9/3/2024 – Today, the Texas General Land Office (GLO) posted six state action-plan amendments for public comment. The amendments reallocate remaining money from federal grants for disasters between 2008 and 2019.
Includes Disaster Recovery Reallocation Program
Each of the six amendments includes a new Disaster Recovery Reallocation Program (DRRP). The DRRP will let the GLO utilize de-obligated and un-utilized funds remaining within the action plan for each disaster.
The $135 million being reallocated pales in comparison to the billions of dollars in unmet needs around the state. Better matching remaining dollars with remaining needs will help create a more resilient Texas. And simplifying the application process will help use up available money before federal deadlines expire.
Action-Plan Amendments, Deadlines, Major Changes
The GLO provided this summary of the deadlines for public comment on each amendment:
Hurricanes Ike and Dolly Amendment 7
Federally required public comment period of 7 days will end at 5:00 PM on September 11, 2024.
2015 Floods and Storms Amendment 6
Federally required public comment period of 14 days will end at 5:00 PM on September 18, 2024.
2016 Floods and Storms Amendment 8
Federally required public comment period of 14 days will end at 5:00 PM on September 18, 2024.
Hurricane Harvey $5.6 Billion Amendment 16
Federally required public comment period of 30 days will end at 5:00 PM on October 4, 2024.
Includes updates to the Harris County Homeowner Assistance, Residential Buyout, Affordable Rental and Single Family New Construction Programs.
Includes updates to the City of Houston Single Family Development and Buyout Programs.
2018 South Texas Floods Amendment 2
Federally required public comment period of 30 days will end at 5:00 PM on October 4, 2024.
Includes updates to the Specific Conditions Report in Appendix H.
2019 Disasters Amendment 3
Federally required public comment period of 30 days will end at 5:00 PM on October 4, 2024.
Includes updates to the Specific Conditions Report in Appendix G.
Submit all comments to cdr@recovery.texas.gov by 5:00 p.m. on their respective ending dates.
$135 Million Reallocated
The Hurricane Ike action plan amendment creates the DRRP. It will utilize remaining program funds from current disaster recovery grants from 2008 to 2019, with the exception of the 2011 Wildfires grant.
DRRP will expedite the expenditure of funds to comply with HUD’s timely expenditure requirements through a call for projects across multiple grants.
Each project will undergo eligibility analysis based on the grant that used to fund it.
As funds continue to be identified through the de-obligation process, they will be added to the DRRP program. All remaining funds will be reallocated to this program for each grant.
The amounts going into the DRRP “pot” total $135 million. That includes:
Based on the Dolly/Ike amendment, GLO will do a single call for projects statewide. Each agency that responds can submit up to two applications, and they will score them based on the published criteria.
Those criteria total more than 800 pages. Criteria for each of the six amendments are hyperlinked with the amounts above.
While that’s a daunting number of pages to read, GLO provides tables that show where money is going from and to, plus rules that will govern grant awards.
The GLO will perform the eligibility analysis to make applications easier. “We want this to be as simple as possible for applicants, so they will only have to submit one application and have all of the difficult analysis of eligibility and funding streams on our end,” said Brittany Eck, a GLO spokesperson.
If nothing else, these amendments dramatize how complex the flood mitigation process is. Today is 2562 days since Hurricane Harvey. But Hurricane Ike struck Houston on September 11, 2008. That’s 5836 days ago!
How to Submit Public Comments
Submit all comments to cdr@recovery.texas.gov by 5:00 p.m. on their respective ending dates to be considered. GLO requests that you please include the name and number of the action-plan amendments that you’re commenting on in the subject line.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/3/24
2562 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Harvey-Action-Plan-Amendment-16.jpg?fit=1100%2C825&ssl=18251100adminadmin2024-09-03 18:37:492024-09-04 12:31:10GLO Posts Six State Action-Plan Amendments for Public Comment
9/2/24 – On 8/26/24, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) issued a report on a San Jacinto West Fork pit capture. “Pit capture” happened when the river cut through an abandoned sand pit on a point bar instead of taking the long way around it. Worldwide, many environmental consequences have been linked to such pit captures. However, the TCEQ report never mentions the phrase.
This report does not discuss other pit captures that happened elsewhere in the West and East Fork watersheds earlier this year.
San Jacinto West Fork entering pit and abandoning its normal channel on May 22.
