News Archives - Page 13 of 277

Home Buyers Beware: Will that Green Space Behind You Remain Green?

12/20/2025 – People pay a premium to live near green space. But will the promises made during a sale be kept? Will that green space remain green, or will it be gobbled up by more development in the future? Here’s a guide to language that should raise red flags when looking at development plans, sales contracts, and public documents. Words can imply one thing, but not be legally binding. So, buyer beware.

The Proximity Premium that Vanishes

Many developers who build in or near floodplains promise early buyers that the green space around them will be “designated as” parks and is “intended for” recreational use.

A review of 33 studies found that properties near green space command a premium of 8–10%. Another study suggests the “proximity premium” may be as high as 20%.

But developers’ plans can change. And the home buyer’s beautiful view disappears. And remember, wetlands may no longer guarantee that land cannot be developed.

Why Developers May Leave Green Space Initially

There are also several regulator reasons why developers may leave large swaths of green space in their original plans. They communicate:

The project provides regional flood storage
Downstream impacts are minimized
Remaining land functions as mitigation, not loss.

Framing plans this way also:

Reduces perceived flood risk
Reduces organized opposition
Narrows legal exposure
Makes the project sound less aggressive.

This is standard practice on controversial floodplain projects according to flood experts I have interviewed.

But Will Green Space Remain Forever?

Many developers promise green space. But will it remain green forever?

Scarborough in MoCo

A Dallas-based developer named Scarborough recently purchased 5000+ acres west of Kingwood through a subsidiary called San Jacinto Preserve. Most of it is in floodplains and floodways. Their president, Ryan Burkhardt says they only “plan” to develop 38% of the land. He repeatedly emphasized that more than half of his land will be used as green space.

Ryko drainage impact study illustration showing outline and floodplains. — *Ryko sold its property outlined in red to Scarborough earlier this year.*

But he ALSO does not plan to put a conservation easement on the green space. Nor is he donating the green space to the City, County or State. This is typical.

I don’t care to cast aspersions on Burkhardt’s integrity. He was brave in returning my phone call and seemed quite candid. But to me, those are red flags. It follows a recurring pattern. For instance…

Signorelli in Commons of Lake Houston

In Huffman, Signorelli reportedly promised buyers in The Commons of Lake Houston that the floodplain land around them would remain green space for community recreational purposes, such as hiking and horseback riding. But now, the company is trying to turn a large part of that floodplain land into more homesites. Signorelli has fought the City of Houston for ten years all the way to the Texas Supreme Court for the right to do so.

Crossing at the Commons of Lake Houston Floodplains and General Plan — Signorelli’s proposed “Crossing at the Commons of Lake Houston” opposite East Fork from Kingwood’s East End Park. Dotted lines snaking through and around the home sites represent the 100- and 500-year floodplains.

Holley in Royal Shores

Also on the East Fork, on the Kingwood side of the river, Friendswood sat on land in Royal Shores that people used for hiking for more than 30 years. Then they sold it to developer Ron Holley earlier this year. One hundred percent of the land is in floodplains.

Royal Shores Wetlands — *See large aqua colored area in center.*

Wetlands occupy much of it. Wetlands used to deter development, but those rules could soon change.

Friendswood tried to develop this land for years before selling it to Holley. Here’s what the land just north of there looks like.

Friendswood gave East End Park to the Kingwood Service Association in 1988 to preserve it for the community. It is NOT in danger of being developed. However, Friendswood retained control of their Royal Shores green space until they sold it to Holley. And now nearby residents may lose their recreational area.

Recognize the Red Flags that Could Undermine Your Home Value

How can you be certain green space around you will remain green and not be developed in the future? Some hints:

Ask for legal guarantees in the form of conservation easements or deeds donating the land to a City, County or State as public parkland. If they don’t exist, be wary.
Be wary of what advertisers call “weasel words.” If a developer says he “plans on” leaving land as green space, that gives him a legal out if plans change. Same with “intends to.”
Look for designations on maps with words like “Buffer,” “Reserve,” “Future Phase,” “Drainage Reserve,” or “Open Space.” Such words have no legal or regulatory definitions.
If the land is dedicated to an HOA or POA, who controls the entity? The developer? If so, he can dedicate it for something else when he’s ready to develop the land.
Do you see maps from Commissioners Court saying things like “subject to future engineering review”?
Does the appraisal district classify any of the land as “livable” or “usable”?
Is there a binding commitment to Commissioners Court ensuring permanent floodplain storage or a conservation function?
Do deed restrictions explicitly prohibit future fill or structures?
Are there special appraisals on the land such as “timber” or “wildlife” that minimize the developer’s carrying costs?

Here are two checklists with even more warning signs to look for:

One is geared to Montgomery County Engineering Department and Commissioners Court reviews.
The other is more general.

Use them to make sure someone doesn’t try to turn “your” promised green space into greenbacks.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/20/25

3035 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.

The Profit in Floodplain Development Explained

12/19/25 – Despite substantial hurdles, floodplain development can be very profitable for patient developers with deep pockets, even if only a small percentage of their land is developed.

For instance, Scarborough Lane Development/San Jacinto Preserve LP has purchased more than 5,000 acres of land in floodplains and floodways near the confluence of four waterways. They include the San Jacinto West Fork, Spring Creek, Cypress Creek, and Turkey Creek.

Floodplains Streams from Ryko Drainage Study — *Base map from seller’s preliminary drainage analysis. Scarborough/San Jacinto Preserve property outlined in red.* *Shades of blue represent floodways and floodplains on property.*

Buyer Says It Paid $140 Million for Property Appraised at Less Than $1 Million

Scarborough claims it paid close to $140 million for the property – 8X higher than the Montgomery County Appraisal District (MCAD) places the market value of the land and 175X higher than the appraised value. See below.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Scarborough-Appraised-Value-1024x518.png — *Source: MCAD-TX.org*. *Timber exemptions account for low appraised value.* Size = acres

Even more stunning, Ryko, the company that sold the property to Scarborough/SJP, produced a preliminary engineering study that suggested only 38% of the land was developable because it has such high flood risk.

So, in what galaxy does this make economic sense?

