Hurricane Harvey deposited a giant sand bar at the mouth of the San Jacinto West Fork that formed a dam behind the dam. More than 3000 feet long and 3000 feet wide, it backed water up into thousands of homes and businesses. Ever since then, removing it has become a major focus of flood mitigation efforts in the Lake Houston Area.
As of this morning, virtually all of the above water portion was gone. So were there two excavators working on it last month. The portions that remain are so narrow that they are starting to crumble into the lake. The remainder of the job will likely have to be performed from pontoons. See the pictures below, all taken on 11/5/2020.
Looking downstream toward FM1960 Bridge. At the start of the current phase of dredging, the little island on the left used to fill the entire foreground and stretch from one edge of the frame to the other.As the mouth bar crumbles into the lake, workers needed railroad ties to stabilize the land long enough to get their excavator onto a pontoon.Looking upstream toward the West Lake Houston Parkway bridge. The Mouth Bar used to fill the whole area in the foreground. Contractors should finish in the next week or so at the rate they have been working. There’s perhaps 50-100 feet in length and 10 feet in width left.
What you see in the photo above is the last of an estimated 400,000 cubic yards that the City of Houston is removing.
With the above water portion of the bar removed, it will be more difficult to visualize the problem from now on. But sand bars are like ice bergs. The majority of them lurks beneath the surface. And an underwater plateau still remains. It stretches from the foreground in the photo above almost all the way to the bridge in the background.
The graph below shows what it looks like. The blue line represents the water level. The gold line represents the deepest part of the channel from where the Corps finished hydraulic dredging in September 2019 down to the FM1960 bridge.
Data compiled by RD Kissling and Tim Garfield use sonar and a 14 foot pole. The plateau stretches 3 miles. Removing the entire thing would be impossible, but a channel could be dredged through it that reconnects the river and lake.
Stephen Costello, the City’s flood czar, is working to formulate plans for the next phase of dredging and hopes to announce them this month. FEMA has said that it will pay for dredging an additional million cubic yards from the mouth bar area.
Current Spoils Going to Good Use – Expanding FM1960
Currently, the spoils are being moved upstream to Berry Madden’s property on the south side of the river, opposite River Grove Park in Kingwood. Madden has plenty of room for more. See below. He says that TxDoT will use spoils currently stored on his property to widen FM1960. That project should start in the next few days. He also says that TxDoT estimates they will use spoils at the rate that dredgers are currently bringing them to his property.
Mouth bar spoils on Berry Madden’s property between West Fork and FM1960
That should create even more room for storage on Madden’s property.
Next Dredging Targets
In addition to dredging a channel through the mouth bar, the City still needs to open up the mouths of several streams and drainage channels around Lake Houston. Rogers Gully, for instance, has formed it’s own mouth bar. See below.
Rogers Gully Mouth Bar. Photo taken July, 2020.
The City also needs somehow to address the dramatic growth of an East Fork San Jacinto Mouth Bar that grew 4,000 feet during Imelda.
Looking north at East Fork Mouth Bar south of East End Park. The blue water tower in the background is on Kingwood Drive.
Kudos to Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin, State Representative Dan Huberty, State Senator Brandon Creighton, and U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw who have worked tirelessly to address these issues since Harvey.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/5/2020
1164 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20201105-DJI_0072.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=19001200adminadmin2020-11-05 13:47:582020-11-05 13:55:48Three Years Later, Above-Water Portion of West Fork Mouth Bar Virtually Gone
George P. Bush, Commissioner of the Texas General Land Office (GLO), announced a 30-day extension of a deadline for renegotiating its contract with the City of Houston for a variety of Harvey Recovery Programs. The new contract would let the City keep some of the programs it had been working on while returning others to the GLO.
By tag-teaming remaining work, GLO hopes to expend all available funds before HUD pulls back unspent money out of the $1.3 billion it allocated for aid within the City.
GLO worries about the slow rate of City’s progress and whether the City can meet HUD deadlines.
The City, on the other hand, keeps insisting it is about to speed up as it falls farther behind.
When HUD attempted to pull the programs away from the City, the City filed a lawsuit to prevent that. At stake: millions in management fees for the City and hundreds of millions in aid for Harvey victims.
