Replacement of the old Union Pacific Bridge across the San Jacinto West Fork is nearing completion.
Less than a month ago, crews constructing the new railroad bridge still had to remove the supports for the old bridge. See below the old four-post steel-frame structures between the new cement supports.
Photo taken on January 20, 2020 shows old supports still in place between new concrete supports.
By 2/13/2020, however, only one of the old supports remained. See photo below.
Photo taken on 2/13/2020 shows only one of the old supports remains.
Trees caught in Union Pacific Railroad Bridge supports during Hurricane Harvey.
The result: the tracks were destroyed. UP had to reroute northbound rail traffic out of Houston for months as they literally built a new bridge around the old one.
Harvey knocked out the Union Pacific Railroad bridge over the San Jacinto River near I-69.
The concrete supports for the new bridge are spaced much farther apart. Thus, they should allow trees to pass through in a flood and eliminate backwater effects.
Photo taken 2/13/2020, the same time as the first shot above. This is from the other side of the bridge.
Other Sign Job is Nearing Completion
Notice in the picture above that crews have already started removing the temporary bridge for cranes on the north side of the river.
All of this is good news from flood remediation and mitigation perspectives. It is yet one more sign that life is finally starting to return to normal after Harvey. The bridge should also help the community deal better with the next major storm.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/17/2020
902 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20200213-RJR_7956.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-02-16 19:46:332020-02-16 19:46:51Union Pacific Almost Done Removing Last Remnants of Old Railroad Bridge
Below are aerial images from two new developments under construction. They show two detention ponds in two different counties. Can you tell which is in Montgomery County and which is in Harris County? I took both photos on the same day, 2/13/2020.
Detention Pond ADetention Pond B
Clue
Look where the grass has established itself:
In A, the land was cleared before the detention pond was completed.
In B, the detention pond was completed before the land was cleared.
And the Answer Is…
If you guessed that Pond A is in Montgomery County, you guessed correctly. Pond A is in Woodridge Village, just north of Sherwood Trails and Elm Grove. It is their S1 detention pond (first southern).
Pond B is in Harris County just north of Bush Intercontinental Airport and Mercer Botanic Gardens.
How You Can Tell
Montgomery County does not require developers to install detention ponds before they clearcut the whole development. So they sometimes come long AFTER clearcutting.
Also, even though Page 44 of Montgomery County’s Drainage Criteria Manual says that “slopes must be revegetated immediately after construction to minimize erosion,” no one apparently enforces the regulation. The sides of Pond A have gone without grass for about a year. See close up below.
Erosion on the sides of Pond A shown above, the Woodridge Village S1 detention pond.
All 268 acres of Woodridge Village have been clearcut for the better part of a year. Meanwhile Perry Homes and its engineering firm LJA are just now taking bids on additional detention ponds for the northern section. And the sides of Pond A still have yet to sprout grass.
Harris County Regs Differ
Note in the Pond B photo how the sides of the channel have been stabilized with grass before the developer has even finished clearing the land.
Harris County employs low-impact development procedures (LID). Harris County Stormwater Quality Management regulations discourage clearcutting giant sites like Woodridge Village all at once. See section 4.2.3.1, Stormwater Pollution Prevention (SWPPP) During Construction.
The text states, “The clearing, grubbing and scalping (mass clearing or grading) of excessively large areas of land at one time promotes erosion and sedimentation problems. On the areas where disturbance takes place the site designer should consider staging construction [emphasis added], temporary seeding and/or temporary mulching as a technique to reduce erosion. Staging construction involves stabilizing one part of the site before disturbing another [emphasis added].”
Two Different Approaches
You would think that preventing erosion would be cheaper than cleaning it up. Why do a job once when you can do it twice? Right?
Close up of remediation work in Pond A, from a slightly different angle.Photo taken 2/13/2020.
