Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission sends Big Creek Estates preliminary plat back to Planning & Zoning for corrections

Ellis County Board of County Commissioners · January 6, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After residents and staff raised concerns about water supply, setbacks, lot sizes and drainage, the commission voted to refer the Big Creek Estates preliminary plat back to Planning & Zoning with a list of items to address before final plat approval.

The Ellis County Commission on Jan. 6 declined to approve the Big Creek Estates preliminary plat as submitted and referred it back to the Planning & Zoning Commission for further work after staff and multiple residents raised compliance questions.

Justin Craig, environmental services director, said the Nov. 17, 2025 application proposes 14 residential parcels plus a stormwater retention lot; proposed lot areas ranged from 12,230 to 25,549 square feet. Craig flagged required items for the final plat: water‑well setback documentation (25‑foot state setback noted), confirmation of a sewage agreement with Big Creek Sewer District (no new septic allowed), stormwater plans and resolution of double‑frontage/access and cul‑de‑sac radius issues.

Several residents urged denial or more scrutiny. James Graham, a Big Creek Estates resident, detailed multiple sections of the county’s subdivision and zoning regulations he said the plat violates, including minimum lot sizes that default to two acres unless centralized water and sanitary sewer are provided. "There are several points that disqualify this plat from being approved," Graham said, urging the commission to reject it until the developer demonstrates compliance.

Developer representatives including Randy Purde of Call Valley Engineering and David Spady (speaking as a proxy for the applicant) said many technical items would be addressed on the final plat and asked commissioners not to delay the project unnecessarily. After discussion the board voted 3–0 to send the preliminary plat back to Planning & Zoning with a commission‑supplied list of issues to be resolved and an instruction that interested residents may appear at the P&Z meeting to reiterate concerns.