As a December 31st deadline expired, approximately $162 million – allocated by HUD to reimburse homeowners in the City of Houston for repairs they made after Harvey – remained unused. The City had worked on the reimbursement program for TWO years. Yet in all that time, the City’s Department of Housing and Community Development successfully processed only 120 applications for reimbursement of repairs. Grants awarded to those 120 families totaled a mere $2,024,000 out of the $164 million allocated – just 1.2% of available funds.
Desperate Families Needlessly Left Empty Handed
Meanwhile, flooded families:
Never received applications, despite repeated calls and emails from potential applicants
Received an application only hours before the deadline expired on the New Year’s weekend
Received incomplete and misleading information.
Regarding the last point, an email sent to residents at the 11th hour failed to inform them that they just needed to start the application and sign it before January 1st. Instead, residents were told that they needed to complete the application before December 31 (i.e., before the end of the day on December 30).
A two-step application process, engineered by the City, complicated and delayed aid. Residents first had to fill out a survey to qualify to fill out an application. The City then tried to sort the survey respondents into priority groups. This increased the workload, created management complexity, and delayed the filing of formal applications for years while the deadline passed.
Had everyone just been invited to fill out an application early on, no one would have missed the deadline.
As the final deadline loomed, it became apparent that the City wasn’t coming close to meeting its performance goals and that aid would not reach people who needed it. As a last resort to help flood victims, the GLO tried to terminate its contract with the City and take over the City’s Harvey-aid program. But the City sued the GLO to prevent the takeover. That cost even more precious time.
Before the final deadline, the GLO notified the City that it should alert all potential applicants and the media so that they, in turn, could spread the word about the impending deadline. The GLO even provided a sample press release that the City could tweak for local media. Instead, the City posted a notice on Twitter and social media. That severely limited the reach of the message.
Confusion Reigned
To this day, lawsuit settlement talks between the City and GLO continue. Meanwhile, the GLO provided the City of Houston with funds for the Homeowner Assistance Program (HoAP), which included its reimbursement program.
But according to Jennifer Coulter, a would-be applicant who called the City, the City swore the GLO had taken control. The resident then called the GLO. GLO correctly said, “No, the City has it.” The back-and-forth continued until she was told the deadline passed.
The Coulter family lived in a trailer in their driveway for almost two years as they repaired their home.
Resident Chris Johnsen flooded 4 feet during Harvey. After waiting 3.5 years for help, he received an email from Housing and Community Development minutes before the close of business on December 30. It erroneously told him he needed to complete and sign the application before December 31.
He was out of town when the application arrived at 4:08 PM on December 30th, but submitted it after he returned. The City rejected his application. When he complained, the City told him, “Unfortunately we are not able to accept the application because it is past the deadline of 12/31/2020.”
Adding Insult to Injury
Being flooded during Harvey and financially devastated during reconstruction were bad enough. But being denied aid through the City’s bureaucratic bungling added insult to injury. Ironically, the City requested and received a nearly $30 million increase in the amount of aid available for reimbursements part way through the program…and didn’t make a dent in it. The amount increased from $135,691,299 to $164,117,633.
Meanwhile, people are moving on with their lives and giving up. But maybe that’s the City’s intention.
The Big Question: Why?
The Department of Housing and Community Development’s avowed goal with Harvey relief is to focus on those “most in need and most at risk.” People who can afford to repair their own homes and then seek reimbursement generally do not fall into that category. By law, at least 70% of HUD reimbursement funds must go to LMI (low-to-moderate income) households.
However, the 70% requirement does not apply to eachindividual program within Houston’s total aid allocation. It’s an average requirement across all programs. So the entire $164 million allocated for reimbursements could have gone to non-LMI households without jeopardizing the City’s LMI requirement.
This has all the hallmarks of a conscious decision to limit reimbursement aid after requesting more. Why?
One observer suggested that spending less on reimbursements will let the City funnel those funds into multifamily housing instead.
