6/7/24 – Last night, the Kingwood Service Association (KSA) Parks Committee discussed the future of its River Grove boat launch. As reported previously on ReduceFlooding.com, the boat launch has become seriously blocked by sand and other sediment coming downriver during the May floods, primarily from the West Fork San Jacinto.
After floods in January, boaters complained of difficulty navigating through the sediment to the river. So KSA commissioned a sonar study. It showed that approximately 11,500 cubic yards of sediment needed to be dredged to open the channel. The cost approached $800,000…without any contingency funds built in.
KSA’s board authorized the Parks Committee to spend the money at its April Board Meeting. However, board members also requested the Parks Committee to explore ways to lower the cost first.
During that exploration, May floods deposited even more sand. To avoid surprise overages, a dredging subcommittee asked the low bidder to do another sonar survey. The new survey indicated that the amount of sand needing removal increased about 50 percent.
Budget-Busting Costs
The cost – without any contingency funds for overages – represents 49% of KSA’s current Capital Assets Reserve Fund balance. And that prompted many tough questions from the Parks Committee. Especially since boat dock usage represents only a small part of KSA’s responsibilities. And because a relatively small percentage of Kingwood residents use the boat docks.
Through June 5, KSA has issued 837 boat trailer stickers. Compare that to 23,842 regular vehicle stickers. Only 3.5% of the vehicles using Kingwood parks use the boat launch.
Meanwhile East End Park needs extensive trail restoration after the last storm. And KSA is about to renovate the entry at Kingwood Drive and US59.
Note, however, that the mouth of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch (at the boat docks) also plays a role in flooding. The ditch drains the western third of Kingwood. And when it became blocked during Harvey, hundreds of homes behind the blockage flooded.
Options KSA Considered
Here is a slight revision of the River Grove boat launch presentation that the KSA Parks Committee reviewed last night. The revisions reflect changes discussed in the meeting.
To make it easier to understand, I’ve also shown the individual pages below with some background information.
The title slide shows sediment buildup at the mouth of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch in River Grove. Not only does it affect boating, if sediment continues to build, it could eventually back water up into homes as it did during Harvey.
Image taken after May floods when lake was down slightly for gate repairs at dam.
The next section of the presentation covered developments since the last Parks Committee meeting.
After the first sonar survey of the River Grove Boat Launch in February, the Dredging Subcommittee authorized a second survey to quantify the amount of additional sediment deposited by May storms and the cost impact…even as it looked for ways to reduce costs.
The cost of the second survey was necessary to be considered for FEMA debris removal/flood mitigation funds. You must prove that the money requested came from the storm covered by a disaster declaration. This became a huge issue with the Mouth Bar after Harvey.
The amount of sediment requiring removal increased 50% during May. The low bidder proposed hydraulic as opposed to mechanical dredging which is much faster. And the sediment would go to a property owner on the south shore of the river, instead of being trucked away.
By paying the landowner directly, KSA avoids markup on disposal costs.
The slide below shows an estimate of the revised costs and the current balance in KSA’s capital assets reserve fund. The River Grove Boat Launch dredging would consume 49% of KSA’s fund balance. Even though more sand is being dredged, the ability to pump the sand across the river helped to keep direct dredging costs close to the first estimate.
What to Do? Options Considered
With all that as background, the next slides present additional dimensions of the problem. The photo below shows the confluence of Spring Creek (left) and the West Fork (right) at US59. Sediment is now coming downriver from the West Fork after flowing through a mile-long sand pit.
The photo above helps explain the sediment build up at the River Grove Boat Launch: 5+ feet in places at the mouth of the Diversion Ditch and an average of 1.5 feet across the entire dredging area.
The dredging-company representative said he’d never seen anything like it in that short of a period.
And a retired Army Corps representative who helped lead the Emergency West Fork Dredging Project after Harvey said, “After we completed our survey of the area, we predicted sedimentation will be a perpetual problem at this location.”
