In the past two weeks, construction activity for the Northpark expansion project has focused primarily on the ponds at US59 that will double as detention basins.
However, progress has also been made farther east. CenterPoint has been busy relocating gas lines. Contractors now have signed right-of-entry permits to UnionPacific (UP) property. And they have been busy installing a storm-sewer junction box in front of the Shell Station at Loop 494.
But the thing most people will notice this week is that two of the four outbound lanes on Northpark at 59 are now closed and will remain that way for several months.
Entry Ponds
I took all the pictures below during the last week of February 2024. For the first time, you can clearly see the outlines of both ponds. Contractors started on the north pond first. So, it is further along. But the outline of the south pond, ringed by transplanted trees, is now also clearly visible.
Looking N at S PondCloser shot shows three more decorative areas for plantings, one on each side of the triangle.Men working on foundation for retaining wall around one of the landscaping areasalong Northpark Drive.Reverse angle. Looking S at N pond.Retaining wall around area to be landscaped was just completed and contractors were removing forms for concrete.Pipe for storm drains is being stockpiled in North Pond.
As you can see from these photos, the sides of the ponds will slope toward the middle. Maximum depth for each pond will be about 20 feet.
According to Northpark Expansion Project Manager Ralph De Leon, excavation currently is down to about 7 feet max, the approximate location of the water table. So, the ponds will eventually get almost three times deeper than they are now. That’s a lot of dirt to move!
Contractors will use the dirt to fill in over the box culverts which will go down the center of Northpark. But because of several utility conflicts, placement of the box culverts had to be put on hold.
So, contractors are storing the dirt at the Eagle Sorters Sand Mine on the West Fork. It will be transported back to Northpark when needed.
Stored dirt (center) from entry ponds at the Eagle Mine on Sorters-McClellan Road.
Once contractors place the dirt over the culverts, they can then begin paving two additional lanes of traffic over where the center ditch used to be.
UnionPacific
Now that all the legal agreements are in place and engineering plans have been approved, work can begin around the UP tracks. It won’t happen immediately though. According to UP, rail traffic is now in its peak season. In the coming months, expect to see three types of activity.
Boring under the tracks to take excess stormwater from the entry ponds to the Kingwood Diversion Ditch and Bens Branch via Ditch One.
Placement of a one-piece concrete bed/continuous section of track over the project area with signal upgrades
Creation of ground-level feeder roads/turn lanes on each side of main lanes which will bridge over the tracks.
Looking E at Ditch One, Part of Northpark Expansion Drainage. Northpark is in upper right.
Northpark Expansion Project Lane Closures
Starting yesterday, 2/26/24, two westbound lanes on Northpark at 59 closed temporarily for reconstruction during the next few months.
During the first month, the existing left turn lane and one through lane will remain open. Then traffic will switch onto the newly constructed lanes, while the other lanes are completed. The contractor will install new storm sewer pipes and inlets along with new concrete roadway.
Looking N. Demolition has already begun on two westbound lanes.At 4 PM on Tuesday afternoon, OUTBOUND traffic on northpark was backed up past Russell-Palmer Road because of the lane closures.
Westbound traffic should expect delays and alternative routes are encouraged.
Judging by the outbound delay I saw today, I plan to avoid this bottleneck for the duration of the Northpark Expansion project.
Other Activity
The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority (LHRA) and City Councilmember Fred Flickinger are scheduled to meet with the City Attorney on Thursday, 2/29/24, to discuss the Entergy issue. After years of discussion, the utility has not yet begun moving its power lines and transformer out of the way.
LHRA will hold a board meeting on March 14th, in part, to discuss Entergy options.
On Friday, March 15, the City, LHRA and Entergy will meet. Hopefully, they will come to an agreement that doesn’t involve legal action, which could increase costs and cause delays.
Reminder: Phase II Meeting on March 7
Also don’t forget the public input session on March 7 from 5-7 PM. LHRA and TxDOT will discuss plans for the next phase of the project. It will reach past Woodland Hills Drive.