Actually, it makes perfect sense – if you understand how the game is played.

Spread Makes Bread

Said another way, buy low; sell high.

The exceedingly low appraised value of floodplain land helps developers acquire and hold the land, sometimes for decades – at a very low tax cost while they work out regulatory issues. And when they do, the step change in value is so great, that if only 20% of the land is developable, they likely still make money.

This is according to ChatGPT, which costed out details of several development scenarios for me. One was even profitable with only 10% developable land.

A wide spread between acquisition costs and potential land sales after all permits and mitigation costs are accounted for is one of the main reasons why developers target floodplain land.

The dynamic is well understood in land economics and is particularly visible in fast-growing regions like Montgomery County.

Floodplain land often sells at a steep discount relative to nearby uplands because of:

Regulatory limits (floodway vs. floodplain)
Engineering costs (fill, detention, bridges)
Uncertainty (permitting, litigation, political risk)
Time value (increased holding costs because of longer periods before land becomes salable).

With steep, discounted prices in mind, even modest success—e.g., making 20–30% of a tract buildable — can make the entire investment profitable. Anything above that is gravy.

Why Floodplain Land Produces Unusually Large Spreads

Floodplain land tends to be priced as “mostly unusable.” Once permits are secured, the buildable portion prices like normal land. But the remainder can still be monetized as detention, mitigation, or open space.

Better yet for the developer, some of the land designated as green space may even be developed years later as the pain of flooding dims and political winds shift.

This can create huge “step” changes in land value.

Factors that Amplify Spread

In Texas, several factors amplify this spread. Consider, for instance:

Timber Exemptions that Lower Carrying Costs:

Developers pay only a few dollars in taxes per acre per year. On the five parcels above, taxes average $148 per acre per year. That makes patience very cheap. A well capitalized developer can afford to wait years while working out permitting issues.

Timber exemptions also mask speculative intent. On paper, the land looks like a passive forestry holding, not a development play.

Reliance on Post-Development Mitigation at Public Expense:

Some developers shift part of their mitigation costs onto the public. For example, some developers in Montgomery County have avoided building detention basins by using questionable flood routing studies. Even the former Montgomery County engineer criticized the practice. As flood peaks build over time, downstream residents clamor for mitigation. But it comes at public expense. So the developer has effectively externalized some of its costs.

Permissive Local Drainage Rules and Lax Enforcement:

This is especially true in counties that surround fast growing metropolitan areas. Some counties around Houston still use drainage criteria from the 1980s to help attract development.

Sometimes gaps in regulations cause flooding as Elm Grove discovered twice in 2019. Many floodplain developers tend to exploit such gaps in regulations and then claim they are complying with all applicable regulations.

Montgomery County recently upgraded its drainage criteria manual and adopted Atlas 14 rainfall probability standards. But willful blindness among regulators can still create a permissive environment to the detriment of people living downstream.

Risk/Reward Ratio Attracts Only Certain Types of Developers

Floodplain land tends to attract well-capitalized, patient developers with a 10–20 year horizon. For those with deep pockets and powerful partners, economics may work even if 90% of the land never becomes buildable.

This is not accidental; it is a rational, well-understood land-banking strategy.

However, the spread only turns into profit if risk converts to permission. It collapses if floodway limits are strictly enforced, mitigation costs surge, public opposition blocks approvals, or political sentiment hardens after major floods.

In such cases, floodplain land can become a capital trap, not a bargain. But still…

The large spread between low purchase cost and high potential value is a major magnet for developers.

And that’s how the Houston region got 65,000 homes built in floodplains since Hurricane Harvey, as investigative reporter Yilun Cheng discovered for the Houston Chronicle.

Courageous reporting, such as hers, makes flood risk highly visible and politically salient. And that makes the spread harder to monetize. Witness recent resolutions by Harris County Precinct 3 and the City of Houston. It will be interesting to see Scarborough’s next moves.

Next Up

I am working on a series of posts about floodplain development. Next, I’ll examine the seductive promise of green space. Floodplain developers often promote abundant, recreational green space to early buyers in a development.

But just as often, they try to monetize that green space during the latter stages of a development – green space they promised early buyers would remain green forever. Check out the warning-sign checklists in my next post before you buy property to see if your green space could someday vanish.

*Scarborough property near US59 bridge west of Kingwood. San Jacinto West Fork on right.* *During Harvey, water was 27 feet above the level you see here.*

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/19/2025

3034 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.

Houston City Council Unanimously Passes Resolution Opposing Scarborough Development

12/17/25 – This morning, Houston City Council unanimously passed a motion opposing development on 5,000 acres owned by Scarborough Lane Development/San Jacinto Preserve immediately west of Kingwood at the confluence of Spring Creek, Cypress Creek and the San Jacinto West Fork.

In opposing the development, the resolution cited:

“Catastrophic flooding rendering the tract unmistakably unfit for residential development”
“Potential liability associated with placing future residents in an area of heightened risk for property damage, personal injury, and loss of life”
The need to build homes to higher standards than Montgomery County (MoCo) currently requires
Substantially increased flood risks for existing residents of both Montgomery and Harris Counties.

The resolution, proposed by District E Council Member Fred Flickinger, also said “the highest and best use of this property should be evaluated for flood-mitigation” and “public park purposes.”

See the Council discussing Agenda Item 18 at https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1JmfRou5CH/. It starts 2:16:17 into the video.

Today’s resolution closely matches one adopted unanimously by Harris County Commissioners Court on 12/11/25. However, neither resolution effectively kills the development. But they do send a strong message that may lead to a better outcome for nearby and downstream residents. See more below.

Scarborough’s Position

Scarborough claims that they would develop the property responsibly and observe all local floodplain regulations and development standards.

I asked their president, Ryan Burkhardt, whether they would observe the highest standards (referring to Harris County standards versus MoCo’s). He said several times that they would observe local regulations.

But MoCo standards are lower than Harris County’s. The primary differences have to do with bringing fill into the 500-year floodplain and minimum finished-floor elevations.

Harris County prohibits fill in the 500-year floodplain; Montgomery County allows it.
Harris County sets the height of living space at the 500-year flood level; Montgomery County sets it at one foot above the 100-year floodplain.

