Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Floodplain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents warn rezoning could worsen Marys Creek flood risk; developer cites mitigation
Summary
Residents during the April 16 Benbrook council hearing said development along Marys Creek would increase flood risk and urged adherence to the comprehensive plan; the applicant and landowner said engineered flood-reclamation and embankment work could reduce the number of homes in the floodplain.
Get email alerts on the Floodplain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents at the Benbrook City Council public hearing urged council members to honor the city's comprehensive plan and existing ordinance protections for the Marys Creek watershed.
"Until effective mitigation occurs, let's continue to follow our comprehensive plan," resident Audra Andrews said, adding that mitigation "must occur, but not by a developer for self gain." Andrews said she and her husband own a home in the Marys Creek floodway and cited thousands of petition signatures opposing the rezoning. Greg Clem, a neighborhood resident, described prior alleged illegal dumping and long-running neighborhood impacts including dust and 4:30 a.m. work starts.
The applicant and landowner countered that engineered mitigation can reduce flood exposure. Ron Ramirez told council the project includes a flood study prepared by professional engineers and an "embankment project" coordinated with Fort Worth that, he said, can "pull homes out of the floodplain." Landowner Corey Waldrop said his team had invested millions in due diligence and asserted the proposal responds to neighborhood concerns with increased buffers, setbacks and green space.
Transcript exchanges included technical references to FEMA flow figures and engineering models; at one point a participant stated a change in modeled flows and cited a figure increase in modeled confluence flows. Planning staff emphasized that technical flood studies and formal approvals are required before development and that regulatory limits in Ordinance 14-90 influence what can proceed without a full PD amendment.
The council ultimately voted to deny the rezoning application; the denial means the city's current PD regulations and Ordinance 14-90 remain the controlling documents for Area 2 and any future mitigation work or development proposals would need to comply with existing ordinance requirements and the formal rezoning process.
