Elizabeth Triggs, Planning and Development Officer for the City of Midland, presented a preliminary plat for Ottawa Estacado Estates, a proposed 91.9‑acre subdivision in the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) that would create approximately 74 lots (majority ~1 acre) and a roughly 15‑acre retention area. The developer, Santa Cruz Properties West LLC, requests groundwater and septic service because the site lies outside the city’s certificate of convenience and necessity and is not eligible for annexation.

Triggs told council that state law now requires a 30‑year groundwater availability study when groundwater is proposed as the water source, and that the developer had submitted such a study. Council members voiced repeated concern about relying on groundwater for a dense cluster of single‑family lots in an area the city will not be able to annex or supply with municipal water in the future. Several council members said they had seen other undeveloped subdivisions where wells failed or production declined after initial development.

Developer representatives said they conducted two test wells and a 24‑hour pump test. Carr Carruthers of Santa Cruz Properties said test pumping produced continuous flow around 24 gallons per minute and that the consultant, hydrologist Gil Vandeventer, extrapolated the data over a 30‑year period and found the development to be sustainable under the modeled assumptions. Vandeventer testified that the test wells encountered about a 26‑foot water column and that the 24‑hour test produced roughly a 1.8‑foot drawdown. He described recharge as a complex, multi‑mechanism process and said the modeling accounted for projected demand and aquifer characteristics.

Council members pressed the developer and staff about other risks: whether future surrounding growth was included in the demand analysis, how pipeline right‑of‑ways that cross the site would affect buildable area, and whether bonding or other sureties exist to protect future homeowners if groundwater availability declines. Staff and the city attorney advised that state law constrains local authority: if a plat meets the statutory requirements the council’s options are to approve it or to take no action; under state law the plat becomes approved by operation of law after the state shot‑clock (30 days). Staff said there is no statutory mechanism to require a “buyer beware” notice as a condition of approval or to require a dedicated bond specifically securing groundwater availability for future buyers.

Developer representatives said the property was previously irrigated farmland, that drillers estimated 35–40 gpm could be expected though the test used a 24 gpm pump, and that the submitted study applied standard state forms and assumptions including 2.57 residents per household for demand calculations. They also said they had met with pipeline operators and that operators had no objections so long as building was not placed over pipeline easements.

Council members expressed deep unease about creating a dense subdivision in the ETJ when the city cannot force future annexation and might be asked decades later to shoulder significant infrastructure costs. One council member said that allowing the plat to be approved by operation of law rather than voting to approve it was preferable in light of legal constraints. No motion or second was made on the item at the council meeting; staff stated that absent action the preliminary plat will be approved by operation of law once the statutorily required time expires.

Outcome: No council motion was offered; the preliminary plat will be approved by operation of law after the state shot‑clock expires unless further legal action or procedural steps intervene.