This brings to a sad, sorry end one of the darkest chapters in Houston’s history. The end of the program means the death of hope for families desperate for assistance. Many cashed in retirement savings and their children’s college funds to rebuild their homes after Harvey.
The City claims hundreds of additional families filed applications before the end of the year for reimbursements. But the GLO has not yet confirmed those.
The City is allowed to process applications received before January 1. But the City can no longer accept applications.
Reimbursements: A Small Part of a Much Bigger Problem
On January 4, the City updated its HUD-compliance website. It showed that out of approximately $1.28 billion dollars that HUD set aside for City of Houston residents, the City still had not submitted applications for almost $800 million dollars (62.5% of the total). Said another way, the City could not achieve almost two thirds of its aid-distribution goals in two years.
The City has not returned calls, texts and emails from ReduceFlooding.com requesting comment and the City’s perspective.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/13/2021
1233 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Screen-Shot-2021-01-13-at-12.35.56-PM.jpg?fit=1200%2C692&ssl=16921200adminadmin2021-01-13 13:34:382021-01-13 16:05:55City of Houston Couldn’t Even Give Away Harvey Aid Due to Bureaucratic Bungling
Castle Hill Partners in Austin, the company that owns CH-B Kingland LLC, did not return phone calls re: its development plans. However, since tollway construction is moving from west to east, it would make sense to develop the western portions in Montgomery and Harris Counties before moving east into Liberty County.
Kingland’s 2017 sales brochure shows that almost half of the western section lies in Montgomery County along the San Jacinto East Fork. The remainder of the western section lies within Harris County. Both portions lie partially within the City of Houston’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction.
Western section of Kingland shows a 41.3 acre detention pond, plus seven smaller ponds. But it’s unclear whether they will lie in the floodway or floodplain.
FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer shows the extent of the floodway and floodplains in that area.
Crosshatched area = floodway. Aqua = 100 year floodplain. Brown = 500 year.
I interviewed a family in that small development south of Kingland property that straddles the Harris/Liberty County Line and discovered that they flooded from the East Fork during both Harvey and Imelda. They live more than 1.5 miles from the nearest mapped floodplain. However, that could soon change when the new post-Harvey flood maps are redrawn.
Anyone downstream on the East Fork or Luce needs to keep a close eye on this one. It has the potential to further alter the hydrology of the watershed.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/11/2021
1231 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 480 since Imelda
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/2021/01/20210101-RJR_4417-1-e1610410584123.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2021-01-11 18:25:112021-01-11 22:16:33Thousands of Acres in East Fork, Luce Bayou Watersheds to be Developed as Part of Kingland
LH Ranch, Ltd has proposed a new wetland mitigation bank for the area upstream from Lake Houston. Part of the land borders the San Jacinto East Fork, opposite Lake Houston Park. Another part to the east stretches across Luces Bayou.
Developers, pipelines, etc., whose projects will cause unavoidable resource losses elsewhere, negotiate “credits” with such organizations to offset the impacts of their developments.
About the Proposed Lake Houston Mitigation Bank
LH Ranch would put conservation easements on 952 acres to create two wetland mitigation banks.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Preliminary indications are that no known threatened and/or endangered species, or their critical habitat will be affected by the proposed work.
Goals of Mitigation Bank
The primary goals of the Lake Houston Mitigation Bank are to protect the water quality of the San Jacinto River system including Luce Bayou and Lake Houston.
From a conservation perspective, restoration projects within the proposed bank could:
Reduce sediment flowing into Lake Houston by 4,000 – 6,000 tons per year
Increase flood storage and reduce pulse flows that exit the property
Restore the ability to transport an amount of sediment adequate for the stream’s watershed
Provide habitat and refuge to wildlife
Establish a dynamically stable forest both resistant and resilient to disturbance
Ensure the longevity and function of the system through long-term conservation measures.
