system that we're putting in, Phase II is 15 right adjacent to this, which begins here within the 16 next -- next few weeks. It's within 500 feet of this 17 subdivision. So then you got $63 million sewer system 18 going in, proposed development, and you're 500 feet 19 apart, so -- 20 MR. NAMKEN: And I think that's kind of 21 where we're going with this. Why it -- it took us two 22 meetings to get to the point where maybe the condominium 23 regime was the perfect fit for this, because we were -- 24 we were going to ask for deviations on the development 25 standards. We -- we -- AQUA wanted to own and maintain 24 1 the water and sewer, and it just started kind of -- the 2 chips started falling into place here why we were going 3 to put this in a condominium regime. 4 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Does this mean there 5 are individual meters or not? 6 MR. NAMKEN: Individual meters within the 7 subdivision. Yes, sir. 8 COMMISSIONER BELEW: All right. 9 MR. NAMKEN: And then the last bit of water 10 usage and sewer control is that AQUA controlled drought 11 contingency plan, and that's basically AQUA has the 12 ability to reduce water flow at the meter. And that -- 13 you know, that -- that kind of goes along with 14 Headwaters as well, that they should follow on their 15 lead on that. 16 Development substantiation is basically the 17 two line items there, deed restrictions and developer 18 controlled construction. The deed restrictions, 19 obviously we'll be able to control house size, which 20 then helps us go to the how we've come up with the 144 21 gallons per day for use for single family. Year-round 22 water conservation, that is -- that's part of our 23 contingency is the irrigation. Harvesting -- rainwater 24 harvesting from off of our houses, and again, we'll 25 restrict irrigation to only use rainwater harvest 25 1 systems. We'll be able to control the maintenance of 2 all drainage areas, common areas, green spaces and 3 roadways. And then we will be able to enforce the 4 drought contingency plan based on Headwaters restriction 5 plan. 6 And then we will -- we will be able to 7 restrict RVs. And what we are finding in our -- in our 8 research is to restrict due to age. Because a lot more 9 efficiency components get put in the newer RVs that 10 conserve a lot more water, use less water, tankless 11 water heaters are actually put -- being put into RVs 12 now. 13 If you go one slide over, I won't read this 14 whole thing, I just have a few highlights. Our -- our 15 vision as a developer or our intent is to provide 16 workforce housing for this area, which you all know that 17 it can be difficult to obtain given land pricing, land 18 topography, off-site development costs, on-site 19 development costs and unit density. 20 Our goal has been to design a conceptual lot 21 layout that will be -- will help mitigate some of the 22 cost -- those cost issues that have arose that come with 23 the developing of this property and while keeping the 24 area -- the prices affordable. 25 And I guess our last -- our goal was -- as a 26 1 developer was design a development that would meet the 2 current housing needs, as well as our needs as a 3 developer, as well as not burden Kerr County with any 4 financial asks or incentives. And I -- I feel like 5 that's a big one. Because we feel like we can do this 6 on our own if we can wrap this up into a condo regime 7 without asking for any aid financially from the County. 8 The last couple pages are some sample houses 9 that we built in New Braunfels and then one of them -- 10 this -- the last one -- the very last one is more of a 11 modern one, but they're all about the same -- same 12 square footage. These -- they range in between a 13 thousand to about 15, 1600 square feet. We feel like 14 that's our -- that's our niche for being able to make 15 them affordable. And that's the direction we're going 16 to head. 17 And I do have a -- it's -- it's our first 18 version of it, but I do have a little flyover, a little 19 long, I may get you to speed up through it. Yeah, I 20 don't know if it's keyed up. It's -- 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: He'll get -- he'll get 22 it there in a second. It's a three minute -- 23 MR. NAMKEN: Yeah. We don't have to watch 24 the whole three minute but -- and this is preliminary 25 stages because we'll put houses on there. This is going 27 1 to be more for our marketing, but this kind of gives you 2 a conceptual of what it looks like. And I wish there 3 was a fast forward button so you could drive a little 4 faster, but I'll try to talk through it if you -- and if 5 any of you want to ask questions during this time, too. 6 But you'll be able to see, this is our -- 7 excuse me, our roadway is coming in. That's our 60-foot 8 right-of-way that we're coming in on. You have a -- had 9 a perfect term for that. What did you call that? 10 MR. WELLBORN: Round-about or traffic 11 combing. 12 MR. NAMKEN: Yeah, traffic combing circle 13 right there so you're not racing to the back. 14 So you can actually see the lot lines on 15 this little flyover. We -- the topography is actually 16 taken into consideration. There may be a little bit 17 more topography than this -- than what we were probably 18 going to show on this marketing one. But you can kind 19 of see the roadway and how we're going to lay it out. 20 And how it comes back to the north up there. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: It's important to say 22 that the topography is as it is. 23 MR. NAMKEN: It is. And -- and it is as it 24 is, which is actually really good for this subdivision. 25 I believe y'all have looked at other subdivisions that, 28 1 you know, went down the road with to approve in this 2 area, and a lot of the times it gets kicked out due to 3 topography when you're trying to do lot grading, and 4 that typically kicks the budget up quite high and it's 5 hard to keep the housing affordable at that point. 6 So this is circling around on the north side 7 and it's -- we're about to start facing the south side 8 back towards the river. 9 MR. HASTINGS: Brandon, that existing pond 10 that we saw would remain? 11 MR. NAMKEN: Uh-huh. We want to leave as 12 many existing features as possible because -- and that's 13 partly why there's 66 acres -- I think it's 66 acres. 14 Yeah, 66 acres of green space. We feel like that's -- 15 you know, if you're going to do high density, you need 16 to have places for people to go to if you're not going 17 to have huge yards. 18 MR. HASTINGS: Brandon, is the drainage also 19 going through that -- the common areas? 20 MR. NAMKEN: It is. It definitely is. 21 Because the way this is shaped, the overall shape of it, 22 so this is the -- one of the streets where the RVs are. 23 The overall shape of it, you know, I use this term and I 24 don't have a better one. So it's -- I'm just going to 25 say it again. It's kind of shaped like a taco shell. 29 1 It's high on the outside and it -- it gets lower in the 2 middle, which allows us -- affords us to be able to 3 funnel the drainage in an area to where it's not on our 4 lots, it's in our green space area, and it gets it down 5 to the bottom, which is on the southern side, where our 6 detention pond will be sitting. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Good job. 8 MR. HASTINGS: It looked to me when I looked 9 at it, that the drainage already had its own course and 10 that you developed around it. 11 MR. NAMKEN: It -- one hundred percent that 12 is true. Our detention pond is going to be exactly 13 where water catches now, except for a lot larger. 14 I'm here to answer any questions. I know 15 Mike with Wellborn Engineering will be able to answer 16 more technical questions than I will. You know, I 17 think -- I think that the area needs it and we're 18 excited to be here. So I -- and I -- I hope that's a 19 fit that works for this area. 20 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Well, you're building 21 communities like this around the state, you say. Have 22 you done any that can compare and see that it's worked 23 getting down to the water usage that you're projecting? 24 MR. NAMKEN: We are just now getting into 25 all of ours. And we have not done any research on water 30 1 usage. So we felt like it was more apt to use water 2 usage from this area on older houses and see how 3 comparable it was to our new houses, and that's why I 4 had -- my architect actually took our house and ran it 5 through a water use calculator, and it was 92 gallons 6 for four people. So it's a lot more efficient than a 7 traditional house that was built 30, 40 years ago or 8 a -- a house -- just because it's a smaller house, we're 9 limiting how many plumbing lines are in our houses. We 10 have tankless water heaters. Things like that that 11 minimize how much water goes into the house that's not 12 actually being used. 13 And then limiting -- and we -- we have never 14 restricted our irrigation either. So that -- this is a 15 new thing. It's actually becoming pretty popular. Lots 16 of people are doing this now. And so I don't have any 17 actual data from our other subdivisions. We just feel 18 like it was more important to actually pull data from 19 this area. And -- and it was within what -- what we 20 were trying to plan for. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I think that -- and 22 Jonathan was there, but I think Keith Marquart from WCID 23 talked about water usage in the Comfort area, which is a 24 high density region also, and the difference in old 25 meters and new meters. It was something -- something 31 1 like 150 gallons per day on an average that they were 2 using and then with the new meters is down to 105. 3 MR. HASTINGS: Well, what -- what -- no, 4 actually what he said was ten years ago their system 5 they had old water meters in there but they were 6 measuring that folks were using 105 gallons a day -- 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Oh okay. 8 MR. HASTINGS: -- at -- at their homes. And 9 now with the new meters, and he's only got like four 10 percent loss now in the system, it's tighter, and 11 they've got lots of people that have moved in that are 12 different living in Comfort. Lots more green grass, 13 people watering the grass. Now they're up to about, I 14 think 145 gallons -- 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah. Okay. 16 MR. HASTINGS: -- per day per connection, is 17 what they're -- what they're looking at. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 19 MR. HASTINGS: And that -- the good thing 20 was that that comparison that Keith made for us was 21 something that we could grasp our hands on, and say oh, 22 so it's possible for you to propose to build these lots 23 with these small homes, and restrict people watering 24 their grasses, because it's a condo regime, you have 25 total control of that or the best control you could 32 1 possibly have, to 144 gallons per day per connection. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Good. Good. 3 MR. HASTINGS: I do want to address one 4 thing the way it was presented. I just want to make 5 sure it's clear because minutes are being taken. 6 Our regulations that talk about the density 7 is completely related to water availability. And those 8 regulations were written 15 years ago, something like 9 that, with the information -- the best information we 10 had at that time. It also -- so what our regulations 11 state today is that if -- if you're going to do a 12 development like this in that area, you need to average 13 two acres per lot to make sure that you have enough 14 water, and we won't make you do any kind of a water 15 availability study. You will have satisfied our water 16 availability studies by sticking with the two acre 17 average. 18 They're going to go with a -- a little more 19 than a half acre average and it's not just residential, 20 it's RV, and they are -- now they're being forced to 21 prove up that that water -- that that's how much water 22 that they can use, the 144 gallons per day and the 45 on 23 RV sites. 24 MR. NAMKEN: We calculated 45 on the RV 25 sites and that was -- the question was, if that would 33 1 change if people are living there full-time and we -- 2 our research says it doesn't due to the fact that 3 there's -- there's not tubs. Nobody's taking a 20 4 minute shower because the water heaters in an RV are not 5 more than ten gallons. And then AQUA actually provided 6 us, I think the 90 unit-ish, 90 unit RV park that they 7 live full-time in in Fredericksburg, and it was actually 8 37 gallons per unit being used. 9 And so we're -- we were even conservative on 10 our calculations by using, you know, eight more gallons 11 or seven more gallons per -- per day per unit, which 12 when we're having to -- getting down to it, every gallon 13 for us matters at this point. So we -- we tried to 14 stick to that little bit of a conservative calculation 15 there. 16 MR. HASTINGS: I -- I just want it to clear 17 if people are reading the minutes and they're not 18 familiar with the subdivision regulations, it's not a 19 requirement that thou shalt have a two acre average 20 period, the end. The -- the regulation is that if 21 you're going to do something less than two acres, you've 22 got more engineering that you have to provide us to make 23 sure that we're comfortable you're going to have enough 24 water. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 34 1 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Charlie, while you're 2 up there. 3 MR. HASTINGS: Yes, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: What's your thoughts 5 on the right-of-way going from 90 to 60? 6 MR. HASTINGS: Oh, I don't have a problem 7 with that. I know that the road and the drainage can 8 fit within a 60-foot right-of-way. So -- and I would 9 agree, that -- that is something we do need to look at 10 in our regulations. 11 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: 90's a lot. 12 MR. HASTINGS: I think the width of 90 -- 13 you know, if that arterial was to continue past this 14 subdivision into another subdivision and another 15 subdivision, we would start saying, you know what, that 16 90-foot of right-of-way is starting to be real important 17 to us because 24-foot of pavement is probably not going 18 to be enough in the future when that next subdivision 19 develops. But that's not what was being proposed here. 20 This would be the end of the road. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the 90-foot -- 22 you know, you have to put a number in rules, you know. 23 And that was kind of based on topography and lots of 24 areas in the County where you need a lot of extra room, 25 because if you only said 60 people are going to go to 35 1 60. If you say 90 then they have to, you know, get a 2 little bit more because you're going up a hill or 3 something like that. So I think that was really -- it's 4 more of the road specifications than the right-of-way 5 width and -- as long as the right-of-way, you know, is 6 sufficient and you can get it done. 7 COMMISSIONER BELEW: This lot frontage drops 8 to less than half. From 200 feet to 75 feet. Is that 9 going to be -- 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Talk about that, 11 Charlie. 12 MR. HASTINGS: Okay. That -- that's 13 another -- would be very critical to us for the Road & 14 Bridge Department to maintain these roads, to have lots 15 of lot frontage. But going to the condo regime, they're 16 going to maintain their own roads. So if they're going 17 to maintain their own roads and their own drainage, what 18 size frontage do you want, you know, and can you make it 19 work. And they're talking about shared access drives 20 and to limit the number of culverts that go in and -- 21 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, it -- it matters 22 only when you have emergency vehicles there if it's 23 privately maintained. It's not the County's expense. 24 It still matters how you have turnarounds and wherever 25 you can get a -- 36 1 MR. NAMKEN: All our turnarounds meet fire 2 code, yeah. 3 MR. HASTINGS: I -- I think the -- probably 4 the most critical thing on this is that now that its 5 gone to a condo regime, they're going to actually build 6 those driveways along with the road, at the same time. 7 The same contractor that comes in and builds the roads 8 is going to put in all those culverts. 9 If it wasn't being done that way, the every 10 one of those driveways would have to be permitted 11 through my office and you're going to have this house 12 build a culvert this year, this house build a culvert 13 over here next year, ten of them going on over here and 14 how is the drainage going to work and where's the mud 15 going to be and it's going to be just a big nightmare 16 and that -- well, that all went away when they said 17 we're going to do a condo regime. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: But -- but there's a 19 single culvert for two lots. 20 MR. NAMKEN: Correct. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So they use -- so that 22 gives you the 150 feet. 23 MR. NAMKEN: Especially when they have 24 culverts. We're -- we're definitely going to try to do 25 one driveway with a culvert. 37 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 2 MR. NAMKEN: If there's areas where you can 3 do just the sheet flow over them. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 5 MR. NAMKEN: I don't mind a driveway -- 6 multiple driveways, but we want to limit the culverts. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 8 MR. WELLBORN: And also given the RVs, 9 spaces are smaller, smaller lots. We're going to do 10 that in curb and gutters. We feel like -- it'll look 11 like a regular in-city subdivision. 12 COMMISSIONER BELEW: There's a lot of green 13 space here. So you talked about having water catchment 14 for the condos. What's going to happen to green space, 15 is that left alone? 16 MR. NAMKEN: It is. 17 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Naturally? 18 MR. NAMKEN: Native. 19 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Okay. And the 20 catchment will be on each one of these -- 21 MR. NAMKEN: Yes, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER BELEW: -- units? Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Cody, do you -- I'm 24 sorry. 25 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Now, in the Headwaters 38 1 assessment, Gene Williams, the general manager, has 65 2 gallons per day with the RV site and you mentioned a 3 different number. 4 MR. MCDANIEL: It was 45. We're using 45 5 as Gene -- we had a discussion with Gene. And the 6 reason we're doing another RV site actually here in Kerr 7 County as well. It hasn't been brought to you yet. And 8 the TCEQ regs are in the 40's. I think it's like 42. 9 And in talking to Gene, he's like they were -- they have 10 done other RV parks and approved 45 for RV parks. His 11 concern was that now it's permanent, if that might be a 12 greater water usage. However, our background study 13 showed that an RV is an RV, whether it's here part-time 14 or full-time. And most the people with RVs are going to 15 be here. If they're -- they've got a destination now, 16 they own this lot, but they're still -- the RVs concept 17 is still going to be the same. 18 If they're not here, they're traveling. And 19 so -- but when they're not traveling on vacation, they 20 have a place they call their home and they're parked 21 here. But the RV usage would be 45. And that's 22 standard. 23 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And they're purchasing 24 these lots? 25 MR. NAMKEN: They have the opportunity to, 39 1 yes. 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Or you'll have some for 3 lease or rent or -- 4 MR. NAMKEN: We will -- we will have both, 5 unless they all sell out. 6 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Okay. Now let's -- I'm 7 interested in the idea that you would restrict them by 8 age of the unit. Is that a -- 9 MR. NAMKEN: Yeah, and we're doing more 10 research on it. We just -- we were told that was one 11 way to -- to ensure the most efficient RV plumbing 12 systems were in. And I'm -- and we're going to have to 13 probably get details with that, because I know right now 14 it is a popular thing to take old Airstreams and redo 15 them and put new plumbing parts and new -- so -- 16 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And that's all I wanted 17 to hear. 18 MR. NAMKEN: -- so there may be some clause 19 in there that's a retrofitted or something has to be 20 proven somehow. But you know, for -- for this purposes, 21 I was -- I was more talking about the newer RVs just for 22 that purpose for a more efficient plumbing systems in 23 it. 24 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Okay. Don't want to 25 get discriminatory here. 40 1 MR. NAMKEN: They're actually really cool. 2 The retro ones. