Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin shocked a meeting of Kingwood residents at a town hall meeting on February 25, 2020. He he said the City would not participate in a much-rumored buyout of the Perry Homes’ Woodridge Village property that contributed to the flooding of Elm Grove Village twice last year. The rumors first went public in a Houston Chronicle story on January 27th this year. In that story the Chronicle characterized the plan as a bailout, not a buyout, but later retracted that in an editorial board statement.
The plan was to purchase all or part of the land and build a giant detention pond on it that would prevent Elm Grove from flooding again.
Silence After Executive Session in Commissioner’s Court Meeting
The Chronicle story appeared one day before a Harris County Commissioner’s Court meeting. Commissioners were to consider the purchase of the property at that meeting in executive session. But there was no public announcement after the meeting of what they decided. We later learned the reason why.
County Asked City to Pay for Half of Purchase
Harris County, according to Martin at the town hall meeting, decided to ask the City to put up half the money for the purchase of the land. Martin initially supported the purchase “at the right price,” according to the Chronicle story.
However, something happened between the Commissioner’s Court Meeting and the Town Hall Meeting to make Martin change his mind about participating in the deal. At the Town Hall meeting, Martin never mentioned the purchase price as an objection.
Martin Claims We Pay Taxes to County So County Should Pay 100%
Instead, Martin launched into a discussion of his tax bill. He said that out of his total tax bill he paid:
56.4% to Humble ISD
18.8% to the City of Houston (of course, that didn’t include fees, such as those for drainage)
14.4% to Harris County.
That adds up to 89.6%, but Mr. Martin did not explain what happened to the missing 10.4%.
Who Is Doing What
He simply said that dramatized the need to get “… Harris County to do more work in Kingwood.” (Editor’s note: at a previous town hall meeting Martin explained that the county was already taking over all work on ditches and streams in Kingwood, but then he quickly added that if the County purchased the Woodridge property, it would let the CITY do more work on ditches and streams. Martin never addressed that apparent contradiction).
Why City Refuses to Participate
Martin then explained that Kingwood overwhelmingly supported the $2.5 billion Harris County Flood Bond in 2018. He also pointed out that the language in the flood bond lets Harris County purchase land in other upstream counties for the purpose of floodwater detention – exactly like the proposal for Perry Homes’ Woodridge Village property.
According to Martin, County Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cagle wants the City of Houston to contribute half of the money.
“Quite frankly,” said Martin, “I’m not going to ask the Mayor to contribute half. Because they (Harris County) should contribute 100% of it because we gave them our tax dollars and they specified what these tax dollars are to be used for. So they need to come up with 100%.”
Martin then talked about berating Harris County Judge Lina Hildago on the subject before urging residents to contact their county officials. He closed by demanding that the County should put up 100% of the money for Perry Homes’ land because “WE are that close to making this happen.” (Emphasis NOT added.) Martin also asserted that if the County took sole responsibility for the deal, it would somehow help flooding problems in other unrelated areas such as North Woodland Hills.
Listen to Audio Clip of Discussion at Town Hall
To listen to a four-minute audio recording of this segment of the meeting, click the key frame of Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin below.
Segment of 2/25/2020 Kingwood Town Hall Meeting in which Houston Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin discusses the buyout of Perry Homes’ Woodridge Village land to construct a detention pond and why Harris County Should Pay for 100% of the deal.
Mr. Martin never explained why the taxing entity we pay the least to should assume exclusive responsibility for the entire project. Nor did he address why drainage fees paid to the City, could not be used for the project.
Meanwhile, the county has been silent on whether it will pick up 100% of the tab for the detention work. And Elm Grove residents still spend sleepless nights every time it rains.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/1/2020
915 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 164 after 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/2020/03/20200225-RJR_8720.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-03-01 13:28:522020-03-02 23:46:11City Decides Not to Participate in Elm Grove Rescue; Says County Should Pay 100%
Yesterday, I posted about the hidden costs of flooding. Here’s another one: infrastructure repairs. And another one: re-doing infrastructure repairs. Like those to the Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch.
Tree Lane was already a pinch point in the Ben’s Branch floodway. That and the combination of even more water during the Tax Day, Memorial Day, Harvey, May 2019, and Imelda floods all took a toll. The picture below shows what the bridge looked like on December 1, 2019. Hundreds of kids cross this bridge on their way to Bear Branch Elementary every day.
