Boerne P&Z tables decision on on‑site sewage at 123 Frederick Street

The Boerne Planning and Zoning Commission on Wednesday tabled consideration of a request to allow an on‑site sewage facility (OSSF) at 123 Frederick Street, giving the property owner time to return with more detailed engineering and cost estimates.

The item drew discussion about three options presented by city staff: (1) upgrade the existing private lift station and associated service; (2) extend the municipal sewer main roughly 1,280 feet from the City Hall complex; and (3) install an on‑site sewage system (septic/OSSF). Staff described the OSSF as the least expensive short‑term option and recommended it under the Unified Development Code’s exemption for cases where connection to the municipal sewer would be an “unreasonable expenditure” compared with other methods of sewage disposal.

Staff said the applicant’s cost estimate for upgrading the private lift station was $20,368.61 but that figure did not include the cost of a new sewer service or any easement acquisition; in discussion staff and commissioners estimated the complete cost for option 1 could be in the roughly $30,000 range. Staff reported the applicant’s estimate to extend the sewer main was $175,912 and noted the city expected the actual cost to be higher. The applicant’s cost estimate for an on‑site system was $15,500.

City staff recommended approval of an OSSF with stipulations: the property must connect to city sewer within five years after a sewer becomes available, pay all necessary costs and fees at that time, have the OSSF permitted through Kendall County (which regulates septic within city limits), and plot the property in accordance with city rules.

Miss Linder, presenting the staff analysis, told the commission "we are going to be recommending the OSF, the septic system" because staff considered the extension option to meet the UDC’s unreasonable‑expenditure clause. The property owner, Vicky Stringer, said she was generally supportive but nervous about some details: "I think it's all really good. I'm a little nervous about some of it," and explained she needs final building siting from her engineer before committing to a system.

Commissioners pressed for more definitive engineering and cost comparisons. Commissioner Case questioned whether nearby buildings were similarly connected and whether an easement could be obtained from the neighboring owner; Commissioner Byrd and others asked whether the lift station design shown would handle commercial uses planned for the site. Staff acknowledged the project was at a preliminary stage and recommended the applicant return with refined site plans and cost estimates.

Commissioner Cates made a motion to table the item pending the applicant’s return with additional engineering and tuned cost numbers; Commissioner Byrd seconded. The commission voted unanimously to table the matter. The chair announced the motion passed unanimously.

The consent agenda (items 4a–4c) was adopted earlier in the meeting by a unanimous 5–0 vote.