Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Eagle Pass planning body approves Unit 5 preliminary plat, accepts 3.67‑acre park donation
Summary
At a Nov. 21 special meeting, the Eagle Pass Planning and Zoning body approved a preliminary plat for a 27.04‑acre Unit 5 that would create 69 homes, two commercial lots and donate 3.67 acres for parkland; approval is conditioned on resolving drainage, easement surfacing and traffic‑analysis items.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EAGLE PASS, Texas — At a special meeting on Nov. 21, 2024, the Eagle Pass Planning and Zoning body approved the preliminary plat for “Unit 5,” a 27.04‑acre subdivision that would create 69 residential lots, two commercial parcels and dedicate 3.67 acres of parkland, city staff said.
Community Development staff told the commission that utilities are present nearby and will be extended into the site, that the applicant has constructed stormwater detention ponds sized for this phase, and that the plat would include about 4,070 linear feet of new 50‑foot public right of way. The staff presentation identified the site near El Indio Highway and Paesto Mancha Elementary and showed planned connections to existing units and future extensions of Patsy Wind Boulevard.
Staff recommended approval but listed two conditions to be resolved before final recordation: Public Works requires additional detail on easement surface materials, and outstanding engineering comments remain on drainage analysis elevations, plat contours and the traffic impact analysis. “The recommendation from the department is to grant the preliminary plat approval of Terre Havel Estate Subdivision Unit 5, including a 3.67‑acre park donation subject to the compliance with the provisions of Eagle Pass code of ordinances,” Community Development staff said.
The presentation also noted the Parks and Recreation Board voted to accept the 3.67‑acre dedication. Staff cautioned that the dedication provides land only and that the city would need to budget for future park improvements, saying the city must identify funding or include the site in the capital improvement program before improvements occur.
An applicant representative responding to the presentation said the city’s subdivision ordinance does not require a full traffic impact analysis (TIA) for the development and described a shorter trip‑generation worksheet the developer prepared. The representative said the planned street connections and recent extensions in earlier units have eased local circulation and that, based on site observations, “I don’t see any issues with traffic.”
Staff relayed a caution from HAP Engineering, the project engineer referenced in the presentation, that while a full TIA might not be required immediately, an area‑wide analysis will likely be needed as growth continues. Staff added that requiring a full TIA now could delay the project because a complete study could take months and that postponing the analysis could shift some burden for mitigation to the city later.
After discussion, a commissioner moved to approve the Community Development recommendation; the motion was seconded and the presiding officer called for the ayes. The commission approved the preliminary plat as presented, with the requirement that the listed engineering comments and easement surface details be resolved and that the project comply with the Eagle Pass code of ordinances. Staff said the applicant intends to seek City Council consideration at its Dec. 3 meeting and hope to proceed to pre‑construction afterward.
Note on names used in meeting materials: the plat and presentation materials used more than one name for the project during the meeting (the item was introduced verbally as “Terre Havel Estate Subdivision Unit 5” while slides and other references used alternate forms). The applicant was identified in staff materials as representing Libco Enterprises (also transcribed in spots as “Lidco”); staff and the applicant clarified that review comments and engineering items must be resolved regardless of the nomenclature.