The TCEQ report, which took four months to investigate, compile and release, did not:
Refer to any water-quality measurements, even though the complaints concerned water quality.
Address other sand-mine dike beaches and emissions in the same area
Explore downstream impacts.
Result in any reprimands, letters of enforcement, or violations.
TCEQ Finds No Problems
The four-month effort resulted in no action. Apparently, the TCEQ feels that since the pit is no longer being actively mined, it is no longer a threat to the public. It simply concludes that the incident falls within their “enforcement discretion” and they chose not to take any action.
Approximate location of entry and exit breaches relative to island with Native-American cemetery.
Who Operated This Pit?
The report also ignores a complex web of interlocking corporations involved with West Fork sand mining. They include, but are not limited to, Hallett Materials, RGI, JR Development and the Rasmussen Group, headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa.
The first paragraph of the report states that the investigation was conducted to “evaluate compliance for RGI Materials, Inc. of the Porter Plant site located north of the West Fork San Jacinto River.” [Emphasis added.]
But the report lists GPS coordinates for a pond on the south and west sides of the river. It also shows photos of the pit on the south and west sides.
The report cites information obtained through a Jacob McCurry and identifies him as a Vice President of RGI Materials. But the Hallett Materials website lists Jacob McCurry as its Operations Manager.
The report never mentions Hallett, the largest operator on the West Fork. Hallett:
Operates a settling pond directly across the river from the pit that TCEQ investigated. That pond has been leaking almost continuously into the river since January through another pit that RGI used to own.
The Texas Secretary of State shows that RGI is an assumed name of Hallett Materials.
It’s all very confusing. Except for the TCEQ report’s conclusion. The TCEQ is taking no action.
Erosion of Cemetery
In 2018, I met Kurt Rasmussen at the Hallett plant. Rasmussen is part of the family that controls Hallett, RGI, and JR Development.
He gave me a tour of the captured pit on the south and west sides of the river. He also told me that Hallett was prohibited from mining that island in the middle of the pit because it is a Native American burial ground.
As a result of the pit capture, dikes no longer protect that island from the river and erosion.
Burial ground (upper left) in middle of pit captured by West Fork. Photo 5/13/24.
Unmentioned Problems with Pit Captures
The TCEQ report never mentions “pit capture.” Nor does it mention any of the problems associated with pit capture discussed in academic literature.
Where a river enters a pit, erosion typically migrates upstream (headcutting). That can lead to more river bank erosion. (You can already see it happening in the photo above on the right.)
Literature about pit captures also suggests that when rivers take a direct path through a sand pit, it can shorten the river’s length. This can increase the river’s gradient (slope) downstream, leading to faster water flow and more aggressive erosion.
Captured pits can act as sediment traps when water moves slow enough for sand to drop out of suspension. But when water moves as fast as it did in the May flood, it can stir up sediment and transport it downstream.
I measured the speed of water moving through the captured Hallett/RGI/JR Development/Rasmussen/Riverwalk pit at 5 miles per hour. That’s enough to pick up and transport large grains of sand.
This can contribute to increased sedimentation in downstream reaches, affecting water quality, habitat, and the morphology of the river.
Downstream from pit capture above at the confluence of Spring Creek and the West Fork. West Fork is on right.
That sediment began dropping out of suspension where the water slowed as it approached the headwaters of Lake Houston.
Kingwood Diversion Ditch blocked at River Grove Park, downstream from confluence above.Dredging cost estimated at about $750,000.
The increased flow velocity after a sand pit capture can also lead to downcutting that disconnects the river from its floodplain, reducing the ability of the floodplain to absorb floodwaters and support wetland habitats.
Scientific reports also say that such downcutting can reduce the level of the water table and destroy riparian vegetation.
TCEQ Ignores Downstream Consequences
TCEQ concluded with the words: “the discharge from this pond has been granted enforcement discretion.” TCEQ chose not to issue any violations.
Their decision apparently stems from the fact that the pit is no longer actively used for mining. According to the report, the current owner, Riverwalk Porter LLC, claims it intends to use the property (and presumably the graveyard within it) for “recreational purposes such as hunting and camping.”
It’s unclear how TCEQ’s ruling will affect boating on the river. The public waterway now cuts through private property. Will boaters be trespassers?
