US Fish & Wildlife Map Shows Wetlands Dot Development
From US Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory. Madera will stretch past the left/right edges of this picture north of SH242 (the east/west highway near bottom.) FM1314 bisects picture from N to S in middle.
FEMA’s Base Flood Elevation Viewer Shows Flood Risk
Note that this survey shows only about a quarter of Madera (see below). The survey stops abruptly on the western margin. So, it is hard to say with certainty how bad flooding is throughout the rest of the site.
Yellow outline shows approximate outline of FEMA BFE survey shown above within Madera tract(black/white outline).
Option to See Depth of 100-Year Flood Waters
Also note that the purple area shows only the extent of 100- and 10-year floods. However, within the FEMA BFE viewer, you also have the option to select a layer that illustrates the depth of 100-year floodwaters. See below. (FEMA does not offer the option to show the depth of 10-year floods.)
FEMA’s estimated Base Flood Elevation Viewer showing extent of 100-year flood on left and depth on right.
Limitations of BFE Viewer
Of course, FEMA shows “estimated conditions” before developers bring in fill and alter drainage. But notice how a pre-existing development near Madera would fare in the same 100-year flood. You can see the close up below just above SH242 near the right edge of the image above.
FEMA shows that most homes in this development are still in the flood zone and would still flood to a depth of 1-2 feet in a hundred-year flood.
The street leading out of the development to SH242 could be under more than FIVE FEET of water in places!
FEMA Base flood Elevation Viewer
FEMA’s “Estimated Base Flood Elevation” is “The estimated elevation of flood water during the 1% annual chance storm event.” Structures below the estimated water surface elevation may experience flooding.” A 1%-annual-chance flood is also known as a 100-year flood. FEMA defines properties with a 1% annual chance of flooding as having “high flood risk” and says they have a 26% chance of flooding during the life of a 30-year mortgage.
Purposes of BFE Viewer
The agency developed its Base Flood Elevation viewer with several purposes in mind. To:
Inform personal risk decisions related to the purchase of flood insurance and coverage levels.
Inform local and individual building and construction approaches.
Prepare local risk assessments, Hazard Mitigation Plans, Land Use Plans, etc.
Provide information for “Letter of Map Amendment” (LOMA) submittals.
A LOMA lets the developer of a subdivision change the depiction of how flooding affects his/her subdivision. It’s the key to offering up-to-date risk assessments.
Full BFE Reports Available
FEMA also lets you download or print full BFE reports that give more specific estimates of flood depth at exact points, not just within a wide area.
FEMA’s BFE Viewer also gives you the option to print out a detailed flood-risk report by clicking on a point.
At the point shown above, you could expect 4.2 feet of water above the land surface in a 1%-chance flood. For the full report, click here.
Here’s what that point looked like last Saturday (1/22/22) from the air.
Madera development today at FM1314 and SH242, the point shown in BFE report above.
Cross-check this area on the maps above for wetlands and swamps! Then you can see why it’s so soupy.
BFE, Fill Not Mentioned in Drainage Analysis or Construction Plans
Text searches of Madera’s construction and drainage plans showed no references to “BFE” or “base flood.”
It seems unlikely that a “cut and fill” operation could excavate enough dirt from Madera’s drainage channel (dotted blue line with red parallel lines) and detention ponds to raise the whole site out the hundred-year flood zone. Five feet is a lot of fill for a 1700 acre site.
To raise a site this large, contractors would likely have to bring in fill from outside the property. But a text search from the word “fill” did not turn up any exact matches either.
So maybe they’re just planning to create the world’s biggest drain and hope to carry water off before it can reach homes.
However, a summary of the Madera master drainage plan notes…
“Coordination with MCED [Montgomery County Engineering Department] andadjacent property owners is recommended … on the potential need for inundation easements.”
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/2022/01/20220125-Screen-Shot-2022-01-25-at-3.52.07-PM.jpg?fit=1200%2C600&ssl=16001200adminadmin2022-01-27 06:08:242022-01-27 06:22:32New MoCo Development Being Built on Wetlands in 10-Year Flood Zone
Yesterday, 1/25/22, Harris County Commissioners Court named Dr. Christina Petersen as the new head of the Flood Control District. That position had been open for seven months since Russ Poppe resigned last July. Below is a brief bio of Petersen distributed by David Berry, the new Harris County administrator.
Dr. Christina Petersen, new head of Harris County Flood Control District
Petersen Background
“Dr. Christina “Tina” Petersen will serve as the first female Director of the Flood Control District in its 85-year history. She joins Harris County from the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District, where she has served as Deputy General Manager for the past 3 years and oversaw the District’s Regulatory Planning, Scientific Research, and Water Conservation Programs. She earned her Bachelor’s degree in Biology and Environmental Studies from Baylor University and her Master’s and doctoral degrees in Environmental Engineering from the University of Houston. She is a registered Professional Engineer in Texas and has over 15 years of experience working with local city governments as well as water authorities, State agencies, and cities across Texas to deliver complex water supply and water quality projects.”
I’m trying to learn more about Dr. Petersen’s background. What I didn’t see in this was any mention of hydrology experience. Nor did I see any mention of private-sector experience. More news to follow.