Thursday, March 7, 2024 from 5-7 p.m. Kingwood Park Community Center 4102 Rustic Woods Dr. Kingwood, TX 77345
Part of Northpark Phase II
The Northpark Expansion project will not only move traffic faster, it will create an all-weather evacuation route for 78,000 people in the Kingwood and Porter areas. During Harvey, other evacuation routes were cut off.
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/2024/02/20240227-DJI_0127.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2024-02-27 16:51:072024-02-27 21:57:00February ’24 Northpark Expansion Update Including Lane Closures
Harris County Engineering has released preliminary drainage plans and a drainage analysis in response to a FOIA Request for a new Kings River Development located along Kings Park Way and Pinehurst Trail Drive. The drainage analysis claims “no adverse impact” on surrounding neighborhoods because of the three detention ponds they plan to build.
But the analysis by R.G. Miller Engineers, which is now under review by Harris County Engineering:
Omits data
Contains misstatements
Leaves out related reports
Includes alarming assumptions.
Together, these issues call into question the conclusion of no adverse impact.
In the meantime, the clearing of the Phase-1 site, owned by Meritage Homes, continues, even though Harris County disapproved construction plans for its detention basin.
Looking W.Mertitage Kings River Phase I construction site was about 80% cleared as of 1/29/24 at noon.
Let’s look at each of the issues above.
Data Omitted
Typically, engineers justify “no adverse impact” by comparing pre- and post-development peak-discharge rates. If the post- rate does not exceed the pre- rate, then they claim “no adverse impact.”
But the drainage analysis does not show the pre-/post comparison in a simple table. Why?
Take Tables 7 and 8A, for instance. They address calculations involving Pond 1 on the first section of land now being cleared (see above).
Table 7 from R.G. Miller Drainage Analysis, Page 7. Note blank boxes top leftafter Existing Peak Discharge.
The data is missing. They omitted the data again in another series of tables later in the analysis.
Drainage Analysis Table 8a, Page 13. Note missing data after “Maximum Allowable Outflow,” line 6.
A third table (1-D, page 8) includes pre-development runoff for all three ponds. Together, they seem to justify the claim.
But I can’t find the peak runoff for Pond 1 by itself in any one of the pre/post comparisons. Keep in mind that the second two ponds won’t be built for years. In the meantime, Pond 1 will be the sole source of mitigation.
Soil Analysis and Environmental Reports Not Completed
Discharge rates also depend on soil types. That’s because the soil on a site affects the rate of infiltration.
But Section 10 on Page 15 of the drainage analysis talks about how a geotechnical report (which would determine infiltration rates) has not yet been produced. It says, “…a geotechnical investigation is required to characterize potential soil conditions.”
The drainage analysis also never mentions the wetlands on the property. Those would normally be addressed in an “Environmental Issues” section. But that section says only, “Environmental investigation has not been completed in this study.”
This is kind of like your jet taking off without a full load of fuel. You might get to your destination, but…
Misstatement?
The report also contains a huge misstatement.
For instance, Section 2.2.3 (Results) begins with, “The detention storage volume required for the proposed 41.5 acres residential development is 26.98 acre-feet per acre.” That would mean they require 11,196.7 acre-feet of detention. But they’re providing only 39.8 acre-feet of storage volume.
I’m sure this is a typo. Another section of the analysis later states that the 26.98 figure is computed by using Harris County’s minimum requirement of .65 acre-feet per acre.
Such misstatements and poor proofing call into question other calculations in the analysis.
Alarming Assumption
Section 2.1 (Existing Conditions) states, “Since the proposed detention ponds outfall to an existing 30-in RCP and 36-inch RCP at Pinehurst Trail Drive, the maximum allowable discharge in this study will be the maximum capacity of the 30-inch RCP and 36-inch RCP.”
That sounds to me as though they feel they can use 100% of the existing storm sewer capacity…without regard to the needs of surrounding neighborhoods. For instance, assume that surrounding neighborhoods already use 75% of existing capacity. If the new development uses 100%, that means the drains would be 75% over capacity.
No Clear Support for Claim of “No Adverse Impact”
Although, they claim “no adverse impact,” it’s not clear to a lay person how they arrived at that assumption.