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Cody Newcomb, 4 Superintendent of -- 5 MR. NEWCOMB: All right. I just wanted to 6 make a couple comments and be here mainly to answer 7 questions also. Everybody's been nice enough to include 8 me on some of the meetings so I know what's going on. 9 A huge issue for us and has been, and the 10 Board's talked about this for a hundred years, is -- is 11 teacher housing. Affordable housing in Center Point is 12 a fallacy. I've had people come up and say well, Center 13 Point is a lot cheaper to live in. It's not. Look on 14 Realtor.com, 1.2 million, 2.1 million. Houses that 15 people in this room would live in are not affordable for 16 some people. 17 So we've had instances -- I've got teachers 18 driving in from San Antonio. And we get into a 19 situation, we train them up, they drive in, and then 20 when they can get a job closer to home, they go closer 21 to home. 22 So teacher housing is a huge issue for us. 23 The school owns one rent house that the kids built years 24 ago. It's never been empty. It's been full since I've 25 been there, and I've been superintendent there for 12 41 1 years. So it's a definite need. 2 Just another common industry. Our school 3 district runs all the way up to Mooney. So we had James 4 Avery come in, it's in Center Point ISD. Killdeer is 5 coming to Center Point ISD. I know Commissioner Moser 6 has told me there's a few other things in the works 7 possibly coming into that area. So it just seems like a 8 fit to have that housing development somewhere around 9 those industry areas. 10 Tax rate. Just so you'll know, we have the 11 lowest tax rate in Kerr County, Center Point ISD does. 12 Also, two weeks ago at a board meeting we just moved 1.5 13 million to our INS fund to pay off all indebtedness. So 14 we'll be debt-free, and we also have the lowest tax rate 15 which makes it a pretty popular place for affordable 16 housing and people to move into that need that luxury. 17 And just as a side note, we've got room to 18 grow in our current school district. Automatically 19 people are going to jump out and think of that four 20 letter word in school is bond. And so, this is not 21 going to be a burden at this time on any kind of 22 taxpayers. 23 We've got -- actually, my enrollment right 24 now -- of course, we take into consideration the COVID 25 crisis, I'm down to about 537 students. My high since 42 1 I've been there is 640. So we've got room to grow in 2 our current facilities. 3 I have no idea what -- what a development 4 would bring student wise, but even this year I'm down 60 5 kids. So -- and with that, that's just a few statement 6 of facts. And I'm here to answer any questions and 7 concerns or information as far as the school is 8 concerned. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Good. Thanks, Cody. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question for 11 Brandon or Mike, one of you two. 12 I'm looking at all the numbers and all that. 13 Y'all are getting very close to the maximum that 14 Headwater is going to allow when you take into account 15 combining, and then you get a -- you lose a little bit 16 of water because there's excess being used in Center 17 Point North, that you're so close that you really don't 18 allow for a -- the drought contingency numbers. 19 MR. NAMKEN: The 10 percent that possibly 20 Gene mentioned? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 22 MR. NAMKEN: So what we discussed is Gene's 23 numbers had the -- correct me if I'm wrong, this just 24 kind of happened at the end. Gene's numbers had 65 25 gallons per the RVs, and there's no data showing that. 43 1 And so with us figuring it at 45, that gives us over the 2 ten percent savings on the water that on -- based on 3 Gene's calculations. I think that takes -- was -- I'm 4 going to roundup, I think it was about 11 million eight 5 and -- 6 MR. WELLBORN: Yeah -- actually no. 45 -- 7 it was ten million -- is about ten million eight 8 hundred. So it was actually just right -- right about 9 ten percent from the maximum that would be allowed. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Tell them what you 11 mean. Ten million eight hundred gallons per year for 12 the development. 13 MR. NAMKEN: Right. 14 MR. WELLBORN: So eight -- a hundred and -- 15 round it to 150, it's 12 million gallons. 149.5, it's 16 in the report. So eleven million eight hundred 17 thousand. Something like that. We're at ten million 18 eight hundred thousand, assuming full peak flow 19 conditions. 20 MR. NAMKEN: And I guess what we -- in case 21 somebody questioned that, the 80,000 gallons per acre 22 per year, equals for our subdivision right at 12 million 23 gallons per year. So the question was asked, how are we 24 getting our ten percent savings for a bad year. And 25 Gene's calculations with using a higher RV calculation 44 1 met our -- we had plenty, but we were at the threshold, 2 but our calculations show, and we were able to prove up 3 actually uses, current uses, is actually about ten 4 percent less. So it drops -- it goes from about eleven 5 eight million to about ten eight million. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are you -- because 7 of the nature of the development, you're pretty much 8 limiting the households to personal water use. 9 MR. NAMKEN: Uh-huh. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you go to further 11 drought restrictions, you hit 20 and possibly 30 percent 12 reduction. How do you -- how can -- as a condominium, 13 you control usage when there's really nothing to cut -- 14 you know, a normal way to cut it is -- 15 MR. NAMKEN: Irrigation. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- lawn watering, car 17 wash, all that stuff. All those are off the table. 18 These people don't have that ability. So how do you cut 19 it further and allow people to function? 20 MR. NAMKEN: You have any input there? 21 MR. WELLBORN: Well, what I would say on 22 this, is that we're -- this subdivision will be running 23 basically under a stage one water restriction all the 24 time. So it's self-imposed water restricted in the 25 deeds for this subdivision. But with the rain 45 1 catchment, you know, washing cars if it doesn't spray 2 off into the street. So we're -- we're already setting 3 it up to be in a stage one. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, but that -- I 5 guess it's -- I'm worried about stage two and three. 6 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Yeah, there's no wiggle 7 room from your starting point. 8 MR. WELLBORN: Yeah, well like Joseph said 9 if like we have somebody that's using more water than 10 they're allowed to even under a state condition, they 11 have the option to go and restrict that. And they can 12 go put in a washer and actually neck down the diameter 13 of the -- of the water system -- 14 COMMISSIONER BELEW: The flow. 15 MR. WELLBORN: -- the flow into the house, 16 and it can reduce it that way. 17 MR. NAMKEN: At the meter. 18 MR. WELLBORN: Right. 19 MR. NAMKEN: And that was one of the drought 20 restriction contingencies that we talked about on one of 21 the pages. I think it was on the fourth page where it 22 said AQUA controlled drought contingency plan, is AQUA 23 has the ability to reduce the water flow at the meter to 24 help get to that point. And I do not know what that 25 looks like. I was told it's a washer that goes in the 46 1 water line that reduces the diameter of flow. Is 2 that -- is that pretty accurate? 3 MR. McDANIEL: Yes, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is kind of a 5 general comment. And I don't know the details of TCEQ 6 rules, but I know Joseph probably does. They're 7 obligated to buy the water. I mean if they can't -- if 8 it starts getting to the point that they need to go buy 9 acreage and drill a well, they're obligated by TCEQ to 10 provide the water. 11 COMMISSIONER BELEW: That's in somebody's 12 CCN. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Well, it's in 14 CCN -- it will be in the CCN. And they're -- and AQUA 15 Texas has I don't know how many systems right in that 16 Center Point area. So there's a -- an obligation that 17 they have in their operating because of lot size under 18 model subdivision rules, where basically for water 19 availability what they need to provide to us is a letter 20 from AQUA that they have water for 30 years. 21 COMMISSIONER BELEW: So you're saying -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So that meets the 23 rule -- I mean, the two acre is a number that we use -- 24 Headwaters -- we use it based on Headwaters, but under 25 the model rules, which is really what they operate under 47 1 here, all we require -- or all that they require is for 2 water availability is for AQUA Tech to say they've got 3 the water. Am I saying that basically correct, Charlie? 4 MR. HASTINGS: Yeah. Yeah. 5 COMMISSIONER BELEW: It's 30 years right 6 now. So you are saying AQUA Tex drills the well? Who 7 are you saying drills the well? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They drill it. They're 9 responsible for the water. Now, they have to work with 10 Headwaters, and that's where it's kind of a three-legged 11 stool. TCEQ says, you know, here's the rules. 12 Headwater says this is how much you get based on your 13 acreage. 14 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Would -- would you care 15 to put -- say anything at all? 16 MR. CHILDS: (Shaking head in negative 17 manner.) 18 COMMISSIONER BELEW: No? 19 MR. JONES: Well, I just think it's cutting 20 it really close on the permit, and I think y'all did an 21 awesome job by the way trying to show us what you're 22 doing, but -- but you're not allowing for an aged system 23 either. And at some point it will be an aged system. 