Last month, Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin hinted that changes could be in the wind, but refused to release details until HUD and the GLO approved them.
Homeowners Worry About Cloud Over Programs
Meanwhile the cloud hanging over the programs worries thousands of homeowners who:
Qualified for aid but were not invited to submit an application
Have not been notified of their application’s status
Can’t get phone calls or emails returned from the City.
As of November 3, 2020, the City reports $776 million in available funds not yet committed for projects.
Three years after Harvey, the City reports it has issued only 82 reimbursement checks to homeowners for a total of $1.4 million. Either that number has not changed or the City has not updated it since October 23rd when I last posted on this subject. Neither has City updated the number of applications in its “pipeline” since August 31, 2020.
The GLO/CoH contract extension will let both sides work out a new plan that doesn’t leave disaster victims in limbo.
Statement from GLO Commissioner Bush
Commissioner Bush said: “The GLO has preliminarily agreed on the framework of an agreement with the City of Houston in the effort to help Houstonians recover from the worst natural disaster in our state’s history. The GLO has agreed to extend the current deadline for termination of the existing contract to better facilitate completion of this new agreement.”
Bush added, “The GLO’s focus continues to be making significant progress in putting federal dollars to work for the people of Houston. The GLO remains committed to helping Houston residents who are still in need of assistance with repair or reconstruction as well as moving other programs forward to successful completion within HUD’s mandatory timeline.”
GLO Still Taking Applications for Homeowner Assistance Program
In the meantime, the GLO will continue to operate the Homeowner Assistance Program to rebuild single family homes for Houston homeowners still needing assistance related to damage from Hurricane Harvey. Houston homeowners with a remaining Hurricane Harvey Housing need may find more information and apply at recovery.texas.gov/hap/houston.
Photo by Camille Pagel. Her children helped gut the kitchen instead of going to school after the Harvey flood.
GLO established the site above to help Harvey victims who have not yet submitted applications. Those who previously submitted applications which have become lost in space should call the numbers listed on the GLO site to determine their best course of action.
Note: the extension above affects contract negotiations between the City and GLO. It does not affect program deadlines.
Full Text of Interim Operations Agreement Between City, GLO
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Camille-Pagel-1.jpg?fit=800%2C1067&ssl=11067800adminadmin2020-11-04 17:58:102020-11-04 18:31:00GLO, City of Houston Agree to 30-Day Extension While They Work Out New Contract for Harvey Relief
The case of Emil C. Shebelbon, II v. Upstream Holdings, LLC ET AL (Montgomery County Cause No. 15-10-10710) provides fascinating new insights into how sand mines can affect flooding. This case is NOT about broken dikes, unauthorized discharges of sediment-laden water, or mines inundated by super-storms such as Hurricane Harvey. It involves the opposite of all those things. Yet it still has implications for state regulations – or lack thereof. Specifically, I’m talking about setbacks of mines from rivers, lack of best management practices, reclamation of mines after the completion of mining and monitoring of floodway development.
All of the mines around Shebelbon’s property (bottom center) lie completely within the West Fork floodway (cross-hatched area). Development in floodways should not impede flow.
Defendants in this case appear to have filled in or walled off more than 200 acres of floodway property north of Shebelbon. That should have raised eyebrows from Washington to Conroe City Hall, but didn’t.
Two sand mines north of Shebelbon occupy more than 200 acres of floodway. The one closest to I-45 has been abandoned without remediation. Mining debris still litters the site. Shebelbon’s property lies immediately to the south, across the river.
Plaintiff’s Property Did Not Fill Floodway
The plaintiff in this case, Emil Shebelbon, purchased approximately 200 acres of land on the southwest corner of the San Jacinto West Fork and I-45 North about 20 years ago. He operates a motorsports facility there with dirt tracks and jumps for cyclists. Most of his land is in the floodway at the original level. He did not bring in fill. However, he did push some dirt into mounds to create the jumps. Very little impervious cover exists. It resembles a park. If you were going to build a business in the floodway, this is one of the few you might consider. It does not obstruct floodwater.
Increase in Flood Frequency, Depth and Erosion
When Shebelbon bought his land, everything north of him was farm, ranch or forest land. Then one mine came in and another. They expanded and started building up their property or walling it off from the floodway with dikes.