Hydrologists call the photo below a “difference map. The colors represent the difference between the first and second surveys. It shows the build up between mid-February and mid-May outside the River Grove Boat Launch. The red, orange and yellow areas show the greatest build up. Blue and green show the lesser areas.
Note the options listed on the left. They set up a discussion of the pros and cons for each alternative.
Pros and Cons of Options
For the sake of brevity, I’ll let you read the pros and cons from the visuals in the following slides. They are fairly self explanatory.
In the first option, KSA would seek help with dredging costs. This became a possibility when the Governor and President issued disaster declarations for this area last month. Suddenly, federal money became available for debris removal and flood mitigation. The sand deposits might qualify under either.
Council Members Fred Flickinger and Twila Carter have already reviewed the pre/post surveys and forwarded them to the City’s Chief Resilience Officer, Stephen Costello, for help with developing an application.
However, the outcome won’t be known for a while. So, if that option fails, KSA could make the decision to dredge one more time using its own money. But if a hurricane should come along and fill the sand back in, then KSA would wipe out its capital asset reserves fund. Hence the emphasis on “ONE” below.
Another option the Parks Committee agreed to explore was asking the City to dredge. The City is strapped for cash right now, but if the City could get funds from FEMA to cover the removal, it might be possible. That’s because the City already has a dredge in the river for a separate project between Kings Point and FM1960.
If FEMA covered the sand deposited after the first survey, perhaps a cost-sharing arrangement could be worked out with the City for the rest.
After all, the City owns the lake and the lake is developing a sediment problem. The City also has responsibility for maintaining the outfalls of the ditches around the lake.
While discussing ways to reduce dredging costs, KSA’s low bidder suggested long-term ways to make periodic dredging more affordable and sustainable.
This is not an immediate answer to the problem, but could be considered as a follow-on option if one of the others becomes possible.
Example: the dredging company suggested building a jetty to deflect floodwaters out into the river instead of letting them curl into the gap between the islands.
They also suggested building low underwater rock walls that could catch sand scooting along the riverbed. This could trap sediment behind the walls. And that could help minimize the area needing dredging in the future. Hopefully, that could also make dredging more affordable and sustainable in the future.
However, the permitting and construction costs for those measures would be in addition to any dredging done now.
Some people on the parks committee felt the jetty might work in small floods, but not in larger ones like we just had.
KSA also considered an option to just close the boat dock. However, after discussion, a compromise became clear: just limit its use.
This would let families with smaller watercraft, such as canoes, kayaks and paddle boards, continue to use the facilities if they could portage over the developing sand bar. Large boats would have to seek other places to launch.
Next Steps and Timetable for Decision
The Parks Committee agreed that the options needed to be shared with HOAs and residents. Hopefully, after debate, public comment, and more exploration of the options, consensus may develop around one of the options. The community can then make a decision in the fall when people return from summer vacations about both short- and long-range plans for the River Grove boat launch.
Make Your Feelings Known
If you live in Kingwood, please share this post with friends and neighbors. And make sure you register your opinion with your homeowner association officers.
Even though most residents don’t use the boat launch, many people might like to have the option. And that option could affect home values. For instance, imagine if a potential buyer for your home someday owned a boat.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/7/2024
2474 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/2024/06/KSA-Boat-Launch-Options-R3_Page_07.jpg?fit=1500%2C1125&ssl=111251500adminadmin2024-06-07 00:47:282024-06-07 09:40:58Future of River Grove Boat Launch Discussed at KSA Meeting
June 5, 2024 – The Triple PG sand mine trial, originally scheduled for 2020, has been rescheduled yet again for March 2025 – a five year delay and counting.
A new schedule shows the Texas Attorney General lawsuit against the Triple PG sand mine in Porter may go to a jury on March 24, 2025. Originally, the case was set for trial on June 22, 2020.
But a corporate shell game by the defendant created a series of delays while the AG tried to figure out who was on first.
Then they took two years off for COVID. Finally the judge scheduled a conference call to jumpstart the case in 2022.