The Before Shot: Taken November 31, 2019
After taking the shot above, I emailed it to the City. To their credit, they sent crews out right away to repair it. Heavy equipment sat at the site for 2.5 months.
After the Repairs
About two weeks ago, the last piece left the job site. So today, I drove by to get an “after” shot. See the improvements below.
The After Shot: Taken 2/29/2020, three months later.
The City put rip rap across the creek to reduce erosion from water shooting out from the storm sewer in the upper right. They also broke up some of the large slabs of concrete to form additional rip rap.
However, it appears that they:
Have done little to stabilize the bridge supports.
Left slabs of concrete leaning against an exposed pipeline.
Threw a traffic sign and traffic cone into the creek.
Left about 50 bags of sand on the large slab at the left.
Someone else could have dumped the construction materials and sign. Crappy looking areas always encourage illegal dumping.
Enlargement of detail from previous shot showing sand that has been left behind or dumped.
I’m guessing that the rip rap may help reduce erosion from the storm sewer. But…
I see little here to stop erosion from upstream of Tree Lane or reduce danger to the pipeline. More important, the City did nothing to increase conveyance under the bridge.
The Tree Lane Bridge still forms a pinch point that restricts conveyance of Ben’s Branch.
Of course, the City may handle the conveyance issue in a second job. That could help build a case for doubling those drainage fees.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/29/2020
914 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/BB-Bridge-BeforeAfter.jpg?fit=891%2C1200&ssl=11200891adminadmin2020-02-29 13:17:592024-08-11 20:20:23Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch: Before and After Repairs
When we think about flooding, most of us don’t think beyond the repair costs of homes. But there are more costs to communities that can remain hidden for years. Erosion, for instance, is one of the hidden costs of flooding that we rarely talk about.
You’ve heard me talk about the eroded sediment from sand mines that winds up downstream in the mouth bars of the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto.
The City, County, State and Federal Government have already spent more than $100 million to remove eroded sediment that is blocking the West Fork of the San Jacinto and much more remains.
Ben’s Branch became virtually blocked with sand after Harvey. Harris County Flood Control is now removing the excess sediment to restore conveyance of the channel.
We’ve all seen how such eroded sediment can back water up and raise flood levels. And we’ve all seen how much that can cost. Not just from the initial flood, but in terms of remediation.
Look At the Cost of Erosion From the Upstream Side, Too
Ditch erosion can affect homeowners in other ways, too. By threatening their property and community property. Lost property is yet another one of the hidden costs of flooding.
Ditch erosion in Commons on Lake Houston.Photo from January 2019.
In Deer Ridge Estates, ditch erosion is creeping inexorably toward back yard fences.
Kingwood diversion ditch where it crosses past Deer Ridge Estates just north of Deer Springs Drive.Photo from Jan. 2019.
On a recent flight down the San Jacinto West Fork, I spotted erosion threatening the back yards of homes still under construction in the new Northpark Woods subdivision.
Erosion can threaten pipelines, too.
Pipelines undermined by erosion at Liberty Materials Mine near Conroe.
Let’s Play Hot Potato
Who is responsible for repairing the upstream erosion when it happens? In Harris County, we’re lucky, we have a flood control district that has assumed responsibility for that. But the ditch two photos above is in Montgomery County. So are the pipelines in the photo above.
Who is responsibly for repairing erosion in these cases? The County? The homeowners? The homeowner association? The developer? The sand mine? The pipelines? A flood control or drainage district? Everyone wants to assume it’s someone else’s problem. No one wants to assume responsibility.
But without someone stepping up, these homes will eventually be threatened. And with the exception noted above, few people or groups are stepping up.
Paul Crowson, a Montgomery County flood activist has posted about this subject on Facebook. Says Crowson, “The county, the flood control district, the neighborhood HOA, the POA, the City, the State, the developers, the engineers … all are passing the blame and responsibility around to each other.”
“These poor people (in the court case) have lost most of their yard, and are in danger of losing their home to the ravages of the drainage easement nightmares,” says Crowson. “Those nightmares are growing every day and will eventually swallow them and their home. Why does it matter to you? I’m thinking right now of Roman Forest, Tavola, New Caney, and Montgomery County.”
It’s Easier to Keep Up Than Catch Up
I would argue that it’s cheaper to prevent a disaster in the making than to remediate a disaster after the fact. Remember those homely homilies your parents and grandparents tried to instill in you? An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. A stitch in time save nine.