24 And so you do have to look at those -- those losses that 25 you're going to have over time. 48 1 AQUA permit for the 74 acres that you 2 already have existing exceeds the initial permit is 3 allowed already by a hundred thousand or something a 4 year, annually over a 17-year average, which is not a 5 major crisis but it is going to become an aged system at 6 some point and you are going to have a deficiency there 7 in the water and you're going to have a larger loss than 8 what's originally calculated in a new subdivision. 9 So being really close to the permit's 10 pretty -- pretty scary. And whatever -- Jonathan, when 11 you were talking earlier about this is the beginning of 12 others to come, and I'm all for growth and I know that 13 area needs it desperately, affordable housing, no 14 question. But that area is -- is one of the first ones 15 that hit drought. There's no water there. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's less water. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, right. 18 MR. JONES: Less water. I stand corrected. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, right. 20 MR. JONES: I stand corrected. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's not, you 22 know -- 23 MR. JONES: It's a concern. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it's a concern. 25 And you know, I'm very much in favor of the development. 49 1 I am concerned about how close they are to the maximum 2 amount of water being used. And it would be -- you 3 know, if there was a way to reduce the number of lots 4 and/or RV spots by like five percent, that would give 5 you -- 6 MR. NAMKEN: Well, another thing that we 7 have calculated in there are a washeteria. And we 8 wanted to calculate that in there just in case, and that 9 is a huge undertaking to add that. And right now we -- 10 we're not necessarily set that that's what we have to 11 do. 12 We have been told in Center Point that there 13 may be something that's coming along with the storage 14 facility that can accommodate something like that. But 15 then that gives us -- I think we calculated, what, 300 16 gallons a day, you know, for 365 days out of the year. 17 So that is a huge gain of water capacity we would get 18 back too if we don't do that. 19 So, you know, I -- we -- we're given the 20 parameters of what we're allowed and -- and that we're 21 trying to design a subdivision that is actually -- we 22 try to be conservative with our numbers. And we feel 23 like we're, you know, ten percent under what was 24 actually allowed to us. And so I feel like this is a 25 good fit and feel like we've done the design concept. 50 1 I do know when you're developing your land, 2 20, 30 years ago you talk about aged systems, they were 3 laid straight in and trenched on rock, and you know, 4 shifting. And now, you know, all the bedding rules and 5 all that kind of stuff that you have to go through, and 6 I do think that pipe, you know, running it at longer 7 foot joints without as many intersections in it, that is 8 a much more efficient system that you do eliminate a lot 9 more loss. Did I say that right? Eliminate a lot more 10 loss. 11 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Now you -- tell me 12 about the landscaping. I know you're going to catch 13 water for it, but are you -- you're not going to put St. 14 Augustine grass or -- 15 MR. NAMKEN: No, we're not putting any grass 16 in. We actually -- 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Xeriscape. 18 MR. NAMKEN: -- have researched actually 19 putting turf in in perimeters, like the -- around the 20 perimeter of the houses. You know, and that helps in -- 21 I'm starting to look at that in commercial settings, 22 too. You're -- it's a permeable solution to areas. It 23 actually helps with erosion control. I don't have to 24 water it. So that -- I don't necessarily want to say 25 that's what we're doing yet, because we gotta look and 51 1 see -- I don't necessarily want to do it if it adds ten 2 grand to each one of these houses because then that 3 starts getting me to the unaffordable if I do that twice 4 within this. 5 So we are looking at other options to -- 6 I'm not looking just for houses in a barren land there 7 in the drought year. But I'm not oblivious to the fact 8 that people aren't going to have plants and possibly a 9 flower bed around their house that they can run with a 10 drip irrigation off of their -- their rainwater 11 collection. 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You know, this whole 13 county's going to have to look at Xeriscape someday, 14 just like Arizona, because -- 15 MR. NAMKEN: Well, there's a lot of cities 16 that don't even let you put St. Augustine in -- 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 18 MR. NAMKEN: -- in the cities anymore. 19 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And they shouldn't. 20 MR. NAMKEN: And so it -- I think it's a 21 concept that's being discussed everywhere on how to do 22 it. 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So that's your plan now 24 is Xeriscape? 25 MR. NAMKEN: Uh-huh. 52 1 COMMISSIONER BELEW: The reason I ask is 2 because if you don't have to water anything but you're 3 catching water, you have a -- you have emergency water. 4 MR. NAMKEN: You do. And -- and so Hays 5 County, the -- the new jail cell there that was built, 6 they did rainwater collection and they have a float 7 switch on their deal and a bypass valve to where if they 8 get into a situation, they can actually use their 9 rainwater for -- for their building if they needed to. 10 Obviously there will be a limited amount of water. They 11 didn't design their rainwater collection based off of no 12 water, other sources. But so there are scenarios there 13 that you can also do that, too, to where you can plumb 14 back into your -- your living quarter supply. 15 MR. JONES: Rain? 16 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Rain. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You have to have rain? 18 MR. NAMKEN: Well, yeah. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You read about it, 20 right? 21 COMMISSIONER BELEW: But you -- you have 22 condensation on the roof, all year long. 23 MR. NAMKEN: That's exactly right. You 24 condensate -- 25 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And that's -- you 53 1 collect more than you realize. 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: It's a euphemism to 3 call it a rain collection. 4 MR. NAMKEN: It's a water collection. It's 5 hard to do the calculation when you're looking at the 6 data and your water -- rainfall and this -- I can get 7 this many gallons off the shed and then like, but it 8 hadn't rained in four weeks and -- yeah. 9 COMMISSIONER BELEW: That's right. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Brandon, the -- we're 11 getting into areas I don't know a lot about. Probably 12 should ask the County Attorney in a second. 13 Condominiums are run or regulated by, I think it's the 14 Uniform Condominium Act of Texas or something similar to 15 that. Anyway, it's regulated by the State. So it's 16 sort of like a HOA but it's independent, or it's 17 different. 18 Generally, we don't get involved with HOA. 19 Or generally -- we just don't get involved with HOA's on 20 a County level, so I presume we don't get involved with 21 condominium rules at the County level either. How your 22 water availability is based on very strict rules under 23 your condominium. How do we -- or how are we guaranteed 24 that those aren't going to be changed, since we have no 25 control over those? 54 1 MR. NAMKEN: Meaning once you all approve if 2 we -- we change it? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How do we have -- how do 4 we know that you -- like an HOA, they change their rules 5 all the time. 6 MR. NAMKEN: Sure. 7 COMMISSIONER BELEW: So you're saying if the 8 Uniform Condo Rules change, we have no control over 9 that? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And it's done by 11 the association, I would think. So you know, I need to 12 be -- we need to be comfortable that the rules that are 13 set have to be followed. Because your entire water 14 availability issue is based on the condominium rules. 15 MR. NAMKEN: You know, other than 16 condominium regime has -- and I'm not a lawyer, but I 17 know we have a whole lot more enforceability within the 18 regime and I do know, you know, there are things that we 19 have to do within development agreements and cities, and 20 when we -- you know, we'll concede to something if the 21 City gives us something in return and that has to be 22 recorded. 23 So maybe there is some -- some items that we 24 will, you know, adhere to what our numbers are that we 25 have in our standards that we have today that -- that 55 1 can be recorded. You know, I -- I don't -- you may be 2 able to answer something more than that. That's about 3 all I know. 4 MRS. STEBBINS: I don't know anything about 5 condominiums. So I'd have to learn a little bit in 6 order to give you some advice. 7 JUDGE KELLY: I do. I've been a real estate 8 lawyer for 45 years. And I have personal and 9 professional experience with condominium regime for the 10 last 20, and I'm still learning. It's a long learning 11 curve. 12 One of the big differences is, is 13 condominium regimes do not have the consumer Bill of 14 Rights that the HOA has, which means that it is pretty 15 much dictated by the condominium ownership and the 16 regime ownership. And I have yet to be involved with 17 the condominium regime that has not resulted in 18 extensive litigation, just to let you know. 19 COMMISSIONER BELEW: The more units, the 20 more litigation? 21 JUDGE KELLY: It's just -- it's much more 22 problematic because it is not traditional. It's new. 23 These are new ideas. And I will tell you that I've 24 gotten increasingly comfortable with condominium regimes 25 over the last 20 years but it's taken awhile and a lot 56 1 of it depends on the judgment and wisdom and common 2 sense of the ownership and leadership of that regime. 3 MR. NAMKEN: Agreed. 