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/2024/09/20240513-DJI_20240513075313_0604_D.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2024-09-02 11:05:022024-09-02 15:46:15TCEQ Report on West Fork Pit Capture Doesn’t Mention “Pit Capture”
8/30/24 – Another month has flown by. Below are quick updates on six flood-mitigation projects in the area.
HCFCD Beryl-related Ditch Maintenance
According to Jeremy Phillips, Director of Harris County Flood Control District’s (HCFCD) Asset Management Division, “The quickest way to ensure we are including debris in our post-storm cleanup is to fill out a service request online. We send them to our maintenance staff. They, in turn, ensure our contractors pick up the reported debris.”
I reported four trees this afternoon in a ditch that runs through Kings Forest just north of Kingwood Drive.
Blockage of Ditch in Kings Forest
The second is more serious: a cluster of three trees that have fallen across the ditch about 50 feet upstream.
Three more trees blocking same ditch in Kings Forest just feet away
Such blockages can catch other debris floating downstream during heavy rains and form dams that back water up into homes. HCFCD has 2500 miles of channels to patrol. Help them help you. Report any problems you see on the web page above.
Emily Woodell, a HCFCD spokesperson, said, “Through our Beryl debris removal efforts, we are currently at 10,966 tons of debris removed from 14 different watersheds. Based on our debris estimates, we are approximately 33% complete with our countywide debris removal operation.” Harris County maintains ditches, streams and bayous in 23 different watersheds.
Northpark Expansion
The expansion of Northpark Drive will create an all-weather evacuation route from Kingwood for almost 80,000 people when Hamblen and Kingwood Drive are cut off.
The project has been delayed by utility conflicts, but those now have reportedly been resolved. The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority posted a new 3-week lookahead schedule yesterday.
The big news: new concrete is not far off.
In the next three weeks, contractors will focus on completing dirt work, preparing the sub-grade, and setting up rebar.
All photos below were taken on 8/30/24.
Rebar is being stockpiled in several places along the route.Looking East from approximately where the bridge over the railroad tracks (behind camera position) will start. Drainage work continues at several locations throughout the project. Here, you’re looking N at the SW corner of Northpark and Loop 494.
Tree Lane/Bens Branch Bridge Repair
I last posted about the Tree Lane bridge repairs over Bens Branch on 8/11/24. In the last 19 days, Houston Public Works has poured a few more loads of concrete and partially installed some culvert for a storm-drain outfall. No one was at the job site today.
New outfall on southeast side of Tree Lane Bridge.
After Harvey, the San Jacinto River Authority engaged in several flood-mitigation projects with partners throughout the river basin. Projects included the San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Study, a Sedimentation Study, a Sand-Trap Study and more. Unfortunately, none have been acted on yet.
The SJRA also worked with several other entities on the State’s first Flood Plan and developed a seasonal-lowering strategy for Lake Conroe to help protect downstream residents.
However, the seasonal strategy turned into an ad hocActive Storm Management strategy under withering criticism and a lawsuit from the Lake Conroe Association. The new strategy contributed to the flooding of hundreds of homes in May. Thousands more nearly flooded. It was the second highest release in SJRA history, exceeded only by Harvey.
Today, SJRA published a newsletter supposedly informing readers about their flood mitigation progress. The first 279 words explained how they don’t have money to do anything. So, they’ve worked with partners and the partner’s money to produce studies…none of which have been acted on yet.
The last paragraph states, “The [Flood-Management] Division has received and utilized grant funding via the Flood Infrastructure Fund through the Texas Water Development Board for studies and projects which may lead to flood reduction benefits in the future.“
“The Division will continue to pursue flood mitigation opportunities and partnerships throughout the region, with the ultimate goal of serving and improving the lives of the public,” said the newsletter.
Editorial Comment: The SJRA needs to focus on actionability in its studies.
Dredging
The City of Houston announced the start of a new dredging project in Lake Houston back on April 1. After delays due to floods, flood damage and a potential change in scope, they now hope to start within 30 days. I last saw them assembling pipe at the Army Corps’ old site south of the West Fork and the Forest Cove Pool.
The original project was designed to remove accumulated sediment between Kings Point and the FM1960 bridge.
The potential change in scope is encouraging. Due to additional sediment coming down from upstream during several floods earlier this year, the City has applied to FEMA for more money to cover several additional projects around the lake.