Shebelbon soon started to notice an increase in the depth and frequency of floods. He also started to lose land to erosion during statistically small floods.
Allegations in Lawsuit
Shebelbon’s lawsuit alleges that:
Mines blocked half of the floodway, forcing their flood water south onto his property, a violation of state law.
Cutting the floodway width in half forced floodwaters up to 3-4 feet higher on his property.
The increased flow in a smaller area increased the velocity of floodwaters.
That increased what hydrologists call “sheer stress,” the force necessary to start erosion.
Modeling showed shear stresses increased upwards of 0.5 pounds per square foot. The hydrologists claim that’s enough to cause substantial land and bank erosion near and within the Shebelbon Property. That, in turn, widened the river, eroding Shebelbon’s property, they say. Shebelbon estimates he lost seven acres due to erosion caused by constriction of the floodway (see photos below).
The mine north of Shebelbon’s property on the San Jacinto West Fork. Shebelbon’s property is out of frame to the right, underneath the nose of the helicopter. To visualize the height of the dikes, compare activity in the red circle with the following photo.A dredging expert estimates that the height of the berm at this point is 50-60 feet based on the size of the dredge. Note: this photo and the one above were taken on April 21, 2020, more than a year after the hydrologist’s study. Dikes here are likely taller than 2018 LIDAR data in the study indicates.
Federal, state, county, and city regulations all prohibit restricting the conveyance of floodways. So how did this get permitted? That will be the subject of another post.
Court documents show that the mines deny any connection to Shebelbon’s damages. They issued simple, general denials and are fighting Shebelbon tooth and nail.
Surprising Expert Witness Testimony
Shebelbon, however, has produced hundreds of pages of expert witness testimony to support his claims. This 197-page document downloaded from the Montgomery County Clerk’s office contains the testimony of several experts. For this post, I’m focusing on Exhibit E-22: Flood Impacts from Surrounding Activities, prepared by Dr. David T. Williams and Dr. Gerald Blackler. Their testimony and credentials run from pages 19 to 101 of the PDF. (Caution: 19 mb download.)
Surprisingly, experts for the plaintiff found that the problem is most visible in smaller floods, i.e., less than 18-year floods. 100-year floods can overtop dikes and spread out. But smaller floods cannot.
Despite hundreds of posts on the relationship between sand mining and flooding, I have not previously focused on the phenomenon described by these experts. But every flood expert I talk to – at local, county and state levels – says their findings make perfect sense.
Looking west.Compare height of dikes on right with river bank on left by Shebelbon’s property.Photo 11/2/2020. Also note how little flood storage capacity is left in ponds.This abandoned sand mine virtually blocks TxDoT’s auxiliary bridge on the north side of the river (upper right).TxDoT commonly uses such auxiliary bridges to convey water in floodplains.Photo 11/2/2020.
Public-Policy Concerns Raised by Shebelbon
Shebelbon’s case has not yet gone to trial. But I see similar situations every time I get in a helicopter. Together, they raise some disturbing public-policy issues. For instance:
Do we need greater setbacks of mines from rivers? Greater setbacks would allow greater expansion of floodwaters and help protect neighboring properties.
Do we need a comprehensive set of best management practices for sand mines that cover reclamation and abandonment? Restoring the natural floodplain instead of leaving an elevated mine next to the freeway might have prevented some of Mr. Shelbelbon’s damages.
What happens when local officials turn a blind eye to those apparently violating regulations? Is there a higher authority to enforce compliance – short of expensive lawsuits?
Hopefully, the TCEQ or State Legislature can address these questions. But it won’t happen without public pressure.
I would simply ask.
Why should miners’ property rights outweigh those of a neighboring business or resident?
Food for thought as we approach the upcoming legislative session!
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/4/2020
1163 Days after 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/2020/11/20200421-RJR_0628.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-11-03 22:42:522020-11-04 10:58:45Expert Witnesses Model Surprising Flood Risks in Sand Mine Lawsuit
Three Years Later, Above-Water Portion of West Fork Mouth Bar Virtually Gone
Hurricane Harvey deposited a giant sand bar at the mouth of the San Jacinto West Fork that formed a dam behind the dam. More than 3000 feet long and 3000 feet wide, it backed water up into thousands of homes and businesses. Ever since then, removing it has become a major focus of flood mitigation efforts in the Lake Houston Area.
