Lago Vista commission trims tree-removal language from draft drainage ordinance, forwards recommendations to council

The Lago Vista Building Standards Commission voted to remove language that would have required a permit to remove “any trees” as part of draft drainage rules and voted to forward its recommendation and supporting materials to City Council.

The changes approved by the commission emerged after multiple residents described flood damage from a July rain event, and commissioners debated new draft language that would allow detention or retention requirements on single-family lots.

Commissioner Cliff McCullough presented a map and photos showing runoff toward his house and said water entered his home’s crawl space during the July storm. “By the time I heard the water running through my garage, I had 6 inches of water standing in that storage space,” McCullough said. He told the commission his contractor had estimated roughly $11,000 in repairs so far.

The draft ordinance under review included edits to chapters 3 and 6 of the city code related to drainage and a redlined copy the commission had circulated. A point of contention was a parenthetical phrase in two locations that read, in effect, to require permits for removal of “any trees” (with an exception for Ashe junipers in earlier language). Commissioners agreed to delete that parenthetical wording so the code would instead rely on the city’s existing protected-tree definitions.

A motion to make the two edits (removing the parenthetical phrase in section 3.11 and in section 6.204) was moved and seconded; the motion passed 4–0. Commissioners then voted unanimously to forward the commission’s report and redline to staff for drafting an ordinance and for transmittal to City Council.

Residents and commissioners also debated whether new construction should be required to provide on-site detention or retention. McCullough and other residents described how ditches often stop at property lines or culverts and how concentrated runoff from new development increases velocity and volume. McCullough said he measured about 4 inches of rain on July 4 and “then before noon on July 5 I had 5 more inches in my rain gauge.” Other commenters and commissioners noted that many older Lago Vista lots are rocky and small, making lot-level detention or retention difficult and costly.

City staff and the city manager told the commission the city already requires drainage studies for new construction and that the city’s practical options for fixing existing problems are limited by cost. “We’re requiring drainage (studies) in all the construction. As far as going back and fixing it, existing problem—we’re not gonna pick up, Charles, I’m sorry,” the city manager said, explaining that large-scale retrofits would be cost-prohibitive.

Commission discussion covered technical terms raised by residents (25-, 50- and 100-year storm events; “time of concentration” and impervious cover), enforcement of existing runoff rules, and possible mitigation ideas including use of vacant lots as temporary basins, larger detention tanks on new construction, and targeted ditch cleaning. Commissioners expressed concern about requiring retention on small single-family lots where rock removal would be substantial.

The commission asked staff to prepare a clean redline reflecting the two agreed edits and a draft ordinance package for City Council. A work session on definitions on the agenda was deferred to a later meeting.

The changes forwarded to council remove the parenthetical tree-removal phrase but keep draft language that allows detention or retention improvements to be required for new construction (the draft states such improvements "may be required"). The commission’s cover letter and redline will go to the city secretary for ordinance drafting and transmittal to council.