Due Diligence & Feasibility Studies
CASE STUDIES
Due Diligence & Feasibility Studies
Feasibility Study 1 — HWY 6 Mixed-Use / Apartment Site, Manvel, TX
A developer was evaluating a floodplain site on HWY 6 in Manvel, Texas for a proposed apartment and mixed-use development. The site required City of Manvel and drainage district approval. Before committing to the acquisition, the developer engaged JRH Engineering to assess whether the development program could actually be built.
What JRH found
The floodplain mitigation requirements on this site were extensive. After modeling the fill and compensation storage needed to bring the development pads above the base flood elevation, JRH determined that the mitigation footprint would consume so much of the site that the apartment and mixed-use program could not be built at a density that made the project financially viable.
The recommendation
Do not purchase.
The outcome
The developer avoided a costly land acquisition on a site that could not support the intended development program. Speed of due diligence is as valuable as speed of design — knowing the answer before closing is worth more than any engineering fee.
Feasibility Study 2 — HWY 6 Industrial Laydown Yard, Brazoria County, TX
A developer was evaluating a floodplain parcel adjacent to an existing industrial site in Brazoria County for potential expansion as a laydown yard. The site appeared to offer straightforward industrial use adjacent to existing operations.
What JRH found
The site had inadequate drainage and sat in the floodplain. A rapid detention sizing analysis showed that the required detention pond would consume so much of the usable area that the effective net acreage available for laydown operations would not justify the acquisition price.
The recommendation
Do not purchase.
The outcome
The developer preserved capital that would have been spent on a site that could not deliver the usable area the operation required. A fast, clear answer before closing protected the client investment.
Feasibility Study 3 — Restaurant Pad Site, Fuqua, Houston, TX
A developer was evaluating a pad site in front of a major retail center on Fuqua in Houston for a fast-food restaurant development. The listing stated that detention was already provided by the retail center — a common representation on pad site listings that is not always accurate under updated criteria.
What JRH found
The listing detention claim was outdated. Updated City of Houston criteria now require 100-year storm conveyance to the detention pond — a standard the existing retail center storm sewer system did not meet. Bringing the conveyance system up to current standards would require rebuilding the entire existing storm sewer infrastructure at a cost that far exceeded the value of the pad site.
The recommendation
Do not purchase.
The outcome
The developer avoided a pad site that appeared shovel-ready but would have required a complete storm sewer rebuild to permit. The detention-already-provided representation in the listing was technically true under old criteria and practically false under current standards.
Feasibility Study 4 — Restaurant Pad Site, Will Clayton Pkwy,
Humble, TX
A developer was evaluating a pad site in front of a major retail center on Will Clayton Pkwy in Humble for a fast-food restaurant — a similar scenario to the Fuqua site.
What JRH found
The same issue. The listing claimed detention was provided, but updated City of Houston criteria require full 100-year storm conveyance to the detention facility. The existing storm sewer system did not meet the current standard, and rebuilding it to comply would cost more than the pad was worth.
The recommendation
Do not purchase.
The outcome
A second pad site with the same hidden deficiency identified before purchase. Two clients saved from the same category of listing misrepresentation — outdated detention claims that no longer satisfy current City of Houston drainage criteria.
Feasibility Study 5 — Office Warehouse Site, La Marque, TX
A developer was evaluating a La Marque, Texas property for an office warehouse development. The location was desirable — good access, strong market — and the site appeared viable on initial review.
What JRH found
Floodplain mitigation requirements would consume too much of the site to support a viable development footprint. After accounting for the fill, compensatory storage, and detention requirements, the net buildable area was insufficient to support the office warehouse program at a density that made the investment worthwhile.
The recommendation
Do not purchase.
The outcome
The developer redirected their search to a viable site rather than closing on a property where the development math did not work. A clear answer delivered quickly is the most valuable output of a pre-purchase feasibility study.
Feasibility Study 6 — Whiskey Distillery Site, FM 1322, Lockhart, TX
A developer was evaluating a site near Lockhart, Texas for a whiskey distillery expansion requiring City of Lockhart, Caldwell County, and TxDOT permits. The permitting path appeared workable and the location had appeal for a distillery operation.
What JRH found
The permitting path was workable. But a utility feasibility check revealed a critical infrastructure gap: natural gas was not available at the site and could not be extended at a reasonable cost. Whiskey distillery operations depend heavily on natural gas for the distillation process — without it, the facility could not operate as intended.
The recommendation
Do not purchase.
The outcome
The developer avoided a site where the permitting was achievable but the operations were not. A rapid utility feasibility check — often overlooked in due diligence focused exclusively on permitting — identified the fundamental deal-breaker before the acquisition closed.