One such project is cleaning out the mouth of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch at River Grove Park. It has become badly silted in.
Diversion Ditch blockage.
A spokesperson for the City said they hope to hear from FEMA on this and other projects shortly.
The idea is to do as many projects as possible while the equipment is here. That reduces mobilization charges as a percentage of each job. And mobilization is a major component of most dredging jobs.
South of Forest Cove Pool, dredgers were assembling pipe on 7/16 while awaiting word on the final scope of the flood-mitigation projects.
Flood Gates
Earlier this week, I learned that FEMA and TDEM approved a change to an interlocal agreement in April concerning 11 new tainter gates for the Lake Houston Dam. The Coastal Water Authority approved the change in July. And the Houston City Council will take it up in September.
Councilman Fred Flickinger is reportedly meeting with Public Works next week to see what can be done to serve residents better and faster.
That’s this month’s roundup of flood-mitigation projects affecting the Lake Houston Area and Harris County.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/30/24
2558 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 54 since Beryl
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/20240830-DJI_20240830140330_0742_D.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2024-08-30 19:17:062024-08-30 19:20:09Flood Digest: Quick Updates on Six Flood-Mitigation Projects
GLO Posts Six State Action-Plan Amendments for Public Comment
9/3/2024 – Today, the Texas General Land Office (GLO) posted six state action-plan amendments for public comment. The amendments reallocate remaining money from federal grants for disasters between 2008 and 2019.
Includes Disaster Recovery Reallocation Program
Each of the six amendments includes a new Disaster Recovery Reallocation Program (DRRP). The DRRP will let the GLO utilize de-obligated and un-utilized funds remaining within the action plan for each disaster.
The $135 million being reallocated pales in comparison to the billions of dollars in unmet needs around the state. Better matching remaining dollars with remaining needs will help create a more resilient Texas. And simplifying the application process will help use up available money before federal deadlines expire.
Action-Plan Amendments, Deadlines, Major Changes
The GLO provided this summary of the deadlines for public comment on each amendment:
The six action-plan amendments are available for review at https://recovery.texas.gov/public-notices.
Submit all comments to cdr@recovery.texas.gov by 5:00 p.m. on their respective ending dates.
$135 Million Reallocated
The Hurricane Ike action plan amendment creates the DRRP. It will utilize remaining program funds from current disaster recovery grants from 2008 to 2019, with the exception of the 2011 Wildfires grant.
Each project will undergo eligibility analysis based on the grant that used to fund it.
As funds continue to be identified through the de-obligation process, they will be added to the DRRP
program. All remaining funds will be reallocated to this program for each grant.
The amounts going into the DRRP “pot” total $135 million. That includes:
Together, they total $135,000,000.
Consult Individual Plans for More Details
Based on the Dolly/Ike amendment, GLO will do a single call for projects statewide. Each agency that responds can submit up to two applications, and they will score them based on the published criteria.
Those criteria total more than 800 pages. Criteria for each of the six amendments are hyperlinked with the amounts above.
While that’s a daunting number of pages to read, GLO provides tables that show where money is going from and to, plus rules that will govern grant awards.
The GLO will perform the eligibility analysis to make applications easier. “We want this to be as simple as possible for applicants, so they will only have to submit one application and have all of the difficult analysis of eligibility and funding streams on our end,” said Brittany Eck, a GLO spokesperson.
If nothing else, these amendments dramatize how complex the flood mitigation process is. Today is 2562 days since Hurricane Harvey. But Hurricane Ike struck Houston on September 11, 2008. That’s 5836 days ago!
How to Submit Public Comments
Submit all comments to cdr@recovery.texas.gov by 5:00 p.m. on their respective ending dates to be considered. GLO requests that you please include the name and number of the action-plan amendments that you’re commenting on in the subject line.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/3/24
2562 Days since Hurricane Harvey
TCEQ Report on West Fork Pit Capture Doesn’t Mention “Pit Capture”
9/2/24 – On 8/26/24, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) issued a report on a San Jacinto West Fork pit capture. “Pit capture” happened when the river cut through an abandoned sand pit on a point bar instead of taking the long way around it. Worldwide, many environmental consequences have been linked to such pit captures. However, the TCEQ report never mentions the phrase.