4 JUDGE KELLY: Because it can -- it can be 5 extremely oppressive. And it becomes oppressive 6 especially when you're restricting people's ability to 7 access water. You can expect to see the Courts flooded 8 with requests to sort through the issues. I'm all in 9 favor of embarking on this, but this is going to be a -- 10 a -- to me, a cataclysmic change in the way to do 11 business in the County and not something to be entered 12 into lightly. 13 But with careful and -- careful examination 14 and getting us familiar with this and being able to work 15 with this type of regime, it is the future, I agree with 16 that. I love to see aggressive young businessmen come 17 in with these ideas. This is wonderful. But at the 18 same time, we have to be careful in how we approach it. 19 And I was talking with some of the -- I am conservative. 20 I am very conservative. And these new ideas are 21 wonderful, and we need to investigate them. We need to 22 flush them out. But at the same time, we need to take 23 the time to learn how this is going to impact us. 24 The first condominium regime that I had 25 experience with personally was on the east coast and let 57 1 me tell you, they're very refined and perfected there. 2 And it was -- it's like, if you think going to City Hall 3 is tough, wait until you go to a condominium regime. It 4 is -- it is another world. But it's all good. And I'm 5 excited about it, I just want to go slowly and 6 carefully, and try to do this the prudent way. 7 My big concern is that I'm looking around 8 this room and we've got what, a dozen highly motivated, 9 very informed people here talking to us about a change 10 in the way we're going to house people in our County. 11 And I'm excited. If I had half the County with your 12 collective wisdom, I would be behind this 100 percent. 13 And I'm -- it's not that I'm not behind it, 14 I'm just slow to make this move because this is going to 15 be a cataclysmic change in the way we house people in 16 this County. 17 MR. NAMKEN: I think historically 18 condominium regimes, when you talk about ending in 19 litigation, you're -- I -- I would -- I would bet most 20 of the litigation came from in the past was paint to 21 paint condominium regimes, where you're actually sharing 22 walls and -- and so basically, your litigation is over 23 air space at that point. And I'm -- I'm thumbing that 24 down quite -- 25 JUDGE KELLY: Well, and I'm -- 58 1 MR. NAMKEN: But we're doing it -- 2 JUDGE KELLY: -- happy to -- I'm happy to 3 explain. The litigation that I've seen is -- comes when 4 somebody in a position of authority is telling other 5 people what they can do with the property that they 6 purchased. People don't like to be told what to do. 7 When they buy it, they think they have certain rights, 8 and what I'm telling you is when they buy it in a 9 condominium regime they don't have many rights at all. 10 The people that have the rights will be you and the 11 people that own that regime. 12 MR. NAMKEN: And -- and we were -- the 13 attorneys we're working with drawing up our condominium 14 regime are very up front with -- when you have a 15 potential buyer that's coming and looking at this 16 property, the first thing you show them is the 17 condominium regime. And they have to sign that they 18 have received the condominium regime because of such 19 incidents. And -- and you have that in HOA's too. 20 JUDGE KELLY: And -- and you know what? 21 They do that every time. You cannot go to that title 22 company and close on that property without signing that 23 form. 24 MR. NAMKEN: I know. 25 JUDGE KELLY: But they don't read it and if 59 1 they read it, they don't understand it until the issues 2 come up. When you start cutting off people's water, let 3 me tell you -- 4 MR. NAMKEN: Sure. 5 JUDGE KELLY: -- we're going to hear it. 6 This courthouse is going to be filled with people 7 protesting their water being cut off. 8 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: I'd hate to have that 9 job going around in the neighborhood putting that little 10 washer in there reducing the flow. 11 (Laughter.) 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Second amendment right, 13 gun rights. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will note that the -- 15 we have one other condominium regime -- 16 (Phone ringing.) 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now Harley, that's 18 twice. 19 COMMISSIONER BELEW: It's an alarm. But I 20 don't know how to turn it off. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: It's called power. 22 Turn the damn thing off. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But Stablewood was done 24 for -- this way for a different reason. And it's not -- 25 shouldn't be high density development, but it is a 60 1 condominium and -- 2 JUDGE KELLY: And that condominium regime 3 has had four failed real estate developments. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 5 JUDGE KELLY: That was afforded to that to 6 try to do something out there to save that subdivision. 7 And whether or not we're there yet or not, I don't know. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it's -- I mean it 9 switched probably five years ago. But I -- it seems to 10 be going okay, but it's -- it's very different than this 11 one. And it was done -- well, no reason to go into all 12 that part of it. A lot of it was because of wastewater, 13 septic tanks. 14 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, the -- the agenda 15 item here is to look at the concept and approve the 16 concept. So question, if we approve a concept that lets 17 the developer proceed with providing a more definition 18 needs to then come back and -- I'm asking this as a 19 question, than as a approved subdivision. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Condominiums are 21 different. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. So that's -- 23 that's the reason I bring it up. Exactly -- exactly if 24 we were saying yea verily we approve of the concept, we 25 understand the low margin on things, but to proceed 61 1 then, what does -- what does that mean and what do they 2 do to come back to the County? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think as it relates to 4 our subdivision rules, except our rules say condominiums 5 and planned developments have to meet our standards, but 6 because we never really had an issue, that's about all 7 it says. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Uh-huh. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So road standards. You 10 know, you're all meeting the road standards. 11 Right-of-way, it can be modified because of the -- you 12 know -- 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- the reason we talked 15 about. But when it comes to, you know -- I'm not really 16 sure what the step is, you know, is there a final plat, 17 Charlie? I guess that's, you know -- 18 MR. HASTINGS: There's a plat that they 19 produce. And I think really, it's the -- the big -- 20 Mike, you want to go? 21 MR. WELLBORN: Yeah, well, tell me -- tell 22 me if I'm -- I'm just talking about it. So like we did 23 a mobile home park. We've done a couple, bringing 24 another one in here. It's not a plat. What looks like, 25 feels like a plat, and it actually gets filed, right, 62 1 because we file those, but it's -- instead of the filed 2 under the plat of records, it's filed kind of as a 3 condominium of records. It's something separate. It 4 looks like -- 5 JUDGE KELLY: It's going to be a kissing 6 cousin to -- just like what we have out at Meadow 7 Wood -- oh, what is it, Meadowbrook? 8 MR. HASTINGS: Meadowbrook. 9 JUDGE KELLY: The train wreck we've got out 10 in West Kerr County. 11 MR. WELLBORN: I didn't do that one, so -- 12 (Laughter.) 13 JUDGE KELLY: I understand that. I 14 appreciate that. But -- but it's not that there's 15 anything wrong that's being done with regard to the 16 development, it's that the public did not understand 17 what was going in out there, and we have had a veritable 18 train wreck in this courtroom over that. And a lot of 19 it has to do with adjacent landowners, and we haven't 20 talked about adjacent landowners. 21 MR. WELLBORN: Well, and what we're offering 22 here, whether there is a mechanism for it or not, what 23 we would propose is treat it just like a normal regular 24 subdivision. We'll provide you the detailed 25 construction plans, the water and sewer layout, the 63 1 details for the roads, the subgrade, the drainage, the 2 storm water detention pond. And we would do it just 3 like we were doing a normal regular subdivision. Bring 4 that in for the Court to approve. 5 We'll work with Charlie on the plans. Bring 6 you a plat, whether it's filed under the Subdivision 7 Regulations or something separately. We want to treat 8 it as exactly the same and -- and bring that to the 9 Court for approval. So we're not trying to -- we want 10 you to be involved and not excluded. 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So does that make sense 12 to you, County Attorney? 13 MRS. STEBBINS: It does. 14 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah. Okay. All 15 right. So that's what I was trying to -- to bring -- 16 kind of bring out. If we approve something today, then 17 what is the next step in the approval process by the 18 County? 19 MR. HASTINGS: We have to prove up our 20 engineering. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 22 MR. HASTINGS: And -- but if -- if this is 23 not an accepted path, then there's no reason for us to 24 prove up engineering. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Sure. Right. Which 64 1 is -- 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Is it being done in 3 phases? 4 MR. NAMKEN: It will be done in phases. 5 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And so this part, I 6 noticed looking at it, and what will come first and what 7 will be the following? 