Cedar Park council allows petition to pursue industrial designation for 9.2-acre site near 183A

The Cedar Park City Council on a unanimous vote with one member absent gave developers permission to proceed with a formal future land-use amendment petition for roughly 9.2 acres north and east of 183A Toll and Scottsville Drive.

Andresina Davina, development services staff, told the council the action on the petition would not itself change the map. “This petition is for a property that’s just a little bit over 9 acres … Tonight’s action in consideration is really more to give direction to the applicant and to staff as to how to proceed with the project. It will not change the future land use plan, should you accept the petition tonight,” Davina said.

The applicant, represented by Drew Raffel of Journey Group and John Lueders of Holt Lunsford, described plans for two office-warehouse buildings that together would total about 107,000 square feet. Raffel said the site has existing constraints—most notably a 100-to-200-foot-wide drainage easement and a fire-access easement that bisects the parcel—which informed the concept to split the project into two smaller buildings rather than one large structure. “We will be open to any uses that they would like us to prohibit via conditional overlay,” Raffel said, committing to neighborhood outreach.

Council members pressed for detail about drainage, long-term maintenance and screening. Staff and the applicant said the existing pond and detention infrastructure were sized to accommodate future development but that specific maintenance agreements and any adjustments would be addressed during site-plan review. The developer said plantings and preserved canopy trees would provide a buffer between the proposed buildings and the adjacent residences.

By allowing the petition to proceed, council directed staff and the applicant to move into the formal amendment and rezoning phase of the process, which will include public notice and another hearing before council. The council emphasized expectations for direct outreach to neighbors and consideration of conditional overlays to restrict specific uses if requested by the community.

The council’s action grants the applicant permission to pursue the amendment and does not itself rezone the property; any final map change requires subsequent hearings and formal council action.