Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Swap topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lago Vista council pauses land‑swap proposal that would add irrigation acreage to Cedar Breaks Park
Summary
Council discussed a proposed land swap with Hines/Tesara that would exchange ~0.53 acres of city frontage on FM 1431 for ~2 acres adjacent to Cedar Breaks Park to expand effluent irrigation. Councilors raised questions about infrastructure costs, TxDOT approval, buffers and legal public‑purpose requirements and voted 6–1 to table the item to January.
Councilors reviewed a proposal from the Hines Group on behalf of Tesara to trade roughly 0.53 acres of city frontage on FM 1431 in exchange for about two acres of land contiguous with Cedar Breaks Park for irrigation use. Development‑services staff told the council the dedicated land would allow the city to distribute an additional 4.1–4.9 million gallons of effluent a year to support irrigation and would require new piping and infrastructure to be usable.
Staff noted TxDOT has not issued final approval for driveway relocations tied to the swap because it cannot approve conceptual changes without a plan set; correspondence indicates TxDOT is willing to review plans but will not issue a formal approval absent them. Council members asked whether alternatives exist — such as additional mid‑block crossings or reconfigurations that would avoid conveying city property — and whether the two acres’ shape, proximity to residences and the cost to build irrigation infrastructure make the parcel practical for the city.
Mayor Pro Tem Prince and other councilors pressed staff for additional detail about the distance to existing irrigation lines, whether the parcel would cause overspray into backyards, and whether the conveyance would satisfy Texas requirements that municipal conveyances serve a public purpose and receive fair market value. Staff said the parcel is contiguous to land the city already irrigates but that pipe and installation costs were not included in the proposed swap and would be an additional expense.
After extended questions from the council and from members who said they lacked sufficient information to decide, Councilor Prince moved to table the matter and return with more information and alternatives in January; the motion was seconded and approved 6–1 (Councilor Benfield opposed). The item will return to a work session with additional details and any responses from TxDOT.
