3/27/26 – On 3/26/26, the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) board heard the results of a feasibility study about creating “dry-bottom dams” on Birch and Walnut Creeks. The creeks are far upstream in the Spring Creek watershed in Waller County and were being studied for flood-mitigation benefits.
The board made no decision in the meeting on whether to pursue recommendations from the study. However, they did agree to discuss several issues with study partners. Other sponsors included the City of Humble, Harris County Flood Control District and five municipal utility districts in Harris and Montgomery Counties.
Chief among the concerns discussed:
Whether funding is available given low Benefit-Cost Ratios (BCR)
Whether land is still available to build the projects
Finding a party that could take “ownership” the projects.
But before the presentation even started, Kaaren Cambio, a former director, laid down a fiery challenge to the board. Let’s look at the study first. It will provide a context for Cambio.
Benefit/Cost Ratio Concerns
Matt Barrett, PE, SJRA’s Water Resources and Flood Management Division Director, gave a presentation that summarized the results of the 661-page feasibility study.
The feasibility study came out of the larger San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan study which identified 16 projects costing approximately $3 billion in a 3000 square mile area upstream from Lake Houston.
Birch Creek had an estimated BCR of .55 to .83. That means costs exceeded benefits by almost as much as 2 to 1.
Walnut Creek had an estimated BCR of .77 to 1.04. In the best case scenario, benefits barely exceeded costs.
See estimated BCRs in blue boxes.
Only when you include “social benefits” do total benefits exceed costs. (See more on that below.)
Design and Operation
Barrett identified the construction as something akin to detention basins. The dams would feature a long barrier that trapped water with a small opening that let water out at a slow rate.
He next described how such construction would work in four different scenarios.
On a sunny day with no rain, water in the creeks would simply pass through them unobstructed.In a small storm, not likely to cause flooding, water would still pass through the opening unobstructed.But in a moderate storm that could cause minor flooding, water would pool behind the dam faster than it could go through.In a major storm, water would also pass over the spillway at the top of the dam.
Barrett then talked about the exact locations of the dams, their widths, and land-use conflicts. The latter include a solar farm and new developments in the project footprints.
Benefits of Project(s)
Next, Barrett addressed the flood reduction benefits of the two dams in 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year storms.
He discussed the benefits of both dams together and individually. Below are the combined benefits of both dams.
They produce benefits measured in feet upstream and inches downstream.
Upstream, near the dams, the benefits exceed 3 to 4 feet. But downstream, near the confluence with the West Fork at the US59 bridge, benefits would only be 3 to 4 inches. That’s because the dams have a large effect on the small watersheds they directly control. But they exert no influence over the rest of the San Jacinto River Basin draining to that point.
Location of Structures Benefitted
The study found that more structures in Montgomery County Precinct 3 would benefit than anywhere else – by a factor of almost 4X compared to other jurisdictions.
Social Benefits Needed to Justify Funding
Near the end, Barrett showed what happens to the BCRs if you include “social benefits,” such as time lost from work during and after a flood. When you factor those in, the benefits exceed costs. However, Barrett also pointed out that as of 2025, the federal government no longer allows social benefits in BCR calculations.
Regardless, he says that the Texas Water Development Board still recognizes social benefits and that some funding could potentially come from them. But the cost of the dams would comprise a huge percentage of the state’s entire Flood Infrastructure Fund.
Significantly, while Barrett addressed the BCR, he did not call out total current costs. He did mention 2020 costs of $200 million in his narration. But total current estimates from the study put the cost at $298 million. And even $298 million assumes property can be acquired at market rates.
Conclusions
Barrett’s concluding slide focused on the challenges ahead based on the findings of his feasibility study. He implies the projects are still worthwhile if you consider social benefits. However, he acknowledges several additional hurdles ahead. And they are high hurdles.
For instance:
Who will take ownership of this project when the dams are in Waller County and the largest beneficiary is Montgomery County Precinct 3?
Where will the money come from when social benefits no longer apply?
For a high-resolution PDF of Barrett’s complete slide deck, click here.
Cambio Comments
You may also want to watch Kaaren Cambio during the public comment period before Barrett took the floor. Cambio starts at 11:10 into the video. She is a former SJRA director appointed by Governor Abbott.
Cambio began by reminding the board that after Harvey, the governor charged the SJRA with developing short, medium, and long range plans to ensure another Harvey would never produce so much damage again.