8 MR. NAMKEN: That's still to be decided 9 because we know we have to get to the backside where 10 there's wells being put and so, you know, the overall 11 cost of that, how many lots do we put in the first phase 12 to try to mitigate the up front costs. You know, those 13 are things that we have to get into when we start 14 looking at our cost that we're getting into. 15 COMMISSIONER BELEW: But you're not going to 16 go in and work your way out. 17 MR. WELLBORN: No, we're going to go in and 18 work our way back, most likely. 19 COMMISSIONER BELEW: That's a lot of wear 20 and tear on that new road. So feasibly you could take 21 any section of this and just do a portion of it? 22 MR. NAMKEN: We know we have to put the main 23 road in. 24 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, I don't mean 25 that. I mean obviously you have to do that. But I'm 65 1 talking about say here for example, and then finish this 2 out? 3 MR. NAMKEN: That's the logical Phase One is 4 that first one that you're talking about. We know we 5 have to get to that main circle there because that's 6 where the well and the tanks will be. But how many lots 7 come off of that -- the first one that you just showed 8 is most logical Phase One. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How -- and I know it's 10 going to depend on sales. What would you anticipate a 11 build out being? For Phase One, you know -- 12 MR. NAMKEN: So the -- the market data that 13 we're getting for buyers is two years. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To build the entire 15 thing? 16 MR. NAMKEN: Uh-huh. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean -- 18 MR. NAMKEN: Now obviously there's lots of 19 things that can dictate the change of that. Another 20 year of shut downs. Although I think this product is 21 actually providing a -- more stimulus for this product. 22 So I -- I don't see change of that. But that's kind of 23 what we've been given our marketing. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- and this -- 25 tossing out an idea if it's being done in phases. If 66 1 you -- if a reduction in the footprint to, you know, 2 half the number of lots, both the RV and the other, are 3 done in Phase One, and then once it's built if 4 everything is working on the water side, then the 5 decision on the density -- the remaining density would 6 be done at that point, at the -- 7 MR. NAMKEN: So you're telling me that I -- 8 I'm going into it blind with not knowing my density? 9 That's hard for me to -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, there could be a 11 potential reduction in the number of the final phase. I 12 mean if there -- if your numbers are coming in, they 13 tell you you're using, you know, 120 to 130 gallons per 14 unit that's one thing. But if it comes in and you're 15 using 180, you know, that's -- that's real problematic 16 because you're very close to the cap right now already. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, let me comment. 18 That was the one reason to get the -- get the data on 19 the 91 properties that are in close proximity. 20 Larger -- larger lots -- lots of green space around and 21 lots of stuff to water that's there. So that's a data 22 point for -- for that area. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they -- they know 24 the total number of water -- you know, the amount 25 they're going to have. 67 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean they know the -- 3 MR. NAMKEN: Currently based off our 4 numbers. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And there's a -- 6 you know, so if you're basing -- if you're confident 7 enough that your numbers are accurate on the water use, 8 then there's really no risk. If that's -- if that turns 9 out to be the actual number, because you're going to get 10 that number of lots because that's how much water you 11 have. 12 MR. NAMKEN: So but you're telling me it's 13 contingent? Is that what you're -- my density is 14 contingent? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On going -- using that 16 water, yeah. 17 MR. NAMKEN: So are you saying that you're 18 going to -- what you're proposing is a ten percent less 19 reduction of lots, in moving forward of our first phase 20 and then we're supposed to report back gallon uses? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm saying -- 22 MR. NAMKEN: I'm just trying to make sure I 23 understand what you're -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Something along that 25 line. Something to show that there is a mechanism to 68 1 reduce the lots, the total number of lots by ten percent 2 on Phase Two, if it's needed. 3 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, let me -- let me 4 say -- 5 MR. NAMKEN: Isn't that kind of what we've 6 done by taking this sort of data over 12 different 7 systems? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's a lot of 9 different -- I mean Headwaters has different numbers 10 than y'all do, a little bit. 11 MR. NAMKEN: But Headwaters is the one that 12 sent us the 144 gallons per -- per unit. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they have a 14 different number on the RV. 15 MR. NAMKEN: That's because the -- but he -- 16 there's no proven -- the TCEQ number is at 40 -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 18 MR. NAMKEN: -- and we increased it to 45. 19 JUDGE KELLY: Aren't those conversations 20 that really need to take place with Headwaters? I mean, 21 you bring in a concept to us. It's a brand new concept 22 for this County. It's going to set precedent on what 23 we're going to do with our $60 million investment in the 24 East Kerr County Wastewater that goes all the way to 25 Comfort. And if this is going to be an example of what 69 1 we can look forward to. I would be more comfortable if 2 we took our time and we had public meetings and we get 3 the public educated on this and get this Court educated 4 so that we're comfortable this is the development model 5 that we want to use. 6 I understand that for affordable housing, 7 Brandon, we're going to have to do something like this 8 because it's just not going to happen otherwise. The 9 dirt and the rocks in Kerr County are just too 10 expensive. 11 Now, with that said, my approach would be 12 not to break it up into bite size pieces like this, but 13 to take this slowly, deliberately. Let's bring it in 14 and get the public on board and work with all our other 15 agencies, such as Headwater, to make sure that we are 16 meeting the public need in this. 17 I mean, we -- we need the workforce housing. 18 So should we just run in and slap it on the ground 19 before we're comfortable that this is the way the County 20 wants to move in this direction and this is how we're 21 going to do it. 22 MR. NAMKEN: Well, I guess in my opinion, 23 that's what we've been doing over the last two and a 24 half months is meet with Headwaters. 25 JUDGE KELLY: But I'm hearing about it for 70 1 the first time today. 2 MR. NAMKEN: Okay. 3 JUDGE KELLY: And I want more experienced 4 people with this type of thing on the court. And the 5 public hasn't heard about it at all. We haven't even 6 gotten it out to the public, and we saw what happened 7 when the public finds out about things after the fact. 8 It's not pretty. 9 And so my -- my suggestion is that we do 10 this deliberately and slowly. This is a little bit like 11 Starship Enterprise. We're going where no one in Kerr 12 County has ever gone before and we need to do it 13 deliberately and carefully and build consensus before we 14 get there. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, Judge, let me -- 16 let me comment. We have worked at this, okay, we've 17 spent hours on it with everybody involved. We obviously 18 can't have everybody in the court in that session 19 because of open meeting rules. So we've looked at it, 20 Jonathan, myself, the County Engineer. 21 And we started -- I mean during these 22 discussions have been in detail, challenges on all this 23 stuff, what is -- what is Center Point. What's the data 24 there? AQUA Texas tells us everything that you've got 25 there. Headwaters Groundwater involved in it 71 1 extensively. We've got cold, hard data from 90 2 properties in Center Point. I mean, that's real data, 3 okay, in proximity using the same types of water. 4 Larger -- larger properties than what's being proposed 5 here. 6 I think the thing that everybody's 7 mentioning over in Precinct 4 had to do with flooding, 8 okay, and what -- what are you doing to control 9 flooding. It was -- that was an issue. Because people 10 had historical data on what the flooding was in their 11 fields and their hay pastures and so forth. 12 This is different than that. This is -- I 13 don't know -- we can -- I don't know what there -- and 14 I'll let Brandon talk to this, of what the timing need 15 is on his acquisition of the property and -- and 16 closing -- closing the deal with that. 17 But also if you look at -- you got existing 18 data. We've got something here that's different, okay. 19 If it -- if it works, I think we've got the margin 20 that's in there. Okay. And it's already been talked 21 about. It's not to say if it -- if it's at the edge of 22 the margin and we're -- we're pushing the envelope 23 there, it's not to say that we can not approve other -- 24 if other condominium challenges come in or proposals 25 come in, concepts, other condominium concepts say no, 72 1 we're not going to do it. Okay. We've learned from 2 existing, we've learned from this. Or we may say this 3 works great, okay, and then consider the next 4 condominium project, if it's proposed. 5 I don't -- I don't see the benefit, 6 personally, in -- and I don't understand the impact if 7 we let the thing be put off until we approve concept. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think the -- 9 and I don't -- I'm not sure exactly what the Judge means 10 by slow down. I mean, if you -- if we say the concept 11 is okay -- 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- but we'd like to have 14 a public meeting on it -- 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Sure. I have no 16 problem with that. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- then fine. But just 18 to slow it down, this thing has been looked at a lot. 19 JUDGE KELLY: By three other people. Not by 20 the rest of us. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's why 22 we're -- 23 JUDGE KELLY: I -- this is my first -- this 24 is my first exposure to it. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. That's why we're 73 1 here today. But -- 2 JUDGE KELLY: That's right. And so this is 3 Step one of a number of steps that I think ought to be 4 taken to get us there. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But this is a -- if he 6 goes and changes this to a subdivision, we have 30 days. 7 JUDGE KELLY: I understand. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I -- to me, we have 9 30 days to make a decision on this. I mean it's the 10 same thing. And we can do a public meeting -- 11 JUDGE KELLY: No, it's -- a condominium 12 regime is not the same thing as subdivision. Just like 13 Mike was saying. If we treat this like a subdivision, 14 we know exactly what the rules are, we know exactly what 15 our subdivision rules are, we know what our timetables 16 are and the public is on notice to that. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then -- 18 JUDGE KELLY: This is something new. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, but if we do that 20 strictly by our rules we'll never have workforce 21 development in this County. Period. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Period. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because our rules don't 24 allow for it because we didn't have wastewater until 25 now. So I mean I think this slowing it down doesn't 74 1 make sense. We need to tackle the issue. We've been 2 talking about a lot of these issues for two years. That 3 we need to figure out how to allow for density 4 development in this area, where there's now wastewater 5 available. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I don't see what 7 slowing it down does. 8 JUDGE KELLY: It gets input from the public. 9 Right now we're getting input from the -- the would be 10 developers that want to come in here and do this. And I 11 understand. I love the aggressive business approach. I 12 do. I truly do. I embrace that. But it's the kind of 13 thing that needs to be tried and true. The public needs 14 to be invested in this. These other regulatory agencies 15 need to be invested in this. 16 We're getting ready to embark upon a 17 condominium regime that we're going to have to 18 incorporate into our subdivision rules on one project, 19 and that becomes the precedent for the future. 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, regulatory -- 21 other regulatory -- 22 JUDGE KELLY: And I think the public 23 deserves to be heard. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- other regulatory 25 things, we got Headwater Groundwater here. We've got 75 1 WCID here. Okay. I think we -- I think we meet their 2 requirements. 3 JUDGE KELLY: I talked to Gene Williams and 4 I -- I question that. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: What do you question? 6 JUDGE KELLY: The water capacity. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: We just went through 8 it, Judge. 9 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. Yell at me. That's 10 fine. 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I'm not yelling at you; 12 I'm just saying, I don't know what else you would do. 13 JUDGE KELLY: I'm going to call the issue. 14 Let's take a vote. Is there a motion? 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I'll make a motion that 16 we -- I'll make a motion that we approve the concept as 17 presented, okay, for Eden Farms in Center Point. 18 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know if I want 20 to approve it as presented. I want to look at it more. 21 But I think we need to move forward. I think we ought 22 to have a plan. 23 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Isn't that what the 24 Judge just said? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, but the Judge -- I 76 1 don't -- I think 30 days is enough. And I mean there's 2 going to be -- if they're going to do a plat, how long 3 does it take you to do a plat, Brandon? 4 MR. WELLBORN: Well, let me back up. We can 5 do a plat -- I can do a plat with that now; however, a 6 condominium doesn't require a plat. What I'm saying is 7 basically this is -- if we're going to do this as a 8 normal subdivision, we would -- this right here would be 9 considered a preliminary plat. And so basically what 10 we're asking for is approval of preliminary plat today. 11 However, being a condominium regime it 12 doesn't requirement a preliminary plat, it doesn't 13 require a final plat. What we are doing is requesting 14 approval on the concept plan so we can move forward from 15 starting today with the detailed construction plans and 16 whatever the Court decides is needed for a condominium 17 regime. 18 MR. NAMKEN: You know, I -- I'm going to 19 speak a little bit on a subdivision that I'm not 20 personally working on but a friend of mine is and 21 they're in Leander. They took 48 acres and platted it 22 as one condominium lot. The City of Leander, who is 23 extremely difficult to develop within, what they did is 24 gave two conditions. We'll grant you that one 25 condominium lot, but the main purpose was because they 77 1 were looking for density that was not within their 2 development standards. So they don't want to rewrite 3 their development standards to adhere to this density. 4 So they were happy with the condominium, but they -- 5 they gave them -- they wanted -- if you're going to do 6 this small of lots they wanted rear entry. 7 And there was one more about cul-de-sac 8 width for fire because the fire -- was getting a larger 9 truck. They had to -- to do a big turnaround. 10 So currently it is platted and filed as one 11 condominium lot and they can overlay their land plan on 12 top of it and it's not a plat. It's one platted lot as 13 it's current, and then the condominium regime that is 14 actually submitted and recorded, is actually the 15 government body that dictates all of the innards of lot 16 layouts and stuff like that. 17 JUDGE KELLY: We've got a motion. Do we 18 have a second? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm -- 20 COMMISSIONER BELEW: What was the motion? 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: To approve the concept 22 plan. 23 COMMISSIONER BELEW: To approve the concept. 24 Just -- 25 JUDGE KELLY: As it is. 78 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- let me 2 answer, I'm not ready to just go ahead and second it 3 right now, and the reason is, I don't see that this is 4 a -- you know, I don't disagree with the Judge that this 5 needs to be looked at by the public, or a small group 6 has looked at it. 7 And I don't want to tell the developer to go 8 and spend a lot of money until we have at least some 9 period of time, which to me would be maybe two weeks, 10 and bring it back at our next meeting to approve it so 11 everybody has had a little bit of time to look at it. 12 Because -- 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- three members of the 15 Court, I acknowledge, they have not -- this is the first 16 time they've looked at it, and I think that there is -- 17 you know, the reason it was brought today was to bring 18 everyone up to speed as to where we are. 19 And I think that -- and during that period, 20 I don't know, we can schedule a meeting maybe in Center 21 Point if they want to or just have -- you know, 22 obviously the school district is very much in favor of 23 this project for a lot of reasons. I -- my preference 24 would be to hold off and maybe put this on the agenda on 25 the 25th. That's a week, two weeks. Two weeks. 79 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Ten days. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Either that or the first 3 week in February for the approval. Because I just hate 4 to -- I don't want them to start spending money if 5 there's any issue. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: What -- what does that 7 mean to -- 8 MR. NAMKEN: I have to make a decision by 9 the end of February. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: By the end of February. 11 So that's compatible with your decision? 12 MR. NAMKEN: Uh-huh. 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. All right. 14 COMMISSIONER BELEW: What do we think we'll 15 determine by putting it off? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's more public 17 awareness. 18 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- you know, 21 I'm a little -- I'm still a little concerned with the 22 water. I know you're pretty close. I'd like to look at 23 the numbers. You know, it is -- the water usage is 24 documented by AQUA Texas and -- and WCID as to what is 25 actually being used. Though the numbers are a lot less 80 1 than what I'm used to attributing to residential lots. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. Well, I'll -- 3 I'll withdraw my motion in light of the fact that the 4 end of February is the -- is when you need to make that 5 decision. I thought it was sooner than that. And then 6 we'll put it on the agenda for the 25th. 7 MR. HASTINGS: Could we get them -- I 8 think -- I talked with Brandon in the hallway and he 9 didn't have it with him today, but he was going to get 10 more information to me about the water and how much was 11 calculated that was actually going to be used in these 12 homes. I have not seen that -- that number yet, that 13 schedule, and I've been kind of chomping at the bit for 14 that. 15 If I could get that, then I could -- right 16 now I can't tell y'all what I think about the water, 17 other than I know it's tight. That's all I can say. 18 And I just wish if I could have those -- those numbers, 19 I could take it to that next step where I could quantify 20 it for you and tell you, okay, here's the percentages 21 and then I think you would be able to feel more 22 comfortable making the decision. 23 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: That would help me a 24 lot. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other thing I 81 1 think that would be helpful, Joseph, I know you need 2 some stuff to do because you're not real busy these 3 days. But if you could take, you know, you're the water 4 provider for most systems in the County. Come up with 5 Center Point North, a few others around Center Point, 6 and just put a chart together, per connection, how much 7 water is being used on average. I know you've done it 8 already. But I mean have a chart. 9 I mean I see -- I'd like to see a chart. 10 Here's the development, or the CCN, here's how many -- 11 or the water system as you call it. Anyway, but put 12 that together as a chart so we can see, you know, what 13 WCID says they're using, what Center Point North is 14 using, all the rest of them are using. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I think it's there but 16 that would be -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it's there but I 18 think it's -- it wasn't in the presentation and I think 19 that's a really important -- 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: The other thing I'd 21 like to see is, I know that there are people that are 22 households that are using water just for personal use 23 that are on rainwater catchment systems. And I know 24 there's some data there. I think it would be 25 interesting to see when they're -- when they're being 82 1 careful on their water usage, exactly what that is. But 2 I think it's another data point that is available. 3 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: I mean, you always 4 plan for the bad years. And -- 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah. Well, I'm just 6 talking about if you're -- if somebody has the 7 philosophy we're going to really be careful about the 8 water we use, what do they really use. Okay. I think 9 there's not many people, but I think there's some in 10 your area that do that. That would be good. 11 COMMISSIONER BELEW: From my time on 12 Headwater's board, what I recall of any of these areas 13 that had dense population, the usage was typically right 14 at or below what they had applied for, unless we found 15 out there was a leak or something like that. Do you -- 16 either of you guys have anything to say about applied 17 for usage versus what the people -- I know sometimes 18 they have a second addition or something, they come back 19 and apply for more. But in general, do people -- 20 because these guys are wanting to stay on target. 21 Generally speaking in a high density neighborhood or -- 22 or trailer park or whatever it may be, how often are 23 they close to their numbers and how close? 24 MR. CHILDS: Some are and some aren't. But 25 we, you know, like to have it to where they have that 83 1 cushion built in for the -- 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Right. 3 MR. CHILDS: -- 20 percent or 30 percent. 4 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Which is -- you're 5 really talking about a comfort zone, but I'm talking 6 about, you know, really getting pretty close to the 7 mark. 8 MR. CHILDS: I'll look at that. 9 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Yeah. But a lot of 10 times it's -- there's -- and that -- there's a lot of 11 variables. I realize that. But do you -- can you think 12 of anything that would be a close comparison to that? 13 MR. JONES: Not to what they're proposing. 14 MR. CHILDS: Now, this one is cut to the 15 bone. It's cut to the bone. But also the restriction 16 of outdoor watering is -- is the key component to this. 17 I mean that's the only way that they're getting close. 18 MR. NAMKEN: Was it WCID that told us that 19 if you -- if you cut outside irrigation it'll cut their 20 usage by a third. And that's a third off of -- what 21 number? Was it the 145 or was that -- 22 MR. WELLBORN: I think that was the higher 23 number. 24 MR. NAMKEN: Yeah. 25 JUDGE KELLY: Well, just to kind of wrap up 84 1 today, this has been very productive and I want to say 2 to you, Brandon and Mike, we are exited about these new 3 ideas that you're coming to us with. They're new to 4 Kerr County. I've had experience with them other 5 places. But this is an exciting opportunity for us and 6 we want to cooperate and work with you and find a way to 7 make this happen. 8 What we're doing today is because we are 9 conservative. We're a conservative County and I happen 10 to be very conservative myself. We're tapping the 11 brakes. We want to make sure we get this right. And 12 let's go forward. We'll have you on the agenda for the 13 25th. And let's start looking for ways that we can get 14 everybody up to speed that know how we can go about 15 developing a residential opportunity to people in the 16 County with this new condominium regime concept. So 17 thank you very much for coming in. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, with that -- and 19 thank you, Judge, I agree with that a hundred percent. 20 So should we have -- to get -- to make sure the public 21 gets exposure of this, should we have a workshop between 22 now and then, invite the public in? What would you -- 23 JUDGE KELLY: I think workshops are good. I 24 think town hall meetings like we're having later in the 25 month in Precinct 2 are good. The more opportunities we 85 1 have with the public to come and listen to what we're 2 talking about. This is a very WOKE group. You people 3 are awakened to the opportunities and the challenges 4 lying ahead for us in developing affordable housing in 5 this County. Not everybody's up to your standard. 6 We need to get more people comfortable with 7 what we're doing so that we don't have the push back 8 that we've had on some of our other projects where the 9 public was not really aware of what was happening. We 10 had a public hearing, but they didn't find out about it 11 until afterwards and it blew up in our face. So this is 12 just trying to prevent all of that to keep this on a 13 steady track moving forward. 14 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, with that, I'll 15 try and -- if the Court agrees, I'll -- I'll set up a 16 town hall meeting, okay, between now and the next 17 Commissioners' Court on the 25th, and try to do it at 18 the AG barn where we can have lots of -- lots of space 19 and when -- 20 JUDGE KELLY: It's going to be a push 21 between now and the 25th at the AG barn, I'll tell you 22 that. 23 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Stock show. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Oh, that's right. 25 Okay. Yeah. Well, we could do it perhaps at the 86 1 cafeteria. 2 MR. NEWCOMB: We'll be glad to help with 3 that. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. So let -- let me 5 work with Cody and we'll -- and with Brandon and Mike 6 and Charlie and everybody, to have a town hall meeting 7 in Center Point. Is that okay? Go ahead. 8 MR. WELLBORN: Thank you. Just so I can try 9 and understand the process. So we're going to have a 10 regular scheduled Commissioners' Court meeting on the 11 25th or 26th? 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: 25th. 13 MR. WELLBORN: Okay. On the 25th. After 14 that meeting, would that be basically the approval of, 15 even though this isn't a preliminary plat, that would 16 give us vested rights to then move forward and go 17 through the development? 18 JUDGE KELLY: I don't know. It just 19 depends. 20 MR. WELLBORN: I mean, it would be approved 21 or denied. 22 JUDGE KELLY: This is -- we're all trying to 23 get up to speed on this at the same time. 24 MR. WELLBORN: Right. 25 JUDGE KELLY: We just have to have a bigger 87 1 audience being exposed and understand what we're doing. 2 MR. WELLBORN: Right. 3 MR. NAMKEN: And I guess my question is, 4 what is our homework between now and then? What are we 5 needing to come back with you for? Is it merely -- 6 VOICE: Water. 7 MR. NAMKEN: I understand that part. But is 8 it merely to communicate to the public, or do I need to 9 create a different presentation, or -- 10 JUDGE KELLY: Well, I think we need you to 11 work with Headwaters. I know that. Because it's 12 pushing -- 13 MR. NAMKEN: Well, that's what we've been 14 doing and I've got a letter from Headwaters. So I -- I 15 don't know what else we need to do with Headwaters. And 16 I guess the conservative nature of it is -- 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, Chris is here. 18 What do we need to do, Chris? 19 MR. CHILDS: You know, Gene has been in 20 the -- you know, we've had what, three meetings with 21 Gene, who wrote you the letter this week. We were sort 22 of anticipating y'all would have come into our office 23 this week. 24 MR. NAMKEN: Oh. 25 MR. CHILDS: We didn't get that. I think I 88 1 mentioned it to somebody else here. 2 MR. NAMKEN: Okay. 3 MR. CHILDS: So if you're going to contest 4 the 65 gallons on the RV connections, probably would 5 have been -- 6 MR. NAMKEN: Gotcha. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And by the time you 9 talk to the public and this is worked out, you'll have a 10 much better case to make for any objections that may 11 come up. There's always going to be somebody that 12 doesn't want you to go there because they don't want you 13 to cut down a mesquite tree that their grandfather did. 14 But you're going to -- you're going to have a -- you 15 have a pretty solid presentation here. Everybody knows 16 the need. You get those details worked out like that, I 17 think you ought to be okay. 18 JUDGE KELLY: I think it's -- I think we can 19 continue that conversation after today. And continue on 20 with all this. I apologize. We're running past the 21 time and I need to be somewhere. There being no other 22 business before the Court, we will be adjourned. 23 * * * * * * 24 25 89 1 STATE OF TEXAS * 2 COUNTY OF KERR * 3 I, DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD, Certified Shorthand 4 Reporter in and for the State of Texas, and Official 5 Court Reporter in and for Kerr County, do hereby certify 6 that the above and foregoing pages contain and comprise 7 a true and correct transcription of the proceedings had 8 in the above-entitled Special Commissioners' Court. 9 Dated this the 22nd day of January, A.D. 10 2021. 11 12 /s/DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD Certified Shorthand Reporter 13 No. 953 Expiration Date 04/31/2021 14 * * * * * * 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25