Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fulshear council delays Waters PUD vote after hours of resident testimony
Summary
After more than two hours of public comment focused on traffic, water and neighborhood character, the Fulshear City Council voted to postpone action on the Waters Planned Unit Development (PUD) and related zoning items until the October regular meeting to allow an updated traffic impact analysis and further legal and technical review.
Mayor McCoy opened a public hearing on the Waters Planned Unit Development (PUD), a multi‑tract rezoning that would reclassify parcels along FM 1093, FM 359 and Rogers Road into a single PUD. Dozens of residents urged council to wait for additional studies and legal review before approving multifamily development across from Fulbrook and Polo Ranch.
Speakers at the podium gave repeated accounts of low water pressure, outages and limited wastewater capacity; several cited drainage, groundwater subsidence and the potential loss of mature trees and habitat. ‘‘Progress and preservation do not have to be opposing goals,’’ Taylor Monroe said, urging the council to choose ‘‘the kind of progress we protect’’ during land-use decisions. Laura Hollenbeck described the proposal as ‘‘a permanent change’’ that could threaten safety and stability for families with special‑needs children and asked council to vote no on the Waters PUD as presented.
Homeowners association president Harry Fowler told the council the packet showed multifamily is not currently allowed in some of the affected districts and urged the council not to create an entitlement by rezoning on an incomplete record. Attorney Trevor Hall reviewed development‑agreement language and told the council the documents do not clearly grant a right to apartment towers; he encouraged an independent land‑use opinion and careful statutory review.
Council discussion highlighted discrepancies in acreage cited by the PUD narrative compared with legal descriptions, and multiple members stressed that outstanding technical work — notably an updated traffic impact analysis scheduled for September — should inform any decision. Councilmember Miller moved to postpone business items B through F (the Waters PUD and related actions) until the October regular meeting to allow the TIA and additional vetting; the motion carried.
The postponement means the council will not adopt the PUD or related zoning changes tonight. Council members asked staff to ensure the developer provides the updated traffic study and to consider independent legal review and other technical reports requested by residents. The council said it intends to revisit the items after the TIA is complete and after staff compiles the outstanding legal and survey clarifications.
