Waller County court approves revised Centennial Life development agreement; removes build-to-rent

Waller County Commissioners Court approved a revised Centennial Life development agreement during its July 23, 2025 meeting after the developer removed planned build-to-rent units and revised housing types.

The court voted on agenda item 49 to carry the agreement, which now excludes build-to-rent and limits multifamily products so that the development will not include apartments. County staff described the revised plan as focusing on single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes and “mother-in-law” suites attached to houses rather than standalone apartment buildings.

County staff member Robert summarized the key terms for the court: the developer will dedicate 270 feet of right-of-way and set aside an additional 180 feet—together a 450-foot corridor—preserved for a potential future route labeled on county maps as a 36A alignment (referred to in staff comments as Prairie Parkway/Stockdick corridor). For lots under 5,000 square feet the agreement strings a county contribution of $3.33 per square foot “for general use,” an amount staff said equates to a little over $500,000 in total contributions under the current proposal.

Robert also described the proposed lot and size mix and other typical subdivision variances the court customarily grants: “the lot breakdown…4,500 lots on 1,464 acres” with a percentage distribution of lot sizes presented to the court (transcript wording as presented by staff). Court members clarified that a previously proposed build-to-rent section was removed from the agreement.

A county commissioner raised the issue of housing affordability during discussion, noting that higher mortgage interest rates make single-family ownership difficult for some workers and public employees and urging the court to keep a range of housing options in mind for the future. The commissioner said, “doing a $350,000 house on an 8% interest rate is really, really hard for them to get,” and asked where multifamily options would be located if allowed in the future.

Court members also discussed why the developer would reserve the 450-foot corridor—staff replied the area would likely remain green space, storm detention and similar uses until such time as the corridor is needed or reimbursed through municipal utility district (MUD) arrangements.

After discussion the court approved the agreement; the motion carried (recorded in the transcript as “49 carried”). The transcript does not record a named mover or a roll-call vote tally for this item.

The court’s action does not itself approve any specific final plats or construction permits; staff noted they will return to the court later with related plats and specific agreements for infrastructure and any tax abatement or incentive paperwork required by the development agreement.