Travis County Commissioners Court
August 18, 2009,
Item 1
Number 1, is a public hearing to receive comments regarding a plat for recording in precinct 3.
revised plat of a portion of panoramic hills, lot 37, a total of four lots.
>> move that the public hearing be opened.
>> second.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
>> good morning, anna bolin, Travis County t.n.r.
the purpose of this revised plat is to split a plot of 37 to four lots.
they would range in size from three acres to four acres, we did send public notice to the original lot owners in panoramic hills.
it is an older subdivision that has several resubsubdivisions in it.
to my knowledge, we have had some concerns raised about this subdivision or this resubdivision.
so the -- the areas of the concern would be whether or not there would be one home per lot, the state of the existing road and the size of the lots.
we have -- we have found one deed restriction that deals -- that pertains to lot 37 and in that deed restriction it does not say that the -- that the lots cannot be redecided.
there is a re-- resubdivided.
this is a restriction that the minimum houses size is 1700 square feet, but we do not find that there is a deed restriction saying the lots could not be resubdivided.
with regard to deer canyon road, that's a private street with the perpetual maintenance agreement and when the lots would be redecided then all of the new lot owners would be paying into that fund for the private street maintenance.
resubdivided.
i have looked, our planners have looked, we haven't found any other deed restrictions, if there are any, we would be happy to re-evaluate that.
that is why we put this on for approval because we believed it met our requirements.
>> deer canyon road is a private road not a county road.
>> yes, sir.
>> okay.
we do know there is opposition because yesterday we were delivered a -- a -- I guess three pages of petition.
>> yes, sir.
>> signed by seven -- 14 I guess residents.
if you are here on item no.
1 and would like to give comments to the court, on this item, then please come forward at this time.
if you would give is your full name, we would be happy to get your comments, just have a seat there.
we have four chairs left.
public hearing, item no.
one, please come forward, give us your full name and then your comments, yes, sir?
>> my name is -- excuse me, glen atkinson, and I own the balance of lot 37 on deer canyon road.
so my property abuts the subject property.
and for some of the reasons stated by this lady, I agree with the subdivision and I don't see any problem with it and like I say, since I own the balance of lot 37, I would like to see it approved.
>> so you are not the applicant today.
you own what's left?
>> that's correct.
>> okay.
>> yes?
>> I'm opposed to this.
>> okay.
your name, please.
>> lynn meritt.
the -- the homeowners on deer canyon road have been having to take care of the road by ourselves.
there's been no fund, you know, established for maintenance of the road or anything like that.
i have already put $5,000 into the road ourselves, we have put $5,000 into the road to have it maintained.
it's still a very bad road, potholes all over it.
if you increase the traffic on the road, you're going to increase, you know, the problems with the road maintenance and so that's one of my issues.
the other issue is that decreasing the lot size and there's two little tiny houses, when you first drive into the entrance of deer canyon road, two very, very small houses that are not very nice houses and I think it -- you know, brings down the property value of the property.
it brings down the value of the home.
to have small homes like that.
so ...
>> okay.
yes, sir?
>> my name is glen atkinson, jr.
i own part of lot 34, which is on the other side of the lot that's being proposed for replat.
i am -- I am not objectionable to the replat.
the -- the issue of the road maintenance is one that -- that I have personally participated in.
both monetarily and personally, physically.
and I think that -- that the replat of this particular lot is not going to modify or change that situation that's another issue that needs to be addressed, you know, I think at another time.
but as far as the replat of this particular lot, I'm not objectionable to it.
>> okay.
thank you.
yes, sir?
>> my name is pete
>> [indiscernible], I live on the road.
i'm not objectionable to -- to the resub, either.
my deed restrictions are none.
i have none.
as far as road maintenance, I -- I drove the road grader on that road for five years maintaining it, so I have a lot of time in that road maintenance.
mrs.
meritt here wouldn't even have a house on the road if I would not have subdivided two and a half acres off to her house, she wouldn't even live there today.
so -- so, you know, my deed restrictions say I have nothing, I'm unrestricted, other than I cannot put a pig farm on it.
that's about it.
so -- so, yeah, I would like to see the plat approved.
>> excuse me, I would like to also interject the lady when she first spoke, indicated that -- by the way, there is something that sustains the maintenance of that road.
and all of the property out there.
there is a requirement for the property owners to contribute each year to the maintenance of that road.
so -- so all this is going to do is enhance that amount of money to -- to improve that road.
>> okay.
your first name is pete, I didn't get your last name.
