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 Office and Harris County 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

District E Council Member Fred Flickinger 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.

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:

• 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.

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.

The post New Plans to Develop 5,316 Acres West of Kingwood Mostly in Floodplains, Floodways appeared first on Reduce Flooding.