Congressman Dan Crenshaw says the Navy Seals have a similar saying for those who fall behind on those long training runs they take. “It’s easier to keep up than catch up.” They’re all true! And the same holds true for deferred maintenance.
When Deferred Maintenance Turns into a Disaster Area
Montgomery County does not have a flood control district. Nor does it seem especially eager to address problems, such as those in the photo above.
As we saw with the mouth bar on the West Fork that had been building up under water for decades, maintenance can be deferred for only so long.
Then a monster flood comes along like Harvey. It finds the weak points in systems…and boom. Deferred maintenance turns into a disaster area.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/28/2020 with input from Paul Crowson
913 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20200213-RJR_7905.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-02-28 12:39:172020-02-28 12:44:11Hidden Costs of Flooding
City Decides Not to Participate in Elm Grove Rescue; Says County Should Pay 100%
Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin shocked a meeting of Kingwood residents at a town hall meeting on February 25, 2020. He he said the City would not participate in a much-rumored buyout of the Perry Homes’ Woodridge Village property that contributed to the flooding of Elm Grove Village twice last year. The rumors first went public in a Houston Chronicle story on January 27th this year. In that story the Chronicle characterized the plan as a bailout, not a buyout, but later retracted that in an editorial board statement.
Silence After Executive Session in Commissioner’s Court Meeting
The Chronicle story appeared one day before a Harris County Commissioner’s Court meeting. Commissioners were to consider the purchase of the property at that meeting in executive session. But there was no public announcement after the meeting of what they decided. We later learned the reason why.
County Asked City to Pay for Half of Purchase
Harris County, according to Martin at the town hall meeting, decided to ask the City to put up half the money for the purchase of the land. Martin initially supported the purchase “at the right price,” according to the Chronicle story.
However, something happened between the Commissioner’s Court Meeting and the Town Hall Meeting to make Martin change his mind about participating in the deal. At the Town Hall meeting, Martin never mentioned the purchase price as an objection.
Martin Claims We Pay Taxes to County So County Should Pay 100%
Instead, Martin launched into a discussion of his tax bill. He said that out of his total tax bill he paid:
That adds up to 89.6%, but Mr. Martin did not explain what happened to the missing 10.4%.
Who Is Doing What
He simply said that dramatized the need to get “… Harris County to do more work in Kingwood.” (Editor’s note: at a previous town hall meeting Martin explained that the county was already taking over all work on ditches and streams in Kingwood, but then he quickly added that if the County purchased the Woodridge property, it would let the CITY do more work on ditches and streams. Martin never addressed that apparent contradiction).
Why City Refuses to Participate
Martin then explained that Kingwood overwhelmingly supported the $2.5 billion Harris County Flood Bond in 2018. He also pointed out that the language in the flood bond lets Harris County purchase land in other upstream counties for the purpose of floodwater detention – exactly like the proposal for Perry Homes’ Woodridge Village property.
According to Martin, County Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cagle wants the City of Houston to contribute half of the money.
(Another editor’s note: neither the bond language, nor the associated project list that was published before the vote specifically mentions Elm Grove or the Perry Homes land. The bond language mentions upstream detention only in a generic sense, and the majority of projects identified before the election involved partnerships.)
Martin then talked about berating Harris County Judge Lina Hildago on the subject before urging residents to contact their county officials. He closed by demanding that the County should put up 100% of the money for Perry Homes’ land because “WE are that close to making this happen.” (Emphasis NOT added.) Martin also asserted that if the County took sole responsibility for the deal, it would somehow help flooding problems in other unrelated areas such as North Woodland Hills.
Listen to Audio Clip of Discussion at Town Hall
To listen to a four-minute audio recording of this segment of the meeting, click the key frame of Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin below.
Mr. Martin never explained why the taxing entity we pay the least to should assume exclusive responsibility for the entire project. Nor did he address why drainage fees paid to the City, could not be used for the project.
Meanwhile, the county has been silent on whether it will pick up 100% of the tab for the detention work. And Elm Grove residents still spend sleepless nights every time it rains.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/1/2020
915 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 164 after 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.
Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch: Before and After Repairs
Yesterday, I posted about the hidden costs of flooding. Here’s another one: infrastructure repairs. And another one: re-doing infrastructure repairs. Like those to the Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch.