Original Complaint
The Texas Attorney General (AG) sued the Triple PG sand mine in Porter on behalf of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality in 2019. Two breaches in the mine’s dikes were allowing industrial wastewater to flush into White Oak and Caney Creeks, then into the headwaters of Lake Houston. The lake supplies drinking water for two million people.
But not much has happened since then. And the Triple PG sand mine trial just got postponed. Again. Without explanation.
New Scheduling Order
See the second amended agreed scheduling order in the Triple PG sand mine trial. Five years of delays on a case originally scheduled to go to trial in one year!
The Attorney General’s office did not respond to a request for explanation or comment.
Discovery is now supposed to end on December 20, 2024. And a jury trial will begin “on or after March 24, 2025.” Uh, oh! I don’t like that “or after” part.
While Everyone Delayed…
Along the way, those daredevils at the Triple PG have:
Those bullet points just scratch the surface. I’ve created more than 60 posts that feature the Triple PG mine.
All Charges Denied
Prabakar Guniganti, the cardiologist from Nacogdoches owns the mine through one of his shell companies. The Montgomery County Appraisal District shows that the Guniganti Children’s Trust Fund owns it now. Guniganti has denied all charges by the TCEQ and Attorney General.
Pipeline that wasn’t exposed, December 6, 2019Wastewaterat Triple PG mine, July 27, 2022.Guniganti has an ag/timber tax exemption on this gem.Trees killed by process wastewater on neighboring property, June 6, 2022Triple PG wastewater flowing unobstructed into Caney Creekand Lake Houston,September 2019
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/5/24
2472 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/2024/06/20190927-Helicopter9.27_106.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2024-06-05 18:22:362024-06-05 18:28:29Triple PG Sand Mine Trial Delays Total 5 Years Now
6/4/24 – Rainfall in the upper part of the San Jacinto River (SJR) Basin during early May storms rivaled Hurricane Harvey totals there. And if you consider year-to-date rainfall (YTD) totals, the amount above normal equals two Harveys in places!
The comparisons with Harvey help put into perspective some extraordinary rainfall in a relatively small geographic area that affects a much larger area.
The comparisons help explain why many people in the Lake Houston Area felt the May flood was far out of proportion to the amount of rainfall received. The most extreme rains did not fall on downstream residents’ heads. For downstream residents, the rains fell unseen – 50 miles north.
Let’s look at data for Huntsville first. Even though the City itself technically sits just outside the San Jacinto River Basin, rainfall south and west of the City entered both the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto.
Harvey Week vs Week Around May Storm
During Hurricane Harvey week in 2017, the SJRA gage southwest of Huntsville received 20.46 inches of rain.
Area near Huntsville received 20.46 inches during Harvey week in 2017.
During the late April/early May storm of 2024, the same gage received just a little less – 18.4 inches.
Huntsville total for week starting April 28, 2024, fell about two inches short of Harvey.
This area got almost as much rain in one week this May as it did during Harvey. Now let’s look at year to date numbers.
Year-to-Date Totals Vs. Harvey
The National Weather Service maintains another gage in Huntsville which accounts for a slightly different total. But I’m using it for the YTD comparison because of the powerful graph. It illustrates how much rain the area recently received compared to normal. (We already know the Harvey total from the first bar graph above.)
From the brown line above, we can see that area normally gets 20 inches of rain through the end of May. This year it got 58.97 inches, almost triple the annual average at that point in the year.
The amount above normal (38.97 inches) is almost twice what the Huntsville area received during Harvey (20.46 inches)!
National Weather Service Data
So far this year, the upper river basin has received almost three Harveys worth of rain, or two above the normal YTD rainfall…for that latitude.
I should note here, that inland areas usually receive less rain than coastal areas during hurricanes. So if you’re saying, “Wait a minute! We received more than 20 inches of rain during Harvey,” you’re right. You also probably live south of Huntsville.
