A complex land‑use and access dispute involving Waverly Place, developer Topstar Construction and adjacent landowners dominated discussion on item 71 at the Aug. 11 Walker County Commissioners Court.

The matter concerns a previously granted variance and conditions tied to subdivision approvals for a 32.83‑acre tract along FM 1375. The tract was divided years ago and later sold in pieces; current owners and a contractor (Topstar) seek to proceed with construction and a commercial driveway while other conditions remain unresolved for an adjoining parcel.

Topstar’s representatives said they have existing TxDOT documentation for a shared access to a nearby water‑plant driveway and want to begin construction on their office and shop. Adjacent owners said they are willing to plat a 12.8‑acre reserve independently, but Topstar’s ability to move forward depends on TxDOT’s position about shared access vs. separate driveways.

County staff and the court explained that prior variances tied the two parcels together — requiring both to meet certain access and platting conditions — to ensure a permanent second access for the larger subdivision in the future. Developers asked the court to allow administrative plan review and permitting to proceed for the parcel with the TxDOT file while the adjacent owner completes required plats and TxDOT permitting.

The court directed county staff to continue administrative plan reviews (so Topstar can submit plans and receive comments), encouraged a face‑to‑face meeting between Topstar, TxDOT area staff and county representatives scheduled for the same afternoon, and asked for a written summary or letter of the TxDOT meeting outcome. Commissioners declined to grant a final permanent change to the earlier variance at the Aug. 11 session and instead continued the matter for two weeks to allow verification from TxDOT.

Court members said they want to preserve the condition requiring a second access for the subdivision but also recognized the practical problem that Topstar cannot proceed with building permits while the other owner has not completed planning or obtained its TxDOT permit. Several participants said TxDOT staff indicated willingness to discuss a shared-access permit at the meeting; county staff said the goal was to secure a clear, written position from TxDOT on whether Topstar can use the existing water‑plant access as permanent or only temporary.

Ending: The court did not make a final change to the variance; it allowed administrative plan reviews to proceed and asked staff to return in two weeks with TxDOT’s written guidance so the court can decide whether to modify the prior variance or require separate plats and access arrangements.