10/30/25 – San Jacinto Preserve (aka Scarborough Development) presented new plans yesterday to the City of Houston District E Council Member Fred Flickinger and Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, PE, for the development of 5,316 acres most of which is in floodplains or floodways. The land lies where Spring Creek, Cypress Creek, Turkey Creek and the San Jacinto West Fork converge south of the Grand Parkway.
Meeting in Response to City’s Request for More Information
Council Member Flickinger and Commissioner Ramsey both had requested the City Planning Commission to defer approval of the new development by taking it off their consent agenda on 10/16/25 until the City could learn more.
General plan submitted to Houston Planning Commission didn’t show much detail.
In response, the District E office said the developer presented these two pages at the followup meeting on 10/29/25.
The first looks somewhat like a paisley shirt. The new plans show where homes and detention basins would be built, but they omit floodplain/floodway boundaries, streets and wetlands.
Note that the new plan still shows a proposed corridor for Townsen Road, which was taken off the Montgomery County 2025 Road Bond. It also shows a bridge across Spring Creek which Commissioner Ramsey previously (and strenuously) objected to.
The developer also presented the following summary sheet, designed to allay concerns. It says that out of the total 5,316 acres, only 2,012 are “intended” for development. 550 acres are set aside for detention and floodplain mitigation. And 2,754 acres are not “intended” for development – 52% of the total tract. See the pie chart below. Then compare the percentages to the map above.
My eye sees less green than gray in the map above. But the irregular shapes make it difficult to precisely quantify percentages. So, judge for yourself.
Troubling, Vague Language
The developer also presented this summary sheet along with the new plans.
Note that the Summary Sheet above uses words such as “intended,” “proposed,” and “limited.” They should raise red flags. They convey promises without legal obligations and beg for explanation that isn’t given.
But there may be an even bigger problem in the Summary Sheet. The developer claims it’s using updated flood maps. However, they don’t show the extent of floodplains and floodways. Nor do they show the difference between the existing and as-yet-unreleased new maps.
And note the reference to “wetlands mitigation credits.” That means they’re mitigating the wetlands they destroy, but doing it somewhere else, i.e., not on this site. So the mitigation may or may not help people in Humble, Kingwood and the Lake Houston Area. It all depends on where the credits are.
LONO References Demand Elaboration
The “LONO” references in the Summary Sheet stand for Letters of No Objection. They imply approval but mean something entirely different.
“LONO” is a formal statement issued by a regulatory authority to indicate that it has no objection to a proposed action, activity, or project — provided certain conditions are met and no specific approval is required under existing rules.
For instance, Harris County Flood Control District issued the LONO for a bridge across Spring Creek without seeing any plans. Such letters serve as an assurance during the early stages of a project that the regulator does not see a regulatory barrier. However, the letter does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance with other requirements or liabilities that may arise.
I have not yet obtained a copy of the Montgomery County LONO, but have filed a FOIA request.
Much Green Space Could Not Be Developed Anyway
While the “52% green space” claim sounds like a concession to preservation and safety concerns, City of Houston regulations already prohibit building in floodplains and floodways without significant restrictions. And this land is almost ALL floodways and floodplains.
Floodplains shown by Ryko (the previous owner) in their drainage analysis.
Restrictions include:
Elevation of the first finished floor 2 feet above the 500-year flood elevation
Construction on stilts/piers to allow water to flow under the home without constricting the flow of water
A floodplain development permit
Flood insurance.
Such restrictions raise the price of building in such areas while lowering the demand, making development – and home ownership – much riskier.
From FEMA’s Base Flood Elevation Viewer.
At the southern end of the area, builders would have to raise homes 27.1 feet to comply with City of Houston regulations…if they could get a permit.
“Like Aiming a Fire Hose at Kingwood”
One of the most respected hydrologists in the region told ReduceFlooding.com that if that area got developed, it would be like “aiming a fire hose at Kingwood and Humble.”
But the letter objecting to the study’s conclusions was later rescinded after it came under fire from MoCo Precinct 3 Commissioner James Noack. Noack was subsequently voted out of office by his constituents. The letter cited a “sincere concern for the safety of the public.” The risk of development was just too high, it said.
Leading Preservation Group Has Better Plan
The Bayou Land Conservancy, one of the leading conservation groups in the area, issued the following statement today after reviewing the plans above.