From a mitigation perspective, the bank would also:
Provide resources to allow for compensation of unavoidable (but authorized) impacts to aquatic resources elsewhere
Meet the need for stream and wetland mitigation credits within the service area of the Bank
Meet the need for mitigation outside the service area when approved by USACE.
Specific Actions to Enhance Property
If this proposal is approved, the applicant would:
Place the entire 952.65 Ac. mitigation bank within a perpetual conservation easement held by an accredited land trust.
Restore 53,264 linear feet (ten miles) of severely entrenched, intermittent stream channels that currently have limited access to a floodplain and are actively eroding an estimated 4,000 to 6,000 tons/yr. into the Luce Bayou/San Jacinto/Lake Houston system.
Enhance 1,342 linear feet of severely entrenched, intermittent stream channels.
Protect more than over 10,000 linear feet of Luce Bayou, 10,000 feet of high-quality, unimpaired intermittent tributaries to Luce Bayou, and nearly 5,000 linear feet of ephemeral streams.
Enhance 315.44 acres of stream buffers to reduce erosion, increase flood storage, improve wildlife habitat, and enhance intermittent stream channels.
Establish 150.64 acres of wetlands, approximately half of which are forested, to increase flood storage, water quality, and wildlife habitat.
Restore 6.58 acres of isolated, non-jurisdictional wetlands and reconnect them to intermittent stream channels.
Enhance 107.75 acres of wetlands impacted by previous silviculture operations and invasive species infestation.
Preserve 53.46 acres of high-quality forested wetland habitat associated with the floodplain of Luce Bayou.
Enhance 280.07 Ac. of forested upland buffer habitat to provide additional protection for wetlands and streams within the Bank.
Why This Is Needed
This area has experienced tremendous population growth. Counties within the proposed service area have added nearly 1-million people with an average 16% growth rate from 2010 to 2017.
The extension of SH 99 (the Grand Parkway) will open up vast new areas to development, including a large portion of the mitigation bank’s proposed service area. Additional mitigation banks are necessary to meet increasing demand because of this growth.
This geographic area also possesses a high degree of low-lying wetland areas and streams compared to higher areas. Here are some aerial photos of the area taken January 1, 2021. Timber on the property was recently thinned, something mentioned in the project’s prospectus.
The applicant proposes the establishment and operation of western and eastern tracts within a larger parent tract of the Lake Houston Mitigation Bank (LHMB). The Western Tract is 351.46 acres. The Eastern Tract is 601.19 Acres. The combined tracts total 952.65 acres.
The restoration and enhancement of wetlands and streams would serve as compensatory mitigation for unavoidable, permitted impacts to “waters of the United States.” That designation triggers Corps involvement in the permitting process.
Currently, the site is undeveloped.
Army Corps of Engineers
The Corps has issued a public notice based on information furnished by the applicant. This project information has not yet been verified by the Corps.
A preliminary review of this application indicates that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required. However, that could change depending on input received.
CLOSE OF COMMENT PERIOD: All comments pertaining to this Public Notice must reach this office on or before 29 January 2021. Ifno comments are received by that date, it will be considered that there are no objections.
Comments and requests for additional information should reference file number, SWG-2019-00077 Lake Houston MB, and should be submitted to:
Mitigation Banking Program / Policy Branch Regulatory Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1229
Galveston, Texas 77553-1229 409-766-3869
Phone 409-766-6301 Fax
Email: swg_public_notice@usace.army.mil
Rehak’s Take
Personally, I feel this project would benefit the Lake Houston Area. There’s little downside, because it’s directly upstream from us. It ensures sensitive wetlands will never be developed. That will help reduce flooding.
That’s especially important with Colony Ridge upstream us. And with a proposed new 8,000 acre development called Kingland just north of the mitigation bank about to kick off. (More on that tomorrow.)
There’s only one potential drawback. In the future, if the Flood Control District ever wanted to do a major drainage project in those areas, it couldn’t because they will be protected by a conservation easement. However, the San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Study did not identify either of the areas in this mitigation bank as a priority for a regional detention basin.