Burkhardt did say that his development plans are based on Atlas 14 statistics. But he also said that they are still at least a couple years away from detailed plans that show exactly where they plan to build houses relative to those floodplains.

Burkhardt also asked me to communicate to readers that his company plans to leave 52% of their acreage as green space. He objected to the characterization of the development as a 5,000 acre development and repeatedly said that they plan only to develop a subset of those 5,000 acres.

*Detail from presentation to Houston District E and Harris County Precinct 3*

Given the fact that homes nearby on higher ground have already flooded, it will be difficult to develop new homes safely at lower elevations. I asked a hydrologist who has studied development in flood-prone areas whether there was any way to develop this property safely.

He replied that the only way to do that would be to elevate the homes on stilts. That way, when floods rise, water can safely pass underneath the homes without obstruction.

But that may be difficult for large homes. Burkhardt said he plans to build large homes on large lots similar to those that are already in Bender’s Landing Estates. HAR.com shows that the median living area for homes in Benders Landing Estates is approximately 4,522 square feet.

*Typical homes in Bender’s Landing Estates*

Listings in the area commonly show homes ranging from about 4,000 to 9,900+ square feet in size, with many properties built at 4,000–6,000+ square feet.

Green-Space Guarantees?

In our discussion, Burkhardt repeatedly came back to the 52% of the property that he says he would leave as green space.

That’s a selling point. We have certainly seen developers throughout the region say similar things. Living next to natural areas is a strong inducement for buyers looking at expensive homes.

But often, after developers sell the homes on higher ground, they start looking for ways to monetize the green space that they promised would remain green forever.

I’m not saying Scarborough would do that. But it’s a common practice. In fact, it’s already happened to several homeowners I talked to in Benders Landing Estates. It’s also happening to people at The Commons of Lake Houston. There, the developer fought the City of Houston for ten years (all the way to the Texas Supreme Court) for the right to build on floodplain land that he promised would remain recreational forever.

Two common strategies to guarantee land remains green forever are:

To put conservation easements on it through a group such as the Bayou Land Conservancy.
Turn it into public parks by deeding it to the City, County or State for that purpose.

However, Burkhardt was not willing to commit to either alternative.

$140 Million Mystery: Who is the Joint Venture Partner?

In my conversation with Burkhardt, he said that his project was a “joint venture.” However, he refused to tell me who the partner was.

I have learned from three other sources that the Texas General Land Office (GLO) may have something to do with the project. One other knowledgeable source said it may have something to do with a fund managed by the Governor, which the GLO administers.

Several sources told me that $140 million tax dollars were at stake. However, Burkhardt repeatedly denied that and said his company paid “close to” $140 million for the property. Hmmmm.

If this was such a good deal and if the GLO was involved, you think they would trumpet their investment. However, nearby residents who would be affected by the development had to file a FOIA request to see what the GLO’s involvement was.

The GLO denied the request and appealed it to the Attorney General. The Attorney General’s office gave the GLO the right to keep the information secret.

However, the Attorney General’s Office dragged its feet so long that it missed the deadline for responding. That made the records public by default, according to the original requestor. He therefore demanded the immediate release of all records responsive to his request.

As of this afternoon, neither the Attorney General, nor the GLO have responded with any records. I guess they must be embarrassing to someone.

If the state has no involvement, why don’t they just say so?

But they’re not saying “We are not involved.” They’re saying, “We have the right to keep our involvement secret.”

GLO Press Office Also Non-Responsive

Meanwhile, I couldn’t obtain any records either. I personally contacted the GLO press office for information. And the press office did not respond to the request. They said they needed “more time to research it.” However, the person responsible has since stopped taking phone calls or responding to emails re: the status. So, at this time, several serious questions remain:

What roles do the GLO and the Governor’s offices play in this “joint venture,” if any?
Is “joint venture” a fair characterization of the relationship, if any?
If the state is involved, is the involvement purely financial?
If so, how much money is involved?
Where does the money come from?
Are any federal dollars involved?
Did the state legislature appropriate the money or is it part of an official’s discretionary budget?
What happens to any money committed if the developer cannot secure the necessary permits?
Why would an agency that manages disaster relief/flood mitigation for the state and federal government support floodplain development?

If the state invested $140 million in this property, I say we should convert it to a park and put this issue to rest in perpetuity.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/17/25

3032 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.

City Council to Vote on Development in Area with Catastrophic Flooding

12/14/25 – The Houston City Council will vote Wednesday, December 17 on a resolution opposing the proposed 5,300 acre Scarborough Lane/San Jacinto Preserve Development in Montgomery County. Virtually the entire area lies in floodplains and floodways west of Kingwood near the confluence of the San Jacinto West Fork, Spring Creek, and Cypress Creek.

The resolution says that the area is “repeatedly marked by catastrophic flooding, rendering the tract unmistakably unfit for residential development.”

The City resolution comes less than a week after Harris County unanimously adopted a similar resolution

Resolution Highlights Potential Liability to Developer

The resolution, proposed by District E Council Member Fred Flickinger, also warns the developer about “potential liability associated with placing future residents in an area of heightened risk for property damage, personal injury, and loss of life.”

While the proposed development lies wholly within Montgomery County, it also lies wholly within Houston’s city limits and extra-territorial jurisdiction.

The resolution largely parallels a similar motion adopted unanimously on 12/11/2025 by Harris County Commissioners Court.

Other Key Provisions of Resolution

Among other things, the resolution urges Montgomery County to:

Apply Harris County drainage standards when evaluating the developer’s plans
Evaluate the property for flood-mitigation, flood-preservation, and public park purposes
Implement flood-mitigation protections while restoring wetlands, replenishing groundwater, and safeguarding the future of surrounding communities.

See the complete text below or download the PDF here.

Text of Resolution

City of Houston, Texas, Resolution No. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF HOUSTON CITY COUNCIL OPPOSING THE PROPOSED SCARBOROUGH LANE DEVELOPMENT IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, LOCATED IN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON, TEXAS AND A PORTION IN AN AREA ANNEXED BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON, TEXAS FOR LIMITED PURPOSES; CONTAINING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE FOREGOING SUBJECT.