Other Related Appointments
Meanwhile, Berry’s press release also listed:
Dr. Milton Rahman, who will serve as the new County Engineer. Dr. Rahman is a Professional Engineer, Project Management Professional, and Certified Floodplain Manager.
Lisa Lin, the first director of the Sustainability for Harris County.
Daniel Ramos, the new Executive Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
Posted by Bob Rehak based on a press release by Dave Berry, Harris County Administrator
1611 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Tina-Petersen.jpg?fit=468%2C624&ssl=1624468adminadmin2022-01-26 12:01:582022-01-26 13:27:08Harris County Names Dr. Tina Petersen New Head of Flood Control District
When it comes to flood control in Harris County, you often hear claims of “historic disinvestment” in low-to-moderate income (LMI) neighborhoods. Residents allege that they flood because Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) funneled dollars into affluent neighborhoods for decades while ignoring lower-income watersheds. But are those claims true? Not if you look at the numbers since 2000.
What Data Shows
See the table below. I compiled it from data supplied by HCFCD in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request. The table ranks each watershed in the county by its percentage of LMI residents. It also breaks them into two groups – those with percentages of LMI residents above and below 50%.
HCFCD Spending by Watershed since 2000through the end of Q3, 2021.
Harris County has 23 watersheds.
Column 1 shows the watersheds broken into two groups – those with more or less than 50% LMI residents.
Column 2 shows the percentage of LMI residents in the watershed. Those with the highest percentages of low-income residents are the least affluent.
Column 3 shows the historic investment in flood mitigation between 2000 and the end of the third-quarter 2021.
Column 4 shows the historic investment plus inflation compounded annually.
Column 5 shows the percentage of inflation over time.
No Historic Disinvestment
In raw dollars, the eight least affluent watersheds received 61% of all dollars since 2000. Fifteen more affluent watersheds received only 39%.
The 8 less-affluent watersheds received $700 million more than the other 15!
After accounting for inflation, the eight low-to-moderate income watersheds received on average almost $300 million each. The rest received only about $90 million each.
Notice also how the rates of inflation tend to be much higher in the less affluent group. That’s because HCFCD has been spending more money in these watersheds over a longer period of time. For example: If a watershed received a $10 million project in 2000, more inflation would apply than if the investment was made yesterday.
Conclusion: I see no pattern of historic disinvestment in low-to-moderate income neighborhoods by HCFCD.
Funding Flows to Damage
The reality of flood bond spending is far more nuanced than most people have the time or desire to explore. At a high level, though, funding flows to damage.
Older neighborhoods inside the Beltway have higher flood risk because of older development regulations, older building codes, and storm sewers or ditches that have filled in with silt or vegetation. See pictures below from Halls Bayou.
Blocked street drains that turn neighborhoods into detention ponds.
The people in this neighborhood (Halls Bayou) claim they “flood every time.” But if you look at historical gage data, you will see that Halls came out of its banks at Tidwell only twice in the last 20 years – once during Harvey and once during Imelda. Harvey was bad. During Imelda, the bayou overtopped banks only by a foot.
I conclude that repeat flooding in the neighborhood shown above comes from blocked street ditches. They turn neighborhoods into giant detention ponds. But the ditches are the responsibility of Precinct Commissioners, not HCFCD.
To sum up, I do not see a pattern of historic disinvestment by HCFCD in Harris County’s LMI neighborhoods.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/25/2022
1610 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Screen-Shot-2022-01-25-at-7.07.51-AM.png?fit=758%2C1060&ssl=11060758adminadmin2022-01-25 11:27:132022-01-25 11:37:35Myth Buster: Historic Disinvestment in LMI Watersheds?
New MoCo Development Being Built on Wetlands in 10-Year Flood Zone
At least part of Madera, a new 1,700-acre development in Montgomery County that straddles FM1314 immediately north of SH242, is being built on wetlands and is in a 10-year flood zone.
US Fish & Wildlife Map Shows Wetlands Dot Development
FEMA’s Base Flood Elevation Viewer Shows Flood Risk
Note that this survey shows only about a quarter of Madera (see below). The survey stops abruptly on the western margin. So, it is hard to say with certainty how bad flooding is throughout the rest of the site.
Option to See Depth of 100-Year Flood Waters
Also note that the purple area shows only the extent of 100- and 10-year floods. However, within the FEMA BFE viewer, you also have the option to select a layer that illustrates the depth of 100-year floodwaters. See below. (FEMA does not offer the option to show the depth of 10-year floods.)
Limitations of BFE Viewer
Of course, FEMA shows “estimated conditions” before developers bring in fill and alter drainage. But notice how a pre-existing development near Madera would fare in the same 100-year flood. You can see the close up below just above SH242 near the right edge of the image above.
FEMA’s “Estimated Base Flood Elevation” is “The estimated elevation of flood water during the 1% annual chance storm event.” Structures below the estimated water surface elevation may experience flooding.” A 1%-annual-chance flood is also known as a 100-year flood. FEMA defines properties with a 1% annual chance of flooding as having “high flood risk” and says they have a 26% chance of flooding during the life of a 30-year mortgage.