Several area residents filed separate complaints with the TCEQ. Even though the report lists eight separate incident numbers, TCEQ apparently conducted one investigation (#1976402) and issued one report.
This report does not discuss other pit captures that happened elsewhere in the West and East Fork watersheds earlier this year.
The TCEQ report, which took four months to investigate, compile and release, did not:
TCEQ Finds No Problems
The four-month effort resulted in no action. Apparently, the TCEQ feels that since the pit is no longer being actively mined, it is no longer a threat to the public. It simply concludes that the incident falls within their “enforcement discretion” and they chose not to take any action.
TCEQ, which the Texas Sunset Commission dubbed a “reluctant regulator,” found nothing to get upset about even though the river:
Who Operated This Pit?
The report also ignores a complex web of interlocking corporations involved with West Fork sand mining. They include, but are not limited to, Hallett Materials, RGI, JR Development and the Rasmussen Group, headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa.
The report cites information obtained through a Jacob McCurry and identifies him as a Vice President of RGI Materials. But the Hallett Materials website lists Jacob McCurry as its Operations Manager.
The report never mentions Hallett, the largest operator on the West Fork. Hallett:
The Texas Secretary of State shows that RGI is an assumed name of Hallett Materials.
It’s all very confusing. Except for the TCEQ report’s conclusion. The TCEQ is taking no action.
Erosion of Cemetery
In 2018, I met Kurt Rasmussen at the Hallett plant. Rasmussen is part of the family that controls Hallett, RGI, and JR Development.
He gave me a tour of the captured pit on the south and west sides of the river. He also told me that Hallett was prohibited from mining that island in the middle of the pit because it is a Native American burial ground.
As a result of the pit capture, dikes no longer protect that island from the river and erosion.
Unmentioned Problems with Pit Captures
The TCEQ report never mentions “pit capture.” Nor does it mention any of the problems associated with pit capture discussed in academic literature.
Where a river enters a pit, erosion typically migrates upstream (headcutting). That can lead to more river bank erosion. (You can already see it happening in the photo above on the right.)
Literature about pit captures also suggests that when rivers take a direct path through a sand pit, it can shorten the river’s length. This can increase the river’s gradient (slope) downstream, leading to faster water flow and more aggressive erosion.
Captured pits can act as sediment traps when water moves slow enough for sand to drop out of suspension. But when water moves as fast as it did in the May flood, it can stir up sediment and transport it downstream.
I measured the speed of water moving through the captured Hallett/RGI/JR Development/Rasmussen/Riverwalk pit at 5 miles per hour. That’s enough to pick up and transport large grains of sand.
This can contribute to increased sedimentation in downstream reaches, affecting water quality, habitat, and the morphology of the river.
That sediment began dropping out of suspension where the water slowed as it approached the headwaters of Lake Houston.
The increased flow velocity after a sand pit capture can also lead to downcutting that disconnects the river from its floodplain, reducing the ability of the floodplain to absorb floodwaters and support wetland habitats.
Scientific reports also say that such downcutting can reduce the level of the water table and destroy riparian vegetation.
TCEQ Ignores Downstream Consequences
TCEQ concluded with the words: “the discharge from this pond has been granted enforcement discretion.” TCEQ chose not to issue any violations.
Their decision apparently stems from the fact that the pit is no longer actively used for mining. According to the report, the current owner, Riverwalk Porter LLC, claims it intends to use the property (and presumably the graveyard within it) for “recreational purposes such as hunting and camping.”
It’s unclear how TCEQ’s ruling will affect boating on the river. The public waterway now cuts through private property. Will boaters be trespassers?
So many questions! And the biggest one: Why did TCEQ not investigate other San Jacinto River Basin pit captures in active mines when its investigators were in the air?
To read the entire TCEQ report, click here.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/2/24
2561 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.
Flood Digest: Quick Updates on Six Flood-Mitigation Projects
8/30/24 – Another month has flown by. Below are quick updates on six flood-mitigation projects in the area.
HCFCD Beryl-related Ditch Maintenance
According to Jeremy Phillips, Director of Harris County Flood Control District’s (HCFCD) Asset Management Division, “The quickest way to ensure we are including debris in our post-storm cleanup is to fill out a service request online. We send them to our maintenance staff. They, in turn, ensure our contractors pick up the reported debris.”
To report a problem, go to: Request Service or Report a Problem (hcfcd.org).