All things considered, I’d lock this in now. When the areas north of the mitigation bank are developed, the wetlands will provide some insurance against flooding … sooner rather than later.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/10/2021
1230 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 479 since Imelda
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/image001.png?fit=739%2C562&ssl=1562739adminadmin2021-01-10 16:37:122021-01-10 17:08:41New Wetland Mitigation Bank Proposed for Areas Upstream from Lake Houston
City of Houston Couldn’t Even Give Away Harvey Aid Due to Bureaucratic Bungling
As a December 31st deadline expired, approximately $162 million – allocated by HUD to reimburse homeowners in the City of Houston for repairs they made after Harvey – remained unused. The City had worked on the reimbursement program for TWO years. Yet in all that time, the City’s Department of Housing and Community Development successfully processed only 120 applications for reimbursement of repairs. Grants awarded to those 120 families totaled a mere $2,024,000 out of the $164 million allocated – just 1.2% of available funds.
Desperate Families Needlessly Left Empty Handed
Meanwhile, flooded families:
Regarding the last point, an email sent to residents at the 11th hour failed to inform them that they just needed to start the application and sign it before January 1st. Instead, residents were told that they needed to complete the application before December 31 (i.e., before the end of the day on December 30).
A two-step application process, engineered by the City, complicated and delayed aid. Residents first had to fill out a survey to qualify to fill out an application. The City then tried to sort the survey respondents into priority groups. This increased the workload, created management complexity, and delayed the filing of formal applications for years while the deadline passed.
Help From GLO Refused
Worse yet, after missing one interim deadline after another, the City refused to let the Texas General Land Office (GLO) help. The GLO oversees HUD funds distributed in Texas. It had sent a team to Houston to help train City employees. However, the City refused to allow the GLO team into the Housing and Community Development offices.
As the final deadline loomed, it became apparent that the City wasn’t coming close to meeting its performance goals and that aid would not reach people who needed it. As a last resort to help flood victims, the GLO tried to terminate its contract with the City and take over the City’s Harvey-aid program. But the City sued the GLO to prevent the takeover. That cost even more precious time.
Before the final deadline, the GLO notified the City that it should alert all potential applicants and the media so that they, in turn, could spread the word about the impending deadline. The GLO even provided a sample press release that the City could tweak for local media. Instead, the City posted a notice on Twitter and social media. That severely limited the reach of the message.
Confusion Reigned
To this day, lawsuit settlement talks between the City and GLO continue. Meanwhile, the GLO provided the City of Houston with funds for the Homeowner Assistance Program (HoAP), which included its reimbursement program.
But according to Jennifer Coulter, a would-be applicant who called the City, the City swore the GLO had taken control. The resident then called the GLO. GLO correctly said, “No, the City has it.” The back-and-forth continued until she was told the deadline passed.
Resident Chris Johnsen flooded 4 feet during Harvey. After waiting 3.5 years for help, he received an email from Housing and Community Development minutes before the close of business on December 30. It erroneously told him he needed to complete and sign the application before December 31.
He was out of town when the application arrived at 4:08 PM on December 30th, but submitted it after he returned. The City rejected his application. When he complained, the City told him, “Unfortunately we are not able to accept the application because it is past the deadline of 12/31/2020.”
Adding Insult to Injury
Being flooded during Harvey and financially devastated during reconstruction were bad enough. But being denied aid through the City’s bureaucratic bungling added insult to injury. Ironically, the City requested and received a nearly $30 million increase in the amount of aid available for reimbursements part way through the program…and didn’t make a dent in it. The amount increased from $135,691,299 to $164,117,633.
Meanwhile, people are moving on with their lives and giving up. But maybe that’s the City’s intention.
The Big Question: Why?
