Hays Commonsense in white
Get Involved

Hays Common sense

Advocating for the annexation of 498 acres into the City of Austin to create a community that balances environmental and housing policy.

Facebook X-twitter Instagram
Explore More

700

Homesites

2,200

Residents

160 acres

Conservation

260 acres

Parks and Open Spaces

Hays Commons is a proposed 498-acre mixed-use project developed by MileStone Community Builders; Austin’s largest privately held homebuilder.

Located at the corner of FM-1626 and SH-45, the project site is in both Travis and Hays counties, with a portion of the land residing in the City of Austin’s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). Once completed, Hays Commons will include approximately 700 residential homesites, 10 acres of neighborhood commercial, and vast parks and open spaces.

This live, work, play environment will bring together single family residential homesites, parks and open spaces, community amenities and commercial space that approximately 2,200 residents will call home. The site offers efficient transportation options to SH-45 and FM-1626 and access to Austin and Hays Independent School Districts.

The project will also create nearly 260 acres of parks and open space that includes a 160-acre conservation easement for generational land preservation, 75 acres of community open space, 16 acres of publicly accessible parks, and three miles of public trails that will serve as critical connectors to the regional trail system, including the Violet Crown Trail.

Hays Commons will deliver much needed housing to a critical growth corridor in Southwest Austin. The project site is uniquely located and has several jurisdictional and regulatory options to pursue for development. In a current environment where developments are actively disannexing and fleeing the Austin ETJ and its environmental, planning and development regulations, Hays Commons is forging a much different path forward by intentionally pursuing a partnership with the City of Austin to expand jurisdiction and have a meaningful impact on the project’s design and development standards.

Finalizing a development consent agreement to give Austin expanded jurisdiction and regulatory oversight is the best-case solution.

  • Live
  • Work
  • Play

About Hays Commons

Explore the Commonsense Path
Hays Commons Plan
hays commons logo icon
  • The Path to Hays Commons

City of Austin Partnership

Collaboration with the City of Austin is the commonsense outcome that strikes the right balance between residential housing and environmental priorities. In recognizing that, MileStone is actively working with the City in pursuit of Council approval of the project. This partnership would result in the site meeting or exceeding city standards for key development issues embraced by the City.

What's the Alternative?

Annexation

MileStone and the City would consent to a strategic partnership agreement for full purpose annexation of the property when infrastructure bonds have been paid in full. Until that time, limited purpose jurisdiction would immediately and permanently allow the enforcement of zoning and environmental regulations.

“The site would come into the city’s jurisdiction via strategic partnership, a huge plus for the City of Austin in terms of regulations, taxes, and services.”

Thomas Rowlinson, Principal Planner, City of Austin Parks and Recreation Board Meeting on August 26th, 2024

“At least 16% and counting of the Barton Springs Zone in the [Austin] ETJ has currently been released. That is a significant amount of land that has released from our ETJ and is no longer subject to the SOS Ordinance, or all of the other regulations that protect the environmental features within the Barton Springs Zone.”

Leslie Lilly, Environmental Conservation Program Manager for Watershed Protection, City of Austin Environmental Commission Meeting on October 2nd, 2024 (11:32)

City of Austin MUD

Approval of a City of Austin Municipal Utility District (MUD) to provide water and wastewater services to the site for centralized regional utilities. Consent is not required if the project is out of the City of Austin's ETJ, but consent gives the City the opportunity to pursue its priorities.

“Please note that this application exceeds the city’s base code requirements for parkland dedication. Without the MUD, these requirements wouldn’t even apply to the site at all.”

Thomas Rowlinson, Principal Planner, City of Austin Parks and Recreation Board Meeting on August 26th, 2024

“…In terms of what is there now in that area, this is a tremendous improvement in terms of much more compact, much more connected. I’m really impressed by the active transportation thoughts from the very beginning. I think this is a really good project considering where it is in the city and ETJ.”

Commissioner Spencer Schumacher, City of Austin Urban Transportation Commission Meeting on July 9th, 2024 (45:01)

Aquifer Protection & Stormwater Quality

Partnership will retain the existing and bring an additional 290 acres of Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone into the City of Austin’s jurisdiction and regulatory purview. Enforcement of SOS water quality standards for pollutant loads and stormwater runoff across the entirety of the property will protect environmental features.