How to Compare Totals at Other Gages
Want to see what happened at a gage near you? HCFCD’s Flood Warning System lets you enter any date range using the historical feature. Just click on the “More Info” button associated with any gage. Or do it for the whole river basin to see the distribution of totals.
YTDrainfall distribution across upper SJR basin.
To quickly compare the distribution during Harvey, just change the dates to 8/25/17 and 8/29/17. It’s fun to explore. And it makes a fun learning experience for your kids. Teach them how to become “data detectives.” It could turn them into homeroom heroes.
Alternatively, you can compare Harris County gages during Harvey by consulting the tables at the end of HCFCD’s final Harvey report. It contains peak rainfall totals for all the gages above for time periods ranging from five minutes to four days.
There’s a point to all this data. We can draw several conclusions and recommendations from it:
Extreme rainfall in the northern tier of the river basin contributed to the flooding that many experienced 50 miles south.
Rainfall coming from the west and east was less intense and likely accounted for less damage downstream.
Heavy rains can fall outside of hurricane season. In fact, spring storms can exceed hurricane rainfall totals and rival hurricane intensity.
We need regional flood control. The people near Huntsville were not prepared for this event. Neither were people to the south protected.
Hurricane Harvey wasn’t a once-in-a-1,000 year rainfall. Pretending it was will jeopardize public safety. We need better building codes and drainage regulations in areas that haven’t already been updated since Harvey.
We also need updated flood maps that show current risk to help protect homebuyers. New floodplain surveys were conducted after Hurricane Harvey. But FEMA hasn’t yet released new risk maps based on those surveys. Many fast-growing areas in the region still base development decisions on data from the 1980s. That puts homebuyers at risk.
Flood Risk: A Shifting Target
Even as FEMA finalizes new flood-risk maps, understand that Mother Nature, sand mines, and insufficiently mitigated upstream developments are constantly changing the landscape through erosion and deposition.
The resulting blockages and reduction in conveyance may now contribute to increased flooding on smaller rains. Consider River Grove Park and the Kingwood Diversion Ditch. Both are now blocked by sand from upstream.
Kingwood Diversion Ditch where it passes through River Grove Park.Photo from 5/26.
It’s not as bad as it was after Harvey…yet. But up to five feet of sand was deposited in this area during the recent flood. So give it a few more floods.
As the City of Houston readies a $34 million dollar dredging program (that doesn’t even include River Grove), look what’s coming downstream to us.
Confluence of West Fork and Spring Creek near US59 bridge. West Fork, on right.
The West Fork snakes through 20 square miles of sand mines between US59 and I-45. And due to pit capture, the West Fork currently runs through a mile-long sand pit.
That raises one final recommendation: I wish the City could use its influence in Washington and Austin to have the EPA and TCEQ eliminate these blatant abuses.
In the meantime, the Kingwood Service Association will debate its own dredging program and the future of River Grove this Thursday night. To attend the online meeting, contact the KSA office at 281-358-5192 for a Zoom link.
Posted by Bob Rehak on June 4, 2024
2471 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/2024/06/20240530-DJI_20240530161911_0905_D.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2024-06-04 17:28:232024-06-04 21:28:42Top of SJR Basin Has Received Normal YTD Rainfall Plus a Harvey or Two
Future of River Grove Boat Launch Discussed at KSA Meeting
6/7/24 – Last night, the Kingwood Service Association (KSA) Parks Committee discussed the future of its River Grove boat launch. As reported previously on ReduceFlooding.com, the boat launch has become seriously blocked by sand and other sediment coming downriver during the May floods, primarily from the West Fork San Jacinto.
After floods in January, boaters complained of difficulty navigating through the sediment to the river. So KSA commissioned a sonar study. It showed that approximately 11,500 cubic yards of sediment needed to be dredged to open the channel. The cost approached $800,000…without any contingency funds built in.
KSA’s board authorized the Parks Committee to spend the money at its April Board Meeting. However, board members also requested the Parks Committee to explore ways to lower the cost first.