In fairness this report is still under review by Harris County Engineering.
The development also sits in the City of Houston’s extra territorial jurisdiction.
I hope both entities make the engineers clarify the basis for their claims and produce a final report that the public can understand. I stared at these 47 pages all day and still don’t understand how they can justify “No adverse impacts.”
Is it too much to ask for clarity when the safety of people and their homes is at stake?
Construction Plan of Detention Basins “Disapproved”
Evidently Harris County Engineering had some concerns with this development, too.
On 2/9/24, Engineering disapproved the R.G. Miller construction plans for Detention Basin #1. Engineering kicked the plans back for housekeeping-type issues.
For instance, the plans didn’t contain:
ID of the channel the ponds drained into
A Project name
A Project number
The signature and seal of a registered Texas professional engineer (PE).
Harris County used to refuse to review plans that weren’t signed and sealed by a PE. I am told that such gratuitous omissions make reviewers angry.
I would link to all the construction plans here. But the file sizes are massive and the construction plans moot for now. More later when/if they’re approved. For now, to review the entire 45-page, 16 meg drainage analysis, click here .
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/26/24
2372 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/2024/02/20240226-DJI_0109.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2024-02-26 18:26:182024-02-27 21:48:43New Kings River Development Drainage Analysis, Plans Raise Questions
Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) has begun construction of a 512 acre-foot stormwater detention basin upstream from Lake Houston on Cypress Creek near Mercer Arboretum. HCFCD hopes to complete the project in 2024.
The Mercer Project is located on the northeast corner of Hardy Tollroad and FM1960. It stretches north to Cypress Creek. A residential neighborhood borders it on the east.
Clearing the wooded site in Commissioner Rodney Ellis’ Precinct 1 began in January and continues. Meanwhile, it appears that excavation has begun in the portion of the site closest to Cypress Creek.
The projects includes two connected basins. Construction of the north basin appears further along than the south basin.
Photos of Construction Progress
I took the photos above on Sunday afternoon, 2/25/24. Surprisingly, contractors were hard at work.
Looking NW from over FM1960 toward Cypress Creek and Hardy Tollroad.North Basin will be on right. Start of South Basin is on left.Lower right area contains wetlands.Reverse angle looking S toward downtown Houston on horizon. Cypress Creek in foreground.Wooded area on left is designated for floodplain preservation.Closer shot shows beginning of excavation of north pond.Contractor is burning downed trees. I did not notice any piles of mulch. Looking N at more new clearing for South Basin.
Details and Funding for Mercer Project
Both basins will have dry bottoms. An underground equalizer pipe will balance the water level in the two basins, while avoiding the majority of jurisdictional wetlands and streams on the property.
A 54″ outfall pipe will move water back into the creek from the basins after a storm at a rate consistent with pre-construction runoff. A 30-foot-wide berm will accommodate maintenance and future recreational activities such as hike and bike trails.
This project is listed in the 2018 Bond Program as F-88. HCFCD estimated the cost at the time at $25 million, which included land acquisition, design and construction. Construction alone costs $14.8 million.
Funding comes both from the bond and a grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program.
Benefits
The Mercer Project will lower the water surface elevation in the area shown below during a 100-year flood by .35 feet.
MercerProject location and benefit limit per HCFCD.
The Mercer project will remove the 100-year area of inundation from 30 structures and the 500-year area from another 17 structures. The homes benefitted extend from the Hardy downstream approximately to Cypresswood Drive.
Impact on Lake Houston Area
I applaud this project because every little bit counts. But three to four inches of flood-level reduction along Cypress Creek will have a much larger impact along Cypress Creek than in the Humble/Kingwood area. Here’s why.
Cypress Creek is just one of 11 watersheds that feed into Lake Houston. Cypress joins Spring Creek just upstream from the US59 bridge over the West Fork. In a 100-year storm evenly distributed across the region, the total runoff volume for each watershed upstream of Lake Houston is almost 2 million acre feet.
This project provides a hair more than 500 acre feet. So, by itself, it will retain only 0.025% of the water running off upstream of Lake Houston.
