Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ellis County tables Hidden Creek variance request after residents cite drainage and safety risks
Summary
The court granted the applicant's request to table variance requests for the Trails at Hidden Creek subdivision until Jan. 6 so staff can review additional road‑specific engineering information; multiple residents spoke against the variances citing soil variability, narrow roads and flooding risks.
The Ellis County Commissioners Court voted to table a variance request for the Trails at Hidden Creek development until the next regular meeting so the applicant can provide a road‑specific engineering report. The variances sought to waive parts of the countystandard pavement/subgrade details on a roughly 65.892‑acre site near Buchanan Drive and South Ring Road in Precinct 4.
Staff told the court that the county analyzed the soils report submitted with the request and determined it addressed foundations rather than roads, and recommended denial. The applicant requested a continuance until Jan. 6 to submit a report that specifically addresses roads. Alberto Maras, the county's director of development, said civil plans and drainage remain under review.
Several nearby residents told commissioners they opposed the variances. William Lenhart (who said he is a degreed engineer and lives at 181 Buchanan Drive) urged denial, arguing the site has both exposed limestone and deep expansive soils and that omitting the required subgrade risks early pavement failure. "Putting concrete on ideal soil without a stabilizing base is inviting cracking," he said. Scott Rosenberger, a mechanical engineer who lives across the creek from the property, also asked the court to deny the waiver, noting local soil variability and that county/TXDOT standards exist to reduce long‑term maintenance costs.
Marie Kelly, who lives on Buchanan Drive, described frequent wet conditions, edge failures and constrained vehicle passage on the road that serves about 13 families today, and warned that adding more homes would worsen emergency‑access and flooding risks. She provided photos to the court.
Because the applicant asked to delay action and staff will continue civil‑plan review (including drainage), the court tabled the matter by voice vote. The item will return on Jan. 6 and interested residents were invited to submit written comments or return for that meeting.