History of Issue
Upstream development in Montgomery County with insufficient and un-repaired detention pond capacity started dumping excess water into Ben’s Branch. It didn’t take long for the area under the Tree Lane bridge next to Bear Branch Elementary to start eroding badly.
Tree Lane was already a pinch point in the Ben’s Branch floodway. That and the combination of even more water during the Tax Day, Memorial Day, Harvey, May 2019, and Imelda floods all took a toll. The picture below shows what the bridge looked like on December 1, 2019. Hundreds of kids cross this bridge on their way to Bear Branch Elementary every day.
After taking the shot above, I emailed it to the City. To their credit, they sent crews out right away to repair it. Heavy equipment sat at the site for 2.5 months.
After the Repairs
About two weeks ago, the last piece left the job site. So today, I drove by to get an “after” shot. See the improvements below.
The City put rip rap across the creek to reduce erosion from water shooting out from the storm sewer in the upper right. They also broke up some of the large slabs of concrete to form additional rip rap.
However, it appears that they:
Someone else could have dumped the construction materials and sign. Crappy looking areas always encourage illegal dumping.
I’m guessing that the rip rap may help reduce erosion from the storm sewer. But…
I see little here to stop erosion from upstream of Tree Lane or reduce danger to the pipeline. More important, the City did nothing to increase conveyance under the bridge.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/29/2020
914 Days after Hurricane Harvey
Hidden Costs of Flooding
When we think about flooding, most of us don’t think beyond the repair costs of homes. But there are more costs to communities that can remain hidden for years. Erosion, for instance, is one of the hidden costs of flooding that we rarely talk about.
You’ve heard me talk about the eroded sediment from sand mines that winds up downstream in the mouth bars of the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto.
Likewise, many of you have seen the work being done now to remove approximately 80,000 cubic yards of eroded sediment from Ben’s Branch.
We’ve all seen how such eroded sediment can back water up and raise flood levels. And we’ve all seen how much that can cost. Not just from the initial flood, but in terms of remediation.
Look At the Cost of Erosion From the Upstream Side, Too
Ditch erosion can affect homeowners in other ways, too. By threatening their property and community property. Lost property is yet another one of the hidden costs of flooding.
We’ve seen how ditch erosion destroyed riding trails in the Commons on Lake Houston.
In Deer Ridge Estates, ditch erosion is creeping inexorably toward back yard fences.
On a recent flight down the San Jacinto West Fork, I spotted erosion threatening the back yards of homes still under construction in the new Northpark Woods subdivision.
Erosion can threaten pipelines, too.
Let’s Play Hot Potato
Who is responsible for repairing the upstream erosion when it happens? In Harris County, we’re lucky, we have a flood control district that has assumed responsibility for that. But the ditch two photos above is in Montgomery County. So are the pipelines in the photo above.
But without someone stepping up, these homes will eventually be threatened. And with the exception noted above, few people or groups are stepping up.
Paul Crowson, a Montgomery County flood activist has posted about this subject on Facebook. Says Crowson, “The county, the flood control district, the neighborhood HOA, the POA, the City, the State, the developers, the engineers … all are passing the blame and responsibility around to each other.”
The problem exists everywhere. Crowson points to the case of Fort Bend County homeowners who are petitioning the Court there to assign responsibility for maintenance of drainage easements.
“These poor people (in the court case) have lost most of their yard, and are in danger of losing their home to the ravages of the drainage easement nightmares,” says Crowson. “Those nightmares are growing every day and will eventually swallow them and their home. Why does it matter to you? I’m thinking right now of Roman Forest, Tavola, New Caney, and Montgomery County.”
It’s Easier to Keep Up Than Catch Up
I would argue that it’s cheaper to prevent a disaster in the making than to remediate a disaster after the fact. Remember those homely homilies your parents and grandparents tried to instill in you? An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. A stitch in time save nine.
Congressman Dan Crenshaw says the Navy Seals have a similar saying for those who fall behind on those long training runs they take. “It’s easier to keep up than catch up.” They’re all true! And the same holds true for deferred maintenance.
When Deferred Maintenance Turns into a Disaster Area
Montgomery County does not have a flood control district. Nor does it seem especially eager to address problems, such as those in the photo above.
As we saw with the mouth bar on the West Fork that had been building up under water for decades, maintenance can be deferred for only so long.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/28/2020 with input from Paul Crowson
913 Days after Hurricane Harvey