* * * * *

WHEREAS, The City of Houston and Harris County lead the nation in flood-prevention investments, with more than $3.5 billion committed to flood-mitigation projects over the coming years, and urges Montgomery County leadership to adopt, at minimum, the drainage criteria previously approved by the Harris County Commissioners Court; and

WHEREAS, the land proposed for the Scarborough Lane Project in Montgomery County rests at the vulnerable confluence of Spring Creek, Cypress Creek, and the West Fork of the San Jacinto River, an area repeatedly marked by catastrophic flooding, rendering the tract unmistakably unfit for residential development; and

WHEREAS, any further construction within this well-documented flood zone would inevitably heighten flood dangers, placing the residents of Montgomery and Harris Counties at greater risk and compounding the devastation they have already endured; and

WHEREAS, this resolution serves as notice to the developer regarding potential liability associated with placing future residents in an area of heightened risk for property damage, personal injury, and loss of life; and

WHEREAS, the highest and best use of this property should be evaluated for flood-mitigation, flood-preservation, and public park purposes; and

WHEREAS, any development of this parcel must rigorously meet or exceed Harris County standards, including the elevation of finished floors, and any proposed mitigation ponds must be located entirely outside the current 100-year floodplain and completely beyond the floodway, ensuring no increased risk to surrounding communities; and

WHEREAS, all mitigation efforts should prioritize detaining stormwater as early as possible during rainfall events; and

WHEREAS, this tract stands as a rare and extraordinary opportunity to transform a hazardous flood zone into a steadfast shield against disaster, delivering vital flood-mitigation protections while restoring wetlands, replenishing groundwater, and safeguarding the future of surrounding communities;

NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON, TEXAS:

Section 1. That the findings contained in the preamble of this Resolution are determined to be true and correct and are hereby adopted as part of this Resolution.

Section 2. That the City Council respectfully calls upon the leadership of Montgomery County to reconsider the currently proposed Scarborough Lane development and any future development on this property, as it poses unacceptable hazards to future residents of Montgomery County and will substantially increase flood risks for existing residents of both Montgomery and Harris Counties.

Section 3. That this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage and approval by the Mayor; however, in the event that the Mayor fails to sign this Resolution within five days after its passage and adoption, it shall take effect in accordance with Article VI, Section 6, Houston City Charter.

[Signatures]

HCFCD/MoCo Both Tried to Buy Property for Flood Mitigation

Harris County Flood Control District tried to buy the property after passage of the 2018 flood bond. But reportedly, the property owner at the time wanted much more than the appraised value of the property.

A person familiar with the negotiations at the time told me that, “If that property ever gets developed, it would be like aiming a fire hose at Kingwood and Humble.

Ryko, the owner at the time, planned to build 7000 new homes on the property according to Montgomery County Precinct 3 Commissioner Ritch Wheeler. Wheeler also tried to buy the property. But the developer reportedly wanted north of $100 million for it.

A press release by Wheeler, dated 12/11/25, states that he believes “preserving this land for public use and for future generations remains a shared goal across our community.”

“If successful,” Wheeler said, “the effort would allow the land to be protected for regional detention, parks, trails, and natural green spaces, ensuring it remains an environmental and recreational asset for Montgomery County residents.”

For More Background Information

See these previous posts about Ryko, Scarborough and the San Jacinto Preserve.

12/13/25 Harris County Passes Ramsey Resolution on Scarborough Development In MoCo

10/31/25 Supposed “Letter of No Objection” to Floodplain Development Lists 3 Pages of Objections

10/30/25 New Plans to Develop 5,316 Acres West of Kingwood Mostly in Floodplains, Floodways

10/16/25 Developer Buys 5300 Acres of Floodplains, Floodways, Wetlands from Ryko

5/7/25 Is It Safe to Build 7,000 Homes on Ryko Land?

5/6/25 Montgomery County Engineering Letter Blasts Ryko’s Drainage Study

4/25/25 Lengthy Catalog of Concerns about Proposed Ryko Development

4/23/25 Harris County Did NOT Approve Ryko Development

4/18/25 Bald Eagles Live Where Developer Wants to Build 7,000 Homes

4/17/25 MoCo Commissioner Taking Townsen Blvd. Extension Off 2025 Road Bond

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/14/25

3029 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.

Harris County Passes Ramsey Resolution on Scarborough Development In MoCo

12/13/25 – On 12/11/25, Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, PE, introduced a resolution in Harris County Commissioners Court that urges Montgomery County (MoCo) to impose certain conditions on the proposed 5,300-acre Scarborough Development west of Kingwood. Harris County Flood Control tried to buy the property after Hurricane Harvey because they feared that if it got developed, “it would be like aiming a fire hose at Kingwood and Humble.” Ryko, the property owner at the time, quoted a price far over market value. So, the deal fell through. But those fears still exist.

While Harris County can’t force MoCo to do anything, the proposed conditions include:

Adopting Harris County’s proposed minimum drainage standards
Recognizing the extreme flood risk of development for current residents in both counties
Using portions of the property for flood mitigation and parks
Ensuring development meets or exceeds Harris County standards including:
- Finished floor elevations
- Placing mitigation ponds outside the 100-year floodplain and floodway
Fostering growth of wetlands and water filtration.

*Scarborough bought most of the land you see in this picture between Spring Creek (l) and San Jacinto West Fork (r). Base flood elevation at the confluence is 25.1 feet above ground level* *using old, pre-Harvey flood maps.*

Ramsey’s resolution is high-level; most resolutions are. But it makes good points. For instance, while MoCo’s new Drainage Criteria Manual is a vast improvement over their previous one, it still falls short of Harris County’s on several key criteria including finished floor elevations and placing fill in the 500-year floodplain. Those concerns are expressed in the text below.