“As staff, we feel that the benefit here is that this is in a very environmentally sensitive area and by developing under limited purpose with some other environmental regulations, it protects the drinking water protection zone and the Barton Springs area.”

Sara Groff, Principal Planner, City of Austin Urban Transportation Commission Meeting on July 9th, 2024 (34:21)

“Staff feels that this is a good deal for the city that we meet superiority by those extra environmental protections that will be placed over this sensitive area.”

Sarah Groff, City of Austin City of Austin Urban Transportation Commission Meeting on July 9th, 2024 (35:00)

Roads & Transportation

Funding and construction of external connections to SH-45 and FM-1626, and transportation network and active transportation improvements, including bike lanes, trails and sidewalks constructed in accordance with the applicable City or County transportation criteria.

Parks & Trails

Parkland commitment that exceeds the highest city code and open space standards that would be publicly accessible. Trail network creation that will provide critical connectivity options to the Violet Crown Trail and Onion Creek Trail and future proposed regional trails.

“In order to achieve superiority, the MUD would need to provide a minimum of 20 acres of parkland. The application is providing a total of 55 acres of combined parks and public open space, which is more than double the requirement for superiority.”

Thomas Rowlinson, Principal Planner, City of Austin Parks and Recreation Board Meeting on August 26th, 2024 (2:09:48)

  • Compromises with City of Austin
This vision can only be realized through collaboration with the City of Austin. Environmental staff supported compromises recognize the unique jurisdictional circumstances of the project. They include:

1) Cut & Fill Requirements

Increase the maximum depth of soil removal and fill from 4 feet to 8 feet with staff approval.

Benefit

This routine change will enable the creation of a berm along SH-45, enhancing visual and sound barriers between roadway access to the subdivision.

2) Interbasin Diversion

Expand the current allowable area of interbasin diversion from the current limit (less than 20% of the site to less than 1 acre) to up to 25 acres.

Benefit

The current channel along Bliss Spillar Road is insufficient to handle flow to Little Bear Creek. Expanding the diversion will allow for the construction of detention and water quality ponds, addressing potential flooding concerns. The construction of these features would meet SOS standards.

3) Impervious Cover

Reduce the amount of allowable impervious cover under state regulations to 25% within the recharge zone.

Benefit

Although this varies from the SOS ordinance, this would result in a significantly smaller fraction of impervious cover under alternative regulations.

  • City of Austin Environmental Staff Supports All of the Above
  • The Alternative

Hays Commons Development Alternative

It is advantageous for the City of Austin to partner with Hays Commons for the benefits outlined above. If an agreement cannot be reached and the City elects to not move forward with approvals, alternative options exist to advance the development.

Choose Hays Commonsense

Disannexation

Under state law, MileStone can disannex the property currently in the City of Austin ETJ and continue permitting the project under state and county regulations. Under this scenario, the City would completely lose the ability to play a role in permitting, zoning, land use, water quality measures, utility services, transportation infrastructure, parkland planning, trail connectivity, receipt of future tax revenue and more. The City would also lose the opportunity for annexation now and into the future.

  • City of Austin vs. County / State

Hays Common sense

Partnering with the City of Austin for a development consent agreement is the superior path for Hays Commons versus development under state and county guidelines. These differing approaches have far-reaching impacts related to regulating and influencing the development.

Annexation

  • City of Austin Path
  • The project must comply with the City of Austin’s development rules.
  • Austin can enforce zoning and development regulations that control what can be constructed, land utilization and watershed requirements.
  • The City of Austin would gain tax revenue from the development.
  • County / State Path
  • Counties do not have any zoning restrictions, meaning there are no controls over land use.
  • County development rules apply, a much simpler approach and less regulation around design and development.