I reported four trees this afternoon in a ditch that runs through Kings Forest just north of Kingwood Drive.
The second is more serious: a cluster of three trees that have fallen across the ditch about 50 feet upstream.
Such blockages can catch other debris floating downstream during heavy rains and form dams that back water up into homes. HCFCD has 2500 miles of channels to patrol. Help them help you. Report any problems you see on the web page above.
Emily Woodell, a HCFCD spokesperson, said, “Through our Beryl debris removal efforts, we are currently at 10,966 tons of debris removed from 14 different watersheds. Based on our debris estimates, we are approximately 33% complete with our countywide debris removal operation.” Harris County maintains ditches, streams and bayous in 23 different watersheds.
Northpark Expansion
The expansion of Northpark Drive will create an all-weather evacuation route from Kingwood for almost 80,000 people when Hamblen and Kingwood Drive are cut off.
The project has been delayed by utility conflicts, but those now have reportedly been resolved. The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority posted a new 3-week lookahead schedule yesterday.
In the next three weeks, contractors will focus on completing dirt work, preparing the sub-grade, and setting up rebar.
All photos below were taken on 8/30/24.
Tree Lane/Bens Branch Bridge Repair
I last posted about the Tree Lane bridge repairs over Bens Branch on 8/11/24. In the last 19 days, Houston Public Works has poured a few more loads of concrete and partially installed some culvert for a storm-drain outfall. No one was at the job site today.
This is the third attempt at repairs since 2019. The most recent started in February 2024. The original completion date was Spring 2024. Now it’s Fall 2024. Technically, Fall lasts until December 22. But there’s always 2025 as a fallback.
SJRA Projects
After Harvey, the San Jacinto River Authority engaged in several flood-mitigation projects with partners throughout the river basin. Projects included the San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Study, a Sedimentation Study, a Sand-Trap Study and more. Unfortunately, none have been acted on yet.
The SJRA also worked with several other entities on the State’s first Flood Plan and developed a seasonal-lowering strategy for Lake Conroe to help protect downstream residents.
However, the seasonal strategy turned into an ad hoc Active Storm Management strategy under withering criticism and a lawsuit from the Lake Conroe Association. The new strategy contributed to the flooding of hundreds of homes in May. Thousands more nearly flooded. It was the second highest release in SJRA history, exceeded only by Harvey.
Today, SJRA published a newsletter supposedly informing readers about their flood mitigation progress. The first 279 words explained how they don’t have money to do anything. So, they’ve worked with partners and the partner’s money to produce studies…none of which have been acted on yet.
The last paragraph states, “The [Flood-Management] Division has received and utilized grant funding via the Flood Infrastructure Fund through the Texas Water Development Board for studies and projects which may lead to flood reduction benefits in the future.“
“The Division will continue to pursue flood mitigation opportunities and partnerships throughout the region, with the ultimate goal of serving and improving the lives of the public,” said the newsletter.
Editorial Comment: The SJRA needs to focus on actionability in its studies.
Dredging
The City of Houston announced the start of a new dredging project in Lake Houston back on April 1. After delays due to floods, flood damage and a potential change in scope, they now hope to start within 30 days. I last saw them assembling pipe at the Army Corps’ old site south of the West Fork and the Forest Cove Pool.
The original project was designed to remove accumulated sediment between Kings Point and the FM1960 bridge.
The potential change in scope is encouraging. Due to additional sediment coming down from upstream during several floods earlier this year, the City has applied to FEMA for more money to cover several additional projects around the lake.
One such project is cleaning out the mouth of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch at River Grove Park. It has become badly silted in.
A spokesperson for the City said they hope to hear from FEMA on this and other projects shortly.
The idea is to do as many projects as possible while the equipment is here. That reduces mobilization charges as a percentage of each job. And mobilization is a major component of most dredging jobs.
Flood Gates
Earlier this week, I learned that FEMA and TDEM approved a change to an interlocal agreement in April concerning 11 new tainter gates for the Lake Houston Dam. The Coastal Water Authority approved the change in July. And the Houston City Council will take it up in September.
Councilman Fred Flickinger is reportedly meeting with Public Works next week to see what can be done to serve residents better and faster.
That’s this month’s roundup of flood-mitigation projects affecting the Lake Houston Area and Harris County.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/30/24
2558 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 54 since Beryl