Highland Village delays cabins at Pilot Knoll as renovation costs climb; city weighs septic, waterline options

City parks staff told the Highland Village Parks & Recreation Advisory Board on Nov. 17 that Pilot Knoll’s water and sewer infrastructure — installed in the 1960s — has required repeated patches and will eventually need replacement.

The presentation from Phil, a parks staff presenter, laid out work-order history and said the city has been consistently capturing work-order data for only about 2½ years. “The mainline waterline at Pilot Knoll has had a tremendous amount of patches…at some point it will need to be replaced,” Phil said, explaining repeated repairs and elevated labor hours in recent years. Phil also said two previously unknown tanks were discovered and pumped after staff identified an area of standing blackwater.

Why it matters: staff said modern recreational vehicles produce far more wastewater than the park’s original design could handle, increasing the urgency for a long-term fix as use and public safety risks grow.

On options and costs, staff presented two divergent paths. A Public Works–designed package plant estimated near $2.2 million would be city-owned, engineered to TAC Title 30 standards and expandable; a private on-site system proposed by KCB Engineering would separate septic service by function and be substantially cheaper for the cabins, gatehouse and RV dump components (staff cited component estimates such as $167,000 for the dump station and roughly $173,550 for cabins engineering in the KCB quote). “We found an option that was substantially cheaper… it’s under a half a million dollars” for targeted elements, Phil said, while noting the smaller on-site systems are not easily expandable beyond 16 cabins and would remain under Parks’ maintenance.

Budget and procurement: Heather, the city’s director of finance, said the cabin feasibility estimate originally budgeted at about $2.3 million rose to roughly $3.3 million in the CMAR budget. At 60% design the combined cabins, gatehouse, boat ramp, RV restroom and day-use area projected about $4.7 million — roughly $1 million over the previously anticipated budget. Heather outlined revenue scenarios for 16 cabins (a 65% occupancy projection showed approximately $772,000 in annual revenue; a 50% scenario reduced revenues to about $590,000), and said payback timelines have stretched: what staff once modeled as a five-year payback now could be 10–12 years under current cost escalation.

Procurement changes included a move to a CMAR (construction manager at risk) delivery method after traditional bids returned over budget or received no bids; staff said the council awarded the CMAR contract to Dean Construction in July and that Dean provided preconstruction pricing and value-engineering work.

Grants and deadlines: Phil said the planning piece of a Texas Parks & Wildlife grant has been awarded and that the U.S. Army Corps has approved aspects of the plan, but he warned that federal-review backlogs and a hard construction reimbursement deadline (April 30, 2028) leave limited schedule margin.

Council guidance and next steps: staff told the board that council has directed not to move forward with the cabins at this time, and that council favored proceeding with other elements of the project while staying within budget. Board members asked staff to model smaller cabin counts (4–8) and higher occupancy scenarios and to return with comparison scenarios; Heather said earlier CMAR pricing and the revenue model were developed around 16 cabins and cautioned that smaller counts reduce revenue and that some infrastructure costs (waterline, sewer realignment) remain necessary regardless of cabin count.

The board requested staff follow up with scenario analyses, clearer cost splits for infrastructure vs. cabin units, and a timeline tied to the grant reimbursement deadline. Phil said staff will return with additional modeling and slides at a future meeting.