MUD/Utilities

  • City of Austin Path
  • Austin water and wastewater would be extended to service the project.
MUD, Utilities Map (COA) - Good Alternative
  • County / State Path
  • Water would be sourced from groundwater wells and wastewater would be processed with a treatment plant and dispersed onsite.
MUD, Utilities (County, State) - Bad Alternative

Water Quality Standard

  • City of Austin Path
  • The City of Austin’s SOS rules for water treatment are applied (100% non-degradation).
  • County / State Path
  • State water quality rules are less stringent.
Water flowing into river

Creek Buffers

  • City of Austin Path
  • The City of Austin’s requirements for protection would be implemented for waterways, including buffers around creeks and streams (CWQZ, WQTZ, EHZ).
Creek Buffer Map - Good Alternative
  • County / State Path
  • Little Bear Creek, the site’s only substantial waterway, is in Hays County. The county only enforces state floodplain setbacks.
Creek Buffer Map (County , State) - Bad Alternative

Roads & Transportation

  • City of Austin Path
  • Infrastructure, roads and active transportation improvements including through bike lanes, trails, and sidewalks, would be built to the applicable City or County standards and regulations.
  • County / State Path
  • Roads would be built to county standards.
roadway

Aquifer

  • City of Austin Path
  • The entirety of the property would be subject to the City’s aquifer protection regulations, including buffering from karst features.
  • County / State Path
  • Aquifer protection and mitigation strategies are not required beyond TCEQ regulations in Hays County. Travis County regulations include Critical Environmental Feature (CEF) buffers.
Hay Hill Country

Parks & Open Spaces

  • City of Austin Path
  • Parks and open space currently planned exceed parkland dedication requirements by approximately 200 acres.
  • County / State Path
  • A requirement of approximately 11 total acres.
Parkland Graph

Trails

  • City of Austin Path
  • Three miles of trails will be added for connectivity to existing parks and trail systems.
  • County / State Path
  • No requirement.
Trail Map

Dark Skies Compliance

  • City of Austin Path
  • The consent agreement includes rules to reduce light pollution to protect dark skies and Bird Collion Deterrent methods.
  • County / State Path
  • No requirement.
milky way over the sky

Impervious Cover

  • City of Austin Path
  • Variance from 15% to 25% for the property currently within the City of Austin’s jurisdiction. Property outside of the City’s jurisdiction does not currently have an impervious cover limit and the limit would be established at 25%. All impervious cover calculations will be based on Net Site Area, which excludes creek buffers.
  • County / State Path
  • Allows up to 138 acres of coverage (estimated), which is 62% more than the City of Austin regulations.
Impervious Cover Comparison chart

Other Environmental Features

  • City of Austin Path
  • The City of Austin requires additional protections for wetlands, rimrock, seeps, sink holes, karst limestone formation and other sensitive environmental features.
  • County / State Path
  • The county only enforces basic protections for karst, with no extra safeguards or setbacks for sensitive environmental areas.
hays commons development
Get The Real Facts

Myth vs Fact

Frequently Asked Questions

MYTH

“The development as currently planned would ignore the City of Austin’s Save Our Springs (SOS) ordinance, which sets strict limits on lot size, impervious cover, and wastewater disposal for development over the Recharge Zone.”

– Save Our Springs Alliance, and Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, Press Release on October 19th, 2024

FACT

The SOS ordinance does not apply to any land outside of Austin’s jurisdiction. Approximately 290 acres of the property is currently ungoverned by the ordinance, and the remainder is entitled under Texas law to be removed. Thousands of acres owned by others already have taken advantage of this right. The City has no right or ability to compel compliance with the SOS ordinance without the landowner’s consent. MileStone is actively working with the city to ensure these regulations are enforced outside their current jurisdiction, with minor adjustment requests addressed in the negotiation of a development consent agreement. This path is fully recommended by City environmental experts and will result in a massive reduction in allowable impervious cover and increase in water quality measures.

MYTH

“Milestone is attempting to establish their own Municipal Utility District (MUD) for the development, in a brazen attempt to skirt the SOS requirements that are part of City of Austin development code.”

– Save Our Springs Alliance, and Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, Press Release on October 19th, 2024

FACT

MileStone is not required to follow the SOS rules under state law and is instead working to establish a MUD to voluntarily bring both the Hays and Travis County parts of the development under the City of Austin’s jurisdiction. Without the City MUD consent agreement, the land would only be governed by county and state rules, which have more limited environmental protections.