However, the Mercer Basin will retain 0.27% of the runoff in the Cypress Creek watershed. See table below provided by the SJRA.
Acre-feet of runoff from watersheds upstream of Lake Houston, assuming a 100-year rain uniformly distributed across the region.
A regional drainage study for the Cypress Creek watershed found that flooding along tributaries is predominately caused by stormwater from a rising Cypress Creek backing up into the tributaries. It’s not a lack of sufficient stormwater conveyance or drainage capacity on the tributaries themselves. HCFCD believes stormwater detention basins could reduce that backwater issue.
HCFCD’s Ultimate Recommendation for Cypress Creek
The regional drainage study described here recommends nearly 25,000 acre-feet of additional stormwater detention in the watershed – 50X more than this project provides. It’s unclear where all that land will come from in a watershed that’s already highly developed.
And that dramatizes the need to preserve land along creeks and bayous before it gets developed. That will be a far more cost-effective strategy in the long run.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/25/24
2371 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/20240225-DJI_0065.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2024-02-25 17:33:462024-02-25 17:42:27Construction Begins on Mercer Stormwater Detention Basin
February ’24 Northpark Expansion Update Including Lane Closures
In the past two weeks, construction activity for the Northpark expansion project has focused primarily on the ponds at US59 that will double as detention basins.
However, progress has also been made farther east. CenterPoint has been busy relocating gas lines. Contractors now have signed right-of-entry permits to UnionPacific (UP) property. And they have been busy installing a storm-sewer junction box in front of the Shell Station at Loop 494.
But the thing most people will notice this week is that two of the four outbound lanes on Northpark at 59 are now closed and will remain that way for several months.
Entry Ponds
I took all the pictures below during the last week of February 2024. For the first time, you can clearly see the outlines of both ponds. Contractors started on the north pond first. So, it is further along. But the outline of the south pond, ringed by transplanted trees, is now also clearly visible.
As you can see from these photos, the sides of the ponds will slope toward the middle. Maximum depth for each pond will be about 20 feet.
According to Northpark Expansion Project Manager Ralph De Leon, excavation currently is down to about 7 feet max, the approximate location of the water table. So, the ponds will eventually get almost three times deeper than they are now. That’s a lot of dirt to move!
Contractors will use the dirt to fill in over the box culverts which will go down the center of Northpark. But because of several utility conflicts, placement of the box culverts had to be put on hold.
So, contractors are storing the dirt at the Eagle Sorters Sand Mine on the West Fork. It will be transported back to Northpark when needed.
After Harvey, the Army Corps used the Eagle Mine as a placement area for sand and silt dredged from the San Jacinto West Fork.
Once contractors place the dirt over the culverts, they can then begin paving two additional lanes of traffic over where the center ditch used to be.
UnionPacific
Now that all the legal agreements are in place and engineering plans have been approved, work can begin around the UP tracks. It won’t happen immediately though. According to UP, rail traffic is now in its peak season. In the coming months, expect to see three types of activity.
Northpark Expansion Project Lane Closures
Starting yesterday, 2/26/24, two westbound lanes on Northpark at 59 closed temporarily for reconstruction during the next few months.
During the first month, the existing left turn lane and one through lane will remain open. Then traffic will switch onto the newly constructed lanes, while the other lanes are completed. The contractor will install new storm sewer pipes and inlets along with new concrete roadway.
Westbound traffic should expect delays and alternative routes are encouraged.
Judging by the outbound delay I saw today, I plan to avoid this bottleneck for the duration of the Northpark Expansion project.
Other Activity
The Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority (LHRA) and City Councilmember Fred Flickinger are scheduled to meet with the City Attorney on Thursday, 2/29/24, to discuss the Entergy issue. After years of discussion, the utility has not yet begun moving its power lines and transformer out of the way.
LHRA will hold a board meeting on March 14th, in part, to discuss Entergy options.
On Friday, March 15, the City, LHRA and Entergy will meet. Hopefully, they will come to an agreement that doesn’t involve legal action, which could increase costs and cause delays.