Evidently, Perry Homes prefers it that way. Last Thursday, I spotted men digging out the pilot channel of Pond A and restoring slopes…again. This was at least the third or fourth time. No wonder those Perry Homes are so expensive.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/16/2020
901 Days After Hurricane Harvey and 150 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/2020/02/Pond-A-or-B-e1581859478892.jpg?fit=894%2C1200&ssl=11200894adminadmin2020-02-16 07:41:032020-02-16 10:57:16Detention Pond Construction: Montgomery vs. Harris County
Q: When is a detention pond not a detention pond? A: When it’s just a wide spot on a stream.
The defining characteristic of a detention pond is an “outfall” smaller than the inlet. The pond holds back rain in a storm and releases it later at an acceptable rate. This reduces downstream flooding.
From the Montgomery County Drainage Criterial Manual
That’s the theory, at least. In practice, sometimes things don’t always work out that way. It often depends on maintenance.
This week, I discovered that a second pond immediately upstream also apparently has an unrestricted outfall.
Two tributaries of Ben’s Branch come together in the foreground pond. The pond also collects runoff from surrounding commercial and residential areas.Photo taken 2/13/2020.Water flows toward exit in upper right.Photo taken 2/13/2020.Note height and width of exit.Photo taken 2/13/2020.
The low area in the picture above measures more than 200 feet wide in Google Earth. That’s far wider than the combined inlets. Net: this pond provides little if any detention capability.
Same Problem with Second Pond
Neither does pond beyond it that I highlighted last week provide much detention capacity.
Note how Ben’s Branch flows both through and around the next pond. Direction of flow is from bottom to top of frame.Photo taken 2/13/2020.Reverse angle looking NW. Direction of flow is now toward camera.Note how the outfall (foreground) is larger than the inlet. Also note how runoff from residential streets (upper right) is channeled outside the pond. Photo taken 2/13/2020.
Both Ponds Provide Little Detention Benefit, If Any
Both of these ponds provide little detention benefit, if any.
Neither pond has a maintenance road around it, even though Section 7.2.8 of the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual specifies that “A 30-foot wide access and maintenance easement shall be provided around the entire detention pond.”
Sometimes, what looks like a detention pond is really just a pond. Or a wide spot in a stream.
Recent Surge in Downstream Flooding
During the May 7th and Imelda floods in 2019, water flowing through these ponds then flowed over Northpark Drive and flooded homes in North Woodland Hills. It also flooded numerous homes and businesses downstream on Ben’s Branch between Woodland Hills Drive and the San Jacinto River West Fork.
One wonders whether those damages could have been averted if the ponds had detained water.
As Harris County Flood Control conducts the Kingwood Area Drainage Study, engineers must consider the possibility that this area may be dumping more water downstream than planned.
The Woodridge Municipal Utility District apparently is responsible for these ponds.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/16/2020
901 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 150 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/2020/02/20200213-RJR_8533.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-02-16 05:49:322020-02-16 10:57:58Part II: When Is A Detention Pond Not A Detention Pond?
Union Pacific Almost Done Removing Last Remnants of Old Railroad Bridge
Replacement of the old Union Pacific Bridge across the San Jacinto West Fork is nearing completion.
Less than a month ago, crews constructing the new railroad bridge still had to remove the supports for the old bridge. See below the old four-post steel-frame structures between the new cement supports.
By 2/13/2020, however, only one of the old supports remained. See photo below.
Reason for New Bridge
Union Pacific started reconstructing the bridge after Harvey. Trees swept downstream by the flood caught on the old supports and backed water up.
The result: the tracks were destroyed. UP had to reroute northbound rail traffic out of Houston for months as they literally built a new bridge around the old one.
Other Sign Job is Nearing Completion
Notice in the picture above that crews have already started removing the temporary bridge for cranes on the north side of the river.
All of this is good news from flood remediation and mitigation perspectives. It is yet one more sign that life is finally starting to return to normal after Harvey. The bridge should also help the community deal better with the next major storm.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/17/2020
902 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Detention Pond Construction: Montgomery vs. Harris County
Below are aerial images from two new developments under construction. They show two detention ponds in two different counties. Can you tell which is in Montgomery County and which is in Harris County? I took both photos on the same day, 2/13/2020.
