One of Bee Cave’s last large lots—a 128-acre tract south of Hamilton Pool Road and near Cueva Drive—may soon be developed and annexed by the city.

Bee Cave City Council will consider both annexing the parcel as well as approving a development proposal on the property Jan. 24, after the item was continued from council’s Jan. 10 meeting. City council members heard from the developer’s representative, Aaron Googins, on Dec. 6 and 13.

Googins said his client wanted to build a gated community, including about 76 homesites that averaged about an acre apiece on the tract.

The property is under an agriculture exemption that removes it from being annexed unless it is to be used for a different purpose, such as the proposed project.

City Attorney Patty Akers said a permit for development will trigger the property’s annexation. However, if the proposed development agreement does not go forward, the owners—the Grumbles family—said they will maintain their agriculture exemption on the property and avoid annexation.

The project developers sought feedback from the city regarding their requests to reduce the setback minimums for the neighborhood and offered to create a nature trail within the neighborhood’s gates, an issue which some council members said may limit access by Bee Cave residents who do not live in the gated community. Googins said nonresidents could access the trail that would abut Little Barton Creek by bike or on foot.

He said the project’s homes would start at $1 million.

“We’re going for a similar look to [the Belvedere neighborhood off Hamilton Pool Road],” Googins said.

He also asked for a change in the water-quality detention plan. Googins said he intends to overcompensate with regard to water detention on the north portion of the property and require less water detention elsewhere on the tract. The project will not have sidewalks to maintain the Hill Country feel of the area, he said.

Googins requested the developer be exempt from the city’s requirement to conduct a tree survey.

Hamilton Pool resident Nell Penridge, whose property is adjacent to the subject tract, said she is concerned about the developer’s request to not conduct a tree survey on the property.

“I think [the council] should require a tree survey as well as [requiring] all of the subdivision requirements be adhered to,” she said. “There’s no reason, especially with a subdivision that is believed to be a high price point, to give breaks here. We’re only antagonizing our traffic on Hamilton Pool Road.”