The Department of Housing and Community Development’s avowed goal with Harvey relief is to focus on those “most in need and most at risk.” People who can afford to repair their own homes and then seek reimbursement generally do not fall into that category. By law, at least 70% of HUD reimbursement funds must go to LMI (low-to-moderate income) households.
However, the 70% requirement does not apply to each individual program within Houston’s total aid allocation. It’s an average requirement across all programs. So the entire $164 million allocated for reimbursements could have gone to non-LMI households without jeopardizing the City’s LMI requirement.
This has all the hallmarks of a conscious decision to limit reimbursement aid after requesting more. Why?
Death of Hope
96,410 homes flooded in Houston during Harvey (see page 15) and could theoretically have been eligible for reimbursements. But only 120 received reimbursement checks by the end of 2020 – again, about 1.2%. See below.
In contrast, the GLO started its own reimbursement program (for the 48 counties in which it is administering the program) on February 28, 2019, and has already completed the program with nearly 3,000 reimbursements approved for more than $85 million.
This brings to a sad, sorry end one of the darkest chapters in Houston’s history. The end of the program means the death of hope for families desperate for assistance. Many cashed in retirement savings and their children’s college funds to rebuild their homes after Harvey.
The City claims hundreds of additional families filed applications before the end of the year for reimbursements. But the GLO has not yet confirmed those.
Reimbursements: A Small Part of a Much Bigger Problem
On January 4, the City updated its HUD-compliance website. It showed that out of approximately $1.28 billion dollars that HUD set aside for City of Houston residents, the City still had not submitted applications for almost $800 million dollars (62.5% of the total). Said another way, the City could not achieve almost two thirds of its aid-distribution goals in two years.
The City has not returned calls, texts and emails from ReduceFlooding.com requesting comment and the City’s perspective.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/13/2021
1233 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Thousands of Acres in East Fork, Luce Bayou Watersheds to be Developed as Part of Kingland
Back in 2015, HHF and Land Advisors advertised 8,673 acres of timberland for sale that bracketed the State Highway 99 extension in Montgomery, Harris and Liberty Counties. They called the property “Kingland” and billed it as one of the largest undeveloped areas left in the Houston area – perfect for a masterplanned community.
Subsequently, CH B-Kingland LLC (the owner) sold 4,394 acres in Liberty County to Colony Ridge in 2016.
Colony Ridge has already started the process of clearing and developing most of their purchase, north and east of the new Grand Parkway (SH99). But ironically, Colony Ridge’s construction practices are sending rivers of mud down the once pristine river and bayous where Kingland could itself soon start developing also.
North of Lake Houston, South of Colony Ridge, Spanning 3 Counties
Here’s a 2017 map of the 4000+ acres remaining in Kingland after the partial sale to Colony Ridge.
Here’s what the property looks like from the air in January.
Development Usually Follows Concrete
TXDoT says this section of the Grand Parkway should open sometime in the spring or summer of 2022. When it does, you can expect development in this area to accelerate rapidly.
Castle Hill Partners in Austin, the company that owns CH-B Kingland LLC, did not return phone calls re: its development plans. However, since tollway construction is moving from west to east, it would make sense to develop the western portions in Montgomery and Harris Counties before moving east into Liberty County.
Kingland’s 2017 sales brochure shows that almost half of the western section lies in Montgomery County along the San Jacinto East Fork. The remainder of the western section lies within Harris County. Both portions lie partially within the City of Houston’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction.
FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer shows the extent of the floodway and floodplains in that area.
Wetlands pockmark the entire area, too.
I interviewed a family in that small development south of Kingland property that straddles the Harris/Liberty County Line and discovered that they flooded from the East Fork during both Harvey and Imelda. They live more than 1.5 miles from the nearest mapped floodplain. However, that could soon change when the new post-Harvey flood maps are redrawn.