Time it has taken the SJRA flood management division to produce studies
Management of the studies
Absence of any benefits produced to date in any of the SJRA studies since Harvey
Pursuit of the Spring Creek study even after it became clear the land was not available
Cost per structure pulled out of the floodplain in the Spring Creek study – more than $800,000 each
SJRA’s inability to examine less expensive options, such as buyouts or elevation of those structures
Cambio closed her remarks by urging the board to “Please go back and look at the goals that this division had and make sure you’re meeting those goals. And redirect your efforts, so that we are seeing manageable solutions.”
An outspoken leader, Cambio raised some great points.
You could sense the urgency in her voice as she pled with the board to implement solutions, not just studies.
Plea for Involvement
More people from downstream areas need to testify at SJRA board meetings. We should never let the SJRA board – now dominated by Lake Conroe residents – forget the destruction of lives and property caused by their massive release during Hurricane Harvey.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/27/26
3132 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/5.3_Spring-Creek-Rev2_Page_10.jpg?fit=2000%2C1125&ssl=111252000adminadmin2026-03-27 19:00:522026-03-27 19:28:47SJRA Board Takes No Action on Birch, Walnut Creek Dams Feasibility Study
3/26/26 – A $29,387,654 bid from Bryce Construction & Design, LLC has been approved by the county purchasing agent to construct the Woodridge and Taylor Gully flood mitigation projects in Kingwood. See Item 45 on the agenda. Here is their bid transmitted to Commissioners Court. It was the low bid.
To streamline approval of US Housing and Urban Development Department Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), several months ago Commissioners Court approved a proposal to let the County Purchasing Agent approve CDBG projects. They all have tight deadlines.
The contractor will mobilize within two weeks according to Emily Woodell, a Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spokesperson. We should see dirt flying this Spring.
History of Project
Up to 600 families in Kingwood flooded twice in 2019 when Perry Homes’ contractors cleared approximately 268 acres for Woodridge Village just north of the Harris County line. Then they sloped the land toward Taylor Gully. Many of the families had just recovered from the first flood on May 7th when they flooded again in September before the stormwater detention basins had been built.
Subsequently, in 2020, Harris County and the City of Houston purchased the land so that it couldn’t be developed and flood Kingwood again. Before the purchase, Perry Homes built five stormwater detention basins on the Woodridge property. However, Montgomery County regulations at the time required much less detention capacity that Harris County – about 40% less.
That was because Harris County had already adopted Atlas 14 and because Montgomery County averaged rainfall estimates across the entire county, even though annual rainfall increases as you move south toward the county line.
Elements of Solution
So, Harris County Flood Control set out to study what it would take to properly reduce flood risk using Atlas 14 data near the county line. The studies recommended:
More upstream detention
Increasing conveyance of Taylor Gully
Replacing a culvert bridge at Rustic Elms with a clear-span bridge
Project overview from construction plans
The project limits of the proposed Taylor Gully Channel Improvements stretch from the Montgomery County boundary on the west to approximately 700 feet upstream of the confluence with White Oak Creek – a length of approximately 12,630 linear feet.
This portion of the project includes replacing the bridge at Rustling Elms.
At Rustling Elms, HCFCD will replace a culvert bridge with a clear-span bridge to remove a bottleneck.
HCFCD also plans to finish one more large stormwater detention basin upstream from Taylor Gully in Montgomery County.
HCFCD started work on the pond in January 2022 under an Excavation and Removal contract with Sprint Sand & Clay. The contract to remove up to 500,000 cubic yards of soil would have more than doubled the previous detention capacity on the site and more than made up for the 40% Atlas 14 shortfall.
However, HCFCD paused the Sprint contract when it applied for a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant. That’s because HUD rules stipulate that a project cannot change during the grant application period.
HCFCD later terminated the contract in November 2023 when it became clear the project would qualify for the grant. At that point, Sprint had already removed 160,000 cubic yards, an amount equivalent to approximately 100 acre feet. So if the figures in the construction drawing are accurate, the capacity of the basin will quadruple compared to what you see below.
Woodridge Village on May 31, 2025. The final basin will extend down past the trees near the end of the entry road.
Expected Impact
Contractually, work must finish within 552 days from the notice to proceed – approximately 18 months. That would make a great 2027 Christmas present for a lot of Kingwood families.
Under HUD’s Community Development Block Grant for Mitigation, all work must finish and billing must be completed by March 31, 2028. That should be doable.
The project will give Taylor Gully a 100-year level of service.
HCFCD
That means it should only come out of its banks in a hundred-year storm.
The improvements would reduce water-surface elevation (WSE) along Taylor Gully up to 6.9 feet in places and 4 to 5 feet on average for a 100-year storm event.
Also, this project will remove approximately 276 structures from a 100-year flood plain. Without the project, area residents would continue to flood in lesser storms.
