City Council will have the chance in September to override the commission’s 4-1 denial of the request. If it does, the development would be allowed to move forward with a 4-acre lagoon and 1,200 apartment units in a mixed-use building.
If council aligns with the commission and votes to deny, developers could still build 35,000 square feet of commercial space to be used for offices and retail, according to agenda documents.
What’s going on?
According to its website, Leander Springs could bring 275-450 hotel rooms and a 20,000-square-foot conference center to the intersection of 183A Toll and RM 2243. It could also bring a 4-acre lagoon and 1,200 apartments if its amendment request is approved by City Council, according to agenda documents.
Unless City Council ignores the recommendation of the P&Z Commission and approves iLand Development Group’s amendment request, only 35,000 square feet of commercial development will be allowed on the 77.9-acre property, according to the documents.
The amendment is needed after a series of setbacks that began in 2018.
How we got here
An agreement to develop the land fell through after a different developer failed to uphold their end of the deal with the owner in 2018.
A new developer entered the picture in 2021, entering into a 380 agreement with the city that required completion of the lagoon by Dec. 31, 2023, according to agenda documents. If the December 2023 deadline was not met, additional development permits would not be issued until the PUD is amended.
A March 18, 2024, letter from the city of Leander to Leander Springs LLC notified the development of the termination of the 380 agreement.
In the letter, the city cited the developer’s failure to begin commercial construction by Dec. 31, 2023, as its reason for terminating the agreement.
Because the deadlines in the 380 agreement were not met, developers will need City Council to approve the amendment request if they wish to develop more than 35,000 square feet of commercial space, according to the documents.
What they’re saying
Commissioner Joseph Morales said the city realizes it needs attractions.
“One of the goals of the comprehensive plan was to create destination points,” he said. “There aren’t a ton right now, and this project could be one of those.”
Morales noted he had mixed feelings on the development and wondered whether the destination development would be beneficial to the city. He was ultimately the one dissenting vote.
Commissioner Laura Lantrip cited water concerns as a reason for denial.
“I am not in favor of multifamily at this site. I’m not in favor of a lagoon,” she said. “We don’t have enough water now.”
After Chair James Oliver said he was leaning toward denial because he wanted more information from the applicant, Pete Conklin, chief operating officer of iLand Development Group, said he was there as the representative.
He said there is a well on the property and the project won’t use any more city water after they fill the lagoon. But after saying that, he noted he was unsure.
“I don’t have all the facts. Unfortunately, I’m not quite prepared for this,” Conklin said.
He then noted the lagoon would be used for swimming and kayaking, and could have an obstacle course and surf park.