Exact Text of Harris County Resolution

WHEREAS, Harris County leads the country in flood prevention investments with $3.5 billion being spent on flood mitigation projects in the next few years, and calls upon Montgomery County leadership to adopt the minimum drainage criteria as per the previously approved Harris County Commissioner’s Court document; and

WHEREAS, the land under development in Montgomery County for the Scarborough Lane Project, is situated in close proximity to Spring Creek, Cypress Creek, and the San Jacinto River, and the historical flood data of this tract of land causes concerns for residential development, and any further development on this property in the flood zone may result in a negative impact to current residents of Montgomery and Harris counties; and

WHEREAS, portions of this property should be reviewed and considered for flood mitigation, flood preservation and park development; and

WHEREAS, any development of this parcel should meet or exceed the Harris County standards, including the finish floor elevations of the structure, and any mitigation ponds be considered only outside the current 100-year floodplain and all the floodway; and

WHEREAS, any mitigation completed should consider trying to hold back water early in a storm, detaining the first of the water that falls; and

WHEREAS, this tract of land renders a significant and affordable flood mitigation opportunity that would not only prevent flood damage, but foster wetland growth and ground water filtration; and

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Harris County Commissioners Court calls upon the Montgomery County leadership to take into consideration the concerns described above.

Considerations Related to the Scarborough Lane Project

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this resolution be spread upon the minutes of The Harris County Commissioners Court this 11th day of December 2025.

Ramsey’s Motion Passed Unanimously; Next Up CoH

County Judge Lina Hidalgo, Ramsey and all three other commissioners voted for Ramsey’s resolution. It passed 5-0.

Houston City Council will reportedly consider a similar resolution on Wednesday. District E Council Member Fred Flickinger says he is optimistic that he has the votes to get it approved.

Note that the City actually has a bigger stick in this fight because most of the land lies within the City limits or the City’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). ETJ helps cities plan and regulate development in unincorporated areas near their borders, influencing growth before annexation.

On October 30, Scarborough and its engineers met with the City and Harris County to discuss their plans. At the time, they presented some high-level documents claiming that half the land would be preserved as green space. That’s certainly a step in the right direction. But is it enough? We will be in a better position to tell when we’ve reviewed their complete plans. And when Harris County Flood Control and FEMA release updated flood maps.

In the meantime, I’ll be watching to see what City Council does next Wednesday.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/13/25

3028 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.

Busted: City Shuts Down Developer Filling Floodplain, Floodway

12/11/2025 – This morning, the City of Houston Public Works Department shut down a developer bringing fill dirt into the floodway and floodplain of the San Jacinto West Fork. City regulations prohibit such fill because it raises flood levels for other people and creates a public danger.

Ongoing Issue

I first reported on this problem on 12/9/25, based on a tip from a reader who noticed an unusual amount of dirt on the roads outside the site. Aerial photos showed that the fill operation, which was behind high fences, had been ongoing for quite some time. The fill violates multiple city regulations.

The flood-prone property sits at the corner of Sorters-McClellan and Savell Roads near the US59 Bridge over the San Jacinto West Fork. More aerial photos taken today show multiple large trucks dumping more fill just moments before City inspectors arrived.

*Three trucks were simultaneously offloading dirt in what appeared to be the floodway of the San Jacinto West Fork.*

While the trucks were still dumping, Public Works vehicles sped onto the site. City inspectors and District E City Council Member Fred Flickinger’s Chief of Staff Dustin Hodges jumped out of their vehicles and started taking pictures.

*Three Public Works vehicles entered the site while Houston Police stood guard outside.*

*Hodges and Public Works inspector (left) observe truck leaving site after dumping its load. Note how bed of truck was not even down yet.*

Hodges described the volume of fill dirt as “unbelievable,” “egregious,” “above and beyond.”

*Height of fill was twice as tall as inspector taking pictures on pond’s bank.*

*Fill extends all the way to San Jacinto West Fork and is higher than several small trees.*

Citations for Multiple Issues

The inspectors found multiple violations affecting multiple City departments. They include floodplains, engineering, permitting, plumbing, HVAC and more.

Hodges said that the owners of the property would be fined each day for each violation until the property is returned to its original condition. That means the owners must remove all the dirt that they brought in.

They will incur a new fine for each day for each violation as long as the violations remain.
Dustin Hodges, Council Member Fred Flickinger’s Chief of Staff

The total could be substantial, although it is not clear yet exactly what that will be.

City Will Use LIDAR to Monitor Restoration

The City will use LIDAR studies to make sure the property is properly restored to previous conditions, according to Hodges.

Developer’s Employee Couldn’t Find ID

The owners were not on site, but a representative was. That individual refused to produce a drivers license until the inspectors called in the Houston Police Department, which was standing by across the street. Then, said Hodges, the representative suddenly found his driver’s license.

I deduce from that last bit of information that the employee knew his employer should not have been doing what it was doing.

What City Regulations Say

I hope this story signals to others that it’s not safe to constrict the conveyance of floodwaters and that the City is serious about enforcing its regulations.

*The site is at the confluence of Spring Creek and the West Fork (R) across from Costco and Main Event at top of frame*. *Both businesses flooded badly during Harvey.*

Harris County Flood Warning System records show that this location had the highest flooding in the county during Hurricane Harvey – a whopping 27 feet above the normal water level.

City of Houston regulations prohibit bringing fill dirt into floodways and floodplains. Chapter 19 Div. 2 Sec. 19.34 states:

No fill may be added to a 100-year floodplain.
Any loss of floodplain-storage volume must be mitigated onsite.

Floodways enjoy even more protection. Chapter 19 Div. 3 Sec. 19.43(a-b3) states:

“No floodplain development permit shall be issued for a development to be located in any floodway…”
“The development will not impede the flow of floodwaters.”
“The development will not result in an adverse effect on the conveyance capacity during the occurrence of the base flood.”

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/11/2025

3026 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.

BLC Letter Protests Redefinition of “Waters of the U.S.”

A new definition of “Waters of the U.S.” proposed by the Army Corps and EPA would eliminate the federal brakes on development of upstream wetlands, such as those in the Lake Houston Area and Montgomery County. Time is running out to file a protest letter. Less than a month remains before the close of public comment; the government must receive your letter by January 5, 2026.

I received the Bayou Land Conservancy’s protest letter this morning and am reprinting it here verbatim in case you want to borrow language from it. First, some context.

What’s at Stake?