“Bayou Land Conservancy believes that the highest and best use of this entire tract is conservation that protects upstream and downstream communities from flooding, while preserving the quality of our drinking water.”
“Although the developer currently plans to set aside 52% of the available land with ‘no future plans of development,’ conservation easements would act as permanent protection of those areas and give the nearby community an assurance that they would remain green space forever.”
I couldn’t agree more. Just a mile downstream on the San Jacinto West Fork, townhomes in Forest Cove were flooded to the third floor. And some were swept off their foundations.
Forest Cove Townhome destroyed by Harveyone mile downstream from proposed developmenton West Fork.
Rather than make the public pay handsomely to buy out such properties after they flood, why not just keep the area natural?
The entire proposed development is laced with wetlands which act as natural sponges during floods.Proposed development photographed from a helicopter flying over the West Fork on 6/22/25.
All those trees create friction that reduces the speed of floodwaters coming into the Humble/Kingwood area. Removing them would increase the velocity of floodwaters that have already swept homes off their foundations.
Leaving this land natural would avoid future home damages and mitigation costs altogether. At a much lower cost to the public and unsuspecting home buyers.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/30/25
2984 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/San-Jacinto-Preserve-Plan-2.jpg?fit=2550%2C1650&ssl=116502550adminadmin2025-10-30 20:02:482025-10-31 13:17:24New Plans to Develop 5,316 Acres West of Kingwood Mostly in Floodplains, Floodways
10/29/25 – Contractors have begun placing rebar and pouring concrete for two giant, cast-in-place junction boxes on either side of the UnionPacific Railroad tracks that cross Northpark Drive. The junction boxes will connect drainage systems on both sides of the tracks.
Construction Roadblocks Eliminated
Unanticipated utility conflicts held up drainage work for months. And the drainage work needs to be completed before Loop 494 can be completed, Northpark surface lanes can be paved, and contractors can start work on the bridge over the tracks/Loop 494. So this is another significant milestone.
Once complete, the junction boxes will comprise a significant link that conveys excess stormwater from west of the tracks to the Kingwood Diversion Ditch on the east.
Pictures Supplied by Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority
The pictures below show the start of work in the first of the two pits.
Clean out of debris from the twin 5′ bores in anticipation of construction of the junction boxes.Contractors start with the bottoms. Then they will build the sides and top.Picture: 10/28/29.Smoothing the concrete and placing anchors for the sides.10/28/29
The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority anticipates completion of the boxes on both sides of the tracks by the end of the first week in November 2025, weather permitting.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/29/25
2983 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/20251029-Smoothing-Concrete-Junction-Box.png?fit=1063%2C1100&ssl=111001063adminadmin2025-10-29 21:21:022025-10-29 21:21:03Contractors Start Northpark Junction Boxes Next to Railroad Tracks
10/28/25 – Yilun Cheng and Matt Zdun, reporters for the Houston Chronicle, published an article this morning about the political donations of floodplain developers. It represents a new high-water mark in investigative journalism concerning Houston’s flooding problems.
Cheng and Zdun found $10.8 million in contributions from development interests to county judges and commissioners in Harris and Montgomery counties for the decade between January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2024. That works out to roughly a million dollars per year contributed to 10 people.
The article’s headline: “How officials approved tens of thousands of homes in Houston floodplains: ‘1,000 ways to rig the model.'” Their story’s preview link gives us a hint: “In Houston-area floodplain development, political donations beat science.”
The thrust of the article is how development interests have:
Influenced the very regulations that govern the industry
Tweaked model inputs to make developments look more desirable and their impacts less severe
Made huge political contributions to those who influence approval of their plans.
65,000 Homes built in Houston Floodplains since Harvey
Cheng previously published a blockbuster story about 65,000 homes built in Houston floodplains since Hurricane Harvey. Today, she delved into how that happened. She and her colleagues tracked the political donations of developers, homebuilders, engineers and their respective Political Action Committees (PACs) and trade associations.
For today’s article Cheng and Zdun focused mainly on Harris and Montgomery Counties, though Cheng interviewed people from the other surrounding counties and cities as well.
Research Challenges and Ensuring Data Quality
Such research is more difficult than it appears at first glance. Contributions often don’t appear under the name of a corporation on a government contract.
Rather, contributions often appear under the names of the corporation’s leaders, employees, and their family members. That adds extra layers of research and verification.