During that exploration, May floods deposited even more sand. To avoid surprise overages, a dredging subcommittee asked the low bidder to do another sonar survey. The new survey indicated that the amount of sand needing removal increased about 50 percent.
Budget-Busting Costs
The cost – without any contingency funds for overages – represents 49% of KSA’s current Capital Assets Reserve Fund balance. And that prompted many tough questions from the Parks Committee. Especially since boat dock usage represents only a small part of KSA’s responsibilities. And because a relatively small percentage of Kingwood residents use the boat docks.
Through June 5, KSA has issued 837 boat trailer stickers. Compare that to 23,842 regular vehicle stickers. Only 3.5% of the vehicles using Kingwood parks use the boat launch.
Meanwhile East End Park needs extensive trail restoration after the last storm. And KSA is about to renovate the entry at Kingwood Drive and US59.
Note, however, that the mouth of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch (at the boat docks) also plays a role in flooding. The ditch drains the western third of Kingwood. And when it became blocked during Harvey, hundreds of homes behind the blockage flooded.
Options KSA Considered
Here is a slight revision of the River Grove boat launch presentation that the KSA Parks Committee reviewed last night. The revisions reflect changes discussed in the meeting.
To make it easier to understand, I’ve also shown the individual pages below with some background information.
The title slide shows sediment buildup at the mouth of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch in River Grove. Not only does it affect boating, if sediment continues to build, it could eventually back water up into homes as it did during Harvey.
The next section of the presentation covered developments since the last Parks Committee meeting.
After the first sonar survey of the River Grove Boat Launch in February, the Dredging Subcommittee authorized a second survey to quantify the amount of additional sediment deposited by May storms and the cost impact…even as it looked for ways to reduce costs.
The amount of sediment requiring removal increased 50% during May. The low bidder proposed hydraulic as opposed to mechanical dredging which is much faster. And the sediment would go to a property owner on the south shore of the river, instead of being trucked away.
The slide below shows an estimate of the revised costs and the current balance in KSA’s capital assets reserve fund. The River Grove Boat Launch dredging would consume 49% of KSA’s fund balance. Even though more sand is being dredged, the ability to pump the sand across the river helped to keep direct dredging costs close to the first estimate.
What to Do? Options Considered
With all that as background, the next slides present additional dimensions of the problem. The photo below shows the confluence of Spring Creek (left) and the West Fork (right) at US59. Sediment is now coming downriver from the West Fork after flowing through a mile-long sand pit.
The photo above helps explain the sediment build up at the River Grove Boat Launch: 5+ feet in places at the mouth of the Diversion Ditch and an average of 1.5 feet across the entire dredging area.
The dredging-company representative said he’d never seen anything like it in that short of a period.
And a retired Army Corps representative who helped lead the Emergency West Fork Dredging Project after Harvey said, “After we completed our survey of the area, we predicted sedimentation will be a perpetual problem at this location.”
Hydrologists call the photo below a “difference map. The colors represent the difference between the first and second surveys. It shows the build up between mid-February and mid-May outside the River Grove Boat Launch. The red, orange and yellow areas show the greatest build up. Blue and green show the lesser areas.
Note the options listed on the left. They set up a discussion of the pros and cons for each alternative.
Pros and Cons of Options
For the sake of brevity, I’ll let you read the pros and cons from the visuals in the following slides. They are fairly self explanatory.
In the first option, KSA would seek help with dredging costs. This became a possibility when the Governor and President issued disaster declarations for this area last month. Suddenly, federal money became available for debris removal and flood mitigation. The sand deposits might qualify under either.
Council Members Fred Flickinger and Twila Carter have already reviewed the pre/post surveys and forwarded them to the City’s Chief Resilience Officer, Stephen Costello, for help with developing an application.
However, the outcome won’t be known for a while. So, if that option fails, KSA could make the decision to dredge one more time using its own money. But if a hurricane should come along and fill the sand back in, then KSA would wipe out its capital asset reserves fund. Hence the emphasis on “ONE” below.
