Seguin resident says new Hubert Road access cut into his property; city says fire marshal ordered Knox lock

A Seguin resident told the Seguin City Council he believes construction of a new road next to his house on Hubert Road encroached on his property, has become an uncontrolled access route and left the adjacent retention pond unmaintained.

At the council’s public-comments period, the resident, who identified himself only as Joshua and said he lives at 2340 Hubert Road, said crews “came in and took, probably a portion about this much on my property” and that he was not notified before work began. “They told me they was not going to put a road there. It was just going to be a drainage ditch. They put a road there,” Joshua said. He said the gate intended for emergency access has been repeatedly cut by people entering from the Hidden Brooks development, and that heavy vehicles and motorcycles are now traveling the road at all hours. He also described maintenance problems at the retention pond beside his house and said rodents and trespassers have become a regular problem.

Why it matters: Joshua said he has lived on the street for about 30 years and that the changes have increased traffic and safety concerns on what he says was intended as an emergency-only access. He asked the council to help resolve trespass, gate cutting and maintenance of the retention pond.

Council and staff response: Mayor Donna Dodge said the city had “already started looking into mister Hellman’s issues.” The city’s fire chief said the fire marshal ordered a Knox lock for the gate and that staff would install a stronger lock and take “some security measures to ensure or maybe capture people that try to cut that lock again.” The chief noted the city purchased a “beefier lock” intended to be more resistant to bolt cutters.

What was asked and what will happen: Joshua asked the city to notify neighbors before development and to restore or maintain the pond and fence line adjacent to his home. The city acknowledged it is reviewing his concerns and said the fire marshal’s action to replace the lock is intended to prevent repeated unauthorized access while staff investigate additional steps. No formal council vote or ordinance was taken on the matter during the meeting.

Context and constraints: The resident described physical damage he says occurred during construction — including disrupted utilities and damage to lawn and septic infrastructure — and said he obtained a survey after construction began. The council’s publicly stated next steps are administrative: staff investigation and installation of a more secure Knox lock. The transcript does not record a city determination about whether any right-of-way or easement acquisition authorized the roadway construction or whether a permit required notification to adjacent property owners.

The council’s staff indicated they will follow up with the resident and involve relevant departments; the fire marshal’s lock order had already been issued by the time of the meeting.

Ending: Joshua closed his comment asking the council to “help me out,” and council members directed staff to continue investigating and to coordinate with the resident about next steps.