And multiple donations from the same individuals may appear in different forms. For instance, an individual might use his full name for one donation and a first initial for the next. That discourages automatic sorting.
So, Cheng and Zdun had to review contributions one by one. “Campaign finance filings vary greatly in quality,” they noted at the end of the article. “The same donor could be represented several different ways in filings, with different spellings, suffixes, titles and punctuation. Additionally, some county officials submitted handwritten filings, which complicated the data parsing.” Accidental? I think not.
The Chronicle standardized names across filings, removing extraneous suffixes, titles and punctuation through a process that involved substantial hand checking.
Then the reporters cross-checked all name matches with occupation and address data to verify that they were the same individual. They also sorted entries by date because during the sampling period, some politicians also ran for offices other than county judge or commissioner.
From my own experience with such research, I suspect the totals they reported may be understated. The rule of thumb? When it doubt, leave it out.
Contributions Don’t Automatically Guarantee Plan Approval
Cheng and Zdun are careful to point out that political contributions don’t automatically guarantee approval of developers plans. But they also point out situations in which contributions to a county commissioner mysteriously made it difficult for county employees to reject a developer’s plans/studies.
For instance, they explored a floodplain development by Ryko in Montgomery County and found that a county employee’s rejection of the developer’s plans was later escalated to a former commissioner. The employee was formally reprimanded. Coincidentally, the developer’s consultant (and former employee) currently chairs the Houston Planning Commission.
In a hundred year flood, some of Ryko’s land would be more than 18 feet underwater in a 100 year flood.
Cheng interviewed Dr. Sam Brody of Texas A&M. He said, “All the models done are based on assumptions, and the assumptions are based on what they think,” Brody said. “There are 1,000 ways to rig the model to come up with an answer that you want to see.”
Cheng also interviewed Chad Berginnis, director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers. Berginnis said he has experienced firsthand how politics can complicate efforts to enforce floodplain rules. “I tried to faithfully administer the regulations,” he said, recalling his time as a local floodplain manager. “And I can tell you on more than one occasion I suffered the county commissioners’ anger.”
I personally know a floodplain manager in Montgomery County who labored under similar pressure and eventually left the county.
Part of a Larger Series
Cheng is a talented writer/reporter with a penchant for meticulous documentation. Today’s article is part of a larger series exploring flooding in the Houston region and Texas in general. I will say this. When the next big flood destroys thousands of homes, people need look no further than Cheng’s articles for answers.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/28/2025
2982 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/20250507-Ryko-Confluence-BFE-Viewer-25-ft-1.jpg?fit=1100%2C633&ssl=16331100adminadmin2025-10-28 20:15:112025-10-28 20:15:58Chronicle Tracks County Political Donations of Floodplain Developers
New Plans to Develop 5,316 Acres West of Kingwood Mostly in Floodplains, Floodways
10/30/25 – San Jacinto Preserve (aka Scarborough Development) presented new plans yesterday to the City of Houston District E Council Member Fred Flickinger and Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, PE, for the development of 5,316 acres most of which is in floodplains or floodways. The land lies where Spring Creek, Cypress Creek, Turkey Creek and the San Jacinto West Fork converge south of the Grand Parkway.
Meeting in Response to City’s Request for More Information
Council Member Flickinger and Commissioner Ramsey both had requested the City Planning Commission to defer approval of the new development by taking it off their consent agenda on 10/16/25 until the City could learn more.
In response, the District E office said the developer presented these two pages at the followup meeting on 10/29/25.
The first looks somewhat like a paisley shirt. The new plans show where homes and detention basins would be built, but they omit floodplain/floodway boundaries, streets and wetlands.
Note that the new plan still shows a proposed corridor for Townsen Road, which was taken off the Montgomery County 2025 Road Bond. It also shows a bridge across Spring Creek which Commissioner Ramsey previously (and strenuously) objected to.
The developer also presented the following summary sheet, designed to allay concerns. It says that out of the total 5,316 acres, only 2,012 are “intended” for development. 550 acres are set aside for detention and floodplain mitigation. And 2,754 acres are not “intended” for development – 52% of the total tract. See the pie chart below. Then compare the percentages to the map above.
My eye sees less green than gray in the map above. But the irregular shapes make it difficult to precisely quantify percentages. So, judge for yourself.
Troubling, Vague Language
The developer also presented this summary sheet along with the new plans.