Romerica swamp — *Wetlands near Lake Houston where Romerica wanted to build a 50-story high rise and now wants to build a luxury resort.*

*Wetlands near confluence of Spring Creek and West Fork being filled by developer*

Immediately across the river…

Scarborough — *A Dallas-based developer is trying to develop 5300 acres laced with wetlands.*

Royal Shores land sold to Ron Holley — *Wetlands near Kings Point and Royal Shores on East Fork above Lake Houston*

The old definition of “Waters of the U.S.” gave the EPA and Army Corps legal authority to protect wetlands far upstream. Wetlands act as nature’s sponges. They soak up floodwater, reducing downstream impacts. They also clean water, reducing filtration costs. And finally, they provide habitat for wildlife that enriches the human experience.

What’s Changing?

The proposed new definition would stop Army Corps and EPA jurisdiction at the first dam on a river. Anything upstream would no longer enjoy federal protection. Local governments often do not regulate development of wetlands; historically they have relied on the federal government to do that.

The regulatory vacuum created by the change would open up millions of acres to development, especially in fast growing areas like north Houston where flood-prone wetlands are cheap and plentiful. Increases in impervious cover in wetland areas that once retained water will likely increase flood risk for everyone living downstream.

Bayou Land Conservancy Letter

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2025-0322

To: Administrator Zeldin, Environmental Protection Agency

Re: Opposition to Updated Definition of Waters of the United States (89 FR 79549, November 20, 2025)

The Bayou Land Conservancy (BLC) submits this comment letter in strong opposition to the updated definition of “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army.

About Bayou Land Conservancy and Our Standing

Bayou Land Conservancy is a community-sponsored land trust working to permanently preserve land along streams for flood control, clean water, and wildlife. As an accredited land trust, we are the primary non-profit organization preserving land within the watersheds that feed into Lake Houston, focusing our efforts on northern Harris and Montgomery counties. Since 1996 BLC has permanently preserved more than 15,000 acres of land in southeast Texas.

BLC has direct standing to comment on this proposed rule because we are not merely observers; we are property interest holders and stewards of the very landscapes this rule affects. We hold perpetual conservation easements and own fee-simple land throughout this region. Our legal obligation is to protect the conservation values of these properties in perpetuity.

Because water flows downhill, the integrity of the lands we protect is inextricably linked to the regulatory status of the waters flowing through and above them. If the definition of WOTUS is narrowed to exclude ephemeral streams and adjacent wetlands, the conservation values we are legally bound to uphold, specifically water quality maintenance and flood storage, are put at direct risk by upstream unregulated activity. Therefore, BLC submits these comments as a directly affected stakeholder whose ability to fulfill its non-profit mission is threatened by the proposed reduction in federal jurisdiction.

The Critical Importance of the Lake Houston Watershed

The Lake Houston watershed is not merely an ecological region; it is a vital piece of the Houston-Galveston metropolitan area’s public infrastructure. Lake Houston is the largest single source of surface drinking water for the City of Houston. Protecting the quality and quantity of water flowing into this reservoir is a non-negotiable imperative for public health and economic stability for millions of residents.

Our area is defined by some of the fastest-growing communities in the nation, including The Woodlands, Conroe, Tomball, and Kingwood. This rapid urbanization creates immense pressure on the natural systems, increasing runoff, sedimentation, and pollutant loads. The Clean Water Act applied broadly is essential to mitigate these impacts.

Hydrological Features at Risk

The proposed updated definition, if finalized, risks removing federal protections from essential water features that are demonstrably connected to Lake Houston and its major tributaries. A narrow definition that excludes ephemeral streams or wetlands without a continuous surface connection ignores the scientific reality of our region’s hydrology.

Specific features at risk in our area include:

The San Jacinto River System (West Fork and East Fork):

As the primary artery feeding Lake Houston, the San Jacinto River relies heavily on a vast network of headwater streams. In Montgomery County, many of these headwaters are ephemeral, flowing only after our region’s intense rain events. If these “temporary” streams lose protection, they become prime targets for development-related filling. This would sever the hydrological connection that sustains the river’s base flow and water quality, turning the San Jacinto into little more than a conveyance channel for untreated stormwater.

Spring Creek:

Serving as the natural border between Harris and Montgomery counties, Spring Creek is one of the most pristine waterways remaining in the region. Its sandy banks and associated wetlands act as a massive filtration system. However, the health of Spring Creek is dependent on the lateral connectivity of adjacent wetlands that may not have a “continuous surface connection” year-round. Excluding these adjacent wetlands from WOTUS protection would allow for their destruction, leading to immediate sedimentation of the creek, choking off aquatic life and destroying the recreational value of the Spring Creek Greenway.

Lake Creek:

This major tributary flows into the West Fork of the San Jacinto River and drains a rapidly developing portion of Montgomery County. The watershed is characterized by “flashy” hydrology; it rises and falls quickly. The wetlands surrounding Lake Creek are critical for slowing this water down. Removing protection from the smaller, non-perennial feeders of Lake Creek will eliminate the natural braking system for floodwaters, increasing the velocity and height of flood peaks downstream in densely populated areas.

Palmetto and Bottomland Hardwood Wetlands:

Our region is home to unique forested wetlands that may be separated from the main channel by natural berms or levees. Under a restricted WOTUS definition, these vital flood-storage basins could be deemed “isolated” and paved over. This would result in a direct transfer of flood volume from undeveloped land into the living rooms of downstream residents.

Additionally, three important factors should also be considered in noting BLC’s opposition to this proposal:

Drinking Water Quality

Unprotected upstream wetlands and tributaries will be subject to increased filling, dredging, and chemical/sediment runoff from development, industrial activity, and agriculture. This degradation will lead to a marked decrease in water quality in Lake Houston, requiring exponentially higher treatment costs for the City of Houston and increasing the risk of contamination.

Flood Mitigation

The wetlands and ephemeral stream systems BLC works to protect act as natural sponges, reducing the velocity and volume of stormwater during increasingly frequent high-intensity rain events. Stripping WOTUS protection from these features will allow for their unmitigated destruction, directly exacerbating the already severe and costly flooding issues in northern Harris and Montgomery counties. Protecting these small, non-perennial waters is directly linked to the safety and resilience of downstream communities like Kingwood and Humble.

