Community map + project status · September 7, 2026
Cedar Creek’s next chapter is still being decided
See the community around the proposed development, the decisions still ahead, and the actions residents have already taken.
Cedar Creek is already a community.
Explore the proposed development alongside nearby homes, schools and other places that matter. Select “Show local opposition” on the map to see anonymous community totals.
The opposition feature collects no names. Exact supporter addresses are never displayed publicly; counts appear in fixed, broad areas. Email confirmation and organizer review are required.
Add your opposition to the mapOpen the full map and current supporter count → · Joining the map is separate from making a submission to a government agency.
There are still consequential decisions ahead.
Pacifico’s air registration remains pending. Aqua’s September 1 vote moved its water request into agreement negotiations. After visiting the County Clerk’s office on September 3, an LPW volunteer reported that Wallace still owned the property and the clerk was unaware of a sale. Construction-stormwater coverage is already active.
The matrix below shows those different stages, the residents’ formal challenges, and the growing participation record. A quieter news week is still a useful time to follow the decisions and make the community visible.
Where the project stands
Site preparation, construction of generating units, water service and operation are different stages. These steps can overlap; a single approval does not settle the entire project.
| Step or issue | What the record shows | Why it matters | What comes next |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land purchase and site control | No sale known to clerk · Sept. 3 After an afternoon visit to the County Clerk’s office, an LPW volunteer reported that Wallace still owned the property and the clerk was unaware of a sale. The main parcel’s appraisal record also still listed Wallace when checked September 7. Volunteer report: Sept. 3 · Appraisal check: Sept. 7, 2026 | Ownership and authority to use the land. The county also allows an authorized owner’s agent to apply for permits. | A fresh clerk/deed-index check for any transfer since September 3, and any disclosed site-control document. |
| County development, grading and drainage | Issued status and scope unverified These steps appear in the applicant’s earlier permit list. That June filing does not establish which permits have since been issued or what work they cover. Verification gap identified Sept. 7, 2026 | Covered land-disturbing work, including grading, excavation and fill. | Issued permits, approved plans, conditions and phase boundaries for each project. |
| Construction stormwater | Both authorizations active TCEQ lists Black Chamber’s TXR1551YV and Pacifico’s TXR1565YW as active. Residents’ challenges are tracked separately below. Registry checked Sept. 7, 2026 | Stormwater discharges associated with construction under the applicable general permit. This covers one part of the project’s requirements. | Coverage changes, compliance records and any order affecting the authorizations. |
| Pacifico air authorization | Pending Registration 185019 / Project 413471 still shows pending permit and action status. TCEQ checked Sept. 7, 2026 | This generating-unit standard permit requires written TCEQ approval before construction or operation of the generating units. | A signed approval or other formal disposition, the approved equipment scope and enforceable conditions. |
| Aqua water-service agreement | Negotiations authorized LPW reported that the September 1 item passed. A completed Non-Standard Service Agreement has not been independently confirmed. Approved September minutes are not yet posted. Vote: Sept. 1 · Aqua records checked Sept. 7, 2026 | Final service terms, capacity commitments and required infrastructure; a service milestone with its own conditions. | The final agreement, its approval record and binding service conditions. |
| Wastewater / on-site sewage | Current authorization unverified On-site sewage facilities appear in the applicant’s earlier permit list. The applicable authorization and its current scope need reconciliation. Verification gap identified Sept. 7, 2026 | The approved wastewater system and its installation and use conditions. | The issued authorization, approved design and required inspections. |
| Fire-service coordination | Applicable ESD letter unverified The applicable emergency-services-district letter was not independently verified in this review. Verification gap identified Sept. 7, 2026 | The county’s commercial development requirements include an applicable ESD letter for permit issuance. | The ESD letter and associated fire-protection plans or conditions. |
| Road access and rights of way | Applicable approvals unverified County and TxDOT access/ROW items appear in the applicant’s earlier permit list; current approvals need verification. Verification gap identified Sept. 7, 2026 | Access and affected road or right-of-way work. The responsible authority depends on the final route. | Approved driveway/access plans, relevant ROW permits and conditions. |
It does not mean a permit is absent or denied. In particular, pending air authorization for the generating units does not establish that every kind of preparatory work is prohibited.