Note that the Summary Sheet above uses words such as “intended,” “proposed,” and “limited.” They should raise red flags. They convey promises without legal obligations and beg for explanation that isn’t given.
But there may be an even bigger problem in the Summary Sheet. The developer claims it’s using updated flood maps. However, they don’t show the extent of floodplains and floodways. Nor do they show the difference between the existing and as-yet-unreleased new maps.
To my eye, the outlines of the floodplains and floodways around areas containing homes look suspiciously like FEMA’s existing map for this area.
And note the reference to “wetlands mitigation credits.” That means they’re mitigating the wetlands they destroy, but doing it somewhere else, i.e., not on this site. So the mitigation may or may not help people in Humble, Kingwood and the Lake Houston Area. It all depends on where the credits are.
LONO References Demand Elaboration
The “LONO” references in the Summary Sheet stand for Letters of No Objection. They imply approval but mean something entirely different.
“LONO” is a formal statement issued by a regulatory authority to indicate that it has no objection to a proposed action, activity, or project — provided certain conditions are met and no specific approval is required under existing rules.
For instance, Harris County Flood Control District issued the LONO for a bridge across Spring Creek without seeing any plans. Such letters serve as an assurance during the early stages of a project that the regulator does not see a regulatory barrier. However, the letter does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance with other requirements or liabilities that may arise.
In the case of the proposed bridge across Spring Creek, there are no laws against bridges. However, the HCFCD letter clearly laid out the need for additional studies, plan reviews and permits.
I have not yet obtained a copy of the Montgomery County LONO, but have filed a FOIA request.
Much Green Space Could Not Be Developed Anyway
While the “52% green space” claim sounds like a concession to preservation and safety concerns, City of Houston regulations already prohibit building in floodplains and floodways without significant restrictions. And this land is almost ALL floodways and floodplains.
Restrictions include:
Such restrictions raise the price of building in such areas while lowering the demand, making development – and home ownership – much riskier.
At the southern end of the area, builders would have to raise homes 27.1 feet to comply with City of Houston regulations…if they could get a permit.
“Like Aiming a Fire Hose at Kingwood”
One of the most respected hydrologists in the region told ReduceFlooding.com that if that area got developed, it would be like “aiming a fire hose at Kingwood and Humble.”
Yet Chapter 11.086 of the Texas State Water Code requires “no adverse impact” on surrounding areas.
The preliminary drainage study by the previous owner of the land came under fire from Montgomery County Engineering.
But the letter objecting to the study’s conclusions was later rescinded after it came under fire from MoCo Precinct 3 Commissioner James Noack. Noack was subsequently voted out of office by his constituents. The letter cited a “sincere concern for the safety of the public.” The risk of development was just too high, it said.
Leading Preservation Group Has Better Plan
The Bayou Land Conservancy, one of the leading conservation groups in the area, issued the following statement today after reviewing the plans above.
“Bayou Land Conservancy believes that the highest and best use of this entire tract is conservation that protects upstream and downstream communities from flooding, while preserving the quality of our drinking water.”
“Although the developer currently plans to set aside 52% of the available land with ‘no future plans of development,’ conservation easements would act as permanent protection of those areas and give the nearby community an assurance that they would remain green space forever.”
I couldn’t agree more. Just a mile downstream on the San Jacinto West Fork, townhomes in Forest Cove were flooded to the third floor. And some were swept off their foundations.
Rather than make the public pay handsomely to buy out such properties after they flood, why not just keep the area natural?
All those trees create friction that reduces the speed of floodwaters coming into the Humble/Kingwood area. Removing them would increase the velocity of floodwaters that have already swept homes off their foundations.
Leaving this land natural would avoid future home damages and mitigation costs altogether. At a much lower cost to the public and unsuspecting home buyers.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/30/25
2984 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
Contractors Start Northpark Junction Boxes Next to Railroad Tracks
10/29/25 – Contractors have begun placing rebar and pouring concrete for two giant, cast-in-place junction boxes on either side of the UnionPacific Railroad tracks that cross Northpark Drive. The junction boxes will connect drainage systems on both sides of the tracks.
Construction Roadblocks Eliminated
Unanticipated utility conflicts held up drainage work for months. And the drainage work needs to be completed before Loop 494 can be completed, Northpark surface lanes can be paved, and contractors can start work on the bridge over the tracks/Loop 494. So this is another significant milestone.
