Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Facade Grant topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Keller board recommends grant for 116 Taylor Street but excludes required sidewalk costs

Keller Economic Development Board · March 24, 2026
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

The Keller Economic Development Board voted unanimously March 23 to recommend that City Council approve a facade improvement grant request for 116 Taylor Street (Jade Beauty Collective) while excluding city‑required sidewalk/paver material costs from the reimbursable total.

The Keller Economic Development Board on March 23 recommended that City Council approve a facade improvement grant for 116 Taylor Street in Old Towne Keller, but the board directed staff to remove costs for city‑required sidewalk pavers and related material from the reimbursable total before the council hearing.

Staff presented the application for the property, which houses Jade Beauty Collective and whose property owners/stated applicants are Michael and Brandon Abelman. Staff said the total project cost is $18,560 and the applicant requested the $10,000 maximum available under the development grant program. "They have a total project cost of $18,560 and are requesting $10,000," staff said during the presentation.

Board members questioned whether items the city requires for redevelopment — notably a six‑foot sidewalk with bands of pavers every 10 feet in Old Towne Keller — should be subsidized by the grant. Staff explained the sidewalk, once constructed in the right‑of‑way, becomes a city asset subject to inspection and public maintenance. Staff also said portions of the on‑street head‑in parking were implemented through an Old Towne cost‑share program and will be public parking, not dedicated to the applicant.

Several board members said they did not want to create a precedent of reimbursing property owners for work that is required by code. One board member moved to recommend approval with the change to exclude required sidewalk material costs from the grant calculation; another seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously; staff said the application will go to City Council on April 7 with invoice subtotals separating required items from optional, grant‑eligible work so council can clearly see what the board recommended.

Applicant representatives said they will fund additional landscaping and other private improvements themselves and are finalizing items needed to obtain a certificate of occupancy. Staff noted the FY26 development grant budget is $35,000, with a little more than $20,000 remaining after prior reimbursements; staff also said additional economic development incentive funds are available and could be considered by council if needed.

The board's recommendation is advisory; City Council will make the final decision on the grant request at the scheduled April 7 meeting.