Another option the Parks Committee agreed to explore was asking the City to dredge. The City is strapped for cash right now, but if the City could get funds from FEMA to cover the removal, it might be possible. That’s because the City already has a dredge in the river for a separate project between Kings Point and FM1960.
If FEMA covered the sand deposited after the first survey, perhaps a cost-sharing arrangement could be worked out with the City for the rest.
After all, the City owns the lake and the lake is developing a sediment problem. The City also has responsibility for maintaining the outfalls of the ditches around the lake.
While discussing ways to reduce dredging costs, KSA’s low bidder suggested long-term ways to make periodic dredging more affordable and sustainable.
This is not an immediate answer to the problem, but could be considered as a follow-on option if one of the others becomes possible.
Example: the dredging company suggested building a jetty to deflect floodwaters out into the river instead of letting them curl into the gap between the islands.
They also suggested building low underwater rock walls that could catch sand scooting along the riverbed. This could trap sediment behind the walls. And that could help minimize the area needing dredging in the future. Hopefully, that could also make dredging more affordable and sustainable in the future.
However, the permitting and construction costs for those measures would be in addition to any dredging done now.
Some people on the parks committee felt the jetty might work in small floods, but not in larger ones like we just had.
KSA also considered an option to just close the boat dock. However, after discussion, a compromise became clear: just limit its use.
This would let families with smaller watercraft, such as canoes, kayaks and paddle boards, continue to use the facilities if they could portage over the developing sand bar. Large boats would have to seek other places to launch.
Next Steps and Timetable for Decision
The Parks Committee agreed that the options needed to be shared with HOAs and residents. Hopefully, after debate, public comment, and more exploration of the options, consensus may develop around one of the options. The community can then make a decision in the fall when people return from summer vacations about both short- and long-range plans for the River Grove boat launch.
Make Your Feelings Known
If you live in Kingwood, please share this post with friends and neighbors. And make sure you register your opinion with your homeowner association officers.
Even though most residents don’t use the boat launch, many people might like to have the option. And that option could affect home values. For instance, imagine if a potential buyer for your home someday owned a boat.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/7/2024
2474 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.
Triple PG Sand Mine Trial Delays Total 5 Years Now
June 5, 2024 – The Triple PG sand mine trial, originally scheduled for 2020, has been rescheduled yet again for March 2025 – a five year delay and counting.
A new schedule shows the Texas Attorney General lawsuit against the Triple PG sand mine in Porter may go to a jury on March 24, 2025. Originally, the case was set for trial on June 22, 2020.
But a corporate shell game by the defendant created a series of delays while the AG tried to figure out who was on first.
Then they took two years off for COVID. Finally the judge scheduled a conference call to jumpstart the case in 2022.
Original Complaint
The Texas Attorney General (AG) sued the Triple PG sand mine in Porter on behalf of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality in 2019. Two breaches in the mine’s dikes were allowing industrial wastewater to flush into White Oak and Caney Creeks, then into the headwaters of Lake Houston. The lake supplies drinking water for two million people.
But not much has happened since then. And the Triple PG sand mine trial just got postponed. Again. Without explanation.
New Scheduling Order
See the second amended agreed scheduling order in the Triple PG sand mine trial. Five years of delays on a case originally scheduled to go to trial in one year!
The Attorney General’s office did not respond to a request for explanation or comment.
Discovery is now supposed to end on December 20, 2024. And a jury trial will begin “on or after March 24, 2025.” Uh, oh! I don’t like that “or after” part.
While Everyone Delayed…
Along the way, those daredevils at the Triple PG have:
Those bullet points just scratch the surface. I’ve created more than 60 posts that feature the Triple PG mine.
All Charges Denied
Prabakar Guniganti, the cardiologist from Nacogdoches owns the mine through one of his shell companies. The Montgomery County Appraisal District shows that the Guniganti Children’s Trust Fund owns it now. Guniganti has denied all charges by the TCEQ and Attorney General.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/5/24
2472 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.
