Oak Hills residents ask court to block replat, citing deed restrictions and septic concerns

Residents of the Oak Hills subdivision packed the courtroom on June 3, 2025 to oppose a proposed replat of Lot 23 that would combine adjacent lots in the subdivision’s extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ).

Members of the Oak Hills Architectural Control Committee and several homeowners told commissioners the proposed replat would convert residential lots into a commercial-style RV park and violates recorded deed restrictions. "Mr. Wall has a responsibility and obligation to adhere to the deed restrictions that have been written and agreed to by the Oak Hills Subdivision property owners," said Russ Kotwal, an Oak Hills property owner and committee member, who asked the court to disapprove the application or at least table it pending further investigation.

Neighbor Sandra Baxter said construction equipment appeared on Lot 23 in April and the Architectural Control Committee delivered a certified cease-and-desist letter asking the owner to stop work and seek committee review. Mason Newton, also an Oak Hills committee member, said the covenants explicitly prohibit converting residential lots to commercial use and warned that approving the replat would set a precedent that could allow more commercial uses in the subdivision.

County staff explained the limits of the county's authority. County Engineer Prathana Banerjee noted that the replat application meets county subdivision regulations and that the City of College Station—whose extraterritorial jurisdiction covers the site—had already approved the plat. She emphasized that deed restrictions are a civil matter between property owners and the owner seeking the replat, and that "the county cannot be a party to that". The county health department had also cleared the submittal for septic concerns, Banerjee said, and the county's replat review focuses on technical compliance rather than private covenants.

The commissioners attempted to take action but the initial motion to approve the replat failed for lack of a second. A motion to proceed was later made but the record shows disagreement among members and members of the public about whether the court should override or defer to the subdivision's deed restrictions; staff advised that the county's review does not supersede private covenants and that enforcement of deed restrictions lies with homeowners and private legal counsel.

Why it matters: The dispute illustrates the difference between county technical review (platting, septic approvals) and private deed restrictions enforced through civil process. Oak Hills residents said granting the replat will materially change the character of the subdivision and raised public-health questions about spray fields and septic-system capacity.

Next steps: The court did not record a final approval during the public meeting. Residents were advised they may pursue civil remedies through the Architectural Control Committee or courts; the county will not enforce or adjudicate deed-restriction claims.