The Ellis County Commissioners Court approved a batch of development plats and replats on its regular agenda, ratifying staff actions and accepting staff recommendations for five separate subdivision matters.

Alberto Matas of the county Department of Development told the court the applications met advertisement and notice requirements, and in several cases cities had approved extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) withdrawal petitions. The court approved a replat of Crestview Estates (2nd section, 1st installment, Lot A Block G) — a 3.517‑acre site southwest of FM 983 and Summerall Lane in Red Oak — which will create one additional lot, bringing the parcel to two lots in total. The court also ratified staff action on the Northstar addition (Lot 1 Block A), a 1.046‑acre site near Ring Road and FM 387, and on the adjacent RCV Investments addition (Lot 1 Block A), a 1.073‑acre site; in both cases staff said conditions had been met and the city actions regarding ETJ withdrawal were in place.

At the public hearing for a replat of Suburban Estates Lot 72 (now 72R), a nearby resident, Aaron Wynne, asked whether the owner was proposing to divide the lot into two smaller parcels; staff clarified the item before the court was only a boundary adjustment for the existing 1.27‑acre lot and that splitting the lot into sub‑acre parcels would require a variance from the commissioners court because the county minimum lot size is 1 acre. Wynne said the mailed notices were difficult to read; the county clerk recorded the public comment and the court proceeded to approve the replat.

Finally, the court ratified staff action on the Crystal Bridge Estates final plat (Lots 1–3 Block A), a 6.336‑acre site north of Matthews Road and North Armstrong Road in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Maypearl. Staff noted the applicant dedicated 40 feet of right‑of‑way along North Armstrong and that Mountain Peak is the water provider. Court members voted to approve all five items after staff recommendations.

The approvals were procedural: staff reported that required advertisements and mailed notices had been completed, right‑of‑way dedications were documented where required, and water providers and thoroughfare plan conditions were noted on the record. No variances or exceptions were granted during this set of items; when a future subdivision would produce lots below the one‑acre minimum, the court said such a proposal would require a separate variance petition and formal consideration.

Court action on the items was unanimous and routine. The approvals conclude the county’s review for the plats presented but do not, by themselves, authorize construction or building permits, which are subject to separate approvals and inspections.