Purposes of BFE Viewer
The agency developed its Base Flood Elevation viewer with several purposes in mind. To:
A LOMA lets the developer of a subdivision change the depiction of how flooding affects his/her subdivision. It’s the key to offering up-to-date risk assessments.
Full BFE Reports Available
FEMA also lets you download or print full BFE reports that give more specific estimates of flood depth at exact points, not just within a wide area.
At the point shown above, you could expect 4.2 feet of water above the land surface in a 1%-chance flood. For the full report, click here.
Here’s what that point looked like last Saturday (1/22/22) from the air.
Cross-check this area on the maps above for wetlands and swamps! Then you can see why it’s so soupy.
BFE, Fill Not Mentioned in Drainage Analysis or Construction Plans
Text searches of Madera’s construction and drainage plans showed no references to “BFE” or “base flood.”
It seems unlikely that a “cut and fill” operation could excavate enough dirt from Madera’s drainage channel (dotted blue line with red parallel lines) and detention ponds to raise the whole site out the hundred-year flood zone. Five feet is a lot of fill for a 1700 acre site.
To raise a site this large, contractors would likely have to bring in fill from outside the property. But a text search from the word “fill” did not turn up any exact matches either.
So maybe they’re just planning to create the world’s biggest drain and hope to carry water off before it can reach homes.
However, a summary of the Madera master drainage plan notes…
Still, engineers for the development claim it will have “No adverse impact.”
To review Montgomery County regulations regarding flood zones and drainage, see the documents under the “Construction Regs in Flood Hazard Areas” tab on my reports page. You’ll see plenty of opportunities for improvement.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/27/22
1612 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.
Harris County Names Dr. Tina Petersen New Head of Flood Control District
Yesterday, 1/25/22, Harris County Commissioners Court named Dr. Christina Petersen as the new head of the Flood Control District. That position had been open for seven months since Russ Poppe resigned last July. Below is a brief bio of Petersen distributed by David Berry, the new Harris County administrator.
Petersen Background
“Dr. Christina “Tina” Petersen will serve as the first female Director of the Flood Control District in its 85-year history. She joins Harris County from the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District, where she has served as Deputy General Manager for the past 3 years and oversaw the District’s Regulatory Planning, Scientific Research, and Water Conservation Programs. She earned her Bachelor’s degree in Biology and Environmental Studies from Baylor University and her Master’s and doctoral degrees in Environmental Engineering from the University of Houston. She is a registered Professional Engineer in Texas and has over 15 years of experience working with local city governments as well as water authorities, State agencies, and cities across Texas to deliver complex water supply and water quality projects.”
I’m trying to learn more about Dr. Petersen’s background. What I didn’t see in this was any mention of hydrology experience. Nor did I see any mention of private-sector experience. More news to follow.
Other Related Appointments
Meanwhile, Berry’s press release also listed:
Posted by Bob Rehak based on a press release by Dave Berry, Harris County Administrator
1611 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Myth Buster: Historic Disinvestment in LMI Watersheds?
When it comes to flood control in Harris County, you often hear claims of “historic disinvestment” in low-to-moderate income (LMI) neighborhoods. Residents allege that they flood because Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) funneled dollars into affluent neighborhoods for decades while ignoring lower-income watersheds. But are those claims true? Not if you look at the numbers since 2000.
What Data Shows
See the table below. I compiled it from data supplied by HCFCD in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request. The table ranks each watershed in the county by its percentage of LMI residents. It also breaks them into two groups – those with percentages of LMI residents above and below 50%.
Harris County has 23 watersheds.
No Historic Disinvestment
In raw dollars, the eight least affluent watersheds received 61% of all dollars since 2000. Fifteen more affluent watersheds received only 39%.
The 8 less-affluent watersheds received $700 million more than the other 15!
After accounting for inflation, the eight low-to-moderate income watersheds received on average almost $300 million each. The rest received only about $90 million each.
Notice also how the rates of inflation tend to be much higher in the less affluent group. That’s because HCFCD has been spending more money in these watersheds over a longer period of time. For example: If a watershed received a $10 million project in 2000, more inflation would apply than if the investment was made yesterday.
Funding Flows to Damage
The reality of flood bond spending is far more nuanced than most people have the time or desire to explore. At a high level, though, funding flows to damage.
Older neighborhoods inside the Beltway have higher flood risk because of older development regulations, older building codes, and storm sewers or ditches that have filled in with silt or vegetation. See pictures below from Halls Bayou.
The people in this neighborhood (Halls Bayou) claim they “flood every time.” But if you look at historical gage data, you will see that Halls came out of its banks at Tidwell only twice in the last 20 years – once during Harvey and once during Imelda. Harvey was bad. During Imelda, the bayou overtopped banks only by a foot.
I conclude that repeat flooding in the neighborhood shown above comes from blocked street ditches. They turn neighborhoods into giant detention ponds. But the ditches are the responsibility of Precinct Commissioners, not HCFCD.
To sum up, I do not see a pattern of historic disinvestment by HCFCD in Harris County’s LMI neighborhoods.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/25/2022
1610 Days since Hurricane Harvey