>> gulla.
>> okay.
anybody else here on this item?
we will need those four chairs.
we have space for four more, please come forward.
room for two more.
last call?
okay.
yes.
>> my name is janice wilson, I've had this land -- it was originally a veterans grant of so many acres, now we see people coming in and wanting to split it up.
this is the first time that I have even heard, you know, people have been splitting up like five acres, but it's not anything like relevant.
some want to put it up to 10, some five.
we're kind of thinking that we need to get together as a group and talk about some of this because there's people on my side who are not and we've used ours for agriculture and there's still people out there who want to have their horses and their business.
it's a kind of controversial place.
and we're seeing, as we look out, it looks like a big city over there on deer canyon.
we are also getting the -- the people that move out there are speeding, it's creating all kinds of different problems and there nor solutions.
our roads over where we are are just terrible, they are like horse trails.
they were deeded over to the county, but the county doesn't want to take them.
i mean not deeded but he said it was used for private use, public.
nothing has happened, we have to do it all ourselves.
so it falls to two or three people.
it's a real problem out there.
and so until something like that is done, I don't see why people won't even move someplace where they can't even hardly get on the roads, but you just wouldn't believe how many people are moving out there.
but they are not really concerned about the roads.
of course, they have to get their own sewage and water, also.
so -- so I would like to see somebody, I would like to know some restrictions.
are they going to put houses or how many houses?
i mean, I think there needs to be some rules now as to what they're going to do out there.
not just throw everything up, you know, so if I split mine up, I would put restrictions on it because I see now you're going to have to have some restrictions out there.
so I think it's important to get some restrictions.
that's all that I have to say.
>> okay.
>> can I ask a question?
ms.
wilson, is there -- do -- you speak of some desire for the neighborhoods -- the neighbors to get together and come up with some kind of restrictions.
has there been any kind of organized effort to get together and maybe form a homeowners association or --
>> no, I haven't -- this is the only time that I have heard of this.
i guess as a courtesy I was told.
in the future or past if I had known all of this was going, I might have had good to say, too, but I didn't find out about it just through hearsay.
i think you ought to tell people if you are going to split it up, it may affect different people out there.
>> okay.
i bring it up only because we don't have authority under state law to regulate the density on property.
but individual homeowners association do if they get together and organize for it.
>> thank you, ms.
wilson.
yes, sir?
>> your honor, my name is j.b.
huttleson, I live out there, 41 acres on deer canyon road.
and the people that's -- that is asking for this permission to -- to resubdivide are real, real good friends of mine and I sold the property to them.
it was my understanding that -- that they was going to build one house on the property and that was all.
i'm not opposed to them resubdividing the property, but I am opposed with the property being two and a half acres big on that property.
i know that they are going to have to have a septic system and without going into the -- into the -- the property pretty heavy with a bulldozer, I don't think that they can get 1700 square foot house on that property antiseptic tank, also, and still -- and the septic tank, also and still have the control of the county on the septic system.
like I say, I'm not opposed to this, but I would like to see that there's more than five acres of -- per lot on this.
i've owned about 65% of that whole subdivision out there and every time that I've sold property, the county has always requested that I have the property over five acres.
and I have stuck with that.
and so now I just think that two and a half acres is just too small.
they're going to have two roads up to the top of the mountain and I personally took an easement off of a piece of property and went from a -- from the road to his property on top of the hill, so he wouldn't have to build the road up the side of that mountain.
and I know he's got a lot of problems on this because I've got a road to get up to my house that goes on top of the mountain.
and it's -- it's -- it's pretty bad.
the road like all the rest of 'em, I have maintained it.
i don't think the road is too awful bad now.
we was given the asphalt off of interstate 35 and we brought that in at a cost of $13,000 and the road is a lot better than what it was.
so if -- if we could have some situation where we could have five acres per lot there, and have -- and have the raise -- change that -- the structure of the -- the resubdivide, I think that that would be a much better than what it is now because at two and a half acres, they are just -- they're going to -- by the time you get your easement, your septic tank, the 1700 square foot house on it, that's just not -- that's just not --
>> [indiscernible]
>> mr.
huttleson, did I understand you to say that you had decided some of your -- sub divided some of your properties directly and the county required that you --
>> yes.
i started about five, six years ago, well, longer than that, I'm sorry, time --
>> time flies.
it's been about 20 years ago.
and I -- I had a total of -- of about 150 acres in there that I resubdivided and at that time I tried to get the county to take the -- the road over.