Clue
Look where the grass has established itself:
And the Answer Is…
If you guessed that Pond A is in Montgomery County, you guessed correctly. Pond A is in Woodridge Village, just north of Sherwood Trails and Elm Grove. It is their S1 detention pond (first southern).
Pond B is in Harris County just north of Bush Intercontinental Airport and Mercer Botanic Gardens.
How You Can Tell
Montgomery County does not require developers to install detention ponds before they clearcut the whole development. So they sometimes come long AFTER clearcutting.
Also, even though Page 44 of Montgomery County’s Drainage Criteria Manual says that “slopes must be revegetated immediately after construction to minimize erosion,” no one apparently enforces the regulation. The sides of Pond A have gone without grass for about a year. See close up below.
All 268 acres of Woodridge Village have been clearcut for the better part of a year. Meanwhile Perry Homes and its engineering firm LJA are just now taking bids on additional detention ponds for the northern section. And the sides of Pond A still have yet to sprout grass.
Harris County Regs Differ
Note in the Pond B photo how the sides of the channel have been stabilized with grass before the developer has even finished clearing the land.
Harris County employs low-impact development procedures (LID). Harris County Stormwater Quality Management regulations discourage clearcutting giant sites like Woodridge Village all at once. See section 4.2.3.1, Stormwater Pollution Prevention (SWPPP) During Construction.
The text states, “The clearing, grubbing and scalping (mass clearing or grading) of excessively large areas of land at one time promotes erosion and sedimentation problems. On the areas where disturbance takes place the site designer should consider staging construction [emphasis added], temporary seeding and/or temporary mulching as a technique to reduce erosion. Staging construction involves stabilizing one part of the site before disturbing another [emphasis added].”
Two Different Approaches
You would think that preventing erosion would be cheaper than cleaning it up. Why do a job once when you can do it twice? Right?
Evidently, Perry Homes prefers it that way. Last Thursday, I spotted men digging out the pilot channel of Pond A and restoring slopes…again. This was at least the third or fourth time. No wonder those Perry Homes are so expensive.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/16/2020
901 Days After Hurricane Harvey and 150 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.
Part II: When Is A Detention Pond Not A Detention Pond?
Q: When is a detention pond not a detention pond?
A: When it’s just a wide spot on a stream.
The defining characteristic of a detention pond is an “outfall” smaller than the inlet. The pond holds back rain in a storm and releases it later at an acceptable rate. This reduces downstream flooding.
That’s the theory, at least. In practice, sometimes things don’t always work out that way. It often depends on maintenance.
Unrestricted Outfalls
On 2/13/2020, I reported on one Woodridge Forest detention pond on Ben’s Branch that had an outfall LARGER than its inlet. Harvey and Imelda blew out the pond’s outfall.
This week, I discovered that a second pond immediately upstream also apparently has an unrestricted outfall.
The low area in the picture above measures more than 200 feet wide in Google Earth. That’s far wider than the combined inlets. Net: this pond provides little if any detention capability.
Same Problem with Second Pond
Neither does pond beyond it that I highlighted last week provide much detention capacity.
Both Ponds Provide Little Detention Benefit, If Any
Both of these ponds provide little detention benefit, if any.
Neither pond has a maintenance road around it, even though Section 7.2.8 of the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual specifies that “A 30-foot wide access and maintenance easement shall be provided around the entire detention pond.”
Recent Surge in Downstream Flooding
During the May 7th and Imelda floods in 2019, water flowing through these ponds then flowed over Northpark Drive and flooded homes in North Woodland Hills. It also flooded numerous homes and businesses downstream on Ben’s Branch between Woodland Hills Drive and the San Jacinto River West Fork.
As Harris County Flood Control conducts the Kingwood Area Drainage Study, engineers must consider the possibility that this area may be dumping more water downstream than planned.
The Woodridge Municipal Utility District apparently is responsible for these ponds.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/16/2020
901 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 150 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.