Texas Record
Hays County
Zoning

Hays Commons Subdivision Density and Aquifer Protection

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Opposed (6)Concerned (1)

At a glance

Public comments
7
Last 30 days
0

Last discussed Apr 28, 2026.

Public comments (7)

ConcernedRodrigo AmayaApr 28, 2026

Urged the court to maintain high ethical standards and criticized officials for claiming helplessness regarding data centers and major developments.

Regular - Apr 28, 2026 · 2:50 →
OpposedAlana BeattieApr 28, 2026

Requested the court vote no and remove items K-6 and K-7, warning that high-density development over the recharge zone threatens local water supplies.

Regular - Apr 28, 2026 · 5:11 →
OpposedChris KnightApr 28, 2026

Spoke against items K-6 and K-7, highlighting dry neighborhood wells and the importance of protecting remaining forested recharge areas.

Regular - Apr 28, 2026 · 8:21 →
OpposedBobby LevinskyApr 28, 2026

Representing Save Our Springs Alliance, urged rejection of the Hays Commons agreement due to sensitive karst geology and wastewater spraying concerns.

Regular - Apr 28, 2026 · 3:50:16 →
OpposedJim CampApr 28, 2026

Shared historical context of multi-decade community fights to protect northern Hays County water resources from inappropriate developments.

Regular - Apr 28, 2026 · 2:25:10 →
OpposedBrett MundyApr 28, 2026

A local business owner and farmer neighboring the site warned that runoff and wastewater spraying would jeopardize his dog boarding business and cattle farm.

Regular - Apr 28, 2026 · 2:25:26 →
OpposedLydia Bryan ValdezApr 28, 2026

Noted the lack of proper advance notice for the agenda item and thanked the community for rallying to protect local water.

Regular - Apr 28, 2026 · 2:29:14 →