Anyone downstream on the East Fork or Luce needs to keep a close eye on this one. It has the potential to further alter the hydrology of the watershed.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/11/2021
1231 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 480 since Imelda
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 Wetland Mitigation Bank Proposed for Areas Upstream from Lake Houston
LH Ranch, Ltd has proposed a new wetland mitigation bank for the area upstream from Lake Houston. Part of the land borders the San Jacinto East Fork, opposite Lake Houston Park. Another part to the east stretches across Luces Bayou.
Why Have Mitigation Banks in General?
Such banks provide a way to encourage conservation. They do that by giving ranchers, farmers and other landowners economic incentives, usually in the form of tax breaks, not to develop land. This page by the Texas Agricultural Land Trust explains how the process works. (The Bayou Land Conservancy also offers advice for those interested.)
Developers, pipelines, etc., whose projects will cause unavoidable resource losses elsewhere, negotiate “credits” with such organizations to offset the impacts of their developments.
About the Proposed Lake Houston Mitigation Bank
Threatened and Endangered Species
Preliminary indications are that no known threatened and/or endangered species, or their critical habitat will be affected by the proposed work.
Goals of Mitigation Bank
The primary goals of the Lake Houston Mitigation Bank are to protect the water quality of the San Jacinto River system including Luce Bayou and Lake Houston.
From a conservation perspective, restoration projects within the proposed bank could:
From a mitigation perspective, the bank would also:
Specific Actions to Enhance Property
If this proposal is approved, the applicant would:
Why This Is Needed
This area has experienced tremendous population growth. Counties within the proposed service area have added nearly 1-million people with an average 16% growth rate from 2010 to 2017.
The extension of SH 99 (the Grand Parkway) will open up vast new areas to development, including a large portion of the mitigation bank’s proposed service area. Additional mitigation banks are necessary to meet increasing demand because of this growth.
This geographic area also possesses a high degree of low-lying wetland areas and streams compared to higher areas. Here are some aerial photos of the area taken January 1, 2021. Timber on the property was recently thinned, something mentioned in the project’s prospectus.
Army Corps Seeking Public Comment
The US Army Corps of Engineers seeks public comment on the LH Ranch proposal which you can find here.
The applicant proposes the establishment and operation of western and eastern tracts within a larger parent tract of the Lake Houston Mitigation Bank (LHMB). The Western Tract is 351.46 acres. The Eastern Tract is 601.19 Acres. The combined tracts total 952.65 acres.
The restoration and enhancement of wetlands and streams would serve as compensatory mitigation for unavoidable, permitted impacts to “waters of the United States.” That designation triggers Corps involvement in the permitting process.
The Corps has issued a public notice based on information furnished by the applicant. This project information has not yet been verified by the Corps.
A preliminary review of this application indicates that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required. However, that could change depending on input received.
The applicant’s prospectus contains hundreds of maps, photos and descriptions of what they intend to do. (Caution: 151 megabyte, 418 page file.) But don’t let that scare you. For those who want to understand how this fascinating process works, it’s a good read.
CLOSE OF COMMENT PERIOD: All comments pertaining to this Public Notice must reach this office on or before 29 January 2021. If no comments are received by that date, it will be considered that there are no objections.
Comments and requests for additional information should reference file number, SWG-2019-00077 Lake Houston MB, and should be submitted to:
Rehak’s Take
Personally, I feel this project would benefit the Lake Houston Area. There’s little downside, because it’s directly upstream from us. It ensures sensitive wetlands will never be developed. That will help reduce flooding.
That’s especially important with Colony Ridge upstream us. And with a proposed new 8,000 acre development called Kingland just north of the mitigation bank about to kick off. (More on that tomorrow.)
There’s only one potential drawback. In the future, if the Flood Control District ever wanted to do a major drainage project in those areas, it couldn’t because they will be protected by a conservation easement. However, the San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Study did not identify either of the areas in this mitigation bank as a priority for a regional detention basin.
All things considered, I’d lock this in now. When the areas north of the mitigation bank are developed, the wetlands will provide some insurance against flooding … sooner rather than later.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/10/2021
1230 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 479 since Imelda