Dripping Springs panel rejects developer's full sidewalk waiver for Hardy Road, upholds DRC approach for internal sidewalks

The Dripping Springs Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 27 denied a request by the developer of the Hardy Subdivision to waive construction of sidewalks and the fee-in-lieu for Hardy Drive and upheld the Development Review Committee's recommendation concerning internal sidewalks.

Jamie Rose, representing Party T Land, told the commission the proposal is for the 78-acre Hardy Subdivision at 2901 W. U.S. Highway 290, with 72 single-family lots and primary access through Bunker Ranch Road. Rose said Hardy Drive is private, only 60 feet wide in places, and must function as a 24-foot fire-access route; constructing sidewalks and the accompanying raised drainage section would harm protected trees and sharply increase project costs. "We are here requesting sidewalk waiver," Rose said, adding the project's total road cost is about $5,400,000 and that she estimated roughly 40% of that total is attributable to sidewalk-related work and drainage improvements.

Residents and landowners voiced conflicting concerns during public comment. Patricia Thompson Van Buskirk, a joint owner of land that uses Hardy Drive, said she favored "no sidewalks" to preserve trees and suggested a pervious trail instead. Madeline Mathis, a nearby resident, asked whether bioswales or pervious pavement had been considered to protect the Onion Creek aquifer recharge area. Jacebe Lalice Abidella, an environmental engineer and resident, urged the commission to weigh both safety (increasing traffic and children walking in the area) and environmental measures, and suggested federal water-infrastructure funding as a possible resource.

Tory Carpenter, planning director, explained that remoteness and subdivision standards require a second access for developments exceeding specified lot thresholds and that public-road standards can be triggered even if the road remains private but is required to be open to residents. Staff and the DRC had recommended a compromise: a 5-foot sidewalk on one side of Hardy Drive with deferral of the opposite-side sidewalk until adjacent property develops, rather than a full waiver.

After discussion about tree preservation, connectivity to future sidewalks near Highway 290, and design alternatives (including wider single-side sidewalks or shifted paving sections to save trees), Commissioner Evelyn moved to deny the applicant's request to waive sidewalk construction and fee-in-lieu for the Hardy Drive roadway; the motion was seconded and passed on a recorded vote the chair stated as "4 to 1." The denial means the developer's requested variance was rejected and the project remains subject to applicable sidewalk requirements as determined in site-development review.

On the separate public hearing about internal sidewalks within the subdivision, the commission moved to uphold the DRC recommendation (which offered options: construct 5-foot sidewalks on both sides, construct an 8-foot sidewalk on one side with a fee-in-lieu for the remaining width, or construct a 10-foot sidewalk on one side). The commission's recorded result (as announced by the chair) included opposing votes but left the DRC recommendation in place rather than granting the applicant a full internal-sidewalk waiver.

What's next: the denial of the waiver for Hardy Drive means project engineering and site-development review must proceed under the ordinance and DRC/staff guidance. Staff retains written public comments for administrative review and will work with the applicant on site-development details, including tree preservation and stormwater measures. If the applicant seeks further relief, additional administrative or appeal procedures would be required.