Other requirements depend on the final design
The applicant’s earlier permit list describes a groundwater-district permit as conditional on using on-site groundwater. Wetlands, habitat, easements and utility connections should be tracked when their applicability is established. Tax incentives, financing and investment decisions are separate commercial or financial milestones.
What we know about land ownership
On the afternoon of September 3, 2026, an LPW volunteer visited the Bastrop County Clerk’s office and reported: The property has not changed hands. Wallace still owns it.
The volunteer’s account also relayed that the clerk confirmed being unaware of a sale at that time.
Source: LPW volunteer’s report of the September 3 visit. This is the volunteer’s wording; the volunteer is not named here.
The main parcel’s appraisal entry separately still listed Wallace when checked September 7. The clerk report describes what was known on September 3; a later transfer would require a fresh check.
Two households challenged the stormwater authorizations.
Two neighboring landowner households raised drainage, hydrology and runoff concerns in separate motions asking TCEQ to overturn the authorizations. These are administrative challenges; a separate court lawsuit has not been verified in this review.
| Step or issue | What the record shows | Why it matters | What comes next |
|---|---|---|---|
| First household’s stormwater challenge | Filed · disposition unverified One neighboring landowner household filed a motion July 20, raising drainage, hydrology and runoff concerns. Filed July 20 · Docket checked Sept. 7, 2026 | An administrative request for TCEQ review of the construction-stormwater authorizations. | The applicable notice, any extension and the motion’s disposition. |
| Second household’s stormwater challenge | Filed · disposition unverified Another neighboring landowner household filed a separate motion July 20 concerning the stormwater authorizations and drainage/runoff impacts. Filed July 20 · Docket checked Sept. 7, 2026 | A second household’s administrative challenge. A separate court lawsuit has not been verified in this review. | The applicable notice, any extension and the motion’s disposition. |
| Stay or suspension | No stay established by this review Both stormwater authorizations remain listed as active. The docket page reviewed does not establish an order suspending them. Registry checked Sept. 7, 2026 | A motion does not itself suspend an authorization. An express Commission order would be consequential. | Any order changing the authorizations’ effect. |
Why “filed” does not establish that a motion is still pending
TCEQ lists two July 20 motion documents under Item 147527 / Docket 2026-0805-WQ, associated with Pacifico’s TXR1565YW. LPW’s earlier review reports that the amended filings seek review and a stay of both that authorization and Black Chamber’s TXR1551YV.
Under §50.139, a motion can be denied automatically if the Commission does not act within the applicable period. The ordinary 45-day period runs from the agency’s mailing of notice of its action; an extension can change that deadline. A filing remaining visible does not establish that the motion is still pending. The mailing dates, any extensions and the disposition need to be checked.
Residents are continuing to speak up.
TCEQ’s displayed categories for Air Registration 185019 / Item 147965, checked September 7, 2026. Changes are compared with LPW’s September 3 update.
Public-meeting requests
+2 since September 3Requests recorded by TCEQ; a meeting notice is a separate milestone.
Written comments
+3 since September 3The category alone does not establish a comment’s position on the proposal.
Hearing requests
Unchanged since September 3Requests recorded; the count does not establish that hearings have been granted.
9 entries await classification. TCEQ labels them “To Be Determined.”
A meeting or hearing decision is a separate milestone. The registration page checked shows no public-meeting entry or hearing-grant action.
These are not unique-person or verified-opposition totals. A person can participate more than once or through several routes. We do not add the TCEQ categories, stormwater motions and map supporters into one opposition count. The registry categories also do not identify how many submissions arrived through eComments.
Find the source records in TCEQ’s registry
Start at TCEQ Central Registry, search RN102987831, and select 185019 for air-registration participation or TXR1565YW for the stormwater challenge. The air counts appear under “Protestant Information.”
Direct air-participation record ↗
Direct stormwater docket ↗
Use the registry entry point if a direct link does not open.
Put your opposition on the map.
Add yourself, share the map with a neighbor, and keep following the specific decisions above. The pending air decision and unresolved public record justify continued participation; the project’s ultimate outcome remains undecided.
This is a dated status snapshot. Each row identifies its evidence date and the next document to watch.