Taylor Gully bridge at Rustling Elms during May 7, 2019, storm.
That means we should NOT see many more scenes like the one above until Noah’s comeback tour.
Thanks to Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey PE, for continuing to push this project when things seemed bleak.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/26/26
3131 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Overview.jpg?fit=2550%2C1650&ssl=116502550adminadmin2026-03-26 16:35:252026-03-27 08:08:45$29 Million Construction Contract for Woodridge, Taylor Gully Project Approved
3/25/26 – On 3/24/26, I photographed partially cleared property owned by HS Tejas LTD on West Lake Houston Parkway (WLHP) between the Kingwood YMCA and Kings Harbor.
Approximate area of partially cleared landcircled in red.
According to Dustin Hodges, Chief of Staff for District E City Council Member Fred Flickinger, the City has received no permit applications for developing the property yet.
To be clear, an owner does not need a permit to survey his property. But the survey may be required as preparation for:
Subdividing land/plat approval
Developing in floodplains
Title companies or lenders
So, this is an early sign that something could soon happen with the property. However, it’s not yet clear what HS Tejas plans.
Who Is HS Tejas?
HS Tejas is a company owned in part by Kingwood developer Ron Holley. Holley sold floodplain/floodway property on South Woodland Hills to a company affiliated with Romerica back in 2012. Since then, Romerica has tried repeatedly to develop the property with little luck using various concepts including:
Currently, Holley is also trying to develop Royal Shores Estates in the floodway and floodplain of the San Jacinto East Fork south of Kings Point.
Shifting Floodplain Maps
New flood maps show the floodway has expanded and now encompasses virtually all of Holley’s property. From a flooding perspective, a floodway is more hazardous than a floodplain because of the speed of water. To see how large the floodway has grown, compare the two images below.
Once the new draft maps become effective, Holley will have a much harder time developing the property because of restrictions on building in floodways. So, the impending map change may have something to do with the surveying.
Pictures Showing Recent Activity
Below are several pictures taken on 3/24/26 that show the partial clearing.
Note Deerwood golf course and Bens Branch in upper left. Looking slightly east and south from over WLHP.Looking S toward Self Storage and Memory Care facility in upper right.Memory Care facility in lower right.Looking E toward Deerwood. Looking W toward WLHP from over Bens Branch in bottom of frame.
Putting Flood Risk Into Perspective
The areas shown above are about a half mile from the San Jacinto West Fork along Bens Branch.
As a result of Harvey flooding, 12 residents of Kingwood Village Estates died. KVE is an assisted living facility more than a half mile north (farther from the West Fork).
Moreover, ALL of the adjacent businesses, townhomes, apartments and homes flooded in:
A floodway is not only defined by the speed of floodwaters. In Houston, the floodway is regulated as the portion of the floodplain required to convey the 100-year flood with no increase in water surface elevation. However, FEMA-mapped floodways may have been delineated assuming up to a 1-foot rise.
Developers cannot bring fill into a floodway. So, doing anything on this property will likely mean stilts, structural analyses, and more. Chapter 19 of the City’s floodplain regulations lays out the requirements.
Current activity is not visible from WLHP. So, please contact me if you hear or see anything.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/25/26
3130 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/HS-Tejas-.jpg?fit=1100%2C707&ssl=17071100adminadmin2026-03-25 15:56:022026-03-26 06:22:30Surveyors Staking Out Property on WLHP in New Floodway
SJRA Board Takes No Action on Birch, Walnut Creek Dams Feasibility Study
3/27/26 – On 3/26/26, the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) board heard the results of a feasibility study about creating “dry-bottom dams” on Birch and Walnut Creeks. The creeks are far upstream in the Spring Creek watershed in Waller County and were being studied for flood-mitigation benefits.
The board made no decision in the meeting on whether to pursue recommendations from the study. However, they did agree to discuss several issues with study partners. Other sponsors included the City of Humble, Harris County Flood Control District and five municipal utility districts in Harris and Montgomery Counties.
Chief among the concerns discussed:
But before the presentation even started, Kaaren Cambio, a former director, laid down a fiery challenge to the board. Let’s look at the study first. It will provide a context for Cambio.
Benefit/Cost Ratio Concerns
Matt Barrett, PE, SJRA’s Water Resources and Flood Management Division Director, gave a presentation that summarized the results of the 661-page feasibility study.
The feasibility study came out of the larger San Jacinto Master Drainage Plan study which identified 16 projects costing approximately $3 billion in a 3000 square mile area upstream from Lake Houston.
Only when you include “social benefits” do total benefits exceed costs. (See more on that below.)