Reminder: Phase II Meeting on March 7
Also don’t forget the public input session on March 7 from 5-7 PM. LHRA and TxDOT will discuss plans for the next phase of the project. It will reach past Woodland Hills Drive.
Thursday, March 7, 2024
from 5-7 p.m.
Kingwood Park Community Center
4102 Rustic Woods Dr.
Kingwood, TX 77345
The Northpark Expansion project will not only move traffic faster, it will create an all-weather evacuation route for 78,000 people in the Kingwood and Porter areas. During Harvey, other evacuation routes were cut off.
For More Information
For more information about the project including construction plans, visit the project pages of the LHRA/Tirz 10 website. Or see these posts on ReduceFlooding:
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/27/24
2373 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.
New Kings River Development Drainage Analysis, Plans Raise Questions
Harris County Engineering has released preliminary drainage plans and a drainage analysis in response to a FOIA Request for a new Kings River Development located along Kings Park Way and Pinehurst Trail Drive. The drainage analysis claims “no adverse impact” on surrounding neighborhoods because of the three detention ponds they plan to build.
But the analysis by R.G. Miller Engineers, which is now under review by Harris County Engineering:
Together, these issues call into question the conclusion of no adverse impact.
In the meantime, the clearing of the Phase-1 site, owned by Meritage Homes, continues, even though Harris County disapproved construction plans for its detention basin.
Let’s look at each of the issues above.
Data Omitted
Typically, engineers justify “no adverse impact” by comparing pre- and post-development peak-discharge rates. If the post- rate does not exceed the pre- rate, then they claim “no adverse impact.”
But the drainage analysis does not show the pre-/post comparison in a simple table. Why?
Take Tables 7 and 8A, for instance. They address calculations involving Pond 1 on the first section of land now being cleared (see above).
The data is missing. They omitted the data again in another series of tables later in the analysis.
A third table (1-D, page 8) includes pre-development runoff for all three ponds. Together, they seem to justify the claim.
But I can’t find the peak runoff for Pond 1 by itself in any one of the pre/post comparisons. Keep in mind that the second two ponds won’t be built for years. In the meantime, Pond 1 will be the sole source of mitigation.
Soil Analysis and Environmental Reports Not Completed
Discharge rates also depend on soil types. That’s because the soil on a site affects the rate of infiltration.
But Section 10 on Page 15 of the drainage analysis talks about how a geotechnical report (which would determine infiltration rates) has not yet been produced. It says, “…a geotechnical investigation is required to characterize potential soil conditions.”
The drainage analysis also never mentions the wetlands on the property. Those would normally be addressed in an “Environmental Issues” section. But that section says only, “Environmental investigation has not been completed in this study.”
This is kind of like your jet taking off without a full load of fuel. You might get to your destination, but…
Misstatement?
The report also contains a huge misstatement.
For instance, Section 2.2.3 (Results) begins with, “The detention storage volume required for the proposed 41.5 acres residential development is 26.98 acre-feet per acre.” That would mean they require 11,196.7 acre-feet of detention. But they’re providing only 39.8 acre-feet of storage volume.
I’m sure this is a typo. Another section of the analysis later states that the 26.98 figure is computed by using Harris County’s minimum requirement of .65 acre-feet per acre.
Such misstatements and poor proofing call into question other calculations in the analysis.
Alarming Assumption
Section 2.1 (Existing Conditions) states, “Since the proposed detention ponds outfall to an existing 30-in RCP and 36-inch RCP at Pinehurst Trail Drive, the maximum allowable discharge in this study will be the maximum capacity of the 30-inch RCP and 36-inch RCP.”
That sounds to me as though they feel they can use 100% of the existing storm sewer capacity…without regard to the needs of surrounding neighborhoods. For instance, assume that surrounding neighborhoods already use 75% of existing capacity. If the new development uses 100%, that means the drains would be 75% over capacity.
No Clear Support for Claim of “No Adverse Impact”
Although, they claim “no adverse impact,” it’s not clear to a lay person how they arrived at that assumption.
In fairness this report is still under review by Harris County Engineering.
The development also sits in the City of Houston’s extra territorial jurisdiction.