As of this morning, virtually all of the above water portion was gone. So were there two excavators working on it last month. The portions that remain are so narrow that they are starting to crumble into the lake. The remainder of the job will likely have to be performed from pontoons. See the pictures below, all taken on 11/5/2020.
What you see in the photo above is the last of an estimated 400,000 cubic yards that the City of Houston is removing.
The graph below shows what it looks like. The blue line represents the water level. The gold line represents the deepest part of the channel from where the Corps finished hydraulic dredging in September 2019 down to the FM1960 bridge.
Stephen Costello, the City’s flood czar, is working to formulate plans for the next phase of dredging and hopes to announce them this month. FEMA has said that it will pay for dredging an additional million cubic yards from the mouth bar area.
Current Spoils Going to Good Use – Expanding FM1960
Currently, the spoils are being moved upstream to Berry Madden’s property on the south side of the river, opposite River Grove Park in Kingwood. Madden has plenty of room for more. See below. He says that TxDoT will use spoils currently stored on his property to widen FM1960. That project should start in the next few days. He also says that TxDoT estimates they will use spoils at the rate that dredgers are currently bringing them to his property.
That should create even more room for storage on Madden’s property.
Next Dredging Targets
In addition to dredging a channel through the mouth bar, the City still needs to open up the mouths of several streams and drainage channels around Lake Houston. Rogers Gully, for instance, has formed it’s own mouth bar. See below.
The City also needs somehow to address the dramatic growth of an East Fork San Jacinto Mouth Bar that grew 4,000 feet during Imelda.
Kudos to Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin, State Representative Dan Huberty, State Senator Brandon Creighton, and U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw who have worked tirelessly to address these issues since Harvey.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/5/2020
1164 Days since Hurricane Harvey
GLO, City of Houston Agree to 30-Day Extension While They Work Out New Contract for Harvey Relief
George P. Bush, Commissioner of the Texas General Land Office (GLO), announced a 30-day extension of a deadline for renegotiating its contract with the City of Houston for a variety of Harvey Recovery Programs. The new contract would let the City keep some of the programs it had been working on while returning others to the GLO.
Origin of Conflict Affecting Aid Recipients
Houston and GLO have fought for months over the speed of the City’s handling of aid applications.
When HUD attempted to pull the programs away from the City, the City filed a lawsuit to prevent that. At stake: millions in management fees for the City and hundreds of millions in aid for Harvey victims.
Last month, Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin hinted that changes could be in the wind, but refused to release details until HUD and the GLO approved them.
Homeowners Worry About Cloud Over Programs
Meanwhile the cloud hanging over the programs worries thousands of homeowners who:
As of November 3, 2020, the City reports $776 million in available funds not yet committed for projects.
Only 82 Reimbursement Checks Written Since Harvey
Three years after Harvey, the City reports it has issued only 82 reimbursement checks to homeowners for a total of $1.4 million. Either that number has not changed or the City has not updated it since October 23rd when I last posted on this subject. Neither has City updated the number of applications in its “pipeline” since August 31, 2020.
Statement from GLO Commissioner Bush
Commissioner Bush said: “The GLO has preliminarily agreed on the framework of an agreement with the City of Houston in the effort to help Houstonians recover from the worst natural disaster in our state’s history. The GLO has agreed to extend the current deadline for termination of the existing contract to better facilitate completion of this new agreement.”
Bush added, “The GLO’s focus continues to be making significant progress in putting federal dollars to work for the people of Houston. The GLO remains committed to helping Houston residents who are still in need of assistance with repair or reconstruction as well as moving other programs forward to successful completion within HUD’s mandatory timeline.”
GLO Still Taking Applications for Homeowner Assistance Program
In the meantime, the GLO will continue to operate the Homeowner Assistance Program to rebuild single family homes for Houston homeowners still needing assistance related to damage from Hurricane Harvey. Houston homeowners with a remaining Hurricane Harvey Housing need may find more information and apply at recovery.texas.gov/hap/houston.
GLO established the site above to help Harvey victims who have not yet submitted applications. Those who previously submitted applications which have become lost in space should call the numbers listed on the GLO site to determine their best course of action.