MYTH

“Establishment of a MUD for Hays Commons would also leave local landowners footing the bill for the development of Hays Commons water and wastewater services.”

– Save Our Springs Alliance, and Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, Press Release on October 19th, 2024

FACT

Only the developer and residents of the project will pay MUD taxes to recover infrastructure costs necessary to serve the project. The residents of the project will also become retail rate payers of the Austin Water Utility, providing funding for other city utility needs and funds for the City’s general fund.

MYTH

“MileStone seeks to drill its own wells to tap into the Edwards Aquifer, which is currently being managed with drought restrictions, while disposing of treated sewage via land irrigation at the confluence of Little Bear Creek and a tributary.”

– Save Our Springs Alliance, and Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, Press Release on October 19th, 2024

FACT

While Hays Commons has existing Lower Trinity wells onsite, the project is actively pursuing City of Austin water and wastewater services to avoid a reliance on groundwater and onsite effluent disposal systems. A City of Austin partnership would not include use of any onsite wells, wastewater treatment, or treated effluent disposal.

MYTH

“The 15% SOS impervious cover requirements, designed to mitigate harmful stormwater runoff to groundwater and Barton Springs, would be ignored in favor of lax 35% impervious cover limits.”

– Save Our Springs Alliance, and Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, Press Release on October 19th, 2024

FACT

The SOS Ordinance only applies to property under City of Austin jurisdiction.  MileStone has committed to a reduction in impervious cover across the entire site from what is allowed under state law and is proposing to apply SOS regulations to property that would not otherwise be governed by this ordinance. MileStone is proposing to reduce impervious cover to 25% of the net site area, just 10% more than the applicable SOS limit.

MYTH

“All the sudden Barton Springs instead of being this clear flowing pool would turn into a cloudy polluted pool [because of Hays Commons].”

– Mike Clifford, Technical Director, Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance, KVUE News on July 16, 2024

FACT

This is a scare tactic. With the approval of the City of Austin MUD, there will be no onsite treatment or disposal of wastewater and stormwater runoff water quality treatment will be held to full SOS non-degradation standards.

MYTH

“We feel that it’s very risky to put a TLAP over the recharge zone, unless [TCEQ] can actually quantify what the performance record is of existing TLAPs … We also, too, know that [TLAP permits] turn into de facto discharge permits because treated wastewater continues to be applied onto oversaturated fields at times.”

– Brian Zabcik, Advocacy Director, Save Barton Springs Association, Hays Free Press on July 24th, 2024

FACT

TLAP areas must meet strict regulations to avoid this exact concern. However, MileStone’s City of Austin application does NOT include TLAP areas. As such, this concern serves to justify the proposal. If Hays Commons were to require a TLAP because an agreement could not be reached with the City, the development has planned for more than 100 days of storage to address concerns of over application when the field is saturated. Moreover, the TLAP application has already been issued a draft permit from the TCEQ staff because it meets TCEQ regulations. Of course, the TLAP will be abandoned if Austin agrees to the proposal.

  • Hays Commons FAQs

Frequently Asked Questions

Get Involved
  • Supporting Hays Commons

Get Involved

STAYING INFORMED
Follow our progress and updates on social media and our website.

Facebook X-twitter Instagram

"We all know that Texas needs more housing, a lot of people are moving here. But it has to be balanced with protecting our natural resources and protecting the land that provides those services."

Annalisa Peace, Executive Director of the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance

We agree. MileStone believes the proposed agreement meets these standards by creating clustered housing with a significant contribution for a conservation easement and land protection. This statement is the exact reason that the City of Austin should partner with MileStone Community Builders and have a seat at the table for this project.

Join us in shaping the future of Southwest Austin! The vision for Hays Commons is only realized through a collaborative effort with the City of Austin and the finalization of a development consent agreement to expand jurisdiction and regulatory oversight for the project, providing limited compromises due to the complex jurisdictional location of the project.

Join the Community

Support a City of Austin Partnership with Hays Commons!

Sign Here
Hays Commonsense in white
Copyright © 2024. All Rights Reserved.