I hope both entities make the engineers clarify the basis for their claims and produce a final report that the public can understand. I stared at these 47 pages all day and still don’t understand how they can justify “No adverse impacts.”
Is it too much to ask for clarity when the safety of people and their homes is at stake?
Construction Plan of Detention Basins “Disapproved”
Evidently Harris County Engineering had some concerns with this development, too.
On 2/9/24, Engineering disapproved the R.G. Miller construction plans for Detention Basin #1. Engineering kicked the plans back for housekeeping-type issues.
For instance, the plans didn’t contain:
Harris County used to refuse to review plans that weren’t signed and sealed by a PE. I am told that such gratuitous omissions make reviewers angry.
I would link to all the construction plans here. But the file sizes are massive and the construction plans moot for now. More later when/if they’re approved. For now, to review the entire 45-page, 16 meg drainage analysis, click here .
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/26/24
2372 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.
Construction Begins on Mercer Stormwater Detention Basin
Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) has begun construction of a 512 acre-foot stormwater detention basin upstream from Lake Houston on Cypress Creek near Mercer Arboretum. HCFCD hopes to complete the project in 2024.
The Mercer Project is located on the northeast corner of Hardy Tollroad and FM1960. It stretches north to Cypress Creek. A residential neighborhood borders it on the east.
Clearing the wooded site in Commissioner Rodney Ellis’ Precinct 1 began in January and continues. Meanwhile, it appears that excavation has begun in the portion of the site closest to Cypress Creek.
The projects includes two connected basins. Construction of the north basin appears further along than the south basin.
Photos of Construction Progress
I took the photos above on Sunday afternoon, 2/25/24. Surprisingly, contractors were hard at work.
Details and Funding for Mercer Project
Both basins will have dry bottoms. An underground equalizer pipe will balance the water level in the two basins, while avoiding the majority of jurisdictional wetlands and streams on the property.
A 54″ outfall pipe will move water back into the creek from the basins after a storm at a rate consistent with pre-construction runoff. A 30-foot-wide berm will accommodate maintenance and future recreational activities such as hike and bike trails.
This project is listed in the 2018 Bond Program as F-88. HCFCD estimated the cost at the time at $25 million, which included land acquisition, design and construction. Construction alone costs $14.8 million.
Funding comes both from the bond and a grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program.
Benefits
The Mercer Project will lower the water surface elevation in the area shown below during a 100-year flood by .35 feet.
The Mercer project will remove the 100-year area of inundation from 30 structures and the 500-year area from another 17 structures. The homes benefitted extend from the Hardy downstream approximately to Cypresswood Drive.
Impact on Lake Houston Area
I applaud this project because every little bit counts. But three to four inches of flood-level reduction along Cypress Creek will have a much larger impact along Cypress Creek than in the Humble/Kingwood area. Here’s why.
Cypress Creek is just one of 11 watersheds that feed into Lake Houston. Cypress joins Spring Creek just upstream from the US59 bridge over the West Fork. In a 100-year storm evenly distributed across the region, the total runoff volume for each watershed upstream of Lake Houston is almost 2 million acre feet.
This project provides a hair more than 500 acre feet. So, by itself, it will retain only 0.025% of the water running off upstream of Lake Houston.
However, the Mercer Basin will retain 0.27% of the runoff in the Cypress Creek watershed. See table below provided by the SJRA.
A regional drainage study for the Cypress Creek watershed found that flooding along tributaries is predominately caused by stormwater from a rising Cypress Creek backing up into the tributaries. It’s not a lack of sufficient stormwater conveyance or drainage capacity on the tributaries themselves. HCFCD believes stormwater detention basins could reduce that backwater issue.
HCFCD’s Ultimate Recommendation for Cypress Creek
The regional drainage study described here recommends nearly 25,000 acre-feet of additional stormwater detention in the watershed – 50X more than this project provides. It’s unclear where all that land will come from in a watershed that’s already highly developed.
And that dramatizes the need to preserve land along creeks and bayous before it gets developed. That will be a far more cost-effective strategy in the long run.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/25/24
2371 Days since Hurricane Harvey