Note: the extension above affects contract negotiations between the City and GLO. It does not affect program deadlines.
Full Text of Interim Operations Agreement Between City, GLO
Neither Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner, nor Mayor Pro Tem Martin, has yet released a statement on this subject. But ReduceFlooding.com has obtained a copy of the interim operations agreement signed by Mayor Turner and Deputy Land Commissioner Mark A. Havens. This determines how both sides will move forward in the next month.
Overview: Who’s Doing What in Next Month
During the Extension Period which ends on December 6, 2020, the GLO will let the City continue administering funds under the:
During the Extension Period, the GLO will also let the City:
Other Terms of Interim Agreement
As part of the settlement, the City must:
Dismissing a lawsuit with prejudice would forbid the City from refiling its suit in the future. For other terms and conditions, see the full text of the proposed agreement.
Posted by Bob Rehak on November 3, 2020
1163 Days after Hurricane Harvey
Expert Witnesses Model Surprising Flood Risks in Sand Mine Lawsuit
The case of Emil C. Shebelbon, II v. Upstream Holdings, LLC ET AL (Montgomery County Cause No. 15-10-10710) provides fascinating new insights into how sand mines can affect flooding. This case is NOT about broken dikes, unauthorized discharges of sediment-laden water, or mines inundated by super-storms such as Hurricane Harvey. It involves the opposite of all those things. Yet it still has implications for state regulations – or lack thereof. Specifically, I’m talking about setbacks of mines from rivers, lack of best management practices, reclamation of mines after the completion of mining and monitoring of floodway development.
Defendants in this case appear to have filled in or walled off more than 200 acres of floodway property north of Shebelbon. That should have raised eyebrows from Washington to Conroe City Hall, but didn’t.
Plaintiff’s Property Did Not Fill Floodway
The plaintiff in this case, Emil Shebelbon, purchased approximately 200 acres of land on the southwest corner of the San Jacinto West Fork and I-45 North about 20 years ago. He operates a motorsports facility there with dirt tracks and jumps for cyclists. Most of his land is in the floodway at the original level. He did not bring in fill. However, he did push some dirt into mounds to create the jumps. Very little impervious cover exists. It resembles a park. If you were going to build a business in the floodway, this is one of the few you might consider. It does not obstruct floodwater.
Increase in Flood Frequency, Depth and Erosion
When Shebelbon bought his land, everything north of him was farm, ranch or forest land. Then one mine came in and another. They expanded and started building up their property or walling it off from the floodway with dikes.
Shebelbon soon started to notice an increase in the depth and frequency of floods. He also started to lose land to erosion during statistically small floods.
Allegations in Lawsuit
Shebelbon’s lawsuit alleges that:
Modeling showed shear stresses increased upwards of 0.5 pounds per square foot. The hydrologists claim that’s enough to cause substantial land and bank erosion near and within the Shebelbon Property. That, in turn, widened the river, eroding Shebelbon’s property, they say. Shebelbon estimates he lost seven acres due to erosion caused by constriction of the floodway (see photos below).
Court documents show that the mines deny any connection to Shebelbon’s damages. They issued simple, general denials and are fighting Shebelbon tooth and nail.
Surprising Expert Witness Testimony
Shebelbon, however, has produced hundreds of pages of expert witness testimony to support his claims. This 197-page document downloaded from the Montgomery County Clerk’s office contains the testimony of several experts. For this post, I’m focusing on Exhibit E-22: Flood Impacts from Surrounding Activities, prepared by Dr. David T. Williams and Dr. Gerald Blackler. Their testimony and credentials run from pages 19 to 101 of the PDF. (Caution: 19 mb download.)
Despite hundreds of posts on the relationship between sand mining and flooding, I have not previously focused on the phenomenon described by these experts. But every flood expert I talk to – at local, county and state levels – says their findings make perfect sense.
Public-Policy Concerns Raised by Shebelbon
Shebelbon’s case has not yet gone to trial. But I see similar situations every time I get in a helicopter. Together, they raise some disturbing public-policy issues. For instance:
Hopefully, the TCEQ or State Legislature can address these questions. But it won’t happen without public pressure.
I would simply ask.
Food for thought as we approach the upcoming legislative session!
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/4/2020
1163 Days after 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.