Conservation Mission

A narrower WOTUS definition undermines the BLC’s mission, and the conservation investments made by public and private partners across the watershed. If the federal backstop of the Clean Water Act is removed from key headwater systems, state and local regulations will be insufficient to protect the water quality and flood storage capacity essential for this rapidly expanding region.

Conclusion and Request

The BLC respectfully urges the EPA and the Department of the Army to reconsider the updated definition of WOTUS and adopt a definition that robustly protects the waters of the United States, including all tributaries and adjacent wetlands that have a significant nexus to navigable waters. For the Lake Houston watershed, a narrow interpretation of WOTUS threatens the largest source of drinking water for the City of Houston, jeopardizes our communities’ flood resilience, and contravenes the fundamental goals of the Clean Water Act.

We urge the agencies to maintain comprehensive jurisdiction over all features that provide filtration and flood control benefits to downstream communities and critical public drinking water sources.
Sincerely,

Signed,

Jill Boullion

Executive Director

Bayou Land Conservancy

Please Help

Every voice counts. Make sure the government hears yours. Please compose a letter protesting the proposed changes to the definition of “Waters of the U.S.” This post that I wrote in November contains more background on the issue.

You can find the government’s proposed changes to the definition’s wording here.

As of this writing, 9,221 people have submitted public comments.

You can submit public comments to The Army Corps here. Or the EPA here.

Please feel free to write your own comment or adapt language from the letter above. But do it NOW. And get your friends and neighbors to do it too! Perhaps nothing you can personally do will have a greater impact on your safety and the safety of your home or business in the next flood.

If this proposed definition is adopted as is, it will make it easier for developers like the one I posted about yesterday to fill in wetlands near rivers and streams.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/10/2025

3025 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Developer Bringing Fill Dirt into West Fork Floodway, Floodplain

12/9/25 – City of Houston regulations prohibit bringing fill dirt into floodways and floodplains. Chapter 19 Div. 2 Sec. 19.34 states:

No fill may be added to a 100-year floodplain.
Any loss of floodplain-storage volume must be mitigated onsite.

Floodways enjoy even more protection. Chapter 19 Div. 3 Sec. 19.43(a-b3) states:

“No floodplain development permit shall be issued for a development to be located in any floodway…”
“The development will not impede the flow of floodwaters.”
“The development will not result in an adverse effect on the conveyance capacity during the occurrence of the base flood.”

And yet this morning, within the space of a half hour, I observed six giant dump trucks bringing fill to a construction site at Sorters-McClellan and Savell Roads near the US59 bridge over the San Jacinto West Fork. The entire site sits in a floodway or floodplain.

The six trucks I witnessed today were reportedly part of a parade of dump trucks during the last few weeks. Photos taken this morning and on Sunday, December 7, 2025 show large volumes of fill in both the floodway and floodplain.

Rationale for Regulations

Regulations prohibit bringing fill into floodways and floodplains because it raises floodwater for someone else, creates dangerous conditions, and jeopardizes public safety.

The irregularly shaped area is approximately 20 acres near the confluence of Spring Creek and the San Jacinto West Fork.

New Development by 59 and West Fork — *Approximate location of new project is in yellow outline. The area is approximately 20 acres.*

It’s not clear what the owner plans to build there. No permits were visible from the road.

FEMA’s Flood Hazard Layer Viewer shows that this area lies ENTIRELY WITHIN floodways and floodplains. See below.

*Floodway = crosshatched. 100-year floodplain = aqua. 500-year = brown. Note date on map: 2014: is pre-Harvey.*

Expect Worse Picture When Maps Updated

When new flood maps are finally released based on Atlas-14 data compiled after Harvey, those floodplain and floodway areas will reportedly expand 50-100%. As a rule of thumb, Harris County Flood Control District urges developers to plan on the floodway expanding to the far edge of the 100-year floodplain and the 100-year floodplain expanding to the far edge of the 500-year floodplain.

Pictures of Site Showing Fill

Below are a dozen pictures that show the extent and height of fill brought into the construction site, and how flood prone the area is.

*Note hight of fill next to channel in center. Also note piles of fill left of center and bottom right of center. San Jacinto West Fork is at top of frame and runs under the US59 bridge, top left.*

*Fill extends all the way to the confluence of Spring Creek and West Fork (top right).*

*Where the development reaches the West Fork (lower left). Note height of fill at river’s edge.*

*Higher on the property, near where the floodway and floodplain meet, a parade of massive dump trucks was bringing in fill today.*

*As one truck was pulling in, two more dumped their loads.*

*Note height of fill relative to trees on left.*

*A bulldozer could not keep up with the trucks depositing their dirt.*

*Note previous loads in foreground still waiting to be spread.*

*Photo taken on Sunday 12/7/25 shows height of fill relative to surrounding area. Erosion shows fill in this area has been there for some time.*

*Site entrance at Sorters McClellan and Savell Roads.*

*Homes damaged in same area during previous floods. See next photo.*

*Same area as above. Photo taken on 1/30/23 before peak of minor flood. Note site entrance in upper right.*

*Same area on 1/25/24. Water came up even higher on this day.*

*Three months later on May 3, 2024, floodwater reached higher* *still.*

Entire Area Inundated During Harvey

Google Earth images show that Harvey inundated the ENTIRE area far BEYOND the site entrance.

I’d hate to be the engineers that approved this project. What were they thinking? Will people never learn?

Plopping thousands of cubic yards of fill dirt here will just make floodwater higher somewhere else. Like Deerbook Mall. The new West Fork High School. Lone Star College. Kingwood Hospital. Benders Landing. Or the 59 Bridge. Remember what finding alternatives to the 59 Bridge was like after Harvey?

I-69 repairs — *TxDoT rebuilt I-69 southbound lanes for almost a year while residents endured massive traffic jams.*

This may be the last place in Houston that you want to raise floodwaters.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/9/2025

3024 Days since 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.

Northpark Update: Drainage on Both Sides of UPRR Tracks Finally Connected

12/6/25 – Northpark Drive expansion contractors started boring underneath Union-Pacific Railroad Tracks on 5/17/25. Yesterday, they finally connected the drainage networks on both sides – an early Christmas present for the project team. It also represents a major project milestone in the quest to build an all-weather evacuation route for Kingwood.

