Who's filing rezonings in Houston
Every petitioner name recorded on two or more cases in our Houston archive, ranked by volume. Names are listed exactly as the packets record them, so one firm can appear under several spellings — the firm alone, a named engineer at the firm, or the firm on behalf of a client — each with its own count. Counts are per recorded name and are not combined. Click a name to see the filings recorded under it; the search below matches across hyphens, spaces and capitalisation.
Tracking a specific name? P&Z Radar can alert you when they file again, as the packet naming them is captured — add them as a keyword on your filters. Start a free trial.
See also: Houston activity trends — volume by month, case types, and the most active cities.
Watch how to use applicant history · 2:41
How to read a filing history, check similar names against the individual cases, and decide what your team should follow.
Recorded September 2026 using historical records; the site may have changed since. Not a live feed.
Read the transcript
Once you have explored individual cases, the next question is how to follow the activity that matters to your team. You may care about a particular applicant, a corridor or a few cities. P&Z Radar’s public archive can help you define that focus. Let’s look at applicant history and market activity, then review the monitoring options without turning every filing into an inbox distraction.
The petitioner index groups names found in the collected cases. Open one and you can review its recorded filings, cities and dates. This is useful background when researching who is active in a market. Treat the name as it appears in the record, and check the individual cases before assuming two similar names are the same organization. A filing history is research material, not proof that someone is currently buying your service.
Next, look at trends. The charts summarize the archive by scheduled hearing month, case type and geography. They can help you decide where to investigate next, but they are not a count of completed construction or final approvals. Changes can also reflect what was captured in the archive. Use the chart to form a question, then move back to individual records and sources to answer it.
Now define what your team actually needs to follow. One city, a county and a whole metro are different research scopes. Review the available coverage before choosing one. The product describes matching alerts and keyword filters; the public trial gives you a way to evaluate the data in a city. Start narrowly enough that you can read what arrives and judge whether the matches are relevant.
For a team workflow, review how the information is delivered. The site describes email and private RSS options, with API access on the eligible plans. Developers should check the documented host, authentication and limits before connecting a system. Keep private feed links and API keys private. An integration is only useful when it brings the right records into a place your team actually checks and preserves a link back to the source.
For your first week, choose one market, a small set of research questions and a simple way to review the results. Use applicant history to understand context, trends to spot areas worth investigating, and the original packets to check important details. Then evaluate whether ongoing monitoring earns a place in your routine. Start with the public archive and coverage page, and move into a trial when the records look relevant to your work.
P&Z Radar AI agent · Expand
Hi, I’m Pip. How can I help?