Once complete, the junction boxes will comprise a significant link that conveys excess stormwater from west of the tracks to the Kingwood Diversion Ditch on the east.
Pictures Supplied by Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority
The pictures below show the start of work in the first of the two pits.
The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority anticipates completion of the boxes on both sides of the tracks by the end of the first week in November 2025, weather permitting.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/29/25
2983 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Chronicle Tracks County Political Donations of Floodplain Developers
10/28/25 – Yilun Cheng and Matt Zdun, reporters for the Houston Chronicle, published an article this morning about the political donations of floodplain developers. It represents a new high-water mark in investigative journalism concerning Houston’s flooding problems.
Cheng and Zdun found $10.8 million in contributions from development interests to county judges and commissioners in Harris and Montgomery counties for the decade between January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2024. That works out to roughly a million dollars per year contributed to 10 people.
The article’s headline: “How officials approved tens of thousands of homes in Houston floodplains: ‘1,000 ways to rig the model.'” Their story’s preview link gives us a hint: “In Houston-area floodplain development, political donations beat science.”
The thrust of the article is how development interests have:
65,000 Homes built in Houston Floodplains since Harvey
Cheng previously published a blockbuster story about 65,000 homes built in Houston floodplains since Hurricane Harvey. Today, she delved into how that happened. She and her colleagues tracked the political donations of developers, homebuilders, engineers and their respective Political Action Committees (PACs) and trade associations.
For today’s article Cheng and Zdun focused mainly on Harris and Montgomery Counties, though Cheng interviewed people from the other surrounding counties and cities as well.
Research Challenges and Ensuring Data Quality
Such research is more difficult than it appears at first glance. Contributions often don’t appear under the name of a corporation on a government contract.
Rather, contributions often appear under the names of the corporation’s leaders, employees, and their family members. That adds extra layers of research and verification.
And multiple donations from the same individuals may appear in different forms. For instance, an individual might use his full name for one donation and a first initial for the next. That discourages automatic sorting.
So, Cheng and Zdun had to review contributions one by one. “Campaign finance filings vary greatly in quality,” they noted at the end of the article. “The same donor could be represented several different ways in filings, with different spellings, suffixes, titles and punctuation. Additionally, some county officials submitted handwritten filings, which complicated the data parsing.” Accidental? I think not.
The Chronicle standardized names across filings, removing extraneous suffixes, titles and punctuation through a process that involved substantial hand checking.
Then the reporters cross-checked all name matches with occupation and address data to verify that they were the same individual. They also sorted entries by date because during the sampling period, some politicians also ran for offices other than county judge or commissioner.
From my own experience with such research, I suspect the totals they reported may be understated. The rule of thumb? When it doubt, leave it out.
Contributions Don’t Automatically Guarantee Plan Approval
Cheng and Zdun are careful to point out that political contributions don’t automatically guarantee approval of developers plans. But they also point out situations in which contributions to a county commissioner mysteriously made it difficult for county employees to reject a developer’s plans/studies.
For instance, they explored a floodplain development by Ryko in Montgomery County and found that a county employee’s rejection of the developer’s plans was later escalated to a former commissioner. The employee was formally reprimanded. Coincidentally, the developer’s consultant (and former employee) currently chairs the Houston Planning Commission.
“Experts, residents and advocates warned that they’ve seen case after case of politics, not math, shaping floodplain development decisions,” said Cheng.
Cheng interviewed Dr. Sam Brody of Texas A&M. He said, “All the models done are based on assumptions, and the assumptions are based on what they think,” Brody said. “There are 1,000 ways to rig the model to come up with an answer that you want to see.”
Cheng also interviewed Chad Berginnis, director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers. Berginnis said he has experienced firsthand how politics can complicate efforts to enforce floodplain rules. “I tried to faithfully administer the regulations,” he said, recalling his time as a local floodplain manager. “And I can tell you on more than one occasion I suffered the county commissioners’ anger.”
I personally know a floodplain manager in Montgomery County who labored under similar pressure and eventually left the county.
Part of a Larger Series
Cheng is a talented writer/reporter with a penchant for meticulous documentation. Today’s article is part of a larger series exploring flooding in the Houston region and Texas in general. I will say this. When the next big flood destroys thousands of homes, people need look no further than Cheng’s articles for answers.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/28/2025
2982 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.