Pictures of Final East/West Connections under Tracks

This morning, Project Manager, Ralph De Leon sent me pictures taken earlier on Thursday.

*Culvert sections creeping toward junction box (right). A concrete/sand mixture surrounds the sections to lock them in place.*

Northpark — *Wider shot shows culvert’s entry point into junction box.*

*Workers place plywood across the entry, then…*

*Contractors finally removed the retaining walls that kept workers safe in the pits.*

How Bore Pits Looked Today

By the time I got there today with my drone, contractors had completely filled one bore pit and mostly filled the second!

*Pit between tracks and Loop 494 filled!*

According to De Leon, even though contractors have completed the east/west drainage, they must still connect the junction boxes to 8′ x 8′ culverts that branch north on both sides of the tracks.

One branch will collect stormwater from Loop 494 shown above.

*Pit east of tracks was mostly filled in today. But note excavator digging an additional trench north (right) of pit.*

The second will convey part of the stormwater that goes under the tracks to the north behind Extra Space Storage, Public Storage and Dunkin’ Donuts. See above. That water will use a ditch that connects with Bens Branch and the Kingwood Diversion Ditch near the Fireworks Stand.

*Trench (r) will connect the junction box to culverts already buried behind storage businesses.*

The rest of the stormwater from the junction box will use culverts already buried down the middle of Northpark. Contractors have already made and buried that connection, according to De Leon.

Up Next Elsewhere on Northpark

According to the Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority website, after tying into the drainage ditch that goes behind the storage businesses, the large storm sewer crew will move across the tracks and tie in the Loop 494 drainage to the western junction box.

They will then begin working on the east side of the tracks from the Anderson Rd to Northpark Christian Church where the paving has been poured setting the curb inlet tops and extensions.

Another crew will also work east of the tracks from Northpark Christian Church to Advanced Auto, setting the curb inlet tops and extensions.

On Monday December 15^th, they will move to the corner of LP 494 and Northpark in front of the Dry Cleaners to set the sanitary sewer manhole cone and top.

The dirt crew will begin backfilling and grading behind the curbs on both east- and westbound Northpark east of the railroad tracks.

The concrete paving crews will pour from Anderson Rd. towards the Dairy Queen driveway. They will then move to westbound Northpark and pave from Sun Auto to Quick Quack/Sherwin Williams.

The driveway crew will continue working on the remaining 4 driveways on westbound Northpark near Northpark Christian Church. They will then return to working on the sidewalk from Northpark Christian Church to the east end of the project at Advanced Auto.

For More Information and a Timetable

See the Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority Website and their three-week lookahead schedule.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/6/2025

3021 Days Since Hurricane Harvey

Engineering Contracts Announced for Largest Coastal Protection Effort in U.S. History

12/5/25 – The Gulf Coast Protection District (GCPD) and Texas General Land Office (GLO) announced yesterday the approval of two engineering design contracts for the largest coastal protection effort in the history of the United States – the Coastal Texas Project.

The two contracts represent a milestone in moving this historic initiative toward construction. Each contract covers a major component of the larger project.

Part I: Galveston Bay Barrier System

The Galveston Bay Barrier System (aka the “Ike Dike”) represents the largest element of the Coastal Texas Project. It accounts for 85 percent of the $35 billion estimated cost.

HDR won engineering design for Beaches and Dunes (Bolivar and West Galveston Beach and Dune System). Goal: ecosystem restoration to strengthen natural coastal barriers along the Bolivar Peninsula and West Galveston Island.

The Beaches and Dunes features will move into design first.

Part II: Bolivar Roads Gate System

The second element: the largest flood gate system in the world. Jacobs won the engineering design of The Gate (Bolivar Roads Gate System). It will span a two-mile-wide waterway between Galveston Island and Bolivar Peninsula.

Remember Ike

Those who lived in Houston in 2008 will likely never forget Hurricane Ike. It began as a Category 4 storm 800 miles wide. And it made landfall along the upper Texas Coast as a high end Category 2. The eye came right up Galveston Bay and crossed the Lake Houston Area. It pushed 15-20 feet of storm surge inland in Chambers County almost as far north as I-10.

Surge traveled deep inland through Galveston Bay, Clear Lake, and the Houston Ship Channel, flooding industrial sites and neighborhoods as far north as Baytown. Also, Ike spawned 29 tornadoes.

Luckily, the world’s largest petrochemical complex was on the dry side of the storm. West of the eye, winds pushed water back out to sea. Therefore, surge was lower.

Had Ike made landfall, a few miles farther west, the story could have been much different.

Importance of Projects

“We can no longer wait to implement this long-term resiliency strategy, aimed at safeguarding the largest port and petrochemical complex in the nation,” said GLO Commissioner, Dawn Buckingham, M.D.

“The State of Texas has appropriated nearly $1 billion to the Gulf Coast Protection District to advance projects offering multiple lines of defense to reduce the risk of coastal storm surges. With President Trump leading the way, I am confident our federal leaders will follow suit and fully fund the Coastal Texas Project, ensuring our national assets are protected from the threat of devastating storms.”

“These contracts are important because they move two major features of the Coastal Texas Project into design. Once designed, we can finally realize the full magnitude of these ideas and further engage local communities with details, not concepts,” said Coalter Baker, Executive Director, Gulf Coast Protection District.

Bolivar after Ike — *Destruction on Bolivar Peninsula After Hurricane Ike. Scouring literally ripped streets and storm sewers out of the ground.*

About the Gulf Coast Protection District

In 2021, the 87th Texas Legislature established The Gulf Coast Protection District (GCPD). Its purpose? To lead a unified and comprehensive coastal resilience strategy for the upper Texas coast. As the non-Federal sponsor for major elements of the Coastal Texas Project and the Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay Project, GCPD plays a pivotal role in delivering large-scale storm surge protection and coastal restoration.

Responsible for safeguarding approximately 5,220 square miles across five counties, GCPD leads the largest coastal protection initiative in U.S. history. For more information, visit the GCPD website.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/5/25

3020 Days since Harvey and 17 years, 3 months since Ike.