Erath County OKs multiple variances for Comanche Moon subdivision; denies single-access road layout

Erath County Commissioners on Monday approved multiple variance requests for the Legends of Comanche Moon subdivision phases 3 and 4 while denying a separate request to permit a single entry and exit to the development.

The court approved reductions from the county’s 500-foot visibility standard, cul-de-sac and lot-size requirements and street block-length rules, with Commissioners requiring additional warning and safety signage throughout the subdivision. The court rejected a requested variance to allow only one access roadway, citing emergency-access concerns.

The variances were presented by a developer representative and discussed with county staff. Mr. Gardner, a county staff member overseeing land development, told the commissioners that steep topography, large contours ("contours can go up to 25 feet") and the recreational nature of the project make some standards difficult to meet. He said some lots will have less than the 500-foot visibility standard and that several lots could have as little as about 200 feet of frontage on one side and smaller frontage on another.

Commissioner Buck moved to approve the variance for the 500-foot visibility requirement; Commissioner Stevens seconded. The court amended the motion to require safety signage and voted to approve the variance as amended. Commissioners later approved the cul-de-sac length, lot requirements and street-block-length variances with the same signage condition. The court then debated a separate variance that would have allowed a single roadway into the phases. After extended discussion about emergency access and fire risk — including a county staff reference to the International Fire Code standard noted during the hearing — the court voted to deny the roadway-layout variance.

Commissioner discussion repeatedly emphasized public-safety risk from limited sight distance and restricted access. Commissioner Buck warned that "1 life is all it's gonna take" if sight-distance and access are insufficient. Developer consultant Skip Cannon acknowledged the concerns and said the owners and developers are exploring options for a second access, including coordination with neighboring property owners and emergency-only gates.

County staff said the subdivision area has no public water supply (a "dry subdivision") and that fighting a major fire there would require hauling water from elsewhere. Mr. Gardner and the developer noted that only a minority of lots in phases 3 and 4—about 15%—would be affected by the visibility variance, and the phases together include roughly 73 lots.

The court used voice votes for approvals; motions and seconds were recorded in the minutes. The court directed staff and the developer to continue working on solutions for secondary access and to add the safety signage specified in the approved motions.

The planning packet presented to the commissioners included the county's older subdivision rules being applied to the development and topographic maps of the site. The county’s concern about emergency access will continue to be discussed with staff and the developer as the project proceeds.

Officials who spoke on the item included Mr. Gardner (county staff member), Skip Cannon (consultant for the property owners), Commissioner Buck, Commissioner Stevens and Commissioner Ray. The court’s denial of the roadway-layout variance leaves the developer required to pursue a second-access solution or return with revised plans for further action.