Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

EDC reviews downtown building ‘redo’: flexible programming, drainage problems and a staged mold-remediation plan

Liberty Hill Economic Development Corporation · October 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

EDC consultants presented a flexible redevelopment plan for a downtown building that could include an events center, catered/ghost kitchen and community studios; staff flagged ponding and drainage that is letting water into the building and recommended staged mold remediation (contract request not to exceed $35,000) to remove affected materials before larger structural fixes.

Consultants from the Kim Group and Headwater presented programming and design options for a planned downtown building renovation and the board discussed how to sequence repairs, remediation and future operations.

The consultants described three operating models under consideration — a city/EDC-run nonprofit, a hybrid EDC-managed model, or a private operator — and a menu of program uses, including a catered/ghost kitchen, event rentals, a podcast studio and partnership programming with local schools. The consultant said the building could be opened up for flexible, revenue-generating uses and emphasized matching scope and equipment to the chosen operating model.

Board members and consultants repeatedly flagged stormwater and drainage entering the building. The consultant said the water is "definitely coming in under that sill plate and soaking through," and showed that drainage from the nearby park and an adjacent business converge at a corner of the building; consultants described options such as French drains, regrading and cleaning existing pipes and coordinating with a city stormwater plan.

The group also reviewed the building’s roof and HVAC. One consultant said a roof replacement alternative was estimated at about $65,000 and that HVAC units have not run in years; the presenters emphasized the need to sequence work so remediation is not undone by persistent leaks.

On mold remediation, staff summarized recent site work and vendor bids. An asbestos survey was performed and no asbestos was found; that cleared the way for a mold remediation scope. Staff said they had selected a recommended vendor used previously and that they were seeking authority to contract for remediation "not to exceed $35,000" to remove affected materials down to studs and leave the structure mothballed until the full redevelopment scope is confirmed. Board members discussed widening the scope to demo the whole interior to studs to avoid repeat work, but noted that full demo would exceed the $35,000 authorization and would require City Council approval and additional quotes.

The board directed staff to obtain a fuller working budget and clarified that the proposed remediation contract would remove mold-impacted materials but would not complete roof/stormwater work; those items were to be bid and scheduled in sequence so the building is made watertight before reconstruction.

Next steps: staff will return with detailed quotes for a full demo-to-studs scope and with the recommended phased procurement approach so that City Council can consider any contract amounts that exceed the EDC’s spending limits.