Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Anna approves annexation and zoning for 10.8-acre Liberty Hills tract after heated tree-preservation debate
Summary
Council approved annexation and a zoning amendment for roughly 10.8 acres tied to the Liberty Hills development, but residents urged the city to claw back a prior tree-preservation waiver and to require preserved canopy in writing. The developer pledged to "try" to save mature trees where feasible.
The Anna City Council approved annexation and a zoning amendment for about 10.8 acres at the southeast corner of County Road 290/1101—land to be folded into the Liberty Hills development—but the decisions followed more than an hour of public comment focused on tree preservation and previous waivers.
Director of Development Services Caleb Kitner and senior planner Lauren Mechy described the staff report and said the original development agreement included a tree-mitigation waiver for the larger development; the current request sought to include the 10.8 acres within that overall agreement. "Prior to any sort of grading on a property, they are required to get a tree removal permit," Mechy said, summarizing the tree-preservation permit and survey process but noting the developer had previously obtained waiver provisions for parts of the overall Liberty Hills project.
Residents said the prior waiver sets a dangerous precedent. "Liberty Hills was given a giant cookie," said Betty Sharp, who warned that allowing removal of mature trees would create heat islands, harm topography for trails and encourage future developers to seek similar waivers. Gerald Culbertson urged council to "claw back" tree-preservation protections for the 10 acres, saying the tract had not previously been annexed and might be treated differently.
The developer’s representative, Kevin Lazarus of Veritas Communities, said the site requires grading for roads and utilities and that the company will "do what we can to save trees" but declined to guarantee specific trees because right-of-way, utilities and road geometry constrain outcomes. "Buyers want mature trees... the extent that we can keep trees, we are trying like hell to keep them," Lazarus said.
Council members acknowledged the legacy of past approvals and the narrow legal options available at this stage. The council approved the annexation (item 6c) by recorded vote of 6–0; the zoning amendment for the related plan development ordinance change (item 6d) also passed (transcript records "Motion passes"; a numerical tally was not recorded in the transcript). Several council members asked staff to strengthen tree-preservation rules and to craft procedures that make future waivers harder to grant.
Because the prior development agreement included a waiver, staff and council said options for immediate reversal are limited; residents asked that preservation requirements be written into future agreements and that staff pursue stronger ordinance language to protect mature canopy.