Design and Operation
Barrett identified the construction as something akin to detention basins. The dams would feature a long barrier that trapped water with a small opening that let water out at a slow rate.
He next described how such construction would work in four different scenarios.
Barrett then talked about the exact locations of the dams, their widths, and land-use conflicts. The latter include a solar farm and new developments in the project footprints.
Benefits of Project(s)
Next, Barrett addressed the flood reduction benefits of the two dams in 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year storms.
He discussed the benefits of both dams together and individually. Below are the combined benefits of both dams.
Upstream, near the dams, the benefits exceed 3 to 4 feet. But downstream, near the confluence with the West Fork at the US59 bridge, benefits would only be 3 to 4 inches. That’s because the dams have a large effect on the small watersheds they directly control. But they exert no influence over the rest of the San Jacinto River Basin draining to that point.
Location of Structures Benefitted
The study found that more structures in Montgomery County Precinct 3 would benefit than anywhere else – by a factor of almost 4X compared to other jurisdictions.
Social Benefits Needed to Justify Funding
Near the end, Barrett showed what happens to the BCRs if you include “social benefits,” such as time lost from work during and after a flood. When you factor those in, the benefits exceed costs. However, Barrett also pointed out that as of 2025, the federal government no longer allows social benefits in BCR calculations.
Regardless, he says that the Texas Water Development Board still recognizes social benefits and that some funding could potentially come from them. But the cost of the dams would comprise a huge percentage of the state’s entire Flood Infrastructure Fund.
Significantly, while Barrett addressed the BCR, he did not call out total current costs. He did mention 2020 costs of $200 million in his narration. But total current estimates from the study put the cost at $298 million. And even $298 million assumes property can be acquired at market rates.
Conclusions
Barrett’s concluding slide focused on the challenges ahead based on the findings of his feasibility study. He implies the projects are still worthwhile if you consider social benefits. However, he acknowledges several additional hurdles ahead. And they are high hurdles.
For instance:
For More Information
See Barrett’s full 38-minute presentation including the Q&A that followed, on the SJRA website. The video starts at 27:50 and runs to 1:05:18.
For a high-resolution PDF of Barrett’s complete slide deck, click here.
Cambio Comments
You may also want to watch Kaaren Cambio during the public comment period before Barrett took the floor. Cambio starts at 11:10 into the video. She is a former SJRA director appointed by Governor Abbott.
Cambio began by reminding the board that after Harvey, the governor charged the SJRA with developing short, medium, and long range plans to ensure another Harvey would never produce so much damage again.
She reminded them of the lake lowering plan and said “you have abandoned a proven solution with no substantive plan” because of a “lawsuit by a non-representative organization.” She lamented the:
Cambio closed her remarks by urging the board to “Please go back and look at the goals that this division had and make sure you’re meeting those goals. And redirect your efforts, so that we are seeing manageable solutions.”
An outspoken leader, Cambio raised some great points.
Plea for Involvement
More people from downstream areas need to testify at SJRA board meetings. We should never let the SJRA board – now dominated by Lake Conroe residents – forget the destruction of lives and property caused by their massive release during Hurricane Harvey.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/27/26
3132 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
$29 Million Construction Contract for Woodridge, Taylor Gully Project Approved
3/26/26 – A $29,387,654 bid from Bryce Construction & Design, LLC has been approved by the county purchasing agent to construct the Woodridge and Taylor Gully flood mitigation projects in Kingwood. See Item 45 on the agenda. Here is their bid transmitted to Commissioners Court. It was the low bid.
To streamline approval of US Housing and Urban Development Department Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), several months ago Commissioners Court approved a proposal to let the County Purchasing Agent approve CDBG projects. They all have tight deadlines.
The contractor will mobilize within two weeks according to Emily Woodell, a Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spokesperson. We should see dirt flying this Spring.
History of Project
Up to 600 families in Kingwood flooded twice in 2019 when Perry Homes’ contractors cleared approximately 268 acres for Woodridge Village just north of the Harris County line. Then they sloped the land toward Taylor Gully. Many of the families had just recovered from the first flood on May 7th when they flooded again in September before the stormwater detention basins had been built.
Subsequently, in 2020, Harris County and the City of Houston purchased the land so that it couldn’t be developed and flood Kingwood again. Before the purchase, Perry Homes built five stormwater detention basins on the Woodridge property. However, Montgomery County regulations at the time required much less detention capacity that Harris County – about 40% less.
That was because Harris County had already adopted Atlas 14 and because Montgomery County averaged rainfall estimates across the entire county, even though annual rainfall increases as you move south toward the county line.