Top of SJR Basin Has Received Normal YTD Rainfall Plus a Harvey or Two
6/4/24 – Rainfall in the upper part of the San Jacinto River (SJR) Basin during early May storms rivaled Hurricane Harvey totals there. And if you consider year-to-date rainfall (YTD) totals, the amount above normal equals two Harveys in places!
The comparisons with Harvey help put into perspective some extraordinary rainfall in a relatively small geographic area that affects a much larger area.
The comparisons help explain why many people in the Lake Houston Area felt the May flood was far out of proportion to the amount of rainfall received. The most extreme rains did not fall on downstream residents’ heads. For downstream residents, the rains fell unseen – 50 miles north.
Let’s look at data for Huntsville first. Even though the City itself technically sits just outside the San Jacinto River Basin, rainfall south and west of the City entered both the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto.
Harvey Week vs Week Around May Storm
During Hurricane Harvey week in 2017, the SJRA gage southwest of Huntsville received 20.46 inches of rain.
During the late April/early May storm of 2024, the same gage received just a little less – 18.4 inches.
This area got almost as much rain in one week this May as it did during Harvey. Now let’s look at year to date numbers.
Year-to-Date Totals Vs. Harvey
The National Weather Service maintains another gage in Huntsville which accounts for a slightly different total. But I’m using it for the YTD comparison because of the powerful graph. It illustrates how much rain the area recently received compared to normal. (We already know the Harvey total from the first bar graph above.)
From the brown line above, we can see that area normally gets 20 inches of rain through the end of May. This year it got 58.97 inches, almost triple the annual average at that point in the year.
So far this year, the upper river basin has received almost three Harveys worth of rain, or two above the normal YTD rainfall…for that latitude.
I should note here, that inland areas usually receive less rain than coastal areas during hurricanes. So if you’re saying, “Wait a minute! We received more than 20 inches of rain during Harvey,” you’re right. You also probably live south of Huntsville.
How to Compare Totals at Other Gages
Want to see what happened at a gage near you? HCFCD’s Flood Warning System lets you enter any date range using the historical feature. Just click on the “More Info” button associated with any gage. Or do it for the whole river basin to see the distribution of totals.
To quickly compare the distribution during Harvey, just change the dates to 8/25/17 and 8/29/17. It’s fun to explore. And it makes a fun learning experience for your kids. Teach them how to become “data detectives.” It could turn them into homeroom heroes.
Alternatively, you can compare Harris County gages during Harvey by consulting the tables at the end of HCFCD’s final Harvey report. It contains peak rainfall totals for all the gages above for time periods ranging from five minutes to four days.
The Reports Page of this website contains similar reports on other storms under the Major Storms tab.
Significance and Recommendations
There’s a point to all this data. We can draw several conclusions and recommendations from it:
Flood Risk: A Shifting Target
Even as FEMA finalizes new flood-risk maps, understand that Mother Nature, sand mines, and insufficiently mitigated upstream developments are constantly changing the landscape through erosion and deposition.
The resulting blockages and reduction in conveyance may now contribute to increased flooding on smaller rains. Consider River Grove Park and the Kingwood Diversion Ditch. Both are now blocked by sand from upstream.
It’s not as bad as it was after Harvey…yet. But up to five feet of sand was deposited in this area during the recent flood. So give it a few more floods.
As the City of Houston readies a $34 million dollar dredging program (that doesn’t even include River Grove), look what’s coming downstream to us.
The West Fork snakes through 20 square miles of sand mines between US59 and I-45. And due to pit capture, the West Fork currently runs through a mile-long sand pit.
That raises one final recommendation: I wish the City could use its influence in Washington and Austin to have the EPA and TCEQ eliminate these blatant abuses.
In the meantime, the Kingwood Service Association will debate its own dredging program and the future of River Grove this Thursday night. To attend the online meeting, contact the KSA office at 281-358-5192 for a Zoom link.
Posted by Bob Rehak on June 4, 2024
2471 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.