and I went and talked to the -- every person that I could talk to or get them to sit down for about five minutes and we come to a decision that the road will never be taken over because of the way that the road is -- is built and it just won't ever do it.
and -- and I was wanting to -- to put it in four and a half acres and I went to the county, the first time that I sold the piece of property out there, they wouldn't -- they just almost refused to do it.
and so -- so they said that I needed to keep five and a half acres or between five and five and a half acres per lot, to make -- to make everything work out with the septic system and the 1700 square foot house.
that's what -- that's what they had required.
it never was a -- it never was anything written down on paper to that effect, but the word of mouth was what it was.
and I have -- each one of the lots that I have sold out there, and I've sold -- oh, quite a number of houses.
a lot of 'em here.
and -- and they are all over that site.
>> thank you, mr.
huttleson.
>> may I ask him a question?
>> all right.
>> mr.
huttleson, do you have additional property that you intend to subdivide?
>> no, I have already subdivided the last five acres that I had in there -- last 50 acres that I had in there.
but then again it was divided into five acre plots.
now the people that bought it did buy the two adjoining lots and they have all gotten acres in there.
and I've -- got 10-acres in there.
i have one self and a half acre plot left.
>> back to what I was speaking with ms.
wilson about.
if you all know property owners with large parcels who may sell in the future, you could discuss with them putting restrictive covenants on the property before you sell it so that -- they can't --
>> there are some restrictions on the property that I'm selling now.
>> it does -- it does often reduce the selling price, but --
>> yes.
>> that is an option.
>> well, I put a much bigger restrictions on the property that I sold this past five years on it, and it does state that.
>> okay.
thank you, mr.
huttleson.
>> for the record, there is no five acre minimum size requirement by the -- by Travis County.
>> no, sir.
we would -- we would caution people to, you know, look at the topography, take into account, you know, the size that you are going to need for your septic systems and your house sizes and taking into account any existing easements or proposed easements when you do that.
but we do not have a minimum lot size requirement.
>> anybody else here on this item?
we will need to discuss this briefly with our attorneys.
that discussion will take place this afternoon.
are we likely to take action today, do we think?
>> in light of the opposition that's come up today and the concerns that are brought forth, I would prefer to postpone this for two weeks as an action item.
>> okay.
>> is the applicant here?
you heard that, right?
>> yes.
>> [indiscernible]
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> if you come up and give us your full name.
give us your comments.
if there's somebody else on this item who would like to give comments today, this is the time to come forward because after this gentleman otherwise we close the public hearing.
last call.
yes, sir, your name.
>> thank you, my name is samir ray, my wife and I were the owners for the property that's up for subdivision.
and I wanted to thank everybody for coming and giving their comments.
just a couple of comments on that.
so on the size, as it was mentioned there's no minimum size requirement.
our goal is to have an increase in property value.
so if we have four homes, two of them will have a great view of the lake from the top of the mountain.
this is not just some, you know, property which doesn't have any value.
so by dividing that into four, we believe we would actually increasing the value of the neighborhood.
instead of one home, we have now four homes that can do that.
so increasing the value, I think that's something that we are attempting to do.
the second comment about size of the home and also the septic tank and things of that nature.
we actually had the -- those
>> [indiscernible] holes dug, we had an excavator up there, that has been done and approved by the tnrc office, they have already looked at the soil report and they don't have any concerns.
so obviously if you are looking at two and a half acres, that's roughly 100,000 square foot.
if you have a 2,000 square foot home in there, there's still 98,000 square foot that's left, you know, in that property.
so obviously not a concern in terms of size.
from a topographic soils condition standpoint, that has already been done and there were no concern abouts that.
everything was okay.
that's all that I had to add.
thank you.
>> thank you.
>> we will hear from our attorney this afternoon and ask legal questions and get answers hopefully and have this item back on the agenda two weeks from today.
and next week is the 25th, so that's -- that's September 2nd or 3rd?
>> September 1st.
>> September 1st.
is when we will post this again.
for action.
and I thank you all very much for coming down.
>> may I make a comment?
if any of you have old deed restrictions that indicate any kind of restriction on the subdivision size, you should let us know because our t.n.r.
staff has -- has not been able to turn up any.
and -- that would relate to this.
but that doesn't mean that it may not be there somewhere.
so I encourage you to look for your own deed restrictions.
>> with that I move that the public hearing be closed.
>> all in gave?
that passes by unanimous vote.
thank you all very much.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, August 18, 2009 3:07 PM