Elements of Solution
So, Harris County Flood Control set out to study what it would take to properly reduce flood risk using Atlas 14 data near the county line. The studies recommended:
The project limits of the proposed Taylor Gully Channel Improvements stretch from the Montgomery County boundary on the west to approximately 700 feet upstream of the confluence with White Oak Creek – a length of approximately 12,630 linear feet.
This portion of the project includes replacing the bridge at Rustling Elms.
HCFCD also plans to finish one more large stormwater detention basin upstream from Taylor Gully in Montgomery County.
HCFCD started work on the pond in January 2022 under an Excavation and Removal contract with Sprint Sand & Clay. The contract to remove up to 500,000 cubic yards of soil would have more than doubled the previous detention capacity on the site and more than made up for the 40% Atlas 14 shortfall.
However, HCFCD paused the Sprint contract when it applied for a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant. That’s because HUD rules stipulate that a project cannot change during the grant application period.
HCFCD later terminated the contract in November 2023 when it became clear the project would qualify for the grant. At that point, Sprint had already removed 160,000 cubic yards, an amount equivalent to approximately 100 acre feet. So if the figures in the construction drawing are accurate, the capacity of the basin will quadruple compared to what you see below.
Expected Impact
Contractually, work must finish within 552 days from the notice to proceed – approximately 18 months. That would make a great 2027 Christmas present for a lot of Kingwood families.
Under HUD’s Community Development Block Grant for Mitigation, all work must finish and billing must be completed by March 31, 2028. That should be doable.
That means it should only come out of its banks in a hundred-year storm.
The improvements would reduce water-surface elevation (WSE) along Taylor Gully up to 6.9 feet in places and 4 to 5 feet on average for a 100-year storm event.
Also, this project will remove approximately 276 structures from a 100-year flood plain. Without the project, area residents would continue to flood in lesser storms.
That means we should NOT see many more scenes like the one above until Noah’s comeback tour.
Thanks to Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey PE, for continuing to push this project when things seemed bleak.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/26/26
3131 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Surveyors Staking Out Property on WLHP in New Floodway
3/25/26 – On 3/24/26, I photographed partially cleared property owned by HS Tejas LTD on West Lake Houston Parkway (WLHP) between the Kingwood YMCA and Kings Harbor.
According to Dustin Hodges, Chief of Staff for District E City Council Member Fred Flickinger, the City has received no permit applications for developing the property yet.
To be clear, an owner does not need a permit to survey his property. But the survey may be required as preparation for:
So, this is an early sign that something could soon happen with the property. However, it’s not yet clear what HS Tejas plans.
Who Is HS Tejas?
HS Tejas is a company owned in part by Kingwood developer Ron Holley. Holley sold floodplain/floodway property on South Woodland Hills to a company affiliated with Romerica back in 2012. Since then, Romerica has tried repeatedly to develop the property with little luck using various concepts including:
Currently, Holley is also trying to develop Royal Shores Estates in the floodway and floodplain of the San Jacinto East Fork south of Kings Point.
Shifting Floodplain Maps
New flood maps show the floodway has expanded and now encompasses virtually all of Holley’s property. From a flooding perspective, a floodway is more hazardous than a floodplain because of the speed of water. To see how large the floodway has grown, compare the two images below.
Current:
FEMA’s current, effective flood map (dated 2007) shows most of Holley’s property is in a floodplain, not the floodway.
Updated Draft Map Based on Atlas 14
See below how much the floodway has expanded.
Once the new draft maps become effective, Holley will have a much harder time developing the property because of restrictions on building in floodways. So, the impending map change may have something to do with the surveying.
Pictures Showing Recent Activity
Below are several pictures taken on 3/24/26 that show the partial clearing.
Putting Flood Risk Into Perspective
The areas shown above are about a half mile from the San Jacinto West Fork along Bens Branch.
As a result of Harvey flooding, 12 residents of Kingwood Village Estates died. KVE is an assisted living facility more than a half mile north (farther from the West Fork).
Moreover, ALL of the adjacent businesses, townhomes, apartments and homes flooded in:
A floodway is not only defined by the speed of floodwaters. In Houston, the floodway is regulated as the portion of the floodplain required to convey the 100-year flood with no increase in water surface elevation. However, FEMA-mapped floodways may have been delineated assuming up to a 1-foot rise.
Developers cannot bring fill into a floodway. So, doing anything on this property will likely mean stilts, structural analyses, and more. Chapter 19 of the City’s floodplain regulations lays out the requirements.
Current activity is not visible from WLHP. So, please contact me if you hear or see anything.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/25/26
3130 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.