HOUSTON - The First Court of Appeals today concluded that a trial court erred in denying the city of Houston’s plea to the jurisdiction in an inverse condemnation lawsuit.
On April 27, 2018, The Commons of Lake Houston sued the city, alleging that the application of the amended floodplain ordinance to its property would substantially damage the market value of its property and that the current development plan would be unfeasible, according to the First Court’s opinion.
In the wake of Hurricane Harvey, the city passed Ordinance No. 2018-258 (the 2018 Floodplain Ordinance) to amend its existing floodplain development ordinance.
Court records show a trial court denied the city’s plea to the jurisdiction. The city appealed, arguing that the trial court erred because The Commons’ takings claim is barred by governmental immunity and is not ripe for adjudication.
The city further argued that the 2018 Floodplain Ordinance’s elevation requirements cannot constitute a taking, the opinion states.
The First Court found that because reasonable minds could conclude that the amended ordinance’s elevation requirements are substantially related to the health, safety, or general welfare of the citizens and are reasonable, the 2018 Floodplain Ordinance “must stand as a valid exercise of the city’s police power” and does not constitute a taking.
“Because the Commons’ regulatory takings claim is barred by governmental immunity, the trial court erred in denying the City’s plea to the jurisdiction,” the opinion states. “We reverse the trial court’s order denying the City’s plea to the jurisdiction and render judgment dismissing The Commons’ claims for want of subject matter jurisdiction.”
Case No. 01-21-00369-CV